Skip to main content

I stepped in a giant pile of Stupid today, and some of the comments that wafted up from it were so amazingly ludicrous that I just have to make a few things clear to some members of Daily Kos who are not quite full citizens of this dimension, and aren't quite clear on the basic premises of liberalism and progressivism.  So below is a quick primer.

America is NOT a monarchy.

Monarchies do NOT work beyond purely ceremonial functions.

Family members of people in government are NOT more suited to government themselves than more qualified members of the general public.

Nepotism is a BAD thing.

Every person given power because of family connections means another, equally or more qualified person is DENIED a job for NOT having those connections.

The word for the practice of keeping public offices within families indefinitely is FEUDALISM.

Being opposed to politically powerful men giving their wives public offices as gifts is NOT "sexism."

Implying that women in general would be helpless to succeed in life if not for such nepotism IS sexism.

Voting for the Iraq War and refusing to admit being wrong about it even to this day is NOT the act of a conscientious, honorable, courageous Democratic leader.

Public offices are NOT possessions.

Public offices are NOT achievements in and of themselves.

Public offices are JOBS.

If you do not DO the JOB, you did NOT have the office.

If you do NOT do the job WELL, you can NOT cite it as evidence of qualification for an even higher office.

Merely BEING in one office is NOT evidence of adequate experience for another office.

To take or give credit for an office, you have to cite actual ACHIEVEMENTS completed as part of that office's duties.

Saying a person is ethically and professionally qualified to be President BECAUSE they are a Senator, or a Governor, or a Secretary of State is like saying you qualify to be a fighter pilot because you own a hang-glider.  It's not enough information, and probably totally wrong.

The kind of system where offices ARE achievements in themselves irrespective of specific accomplishment is called FEUDALISM.  

Feudalism SUCKS.  It does NOT work.  Accountability and opportunity are rare bordering on impossible.

We have THREE branches of government in the United States, and they are COEQUAL.  So stop fixating on one guy at the top of one branch.

Here endeth the messin'.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Yes, but it's the idea that counts and if people (5+ / 0-)

    think the U.S. has a rotating monarchy in which lots of people, anyone really, get a chance to be king for a term, then that's what it is. It's all a matter of chance. Fate decides who gets to reign.
    Besides, it's not all that much fun. Most people with any sense wouldn't even want to be President. So, anyone who does is obviously daft.
    It all depends on preconceived notions.
    Read Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery" again.

    Or, remember the sacrificial lamb. What happens to the lamb after we sacrifice it? We eat it.

    We organize governments to deliver services and prevent abuse.

    by hannah on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 12:22:53 AM PST

  •  Oh FFS, get over yourself (4+ / 0-)

    You must work-we must all work-to make a world that is worthy of its children -Pablo Casals Please support TREE Climbers for victims of child sexual abuse and exploitation.

    by SwedishJewfish on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 12:31:02 AM PST

  •  There's only 2 kinds (3+ / 0-)

    There's Coke and then there's Pepsi.  And it will be like that until the end of the current empire.  Then it will be war and famine.  So I woudn't worry about this too much.

    Republicans: Taking the country back ... to the 19th century

    by yet another liberal on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 12:49:24 AM PST

  •  But there's much more choice (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Words In Action, hnichols

    On the propaganda box.  There's ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, Fox News.  Shit, talk about diverse choices!!!

    Republicans: Taking the country back ... to the 19th century

    by yet another liberal on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 12:53:39 AM PST

  •  I think someone farted, and is blaming (6+ / 0-)

    it on someone else.

    Politifact, the lie of the year is. - Yoda

    by gakke on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 02:05:02 AM PST

  •  Don't double-down on your stupid sexism. (4+ / 0-)

    It's unseemly.

    You know, I sometimes think if I could see, I'd be kicking a lot of ass. -Stevie Wonder at the Glastonbury Festival, 2010

    by Rich in PA on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:42:00 AM PST

  •  Not true, America is more of a monarchy than (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    hnichols

    under George III. After Citizens United, U.S. elected officials are more closely related to global financial elites than international royals are to each other. The Court now controls the elected branches, which are expected to follow unconstitutional precedent. Not so during Lincoln's day when he saved the Union by ignoring Dred Scott. It's a fatal mistake to believe that the elected branches aren't primary. The Court hides behind the myth that it is Congress's equal, but when the chips are down, under Article III, Sec. 2, it's not.  

  •  I didn't read the earlier diary, so I don't know (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    hnichols

    the specifics of the diary or comments. But if it's about questioning whether or not Hillary may not actually be the best choice for next President -- as thoroughly entrenched as she is in an entrenched in an establishment of vested interests that created this mess and refuse to clean it up any time soon -- then I'd like to say I agree with the line of questioning. As it turns out, Obama is as much of a centrist as Hillary (and Bill) -- at least to date -- and that has resulted in far less change than we need on the Class, Terror and especially Climate War. So why would we want another President who would likely be too serious to suggest dealing with real imminent threats as imminent threats, and not treating as imminent threats those people who are trying to expose the imminent threats?

    If the question is about whether Hillary is technically, of course she is. If the question is whether or not Bill bought her "right" to be the nominee, that's speculation, but it certainly seems plausible. He was pretty dang instrumental last year. He's shrewd. Hard too imagine he didn't collect a stack of chips on that. And it certainly crossed my mind that it might have to do with clearing the path for another chance for Hillary.

    Barring total catastrophe over the next three years, Hillary would have a very good chance of winning, considering her stature and the state of public opinion on issues and the Republican Party. But, barring an amazing turn-around during that time on the Class, Terror and Climate Wars, she probably is not the best candidate for ruler of the free world. That person would be serious about saving the planet on its own terms, which would mean first putting the fossil fuel plutocracy in its place and then slashing the carbon footprint of defense, government in general, and business.

    The Class, Terror and Climate Wars are indivisible and the short-term outcome will affect the planet for centuries. -WiA "When you triangulate everything, you can't even roll downhill..." - PhilJD

    by Words In Action on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 07:45:13 AM PST

  •  Thanks for clearing that up (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gakke, oysterface

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site