Reader Comments for Righting America >>>
Im with you, Timmer. I think its very big of you to take this attitude, given your politics (I read some of yur earlier articles.
You show the difference between being a patriot and a pundit. Thanks it was very refreshing to see this.
Jean
I accept the old saw that states that parties don’t win elections – they loose them. There is nothing new in this observation. But naturally, however, I feel compelled to add a point or two more. I might point out, for instance, that it is all very well calling the Democrats ‘rudderless and nagging’ but as the only viable opposition to the GOP, they were only doing their job; it is the Dems place in a functioning democracy to point out the shortcomings of those in power. If you wish to term that as ‘nagging’, so be it.
Similarly with ‘Rudderless’; if by that you mean ‘lack of policy’, it is often hard for an opposition to articulate a coherent alternative plan, and for that plan to get any oxygen in the media, especially when that opposition have been out of power for so long.
The Dems do have plans – lots of ‘em. But only until they have some sort of say, and discover who it is they have to work with, can they truly define exactly how they will go forward, and you will find that this works for both sides of the debate.
I’m very glad that you are opposed to the Repubs manifesting their unhappiness by indulging in a legislative sulkathon, although I think that blaming the Dems for popularising the term ‘filibuster’ is a bit rich; as you say, for the past 6 years the Repubs have been ‘drunk with power’– the Dems were honour bound by the system designed by your beloved FFs to put some brakes on that power wherever they saw fit and by whatever means the FF left open to them. Remember that the Repubs nearly killed the filibuster last year; now I’ll bet you’re glad the Dems were so resistive. Be careful what you wish for indeed.
The Dems do have to be reasonably careful for the next two years or two if they want to take the WH; they will be heavily scrutinised by the corporate media’s attack dogs (you-know-who) who seem to think that the Dems are now completely responsible for absolutely everything,
I believe Nancy Pelosi when she calls for a bipartisan approach. However, that does not mean that she must not attempt to find out what has been going on and, if necessary, take the appropriate actions. Nobody is above the law, Timmer; this is a central tenet of the conservatism you say the modern Republicans have deserted, and if that means Bush must be impeached, then so be it. The rule of law, remember? And anyway, what’s to fear from Investigations if you’ve nothing to hide, right?
Pelosi and Co. have not ‘taken over ownership’ of anything; Bush is still the ‘decider’, and with the entire Iraq debacle being of his making he cannot just wash his hands of it. It has taken this mid-term whipping to get GWB to agree to listen to other ideas, but none of them will popular with everyone – all the choices are hard, and bound to be resisted somewhere.
With your permission, and in the new found spirit of bipartisanship,, I would would like to finish this off before you respond Whaddaya say, huh?
Cheers
Elroy.
Elroy -
(sigh...) Okay mate, if you must. 
Elroy -
Ummm...did you mean some time this year, or shall we consider your thought finished? Just askin'...
Here you go!
So what is cut and run? What is ‘victory’? If you know, definitively, you’ll be about the only soul on the globe that does. The Iraq question is hard. All the solutions have their pitfalls, and it is unclear just what constitutes ‘victory’.
Iraq should not be looked upon as a ‘war’ to be ‘won’ in the traditional sense but a problem to be solved; guerilla war has been around for at least 150 years and is nigh impossible for a regular army to win.
Something has to give; why should it be more human life? Pulling out does not dishonour the dead – it just means there will be less of them.
Resolving Iraq is going to take a lot of hard work by parties reluctant to do so, but it is complicated. If Iraq is to take ownership of its ‘fledgling democracy’ then the constitution foisted on them by the US must be torn up and rewritten, and the government must be free to award reconstruction tenders to whomever THEY see fit; see ya later, Haliburton!
After all the WMD rhetoric, the ‘regime change’ routine, the ‘bringing democracy’ spin, the truth is Iraq did not ASK the US to go over and blast its infrastructure all to hell; the US did it purely of its own volition, so they must pay for its reconstruction. Powell’s ‘Pottery House’ Doctrine – ‘you broke it, you own it’ – still applies, but that does NOT mean that Iraq becomes an Imperial possession or colony; it means that, basically, the US must pay war reparations.
I, too, am a citizen of the world (so I cannot, by definition,. also be a ‘patriot’), I am proudly what Bill might call a ‘Secular Progressive’, hopefully a thorn in the side of at least one Conservative Republican Blogger and, like mine host, a great guy.
But most importantly I am also a family man and, for the sake of my kids, I would rather see the WORLD succeed as a whole than worry about the politicians that got us there, but alas that is not a luxury afforded me or any of us.
I am heartened that you wish to promote world peace, secure your borders, maintain your robust economy, protect civil rights, provide decent and affordable education and health care and reduce oil dependency, and these things CAN be done, but the methods required to achieve these need a political will that I feel is lacking.
For instance, believe it or not, we all want lower abortion rates. Holland has the lowest in the world, so why not do as they do? Because dolts like BO’R say they do not ‘want to become like the Netherlands.’ So I ask, is his so-called ‘culture war’ more important to him than abortion rates? Don't the means justify the ends?
There are solutions to every problem, The Dems may even suggest some, but will your side be willing to listen? Or is your idea of ‘bipartisanship’ allowing the Dems to sit at they table so long as they do as they are told?
If you ARE a citizen of the world you will listen, with an open mind, to alternative voices. Time will tell.
We do, indeed, live in interesting times.
C
Cheers
Elroy
Elroy -
Funny thing is, I agree with much of what you say here. It would be picking nits to point out the disagreements.
"If you ARE a citizen of the world you will listen, with an open mind, to alternative voices. Time will tell."
I think I have already expressed a willingness to do so...in fact, that was the point of my article!
Cheers, T
You agree? Great! But please, Timmer, don’t spare me – pick all the nits you want! I’m very interested in what you don’t agree with.
I understand what the point of the article was; hence I tried to stimulate debate by discussing the state of the war in Iraq, to elicit what your reactions to alternative strategies might be and what would be acceptable to you.
That’s why I mentioned the Netherlands’ abortion rates. Would you be willing to go down the Dutch road (safe, free and legal abortions plus plenty of free condoms and sex education) if it resulted in bringing the US abortion rate (21.3 per 1000) more in line with Holland’s (6.5)?
Or world poverty. The World Bank and the IMF do nothing but force poverty on the world’s most vulnerable, so how about abolishing them? We could institute . Keynes original vision of a International Clearing Union, and we could allow poor states to value-add and build tariff walls to incubate their fledgling industries How about that?
Global warming? Try this ten-point plan: http://www.monbiot.com/archives/...heres-the-plan/
Throwing money at education would help, and losing NCLB and all the private ‘supplementary’ educational vultures that have chained themselves to the gravy train, before they start whining.
Smart countries educate their young if they are to have a future. Even India has educated millions of their young to take advantage of Western IT corporations’ race to the bottom. You want to save your economy? Educate.
But it costs money to train teachers build schools and resource them properly, and the only institution that can mobilise the kind of cash needed is, like or not, the state. Countries that have done this now have an educated workforce. America has not.
There is no doubt that the US has the money to build public schools like palaces; if it can afford to pay 25,000 cotton farmers $3.9 billion p.a. for the express purpose of making sure impoverished African cotton farmers stay that way, it can afford to educate its young. What do you say?
Likewise health. The health industry is no place for the profit motive. HMOs have no incentive to make people well – making people well is expensive. The best way for them to make money is to take yours and help you die by whatever means necessary. America spends 13% of its GDP on health yet has 50 million people without cover, but countries with social medicine do not have this problem. Would it not be a wise idea to have a look at what they are doing right?
Oil dependency is a no-brainer. Read this:
http://www.participate.net/oilch.../oilchange/
tips
Stop waiting for your gov to do it for you like some cry-baby Dem and show some good ol’ American initiative!
And do you know what? Apply the above
solutions, leave Iraq, resolve the Palestinian issue and world peace will follow.
So, as you have expressed your willingness to keep an open mind, tell me what you think of these ideas – in fact, that is the point of my articl
e!
Cheers
Elroy
Elroy -
I'm sure you would like to see those nits...cuz you get very frustrated when I don't take your bait! Despite the fact that you think you have all the answers.
As I have done many times now, let me just reiterate this ONCE AGAIN: If you want to drive the subject matter of the conversation, you need to start YOUR OWN BLOG!!!
You say at the end of your comment "that is the point of my article!" Brother, you are in THE COMMENT section of one of MY ARTICLES!!! You don't write the articles here - sorry to break that to you matey.
It's not that I don't like your visits...some are kinda' fun (and others funny )...but it would be interesting to see what you do on your own site - which I would visit often! Hey, I could be YOUR Gadfly! Waddaya think???
I'm not trying to bait you, Timmer; I'm trying to debate you. I don't have the time to run a blog, I only just have the time to argue with you – so please, ARGUE goddammit!
Do I think I have all the answers? I don't know. If there are problems with my solutions, maybe you would be so kind as to point them out. Maybe I have missed something.
I called my post an 'article' in echo to your response. I apologise if that offended you in any way. I know this is not my site. Durrrr!
Cheers
Elroy
Elroy -
It seems we suffer the same problem...lack of time. YOU don't have time to maintain a blog, and I don't (always) have the time to do otherwise...including debates with you.
I do it when I can...I don't like to give half-assed responses when engaging, but admittedly they are almost always much shorter than yours, and often less researched point-by-point (excepting information pertaining to the article topic, which we leave in the dust more often than not with commentary) than I would like.
No apologies necessary...DURRRR!
Ah, time! 'Tis the curse of the industrialized nations!
If you don't/can't argue with what you don't agree with, how about you indicate what you DO agree with. I'd be very interested to know, if I DO make good points, which ones they are.
I will, then, in the spirit of detante, forgive you for being so selective in your replies. Maybe we could argue just ONE juicy point every now and then? Go on, Pleeeeeeeeeeeese?
Do you really think that we stray from the subjects in your article topics? I thought we were expanding, looking at the detail and the wider context.
I mean, look at my posts above. I have not strayed from anything. You wanted solutions, and I suggested some. Do you like them? Some? None?
C'mon Timmer, chuck us a bone here!
Cheers
Elroy
Commenting by HaloScan
