15 reasons it's time for a new US revolution

[Kristatos]

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/272 ... revolution

Extract:

It is time for a revolution. Government does not work for regular people. It appears to work quite well for big corporations, banks, insurance companies, military contractors, lobbyists, and for the rich and powerful. But it does not work for people.

The 1776 Declaration of Independence stated that when a long train of abuses by those in power evidence a design to reduce the rights of people to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, it is the peoples right, in fact their duty to engage in a revolution.

Martin Luther King, Jr., said forty three years ago next month that it was time for a radical revolution of values in the United States. He preached "a true revolution of values will soon cause us to question the fairness and justice of many of our past and present policies." It is clearer than ever that now is the time for radical change.

Look at what our current system has brought us and ask if it is time for a revolution?

[Dr. No]

I'll have to read it through when I have more time. To me the radical thing Washington needs, is doing the right thing regardless of the big money interest.

I keep thinking about the late 19th century and sadly I see similarities to today.

[Kristatos]

I'll have to read it through when I have more time. To me the radical thing Washington needs, is doing the right thing regardless of the big money interest.

Hard to see that happening under the current system, though. If one good thing comes out of the Obama administration, it might be that people are finally disabused of the notion that there's any meaningful difference between the Republicrats and the Democans. But that's no good if it just leads to people staying home at election time, making elections into a contest for the votes of a tiny percentage who can still be bothered to get off their asses on election day. I'd much rather see an end to the two-party system and the rise of a viable third party (or, even better, several viable third parties, leading to a real choice for the people).

[bjmdds]

As long as Jessie Ventura is not the solution either. He has lost the rest of his marbles. The TEA PARTY movement will devour the Democratic candidates in 8 months. Kris, you left the USA?

[Kristatos]

As long as Jessie Ventura is not the solution either. He has lost the rest of his marbles. The TEA PARTY movement will devour the Democratic candidates in 8 months. Kris, you left the USA?

Like I said, my wife and I were bankrupted by American healthcare after I developed an expensive illness, despite having really good insurance (I worked for state government and my wife was a teacher). So we moved back to my native UK, where most healthcare is free at the point of delivery. But I still follow the healthcare debate with interest, as I recognise that leaving the country is not an option for most of those who are uninsured or underinsured. I know a British style NHS wouldn't work in America, but something like Canada or continental Europe, where the system is publicly funded but privately run, probably would.

As for the Tea Partiers, I see them as part of the problem, not part of the solution. What started out as a genuine populist uprising has long been co-opted by elite interests as a vehicle for preserving the status quo on healthcare and dragging America back to the 18th century - a time when government was by the rich, white plantation owners for the rich, white plantation owners.

And yeah, Jesse Ventura is madder than a bottle of crisps, but I think the world would be a poorer place without him. But then I'm English - we treasure our eccentrics. It's part of our national character.

[katied]

Shame that you couldn't get the health care you needed here, Kris.


Jesse Ventura is.. *tries to find a better word that "bats*** crazy" and fails*.

[Kristatos]

Shame that you couldn't get the health care you needed here, Kris.

Oh, I got the healthcare, but I also got a bill that would take 14 lifetimes to pay. What's happening with the single-payer bill that passed in California? Did Der Governator veto it like he was threatening to? Regardless, I think if single-payer does happen, it will come from the states rather than the federal government. PA looks set to become the first state to implement a single-payer system (single-payer in Canada also started in one province, Saskatchewen, and gradually spread across the country when the other provinces saw it and thought "hey, I want that").

[katied]

The Governator is just one of many downsides to living in California!

[bjmdds]

And Hollywood.

[bjmdds]

As long as Jessie Ventura is not the solution either. He has lost the rest of his marbles. The TEA PARTY movement will devour the Democratic candidates in 8 months. Kris, you left the USA?

Like I said, my wife and I were bankrupted by American healthcare after I developed an expensive illness, despite having really good insurance (I worked for state government and my wife was a teacher). So we moved back to my native UK, where most healthcare is free at the point of delivery. But I still follow the healthcare debate with interest, as I recognise that leaving the country is not an option for most of those who are uninsured or underinsured. I know a British style NHS wouldn't work in America, but something like Canada or continental Europe, where the system is publicly funded but privately run, probably would.

As for the Tea Partiers, I see them as part of the problem, not part of the solution. What started out as a genuine populist uprising has long been co-opted by elite interests as a vehicle for preserving the status quo on healthcare and dragging America back to the 18th century - a time when government was by the rich, white plantation owners for the rich, white plantation owners.

And yeah, Jesse Ventura is madder than a bottle of crisps, but I think the world would be a poorer place without him. But then I'm English - we treasure our eccentrics. It's part of our national character.

Unions are also special interests groups. They want their financial goodies too and have ruined a lot of business in the USA with their benefits. Why do you emphasize the 'white' people Kris? Is it because few blacks attend their functions?

[Kristatos]

Why do you emphasize the 'white' people Kris? Is it because few blacks attend their functions?

I also emphasised "rich" and "plantation owners". My point was that the US was founded on some noble ideas of liberty, but in the periods of its founding, those ideas didn't extend to everybody. It has gradually expanded over the years, but the Tea Party, with its name evoking the American Revolution and its fondness for 18th century drag, seems to be hell-bent on reversing those advances and turning the clock back to an era when a large portion of the population lived in servitude. I am not just talking about African slaves here, many of the European settlers who originally colonised North America were indentured servants (aka redemptioners) whose living conditions were little better than those of the slaves. However, while not all whites in antebellum America were members of the ruling elite, all the members of the ruling elite were white, and its pretty clear that the Tea Partiers who want to drag America back 200 years see themselves as the plantation owners, not the redemptioners.

[bjmdds]

Do you consider them racist?

[Kristatos]

Do you consider them racist?

Not all of them, but I don't doubt that racism is a factor in the objections of some of them to Obama.

[bjmdds]

How about the signs and hatred of Bush? Was that any better? It's not a one way street.

[Kristatos]

How about the signs and hatred of Bush? Was that any better? It's not a one way street.

What does that have to do with racism?

[bjmdds]

Hatred is hatred. Where was the media's outrage then?

[Kristatos]

Hatred is hatred. Where was the media's outrage then?

Nice way to change the subject. To recap: You asked if I thought the Tea Party is racist. I responded by showing pictures of racist placards carried at Tea Party rallies. You then responded by saying "but people said mean things about Bush too". Do you really not see a difference between "Bush lied, people died" and pictures of Obama Photoshopped to make him look like a witchdoctor?

[bjmdds]

I cannot stand Bush either. But pictures of him as Satan were the same thing with the protests. Can't you see that?

[Kristatos]

I cannot stand Bush either. But pictures of him as Satan were the same thing with the protests. Can't you see that?

Yes, showing Bush as Satan or Hitler is dumb, but at the end of the day, they are just attacks on Bush himself. The equivalent would be those Obama Joker posters - equally dumb, but not offensive. A racist attack, on the other hand, is not just an attack on Obama, but on all black people. There's a world of difference between this:



and this:

[bjmdds]

Do you support the big O's presidency so far Kris, being in the UK now? Has the UK fallen out of love with him yet?