Change (getting very scary here).

As usual, Cenk explains it how it is:



A lot of this stuff sounds unbelievable.|||Indeed, if Obama isn't shutting down the Patriot Act, I'm very disappointed in him.|||Oh, Bam. I hope these are lies.|||Well, it's not the first of April, and J didn't post this... so...

(actually, J doesn't really lie... he spins... but he doesn't really lie)|||A spin is still a lie, it's just not completely fabricated from scratch (i.e. "RDarken praying for his death"). Anyway, this is an actual concern about Obama, not like the numerous "Obama Nation" threads we've been seeing here. I've been saying all along that this animosity towards Obama from the Right is hilarious and baffling considering Obama is low on progressive action and more like Bush-light. So far, he's extended each of the key programs leftover from the Bush era like the tax cuts for the rich and now the Patriot Act.|||Since Liberty Prime has me on ignore, I wonder if anyone would convey this particular piece to him.

It would be interesting to see how his conservative/right wing ideology clashes with the constitutional violations described above...|||I see that lolmerica, the land of the slave and the home of the coward, does it again. Carry on...|||I'm sure everyone has heard about Weinergate. I was talking to my best friend about it, completely baffled by the fact that we let these douches tell us what to do / make our laws. He said we have no choice. I said there HAS to be a way to fix things. He said "I'm pretty sure the US is a new kind of dictatorship." Oh snap.|||Quote:








pretty sure the US is a new kind of dictatorship




Your friend is right but wrong. There's nothing new about this kind of dictatorship.

Give people two warring political organizations, and they'll think that they represent the two ends of the political spectrum. Regardless of whether they both have essentially the same policies or not.

Give people a package of policies - a party program or so - and they'll believe that they have to take the good with the bad.

Give people a labyrinthine bureaucracy to hide unpopular decisions in, and they'll never see that you are the one making these decisions. If they do see it, just say that you "have to".

Re-read the Constitution of the United States with fresh eyes, thinking about these things. First and third were built in from the start, second always existed. Your dictatorship is more than 200 years old and based on ideas from thousands of years ago.|||Quote:








Your friend is right but wrong. There's nothing new about this kind of dictatorship.

Give people two warring political organizations, and they'll think that they represent the two ends of the political spectrum. Regardless of whether they both have essentially the same policies or not.

Give people a package of policies - a party program or so - and they'll believe that they have to take the good with the bad.

Give people a labyrinthine bureaucracy to hide unpopular decisions in, and they'll never see that you are the one making these decisions. If they do see it, just say that you "have to".

Re-read the Constitution of the United States with fresh eyes, thinking about these things. First and third were built in from the start, second always existed. Your dictatorship is more than 200 years old and based on ideas from thousands of years ago.




Founding fathers were against partisan politics, if I'm not mistaken.

What my friend meant was that we don't really have a lot of choice in our government, much the way this is the case in a dictatorship. There's lobbying, millionaires (literally) getting away with murder, politicians acting like criminals, while those of us in the middle are handing over 30+% of our income to the government and not seeing any real returns for it.