<p>The apologists always stand up for the Teflon administration.</p>
<p>So you’re saying, we (whatever Republicans are in the new Congress) HAVE to stay the course, lest the current party in power loses credibility. Yikes, tooooooo late for that. The party that gets people moving onto a better track and seeks to work to compromise, but not by compromising their morals will lead in the election after this one. We need leaders! We need to get back the high moral ground. We need to strike down some of the laws that just were approved…say approving torture and getting rid of habeous corpus… We need EVERYONE in the new Congress to show the system isn’t really as broken as it now appears.If anyone ever wants to be voted in again they better shown that they are part of the solution, not the problem.</p>
<p>I’m not an apologist for the Republican party, I just don’t think the Democrats will do anything better. </p>
<p>The Republicans at least will fight when necessary. They will defend American interests and try and minimize American losses. It may take longer, but it’s better than what the Democrats wanted to do - first pour in personnel and equipment, then quickly pull it all out when the going gets tough…if they ever fight at all. No way.</p>
<p>Lest you forget, the last Democrat war was Viet Nam. Not only were billions and billions wasted they also got some ~58,000 Americans killed. I am old enough to remember the Democrats and Viet Nam. It still matters to me.</p>
<p>Agreed. The Republicans have made many mistakes in fighting this war. However, if the govrenmnet were to shift to democrats then the mistakes would be ever worse. Its not that democrats are incompetant, and the republicans are not. No, its the ideologies behind the two parties. Democratic policies, as we know the party now-represented by Moveon.org, ACLU, moore, and the “lamontniks”, will be hurt the war on terror without a doubt. Just look at John Kerry, he considers the war on terror to be a law enforcement issue. Or look at the ACLU, which is on the sides of terrorists, trying to secure for them privelages that are afforded to citizens and legal combatants.</p>
<p>You know it’s funny. For all this talk I hear about how the Democrats won’t fight, a number of Iraq war veterans are running for the House and Senate on the Democratic ticket. All together, 9 Iraq war veterans are running for Congress–8 of them as Democrats. </p>
<p>One of them, Tammy Duckworth lost both legs in Iraq, yet her Republican opponent, who has never seen a day of military service in his life, has characterized her as a coward who wants to “cut and run” from Iraq. </p>
<p>And now you’re saying that Democrats won’t fight when necessary. It’s outrageous.</p>
<p>The Democrats learned the lessons of Vietnam - the Republicans didn’t. It’s really almost that simple.</p>
<p>I don’t know if the Democrats will do a better a job, but I can’t imagine doing a worse job than this administration has.</p>
<p>Quite frankly, it’s hard to imagine anyone doing a worse job than this:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/16/AR2006091600193_pf.html[/url]”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/16/AR2006091600193_pf.html</a></p>
<p>It’s all interesting, but if you skip around, be sure to scroll down to the part about “Loyalist Replaces Public Health Expert”</p>
<p>A physican with a master’s in public health (in addition to his M.D.) and perhaps more experience in post-conflict public health than anyone else in the United States was replaced as the person overseeing the rebuilding of Iraq’s public health system by…a party loyalist social worker. The ousted physician is a recognized expert in disaster medicine (lecturing at Johns Hopkins), expertise he gained in post-conflict relief in Somalia, Kosova, and post-Gulf War Iraq. </p>
<p>The Bush loyalist social worker, not recognizing that the people of Iraq don’t live long enough to die of chronic illnesses like lung disease and cancer, focused efforts on a campaign to get Iraqis to stop smoking…and did nothing to fight childhood diarrhea, an easily preventable and treatable illness that kills countless Iraqi children each year. </p>
<p>Although injuries from insurgent attacks are the chief medical problem facing Iraqis today, he spent nothing on emergency rooms or operating rooms. Nearly all of the $793 million in reconstruction funds (funds that I believe came from Iraqi oil revenue) went to building maternity hospitals and community care clinics. The day he left Iraq, “Baghdad’s hospitals were as decrepit as the day the Americans arrived.” Among the things the hospitals didn’t have: blood pressure cuffs, sterile implements, and much of anything in the way of medicine.</p>
<p>There’s lots more, and it’s all bad. The guy had his heart in the right place, but he simply did not understand the difference between a country like America (where most health problems are chronic issues like cancer and heart disease, because we’ve conquered the acute problems) and a country like Iraq that’s still facing mainly acute illness and trauma issues. </p>
<p>Maybe if he had ever once in his life treated a patient for a medical problem, he would have understood the difference. To put him in charge of rebuilding a country’s entire hospital system, and in that position over a supremely qualified disaster physician, was worse than unthinkable.</p>
<p>The Democrats only learned from Viet Nam after the Republican President Richard Nixon started several immense bombing campaigns in the North that forced the Communists to the table. This gradually set the stage for the U.S. to withdrawl. </p>
<p>The Democrats started the American war in Viet Nam, the Republicans ended it. Fifty plus thousand lives is a helluva way to finally learn a lesson. Many Democrats (liberals) still feel paralyzed from these events - and that’s no good either. Errors are made in war…it always happens. </p>
<p>Be that as it may - it’s all history. What’s important is that errors in Iraq are corrected and the Iraqis elected to govern run their own country - as soon as possible. As a conservative, I want our folks (Americans) to get it right and then get out. It’s their country - they can run it, once it’s stable and we can leave.</p>
<p>I do not understand what your anecdotes about 8 iraq war vets running for office have to do anything. I am not talking about republicans physically fighting nor democrats physically fighting, we were discussing dems and repubs plan for war on terror, the approach to take, be it war or negotiation, military or law enfocement, racial profile of muslims of middle east descent because terrorist targeting us are generally muslims of middle east descent or no racial profiling, it has nothing to do with weather a senator is willing to actually serve in the military, unless that is i misunderstood our discussion in which case i apologizr</p>
<p>I wasn’t actually talking to you, golani. I was specifically addressing the outrageous smear that only Republicans will fight when necessary. But I do think it’s significant that of the actual Iraq war veterans who have chosen to run for Congress, an overwhelming number of them feel that the Democrats are in a better position to handle Iraq than the Republicans.</p>
<p>Parent2noles, I don’t see how your position is any different from that of the Democrats. “What’s important is that errors in Iraq are corrected and the Iraqis elected to govern run their own country - as soon as possible.”</p>
<p>That sounds exactly like what most Democrats are recommending. The difference is, we believe that to get a different result, you actually have to DO something different. Keeping the same unqualified and even corrupt people in charge of stabilizing Iraq isn’t going to magically stabilize the country. “Staying the course” is only a good idea if you’re actually ON course to begin with. </p>
<p>Chanting it over and over like a mantra is really not much help at all.</p>
<p>How can the GOP fix anything, if they and you won’t admit there IS any problem. That’s why you will lose power in 3 weeks. At least we KNOW there is a problem. How to solve it may be harder. It took 6 years to get this bad, so if it takes a little while, that’s okay. The GOP had the chance to vote for real lobbyist reform and they didn’t, and the lobbyist issue may be one of the keys to why things are sooooo bad. Not only won’t they admit there is a problem, they won’t do ANYTHING to try to fix it. It seems the only “fighting” the GOP does is to keep the status quo. I think I read recently someone quoted the well known phrase “the definition of madness is to keep doing the same things and think the outcome will change”.</p>
<p>This partisan bickering is really depressing me! No one should be so invested in party loyalty as to not respect the TRUTH above all else. I honestly don’t shiv a git about the “timing” of this film. Whether or not it is telling the truth should be ALL THAT MATTERS. If we as Americans, regardless of party affiliation placed honesty and moral rectitude above blind party loyalty, a new day would dawn in this country. Instead of pointing fingers at the other side, and making excuses for the shortcomings of the party we happen to favor, we should demand integrity and accountability, NO MATTER WHO HOLDS OFFICE! I am just so sick and tired of the bickering. The truth is that politics is a nasty business (and it seems to me, getting nastier by the day!), whose primary motivation is the attainment of POWER, WEALTH, and SELF AGGRANDIZEMENT. The truth is the Republican party is full of sleazy, dishonest, and corrupt operatives who, if their moral compasses were pinned to their backsides, they couldn’t find them with a map and a flashlight. The bad news is that the Democrats are no better. In other words, we are in deep do-do, but most of us are too party-blind to recognize it. And the depressing insanity is that we keep doing the same thing, somehow hoping for a different result everytime: We get thoroughly sick and disgusted with the party in power when, after eight years, they’ve proven how morally base, how lacking in courage, and so not-about-the-people’s-business they can be, and then we optimistically vote the other side into power in the doggedly hope that they’ll “do better”. You’d think we would wise up sooner or later. You’d think that we’d realize that, if you put the same rancid meat into two different cans, changing nothing but the color of the label, it won’t miraculously change what’s on the inside.</p>
<p>Excellent post, Poet, and I agree with you completely.</p>
<p>I think neither party has the edge on “moral compasses”, and the truth, as it were, needs to come out.</p>
<p>Contrary to many people who affiliate with the opposition party, I don’t hold much hope that much of anything will change when (because Americans are sick and tired of the current charade) there is a sea change in Congress next month.</p>
<p>Power and corporate wealth is ALL that matters to most politicians, and while Democrats may respond to certain issues in a way that resonates more with me, in the last analysis, both parties don’t think about the good of the American people, and put our needs ahead of their own political interests.</p>
<p>"This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. </p>
<p>In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. </p>
<p>We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together." </p>
<p>Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1960</p>
<p>I agree that neither party will find it easy to change the situation, but I’m so hoping that we can at least get REAL lobbying reform, which would be a start. (I know the Dem’s are in bed with them, too.) Everyone who can afford to run is already wealthy, so NO ONE is representing the middle class and poorer people, who are falling behind.
I’ll start with the little things: putting people in supervisory jobs who actually have qualifications, instead of industry and party representatives (Good job Brownie). Getting religion back out of government, finding a way to really punish leaders who have their hand in the cookie jar. I heard even if you get caught you don’t lose your pension, possibly even health care! urggg. (sound of utter frustration with the insanity). Maybe someone can get us out of Iraq and start saving millions to try to solve our problems! Appoint justices who do not favor large corps in their rulings. If the new group of Congress reps don’t produce what WE want, they get thrown out until we do get things cleaned up. We need bipartisanship the way I remember it when I was growing up…at least it was there in the Senate. Reps who will do what is good for the people, in spite of the fact there is no money for them there, only the satisfaction of being a great leader. Is there no altruism in leaders anymore? Goodness gracious, if they’re all so religious (growing number of crosses being worn) don’t they all want to go to “heaven”?? Maybe some should be truthful and admit they aren’t religious, but perhaps some can show they at least have a morality code, that isn’t a persona, but is real. Ummm that may be hoping for too much. Can you even get elected if you are really a nice person and aren’t after the money and won’t lie??? I’m getting so cynical I’m starting to believe the system could be rotten to the core. As we keep in mind how immoral these same corporations are in their own business dealings… and now their money is tainting our government. I look forward to any little step out of this rubbish heap…</p>
<p>Poetsheart, I agree with that sentiment. Frankly, bickering isn’t all so bad - it brought you out with a notion that most can recognize and agree with.</p>
<p>No one party can do it - the minority side must point out the weaknesses of the majority and hopefully correct them through the political process. </p>
<p>It will always be messy and argumentative (though it should be polite). There are no easy answers and the Democrats are not always at fault nor are the Republicans. Both stink, many times.</p>
<p>I do however regret the loss of Senator Joseph Lieberman (D - CT). He is a man of integrity and moderation I hope would have continued to represent CT. Here, the shrill anti-war types won - for the moment.</p>
<p>I don’t believe “We,The People” (as opposed to Them, The Politicians) have a prayer of bringing about constructive and meaningful change in our political system unless “We The People” stop playing THEIR destructive game of partisan politics. Why won’t we demand that they—ALL OF THEM—stop bickering and pointing fingers, but instead get down to work? Why won’t we demand that they cooperate and do what’s best for America for a change? In the past fifty or so years, I doubt Americans have ever been as vitriolically polarized along party lines as we are today. It quite honestly scares me, because it means we’ve never been more hoodwinked into believing that party affiliation determines “rightness”. </p>
<p>It doesn’t. </p>
<p>Only the doing of what’s right determines rightness; and quite frankly, neither party, once in power, demonstrates much of an inclination to do what’s right, because what’s right would be the desire to build concensus with the view toward actually solving our pressing problems, and meeting our growing needs. It would involve putting party affiliation last. It would involve a daily personal integrity gut-check on the part of every elected Washington official. It would involve a TRUE love of America. And I just don’t believe many politicians place America first. </p>
<p>But the sea change necessary to transform American politics MUST first occur in the hearts of Americans. If we would only wake up! If we would just tell the whole lot of them that we no longer care what they call themselves (Republicans, Democrats, whatever!—we only care about how well they exemplify the principles that show Americans at their best: Honesty, hardwork, fairness/equality, liberty, compassion, selflessness) and then prove it at the polls, then perhaps we would have reason to hope.</p>
<p>^^ :)</p>
<p>You go, girl! (assuming you’re female :rolleyes: )</p>
<p>Totally agree with poets at heart! I had a friend who, after a second marriage, moved over to the very conservative side, even having dinner with a few neo-con big wigs. She never wanted to hear facts, because Fox always told THE TRUTH and I didn’t understand. One day we met for coffee and after I pointed out 5 areas in which the conservatives and liberals would agree she seemed so surprised. That’s what happens if you blindly accept the “version of reality” given to you by the spinmasters and don’t really analyze it. Everyone can agree on quite a few things, once you take out the lies given to justify certain actions.
I’m thinking of Ralph Reed convincing the Christian Coalition in Texas to come out in a drive against Gambling in the state. Only now is it coming out that The Indian tribes in Louisiana, through Jack Abramoff, were paying for the protests, because they didn’t want casinos in Texas, they wanted everyone to have to go to Louisiana. If we really explore what is real and what is facts I would think "We the people’ would agree on MANY more issues!</p>
<p>The fact is “we the people” might agree on an awful lot, but “we” and the “corporate socialists” wouldn’t agree on much of anything, so the strategy is to keep us well entertained. ;)</p>