You are here
Home > Perspective > Politics > Eye now on undemocratic nature of the Democratic Party

Eye now on undemocratic nature of the Democratic Party

Super delegates or not, the public eye will still be turned on the totally undemocratic nature of the Democratic Party, since there is nothing about Barrack Obama that will bring about any real change long term. Still, the question of the moment though is whether the Clinton part of the DLC machine can still manipulate the entire DP or not? The Obama part certainly could… short term.

There is no doubt though that the corporations can manipulate the party since they totally own it. This is no people’s party at all. Rather, The Democratic Party is owned by the military industrial complex every bit as much as the Republican Party.

Nothing will be gained election time with a Barrack Obama as the new president. The only long term gain can only come about when the US population gets angry and totally fed up enough with the corporate 2 parties that act as one con. Unfortunately though, the American people still think that their corporate rulers have some God given right to rule everybody on the planet. Stupid, very stupid. No personality change in the front office will bring about change as long as the American people still are enamored of their country’s nationalism….The Empire.

4 thoughts on “Eye now on undemocratic nature of the Democratic Party

  1. The news commentator I transcribe audio for posted this yesterday:

    [February 12 2008] Travus T. Hipp Morning News & Commentary: Its A Private Party Whether You Like It Or Not The Political Primaries And The Super-Delegates

    http://leighm.net/wp/2008/02/12/tth_080212/

    In… “Other” News: Some folks call it depression Federal mortgage bailout Details.

    Kosovo will declare independence this week the Serbs are not pleased, and the UN is moving peacekeeping troops nearby (as if they ever went away.)

    The Paris to Dakar motor race is now The Chile – Argentina race due to terrorism ALL ALONG the traditional route.

    .

  2. Greetings, Buffalo. I like your blog and your description of Santa Cruz, Californika where you live seems quite accurate from what I saw when I lived in the San Jose area some 8 years ago. Santa Cruz is both reactionary and ‘progressive’ at the same time, as you say it is. Have you considered living in nearby Gilroy or Watsonville? …lol.

  3. Lived in Watsonville, and in North Monterey County out in the Strawberry fields of Pajaro and Las Loma about 10 years ago.

    But Santa Cruz is where the totalitarian action is. Gentrification is in full swing here even as their whole (consumer/tourist oriented) business model goes down the dumper.

    There’s a lot of pressure on the homeless community here exacerbated by the fact that over the years, our ‘progressive’ (economically, NOT socially) city council managed to eliminate the bulk of industrial work in the area under the guise of (faux) environmental issues, and made a large portion of the working class and lower working class community here homeless/transient.

    The police harassment of the homeless who hang out downtown (There is no place else for them to go except the public library or a coffee shop) was severe during the xmas season.

    For all intents and purposes, there is a class war (nb. NO quotes) in progress.

    The police here have been politicized to the point of law enforcement ineffectuality as the city continues to build housing for the $80,000 dollar a year over-the-hill (to San Jose/Santa Clara) commuter class, and ANYONE who looks like a non-consumer, including the Chicano and (miniscule) Black community are being ‘targeted’ by the businesses, the local newspaper and the “re-development” (quotes intentional) agency as interfering with the shopping potential of the commuter class for the scant amount of time they are actually downtown and not sleeping or working etc.

    California Rural Legal Aid (CRLA) just spent 12 years on a lawsuit proving that the county of Santa Cruz is in violation of the state charter which requires municipalities to build housing for the people who actually live and work in the community.

    It’s not just the city, they were trying to ‘Red-line’ the who dang county.

    CRLA recently told the city that they were going after them next, but if things keep going this way, by the time those potential 12 years pass, the city WILL be inhabited by a majority of high earners and the suit would be moot (ahhhhh! poetry!) for all intents and purposes.

    Before I moved here in 1976, I lived in Boulder CO and Ward for a year or so.

    That was before the gentrification of Boulder’s downtown… Pearl Street.

    Is it as fubar as that description of Santa Cruz?

    I always assumed that the counter-cultural attraction of the Naropa Institute et al would prevent a total gentrification of the area, and from what I’ve heard from the ‘roadie’ types who travel through these parts, Boulder is still relatively humane.

    Is that so?

    Leigh, Da’ Buffalo

  4. I would have to say that Boulder does compare favorably to the yuppification of Santa Cruz you are talking about, Buffalo. This whole police battle zone mentality seems to be a coastal thing in California, from Sand Diego north through LA and onward. I saw some stuff last visit to Ocean Beach, San Diego that made me think I was watching Migra working on The Border. It was a economic class battle zone for sure with the cops as goon squad against the street folk milling about. Poor and walking down the steet is a crime these days.

Leave a Reply

Top