Words matter, as Joe McCarthy knew well. Republicans, by trashing the name of the Democratic Party, are simultaneously trashing the concept of democracy itself…
It's important to note that the concepts of American democracy were very much enshrined in a long line of supreme court decisions starting with baker v. Carr. While the warren court featured justices with some fairly different ideologies, it was generally the case that all different sides joined together in the concept that voting rights are fundamental rights.
I often hear people try to describe what democracy is in America without understanding, or referring to, these decisions by the warren court. We get discussion in media today about "state gerrymandering" without any reference to these very important and well-supported decisions of the court.
Thom has done a great job of highlighting much of the legal issues lately, which is something I find lacking in other lefty media. I often hear people try to describe what democracy is in America without understanding, or referring to these decisions by the warren court. Of course thom has done a public service by writing about these topics and the war on voting rights. This is one aspect of the movement to the right that I find to be truly breathtaking - that faith in democracy has vanished and our "friends" no longer value fair elections.
Fantastic how we can listen to tapes of oral arguments in the Supreme Court going back to the 1960s, like this case about a Texas law that might have prevented a member of the armed services from voting in Texas:
An important debate plays out here over the scope of 14th amendment. Here you can listen to Texas argue for less "scrutiny" under 14th, with various arguments that include the passage of 15th amend. - justice Harlan II is the sole dissenter here - he thought that 14th amendment doesn't apply to voting rights and he was pretty LONELY in that view..... until today's court which ALREADY seems to have overruled the principle that 14th amendment applies broadly (see eg the brynovich case on az voting laws).
That may be our only solution, but it’s hard to achieve when the Republicans continue to gerrymander their way into power and to pack the Federal and state governments and judiciary with representatives, senators and judges.
In our word salad world we listen to I wish Dems would stop being so nice by bringing a knife to a gun fight. Why do Dems allow the distorted negatively to be said without confronting the name callers? Why do Dems call Republicans conservative when Republicans are being obstructionist unless it only benefits themselves? Conservative is suppose to stand for a rational viewpoint not wanting to rush into a problem without throughly understanding the issue. Looking for the best value. Yet Republicans are very negatively describing that the evil 'rat' party is going to take away your liberties. No to little pushback to I see or hear from the Democratic Party. I understand the concept of not lowering oneself to the other's negative level. But come on! Dems are being murdered daily to the tune of 1500 right wing radio talk shows. Not to mention the reviews Dems get from Fox & Friends. Why can't Dems talk in simple descriptive terms of; obstructionism, projectism, self serving, selfishness, cater'er to the obscenely rich, or our re-puker of another con colleague? Or, as the FBI would say, not being candid, when they caught someone in a lie. What is wrong with adding some juicy adjectives to a proper noun? Media outlets love shocking one liners. Editors create eye catching headlines to a story. The writer has no say in naming rights. Maybe it is time Democrats (or the Democratic Party) should think about shortening their name to Dems. I'm the 'Dem' in Democracy.
It's bring a nerf knife to a gunfight. This mentality is what is destroying this country. Playing high and mighty, assuming the moral high ground, when there is an existential struggle going on.
"When they go low, we go high", that is the refrain of a coward, and a a loser. Sorry Folks, but that is why Democracy is losing to Fascism.
I agree with Thom that it’s a sad and dangerous fact that too many Americans (including the GQP hordes in our legislature)are ignorant of how our government works to benefit all Americans. Even though we might disagree with some policies or ideology we, of course as Americans ,have a right to voice disagreements and work within the system to make effective changes. However, the GQP or Grievance On Parade Party labels everything they disagree with as “radical socialism “ or “communist “ and again ,ignorant Americans swallow the gaslighting propaganda. The ultimate aim of these GQP fascist enablers is to destabilize regulations and protections from corporate malfeasance to clear the path for limitless wealth accumulation while installing a system of government to keep POC, women and workers enslaved under the guise of a capitalistic version of “Christianity “. Their version of government is what many Faux news viewers long for- the good ole days when women and POC had no say or power over their daily lives.
Democracy is the engine that drives this Republic. The Constitution was amended. With the only exception of the Electoral College, we are using direct democracy to elect our office holders from your senator, representative, governors, state legislature, county commissioners, sheriffs, mayors, city councils, and a myriad of boards for planning, water, etc.
There you have it in a short paragraph.
"Pew found a record 63% of U.S. adults believe the president should be elected by popular vote."-Deseret News, Aug. 10, 2022.
From Google: "Choosing each State's electors is a two-part process. First, the political parties in each State choose slates of potential electors sometime before the general election. Second, during the general election, the voters in each State select their State's electors by casting their ballots." Electors are part of the democratic process too. Even so, time for it to go.
I had just tuned into to C-Span when Representative Raskin gave his grammar lesson---priceless! He is a treasure, just like Thom.
In 1788, Alexander Hamilton said, “We are attempting, by this Constitution, to abolish factions, and to unite all parties for the general welfare.” As Thom noted, Gouveneur Morris wrote the Preamble (the mission statement for our democracy) and it has six objectives that cover the same sentiment as Hamilton’s idea of Constitutional purpose. Regardless, our elected officials pledge oaths to the Constitution. If we are to have a purpose-driven democratic republic, our elected and appointed decision-makers need to do their best to satisfy those six objectives in the Preamble, and when they don’t they are either incompetent corrupt, or some taint of both. If we assume that our democracy has already achieved the distinction of being one which is backsliding to autocracy, what evidence will we need to tell us when we gradually then suddenly change from a democratic republic to an autocratic republic?
As a casual observer I have come across several Trump supporters who insist America is a republic not a democracy. This must be being amplified on the right wing hate radio machine, I don't hear it much on Fox?
Another word that I keep hearing that makes the left sound bad, is neoliberalism. How did Reagan's economic policies get that name? Shouldn't they be called Neo conservatism?
2. a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.
o ARCHAIC
a group with a certain equality between its members.
"the community of scholars and the republic of learning"
When I I look up the Republic and Democracy, present definitions are basically the same, but there is a difference
Plato’s Republic and the Roman Republic were governments run by the landed elite, in Roman the Senatorial class.
The elite were elected to office by the plebs. The common man need not apply.
Our founding fathers set up a similar situation, an amalgam drawn on their only political experience, parliament.
With a house of Lords (Senators)and a House of Commons (House of Representatives), but it was a Republic, and Senators,, the more powerful of the two chambers of Congress, an served six year sentences, while the House, made up of commoners had to be re elected every 2 years.
The 17th Amendment moved us to a democratic Republic., when it took the appointment of senators by the state legislature and made them directly electable by the people
As I understand it, a Republic is ruled by an elite, drawn from the ruling class, whereas a democracy is governed by elected representatives
Given the above, our country was founded as a democratic Republic, With a bicameral congress populated by a House of Representatives and a Senate of appointed “lords” or the American equivalent, an analogy would be Mussolini’s Chamber of Deputies.
In parliament, the House of Lords is called to parliament by the sovereign, like being called to jury duty, only the jury pool is limited to the entitled.
But the 17th Amendment changed all of that, however ,to be a senator, even though popularly elected, one must have the backing and support of those with real power, money and position. While senators are not necessarily drawn from the ruling class, they are never the less put up by, financed by and obligated to the ruling class.
While AOC, and the squad can be elected to the house, they could never even make it through a primary for the senate.
What senators aren’t on the take? If they wore sponsor patches on their coats like NASCAR drivers, you would see hero’s crumble
The upcoming race for Dianne Feinstein's set in California will be instructive.
The whole republic vs democracy language dispute goes back to the 1950s, when Robert Welch established the Joh Birch Society. Birchers always harped on referring to the United States as a “republic” as opposed to a “democracy,” because they viewed the latter as a degradation of self government. In reality, they were really motivated by an impulse that only “certain people” should be allowed to vote and they didn’t believe in free exercise of the right to vote for all citizens. The GOP is now committed to a goal of allowing only certain citizens to vote, and to deprive minority voters of a real say in their own government.
It's important to note that the concepts of American democracy were very much enshrined in a long line of supreme court decisions starting with baker v. Carr. While the warren court featured justices with some fairly different ideologies, it was generally the case that all different sides joined together in the concept that voting rights are fundamental rights.
I often hear people try to describe what democracy is in America without understanding, or referring to, these decisions by the warren court. We get discussion in media today about "state gerrymandering" without any reference to these very important and well-supported decisions of the court.
Thom has done a great job of highlighting much of the legal issues lately, which is something I find lacking in other lefty media. I often hear people try to describe what democracy is in America without understanding, or referring to these decisions by the warren court. Of course thom has done a public service by writing about these topics and the war on voting rights. This is one aspect of the movement to the right that I find to be truly breathtaking - that faith in democracy has vanished and our "friends" no longer value fair elections.
Fantastic how we can listen to tapes of oral arguments in the Supreme Court going back to the 1960s, like this case about a Texas law that might have prevented a member of the armed services from voting in Texas:
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1964/82
An important debate plays out here over the scope of 14th amendment. Here you can listen to Texas argue for less "scrutiny" under 14th, with various arguments that include the passage of 15th amend. - justice Harlan II is the sole dissenter here - he thought that 14th amendment doesn't apply to voting rights and he was pretty LONELY in that view..... until today's court which ALREADY seems to have overruled the principle that 14th amendment applies broadly (see eg the brynovich case on az voting laws).
Its a very obvious ‘bananas’ Republican ploy to pretend what they are doing to Democracy is ok.
They are without question , the most devious perpetrators of ego centered collusion.
They have ordained themselves as the only accurate interpreter’s of
our Constitution.
But don’t let us forget the
conservative justices in the Supreme Court , who are anything but just.
They too bastardize the Constitution to push these bananas interpretation by their
monied masters.
The voters have no protection with these wrong thinking ‘People of the Lie’ calling the shots.
Their insidious malignant
attacks on black and brown people, poor people and their hateful isolation of LGBTQ and Trans people and children illustrates their soulless fear.
If ever their was a time to actively fight these ego driven promoters of hate and chaos , its now.
Seems that expanding the court is the only solution. Nothing will change with this majority.
That may be our only solution, but it’s hard to achieve when the Republicans continue to gerrymander their way into power and to pack the Federal and state governments and judiciary with representatives, senators and judges.
In our word salad world we listen to I wish Dems would stop being so nice by bringing a knife to a gun fight. Why do Dems allow the distorted negatively to be said without confronting the name callers? Why do Dems call Republicans conservative when Republicans are being obstructionist unless it only benefits themselves? Conservative is suppose to stand for a rational viewpoint not wanting to rush into a problem without throughly understanding the issue. Looking for the best value. Yet Republicans are very negatively describing that the evil 'rat' party is going to take away your liberties. No to little pushback to I see or hear from the Democratic Party. I understand the concept of not lowering oneself to the other's negative level. But come on! Dems are being murdered daily to the tune of 1500 right wing radio talk shows. Not to mention the reviews Dems get from Fox & Friends. Why can't Dems talk in simple descriptive terms of; obstructionism, projectism, self serving, selfishness, cater'er to the obscenely rich, or our re-puker of another con colleague? Or, as the FBI would say, not being candid, when they caught someone in a lie. What is wrong with adding some juicy adjectives to a proper noun? Media outlets love shocking one liners. Editors create eye catching headlines to a story. The writer has no say in naming rights. Maybe it is time Democrats (or the Democratic Party) should think about shortening their name to Dems. I'm the 'Dem' in Democracy.
It's bring a nerf knife to a gunfight. This mentality is what is destroying this country. Playing high and mighty, assuming the moral high ground, when there is an existential struggle going on.
"When they go low, we go high", that is the refrain of a coward, and a a loser. Sorry Folks, but that is why Democracy is losing to Fascism.
I agree with Thom that it’s a sad and dangerous fact that too many Americans (including the GQP hordes in our legislature)are ignorant of how our government works to benefit all Americans. Even though we might disagree with some policies or ideology we, of course as Americans ,have a right to voice disagreements and work within the system to make effective changes. However, the GQP or Grievance On Parade Party labels everything they disagree with as “radical socialism “ or “communist “ and again ,ignorant Americans swallow the gaslighting propaganda. The ultimate aim of these GQP fascist enablers is to destabilize regulations and protections from corporate malfeasance to clear the path for limitless wealth accumulation while installing a system of government to keep POC, women and workers enslaved under the guise of a capitalistic version of “Christianity “. Their version of government is what many Faux news viewers long for- the good ole days when women and POC had no say or power over their daily lives.
They aren't ignorant of how our government works. They know how it works, they want to change how it works to the authoritarian model.
Democracy is the engine that drives this Republic. The Constitution was amended. With the only exception of the Electoral College, we are using direct democracy to elect our office holders from your senator, representative, governors, state legislature, county commissioners, sheriffs, mayors, city councils, and a myriad of boards for planning, water, etc.
There you have it in a short paragraph.
"Pew found a record 63% of U.S. adults believe the president should be elected by popular vote."-Deseret News, Aug. 10, 2022.
From Google: "Choosing each State's electors is a two-part process. First, the political parties in each State choose slates of potential electors sometime before the general election. Second, during the general election, the voters in each State select their State's electors by casting their ballots." Electors are part of the democratic process too. Even so, time for it to go.
I had just tuned into to C-Span when Representative Raskin gave his grammar lesson---priceless! He is a treasure, just like Thom.
In 1788, Alexander Hamilton said, “We are attempting, by this Constitution, to abolish factions, and to unite all parties for the general welfare.” As Thom noted, Gouveneur Morris wrote the Preamble (the mission statement for our democracy) and it has six objectives that cover the same sentiment as Hamilton’s idea of Constitutional purpose. Regardless, our elected officials pledge oaths to the Constitution. If we are to have a purpose-driven democratic republic, our elected and appointed decision-makers need to do their best to satisfy those six objectives in the Preamble, and when they don’t they are either incompetent corrupt, or some taint of both. If we assume that our democracy has already achieved the distinction of being one which is backsliding to autocracy, what evidence will we need to tell us when we gradually then suddenly change from a democratic republic to an autocratic republic?
As a casual observer I have come across several Trump supporters who insist America is a republic not a democracy. This must be being amplified on the right wing hate radio machine, I don't hear it much on Fox?
Another word that I keep hearing that makes the left sound bad, is neoliberalism. How did Reagan's economic policies get that name? Shouldn't they be called Neo conservatism?
https://amzn.to/3L8U7yT
1. Republic:
2. a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.
o ARCHAIC
a group with a certain equality between its members.
"the community of scholars and the republic of learning"
When I I look up the Republic and Democracy, present definitions are basically the same, but there is a difference
Plato’s Republic and the Roman Republic were governments run by the landed elite, in Roman the Senatorial class.
The elite were elected to office by the plebs. The common man need not apply.
Our founding fathers set up a similar situation, an amalgam drawn on their only political experience, parliament.
With a house of Lords (Senators)and a House of Commons (House of Representatives), but it was a Republic, and Senators,, the more powerful of the two chambers of Congress, an served six year sentences, while the House, made up of commoners had to be re elected every 2 years.
The 17th Amendment moved us to a democratic Republic., when it took the appointment of senators by the state legislature and made them directly electable by the people
As I understand it, a Republic is ruled by an elite, drawn from the ruling class, whereas a democracy is governed by elected representatives
Given the above, our country was founded as a democratic Republic, With a bicameral congress populated by a House of Representatives and a Senate of appointed “lords” or the American equivalent, an analogy would be Mussolini’s Chamber of Deputies.
In parliament, the House of Lords is called to parliament by the sovereign, like being called to jury duty, only the jury pool is limited to the entitled.
But the 17th Amendment changed all of that, however ,to be a senator, even though popularly elected, one must have the backing and support of those with real power, money and position. While senators are not necessarily drawn from the ruling class, they are never the less put up by, financed by and obligated to the ruling class.
While AOC, and the squad can be elected to the house, they could never even make it through a primary for the senate.
What senators aren’t on the take? If they wore sponsor patches on their coats like NASCAR drivers, you would see hero’s crumble
The upcoming race for Dianne Feinstein's set in California will be instructive.
Check this infographic to see if you might be dealing with a Banana Republican?
https://infogram.com/how-to-spot-a-banana-republican-1h7j4dvx3wrv94n
Read the blog to see how they're destroying American democracy. https://thedemlabs.org/2023/03/08/how-to-spot-a-banana-republican/
So, why aren't the Democrats standing together and speaking out just as loudly as the Republicans?
BTW, I believe the last time we were truly living in a republic was in Lincoln's time.
The whole republic vs democracy language dispute goes back to the 1950s, when Robert Welch established the Joh Birch Society. Birchers always harped on referring to the United States as a “republic” as opposed to a “democracy,” because they viewed the latter as a degradation of self government. In reality, they were really motivated by an impulse that only “certain people” should be allowed to vote and they didn’t believe in free exercise of the right to vote for all citizens. The GOP is now committed to a goal of allowing only certain citizens to vote, and to deprive minority voters of a real say in their own government.