Political Industry rules: No "accountability" candidates in 2008

[Parisle]

--- Can't vote for a candidate if they're not on the ballot, eh? And regardless of whatever partisan sentiments exist throughout the electorate-at-large, the political industry's first loyalties will be to itself.

--- The "political industry" is the oblique, but highly-evolved system by which Big Money corporatist elements essentially control the government by underwriting the two-party political system. Sometimes it presents as a "good cop - bad cop" charade,... other times it appears almost to touch upon the socio-economic dichotomy of the "haves vs. the have-nots." And while a few mavericks always manage to get into the game (Waxman comes to mind), the outcome seldom changes in any manner not acceptable to those paying the piper. The parties,... both of them, mind you,.. broker government favor and largesse for corporate patrons in exchange for the campaign money which keeps the good times rolling,... then they use that money to charm, cajole or otherwise influence voters who think they are the recipients of an actual choice.

--- But those "choices," ... and indeed, the selection of issues to be addressed and the method whereby those issues are framed for discussion,... are arbitrarily set by the political industry. How often have you heard people lament that they voted for the lesser of two evils?

--- So you end up with such things as campaign finance reform which does not reform,... gas-guzzling soccer-mom SUV's categorized as EPA-evading "trucks," and a "crackdown" on corporate corruption in the midst of the most corrupt administration in history. "Accountability" will work the same way.

--- Oh,.. plenty of candidates will be screaming to high heaven about accountability in government. And to be fair, there will probably be one or two lesser individuals sacrificed to the public mood,.. and well-greased political palms will be triumphantly dusted together with a "Well,.. guess we showed him!" But pursuing accountability in that manner is a lot like Rumsfeld explaining the anti-terrorist segueway into Iraq by whining that Iraq had more "targets."

--- The Iraq War issue has been framed for the public as a question of how and when to get out of Iraq. "Cut & run," ... timetables,.. phased redeployment,.... you name it. But is anyone mentioning accountability as it applies to the Big Oil-PNAC conspiracy to fabricate grounds for the war? No, I don't mean convicting Libby for the Plame incident,.. or merely impeaching Bush & Cheney, either. Aren't there actually about a hundred individuals who have lied, cheated, conspired and committed outright treason in this sordid affair? The entire membership of the PNAC,.. plus executives in Big Oil, Halliburton, Bechtel, KBR, etc, etc? Can a scapegoat or two "account" for what was actually a twisted and malfeasant miscarriage of the entire governmental function? Shouldn't accountability-minded democrats be dealing straight-up with voters about what has actually transpired? Shouldn't they be looking for ways to punish as many of the perpetrators as possible? Substantial prison sentences,... confiscation of all property,.. maybe an execution or two? And corporate influence of all forms thrown OUT of government forever. That's what I want to see. It would be the only justice,... but it won't happen.

--- The minimum wage increase is nice. So is the prescription drug thing. But they do not solve this gargantuan perversion of our Constitutional government, and that should cause folks to wonder just who is actually calling the shots and pulling the strings.

[Jackpine Radical]

1. Nice rant.

There's no evidence of missing time recently in my life, so I'm reluctantly ruling out the possibility that I tranced-out & wrote this.

[Parisle]

2. Thanks, JR,...

--- That sounds very flattering. But the rant becomes really scary when you consider how many people,.. DU'ers included,.. will bend over backwards to avoid admitting that this is the situation we have to correct. Some sort of figure-ground gestalt problem, I assume,.... can't see the reality for the politics?

[Bullet1987]

3. I agree with the OP...

...But you're just going to be labeled a "conspiracy nut" or "moonbat" or any other derogatory name from people who don't want to believe you.

[Parisle]

4. That's the key: "Don't 'want' to..."

--- And that is especially remarkable when one considers that, given human nature and certain "material realities" attending to that nature, the behavior I've described is exactly the state of affairs one would EXPECT to evolve. All the trends and forces and dynamics involved point to that very conclusion. Failure to see it invites suspicion of delusion. Failure to admit or accept it borders on denial. I believe that depicting such a dire situation must take a lot of the fun out of participating in these boards, as it undercuts the "team spirit" nature of most folks' involvement.

[Tellurian]

5. When you're presenting a picture

that has taken anywhere from 25-40 yrs to evolve as the big picture. Are you being realistic in your expectations to assume past creeping corruption can be resolved in one felt swoop of investigations? Are you expecting a new Congress who have taken over the helm of a floating disaster to begin their tenure by reaching backward in time rather than making the "present" a priority of doing all the can to improve current living conditions, health care, minimum wage increases and addressing the IWR?

Most of are aware of issues mentioned in your well written OP- Very few here are in denial. If they are they're not Democrats.

However, the house is on fire endangering the lives of the people trapped inside. The Bank just called informing you a bank officer just embezzled the full value of your retirement account. What should you do? Leave the burning house with your family trapped inside, after all, this embezzler has just stolen your family's financial future? Or do you stay, and take care of first things first worry about the rest after your family's lives are safe? No doubt you know a rhetorical question when you see one... but that is my best analogy of your OP. IOW- everything will be done in due time as long as we have a Demo Adm and Dem controlled Congress. Hopefully, all will go well and be the happy ending we've been yearning for over the last 2 yrs.

[Parisle]

6. I was just making an observation

--- I stated no expectations about resolving corruption, nor do I feel the circumstances I described may be passed off as mere corruption. Certainly any solution I might envision could scarcely be effected by "investigations," any more than Jefferson or Adams found it necessary to investigate George III. I don't follow the burning house analogy at all, but if I understand the objection you're raising, let me respond by saying that I definitely vote for democrats,.. but I do not think they are magic.

[Tellurian]

7. If I'm understanding you correctly

excerpt from your post:

"Can a scapegoat or two "account" for what was actually a twisted and malfeasant miscarriage of the entire governmental function? Shouldn't accountability-minded democrats be dealing straight-up with voters about what has actually transpired? Shouldn't they be looking for ways to punish as many of the perpetrators as possible? Substantial prison sentences,... confiscation of all property,.. maybe an execution or two? And corporate influence of all forms thrown OUT of government forever. That's what I want to see. It would be the only justice,... but it won't happen.

If the Libby Trial reaches all the way to the TOP...ie..Bush and Cheney, the entire house of cards of corruption will come tumbling down. I read yesterday there are 168 Heads of Government Agencys who are accused of criminal behavior. The Libby Trial is our lynch pin. If this trial scales up where Bush and Cheney are put under oath and cross examined as to their culpability in Lying to The American People of WMD in Iraq and they chose to lie again..either way they are going to be removed from office. Maybe you haven't been following this trial. It may give you a sense of hope if you do.


adding this link to an article stating exactly what I said above:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x261822

[Parisle]

8. I have followed the Libby trial

--- It would be great if a breakthrough in the trial led to multiple prosecutions within the Bush administration,... Cheney's, especially. But I do not see it leading to the arrest, imprisonment and confiscation of all property of all the CEO's and Board members of all the companies secretly participating in Cheney's energy panel meetings and profiteering in Iraq..... which is what I would like to see, for starters. There is little chance of reforming the political industry if the retributive proceeds of this moment are limited to the GOP political spear carriers. The corporate "owner-operators" of the political industry have to be stung, as well,... stung hard. I would be personally amazed if at least a dozen of them had not engaged in activities sufficiently traitorous as to warrant their summary executions. (that would make for some interesting conversations in the better country clubs, eh?) And corporate money, corporate influence and corporate participation of any kind MUST be fully excised from the political system. It's very simple; you just tell corporations that they can't give ANY MONEY to parties, candidates, PAC's, etc,.. they can't lobby,.. can't talk to office-holders... and can't hire "former" office-holders. Violators will be prosecuted. What's it gonna take to get the democrats moving in THAT direction, eh?