Bush

Hi Frank,

    How ya been?

We have at least one thing in common.... our extreme distaste for Bush.

You wonder why the will of the American people is not being done.

by Bob Gormley (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 909 comments) on Monday, July 23, 2007 at 3:27:45 PM
 

The will of the people....

Hi Bob,

The will of the people is not being done for a very simple reason. Contrary to the revisionist history so may of us are indoctrinated with, and unswervingly clutch to without reason or true examination of the facts, is our nation is run by an oligarchy.

Fact 1: Pelosi, Reid and the rest of the Democrats are quite content to allow Bush to self-destruct, in full view of the nation, while the U.S wreaks havoc in the Middle-East, in order to create what they believe will be a landslide election weighted heavily for the Democrats by Bush's massive blunders and political collapse.

Fact 2: Bush has now fully entrenched himself – in a twisted, inflated, bravado-ridden version of Nixon – by stonewalling every action Congress takes, as a proto-dictator, more bellicose and bombastic than his previous six years of pompous governing.

The juxtaposition of these two loggerheads leads to the will of the people being usurped, subjugated, and silenced. You and I do not have a voice in this government (notice carefully I do not say 'our government'), for it is not a democracy. It is an autocracy operated by lobbyists, mega-corporations, the military-industrial complex and the whores in Washington that these power brokers, in a very fascist way, have bought their loyalty acquiescence and obedience.

Remember, dictators and despots do not find fear in – or seek shelter from -- the near unanimous disapproval of the people they suppress and subdue. They seek not the consent of the people; for they seek only loyalty and allegiance to their own reprehensible, egocentric, and depraved pursuits for power, money and tyrannical control.

The Declaration of Independence spells out the only redresses we have left against such heinous acts of oppression. We as a nation, as a people, have rights under the supreme laws of our land, to abolish and institute a new government, if the current government is destructive or corrupt and has failed the people it has garnered privilege to, in representation and defense of our rights, our nation and as a soverign people.

Frank J Ranelli

by Frank J. Ranelli (63 articles, 143 quicklinks, 28 diaries, 362 comments) on Monday, July 23, 2007 at 4:03:16 PM
 

Sounds Like

Sounds like it's time for another revolution.

It's obvious that we the people really have no control whatsoever.

I'm just wondering where all this will lead.

by Bob Gormley (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 909 comments) on Monday, July 23, 2007 at 7:40:51 PM
 

Frank - a Question

What if the 25% that support Bush, and another 30% or so at a minimum do not want a Revolution? What do you do then?

by Steven Leser (193 articles, 37 quicklinks, 32 diaries, 1298 comments) on Monday, July 23, 2007 at 9:05:59 PM
 

A 21st Century-Style Revolution

Hi Steve,

A revolution, in the spirit of the 18th century American Revolution, as in taking up arms the way our founders did, is not what I am advocating. My response to Bob was an attempt to illuminate it is the players – politicians, big money, religion, political parties, et al., that are corrupt and have failed the people. It is the government – the current, contemporary government – that should be abolished and not the foundation (the Constitution) that should be negated.  

The framers gave us all the tools we need, without the shedding of blood, to ensure the rights and freedoms of the people remained intact and attempts at tyranny or oppression were rejected and blocked. Impeachment of the current president and vice-president are certainly prologue to the amelioration process I speak of.

Joel Hirschhorn, a frequent contributor here, has already suggested, advocated and wrote a book, Delusional Democracy - Fixing the Republic Without Overthrowing the Government, on how to save the democracy without "killing" the country. It begins with convening a Constitutional Convention to amend and update, not abolish or annul, the Constitution. I can cite many inferences of what some of the topics would be, but in the interest of illustrating the idea proposed by Joel Hirschhorn, we need at minimum an amendment to the Constitution outright prohibiting signing statements by future presidents is one of them.

Steve, in regards to the "25% crowd" of Bush sheeple, that believe whatever they are told, without processing it to be sure that it is an accurate account of the real world around them; they cannot be reached and I would not try to reason with them. As John Dean points out in his book, Conservatives without Conscience, these people are so certain in their convictions and so thoroughly entrenched in the ideology of being told what to do by authority, without question, and who to blame, they cannot be helped, saved or re-educated. Do not ignore them, but educate the other 75%, so the "25% crowd" always remains an ineffectual minority.

The other "30%" that you speak of, in my opinion and personal experience, are blissfully ignorant by default and only need guidance. (I say ignorant in a totally benign and non-disparaging way.)

In short, education is the key, for the best sanitizer is always light and knowledge.

by Frank J. Ranelli (63 articles, 143 quicklinks, 28 diaries, 362 comments) on Monday, July 23, 2007 at 11:32:07 PM
 

What if in addition to the 25%, another 30%-40%

Do not want to change the Constitution no matter what you tell them? For instance, I don't want to change the Constitution or have an Article V convention. I dont think it is necessary. So, what would you say to me? What would you do?

by Steven Leser (193 articles, 37 quicklinks, 32 diaries, 1298 comments) on Tuesday, July 24, 2007 at 11:57:19 AM
 

Shifting the Paradigm

Steve,

Regrettable, I do not have much time to respond today, but shifting the paradigm of these people (and I am using your ‘assumed number’ of 30-40%) How many people actually know what an article V is or why Jefferson suggested we have it every 20 years?

In summation, you have to change the framing of peoples’ mind first, and then explain the actions that need to be taken. No matter what the facts are, if the framing, the paradigm within which people operate, is not changed, then no change will take place.

Can you honestly assert that you do not want to ban signing statements?

 In your case, my first response is, “why don’t think it is necessary to change anything?” I would ask you to examine your own mode of thought on how you arrived at that and to really bore-down and articulate your reasoning. Avoid pithy statements, such as, “I like it the way it is” and open up your mind, as the founders did, and lay out your arguments for each and every piece of the Constitution as to why, or why not, it should remain. 

Let’s start there.

Frank J Ranelli

by Frank J. Ranelli (63 articles, 143 quicklinks, 28 diaries, 362 comments) on Tuesday, July 24, 2007 at 2:20:10 PM
 

Rebels with causes just don't know how much they count

Start with the idea that people are always ahead of the representatives they choose. Thus, we arrive at a critical point. It happened in the 60s. Nixon realized he couldn't beat the anti-war movement so he decided to find out what the hippies wanted and he found young men like John Dean to update his image. The rest is history. Of course, there was overhang, because Nixon left but some of his cohorts remained with a sour taste in their mouths. Now we call them neoconservatives.

So we have come to another misbegotten war and another sickandtired group. Slowly Congress believes that their supporters are restless. Politicians still have an idea that money is what oiled their success so far. Just think what would happen if everyone who receives a solitication for funds would write back to say "no money without impeachment." As it's been said many times in the past few weeks, impeachment is the people's way of protecting the constitution.

by Margaret Bassett (21 articles, 1346 quicklinks, 28 diaries, 805 comments) on Tuesday, July 24, 2007 at 10:55:51 PM
 

Steven Leser

I see you are still hard at work. ;-)

by RCG (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 352 comments) on Wednesday, July 25, 2007 at 5:07:24 AM