PDA

View Full Version : What It Means To Be A Republican



Good Doctor HST
03-02-2006, 11:18 PM
Published on Sunday, February 19, 2006 by CommonDreams.org

What It Means To Be A Republican

by Larry Beinhart


The vice president shoots you in the heart and in the face. Then you apologize for all the trouble it’s caused him. That’s what it means to be a Republican.

Despite almost hysterical warnings the president stays asleep at the wheel. He does nothing about terrorism and 9/11 happens. He responds by running away to Nebraska. Three days later he makes a supposedly impromptu speech with a bull horn on the rubble of the World Trade Center. He is universally cheered as a hero. That’s what it means to be a Republican. The president puts together false claims to go to war with the wrong country. His party universally supports him. That’s what it means to be a Republican.

The administration mismanages the war in Iraq so that it creates chaos, a breeding ground for terrorists and political opportunities for Islamic fundamentalists. Along the way, the reasons for going to war are exposed as false. The president runs on national security as his main issue. He is re-elected. That’s what it means to be a Republican.

The president cheerfully gives away the surplus to the richest people in the country. Then he runs up record debts, just to throw more money their way. He claims it has helped America’s economy. People act like they believe him. That’s what it means to be a Republican.

The administration continues it’s magnificent tradition of going to sleep when it is warned of disaster. It does nothing when Katrina is coming. It continues its record of doing nothing when disaster arrives. As New Orleans was lost, just as when the World Trade Center was lost, the president got as far away as possible. But he can’t be blamed for what nature did. That’s what it means to be a Republican.

The president orders wiretaps without warrants, a straightforward violation of the constitution. When the Attorney General is called to testify, the head of the Judiciary Committee insists that his testimony not be under oath. The head of the intelligence committee suggests that the law be changed, now, to make it legal after the fact. That’s what it means to be a Republican.

Alberto Gonzales helped come up with the program that rejected the Geneva Conventions, that permits torture, that says that the president is above the law and that “I was only following orders” should be a defense against a charge of war crimes. Ah, if only the Nazi war criminals who were hung at Nuremberg had Gonzales there to defend them. The president nominates Gonzales to be his new Attorney General. He is confirmed with little debate and no outrage. That’s what it means to be a Republican.

This needs to be understood.

What it implies is that Republicans can’t be dealt with as if reason and facts will sway them. Because it wont. It’s hard for reality based people, regular Democrats and Liberals to understand that. What it let’s us know is that reality based people, Democrats, Liberals, real Conservatives, old-fashioned Republicans and non-profit Christians have to take more vigorous and rigorous stands. Or reality and real American values and the American landscape will disappear, not just temporarily, but forever.

Larry Beinhart is the author of Wag the Dog (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/156025663X/commondreams-20/ref=nosim), The Librarian (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1560256362/commondreams-20/ref=nosim), and Fog Facts: Searching for Truth in the Land of Spin (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1560257679/commondreams-20/ref=nosim).

PhilosophyGenius
03-03-2006, 01:33 AM
He forgot the right to be a stupid learning impaired idiot.

MissVA15
03-03-2006, 01:44 AM
"What it let’s us know is that reality based people, Democrats, Liberals, real Conservatives, old-fashioned Republicans and non-profit Christians have to take more vigorous and rigorous stands."

So basically this article, or whatever it is, is saying that President Bush and the elected representatives that call themselves Republicans are a different form of political party, because I am a republican but I don't feel like any of those statements pertain to me, or the majority of my other republican friends.

Gold9472
03-03-2006, 10:21 AM
"What it let’s us know is that reality based people, Democrats, Liberals, real Conservatives, old-fashioned Republicans and non-profit Christians have to take more vigorous and rigorous stands."

So basically this article, or whatever it is, is saying that President Bush and the elected representatives that call themselves Republicans are a different form of political party, because I am a republican but I don't feel like any of those statements pertain to me, or the majority of my other republican friends.


That's because you're not a neoconservative Republican.

EminemsRevenge
03-03-2006, 10:37 AM
As Amerikkka breathed a sigh of relief on the morning of January 1, 2000...little did they realise that the REAL Y2K problem would be that November.

Gold9472
03-03-2006, 10:42 AM
As Amerikkka breathed a sigh of relief on the morning of January 1, 2000...little did they realise that the REAL Y2K problem would be that November.

I've always thought of Y2K as the "test subject" to see if the media would have the ability to influence the masses convincingly. I'm in the information technology industry, and at the time of Y2K, there were companies paying ridiculous amounts of money for their software to be "fixed". The actual problem regarding Y2K wasn't nearly as "critical" as we were led to believe.

Partridge
03-03-2006, 11:05 AM
What it means to be a Democrat

The vice president states that he is Mr. Environment, then presides over increased toxic emmissions and further deforestation. You apologise [i]for him. That’s what it means to be a Democrat.

Despite almost hysterical warnings the president stays asleep at the wheel. He does nothing about the Blind Shiekh Cell and WTC 93 happens. He does nothing about White Power extremists (other than inflaming them with Ruby Ridge and Waco) and OKC happens. He does nothing about Able Danger and 9/11 happens. He is universally cheered as a hero. That’s what it means to be a Democrat.

The president puts together false claims to go to war with the wrong country. His party universally supports him. That’s what it means to be a Democrat.

The administration mismanages the war in former Yuogslavia so that it creates chaos, a breeding ground for terrorists and political opportunities for Islamic fundamentalists. Along the way, the reasons for going to war are exposed as false. That’s what it means to be a Democrat.

The president cheerfully gives refuses to repeal anti-labor laws. His Labor Secretary opnely admits that "We essentially have collaborated and responded to the business community." People act like he is the second coming of Eugene Victor Debs. That’s what it means to be a Democrat.

The president has no qualms about using 'extraordinary rendition (http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2004/06/extraordinary_r.html)'. This is 'good rendition'. That’s what it means to be a democrat.

Clinton's general Wesley Clarke oversees the bombing of Serbia, including the bombing of Serbian State TV offices claiming it as a military target. This is hailed as 'humanitarian bombing'. That’s what it means to be a Democrat.

This needs to be understood.

What it implies is that Democrats can’t be dealt with as if their righteous indignation is sincere. Because it's not. It’s hard for reality based people, regular people to undertsand that. What it let’s us know is that reality based people have to refuse to put either party in power and build an alternative that is democratically controled by the membership and is genuinely commited to social justice, environmentalism, solidarity, democracy of the people and peace. Or reality and real internationalist values and the American landscape will disappear, not just temporarily, but forever.

Partridge is the author of several hundred rants on ybbs, gnn, indymedia and elsewhere.

EminemsRevenge
03-03-2006, 11:32 AM
I've always thought of Y2K as the "test subject" to see if the media would have the ability to influence the masses convincingly...The actual problem regarding Y2K wasn't nearly as "critical" as we were led to believe.
IF you're talking about the media being a Chicken Little the-sky-is-falling apparatus that thrives on hysteria then you have a point, but if you knew of the media that ended the war in Vietnam and brought down Nixon then we definitely had a Y2K problem:beating:

The chads and disenfranchised Black voters in Florida was more "critical" to the world than some mass computer failure!!!