It is not easy to ignore those who parrot what they have heard from the Fox crowd. I have found that when I allow myself to become angry at yet another stupid person who allows ideology to trump fact, it does nothing but raise my blood pressure. No good comes of it. If I can not respond without heated rhetoric, I try not to. Occasionally I fail.

I have long been a fan of one of Asimov's minor novels "The Gods Themselves" which is comprised of 3 parts:
First Part: Against Stupidity
Second Part: The Gods Themselves
Third Part: Contend in Vain.

From way out here, I'm with you on this.

Well stated, Doug. I'm with you. I can no longer tolerate the deliberate lies that are continually used to retain power. It is worse than obscene with no end in sight.

I can not watch the TV news with their filthy and deliberate propaganda. I cannot read the garbage that often finds its ways to this site. My heart is just not in this crap.

The problem is that we must take back our country. It will not be easy but it must be done. Keeping that in mind, we must have a plan.

The first part of the plan must be to rid our govt of these neo-cons that have enabled the corporate welfare over the welfare of its citizens. We must replace these neo-con judges, prosecutors, and endless bureaucrats with like minded people who want to work towards making America a better place for everyone.

If we do not exterminate these folks out of our govt, NOTHING WILL CHANGE! Do you hear me Doug? Nothing will change!

So that must be the first part of our plan. I know Senator Obama may not be much different than past recent leaders but at the VERY LEAST, he is NOT a NEO-CON!

I will not talk about what will happen after than because a)if we don't succeed in the first part it doesn't really matter and b)everything we say here can and will be used against us by the self same neo-con politicians. So for now, the focus must be in the extermination of DC.

Let's get the war in Iraq over! Let's get some civil rights back in D.C. Let's talk about health care, education, and how to fix the infrastructure that has allowed the deaths of so many of our citizens. We must discuss how much government we really want. How far into socialism will we go to fix our problems?

I think I've heard this speech before.

I hope you mean it this time.

Mr. Thompson:

With all due respect, some of us are going to be waiting to see what lead you take. I've taken the time to read a lot of the stuff you write, and while I see a lot of words, what I cannot find is much in the way of constructive criticism, just destructive emotion. And people who have pointed this out seem to get tired of beating their heads against an obdurate monolith of poorly concealed rage.

Not so long ago you told some guy who had disagreed with you that you always had the last word. And that's not too far afield from saying, "I'm the decider." Though I have to admit you said it with better English.

And that attitude is coming to be reflected in those who frequent this site. A recent thread only barely veiled a call for armed rebellion against the United States, and that was a thread that you started in one of your rants.

Hey, there's a place to start. Have a contest to find a word to replace rant, which has so many negative connotations. In fact, at visualthesaurus.com, these are the words that come up in association with rant: jabber, mouth off, rabbit on, rave, spout, harangue, ranting, blah, bombast, claptrap, and fustian. Not one of them has a positive meaning.

My entry in the contest: Doug's Dialogue.

Churlpat -- a plutarch by any name is still a plutarch

BRAVO Doug!
Years ago my Leadership Class instructor(trying to inspire us all to become active participants in society) gave each of his students a blank paper telling us we were to turn it in the next day as a poster, depicting the dynamics of action. I turned in a blank paper with this note attached "No Action...No nothing!" I recieved an A for my poster.
The same teacher reminded his students daily, that each person held within themselves the power of a match, that we alone were in control of how that power would be used during our lives, through our words and actions...that we would either use it to benefit or destroy..the choice would was ours. The teacher was brilliant, inspiring. and absolutely correct.

I agree and we will try again Doug, but some way the people need to get the news back to news again I think that would be a great start. If they reported the real news and just the straight facts like old times our Political leaders would not be able to turn every word into something big. I really miss the old days when you had news and I mean what was really going on.
Both these things would help each other to be better and not act like a movie drama every day.
I do not know how one would go about getting real news but that would help and not poison so many minds they would have lots of real news out there. Our new people are the drama queens that buss around the Political leaders and they lead them by their noses. I think in a whole we have the worst news now than any time in my life. If we could get them to report real news I think the other would work out because the Political leaders would not be talked 24/7. I am tired of being treated like sheep made to lead well to tell the truth I never have been lead anywhere by anyone, but I know lots that have just from the news.

Ann

The vote is rigged. Both parties want the same things.

Big government
Big business
Global hegemony

Being civil for over 30 years got us this mess. Why continue that failed policy?

This doesn't mean don't do unto others. Just don't expect me to talk nice about Dick "Go F*ck Yourself" Cheney or any of the others that have proven their disdain for ordinary Americans.

What we need in this country is Freedom. Simple, delicious Freedom.

I often think about how great my life would be if my government would just get the hell outa my way and let me live in peace.

I'm in total agreement with you on that.

Food for Thought.......

We can't think ourselves into acting right. We have to act ourselves into thinking right.

Ponder that...see if it makes sense and in line with Doug's comments.

We need to write a platform for a new political party, as much as I hate political parties. Maybe that sounds arrogant, but if not US, then WHOM, and if not NOW then WHEN?

Plank 1: No military intervention in any country which has not directly attacked the U.S. mainland, Alaska or Hawaii. "Terrorist" attacks on U.S. foreign embassies or at home are crimes to be handled by police agencies and not the U.S. military.

Plank 2: Dissolution of the Federal Reserve, and returning of money creation to the U.S. Government as defined by the Constitution.

Plank 3: Withdrawal of all U.S. military forces everywhere, and closing of all foreign U.S. military bases.

Next? Anyone?

-- Kent Shaw

The anger, frustration and all the rest of the negative side of life are coming from very dissatisfied, unlistened to Americans, yes, even bitter ones. (When did THAT become a nasty word?" To those who bleat about Obamas short time in DC I say.. Thank heavens he has not yet had time to become like the rest of them there, I think his limited amount of time there is a PLUS for him. If he gets to be like the rest of the group in DC, I will have a very great disappointment in my old life here. From where I sit, I see a man who is unafraid to change his thoughts when facts are brought to him that make a change in policy necessary. He is only ONE MAN and no one man can make the necessary changes in anything like this screwed up government in Washington.

The thought of having an intelligent man in charge is scaring the hell out of the neocons running things now. They have dealt so long with this airhead of a president. that having someone come into office with an IQ larger than his shoe size is really giving them a lot of food for thought. He will need the help of every thinking American to accomplish what he wants to in office. I am sick of the men and women who say.. if I cannot vote for--whoever--- I won't vote at all. Shame on them. It is one of our most precious rights, and imagine how you would feel if told your right to vote had been stripped from your freedom as an American
There IS NO perfect man walking the face of this earth I cannot see the old man running as president, not for a split second...read his past history as a person in private life. He puts Clinton to shame on adultry...and for all the glory he heaps on himself from HIS war.. he is no better than any other POW who served the same way as he did. The glory part of his life is well overdone., because in my own mind, the heroes of that war, 65,000 of them, never came home.

Give the young man a chance,he could never be worse than what we have had for the past 7 1/2 years.He will come home from this trip abroad with many things to finally decide on and Flip Flop John will have a heyday making light of all he hears, because that tired old man really has NOTHING new to say except be critical of Obama.He is negative on everything Obama does. his funeral oration puts me to sleep. We need youth in this country to keep us going forward and I guess the old saying of Love your country or leave it, still applies. I have lived with seven generations in my life, and never before have we needed so big a change in this country. Obama is the best we have to vote for this time around. Help the man out, do not disparage him before he has a chance.

LET THE HEALING BEGIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

Doug, I've been reading your stuff for quite a while now and am certainly in agreement with the premise of your piece.

This does however bring a couple of questions to mind.

1. You've been in politics/journalism for HOW many years?? And you're just figuring this out NOW?

2. Can you really do it? Can you break the pattern that has been highly consistent the entire time I've been reading this site?

I'm wondering how long it will be before W or Pelosi piss you off again and how you'll react.

I'm wondering if this "change" will last longer than your most recent "retirement".

I would gladly welcome the change you describe, but honestly? I'll believe when I see it.

I agree with the comments on the "grass roots" change imposed by those at the top will always fail. Change only comes from the bottom up, when enough people get together and say"I have had enough". Until then, things will continue on their chosen path. We will continue to elect "clowns" because of the darth of information from the MSM. It is their willingness to repeat the days talking points of the republician party as revealed truth, without background, context, or knowledge. It is no wonder that we have become a nation of the ignorant, our constitutionally protected MSM continues to do us a disservice by blindly repeating the words of the party in power. The fact remains that the MSM is owned by a very few major corporations, that those corporations, and others of their ilk, want things to remain the same . This is why change must come from the bottom up. There is no other way to change the top without changing the bottom. Kick all the bastards out, start over. One thing that my city-San Antonio, Texas, 7th (soon to be 6th) largest city in the nation did when total disgust with those in power finally led to the citizens deciding how to take charge. They enacted term limits-the toughest in the nation-on the mayor and on the city council. 2 2 year terms each. period. Having the right of the vote to kick the bastards out means nothing. 98% of incumbents win reelection. Term limits are the only way to put a stop to this once and for all. Now those who desire power and want to continue in office have tried to get the public to vote for much longer term limits, so far they have failed in every election. Remember when the republicians took charge of congress, how they all promised to impose voluntary term limits on themselves? How many kept that promise. The answer shouldn't surprise anyone. None were willing to keep that promise to not seek reelection after their self imposed term limits. The only way that we the people can take back our government and our country is to impose real term limits on congress. make it 12 years. total. 2 terms as senator, or 6 as a representive or a combination of the two. No more. and if a representive becomes a senator, the 12 year limit stays. We changed the constitution to limit a president to 2 4 year terms. So we should be able-if the disgust level is high enough-to change the laws to limit the number of years that one can serve in congress. There, a positive solution, not a name calling rant.

ONE five-year term for President, ONE six-year term for the Senate and TWO three-year terms for the House.

Presidential, House and Senate campaigns financed ONLY from public monies. Free airtime for legitimate debates (NOTHING like the "debates" we've seen so far which have been little better than dog and pony shows. "Everyone who believes in God raise your hand.")

NO MORE ATTACHING UNRELATED ISSUES TO ANY BILL BEFORE THE HOUSE OR SENATE.

-- Kent Shaw

The Age of the Feuilleton

The German author Herman Hesse wrote in his novel "The Glass Bead Game" (1943) of a time of social failure that was precipitated by “The Age of the Feuilleton" (i.e., leaflet commentary and talking heads), where anybody was entitled to an opinion and because of which society decayed into chaotic babble and dissension. Because the Internet is now manifestly the real version of that once fictional society, all of us who inhabit the blogosphere have become Feuilletons; and because of the ease with which we can spread the infection, we actually think that every one of our opinions matter and must be heard.

Liberals (Capital L) are by John Locke’s definition people of many persuasions that expect that their government will provide for those things that individuals cannot, whether it is delivery of services, collecting taxes, making war, or stopping runaway abuses of power. We are, fundamentally, people who believe that government has a duty to act. Historical Conservatives were largely those who felt that the paramount role of government was to prevent the Hobbesian “war of all against all,†and thus supported a strongly authoritarian and restrained central government to keep us from killing each other. The dynamic tension between these political and intellectual schools provided for a generally healthy balance among/between community interests.

Today’s so-called liberals and neo-conservatives are a self-absorbed, muddled, hodge-podge of narrowly focused special pleaders who have made the social agenda all about winning and losing. Whether it’s the NRA on the right or PETA on the left, such organizations have made their issue a litmus test for every office, and woe to the politician who isn’t with them 100 percent of the time. Such absolutism drives out rational behavior and civility and replaces it with flamethrower argumentation and blood libels.

I think it's worth remembering that while the social divisions in our society are deep, they're not really that wide. On virtually all social justice, economic, and moral questions that end up on ballots, the decisions tend to split by only around +/-3 percentage points. A 49-51 split says to me that we still have enough in common as Americans to have a rational conversation, provided we keep it civil.

That said, as Blue liberals, we need to make our criticisms and challenges of the current government immediate, direct, and accurate. It is the ability of inaptly named groups like the NeoCons, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, or the American Family Alliance to wave the bloody shirt that outrages their followers and drives them to action; while those of us on the left sputter with impotent rage, or dissolve into a feckless inarticulate mass.

We lost the battle a long time ago when we let "Them" condemn us by accepting the word "Liberal" as a pejorative, and by ceding to them the “authority†to define the “proper†role of government. We lost another round when we let rigid ideology intrude into the public space, without calling it for the prejudice and ignorance that it was and still is, and so we are playing catch-up ball. In no small part our failings as liberals stem from our willingness to let “a hundred flowers (of controversy) blossom†without critical examination and immediate contradiction.

But that was then and this is now, and despite the cliché, if we want to assert a role in the national community that is respectful and respected, we must reclaim the agenda; redefine the terms of the debate; field our own truth-squads to rebut the lies and libels of the anonymous contributor and the POV biases of the chattering class; and get a grip on our own rhetoric.

None of this is particularly revolutionary, but it will require courtesy, discipline, and patience to restore mutual respect and get beyond the noise of the "other" Feuilletons. (And if we consider the quality of the Obama campaign, that seems to be their model...)

ADB