26 October 2009

Where's the party?

I'm a life-long Democrat. I spent a decade as a policy analyst for legislative Democrats. I've poured hundreds and hundreds of dollars into Democratic campaigns. I've gone door-to-door exhorting my fellow citizens to vote for them. I've happily supported many Democrats ... although I'll admit it has seemed that I've far too much time holding my nose and supporting equivocal Democrats simply because they were "the lesser of two evils." Through it all, I've been a good Democrat.

That approach led me through the 2006 elections, when the Democrats took both Houses of Congress from the neocons who had stolen it. I was hopeful that 2007 would see a new dawn of both capital-D Democracy and, more important, democracy itself.

Wrong.

The war continues, meaningful action on global warming is entirely absent, the administration's assault on the Constitution continues unabated, nothing's been done to reverse the growing disparity in our nation's distribution of wealth, the new Congressional majority acquiesces in the administration's abridgments of civil liberties and violations of international law, our addicition to petroleum continues unchecked as Congress fails to enact new CAFE standards or other effective conservation strategies, the leading Democrats vying for the Presidency utter dark threats against Iran which differ little from Republican threats of war except in the use of marginally softer words, the Senate continues to confirm the awful nominations coming from the White House, and the I-word remains unutterable against an administration which has horribly outstripped the petty offenses which charged against Bill Clinton.

However, the Democrats still want my money.

The other day, the Democratic National Committee sent me a fund-raising letter disguised as an opinion survey. Among other things, it asked me to rank order a list ten issues described as "the most important." Hah! There was nothing on the list about the administration's unconstitutional assertions of power. Nothing about "signing statements." Nothing about protecting our civil liberties. Nothing about torture. Nothing about habeas corpus. Nothing about Guantanamo and "rendition." Nothing about confirming the administration's awful appointments. Nothing about Mukasey. Nothing about restoring America's international reputation. Nothing about Iran. Nothing about caving in to lobbyists from ADM and other major corporations and calling it "energy policy." Nothing about impeaching Bush and Cheney. And nothing, absolutely nothing, about being a real party of opposition, a party "speaking truth to (the abuse of) power. Frankly, I'd rate all of these a tad higher than stem cell research, but I can guarantee that the Democrats won't use their Congressional majority to do anything about any of them. Most important? Most important? Hah! I'm afraid the Democrats don't even care.

Except about my money. And using it to gain a share of power, and the goodies it brings. Which doesn't seem to set them that far from the Republicans they should be opposing most forcefully.

As Mercutio would put it, a plague o' both their houses.

Note: this was originally posted on ketches, yaks & hawks 11 November 2007

2 comments:

sanderling said...

I’m with you, James. Got a call from the Democratic Governors group yesterday, asking for more money, and I answered that I couldn’t make any more donations until next near. I don’t know that any other comment I might make would travel beyond the paid solicitor, nor would any written comment on a mailed solicitation.
Does a third party have a chance?

Note: originally submitted by Jackie, 11 November 2007

sanderling said...

When they call me, I tell them what I think of the knaves in Congress. The soliciters usually tell me rather ruefully that they get that response from a lot of Dems. I can only think that the buzz goes up to higher levels in the organization, if only because it means the $$$$ aren’t rolling in the way they should.

Third parties have no chance, alas. Worse, they invariably weaken the major party closest to them, and strengthen the major party further away. Which is how Ralph Nader gave us George W. Bush. Beyond that, they push the party closer to them towards the middle, thereby defeating every purpose they’ve got.

The ONLY time a third party has been successful was in 1856-60 period, when one of the major parties was disintegrating and the other was fragmenting.

The only effective way to reform a major party is from within, as the neocons did in the 1980s and 90s.

Note: originally submitted by Sanderling, 11 November 2007