A Party That Stands For Nothing

I'm sure many of you are outraged over George Bush's recent comments about the Democratic party....But he was right. The Democratic party has become the party of obstruction who stands for nothing more than "no". So what's the plan?

Every piece of legislation, policy, or appointments have been met with a resounding "No!" from the DNC. At the same time, the DNC's lapdogs (as Hannity and Limbaugh are the lapdogs of the GOP), like DemocraticUnderground.org, MoveOn.org, and others rally to the no cry with tales of Armageddon if the republicans get their way. (I think it was just a plague of locusts if Judge Janice Brown was appointed).

Ok, so you don't like what the Republicans are doing. What's your solution? Where can the compromise begin? It's like dealing with a todler. "You need to go to the bathroom, son." "NO!" the kid screams as he pees himself.

So now my challenge to people who disagree with me. What is the plan? What's the solution to Iraq? What's the solution to Gitmo? What's the solution to Abu Gaharib(SP)? What's the solution to Socail Security? What's the solution to overcrowding in the prisons? What's the solution? Stop saying "no, bad man, bad man" and start suggesting how to fix the problems. We know there are problems out there, and we know the Republicans aren't perfect. Give us some feedback on how to make these policies better! You're killing your party, they have nothing more than two little letters to stand on these days: N and O.

Ya know, I am so unhappy with many of the things that this Republican Administration has done and seems poised to do. I don't like the influence of the religious right at all. I don't like the kowtowing to special interest (i.e.: big business). However, dispite all these faults, they are still much better than the Democrats

I agree, JJ. The Democrats offer no solutions. They seemingly have no plan at all other than opposition. I believe they are so overwhelmed by their lust for power, they have forgotten why that power exists and for whom it is supposed to used.

More than likely, I won't be voting for many Republicans next time around, but I will vote against Democrats.

It is sad to say that most Americans today do not vote for a person or party but against another person or party. It is like we choose the lessor of evils. I always wondered what would happen if we merged the two main parties, would we get something that could work on both international and domestic issues without ignore one when another is hot? I have not seen much come out of the other little parties to strike my fancy yet but you never know, it could happen.

We need at least two major parties to keep legislature decent. If everyone is there patting eachother on the back for their great ideas instead of questioning the validity of the points being made, our laws will not be well thought out and could have some major long-term ramifications. By having two parties, it prevents extreme laws, such as the draft bill proposed several years ago by the dems.

That may be true to a point but so far, the two parties are not impressing me. We have become our own worst enemy in DC and are not accomplishing much of anything other than making other countries mad. We are failing in international policy and we are failing at home. We have serious health care issues and illegal alien (people, not green people) issues that are out of control. It is like each party starts on something but never finishes the job. Sometimes you can spread yourself too thin and you can waste time in constant debates like the two parties do with each other.

If they spent half as much time on issues as they did trying to attack each other we might actually get something done for a change. Like in big business, it is time for a little re-organization and perhaps some down-sizing.

Falling into the blame-the-opposition trap is both counterproductive and a great way to divide the country further apart on issues and BOTH parties are guilty of playing along. Purely, for selfish reasons, it seems like no one wants to take accountability in Washington. By doing this, not only does your side lose integrity but also you are just adding to the already existing problem. The MSM (a joke) just fuels the problem even further by adding it’s spin…it’s how our society works these days and it’s a shame.

BUT, on some level the blame game must be working, it works for the side who provides the best spin…you can’t fight spin by bowing down to your opponents, NO you must spin back. This is what we see happening now, many Americans are too lazy to connect the dots themselves that they seek talking heads to tell them how to think. The strong desire to be right makes it easy to ignore how things went wrong in the first place. Accountability is important to insure we don't make the same mistakes over and over.

Current issues you brought up:

Iraq – This has become a complete disaster; it’s a damned if we do…damned if we don’t situation. It was a huge mistake in which I believe was based on LIES. While I do believe that Bush should be held accountable, in the meantime we need to come together and figure out resolutions to this dilemma…”freedom takes time” is just not good enough. Both republicans and democrats are at odds on this subject matter, my personal opinion is that we need to hand Iraq over to the Iraqi’s and figure out a responsible way to bring our troops home. I do believe that the draft was an attention-getter for the president to start taking some action on this problem, no one wants a draft…have we not learned anything from past mistakes? Bush is losing much support over this and it has nothing to do with partisan politics, one does not have to be a democrat to disagree with this needless war. Even a few republicans have suggested that Bush make plans to leave Iraq…the white house has plainly dismissed that idea.

If you think that problems with military recruitment have nothing to do with this Iraqi mess then you are truly delusional; this is another reason why I believe we should bring our troops home. I believe that more Americans will be more willing to serve our government if the cause is good and right.

Gitmo – Instead of facing this dilemma, some people are pretending like it doesn’t exist, while others are frustrated and making Nazi references. Again, both parties need to act…instead it’s putting both sides on the defensive: republicans ignoring the problem and telling the dems they are crazy, democrats in turn are frustrated with the lack of accountability and are making exaggerated insults. Back and forth while the media goes wild and pits the two sides further against each other.

Social Security – If the democrats are being so unreasonable here then why after months and months are the republicans still in disagreement over the matter? It seems like the president is having a hard time selling his new social security plan to America, period. Instead of the democrats discussing other options, they have fallen into the trap of responding by blaming the republicans for putting us into this mess while some didn’t think it was ever a problem in the first place. In all honesty, no matter what Bush claims…social security isn’t one of the nation’s leading problems at the moment.

Abu Gharib – Old news and another embarrassment to our country, instead of taking responsibility people place the blame on others.

Both sides need to grow up and take responsibility for the problems they have caused while working together to come up with solutions. Of all people, Bush needs to play his part by being a true leader. Real leadership is not about avoiding blame or assigning it to someone else. Leadership is about helping both parties to understand what has happened, and then stepping out in front with a solution.

Can you honestly say Bush has done this? BTW, I challenge you to answer me without including the name Clinton.






[edit on 6/17/2005 by Lecky]

Originally posted by junglejake
I'm sure many of you are outraged over George Bush's recent comments about the Democratic party....But he was right. The Democratic party has become the party of obstruction who stands for nothing more than "no". So what's the plan?

Obstruct tyranny. Yes. That's the plan. Protect what we've got. Promote civil liberties of all and the progress of society as whole.

Every piece of legislation, policy, or appointments have been met with a resounding "No!" from the DNC.

Quit proposing stupid # and we'll support it.

Ok, so you don't like what the Republicans are doing. What's your solution? Where can the compromise begin?

Why compromise on issues Americans overwhelmingly disagree with? Compromise on what? Your efforts to introduce theocracy? Reduce civil liberties? Increase the debt? Screw the middle class? Why compromise with that?

It's like dealing with a todler. "You need to go to the bathroom, son." "NO!" the kid screams as he pees himself.

Maybe there's a reason America doesn't like being told when to go to the bathroom (or being taken by the GOP). Authoritarian perverts.

So now my challenge to people who disagree with me. What is the plan?

What's the solution to Iraq?

A start would be to stop torturing people and turning the world against us with bonehead appointments like Bolton.

What's the solution to Gitmo?

Hello? Stop torturing people.

What's the solution to Abu Gaharib(SP)?

Is this thing on? Stop Torturing People!

What's the solution to Socail Security?

Oh, you mean in 40 years? Well, it's certainly not to turn it over to Wall Street in a thoughtless fever pitch rush simply because Bush only has so many days left to fulfill his promises to donors.

What's the solution to overcrowding in the prisons?

Well you could stop trying to make everything illegal. That'd help.

What's the solution? Stop saying "no, bad man, bad man" and start suggesting how to fix the problems. We know there are problems out there, and we know the Republicans aren't perfect. Give us some feedback on how to make these policies better! You're killing your party, they have nothing more than two little letters to stand on these days: N and O.

You know it's not like there wasn't a whole campaign forum on this or Kerry and the DNC didn't have mountains of paper and speeches on how they'd fix what they saw as real problems during the campaign.

You seem to be under the impression now that there's a "solution" or third option to what the GOP considers important. No, banning butt sex isn't big on my list of concerns. Just say no.

[edit on 17-6-2005 by RANT]

Originally posted by Lecky
Can you honestly say Bush has done this? BTW, I challenge you to answer me without including the name Clinton.

Not mentioning Clinton (besides there and once more) won't be a problem. If you wanted me to include Clinton, then I'd have a problem

Yes, I can say Bush has done this. He may not be the best at doing it (Reagan was awesome at it, as was FDR), but he does it well. The press conferences and State of the Unions we've seen Bush has identified problems and made propositions to fix them. He has also said that if those ideas aren't good enough, respond with a better solution. The response? "No!"

Why is Iraq such a disaster? I've heard people talk about the casualty reports as an indication the war is far worse than anyone ever expected it to be. Do you realize we took over an entire country and have lost less than 3000 soldiers doing it?!

In Vietnam, we lost 58,184 brave soldiers. 36,913 in Korea. 405,399 in WWII.

Vietnam was a waste of time in an attempt to help France regain control over one of its colonies (and possibly as a training ground to create veteran officers for a coming war with the USSR since so many vets from WWII and Korea were retiring or passing on), didn't do it, and lost almost sixty thousand soldiers. In Korea, we repelled an offensive by China and North Korea into South Korea. We won, and lost almost thirty seven thousand soldiers. World War 2 we liberated Europe and lost 405 thousand soldiers with the help of millions more who didn't make it from our ally countries.

Now, there's terrorism there in Iraq. Those brave and noble terrorists realized that our soldiers were a threat when trying to blow themselves up, so they started targetting Iraqis. They're not as prepared as our troops, and the Iraqi casualties have been steadily climbing. These sick $#%^s are targetting women and children because they can't kill our soldiers. Instead of going after the military, they decided to wage a PR war by killing innocents and then saying it's America's fault they have to kill innocents. The worst part is, our media is buying it!

Gitmo: Instead of facing this dilemma, some people are pretending like it doesn’t exist, while others are frustrated and making Nazi references.

And what about those who know it exists and think it's a good idea? AI came out and called it a Gulag. When called on it, they admitted they really didn't know the conditions in there. Dick Durbin explained to us that the A/C was on so low some prisoners were shivering, and this makes Gitmo equvelant to a concentration camp. Does that mean I can charge my company with torturing me and violating my human rights? I'm shivering right now because the A/C is too low. The day before yesterday, my car was about 120 degrees in there. Should I go after Toyota for not making a sufficient ventalation system so as to keep the car cool when I'm not using it on a 95 degree day?

I will admit, hearing loud rap music I would consider torture. Actually, I should start calling the cops and reporting war crimes every time a car passes me or I pass a car cranking it with their windows open.

Where do we move the prisoners if Gitmo isn't any good?

Finally,

Falling into the blame-the-opposition trap is both counterproductive and a great way to divide the country further apart on issues and BOTH parties are guilty of playing along.

Can you tell me where I'm wrong in my original assessment? Where haven't the Dems been a party of opposition instead of progressive in trying to fix legislature put forward?

Originally posted by junglejake
Can you tell me where I'm wrong in my original assessment? Where haven't the Dems been a party of opposition instead of progressive in trying to fix legislature put forward?

Stopping what you're trying to break is about the best a minorty party can do.

You think the Democrats don't propose legislation, and propose compromises to boot? How far does it even get as a minorty party? Barely in the press is how far, and hardly anybody even bothers to respond here.

I'm sure a Hillary fan can come along and give you stats on her bi-partisan co-sponsers in a minute, but this I know well...

An excellent Proposal to Reduce Abortions

That would be a "compromise" ... a solution to satisy the most Americans possible. But no. Ya'll don't like that because it promotes contraception.

Your efforts in that area?

Wisconsin GOP May Ban Morning After Pill :shk:

You tell me how to compromise with a party that demands nothing but lock step agreement on every single issue? How Jake?

And don't even try to tell me your party isn't run by bona fide crazy people.


CRAZY PEOPLE!

You've got to tell me where that pic came from, Rant! You'll have a response to what you said from me later, kinda busy at work right now, but I really want to know where that pic came from!

Originally posted by junglejake
In Korea, we repelled an offensive by China and North Korea into South Korea.

No, you're wrong there.

North Korea attacked South Korea. They pushed South Korea back to the Pusan along with the small number of American soliders that were helping the them.
United Nations (over 17 Nations of it) then attacked North Korea under General Douglas MacArthur, this was called Task Force Smith and began on July the 5th. They pushed North Korea back to the Yalu River, which China had told them if they attempted to cross the Peoples Republic would defend their Nation.
This is what they did and pushed America back down to the 38th which is where the war ended. The Chinese never got involved in the war prior to October the 19th, nor did the U.S.S.R and this resulted in the largest retreat in American Military History. (X-Corp Retreat)
The Chinese never made any attempt to take South Korea, they only attempted to hold the 38th. The units that attempted to take the South were always Korean. China only held a defencive war nothing more.

The 101st Fighting Keyboarders for Bush over at PowerLine are selling them.

It's funny, but it's maddening.


EDIT: And Limbaugh. Ugh. No longer remotely funny.

Limbaugh touted "Club G'itmo, the Muslim resort"
mediamatters.org...

As part of a new "advertising campaign" for the U.S. detention facility at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, radio host Rush Limbaugh suggested touting the facility as "Club G'itmo, the Muslim resort," a "tropical paradise down there where Muslim extremists and terrorist wannabes can get together for rest and relaxation." On his website, he is even selling "Club G'itmo" T-shirts that read "I Got My Free Koran and Prayer Rug at G'itmo," "Your Tropical Retreat from the Stress of Jihad," "My Mullah went to Club G'itmo and All I Got Was This Lousy T-Shirt," and "What Happens in G'itmo Stays in G'itmo."

Of course, he's got to take it to the extreme and actually try to offend people to make his dope money. Sad. People eat that stuff up.

Yay torture!

[edit on 17-6-2005 by RANT]

Kind of a Cognitive Dissonace Acid Reflux or something? Jake has the "Hey Koolaid" size glass of the Koolaid.
Man, I know I was on a team during the Campaign Forum era, I know I wrote several long disertations answering these questions, along with my teammates. I know the Republican arguments got splayed & tanned like hides....yet, this 'obstructionist' canard making the circuit on the dirt track of Republican "thinking" boards take Dim Sons speech & is sucking it up like Mama's milk, while crapping out this "logic" that Jake's spounting off.

Where do you get the gaul to ask for compromise when GOP Chairmen storm out of sessions carrying their gavels and turning off the mics of Democrats? Where do you get the gaul asking for compromise to legitimize impeachable offenses? I can go on, but Rant nailed you to the cross already ( S.O.B. takes all the fun! ).
But hey, DU , being on the radio + TV everyday in every market like Rush & O'Reilly is reality in your world, along with Bush not getting a fair shake in the media!

Originally posted by Bout Time
Where do you get the gaul to ask for compromise

From the fact that the Republicans control the majority, but not a supermajority. As a result, the minority party has to work with the majority party to compromise on legislation. When you have a supermajority in place, compromise is out the window. When you're the minority, compromise is all you have if you want to do your job. That's where the gaul comes from

(still comin', rant )

Originally posted by junglejesus
Yes, I can say Bush has done this. He may not be the best at doing it but he does it well.

How is calling the democrats the party of obstruction productive? I don't see him putting any effort into cooperating with the democrats on anything…in fact I doubt he gives a damn what the democrats have to say. Been watching the news lately?

The press conferences and State of the Unions we've seen Bush has identified problems and made propositions to fix them. He has also said that if those ideas aren't good enough, respond with a better solution. The response? "No!"

Oh please, that's such a comedy show, no one ever asks him hard questions...the man is never taken accountable for anything. It's all show, it's not what really goes down in D.C. and you know it.

Why is Iraq such a disaster? I've heard people talk about the casualty reports as an indication the war is far worse than anyone ever expected it to be. Do you realize we took over an entire country and have lost less than 3000 soldiers doing it?!

I don't understand how people just shrug off a war that was completely unnecessary to begin with. It really makes me want to go out and enlist! 100,000 Iraqi's dead, 1700 Americans dead...ho hum. Why is taking over Iraq worth it? Lets stop pretending that Iraq was a threat and deal with the real issues. How can you complain about democrats when the president doesn't have any solutions himself?

Now, there's terrorism there in Iraq. Those brave and noble terrorists realized that our soldiers were a threat when trying to blow themselves up, so they started targetting Iraqis.

What our media fails to mention is the fact that some insurgents are just people fighting for their country that we invaded. It's not a clear cut good guys vs. bad guys situation.

And what about those who know it exists and think it's a good idea? AI came out and called it a Gulag. When called on it, they admitted they really didn't know the conditions in there. Dick Durbin explained to us that the A/C was on so low some prisoners were shivering, and this makes Gitmo equvelant to a concentration camp. Does that mean I can charge my company with torturing me and violating my human rights? I'm shivering right now because the A/C is too low.

Do you honestly think the democrats are making up torture stories out of spite for Bush?

Can you tell me where I'm wrong in my original assessment? Where haven't the Dems been a party of opposition instead of progressive in trying to fix legislature put forward?

You are leaving out some major parts of the story, which I believe have been addressed by other posters above.



[edit on 6/18/2005 by Lecky]

I do often feel frusterated at the democrat's lack of progress, and over-use of saying "no" to everything that Bush proposes. And from what I've heard, although I wasn't involved in politics at that time (I was like 12), the Republicans were pretty bad during the Clinton administration as well. However, this, in my mind, doesn't excuse the actions of the democrats today.

I'd just like to comment on that editorial comic that was just posted.

The democrats do have plans for social security. Just because you don't hear them in your choice of media does not mean they don't exist.

One plan involves cutting the Bush tax cuts by 1/3, which would pay for social security for the next 75 years.

You do know that Bush has admitted that his privitization plan would not add one penny to the solvency issue of social security.

The plan he keeps touting would actually cost more than doing nothing.

Even if it were true, doing nothing is a form of action. By saying no that is offering an alternative to saying yes. The GOP is refusing to consider any compromise, why should the democrats do any differently?

Bush seems to think he is fiscally conservative. Why is the deficit so enormous? Would we be worse off if we spent such a deficit on universal healthcare instead of a war in Iraq and tax cuts?

We all need to realize that the Bush administration's goals are not in any of our best interests.

This goes beyond pary lines, this is all of us being screwed for others gain.