Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

Any questions?

Looks like one of those emails that makes the rounds, but it's still a useful exercise in doing the math:

Take a look at this and just remember elections in November 2010.

1. U.S. House & Senate have voted themselves $4,700 and $5,300 raises.

2. They voted to NOT give you a S.S. Cost of living raise in 2010 and 2011.

3. Your Medicare premiums will go up $285.60 for the 2-years

4. You will not get the 3% COLA: $660/yr.

5. Your total 2-yr loss and cost is -$1,600 or -$3,200 for husband and wife.

6. Over these same 2-years each Congress person will get $10,000

7. Do you feel used?

8. Will they have your cost of drugs - doctor fees - local taxes - food, etc., decrease?

9. NO WAY.

Congress received a raise and has better health and retirement benefits than you or I.

• Why should they care about you?

• You never did anything about it in the past. (emphasis added)

Send the message to these individuals --- "YOU'RE FIRED!"

In 2010 you will have a chance to get rid of the sitting Congress: up to 1/3 of the Senate and 100% of the House!

Again, I think NOTA (None Of The Above) is the answer. There's plenty of evidence from the term limits movement that "throwing the bastards out" isn't the answer, and makes things worse.

So I think that the issue is the legacy party system as such, and that's what needs to be broken down. We need to destroy the ratchet entirely, not just move it forward or back a notch. (To be fair, Tony Wikrent makes a great case on why I'm wrong.)

NOTE Via, again, Ellen of the Tenth.

0
No votes yet

Comments

sisterkenney's picture
Submitted by sisterkenney on

stale. What happened 100 years ago is not relevant to the situation today (and no, Santayana doesn't come into play here)..I'm talking about the entire technological and cultural situation..there are NO equivalencies that can be made to any degree of accuracy. And the argument that Dems are dysfunctional locally just validates the need to engage in a third party action, rather than try to "school" them for the what, 100th time? And Wikrent's argument that the Democratic Party "is essential to the need to govern" well, words fail me.

al_schumann's picture
Submitted by al_schumann on

If the Democrats, however flawed, are essential to governance, that makes third parties all the more important. They're needed to pose a flank threat and to give legacy party refugees some kind of systemic lever. Every truly progressive reform we've ever had has come from threats to the entrenched elite.

As regards the Republican belief that government can't work: hogwash. The party rhetoric along those lines is nothing more than marketing and tormented euphemism. Republicans believe in enormous government. They love it. and they gloat over its efficacy when they feel in control. They also believe in copious amounts of welfare and an all encompassing "nanny state". They want a state that protects the social status of their neurotic tribe, and no one else. Everything they do points straight at that.