I met with a couple of friends the other nite for dinner. We talked about the tax cut deal, and the conversation was very heated. Lot of shouting and yelling over dinner. I started the whole fight, but I don’t care. I was livid, and they deserved to hear my rage. They were both liberals, and both supported Obama’s tax plan sellout all the way as some sort of imperfect but acceptable compromise. I let em have it.
At some point partway through the conversation, one of them pointed out that Obama and Dems were getting ready to do some good things. What good things? I was laughing.
Well, for starters, there was Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repeal, which failed.
Then there was the Dream Act, which will hopefully also fail.
I snorted derisively at both of these bills. “They’re not important!” I huffed.
They’re not. I’m an Economic Man. Economics (capital E) and Politics (capital P) are everything. Both are intertwined, one leads into the other and vice versa. They’re actually part of each other.
Most of the rest is theater and sideshows. DODT and the Dream Act are Identity Politics BS, sexual orientation and race sideshows. I could care less about either of them, pretty much. They’re both pretty far down on my list of priorities.
Later on, something crystallized. We have two neoliberal parties, two parties pursuing trickle-down, neoclassical, beggar the state, smash the workers, eviscerate the middle class, gorge the rich political economics. One pursues a milder version than the other. The milder ones are called Democrats. But the truth is that both parties are pursuing Republican economics, either light or hardcore. And Republican economics is heaping steaming toxic waste stew served to hundreds of millions. It’s as appealing to me as swallowing arsenic – it’s poison.
Since both parties are shoving poison down my throat, what’s the difference? The difference was crystallized above.
The Democrats offer the groovy race, gender and sexual orientation sideshows.
For instance, this week, the Dems offered Republican economics, 190 proof this time instead of the usual near beer. But they did offer faggots and wetbacks for me to munch on while I waited for the arsenic main course.
Dream Act is wetbacks, illegal aliens. I don’t think much of illegal aliens. A side dish of Deep Fat Fried Illegal Alien Sopapillas is one of the benefits of dining at Democrat Cafe. Yum!
DODT is faggots. Faggots or queers, take your pick. I like fags even less than I like illegals, and I don’t like illegals at all. At Democrat Cafe, you finish your meal of Republican economics with a gigantic helping of Faggot Cheesecake. Delicious!
So the Democrats are just Republican economics, plus faggots and illegal aliens. Republicans are Republican economics minus fags and wetbacks.
Give me one reason I shouldn’t just vote Republican?
3
20
20
20
“So the Democrats are just Republican economics, plus faggots and illegal aliens. Republicans are Republican economics minus fags and wetbacks”
When the the republicans become devoid of faggots and wetbacks? McCain Tried to puch the amnesty backed by Bush. Both republicans. I also don’t believe that republican politicians are as anti-faggot as you hope. I have a feeling that if the christian right ever loses any steam and they see an opportunity they’ll jump right on the faggot bandwagon with the democrats and the rest of mainstream america.
The problem is tha there is no viable alternative, and that’s just the way the rich want it.
The hope which quickly vanished was circa 2008 when three parties got together in a few cross-ideological endeavours.
They were the anti-war Left “Nader/Kuchinichites”, for lack of a better term, the libertarian Ron Paul core and the “tradcon” “Buchananite”
protectionist, non-interventionists-these are often being called “Jacksonian” Republicans now, probably because of Buchanan’s lowered profile.
These co-operated in some anti-war, anti-banker legislation and economic proposals–and with finesse theoretically could have evolved into a
movement.
Oh, yeah, it would have taken the finesse of the most talented Wallenda.
Meanwhile, the neocons took over the tea party and Ian Welsh counsels fans to simply emigrate if you have the means.
“Dream Act is wetbacks, illegal aliens. I don’t think much of illegal aliens. A side dish of Deep Fat Fried Illegal Alien Sopapillas is one of the benefits of dining at Democrat Cafe. Yum!”
Not necessarily true. Outside the Southwest, we have a smaller concentration of immigrants and they are more easily assimilable into US society. Mexico has had a past history with the Southwest, so Mexicans in California are more likely to be hostile towards white Californians than other groups. Boston Brazilians do not hold the same hostile attitudes towards the US that Mexicans do towards the Southwest. Their country has no prior attachment and therefore has no claim to the Northeast-and the Brazilians living here have no interest in taking it over. Overall I’ve had pretty decent relations with the Brazilians I have met who now number 250,000, (approximately 70% of whom are illegal), the largest immigrant group in Boston today. They’re clean, they work hard, don’t commit crimes, their children are polite, many of whom intend to pursue higher education, a substantial percentage are serving in the military. I enjoyed watching the world cup with Brazilians last summer. The main issue I have with them is that they send a lot of money out of the country and many of them plan to take their hard earned money, and retire to Brazil someday.
I think we need a saner position on Dream Act
In order to gain Amnesty,
a) They must have a thorough background check. If an amnesty seeker has ever committed a crime (besides driving without a license,) they’re out of here.
b) They must pledge their undying allegiance to the United States and terminate their citizenship to the country of their birth,
c) They may maintain their cultural identity but not their national identities or cultural biases; we don’t want any infighting or ethnic rivalries, whether it be between Mexicans and gringos in the Garden City, Iowa, African Americans and Dominicans in the Bronx, Sunnis and Shiites in Dearborn, or Guatemalans and Oaxancans in Madera. So leave your national identities and cultural biases at home.
d) We should limit the amount of money that one can send out of the country except in the event of an emergency. We can not fully prevent them from moving back to their country of origin and taking their US dollars with them, but if we force them to terminate their citizenship, it will be harder to get it back.
Everyone, please come up with more suggestions on how to deal with illegal immigrations.
“Everyone, please come up with more suggestions on how to deal with illegal immigrations.”
Throw feces at them and tell them to leave.
“Throw feces at them and tell them to leave.”
We won’t get anywhere with that kind of language.
We have to find a middle ground that everyone can relate to. I’m doing my best to find that ground.