Road to Ruin Or Just Weaker?

[Lucky]

Sarah Palin says that the country is on the road to ruin. Yet today liberal New York Times columnist Bob Herbert says that democracy in the US is weakening. Could it be that there is some agreement between the two? Well, the question of course assumes that Palin has actually studied the issue, which I doubt. Herbert says in today's column:

"While millions of ordinary Americans are struggling with unemployment and declining standards of living, the levers of real power have been all but completely commandeered by the financial and corporate elite. It doesn’t really matter what ordinary people want. The wealthy call the tune, and the politicians dance.

So what we get in this democracy of ours are astounding and increasingly obscene tax breaks and other windfall benefits for the wealthiest, while the bought-and-paid-for politicians hack away at essential public services and the social safety net, saying we can’t afford them."

I agree with what Herbert says, but if democracy is weakening in the United States, is that not the same as saying that the country is on the "road to ruin?" Democracy is, after all, the main principle on which the country is based, and if it is weakening, that cannot be the road we want to be on.

Yet I doubt that Palin, now a multi-millionaire, would have the rich losing their control of the matters Herbert refers to. Despite her claims to be a "soccer mom" she is hardly an economic pal of Joe Sixpack. Her "road to ruin" is the opposite of Herbert's. She would have the country more enthralled with the right wing, more willing to enact Patriot Acts, and more willing to save taxes for the rich. So, we may be weakening, as Herbert says, but the road to ruin is possible if Palin gets any more influence on the course of events in this country. Then we'll know that America does not expect much depth in its leaders.

The Herbert column in its entirety:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/12/opinion/12herbert.html?ref=opinion

[RA1]

Of course, we are on the road to ruin. Weaker is just a variation of this. And, it has been thus since the beginning of the revolution or the origins of the US (et al). We consistently seem to have lost our values of helping each other, letting others continue with their own life styles, being afraid of "big government", etc., etc.

Personally I have no faith in MS. Palin. She seems to be just another pol looking after herself while spouting BS which she hopes will appeal to the conservatives among us. I do not look forward to her being a so called candidate for the US presidency. I also do not look forward to having BO continue.

I hate to say it but we apparently need a third party who will look after the folks who are working and have some equity in our future but are not obscenely wealthy, all too often at the expense of the rest of us.

I realize this all may be hopeless but we must try, mustn't we?

Best regards,

RA1

[Guest zipperzone]

I was astonished to hear Piers Morgan interviewing Donald Trump last week. The Donald was asked his opinion of Palin and it was overwhelmingly positive. He said she could very possibly get nominated but didn't think she could win against BO. I thought DT would have had more smarts than that.

He also teased the audience by saying he was still considering running himself and would make his decision know this summer. He made numerous statement about what he would do if elected. It appeared that he was discounting the power of the house and the senate. Perhaps he is planning a dictatorship.

[Lucky]

The Donald loves attention. He was at a Broadway show I attended and made sure everyone got to see him. Once everyone was seated after the intermission, he remained standing in case anyone had missed him.

At least he is slightly more qualified for president than The Sarah. BTW, Mitt Romney also said she would make a great president. So we might have The Donald, The Sarah, and the Twittmitt all running together.

[Guest zipperzone]

So we might have The Donald, The Sarah, and the Twittmitt all running together.

May God help you all......

[TampaYankee]

Lucky, on 12 February 2011 - 08:06 PM, said:

So we might have The Donald, The Sarah, and the Twittmitt all running together.

May God help you all......

Right now it looks like the next GOP Presidential Primary will be reminiscent of the 1980 Primary starring Regan and the Seven Dwarves but this time without a Regan.

The only unmitigated disaster in the present bunch, as it looks now, is probably Romney. At least he can run a corporation and clean up the Olympics and I don't think he has lost contact with reality as the others have, although he is trying to convice CPAC and the Tea Party that he has. Add Pawlenty to that column as well. Both these guys are shilliing for themselves and it is downright embarassing. Neither of them can make the sale to the Tea Party.

It will be interesting to see what the general electorate will think of the GOP offering this next go-around. Seven (or however many) dwarves running to the neo-Birchers on the right and then back to the center for the general election, alienating all the the neo-Birchers who will then sit on their asses realizing they brought a whore to the Prom. Or will the general electorate pick a real nut? That would be best for the congressional Dems in the following midterm but not good for the country.

Will is weak field actually insure the reelection of a President when unemployment has remained north of 8% for nearly four years? That would be an historic event not seen since FDR I believe.