Skip to main content

quote:
Why are bloggers targeting Lieberman?
Are they more interested in ideology or winning elections?

As U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., races to fend off a stiff primary from anti-war challenger Ned Lamont, Washington's chattering class has been chattering. A lot. And a common refrain has been how the left's furious assault on the centrist Lieberman is an ideological witch-hunt, an attempt to cleanse the party of heretics, and -- just maybe -- a fight over the future of the Democratic Party.

"This isn't a fight between left and right," New York Times columnist David Brooks wrote earlier this month. "It's a fight about how politics should be conducted... What's happening to Lieberman can only be described as a liberal inquisition."

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14025016/

Or maybe, Bloggers [We The People] are objecting to Lieberman's Neo-Con politics. Lieberman is closer to this administration on many issues (e.g., Foreign policy, the War in Iraq, the coming War in Iran, the non-War in Lebanon, Tax Policy) than many life long Republicans.
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

I recently read an article that posited that there is no longer a Democrat/Republican fight; but rather, a Neo-Con versus Everyone else fight.

I happen to agree.

quote:
"you are not a good chicken, when all the foxes like you.."


Isn't that backwards? I would imagine that one is a great chicken, if the foxes like you. A fox is going to like a chicken regardless; but you'd be a lousy fox if the chickens liked (i.e., were not threatened by) you.
Since you are asking, I think changing these Mandatory Minimum sentences is in our intrest. Doing something about this No Child Left behind crap is in our best intrest. Getting some Economic development within our communities are in our intrest. Raising if the Minimum wage is in our best intrest. Allowing Africa the opportunity to participate in the WTO is in our best intrest. Basically having someone represent us,who will actually bring about positive change in the conditions of African people is in our best intrest. Quite frankly I have yet to see either the National Democratic Party or the National Republican Party really address any essential issues concerning African people.

What do you think is in the Intrest of Africans in America, and do you think the Democratic party addresses these issue? I assume you are a democrat , am I correct?
quote:
Originally posted by ZAKAR:

What do you think is in the Intrest of Africans in America, and do you think the Democratic party addresses these issue?


I suspect that if there was a viable (not necessarily in terms of winning an election, but in terms of having a real ability to draw significant numbers of votes) Black political party, that the Democratic party would be much more responsive to the interests of African Americans.

Absent such a real political threat, what's their incentive?
I got a question, why continue to support the Two Party System? Instead of "playing strategically" = vote Democrat, why don't we play strategically and vote Indy and push for a Multi-Party System? Why should we have to be forced to ultimately choose between the lesser of the two evils? The lesser evil is STILL AN EVIL.

Our goal is Black Liberation. The Democrats may support a few integrationist and paternalistic social measures, and a few corporate-friendly reforms to economically boost opportunities for the Black Community, but that's about it. They most they would ever want us to do is maybe to create a class of Black capitalists to work along with the White capitalists. That's it.

That's not Black Liberation, that's Con-Feed-style token integrationism. Why should we help the exploiters raise another class of exploiters from within the community? Our goal is the desruction of White Privilege, White Supremacy as well as class strife. The Democrats don't want a change to the class system any more than the Republicans. They don't want TOO MUCH of a change to the racial system either.

I think you'll find that as soon as we start pushing for the demolition of White Privilege and alternative economics, we'll quickly openly become the enemy of the Democrats. Not like they were ever on our side to begin with, they'll just start saying it to our faces like the Republicans do.


Republicans = Neoconservative White Supremacists
Democrats = Neoliberal/Keynesian White Supremacists with a smile and a smarmy glad-hand
quote:
Originally posted by Empty Purnata:
I got a question, why continue to support the Two Party System? Instead of "playing strategically" = vote Democrat, why don't we play strategically and vote Indy and push for a Multi-Party System? Why should we have to be forced to ultimately choose between the lesser of the two evils? The lesser evil is STILL AN EVIL.


Because a majority of Black people are not politically savvy enough to strategically unite for the purpose of changing the status quo. First and foremost, an all-out effort should be being made by those who do know and are supposed to be "leading" us in the right direction to have every one of us change their political registration to that of the Independent party. That in itself would cause a political ripple and make Dem and Repub heads start to turning!!

We could then sit back and be entertained by the scramble to figure out what we're doing and why and most importantly, what it is we're going to do next!!

Next would be to actually organize as a full and potentially lethal voting bloc against the party that couldn't come up with the biggest carrot. And ultimately, the creation of a third party more geared toward our political needs and solutions would more than likely be formulated to be able to take care of our specific goals.

Because neither of these current parties is capable of doing anything close to that.
^I agree, that's a good short-term strategy.

But we also have to think of the big picture in the long run. Ultimately, neither party will EVER support Black Liberation. They may support a few appeasement and integrationist goals in an attempt to satiate (ie. exitinguish) Black Liberation, but that's it.

That's a good starting plan, but I think that's only a start. Once we get underway with our long-term goals, I don't think either party will ever support us again. They'll never support full equal rights of African-Americans and they'll never support alternative economics.

I think we can educate our brothers and sisters to be savvy enough to change the status quo. We did it before, we can do it again.
quote:
Next would be to actually organize as a full and potentially lethal voting bloc against the party that couldn't come up with the biggest carrot. And ultimately, the creation of a third party more geared toward our political needs and solutions would more than likely be formulated to be able to take care of our specific goals.

ebonyroze..

now we are talking..
firstly i don't agree w/ democracy (or at least what-ever you wanna' call we practice in amerikkka..)

the dems could not win a national (and most state for that matter) elected positions w/ out the blaq vote..

they know that, the repugz know that..

so what do we do?

bring the dems to their knees, make them give us outlandish demands (reperations, 40 acres and a dam mule,ect)..

if they don't give it we don't vote or we turn in blank ballots...
quote:
Originally posted by blaqfist:
now we are talking..
firstly i don't agree w/ democracy (or at least what-ever you wanna' call we practice in amerikkka..)


We don't have democracy in America. What we have is capitalist republicanism (republicanism as in representative democracy). Our "democracy" consists of electing one of two people from two parties who claim to "represent" what we want or tell us what we "need". All politicians in this country are from the corporate class because those are the only people who can afford to run. Since that is their class status, the people who they "respresent" are business owners, financial moguls and major shareholders. Then the rest of us second.

The closet thing to democracy (direct democracy) on a national scale I've seen is in Switzerland.
I disagree, E.P. I fear our Capitalist Republic[nism] has degenerated into a Corporatocracy, or more commonally called a Fascist state. But the media continues to sell us on the appearance of the Capitalist Republic state.

I say this for the same reasons that you have accurately outlined, below:
quote:
Our "democracy" consists of electing one of two people from two parties who claim to "represent" what we want or tell us what we "need". All politicians in this country are from the corporate class because those are the only people who can afford to run. Since that is their class status, the people who they "respresent" are business owners, financial moguls and major shareholders. Then the rest of us second.
quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:
I disagree, E.P. I fear our Capitalist Republic[nism] has degenerated into a Corporatocracy, or more commonally called a Fascist state. But the media continues to sell us on the appearance of the Capitalist Republic state.

I say this for the same reasons that you have accurately outlined, below:
quote:
Our "democracy" consists of electing one of two people from two parties who claim to "represent" what we want or tell us what we "need". All politicians in this country are from the corporate class because those are the only people who can afford to run. Since that is their class status, the people who they "respresent" are business owners, financial moguls and major shareholders. Then the rest of us second.


You know I agree. Wink

The only difference with me is, I believe that capitalist republics are destined to devolve into corporatocracies because of the way they are structured.

Even if they don't devolve into Fascism, I still don't think capitalist republics are the most ideal society. Even though they are an improvement from corporate states.
quote:
Originally posted by Kweli4Real:
quote:
Why are bloggers targeting Lieberman?
Are they more interested in ideology or winning elections?

As U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., races to fend off a stiff primary from anti-war challenger Ned Lamont, Washington's chattering class has been chattering. A lot. And a common refrain has been how the left's furious assault on the centrist Lieberman is an ideological witch-hunt, an attempt to cleanse the party of heretics, and -- just maybe -- a fight over the future of the Democratic Party.

"This isn't a fight between left and right," New York Times columnist David Brooks wrote earlier this month. "It's a fight about how politics should be conducted... What's happening to Lieberman can only be described as a liberal inquisition."

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14025016/

Or maybe, Bloggers [We The People] are objecting to Lieberman's Neo-Con politics. Lieberman is closer to this administration on many issues (e.g., Foreign policy, the War in Iraq, the coming War in Iran, the non-War in Lebanon, Tax Policy) than many life long Republicans.


Lieberman is Jewish so I can see how he would be pulled in the war effort in Iraq although misguided. He votes with the Democrats 90 plus percent of the time, I agree with you.

Colin Powell is a smart man to advise them better then got out when he saw that Bush was not going to listen to him.
quote:
Originally posted by Empty Purnata:
^I agree, that's a good short-term strategy.

But we also have to think of the big picture in the long run. Ultimately, neither party will EVER support Black Liberation. They may support a few appeasement and integrationist goals in an attempt to satiate (ie. exitinguish) Black Liberation, but that's it.


Exactly, Empty Purnata. But, I believe our goal should be to not need their support anyway. Be accepting of any they might care to share, maybe ... but be self-sufficient enough to be able to control our own destiny and success.

quote:
That's a good starting plan, but I think that's only a start. Once we get underway with our long-term goals, I don't think either party will ever support us again. They'll never support full equal rights of African-Americans and they'll never support alternative economics.


Yes, it's definitely only a start ... but every long, great journey begins with a first step! Smile And then another ... and another ...

And they may not support those "alternative economics," but if they work for us, you can best believe they will try to steal, copy, borrow or somhow simply disrupt the process. But again, as long as we are taking care of us economically, educationally and socially, then we can wait for full equal rights.


quote:
I think we can educate our brothers and sisters to be savvy enough to change the status quo. We did it before, we can do it again.


I deeply hope you're right.
quote:
Originally posted by blaqfist:
bring the dems to their knees, make them give us outlandish demands (reperations, 40 acres and a dam mule,ect)..

if they don't give it we don't vote or we turn in blank ballots...


tfro tfro

The Dems would definitely try to cave before the Repubs ... one good solid show of solidarity by us, and it would cause a political ripple that would be at the least entertaining ... and at best change the political landscape of this country pretty much as what happened when the Dems became the Repubs and vice-versa!! Eek Eek

I mean, the Party of Lincoln?? Gimme a break! bang

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×