the party for no one?
these days, it’s clear whose interests the republicans represent at our capitol: those with money, influence, and power. these are the people who benefit from illegal wars, lax environmental policies/enforcement, and top bracket tax cuts, just to name a few. and while i wouldn’t say the republicans represent the religious right, they certainly pretend to (in order to keep control). now, can you tell me who the democrats represent? the average response is the working man. the middle and lower classes. at least, they used to.
political commentary following the november midterms was more or less consistent: the democrats didn’t win, the republicans lost. with no clear plan or message, the democratic party cleaned up in the elections and was given back control of congress for the first time in 12 years. those same commentators also said the number one issue was the war in iraq. while i’m starting to believe democrats are the sharpest knives in the drawer, it seems pretty clear to me that they won because people are sick of the war and want out of iraq.
now, little more than a month after their startling victory the party of the common person still has no clear plan or vision for iraq. in fact, there are those amongst the party leadership that seem to think SENDING MORE TROOPS IS A GRAND IDEA! reid has said he’s not apposed to the idea and (as far as in know) pelosi hasn’t publicly claimed a position. i wish this was a sign that i have wandered into some alternate reality, but alas, i cannot feign surprise. as has become sadly typical for the democratic members of congress they seem to be flailing wildly with no plan, no party cohesion, and no hope of making any real changes.
mere days after the election, speaker-to-be pelosi politely stepped any discussion for impeachment right out in front of the bus. since then, while congressmen and women do their christmas shopping, progressives (i prefer to call them liberals, but whatever) across the country have been organizing for showdown on the issue of impeachment, despite the democratic party’s apparent unwillingness to even discuss the issue.
and don’t even get me started on the issue of INCREASING the size of the US military….
i am disappointed and disgusted (though not remotely surprised) with the democratic party. unfortunately, they are continue to be the lesser of two evils and i’m forced to swallow hard every time i’m asked of which party am i a member. let’s face it, the days of party politics (at least the good parts) are gone forever. just about the only way to tell the difference between republicans and democrats these days is to ask to see their party membership card.

![[PDA - Heathcare NOT Warfare - Sign the Petition.]](http://pdamerica.org/images/ads/HealthNotWar_final.jpg)
you are extremely sorely mistaken on who represents who. both parties rely on money, influence and power. R’s use big business. D’s use big labor and social program $ recipients. both parties evil at their extremes and civil at their centers. both have rich sponsors that believe in the cause. both get twisted agendas.
now, if you want to take your comparison and bring it home, to Hawaii, there’s no discussion here to be had. The D’s have been in nearly absolute power since ‘59 and look what we have to show for it.
the lesson? there should always be a two party system in place. any one party gets too powerful and the inevitable corruption follows.
Comment by Pohaku Kala — December 20, 2006 @ 9:17 pm
i do, in fact understand this and while ‘big labor and social program $ recipients’ (when you say labor, i think of unions) do have their problems, i think they are a far cry better than big business. big business has been working slowly over the years to erode these two groups.
the middles in both parties have shrunk nearly out of existence, leaving only the evil extremes. though i rarely (if ever) agree with the republican platform and am only slightly more aligned with the dems, i do believe in a MULTI-party system. i think the lesson is that our simple two party system has failed miserably. we need more party diversity in politics (both locally and nationally).
Comment by frosty — December 21, 2006 @ 10:56 am