Spoiled Americans want to flee what they created

Good article, WV.

But I’m seeing an excess of self-flagellation happening on the left the last coupla days, and I don’t think all of it is productive. Some, definitely. But it’s selective, etc.

And all of these “You brought it on yourself!!” pieces and $5.00 may get us a cup of coffee at Starbucks. I just don’t see most of them achieving much beyond maybe making the writer feel temporarily superior. And I’m guilty of that “told you so” urge as well. On another website, dominated by Clinton supporters and centrist Dems, I clashed with them before the election repeatedly, but decided to end that futility a coupla months back. Too tired of feeling hopeless in the face of their acceptance of neoliberalism, Republican-Lite and Clintonian, crackpot realism.

You should read the article linked, btw.

To me, now is for the left to “come together.” Bigly.

wv wrote:

Billy_T wrote:

Good article, WV.

But I’m seeing an excess of self-flagellation happening on the left the last coupla days, and I don’t think all of it is productive. Some, definitely. But it’s selective, etc.

And all of these “You brought it on yourself!!” pieces and $5.00 may get us a cup of coffee at Starbucks. I just don’t see most of them achieving much beyond maybe making the writer feel temporarily superior. And I’m guilty of that “told you so” urge as well. On another website, dominated by Clinton supporters and centrist Dems, I clashed with them before the election repeatedly, but decided to end that futility a coupla months back. Too tired of feeling hopeless in the face of their acceptance of neoliberalism, Republican-Lite and Clintonian, crackpot realism.

You should read the article linked, btw.

To me, now is for the left to “come together.” Bigly.

——————
I dont see it that way at all, Billy. I dont think the ‘real left’ is blaming ‘themselves’ at all — i think the are blaming the DNC and Neoliberals.

w
v

I can it that too. And if that’s the case, I reserve the right to retract everything I’ve just said.

;>)

zn wrote:

wv wrote:

in a few months, they will be ruled by a less-than-desirable leader. One which, the world will be quick to mention, was actually chosen by Americans and not imposed on them by occupation or intervention.

Reminds me of the old joke.

Why will there never be a coup leading to an imposed dictatorship in the USA?

Because there’s no American embassy there.

.

That’s a good one.

But have we really been “coup-free”? One could argue it happened in 2000. One could also argue that the GOP’s prevention of hearings to replace a dead Supreme Court justice, after that Court’s majority had gutting voting rights, which made mass voter suppression possible, is pretty close to a “coup.”

One could also argue that an FBI faction, leaking docs harmful to just one candidate, and not the other, along with Wikileaks and Russia doing the same . . . . Well, it at least has some of the elements.

The likely reason why those of us on the left don’t “go there” in this case is because we see the existing state apparatus as too similar to the one replacing part of it via the election. It’s not like we had this really awesome, “people first” governance, crushed by a right-wing revolt. We had a donor-class lovin’, center-right tilting, corporatist borgified, soft-neoliberal rule replaced by a more aggressive version of all of that . . . . with heightened bigotry, proudly anti-science and know-nothingism thrown in to sweeten the pot.

In short, while there is “contrast,” perhaps it’s not enough to make people think “coup”?

zn wrote:

Billy_T wrote:

But have we really been “coup-free”?

Compared to what we’ve done to other countries? I would say yes. We DO have nasty machine politics, but then those of us (which will be many) who remember Mayor Daley won’t think that’s necessarily new.

And we also have the traditional american problem many other democracies do not have—namely, that the USA does not have a left. We aren’t represented by a major party and our worldview is simply made nonexistent in the mainstream media.

But a real american-imposed dictatorship where there’s brutal reprisals for opposing the regime? Obviously not.

Which doesn’t mean of course that we’re all flowers and pancakes.

…

Agreed. That’s a good way to put it, too, the part in bold especially.

But I definitely disagree with your last sentence. Here’s proof:

Is that a balsamic reduction on those pancakes?
Because that just sounds awful.

Billy_T wrote:

Is that a balsamic reduction on those pancakes?
Because that just sounds awful.

Mrs. X and I are foodies. But not the shitty, ‘post immediately to Yelp as if I review Michelin Star restaurants for a living’ type foodies. We just like to try different stuff from all of the up and coming chefs and new restaurants/diners/dives in the area. We had Tapas the other day at Zambra, and it was really good. Expensive, but really good. http://zambratapas.com/cuisine/

Billy_T wrote:

That’s cool. I do love good food. And my long-time dream was to have a thousand acres of my own, grow all of my own food, have a coupla lakes and streams for fish and fowl, maybe breed rabbits too as a meat substitute. I’d have giant greenhouses as well, fill them up with every exotic fruit, plant and herb. Would do my best to make sure I never had to go to a grocery store for anything. Everything home grown and fresher than fresh.

Also dreamed of having work shops for wood and metal. Make my own tools and musical instruments. The whole 19th century deal.

Simplify, get back to the earth, get back to basics. End my dependence on corporations, etc. etc.

Well that sounds awesome. I had a similar dream for a while, but not about the non-meat rabbits. *razz

We did pick up 5 acres in Western NC with a steam in the back in a town that is almost entirely chain free with the exception of two lower-end grocery stores and a gas station. Lots of small independent shops, health food stores, soap and candle makers, an actual cobbler, a taco truck, and within 5 miles of a farmers market. We eat a lot of Quorn products too as a real meat substitute. If you haven’t tried it, I recommend it. Especially the Quorn burgers. Almost identical in taste to a real hamburger with the right seasonings and cooking temp. [review here]

Personally, I don’t see what the angst is all about. Don’t people realize that the GOP doesn’t have 60 votes in the Senate, like Obama had for 2 years? That means there will need to be major compromise and negotiation like we haven’t seen in many a year.
I doubt Trump uses executive orders to push his way through. Not like Obama did, anyways. He’s a populist not an idealist conservative.
I believe negotiation will now find its way back into our federal system.

NewMexicoRam wrote:

Personally, I don’t see what the angst is all about. Don’t people realize that the GOP doesn’t have 60 votes in the Senate, like Obama had for 2 years? That means there will need to be major compromise and negotiation like we haven’t seen in many a year.
I doubt Trump uses executive orders to push his way through. Not like Obama did, anyways. He’s a populist not an idealist conservative.
I believe negotiation will now find its way back into our federal system.

Obama went the executive order route less often than Dubya, Clinton, Reagan and every president going back to Benjamin Harrison. And Trump has promised to overturn all of them — at least until he met with Obama and changed his mind about some of them. But we’ll see. Overturning them is also using the power of executive orders.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php

As far as the lack of negotiation and compromise? That’s virtually entirely on the GOP, whose leaders said on Obama’s inauguration day that they would block everything he tried to do, and they were able to for the most part.

The Dems, in stark contrast to the GOP, are all too willing to compromise and negotiate. That’s one of their biggest faults as a party. Rolling over and playing dead for the other side of the aisle, caving in, basically always starting the negotiation process within the frame the other side creates. Drives me up a wall.

NewMexicoRam wrote:

Billy_T wrote:

NewMexicoRam wrote:

Personally, I don’t see what the angst is all about. Don’t people realize that the GOP doesn’t have 60 votes in the Senate, like Obama had for 2 years? That means there will need to be major compromise and negotiation like we haven’t seen in many a year.
I doubt Trump uses executive orders to push his way through. Not like Obama did, anyways. He’s a populist not an idealist conservative.
I believe negotiation will now find its way back into our federal system.

Obama went the executive order route less often than Dubya, Clinton, Reagan and every president going back to Benjamin Harrison. And Trump has promised to overturn all of them — at least until he met with Obama and changed his mind about some of them. But we’ll see. Overturning them is also using the power of executive orders.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php

As far as the lack of negotiation and compromise? That’s virtually entirely on the GOP, whose leaders said on Obama’s inauguration day that they would block everything he tried to do, and they were able to for the most part.

The Dems, in stark contrast to the GOP, are all too willing to compromise and negotiate. That’s one of their biggest faults as a party. Rolling over and playing dead for the other side of the aisle, caving in, basically always starting the negotiation process within the frame the other side creates. Drives me up a wall.

___________________________________________________

That’s not the history I’m looking at. Many times Obama blasted the GOP to get on his side before Congress even debated an issue. And Harry Reid did the same in the Senate. Did the GOP try to block things? Of course. Will the Dems try to block things now? Of course. But look at the tone the last 24 hours where there are reports that Trump is changing his tune some on major issues. It may make many in his camp angry, but it does show me that there is a willingness to negotiate. That’s important going forward.

I thought you agreed in another thread to look at the other’s POV?

NMR,

I read your point of view, considered it carefully, and I disagree. That’s all. And I said why. There is no evidence that Obama or the Dems were unwilling to compromise or negotiate. Again, IMO, they’re guilty of being all too willing to do that. And no American president in my lifetime has tried as hard as Obama to reach across the aisle. Again, he did this to a fault. It’s one of the worst things about the way he governed, IMO.

And the GOP didn’t just try to block things. They took unprecedented steps to do so, and broke every record for filibusters and holds in American history. The Dems don’t come within light years of the recent GOP for that. Think about it, NMR. The GOP refused to even allow hearings to replace Scalia! That’s never been done.

And to make it worse, they said “Let the people decide,” as if they hadn’t already. Obama was elected twice and his term runs four years, not three. And when Republicans thought Hillary was going to win, they changed their mind again about “let the people decide” and said they would block ALL of her nominees for SCOTUS.

Now we get, “The people have spoken,” cuz Trump won the Electoral College. Apparently, that only counts when a Republican is elected. If it’s a Democrat, it’s “We’re going to block everything they do,” despite the people’s vote.

NMR, Please don’t leave. Go outside and breathe some of that blue state air. Definitely return tomorrow for the game chat.

NewMexicoRam wrote:

m sorry Billy. Those comments are in the extreme. So the GOP “always” does the wrong and the left/Dems/whatever term you want “always” is correct and fair.

Thats not what he said NMR.

Two things, both important to the discussion.

First, the majority here, BT included, are not dems. We;re leftists and (speaking generally) we consider dems to be center-right sell-outs. So BT was not defending the dems.

2nd, what he actually DID say is not only right, it;s backed by endless fact. The reps in office tended to react to the Obama presidency by fighting everything. BT’s complaint about the dems is that they tended to compromise too much (you took that as him complimenting the dems, and, no, it’s a very stinging criticism). That’s just all true. Speaking just from an historical perspective it’s accurate. And it’s backed by numbers on different things. Everything he says in this paragraph is strictly accurate:

And the GOP didn’t just try to block things. They took unprecedented steps to do so, and broke every record for filibusters and holds in American history. The Dems don’t come within light years of the recent GOP for that. Think about it, NMR. The GOP refused to even allow hearings to replace Scalia! That’s never been done.

He was speaking in straight-up specifics. You took that as being general when it wasn’t.

And let me stress this. Because it has to do with how fair YOU want to be. Namely, you need to hear this—most of us are simply not dems. In different ways, we’re all highly critical of the dems for their economic policies, their foreign policies, and for being corporate-money beholden centrist sell-outs. If you keep reading us as pro-dem, it only distorts the discussion, and we have have to keep repeating this same thing. Which gets tiring.

You are not in a traditional, mainstream, business as usual political discussion here. We as a community, or the majority of us, are very different from that.

There’s not just 2 choices and we are to the left of dems.

Not hearing that might be why you somehow heard BT as praising the dems when in fact he was slamming them.

.

OK, I’m cutting back in to make one last comment.

I know the GOP increased the use of fillibusters. I knew that when I posted my link. I believe that to be the result of a president who tried to force things through rather than negotiate. He is the one who said “elections have consequences.” That should be a red flag for any party to hear. I want to see a President who will take the time to discuss with the other side and find ways to compromise. That’s the way things get done. I believe we are seeing Trump begin to do that. Maybe I’ll be proven wrong, but I doubt it. I’m ok with the fact that the GOP won’t get everything they want. And the left should feel the same.

And I’m sure there are over 300 million ways in this country to take positions on an issue. Somehow, over our history, this has boiled down to 2 major parties instead of the 3,4,5 or whatever numbers of positions there are. It works as a 2 “position” platform for the most part, with each party having its disagreements within their ranks. But it still works as a big awkward 2 party system. So, while I respect the opinions of everyone here and their multiple sides, 2 parties is what is largely seen in public and I’ll use terminology that fits as best it can within that, hoping people realize I know there are a multitude of opinions and positions.

I am not going to be a guy who takes his ball and bat and goes home whining. Please don’t think that of me. But I want to see discussions that recognize none of us are perfect, no party or position is perfect, and we live with flaws. I can respect the positions of others here, while disagreeing. But let’s not use “they always, or never” and terminology like that, please. If there are multitudes of positions, please recognize that in “the other side” as well. I tend to vote GOP, but believe me, there are things that frighten me about doing so. I just hope and pray that the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness can continue for years to come.

NewMexicoRam wrote:

OK, I’m cutting back in to make one last comment.

I know the GOP increased the use of fillibusters. I knew that when I posted my link. I believe that to be the result of a president who tried to force things through rather than negotiate. He is the one who said “elections have consequences.” That should be a red flag for any party to hear. I want to see a President who will take the time to discuss with the other side and find ways to compromise. That’s the way things get done. I believe we are seeing Trump begin to do that. Maybe I’ll be proven wrong, but I doubt it. I’m ok with the fact that the GOP won’t get everything they want. And the left should feel the same.

And I’m sure there are over 300 million ways in this country to take positions on an issue. Somehow, over our history, this has boiled down to 2 major parties instead of the 3,4,5 or whatever numbers of positions there are. It works as a 2 “position” platform for the most part, with each party having its disagreements within their ranks. But it still works as a big awkward 2 party system. So, while I respect the opinions of everyone here and their multiple sides, 2 parties is what is largely seen in public and I’ll use terminology that fits as best it can within that, hoping people realize I know there are a multitude of opinions and positions.

I am not going to be a guy who takes his ball and bat and goes home whining. Please don’t think that of me. But I want to see discussions that recognize none of us are perfect, no party or position is perfect, and we live with flaws. I can respect the positions of others here, while disagreeing. But let’s not use “they always, or never” and terminology like that, please. If there are multitudes of positions, please recognize that in “the other side” as well. I tend to vote GOP, but believe me, there are things that frighten me about doing so. I just hope and pray that the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness can continue for years to come.

NMR,

On that part in bold. If that harmless little statement caused problems among the GOP — and I don’t for a second believe it did — then the people who did react to it are incredibly sensitive and need to buck up. It’s also a statement I’ve heard come out of the mouths of presidents and congressional leaders after every election in my lifetime. It’s standard fare. Nothing more. Both parties always say that.

And, again, Obama did take the time to discuss the issues with the GOP. He continuously reached across the aisle and had his hand slapped down. As ZN said, I’m highly critical of this, that the Dems do this all the time, that they go fetal, spineless, cave in. It pisses me off. But, from everything I witnessed and read about, following politics far too closely for my own health, I have never in my life seen a president more willing to work with the other side — to a fault. This is all the more stunning given the way his overtures were met.

Take the ACA. The Dems and Obama set up endless meetings between the two parties, industry, etc. etc. including the Gang of Six — basically three conservadems and three republicans. They hashed things out for nearly two years. The Dems agreed to more than 150 GOP amendments in hopes of getting them on board, and they began the entire thing with the Heritage Foundation and Romneycare as its basis. It started on the Republican side and they still added 150 GOP amendments. Did the Dems receive a single GOP vote after all of that?

Um, nope.

This happened with the Stimulus too. Major concessions toward the Republicans, including tax cuts that made up nearly a third of the Stimulus. That wasn’t good enough either.

(more below, to split this up a bit).

Obama also held a summit on the deficit in the middle of a recession. A major concession to the Republicans, and incredibly stupid to boot. In the capitalist system, it’s economic suicide to cut spending and try to reduce deficits in the middle of a recession.

He also reupped Bush’s tax cuts twice
Kept his defense secretary
Rehired his Fed chairman
Kept his wars going and expanded them
Kept his GWOT going and expanded it
Radically increase his drone program
Continued his Wall Street bailouts, TARP and TALF, etc.
Never once suggested we should roll back Bush’s surveillance state measures
Added to them
Offered Boehner the “Grand Bargain,” which included slashing Medicare and Social Security, something that would have been unthinkable for a Democratic president a few years before that

The above is just for starters.

Obama’s record is “conservative” in every way except for a few culture war issues and the DREAMers act. Maybe a coupla “green” items. But on balance, Republicans should have seen Obama and the Dems’ governance and danced in the street, day after day. Because far from getting some “far left radical,” bent on “transforming America,” they actually got a old-style, moderate Republican with the D on his sleeve. And Obama worked hard to maintain the status quo ante he received from his predecessor.