They're all the same

[UberNeuman]

well - what does that mean?

Often I see that or hear it and I wonder to myself what the meaning of that is...

Facts are, they're not "all the same" or there would be no argument...

And the oft wished dream of some others to drag us past our disagreements - guess what... they ain't there....

Discuss... if you're willing...

 

[SirStev0]

Sigh, I don't feel like typing an actual response, so here is the gist of what will probably be written in everyone of the next few posts:

Rose-colored glasses, troll, Kool-Aid, flame, Meaningless side rant, Flame, sheeple.

 

[UberNeuman]

Sigh, I don't feel like typing an actual response, so here is the gist of what will probably be written in everyone of the next few posts:

Rose-colored glasses, troll, Kool-Aid, flame, Meaningless side rant, Flame, sheeple.

And I thank you for that - and it should task everyone, be it Dem, Rep, Libertarian, to step up to the plate...

How are they not all the same?

 

[Jaskalas]

Facts are, they're not "all the same" or there would be no argument...

Argument is to divide and conquer the electorate.

Both parties are the old and entrinched incumbents who don't give a shit what you think they will serve themselves and increase government programs and spending. No reductions, that'd be like cutting one of their arms off. Self preservation has them grow the government they belong to. That they are part of.

They are all the same, in that they are the enemy.

 

[MotF Bane]

Civil rights/freedoms: both parties consistently work to take them away, despite lip service to the contrary. For the latest and greatest example, look no further than the "Patriot" Act.

Government size: both parties expand the government. There is no party of small government. It's growth and more growth.

Economy: really, it's largely the same. Corporations and unions own Congress. Plus, both parties threw money at the latest economic downturn. They bickered about exactly how much or where, but not so much about the idea of it.

Foreign policy: one side gets into wars, the other continues them. You can even look back to Vietnam. Didn't matter which side was in power, that war just dragged on. You'll get dog and pony shows of cuts or hearings, but the bulk of the foreign policy, and of the DoD, remains much the same.

Spending: ha, ha, HA. There is no fiscal conservatism, there is a non-stop spending spree with the largest credit card in the history of the world.

What else do you want me to cover?

 

[woolfe9999]

Count me among those who think there are real ideological differences between the parties, even though to a large extent the real world functional differences are not as much as one might expect. There are several reasons for that. One is that our system in Congress tends to empower moderates in both parties by making them the swing voters. Accordingly, most legislation that actually succeeds ends up being a blend of the two relatively polar ideological positions.

The issue about neither party being fiscally conservative is also misleading. The trouble with fiscal conservation is that it seems to be easier to get an agreement to do something that harms the fiscal balance sheet than something that helps it. The American populace wants fiscal responsibility, but absolutely every individual thing that must be done to balance the books is immensely unpopular. When every elected official wants to be re-elected, what else do we expect?

A better question to ask is how either party would function if in total power, unchecked by any opposition. The dems may have come close for a year, but the truth is there were conservatives in their own party they had to contend with, and in the end, even without real opposition in government, they are still accountable at the ballot box. The scenario I'm talking about is where either party can push through its full agenda without concern about either opposition or re-election. I think in that kind of scenario you'd see extremely different policies from the two parties.

- wolf

 

[Siddhartha]

I know a guy who instead of just complaining about politicians and politics actually tries to do something about it by being politically active.

My response to the OP, is stop complaining and get involved, volunteer your resources to candidates that you support and or run for political office.

One of the cool things about living in the US is there are regularly elections at all levels of government. Get involved in working towards the changes you think are needed.

 

[Zebo]

They're all the same in that it takes money to even make a competitive run for a seat. That money can come from government labor unions, Business, religious orgs and whatnot - regardless of whom, they are co-opted before they even get elected and do not represent their constituents by in large.

I mean hell, Just Chis Christie, the New Governor of NJ when he was a Federal Prosecutor office won convictions of 130 public officials, both Republican and Democratic, on the state, county and local levels without losing a single corruption or bribery case.

The proof is out there just read. I see all the time locally with wealthy developers getting anything they want and smaller having to jump through hoops. Nationally it's very easy to see it. Check out democratic backtracking on public option once they found out they could do it though reconciliation. Dropped public option like a hot potato because they who who pays their bills.

They whined for a year now of only having 54 votes for a public option but said they really really wanted it. As the public wants it. Soon as it became a reality 5 additional democratic senators, now say , it's just too divisive even though it's the most popular thing in the whole 'making you buy private insurance bill' - utterly corrupt. Dems just pretend better.

 

[Zebo]

Civil rights/freedoms: both parties consistently work to take them away, despite lip service to the contrary. For the latest and greatest example, look no further than the "Patriot" Act.

Government size: both parties expand the government. There is no party of small government. It's growth and more growth.

Economy: really, it's largely the same. Corporations and unions own Congress. Plus, both parties threw money at the latest economic downturn. They bickered about exactly how much or where, but not so much about the idea of it.

Foreign policy: one side gets into wars, the other continues them. You can even look back to Vietnam. Didn't matter which side was in power, that war just dragged on. You'll get dog and pony shows of cuts or hearings, but the bulk of the foreign policy, and of the DoD, remains much the same.

Spending: ha, ha, HA. There is no fiscal conservatism, there is a non-stop spending spree with the largest credit card in the history of the world.

What else do you want me to cover?

I agree 100%. I forgot about the DOD lobby in my post but many don't understand National War Powers Commission, CFR, Defense Policy Board especially et al are just defense company front groups who advise congress and president to war and often. Both parties stack em when not revolving through "lucrative" defense contractors and government "service" doors.

I just love how People think Bush was stupid. All his advisors too, all dumb, not knowing these wars would take more than 6 weeks. Nor about Sectarian Divide. Guess they all are a bunch of idiots...Democratic congress too just mislead by dumb ole Bush... like PhD's Greenspan and Bernake who saw no signs of impending blowup... funny the guys cashing these huge checks year after year from defense contractors to Bankers lobby for such idiots, isn't it? I think not.

 

[waggy]

Civil rights/freedoms: both parties consistently work to take them away, despite lip service to the contrary. For the latest and greatest example, look no further than the "Patriot" Act.

Government size: both parties expand the government. There is no party of small government. It's growth and more growth.

Economy: really, it's largely the same. Corporations and unions own Congress. Plus, both parties threw money at the latest economic downturn. They bickered about exactly how much or where, but not so much about the idea of it.

Foreign policy: one side gets into wars, the other continues them. You can even look back to Vietnam. Didn't matter which side was in power, that war just dragged on. You'll get dog and pony shows of cuts or hearings, but the bulk of the foreign policy, and of the DoD, remains much the same.

Spending: ha, ha, HA. There is no fiscal conservatism, there is a non-stop spending spree with the largest credit card in the history of the world.

What else do you want me to cover?

and thats pretty much it. Both parties only real goal is to stay in power.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Civil rights/freedoms: both parties consistently work to take them away, despite lip service to the contrary. For the latest and greatest example, look no further than the "Patriot" Act.

Government size: both parties expand the government. There is no party of small government. It's growth and more growth.

Economy: really, it's largely the same. Corporations and unions own Congress. Plus, both parties threw money at the latest economic downturn. They bickered about exactly how much or where, but not so much about the idea of it.

Foreign policy: one side gets into wars, the other continues them. You can even look back to Vietnam. Didn't matter which side was in power, that war just dragged on. You'll get dog and pony shows of cuts or hearings, but the bulk of the foreign policy, and of the DoD, remains much the same.

Spending: ha, ha, HA. There is no fiscal conservatism, there is a non-stop spending spree with the largest credit card in the history of the world.

What else do you want me to cover?

Excellent summary. I'm sure Craig will be here any moment to defend the "progressives" and how they're "different" than the "other" Democrats -- the same Democrats he blindly supported until recently.

 

[NAPA7M]

I think MotF Bane is right on target.

I dont see parties in our government. I see slightly different arguing points intended to keep the masses distracted. Our society has been duped - convinced of an altruistic intent, so its smooth sailing from here [for them]. Its a full blown assault on individual liberties and the constitution (everything that made this country what it once was) by Big Government and the financiers that own it.

A writer by the name of G. Edward Griffin has a lot of good articles relating to this subject (see first link in my signature). He's not the first to write about how people get so focused on the facade of Right vs. Left/Repub vs. Dem/Conservative vs. Liberal/etc in our current system that they fail to identify the stronger force at work. That is; the ideology of collectivism.

 

[Zebo]

I know a guy who instead of just complaining about politicians and politics actually tries to do something about it by being politically active.

My response to the OP, is stop complaining and get involved, volunteer your resources to candidates that you support and or run for political office.

One of the cool things about living in the US is there are regularly elections at all levels of government. Get involved in working towards the changes you think are needed.

Voting is for suckers. Real change will only come in the streets or from massive revolt....Howard Zinn and Patric Henry style. Did we get Bill of Rights by voting? Did we end the Vietnam war by voting? Did women get the right to vote by voting?

 

[Fenixgoon]

in the context of politics, it means that no matter who you elect, they won't end up doing things for the good of the country. they will serve the loudest constituency.

i liken politics to sex. no matter what position you're in, you're still getting fvcked.