The strange occurrence of the Democrats in the night

There is a short story called "Silver Blaze" in which Sherlock Holmes mentions the strange occurrence of the dog in the night. His companion says the dog didn't do anything in the night. "That is the strange occurrence", says Holmes.

Our "strange occurrence" is the lack of any opposition party. The Democrats smile and nod as if everything is just a-ok in this country, as if we weren't being led by an evil and secretive cabal which came to power over the will of the people. They have lost their voice, and when they are allowed to speak, they give no alternative view, just what seems to be Republican-lite.

"Corporate campaign contributions? We take them, too, just not as much as the Republicans." "Tax cuts? We're for them, too, only smaller ones than W. is proposing." "Saddam? We're sort of for regime change through military intervention, too, only maybe with a bit more caution." "Clinton? We think he was pretty rotten, too."

I mean, it seems as if the Republicans and Democrats have merged into one large, corporately-controlled party, the Republicrats (with a nod towards Billionaires for Bush or Gore), with two wings: one more humane and wimpy, the other loud and cruel. But both controlled by the same people. Who is opposing the madness? Why can't the Democrats give voice to the protest some citizens feel against this awful regime? Who will we find to actually represent us?

Being frustrated with the Democrats is a bad place to be. It is very understandable, but it leads some people to support third parties like the Greens, which can be ok as long as it doesn't help the Republicans (in other words, nearly never). A Green candidate for Attorney General of Delaware here this year helped defeat a very competent and humane Democratic incumbent last year, allowing his Republican challenger, who is by many accounts a hack, to take the position. Nader's involvement in the 2000 election was only one of many factors, any of which could have gone the other way to provide a win for Gore - only in combination did these factors converge to yield a "win" (of sorts) for W. But Nader has been shown to be only too happy to help defeat Gore and usher in this Golden Age of Bush. ( An excellent compilation of links and articles showing just how Nader was knowingly helping Bush during the campaign was available at MediaWhoresOnline, through a link called "MWO vs. the Saint". The link is broken right now, but I've written and asked for them to reactivate it - it's one of the most important pieces of research about the 2000 election. It is an exchange between the MediaHorse and one of Nadar's campaign leaders, with MWO taking her out to the woodshed.) Because of the realities of our two-party system, we cannot afford to abandon the one which offers us only Republican-lite, because we end up with Republican-dark instead. This is not a great system, but until the Democrats gain back control of the executive and legislative branches, we will have to be patient and work to change the Democrats from within if any hope for our freedoms is to survive.

If you do not vote the lesser of two evils, you will end up with the greater.

But it can be enormously frustrating. For an example of the great Democratic leadership, please see this little gem. Isn't that special? The Democratic candidates are lauding Powell's speech. Why is it that these guys think anyone would vote for them? If they think Bush is doing such a good job, then what is the basis for voting for them? This country is screaming and crying out for sane, non-bloodthirsty leadership, and unfortunately bland agreement with the putsch now in power is the best we can hope for. The lone exception is Howard Dean. I may work for him in the upcoming primaries just because he has presented a consistent anti-war message. What about the hundreds of thousands of people who marched in the cold anti-war rallies recently? Doesn't anyone want their votes, and the votes of the millions of people who agree with them, but were too cold or far away or busy to physically march? I don't know what has lobotomized this opposition party, but we have to support them anyway. What a dilemma.

It can't be because there is a lack of issues. Everyday we are treated to a new atrocity, which deserves being dragged into the light and exposed as the rot at our foundation which it is. I could go on for hours about the madness, the bad policy, the way every decision seems to be founded on the assumption that Armageddon is coming soon. And I'm just a guy with a day job. Why can't these guys speak up effectively? I realize the media would begin the ridicule and smear campaign immediately, but the people can tell. Look at Gore - he was crucified by the media in 1998-2000, and he still won the election.

Here is an issue - the Democrats should feel free to use it. Please see the chart below, which was featured at mediawhoresonline today. All Democratic candidates would have to do is display it everywhere they go, everytime they are on TV. The chart makes its own case. Unless we want to be crushed under debt, and Chimpy is making no signs of reversing that anytime soon, we'd better start getting serious about funding the government. It's almost laughable.

See this link if you want to see how easily the debate can be won with conservative idiots - someone went on O'Reilly's show and didn't back down, and Bill the great debater just about lost it. Good for a laugh, until you realize that people like him control the debate.

Humor Watch

If you haven't already been there, please see one of the sister sites to whitehouse.org, bettybowers.com I guarantee you will find something there to love.