With Democrats like these, who needs Republicans?


4 comments posted
We have devolved just as the founding fathers feared we would

The system set up in the Constitution was intended specifically to prevent us from developing a two-party system. They knew that this kind of binary prevents things from getting done. We were always intended to function more independently and have more flexibility in government and citizen participation in it allows. I want to know why we can't demand that we go back to the original design of the Constitution. It has gradually been changed into the mess we have today - let's go back to the beginning and restructure everything as it was originally designed.

Support the Women's Autonomy and Sexual Sovereignty Movements

Morgaine Swann's picture
Posted by Morgaine Swann on 30 September 2005 - 11:51pm
Have we devolved as the founding fathers feared

Evolution of the two party system is attributed soley to the advent of mass media culture. Around the turn of the last century, radio broadcasting was in it's infancy. Political parties quickly moved to consolidate thier power for greater control of the message and assure longevity in office.

This era saw the emergence of the professional politician. The 'professional politician' is contrary to what the founding father's intended; they saught plurality through multiple parties and advocated for a citizen legislature that would return to their farms and businesses when congress was not in session.

Many of today's media outlets, print and broadcast, bar coverage of third party candidates. If they do cover them, they are typecast as mavericks and relegated to the style pages of your local rag. Just the term "third party candidate" has a 'redheaded-step-child' connotation to it, a sort of anomaly in the political spectrum.

The media sought access to this inner sanctum in the early days of radio and wire services, and has shown it's hegemony since. Further consolidation of the fourth estate only seals the fate of any candidate who would challenge this very new status quo.

It's hopless.

Daniel Menefee's picture
Posted by Daniel Menefee (not verified) on 1 October 2005 - 8:08pm

Hey MG, thanks for the link. Eventually, I'll get around to turning this into a web application so that you can do real-time analysis.

One thing I did want to point out, I put out the Hillary and Reid profiles as comparisons to Nelson's, not to complain that they were also Republican. I'm not a fan of Hillary's, particularly. She is the DLC poster-child and she's pandering to position herself to the right. Her voting record, however, compares with Kerry's. Reid is in the middle on my chart, but if you eliminate the gun stuff, he looks much better. I suspect Leiberman, who's right next to him in the Senate analysis, doesn't fare as well.

I also did a pdf on the recent House vote on the Threatened and Endangered Species Recovery Act, another one of those bizarro world-named bills, which weakens the act it pretends to save.

Anyway, thanks again.

DrLaniac's picture
Posted by DrLaniac (not verified) on 1 October 2005 - 2:36pm

Does anyone recall George's use of the phrase "humble foreign policy?"

David's picture
Posted by David (not verified) on 1 October 2005 - 6:41pm