This country is ungovernable

[fujiyama]

I'm sorry, but this week has proven that this country has no possibility of competent governance. Many can blame the voters, but saying "people are stupid" is a given axiom in life and especially in politics. It's like saying "life is cruel".

The Brown victory was indicative of schizophrenic nature and mentality of the electorate. Its notions and desires are conflicted and confused. The people want reform, but are scared of it.

OK, one thing we heard mentioned is that Democrats can't govern. That is true to the extent that actually getting the party to agree on anything is next to impossible, but for anyone that has paid any attention to Democratic politics, that isn't really much of a revelation. I'm not saying there aren't good Democrats. There are. In fact there are many. I think on the whole the platforms are decent and when a bill comes up for a vote many Democrats do the right thing. Usually a majority do. But there are enough of them that don't really even vote with the party when it REALLY counts.

But the real fundamental truth however is that the country itself is truly ungovernable. Structurally the government doesn't function in a way you would expect a Democracy to. Without actually getting every single piece of legislation vetted by very wealthy and powerful corporate interests - nothing, and I mean nothing can be passed and signed into law.

Passing more legislation is not addressing this. The SC shows this. This will take amendments to the constitution. At this point only radical measures can address the real issues - like corporate person-hood and senatorial deference to the corporate state itself.

I know this won't happen, but I think we've been naive in believing a representative, a senator, or even a president can actually get anything done. Well, but not "we" but I know I have been naive. It's been a wake up call.

[Cleita]

1. Maybe. However, this particular disfunction seems to be a

back east thing to me, considering I'm from the west. I never thought this country was that governable. It seems we have had leaders who could hold it together, but now it seems that we might start to see some schism.

[fujiyama]

2. Maybe it was naivite

Actually believing that government had a meaningful role to play in improving people's lives.

I'm rethinking if that's even possible nowadays.

[robo50]

3. Provocative and reasonable thesis...I'm considering it

I have heard little as reasonable as this.......but I also wonder why we are so willing to let Obama off so early into his career.

I thinks some people, men or women, could have set more clear priorities.

Obama gave speeches, set no real goals, walked away from HCR, from Senate and House debates, now has 3 or 30 messes to deal with.....and not much results........

Rahm Emmanuel.........FIRE HIM!!!!!!!!

[Why Syzygy]

4. It was never designed to be.

Our founding fathers gave us a REPUBLIC, not a Democracy. Governance was given to the PEOPLE at their state and local levels. The states have abdicated their powers in exchange for a lumpy gravy boat sailing from DC. Until the PEOPLE, the true power, stand up and take responsibility locally, we will continue to dash against the rocks unguided.

[fujiyama]

6. It's a good reminder

that the republican form of government we have in place is much less open to change than those with parliaments.

It almost feels like the federal government throws a little money at states - and maybe a defense contract or two to get a few jobs in a district - and says "here here play along now". Like Al Bundy giving everyone a buck at the beginning of Married with Children just not to be bothered with real problems. Granted, that's probably way too benign and the real motives are far darker.

[valerief]

5. Diebold could have elected Brown. nt