Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts)
Fri May-15-09 03:09 AM
Original message
I have to admit...I'm concerned.
I'm curious. Why did we fight so hard to put the Dems in Congress, to put a Dem in the Oval Office? Was it to, hopefully, look at reversing some of the worse trends that have afflicted us over the past dozen or more years? Usurious interest rates, skyrocketing healthcare, college education growing more and more expensive, and yet less and less effective at guaranteeing a good job once it's finished? Two wars that cannot be won, one of which in the very place where the Soviet military became mired, itself helping to end the Soviet Union once and for all.
I'm not much for blind loyalty. I voted for these people, I fought for them with my words, because I'd hoped that they'd actually represent us and work to protect US, the People, from being taken advantage of by unscrupulous corporate types. Okay, I'll admit it. I'm occasionally naive. Then again, I think hope is perhaps one of our greatest gifts. People without hope are simply grist for the mill.
It's things like the credit card "reform," locking single-payer advocates out of the debate, and ignoring the long term military, social, and political ramifications of torture that cause people to close the door on politics, to become what some like to call "apathetic," but I prefer to refer to as "disillusioned."
They won't fight for us. Not as a group, anyway. If 60% of Americans want single payer universal health care, who are these people to refuse to discuss it? Our employees? Our representatives? Or do they see themselves as something else entirely? These discussions should have nothing to do with what's best for the insurance and pharmaceutical industries, but what's best for Americans and America as a whole. Inviting them to participate in the debate is a bit like inviting the local meth dealers to a town meeting to discuss how best to deal with the meth epidemic.
Cries of "socialism!" from the right notwithstanding, it's about time the United States took a long look at the possibility of doing something akin to the rest of the western world. Putting the health and welfare of its citizens before the profitability of industry. We should have expected this attitude towards torture from the right, considering how much satisfaction and joy they get out of torturing logic. I'll be damned if I'll understand why someone making 25,000 dollars a year and paying several hundred dollars a month in health insurance would fight single-payer universal health care. Okay, I realize some of it's fear, fear that the Limbaughs and Hannitys have fomented for their own ideological purposes.
I'm serious when I say I'm concerned. What percentage of our ostensibly "democratic" senators and representatives actually serve US rather than corporate interests? I know that both Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell voted against the 15% interest rate cap. Can someone please explain to me how it benefits the vast majority of their constituents to be stuck with clearly usurious interest rates?
And Obama, in his speech on the subject, made me wonder as well. Certainly people should accept some of the responsibility for what they've done with their credit cards, but there is NO reason to tolerate the unethical and underhanded way many of these companies operate. We the People are currently loaning BILLIONS of dollars to the banks and yet, somehow, their perspective, their profitability, trumps the long-term welfare of the American people.
No, the Democrats aren't anywhere near as bad as the Republicans. Unfortunately, that's about the same as saying a rattlesnake isn't nearly as bad as a water moccasin--at least the rattler will warn you before it bites.
The Republican Party's discussion about renaming the Democratic Party can only leave one scratching one's head and thinking WTF? Wouldn't it have to actually act as though it GAVE a shit about the people to be the least bit socialist? So far I'm seeing only a few members of Congress acting that way. And, funny thing, one of those who are isn't a Democrat at all, but a SOCIALIST in truth.
More tortured logic from the masters of torture.
If this country is going to recover from what Bushco did to it, certain things will have to happen. We have to truly move into the 21st Century. We need unswerving dedication to finding clean, renewable energy, we need universal health care, we need a minimum standard of workers' rights, and we need a complete overhaul of our banking system intended not to serve the banks and their shareholders, but to serve the United States as a whole. They should be able to accept a reasonable profit margin rather than trying to stretch it beyond reason at every opportunity. Enough is enough.
Without these things, the U.S. will have abandoned any chance it has of remaining a real world power, and the end of the union will become a certainty no matter how long it actually takes. The way things are going, I have to wonder how many of the Dems are complicit, complacent, lazy, or just plain cowardly.
People are left asking "so, what do the Democrats stand for?" And the only answer we can give at this moment is "**** if we know." Because they clearly don't stand for defending the people against the banking industry, or the insurance and pharmaceutical giants. They don't stand for workers' rights. They don't stand for prosecuting war crimes.
So, indeed, what DO they stand for?
**** if I know.
Reading the letters to the sens/reps over at gradegov.com, you get a sense that the Democrat letter writers loathe their Dem critters as much as the rep letter writers. It's good reading. I really do think big changes are coming next year.
At least he got "ostensibly" right.