We’ve debated this many times before. Let’s put it to one side just for a moment.
Look at the 2004 Dem Platform, linked above. What particular elements of it do you think the Dems might “moderate,” and moderate how and to what extent, to make themselves more electorally appealing, without turning into Pubs-Lite? Please be specific.
To clarify: I do not mean, “Are we so retarded we can’t see the value of UHC?” but “Are we so retarded we can’t make UHC work when other countries can?” I think not.
Other countries typically have a 40-50% tax rate too (The exception being Canada, but Canada is an exception to a lot of things, a gigantic country with a relatively small population base. You want to impliment the Canadian system you say? Great, just eliminate 90% of the people in the U.S. and we can do it without raising taxes). Is that what you would propose?
As for the Democratic platform, I’m not going to read the whole thing and give you a point by point analysys, but I did scan the first couple of pages, and it reminded me of something from last election. I voted for Kerry, but the biggest qualm I had about doing so was the way he and the Dems kept yammering on and on and on about how important it was to work with other countries, and how focused they were going to be on getting a worldwide consensus before doing anything. Frankly, it sounds weak. Now, I’m not saying we shouldn’t work with other countries, we should, and that’s been one of the biggest weaknesses of the Bush administration, and if John Kerry gets elected, he can run his foreign policy any way he wants, but the way they kept harping on that over and over really turned my stomach. Let’s take terrorism, for example. France is never going to take any serious action against terrorists. They just aren’t going to do it. They are committed to a policy of appeasement, and too scared of offending the huge Muslim minority in their country. Germany isn’t either. The pacifists in Germany have gained an enormous amount of influence in politics. China and India are generally delighted at anything they see as weakening America, even though they may put a public face of condemning terrorists acts, both countries are determined to replace the U.S. as the dominant nation of the 21st century. Russia’s got enough problems with their own homegrown rebels and terrorists. So where is this international concensus going to come from? It’s imperative to try to form an international consensus before acting, but we also have to be prepared to act on our own if we can’t get one. When Kerry said he would it always seemed like an afterthought. Change that one thing, and it’s not even really a policy change, just more of a matter of emphasis and being more clear about putting our national interests first rather than being subordinate to organizations like the UN and world opinion, and I bet he would have swung that 2% last time. Hell, he’d probably have swung 7 or 8%.
I agree that Ken Blackwell is a partisan sleazebag who should not have anything to do with the running of Ohio’s elections.
I am also getting tired of the left wing’s attempts to use Ohio as a poster child for electioneering sins by their opponents, while simultaneously ignoring Democratic sleaze.
For instance:
Democrats have for some years now been in the minority in state government, allowing Republicans to draw up legislative districts to their advantage. So you’d think that when a proposal came along to eliminate gerrymandering in the drawing up of districts and leave the process to an independent board, Democrats would jump at it.
(In case this requires registration, the Columbus Dispatch editorial describes how Democrats in the Legislature recently blocked a bill they had previously drawn up to institute this reform (with bipartisan support), because Republicans were now pushing it). You see, Dems hope to take advantage of GOP-related failures and scandal to take power in November, and they want to indulge in the same sleazy power grabs that the Republicans have enjoyed.
It’s equal opportunity slime in Ohio politics, much as in the rest of the country. Let’s stop pretending that Democrats have some monopoly on decent political behavior - at least until they demonstrate it consistently when they have the power.
Jackmannii, registered Democrat.
Gerrymandering is a different problem. Both parties are equally guilty of it and always have been. What else could you expect under the circumstances? If the Dems, in power, act like fair-minded gentlemen when they draw up districts, they run the risk the Pubs will get in, and then gerrymander the districts to freeze out the Dems; so they have to gerrymander preemptively; and vice-versa. I mean, what would you do?
If you don’t like that, support reforms to take the redistricting power away from the state legislature and give it to some nonpartisan – well, that’s a fundamental impossibility – some balanced, multipartisan panel. (We tried to do that in Florida this year but the shitsucking Supreme Court knocked the measure off the ballot! :mad: :mad: :mad: )
But, I agree, it was hypocritical of the Ohio Dems to reject such a proposal. Just as it was flat evil of California Dems to oppose a similar proposal by Governer Ahnold.
Partisanship, you know.
But that doesn’t mean Ohio isn’t a legitimate poster child for Republican electoral malfeasance. It is. (And so is Florida.)
When the only documentation sources for Republican wrong-doign are commondreams.org and its ilk, I’d say that if there is, in fact, election cheating, the Republicans are pretty much getting away with it. That is, there is no mainstream media exposé, no grand jury investigating the issue, no one behind bars, indicted, or even subpoenad.
So my question to the Democrats would be… suppose I were to adopt the following position: “Nyah, nyah, nyah - whatcha gonna do about it?”
What, in fact, can you do? The forces of evil seem to have paralyzed the usual avenues of redress. No one that matters is raising a stink. How can the Democrats possibly counter this?
Read the article linked in the OP more closely. Blackwell accused of practices which are unfair and egregious, but not necessarily criminal. (Arguably illegal, but that’s different; it is possible for a public official to do things that skirt or even break the law without actually incurring criminal liability.)
I’ll be very surprised if the Dems in Ohio, including Blackwell’s opponent for the governorship, don’t at least make a campaign issue of all this.
By then it’ll be too late don’t you think?
Blackwell can’t be prized out his position before the election, but all this stink and public attention will make it harder for him to rig things.
Benjamin “Pitchfork” Tillman was a Democrat. Yeah, that was more than 100 years ago, but the Democrats have a larger (and far more violent) history of attempting to supress voters than does the Republican party.
So you believe he has rigged things in the past?
What Brain Glutton really means, Bricker, is "read the article linked in the OP uncritically.
Once again, it depends on how you define “rigging,” but yes, I would apply that word to what he did in Ohio in 2004, even if nothing more remains to be revealed.
So you admit that Ohio can have a honest election this November - and that it will more likley be honest than those in the past?
I know, I’m very familiar with the history of American urban political machines (mostly Dem), but those machines are long gone – even in Chicago, IIRC. Let’s try to limit this to things within living memory. My point still applies: Nowadays, Dems don’t try to suppress the opposition (and cannot even remember the days when their predecessors did); but Pubs do.
I hope so. If it is (more) honest, it will be largely because of all this public attention.
That might mean something if you could point out any factual errors in it.
And your implicit accusations of a dishonest election in Ohio in recent years would mean more if the Congress of the United States hadn’t lookes at the issue and dismissed it.