Written by: Goemagog

After reading comments one genocidal idiot made on some other posts, I thought I'd point out again that George W. Bush is actually to the left of Clinton. People keep calling him a right-wing extremist, or a religious zealot, but despite all the heated rhetoric, he's on pretty much the same ground as most of the Democratic Party leadership. Dean doesn't count, because he's insane and not really aware of where he is, either on issues or geographically.

I thought I'd go with a Bush as Trotsky explanation. Trotsky, loyal socialist and establisher of the first death squads and gulags on Lenin's behalf, was expelled from the russian communist party in a power grab by Stalin. The Stalinists claimed that Trotsky betrayed the revolution and was really a opponent of genocide, while Trotsky's followers claimed that Stalin was the betrayer and not killing enough people.

The problem is corruption, not bribery but power. Two groups wanting the same thing (absolute power) and intending to rule on the same tyrannical principles still can not share power. Sharing power means their power is not absolute, so they squabble over petty details.

Democrats claim that they're the victim of a suppression campaign by republicans, despite having spent decades suppressing people who disagreed with them. Anarchists almost universally support tyrannical governments over a free and open society.

The republicans are openly shifting to the left under the leadership of Bush. The democrats are upset because this will force them to the right. They want absolute power for themselves so they can't support giving absolute power to a government they don't control. They'll shift right until they gain control, then shift left again trying to turn that control into absolute power. They might not do this right away though, their claims that Bush has betrayed them by doing what they wanted to do is strengthening the commitment they are getting from groups who have already agreed to subjugate themselves to Democratic Party tyranny.

That the government should have absolute power to control every aspect of your life is not disputed in political circles. The only thing that matters to them is which party's leadership gets to pick the tyrants. It'll be a long time before we get there, but it's good to know where the road is heading. Of course, one day a supreme court justice may notice that there are ten amendments in the Bill of Rights, but they're all lawyers so I wouldn't count on it. The lust for power is a fundamental and irreverisible flaw of human nature, and while we may be okay, your grandkids are pretty much fucked.

Goe, noting that any country with "Democratic" or "People's" in it's name is neither.