Is this plausible?

[Skip Intro]

Can't say when this might have started, but what if elections and the big parties have been little more than charades for some time now? What if the showdown every two, four years became just a show at some point? A ruse to keep those still awake occupied while a larger, hidden agenda was carried out, regardless of who was in power.

That would explain the compliant, until recently, behavior of the Democratic party, as a whole, since 2000. It would explain some of Clinton's moves while he was in office. It would explain 2000, 2002 and 2004. It would explain the lapdog media. It would explain an installed, moronic figurehead "president." It would explain a joe lieberman.

And if that had, hypothetically, happened, my guess would be not before President Carter's administration, and if you can hold that premise for a few, it must be asked - what agenda does America secretly pursue? Who is really calling the shots? What is victory? And where does that leave the American people, and this country?

Something isn't right, and it hasn't been right for a while. Why bullshit elections and DINOs? Why an "Iraq = wmds" from both sides, even before bush slithered under the back door?

Just some tinfoil ramblings. Dismiss, discuss, or ignore as you will...

[leftofthedial]

1. Frank Zappa, 1977

"The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way, and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theatre."

[InkAddict]

6. Oh no, no dog and pony show

and, worse, they've pimped our ride!

[americanstranger]

2. I've thought that for a long time...

I blogged about it a few weeks back.

It's long been a pet theory of mine (as well as just about my worst nightmare) that the concept of the two-party system in this country was scotched long ago in favor of promoting the appearance of a two-party system, and that those fortunate enough to get themselves elected to Congress put up a front of being Democrats and Republicans while all the while making decisions that have very little to do with preserving the common good of this country.

Sure, they go through the motions of being 'liberal' or 'conservative,' but they're all in on a joke that's being perpetrated on us rubes. Why else would Bill Clinton - still the face of Resident Evil over at Fox News - have a 'personal relationship' with the very organization that all but wishes him dead on a daily basis? Why would his wife accept money from the very guy whose network regularly paints her as an unholy amalgam of Marie Antionette and Lizzie Borden?

Why would Democrats - excuse me, 'Democrats' - allow themselves to be demonized and marginalized and threatened and belittled and bullied by a corporate media without raising so much as a whimper of protest?

Because they're in on the joke, and the profit margin is exceptional.

Josh Marshall has opined that neither Democrats nor Republicans matter nowadays, that the real ruling party in this country is the 'incumbent Party.' And he's got a point. Those who are in power at this point want to stay in power, and if it means that half of them get to be the Harlem Globetrotters while the other half gets to be the Washington Generals, so be it.

they're all in on the joke, laughing their asses off. Unfortunately, the joke's on us.

More here, if you're interested: http://www.blah3.com/article.php?story=20060803020106679

- as

[Skip Intro]

3. wow, yes!

very good at saying what I was trying to say.

Its almost like there a dots there, waiting to be connected, begging, even.

Its a scary feeling when you realize that what you thought was reality may in fact be manufactured theater.

[americanstranger]

5. I always used to wonder how Clinton could be so cool...

...toward the people who tried to bring him down. I remember reading a quote from him about how it was 'only politics' or some such.

That made me realize that those in government look at everything quite differently from you or me. There's a lot of cameradreie between these people - they look pretty chummy in social situations, while they are supposedly diametrically opposed when they go to 'work.'

But what if their 'work' is merely to preserve the illusion of two parties while they actually both work on the same side?

Chilling to think about, isn't it?

- as

[MisterP]

4. it's not that hard: just two big parties, a few hundred people out of

2-300 million; can't be too hard to corrupt whole gobs of 'em