Sunday, September 5, 2010

Democrats Pay How Much For War? - 2

About a year ago Dredd Blog wondered how much Democrats were willing to pay for war.

Bloggers here and elsewhere wondered why they did not get "it", it being that the American majority was against the wars.

It seemed to us that the Democrats were under the mistaken impression that the neoCon base of the right wing Republicans were who voted those dems into office.

I explained what was meant by "how much would the wars cost" the Democrats:
I mean in the upcoming elections, since they have shown, up until this point, that they will pay any amount for war, but very little for domestic needs.

The people have polled against the wars for years now, to no avail. The people overwhelmingly voted the neoCon republican hawks out, to give the democrats a chance to do what the people want.

Nevertheless, the wars continue, now having lasted longer than WW I and WW II combined.
(Democrats Pay How Much For War?). A study on the polling shows the majority has been sick of the wars for longer than WW I and WW II lasted:
Although some polls show Americans have already decided against a second Obama term in 2012, there remains much time for recovery, although the economy shows signs of even further weakening and war losses are growing.

Langer sets June 2004 as the first time a polling majority (52%) decided the Iraq war was not worth it. And numbers went downhill from there, not coincidentally, as casualty figures rose. The Afghan war, which was tied so closely to Sept. 11 and its planning, has gone on more in the background.

However, recent polls show dissatisfaction mounting.
(LA Times). Obviously those in the U.S. government who promisingly lie during campaigns could care less what the people think or want, so the question arises, "Who are these people?"

That was explained in the post Circle W Cowboys.

UPDATE: For an example of the antithesis to The Circle W Cowboys, I offer a response by Noam Chomsky, who has remained humane in the face of government depravity:
I had taken dozens of journalists, peace activists, diplomats, experts and others out to camps of refugees who had fled U.S. saturation bombing. Chomsky was one of only two who wept openly upon learning how these innocent villagers had seen their beloved grandmothers burned alive, their children slowly suffocated, their spouses cut to ribbons, during five years of merciless, pitiless and illegal U.S. bombing for which U.S. leaders would have been executed had international law protecting civilians in wartime been applied to their actions. It was obvious that he was above all driven by a deep feeling for the world’s victims, those he calls the “unpeople” in his new book. No U.S. policymakers I knew in Laos, nor the many I have met since, have shared such concerns.
(Truthdig, emphasis added). We have all chosen sides in the recent wars that continue to do the same thing. Weep if you are humane, but if you can't yet, keep trying.


  1. The questions are, is it worth it to vote them out to teach'em a lesson, when we know we'll get someone worse if we do? And even if we want to do that, how do we really make it known that we coming after them (note keeping with the cowboy theme) from the left? The real left never is mentioned in the media most people see, including politicians.

    I was actually polled recently, and I had the person on the phone in stitches as I told her my real views, which weren't even close to any of the boxes she had check off. It made her day, I guess, but, for instance, 'Do I call myself liberal or conservative or (some other choice I can't remember), or don't know?' The choices of who I voted for were Republican or Democrat, Independent, or 'don't know'! Even tho she knew where I was coming from, there was no place for her to put my opinions on the form.

    What do you think would happen if, between now and the general election masses of registered Dems changed their registration to 'Peace and Freedom, Green, or Socialist Workers Party - ANY leftwing party? I'm not even saying that those parties are viable now, but they have published platforms that include many good things. What would the Dems in office do? They'd have to get the message, at least, and just registering would make it clear that people don't want to go to the right, but the Dems are blowing it. What say you?*

    * I guess these parties have been trying this for years, so then the question is, how to get Dems to do it?

    If they shaped up by the election one could then still vote them in, or not.

  2. By the way, I suggested this to, instead of having house parties and stuff for the Dems. I don't think they'll go for it, do you? Ha!

  3. Alice,

    The dems are betting that people will not go over the edge no matter how much the dems move to the right.

    In this age of madness that is a very risky bet.

    We shall see if the voting public is going to jump out of the frying pan into the fire.

    It could happen, we could move more quickly toward a third world status.

    The warsters want Social Security money now.

    Like George Carlin said years ago, "they want your Social Security and they are going to get it".

    That means a jerky move much further to the right is in the cards it would seem.

    We live in very dangerous times.

  4. Sure, this has been going on for a long time, now. The question is, what can we do to avoid catastrophe?

    It appears one must be adult about things, ignore the insults and betrayals and go on trying to work with the Dems.

    I'm not callow enough to say, don't vote for them, let the chips fall where they may. Even though there is little difference between the two parties, there is a little.

    I was hoping the brilliant fellow who created the Dredd Blog would have some ideas how to get some traction against this rightward and down slide.

  5. Alice,

    Your approach is as good as any.

    The only thing I can recommend beyond, which I have said before, is better mass therapy.

  6. There comes a time when it is too late. All math, science, and common sense supports that reality.

    Clearly it is too late to save the current civilization.

    The wise will prepare to develop a better civilization based upon the reality of the planet we inhabit, the solar system we inhabit, and the cosmos we inhabit.

    The current civilization missed all of that in terms of how government functions.

    That is what the Dredd Blog System has freely informed us of.

    Now get out there and figure out how to survive the collapse of this civilization so you can improve the next one.