I haven’t voted in years, I honestly don’t remember the last state or national election in which I voted (although I think it was Clinton in ‘92). I am still registered, but only because I vote in local elections. Even there I only vote on bond, tax and constitutional amendments. I've been pondering since before the primaries started why I have given up on the political process. Follow me below the fold.
My first national election was 1972 and I found myself registering and voting Democratic. I actually knew little to nothing about politics and had been raised in a Republican home. The most obvious reason I registered as a Democrat was that we were fighting and dying in Vietnam. I had completed service in the Navy and was living and going to college in Nebraska at the time. Nebraska, one of most severely deranged right wing states in the union. Just to give you a reminder of how right wing Nebraska is, at the time of the Nixon resignation, the last two Senators who supported Nixon were Nebraskans Carl Curtis and Roman Hruska. I believe it was Curtis who “explained” the 18 ½ minute gap as the work of a ‘sinister force’ (meaning the Devil did it). Hruska was no better. He once said, defending the nomination of a justice many considered mediocre, “Even if he is mediocre, there are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers. They are entitled to a little representation aren’t they?” The ’72 election of course was Nixon/McGovern. I knew McGovern didn’t have a chance, and a vote for a Democrat in a presidential election in Nebraska was simply an exercise in standing in line. Yet I drove 120 miles round trip to cast that vote.
After moving to Colorado in 1977, I worked in several campaigns, always for Democrats. I will admit that I have not always voted Democratic. In 1984 I voted for Reagan. Not because I liked his policies, but because I realized I had never voted for a single person running for President who had won. This depressed me, although only slightly. I also voted for Bush the first in 1988. Dukakis I simply couldn’t abide. I voted for John Anderson in 1980, more as protest than anything else. Otherwise, I have been a dedicated Democrat.
When the Democrats won the majority in Congress in 2006, I was reenergized. When Biden, Richardson, Dodd and Clinton entered the primary, I saw myself once again voting (Obama was not yet on my radar). And even more, I saw myself once again volunteering for whoever the Democratic nominee would be, working to see that Colorado was blue in 2008, and beyond. Because a newly elected Democratic President, working with increased majorities in both houses of Congress after 2008, would bring America back to their senses. They would right the wrongs and criminal actions perpetuated over the last eight years. They would of course, immediately begin to wind down the Iraq war, bringing the troops home safely while at the same time trying to leave behind an Iraq that would find its’ way to some semblance of stability.
And, hope of all hopes, the house might vote articles of impeachment against both Bush and Cheney. While I did not expect the Senate would vote to uphold articles of impeachment and actually oust these criminals, at least a shot would have fired across the bow of the Republican Party, letting them know that the Democrats were back, that we were mad and hell, and we weren’t going to take it anymore.
And. And. And.
And shortly after taking office, Nancy Pelosi announced that impeachment was “off the table”. The war dragged on, with more Americans and Iraqis dying every day. The Democratically controlled Congress did not cut off funding of the war, did not set a timetable for withdrawal did not bring the troops home, did not stand up to Bush and Cheney. Instead they rolled onto their backs, and presented the President their bellies.
And. And. And.
And I found myself asking why. Why hadn’t the Democrats stood up to Bush? There was no question why they were elected, to end the war in Iraq. Everyone knew this, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian and Independent. The presidents’ favorable ratings were running around 30%, he was, and is, a lame duck, yet the Democrats caved on almost every substantive issue.
Finally I had to admit I had known the answer all along. And the answer was the reason I had stopped voting, had stopped supporting Democrats, and had stopped working on campaigns.
The reason is that both parties are corrupt, and I’d known this for years. The Republicans of course are corrupt in an entirely different and much more effective and sinister way than the Dems. They pander to the worst of religious and racial prejudices. They steal elections, bribe people not to vote, suppress voting and attempt to disenfranchise those who are more likely to vote Democratic. They prey on fear. They hold themselves up to be morally superior, all the while having the same weaknesses as we all do. And when all else fails, they corrupt the judiciary.
The Republican Party is to democracy what reality television is to intelligent entertainment. The Republican Party is the lowest common denominator of American politics. The Republican Party is corrupt, but they are corrupt to a purpose, to win elections, something they do very well and just might do again in 2008.
The Democratic Party is corrupt in an entirely different manner. Theirs is the corruption of incompetence and cowardice. Theirs is the corruption of the dog that has been beaten so many times, first by Reagan, then by Bush II, that when its master bothers to notice it, the dog rolls on its back and turns up its belly.
And so, I present to you ladies and gentlemen, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Democratic Congress (with a few brave exceptions, Dodd, Feinstein and Wexler chief among them). The Dems have turned their bellies up to the Alpha dogs: the Moron-in-Chief and Darth Cheney. The Democrats have become enablers of the worst kind. They KNOW they are enabling a fascist criminal cabal and all they can do is mutter darkly ‘Just Wait’ without even putting up any kind of fight. What in hell will Congress do if Bush declares martial law in 2008 and refuses to leave office?
The Republicans in 2007/2008 are at the lowest point they have been since the Nixon resignation. With an ounce of competence by the Democratic nominee, the newly elected president on January 20, 2009 will find himself or herself with several mandates (end the war in Iraq, restore the Constitution, enact universal healthcare chief among them) along with increased majorities in both houses.
Will the next president be a leader or a caretaker? Will the next president rise to the levels of Lincoln, FDR or LBJ or fall to the levels of Hoover, Nixon or Bush II? All of these men were presented with their crises. For Lincoln it was slavery and the civil war. For FDR it was the Great Depression and WWII. For LBJ it was the civil rights movement and health care for the elderly (and Vietnam, at which he failed). For Hoover it was also the Great Depression. For Nixon it was Watergate and a constitutional crisis of his own making. For Bush it was 9/11.
Lincoln, FDR and LBJ succeeded by articulating a vision, drawing people to their views by spoken word, leadership and the use of the levers of power in Congress. They then implemented their vision.
Hoover failed by simply ignoring the greatest financial crises in world history. Nixon failed because he was a paranoid, hateful fear mongering venal crook. Bush failed for reasons too numerous to mention, but mostly I believe, because he has no vision, no sense of the possibility of being wrong and because he was being enabled by those below him into believing he was remaking America for the better.
Lincoln spoke to the country most famously with the Gettysburg address. FDR told Americans “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself”. LBJ imagined a Great Society.
George Bush asked us to go shopping.
What this country desperately needs is someone who, upon being inaugurated, dwells not on the failures of the last eight years, but who articulates a vision for the future, and then leads all Americans toward that future. And not just America, but someone who can repair the wounds this administration has created around the world. A leader who can participate in the leadership necessary to lead the world toward answers on global warming, nuclear weapons, disease, hunger, genocide, and many more issues.
I see no such leaders among the Republican candidates. To me, all of the Republican candidates for president fit the description writer Jimmy Breslin has for Rudy Giuliani “A small man in search of a balcony”.
Unfortunately, I see mostly caretakers among the Democrats. There may be a possibility that among the Democratic contenders, a person of vision and leadership will emerge. I keep waiting for one of them to stand up, to tell the country how bad things are, how things got this way, and what all Americans can do to effect change. But mostly I wait for one of the candidates to tell us how he or she intends to provide that leadership and vision.
How does your candidate measure up?