His observation about some “spiritual groups” applies very much to the quicksand in which both political parties seem to be stuck. To what degree this applies to sectors of the voting public remains to be seen.

======================================

“Finally, it must be acknowledged that some communities become so grandiose, so unconsciously duplicitous and fearful that they are unwilling or unable to face their difficulties. Inevitably, some unhealthy systems are exploitive and abusive beyond repair.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What to do…??

The only real difference between the two is that the conservative side is bankrolled by deeper pockets, but they’re both inimical to authentic human needs and wants.

How ‘learned’ ‘we’ have become !

Therese nails it. The neocons certainly have “come together FIRST” to command the media and its use to push the government-as-the-problem litany. Where is the countervailing strategy amongst those who hold a more humane view of our polity?

At the rally before the march, I expected to hear again what we were protesting. Instead each individual group came to the podium with a list of grievances about their own plight; women’s rights, gay rights, environment, etc. Given this was Reagan’s terms, their grievances were valid, but they were missing the point. The chance to say something in a united fashion was given away to remain focused on their own agenda. As we marched to the White House, I felt so disappointed as I saw banners about this issue or that, while my one friend and I seemed to have the only sign actually relevant to the march – No arms to El Salvador.

My example goes to show that the Democrats do this as well. Without unity of purpose, the chance to begin to make change will be squandered. The Democratic Party is filled with special interests and diversity to such an extent that they are blinded to the need to come together FIRST. Then seek redress for their separate issues. Their separate self-interest destroys their message.

In the article, which is about the appearance of Vice President Biden on MEET THE PRESS, the Biden quote from the interview has him saying, twice, “Dick Cheney’s a fine fellow.”

What’s the point of such a declaration?

Biden had indicated previously, during the 2008 campaign, that Cheney had “done more harm than any other single elected official in memory in terms of shredding the Constitution.”

How fine a fellow can a man be who’d done more than any other to shred the Constitution?

If this is what a Democratic leader sounds like when he “tears into” a liar and criminal and fear-mongerer like Dick Cheney, God help us!

Because, Andy, his black and white world views the American politician diametrically opposed to the American artist.

Artist? That confuses me: that doesn’t seem like one of the face cards is David R’s deck.

Surely, the corruption and irresponsibility of the media have to be taken into account in devising the best strategy, along with the darkness of the Republicans and the defects in the American public.

My point is predicated on this simple proposition: CONSIDERABLY BETTER STRATEGIES HAVE BEEN AVAILABLE TO THE DEMOCRATS THAN THOSE THEY’VE EMPLOYED. Much better. That lack of “boldness,” that lack of “spine,” that lack of strategic judgment, that lack of clarity about their BEING IN A BATTLE have led them to give away territory while –in my view– they could have been GAINING territory this past year.

So when you say, “get behind them,” it raises the question: Is the best way of getting behind them to applaud what they’re doing, which is squandering their advantages, or to exhort them into the battle so we can be behind their doing what can succeed?