Um...are we starting a revolution here? n/t

[truthpusher]

[PittLib]

1. I sure as hell hope so! nt

[BlackVelvetElvis]

2. Why not here? Why not now?

I feel like a fight.

[ET Awful]

20. If not now, when?

I'm ready.

[theorist]

3. I'm not sure what you mean.

We're just an underground group of liberals and progressives. What can we do?

[CityZen-X]

7. No Taxation Without Representation?

Stop paying your taxes! If 40-million of us would stop feeding the Chimp and his illegal government, what do you think would happen?

[ladjf]

16. They would take all of your property and put you in jail. It happens

every day.

[truthpusher]

11. I don't know thats why I am asking? I would like to know what our next...

...move is. I am pretty sure DU is part of what's new. But what is it? and what are we going to do about it? I hated Kerry's concession speech, all the blah, blah, blah of coming together, I was literally yelling at my radio! This rhetoric always fizzles out. I sometimes think that the gentler side of liberalism is just a form of therapy for liberals. The liberal agenda and our approach to it is a bit masturbatory, don't you think?

[theorist]

21. All of our camels have broken backs.

And they've been broken for some time now. It is our job, as a group of liberally minded people to help the other side see it.

We were all thinking the same thing when Kerry asked all of America to come together. We know that Bush won't meet us half way. Hell, he'll put the center in his left coat pocket and call us radicals. We must not let this happen, otherwise we will be on the eve of revolution. I have no clue what this revolution will look like, but I hope it's peaceful and that it takes place around a ballot box.

I think the key to moving the "liberal agenda" (as you put it, I hate that term) is to win back the language of partisan politics. It's not a "liberal agenda", it's an agenda for the good of all Americans. There are so many cases during this campaign alone where Kerry gave in to the President's focus-group-tested vocabulary. This goes well beyond "compassionate conservative", which saw much less play this time around.

I know that I'm in a small minority when I say this, but the fundamental concept of the "War on Terror" is flawed. If you believe that terrorism is an act of war that may or may not be state sponsored, as I do, then you are incidentally fighting a "War on War". This is logically incoherent. The real way to combat terrorism is to fulfill the promise of the American Dream to the rest of the world. This can't be done under a Bush administration, which has denied this promise to large groups of our fellow citizens. I do have a feeling that Kerry agrees with me on this to some small degree.

And had he taken the Republicans to task on this one point, he may have had a chance to wake up the American people. Telling them that peace is inevitable and that fear is something that this country has historically rejected would have caused a huge firestorm in the network pressrooms. It would have been a political risk, but it would have had Bush & Cheney in full attack dog mode, i.e. falling into the perfect linguistic trap.

[truthpusher]

23. That's a big problem, fear of risk...the Kerry campaign was vbirtually...

...risk free, and look what happened. Thanks for the post, you said a lot of good stuff. :)

[mr_hat]

4. If you have to ask...

[ParanoidPat]

5. We didn't light the fire.......

.......you know the rest. :evilgrin:

[knowbody0]

6. hey truthpusher

wise words: feign insanity to let others show their ludicrous side.

don't believe kerry turned his back

[truthpusher]

13. My heart is telling me the same but WTF! Where is it!

[Greenbeard]

8. the revolution has already begun

and the right-wing extremeists are winning. We better start thinking of ways to fight back.

[MatrixEscape]

10. I agree ....

The term "counter-revoluton" is what you might call a response to a Radical Right-wing Religious Republican Revolution already in progress. No?

[truthpusher]

14. There's is NOT a revolution!!! There's is the cannibalization of...

...an apathetic nation. What the right and the Fundies are doing is shanking us while we were busy looking up at the sky drinking our Starbucks coffee. I think we got lost in the glamor of the righteousness within liberalism. What is right and good does not always work itself out. I am getting the sense that we have all put our coffee cups down and are staring at the ground, wondering what the fuck to do next!

[ladjf]

18. Outstanding post.

[Heyo]

9. Not without a stylish beret, you're not....

...no revolution is complete without one!

Heyo

[Poll_Blind]

12. Nobody's talking about starting a revolution. What they're...

...talking about is upholding The Constitution. You make a proclamation that you're starting a revolution and it means you reject the sacred document that binds us together and protects us from tyranny.

Really, it's worth making the distinction.

PB

[truthpusher]

15. The constitution has been abused by our apathy...

...If you haven't noticed. The fundies are now claiming the founding documents are essentially the interpretation of biblical laws. The Fundies are trying to make the two indistinguishable. Our revolution (if there is any) has to do with extending the drive against persecution by the religious and oppression through fundamentalism.

[starroute]

17. Nah, we're just trying to take back our country

We had our Revolution over 200 years ago, it's got a lot of mileage left in it, but the extreme right wants to reverse it.

We're the protectors of freedom and democracy, guys. We're not trying to overthrow anything.

[ladjf]

19. In many ways, our situation is similar to the so called Iragi

insurgents. We are trying to take our county back.

[69KV]

22. Not starting one. Just finishing the last one.

The last revolution was never completed. The liberal Founders forgot to take the necessary steps to ensure that Tory (conservative) influence could never again gain influence in this country.

We're going to have to do that now.

[DELUSIONAL]

24. Humm perhaps there is a reason to study the past and

the reasons why the revolutionary war took place in the first place?

They also left us with a legacy of not trusting the electorate -- in that who could vote was limited to a few white men.

However -- when I see uneducated, uninformed people voting -- I somehow wonder if the founding fathers were wrongly correct -- that is they were correct about limiting the electorate but the limited the wrong class of voters.

I am beginning to believe that one must be educated about the issues in order to vote. In this state we often have very complex voter issues and the "nonpartisan" candidates are NOT nonpartisan in they way they carry out their official duties. I have to do a lot of background research on all the issues and candidates before I mail in my ballot. How many people bother?

[truthpusher]

25. Knowledge is too French for many voters...

...in other words they vote their fears and prejudice and choose not to acknowledge the facts. The facts would prevent them from having an excuse to place the hate vote.