Skip to main content

View Diary: The banana republic in which we stand (196 comments)

Comment Preferences

    •  take back the money (36+ / 0-)

      Ike's tax rates--including inheritance and corporate tax.  Make lobbying non tax deductible.  Cap on political spending--equal to $x/voters in last election cycle.  No PACs.
      One other suggestion--from left field.  Cloture votes in the Senate should be a secret ballot.

      Apres Bush, le deluge.

      by melvynny on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 06:20:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And the strategy (11+ / 0-)

        ...for putting the bell on that cat is....

        50 states, 210 media market, 435 Congressional Districts, 3080 counties, 192,480 precincts

        by TarheelDem on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 06:29:55 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Vote! (11+ / 0-)

          :)

          See my sigs.

          Really, wtf are we doing here, folks.

          What's the point of letting neoliberals into the tent when neoliberalism is burning down the campground?
          Since elections will never change the ownership of government, why does our strategy rely entirely upon them?

          by Words In Action on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 06:35:17 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Am really asking myself that... (12+ / 0-)
            Really, wtf are we doing here, folks.

            What's the point of letting neoliberals into the tent when neoliberalism is burning down the campground?
            Since elections will never change the ownership of government, why does our strategy rely entirely upon them?

            Move Single Payer Forward? Join 18,000 Doctors of PNHP and 185,000 member National Nurses United

            by divineorder on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 06:38:27 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  The Early Warnings I missed (11+ / 0-)

            At the Hamilton Project 2006

            It’s not long, it touches most of the bases, and tells you all you need to know about how Barack Obama would govern.
            I’m going to color code the transcript using the same scheme I used for Obama’s inaugural (here; here), with one new category:

            Blank screen: Placeholder material onto which the audience may project what they like. The phrase comes from Obama’s famous remark in the preface of the second of his two autobiographies: “I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.”

            If I had seen this before 2008 the chances are that I would not have been bamboozled.    I believe it was in September 2012 at the University of Washington when Obama told us his personal preference was to raise the Cap.  A master of deceit.
          •  Still doesn't answer the strategy question (28+ / 0-)

            A primary electoral strategy has to go for a general election win in order to be successful.  A third party general election strategy has to go for a win instead of "sending a message".  Progressives have failed at organization on both of these.  If they are to be realistic strategies progressives must do better.

            If conservatives have a demographic disadvantage, progressives have a geographic disadvantage.  Progressive strength is in too few Congressional districts or legislative districts nationwide to have significant effect in the short term.  And there are too many places in the US in which conservatives are never opposed rhetorically because of progressive aversion to conflict or fear of intimidation.  The gerrymandering of districts is a problem only to the extent it amplifies the geographical disadvantage that is already there.

            We have to move beyond snark to developing real strategies that are independent of the Democratic Party, but which might on occasion involve the Democratic establishment as part of a coalition.

            That means that not disdaining electoral strategies but being clear of their limitations.  And IMO focusing on electoral strategies closer to the grassroots-local, county, state legislative offices.

            But electoral strategy must be a minor part of overall progressive strategy, which must go to broadenin the geographical base of progressives so that the default statement of folks who are apolitical is not "Conservative, I guess." but "Progressive, I guess."

            50 states, 210 media market, 435 Congressional Districts, 3080 counties, 192,480 precincts

            by TarheelDem on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 08:43:59 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Best comment. Because it is reality (11+ / 0-)

              based, it likely will be ignored for pretend -revolution.  This problem has existed for  a long time.  Neither the third party route nor the better democrat route has truly been successful.  Nor did occupying parks change America.  So long as the media found it interesting, inequality became an issue, but that faded as usual.  We have ways of  "sending a message, " but not of winning. More fun,  however,  to do outrage on a blog for many.  Yours is the best comment I have read here in a while.

              Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

              by TomP on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 09:13:49 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  I agree with the "best comment" remark... (8+ / 0-)

              And here is the best phrase in the best comment:

              "...to developing real strategies that are independent of the Democratic Party, but which might on occasion involve the Democratic establishment as part of a coalition."

              "We refuse to fight in a war started by men who refused to fight in a war." -freewayblogger

              by Bisbonian on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 09:41:53 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  It took about 30 years for "Conservative, I guess" (7+ / 0-)

              to become the firmament that distracts people from reacting en masse to the government running fully to the 1%'s cause.

              As mentioned in a diary earlier this week, if we live and speak in liberal+progressive terms while disrespecting the now-assumed conservative+libertarian societal values i this country, we start to take back the idea that things are fine so long as more money and power rise to the top, I feel.

              One person, one group of acquaintances, one community at a time.  I haven't let conservative or libertarian assumptions or even jokes get by in real life interactions without simply showing how they don't apply to real life, for years.  None of the people I know in person beyond a glance at our kids' school functions will talk to me in a manner that assumes the status quo makes sense, today.

              "So, please stay where you are. Don't move and don't panic. Don't take off your shoes! Jobs is on the way."

              by wader on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 09:46:44 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  How about an amendment to the constitution to (3+ / 0-)

              end the outsized influence of the one percent.Public financing of all elections is the only solution I see to form a government responsive to the average voter.I see this as a logical step up for Occupy. We could make it a populist 50 state campaign.

              Since when have we Americans been expected to bow submissively to authority and speak with awe and reverence to those who represent us? William O. Douglas

              by GayHillbilly on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 04:12:07 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Are you suggesting (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                GayHillbilly

                ...an action of state legislatures to go around Congress in order to get a Constitutional amendment through Convention?  Exactly how do you deal with a Congress that is invested in not changing the system of corruption?

                50 states, 210 media market, 435 Congressional Districts, 3080 counties, 192,480 precincts

                by TarheelDem on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 07:19:16 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Maybe congresspersons would (0+ / 0-)

                  appreciate not spending an inordinate amount of time begging for money.

                  Since when have we Americans been expected to bow submissively to authority and speak with awe and reverence to those who represent us? William O. Douglas

                  by GayHillbilly on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 09:21:50 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  We did vote. (6+ / 0-)

            And here we are.

            "We refuse to fight in a war started by men who refused to fight in a war." -freewayblogger

            by Bisbonian on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 09:38:39 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Better and More Democrats (4+ / 0-)

          Duh!

          We know that demographics and generational change are firmly on our side, to the point where the continuing existence of the Republican Party is strongly in doubt. We know that we still have a voting gap, where there are more of us in the population, but fewer of us vote, in large part because it is a long-running Republican strategy to convince Democrats and especially Progressives that their vote doesn't matter.

          Also Ralph Nader, Boo, Hiss!

          The only difference between the Republican and Democratic parties is the velocities with which their knees hit the floor when corporations knock on their door. That's the only difference.
          A typical Thoreau
          man of one idea, like a hen with one chick, and that a duckling.
          That means that the key to taking back the House, reforming the filibuster, breaking the gerrymanders, and dispensing with the Blue Dogs is GOTV, GOTV, GOTV. As in the Battleground Texas plan to turn Texas into a swing state, and then a Blue state. We also need the states that Barack Obama won in 2008, including North Carolina and Indiana. Given the established average 1% annual shift in public opinion on most issues (more on LGBT rights lately, less but still some on abortion), and the accelerating Republican descent into ever more vicious denial and intransigence, that will happen in the next decade.

          Also at some point most probably within the next decade the President, most probably a Democrat, will get to appoint replacements for Supreme Court Justices Scalia and Kennedy, making the court balance 6-3 for sanity.

          Then we will be able to pass and sustain legislation reining in the imperial Too-Big-To-Jail/Too-Big-To-Exist corporations, and to talk about real public funding for elections. Not the nickel-and-dime systems that everybody opts out of now, but something big enough to counter corporate money.

          Also, the conversation will shift to the differences between the Democratic and Progressive agendas, not how far Democrats have to bend over to accommodate the tyrannical minority.

          There is historical precedent for all of this in the Era of Good Feeling, of one-party rule by Jefferson's Democratic-Republican Party after the implosion of the corporate, big-money Federalists.

          Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

          by Mokurai on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 08:51:04 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Good luck with that. Since Congress=bootlicks, (14+ / 0-)

        it's never gonna happen.

        My favorite solution would be to flood the system with public money. The best proposal I have seen is to give every voting age citizen a yearly $100 credit that can only be 'spent' as a political contribution to any candidate or candidates you like.

        This would flood the system with so much money that even the Koch brothers couldn't make a dent. Our craven Congress-critters would no longer be chained to their corporate masters because they wouldn't need their money anymore.

      •  Elaborate, please (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Pescadero Bill
        Cloture votes in the Senate should be a secret ballot.

        When someone is impatient and says, "I haven't got all day," I always wonder, How can that be? How can you not have all day? George Carlin

        by msmacgyver on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 07:36:40 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Agree, but-who would change the current laws?... (10+ / 0-)

        Unfortunately, it's the same people whose votes are currently being influenced by the "132 people who provide 60% of the PAC funding".  Those 132 people have no interest or desire to change the status quo, and no doubt have shared their preferences with the lawmakers they fund.

        Most of us want to see the "One person" one vote, or even "One Person, One Dollar One Vote" rather than the current system where the status quo seems to be more skewed to the One Dollar, One Vote system.  For example, re: Bush tax cuts for wealthy:

        ...repeal is supported by 56% and opposed by only 36%...

        ...American politicians are powerfully affected by the views of the rich, and this has nothing to do with any recent electoral trends.

        Rather, as the chart on the right shows, things have been this way for a long time. Using data from voting records in the early 90s, it shows that the responsiveness of senators to the views of the poor and working class is....zero. Or maybe even negative. And that's true for both parties. The middle class does better — again, with both parties — and high earners do better still. In fact, they do spectacularly better among Republican senators. And this disparity has almost certainly gotten even worse over the past two decades...

        ...This is the shape of American politics. If your income is low..politicians simply don't care. If you're middle class they care a little more. But if you're rich, then they really, really care...  

        The real problem is how to make the politicians currently in office, (the ones who "really really care" about what the "rich people" want, but who "don't care" what the non-wealthy people/voters want) vote for legislation that limits the rich people's campaign donations and PAC donations to put the rich on an equal footing with the middle class and poor.

      •  Who exactly is going to do all of that? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        shaharazade, countwebb, mightymouse

        Certainly not the people who got by the "Lestors" or the "funders"!

        Isn't that the problem? I listened to his hopeful close . It certainly sounded good. But  right before it he conflated the love of country to the love of family by using the example of his son having inoperable Brain Cancer.

        What he didn't address was the incredible divide in the country that has either occurred as a outgrowth of this or by design. Until people find common cause, then the situation, the status quo ; will be the same.

        “ Success has a great tendency to conceal and throw a veil over the evil of men. ” — Demosthenes

        by Dburn on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 08:55:09 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Civil war (4+ / 0-)

      nt

      Yes, I am psychic...or was that psycho? I always forget which.

      by Farradin on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 06:30:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Constitutional Convention (18+ / 0-)
      And the solution is...??
      1.  Limit the terms of the SCOTUS

      2.  Popular Democracy (get rid of the electoral college)

      3.  Publicly funded elections.

      4.  Fix the Senate (no more silent holds;  have real filibusters; lower the thresh-hold it takes to overcome a filibuster)

       

      This space for rent -- Cheap!

      by jds1978 on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 06:56:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Exactly (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Kevskos, Klusterpuck

        But how do you force a constitutional convention to happen and will the politicians pay any attention to the outcome?

        "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Rianne Eisler

        by noofsh on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 07:11:33 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  2/3rds of the state legislatures must ask for one (4+ / 0-)
          But how do you force a constitutional convention to happen and will the politicians pay any attention to the outcome?
          They have to, or the courts will remove them.

          The first step is to stop pretending that the Founders were all knowing geniuses.  After all, in the original version slavery was essentially codified into the the Constitution.  Less than a century later, the US was almost destroyed by a war b/c of their actions.

          Poll any knowledgeable political scientist and they will tell you that the US Constitution is not a model for emerging democracies.

          This space for rent -- Cheap!

          by jds1978 on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 08:27:08 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  As Jackson said... (0+ / 0-)

            "Mr. Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it!"

            The Supreme Court has no standing army, nothing more than a few bailiffs.  It was unable to bend a president to follow its decisions; you think it's going to do any better against Congress?

        •  Constitutional convention? (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Lying eyes, Bisbonian, kayak58

          How do you keep it from allowing Congress to criminalize desecrating the flag? How do you keep it from otherwise pandering to the criminal justice industry?
          How do you keep it from redefining marriage as the union of one man and one woman?

          Censorship is rogue government.

          by scott5js on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 08:47:35 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Whatever comes out of the Convention must (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Chi, Simplify
            How do you keep it from allowing Congress to criminalize desecrating the flag? How do you keep it from otherwise pandering to the criminal justice industry?
            How do you keep it from redefining marriage as the union of one man and one woman?
            ....pass 4/5th of the states or it's a 'do over'

            This space for rent -- Cheap!

            by jds1978 on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 09:30:33 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  All valid concerns. It's a huge can of worms. (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Chi, jds1978, Simplify, Klusterpuck

            But the current path is a dead end.

            "We refuse to fight in a war started by men who refused to fight in a war." -freewayblogger

            by Bisbonian on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 09:45:58 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Wir sind nicht in Deutschland (0+ / 0-)

            Germany got its Grundgesetz (Fundamental Law) because it had to start over from scratch and had to live some things down. It could draw upon the experience of many other countries with their constitutions. It adopted something of a hybrid of the French and American constitutions and the British system. It has a good constitution, but not a perfect one. No such animal.
            We Americans do not have proportional representation, and it would be very hard to graft onto this country. We do not have a provision that any vote of confidence must include the nomination of a new flesh-and-blood chancellor. After all, we do not have a parliamentary form of government.
            Thank goodness we do not have an emergency powers clause like in the Weimar constitution, although George W. Bush seemed to believe in a Living Constitution that implied emergency powers for him in case of an attack on the World Trade Center or a fire in the Reichstag.
            What I hear people yelling "we need a new system" I feel like asking, "Doesn't the German Grundgesetz require that if you raise a vote of confidence you must name a successor?"

            Censorship is rogue government.

            by scott5js on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 12:36:32 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Press freedom in USA (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            GayHillbilly

            http://en.wikipedia.org/...

            This country ranks behind 31 countries (including Finland, Germany, UK, and Czech Republic) and just ahead of Lithuania.
            Are you satisfied?

            Censorship is rogue government.

            by scott5js on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 02:10:29 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  And where do the representatives to (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DarkestHour

        this constitutional convention come from? The system of elections is the problem, there's no way to have a Constitutional Convention without somehow electing representives, so that's not really a solution. If we could elect an honest Constitutional Convention, we could just as easily elect an honest Congress.

        "All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out." --I.F. Stone

        by Alice in Florida on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 08:24:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'm not so sure having an election for..... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Chi

          ....Conventionists would be the ideal solution.  You will need a broad swath of people:  Lawyers, scholars, experts in political science and bureaucrats.  With an election, you will basically have a lot of lawyers and a few political celebrities

          Each state would have to work out the best way to pick it's representatives....give them a year to decide.

          I would put everything on the table at the convention....up to and including the peaceable break up of the US

          This space for rent -- Cheap!

          by jds1978 on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 08:33:58 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  5. Put a doorstop in the revolving (13+ / 0-)

        Door between congress and K street.  A permanent moratorium on government employees moving to lobbying jobs.  And a moratorium on the revolving door between the regulatory agencies and the industries they're supposed to regulate.
        Might I point out that most of these necessary laws can also be implemented at the state level.  It's a place to start.

        •  I think this is a good step, but... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          socindemsclothing

          who is going to honestly implement this policy?  My State, Michigan, is essentially owned lock, stock, and barrel by monied interests, with the legislators willing to hawk off our feet to make any extra cash.  Engler brought us to our knees and Snyder's making off with our feet.  

          "You have to let it all go, Neo. Fear, doubt, and disbelief. Free your mind." -Morpheus, The Matrix

          by Sarenth on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 11:57:50 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  And the delegates to a Constitutional Convention (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Bisbonian, mightymouse

        would be different from the current crop of politicians…how?

        Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

        by Mokurai on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 08:54:09 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Stop trying to influence elections (12+ / 0-)

      with our checkbooks, start trying to mobilize people through the things we have more of--our time, our passion, our ability to connect with people personally.  Person-to-person contact is more powerful than ads.  And if the structures are created to both put people in office that way--permanent structures that rely on people power not money power--they can also be used to track and monitor what officials do when in office.  When this happens, it will be possible for officials to chose not to seek big money if they don't want to. Now, even the most well intentioned member of Congress has no choice. The other thing this approach can be used to do is to democratize the states, including removing voting barriers and public funding. This is an important first step, as doing this is easier than democratizing at the national level.

      All of this requires rejecting the idea that the parties and the media get to determine the agenda: what we seek, and the terms of the debate. It also means rejecting the notion that politicians are our allies and that their fate should be our first concern.  They will respect us only when they fear and loath us.

      Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity. Notes on a Theory

      by David Kaib on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 07:03:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yep. There is no way we "little people," often (11+ / 0-)

        already struggling, can compete with the deep pockets opposed—even with our few deep pocket allies.

        I've also noted another phenomenon. All this "sign the petition" stuff, including from this site, is just flooding my mailbox with "donate, donate, donate, just three (or 5, 10, 100) dollars" because some TP/GOP idiot said something or some whack job might be a candidate somewhere a thousand miles from me. As a result I've shut down, unsubscribed, made scripts to send them the same place

        This is to inform you that this AUTHORITY has precedence over your WINNING Fund and as such is totally in control of all winners seeking  for immediate settlement in various Security Companies and Trust Clearing . . .
        this goes.

        Costs and helping my adult kids who aren't as secure as I was limits me to very judicious use of my pockets and that is limited exclusively to my local elections. Sorry, I can't help you in Deep Redland no matter how I feel for you and us suffering from idiots sent from those villages to pollute my Beltway area.

        Nope! I gotta depend on you in the precincts out there to kill these critters' political lives in the crib and to snuff out the larvae in the state house and the adult forms in Congress—by your vote.

        And there lies the problem and solution. No amount of deep pocket, devious, corrupting cash can buy anyone's vote unless they are asleep, village idiots themselves or just don't get involved. That cash "buys" sound bites and glittery door hangers and little rallies that the gullible fish bite on hard. That is the problem. The solution? Each of us has to do, within ourselves, families and limited circle of contacts, what we can to nullify those glittery baits funded by true enemies of our republic, those that seek to become the oligarchy of a big and powerful banana republic.

        Then, and only then, when an alert and dedicated citizenry votes out the subversive agents of those deep pocketed bait trollers can we begin taking back America for ordinary people of good will.

        The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

        by pelagicray on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 07:22:09 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  This! Thank you for noting that that parties (5+ / 0-)

        Are in it up to their necks.  The parties are one enforcement mechanism to encourage/require congress critters to spend so much of their time fund raising.  Congressional chairmen are required to raise even more $$ than backbenchers., to flow not only into their own campaign coffers, but into the party coffers to be distributed to the reelection campaigns of other good little fund raisers.

        We can help break this cycle.  Do you know who is on your county party board?  It's usually a small group of people who keep the county level parties running.  It's often pretty easy to join/replace them.  Get local help, and take over your county party.  That puts you in position to have some influence on who your local and state candidates are, and to recruit people to knock on doors to help you get those folks elected on a platform of getting the money out.  And your door knockers don't ask for donations, the ask for a few hours of time.

    •  We've done it before. (6+ / 0-)

      Study the late 19th century through FDR.

      •  Teddy R. & FDR were anomalies. Who was the (11+ / 0-)

        plutocrat who said Teddy wouldn't "stay bought" & was originally an accidental President whom the plutocrats had made VP to get him out of any position of real power.

                 FDR was, famously, a "traitor to his class" who started out with conventional economic ideas before being convinced to take "radical steps"--e.g., going off gold standard.  And both were reacting to protect the establishment from threats from the left--William Jennings Bryan and the Populists for Teddy and the socialists, Communists, Huey Long, Dr. Townsend, etc. for FDR.  LBJ had MLK & the civil rights movement pushing him  

                PBO has had no threat from the left because the American left has been totally ineffectual since 1972, except for electing The Shrub in 2000; and progressives will remain totally ineffectual as long as they keep supporting "liberal" Republicans like PBO and Hilary.

        "If you don't read the newspapers, you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- M. Twain

        by Oliver St John Gogarty on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 07:50:58 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Many countries (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        alice kleeman

        have done it before. If we study what countries have done this an how, then we may be able to replicate the successful strategies.

        If we abandon our allies and their issues, who will defend us and ours?

        by Bryce in Seattle on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 02:59:24 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Lessig supports (4+ / 0-)

      The Grant and Franklin Project as a solution.  Which gives every American some amount of money, around 50 dollars,  which they can donate to candidates.

      Its part of the American Anti Corruption Bill, which he helped create.  

    •  And the SOLUTION is structural and easy: (0+ / 0-)

       

      SOLUTION:  To get out of this plutocracy, we need to do two things:

          1.  Reclaim the election tabulation process:  Stop letting corporations tally our votes in back rooms.  We need to tally our votes at the precinct level with local witnesses--just like we used to do.  (In other words, stop centralized vote tabulation in back rooms by rogue-able software, which makes it one-stop shopping for thuggery.)  

          2.  Vote Money out of Political Pockets:  If we want these folks to work for us, we have to be their breadwinner.

      Separation of Church and State AND Corporation

      by Einsteinia on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 09:51:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  We live in a banana republic (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Chi, Sarenth, alice kleeman, Klusterpuck

      And this banana republic is controlled by Banana Republicans because Democrats have surrendered and refuse to fight.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site