I Wonder If There is a Dog...

[SavageDem]

You know the old one about the agnostic, insomniac dyslexic who lies in his bed at night thinking that thought, right? I told a friend the other day that the 2008 Presidential election is a referendum on God. If God really exists, a Democrat will win. And I mean a true Democrat, like, uh, um, say John Edwards.OK, so that’s out on the table. You know what cards I’m holding. I’m what you’d call an ABH Democrat; Anyone But Hillary, that is. To me she’s Republican Light (now with added flavor!). But I digress.

If a Supreme Power truly exists - and we won’t delve into what constitutes “existence”, as I’m not that strong on Quantum Physics, and if we get down into the sub-atomic level and different planes of being and disappearing electrons and String Theory, then I won’t be able to really put up a strong offensive - then an ABH Democrat will be elected President on November 4, 2008. And I know, I know: God has a lot more to do than worry about a piddly Presidential election of some f*cked-up country on some backwater planet in some forgotten galaxy. There’s an intergalactic war that’s been raging for 2000 years in NGC 3370, fer chrissake! But even knowing how busy God’s schedule is, It (for lack of a better pronoun - God doesn’t have a gender, ethnicity, or form, and if you think differently, then your intellect is too limited for this conversation anyway, so good-bye) has to devote just a minute fraction of time to make sure this one goes right (or left, as it were). I mean, come on, give us a real President so we can have a fighting chance at setting things straight before Iran, Iraq, Israel, the U.S., and a bunch of other places are rendered uninhabitable due to nuclear fallout, and the rest of the world is pretty much submerged after the polar ice caps melt…

The Rethuglicans have such an embarrassing panel of candidates that I wonder, nay, gawp, at the sheer audacity of any of them running for President. And after watching the Repub “debate” last night, I despair even more for our country that there are people who would actually vote for one of them. My brother-in-law is one of those people. Lord, forgive them - they know not what they do.

So I said, “Hey, God, hey! How about a little something, you know, for the effort, you know?” We deserve a break down here. OK, maybe we don’t really deserve it, but God is supposed to be all loving and forgiving and empathetic and stuff, so perhaps It will take pity on us in between finding more space beyond the edge of the Universe to stretch the expanding galaxies into and listening to It’s favorite mp3 mix (God loves alt, punk, and old 80’s stuff like Hot Hot Heat, The Soviettes, The Smithereens, Cake, and the Ramones; what no one knows is if God uses some type of ethereal iPod, or if It just pulls songs off anyone’s hard drive; and will the RIAA go after God for not buying the music?) to monitor the election and ensure a Dem win. And when the neocons f*ck with the election results again, I’m praying that God will flip a few electrons back to tally the vote correctly.

If we end up with - God help us all - warmongering nutjob Giuliani, or even some amorphous dog-torturing creep like Romney, it’s a definite sign that God Has Left the Building. I had a friend in college who was an outstanding ping-pong, tennis, and pinball player. He would absolutely crack me up with his deadpan delivery of a line that was not originally meant as a comedic throw-off. When the ball, despite his best efforts, would drain down the middle between the flippers, he would in a totally calm way say, “Jesus wept.” I will echo that line if a Dem doesn’t carry the day on 2008-11-04.

Original Article

[lvx35]

1. A wise old sufi told me...

...when I asked him about the horror that is Bush, not to presume to know the will of God or impose our own ideas of right or wrong. "After all" he said, "God might WANT to destroy America, so Bush could be here for a reason..."

true story.

[hfojvt]

2. is that your blog

or just a blog you sometimes read?

edit: If it is the latter, you should put the whole thing in quotes. If the former, then you can reprint the whole entry here without worrying about copyright laws.

[Lebowski]

3. Let the choir say...

Amen!

[riqster]

4. Said Celestial Canine should focus on

all of those starving, disease ridden kids in the third world first IMNSHO. THAT's a theological litmus test for ya.

[SavageDem]

6. I agree wholeheartedly

The post was meant very tongue-in-cheek -- as I said, I think the Supreme Mutt has far more critical things to concern Itself with across the Universe(s) than an election.

[wyldwolf]

5. anyone who seeks to define what a "true Democrat" is cannot possibly be a true Democrat.

[SavageDem]

7. Since we agree that there is no definition...

...of "true Democrat", then I have as much claim to that title as anyone! Not that I make that claim. It's a big tent. I just hope we get our sh*t together, take out the neocon trash, and start on America 2.0 with upgraded features like:

* universal health care
* truly "fair" foreign trade practices that don't kill our economy
* restoration of civil liberties and rights for all regardless of race/gender/sexual orientation/et al
* huge decrease in military spending and the military-industrial complex, including, but not limited to, GETTING THE HELL OUT OF IRAQ
* progressive tax reform
* a huge commitment to improving our educational system, with a college education becoming accessible and affordable for ALL

[wyldwolf]

8. here is a perfect example of a ludicrous statement

"I’m what you’d call an ABH Democrat; Anyone But Hillary, that is. To me she’s Republican Light (now with added flavor!). But I digress."

In regards to the six points you mentioned, there is no such thing as a "true" Democrat. Indeed, several points run counter to the history of the modern Democratic party. I realize what you're proposing is a "progressive"* agenda and would be wonderful if possible, but the Democratic party is not nor has it ever been a "progressive"* party. It's only been more progressive than the alternative.

Want to change the recipe? Marshall the troops to do it. But to say Democrats today and yesterday are not "real Democrats" isn't grounded in reality.

[SavageDem]

11. Semantics

It seems you're hung up on the "Democrat" label. I am not. Let's just change the party name to "Progressive" then so we can stop bickering over labeling. As you say, the Democratic party is more progressive than the alternative, and as our pal Donald Rumsfeld said, "You have to go to elections with the parties you've got."

We can all work - and I think we are - to make the Democratic party a progressive one. Just because the Dems have not always stood for the values that I think define (or should define) the party today does NOT mean that I can't work towards making it that way, or that I can't define what I think what the "real" Democratic party should stand for. It is, after all, - still, I think...maybe I should check what laws have been abridged by the Bushies today first - a free country.

And, for the record: if your gal comes up as the nominee, I will vote for her. I'll grit my teeth and hope for the best, but I'd take her over any of the redneck, jack-booted pseudo-religious toads on the right ANY day. So please stop labelling ME as "ludicrous" and "not grounded in reality" and realize that we're (Progressives, "true" Democrats, "old" Democrats, liberals, etc.) all in this together, differences notwithstanding.

[wyldwolf]

15. fall-back cop out

It seems you're hung up on the "Democrat" label. I am not.

That's why you called yourself an "Anyone But Hillary DEMOCRAT." :eyes: Yeah, I'm hung up on the label. Because I'm a Democrat. A member of the party of Roosevelt, Truman, Kenney, Johnson, Carter, and Clinton. I'm not a "d"emocrat.

Let's just change the party name to "Progressive" then so we can stop bickering over labeling.

Absolutely not. Roosevelt and Truman (especially Truman) deplored the term. Henry Wallace ran on the "Progressive" ticket against Truman in '48 and almost threw the election to the GOP. You want to belong to the "Progressive" party, it exists, but is isn't the Democratic party.

We can all work - and I think we are - to make the Democratic party a progressive one.

The Democratic party is already "progressive." We're the party that has rescued the country each time the economy has been in the toilet. We've lifted people out of poverty, we've created jobs, we've funded cures for diseases, and fed the hungry. The Democratic party just isn't "progressive" enough for some simon-pure elements who resemble the Christian Coalition more and more, tactics wise, in their drive to remake the party in their image.

[SavageDem]

16. My mistake in trying to negotiate and find commonality

I guess you're just intent on being bitter and self-righteous, sort of like most of our opponents on the right-eous side of the aisle. I try and find areas of agreement (which you refer to as "cop out"), and you just keep slamming me trying to make your point that you're the only "true" Democrat (my words originally written in a humorous vein, but which you seem hell-bent on claiming as a mantle).

Being a Democrat doesn't mean you hold blindly to all historical tenets. It's time to pull your head out of the sand. I agree with Thom Hartmann's idea that in order to do our civic duty we need to infiltrate the Democratic party and re-make it. Who gives a damn if Truman deplored the term "Progressive?" People are hungry for a change, and it's time to stop being afraid of our own shadow. And by "our", I mean Democrats/Progressives/Liberals. I feel no need to fret about the historical meaning of the term "Democrat" and whether the party of 2008 mirrors exactly the Democratic party of 1944. As Kevin Cronin once said, "Roll With the Changes."

[wyldwolf]

17. you have found commonality

You can be green/progressive/whatever... a Democrat... a Republican. The Democratic party is the commonality.

I guess you're just intent on being bitter and self-righteous, sort of like most of our opponents on the right-eous side of the aisle.

No, I'm intent in keeping the Democratic party solidly grounded where it has always been and keeping the elements who would take it further left at bay. The bitter ans self righteous ones are those who say someone isn't a "real" Democrat if they don't adhere to this is that litmus test.

you just keep slamming me trying to make your point that you're the only "true" Democrat

LOL! I've made no such claim. You can call yourself a Democrat if you wish. Your mistake is thinking there is some defining characteristics of what a Democrat is. The party is and always has been a big tent. "Progressive"* Democrats simply cannot win elections in some part of the country. There simply is no invisible progressive majority in many places.

true" Democrat (my words originally written in a humorous vein, but which you seem hell-bent on claiming as a mantle).

Negative. You may have framed it in a humorous way, but you intent was serious unless you are prepared, right here, to retract your "Republican lite" insult.

Being a Democrat doesn't mean you hold blindly to all historical tenets.

It doesn't mean you blindly ignore them, either. Was FDR a "true" Democrat? He was a big backer of free trade and welfare reform. Harry Truman? A big supporter of a muscular foreign policy. How about JFK? He continued Truman's policies on defense, bucked labor unions, and had Republicans in his cabinet.

It's time to pull your head out of the sand.

The problem with the netroots is they believe the historical revisionism they pass around.

I agree with Thom Hartmann's idea that in order to do our civic duty we need to infiltrate the Democratic party and re-make it.

Now you're admitting it - just like the Christian Right felt it their duty to infiltrate the GOP and re-make. But trust. I ain't happening.

People are hungry for a change,

They're hungry for competence - something "progressives"* sorely lack.

[SavageDem]

27. Now I understand

Only you get to set the Democratic plank. I guess I thought that the Democratic party was a democracy. My bad.

You argue both sides of the fence. You say that the party is a "big tent" - echoing my words from an earlier post - and that Democrats of yesteryear have had widely different policies, but then you exclude me from the party for some perceived transgressions of a "progressive" nature, and claim that I can't come into the tent: I don't belong to your elite club.

You may think that we can't remake the Democratic party; I disagree. I'm going to stop this bickering now, as it's obvious we will never agree. And to think that I was having fun when I wrote it. You sucked that right out.

[cuke]

18. Your mistake is thinking you get to set the criteria to see who is a "real" Democrat

and trying to duck that point by claiming ww is "bitter and self-rightous"

[Thor_MN]

19. Wyld, I have to tell you that there are decaffeinated coffees that taste the same

Lighten up Frances.

[wyldwolf]

20. hey, thor - just get sick of attitudes like this guy has

[Thor_MN]

21. From my POV, the attitude looks like it's coming from a different direction.

Make me wonder if your cheerios were tinted yellow this morning.

Face it, you both are going to vote for the Democratic candidate, who ever it is. Why go all GOP Youtube debate and complain about someone else's opinion?

[wyldwolf]

23. you're entitled to your opinion. But anytime someone uses "Republican lite" to describe a Dem...

...they're clearly off base.

[Thor_MN]

25. Oh. sorry. I didn't understand that you were in favor of corporatocracy.

The power has been shifting towards corporations for far too long, longer than 7 years. While clearly better than the war hungry neocons, the "neopros", for lack of a better term, have been selling out to corporations as well. It's way past time for the pendulum to swing back towards the little guy.

Unfortunately, it probably will only come with the collapse of big oil, which won't be too soon. Once it gets too expensive to drive to big boxes, the mom and pop's will have a chance to return. Rail service will probably also return, where the rail grades haven't been destroyed to build McMansions. If we are to get back on track, it's time for some monopoly busting, and CEO hanging.

[wyldwolf]

28. oh, sorry, marxist rhetoric like "corporatocracy" isn't real impressive

[Vickers]

9. I make it a point to never rely on God/Dog on predictions of the future

especially regarding investments or other financial advice.

:P

[ronnykmarshall]

10. You need boots in this place these days.

[SavageDem]

12. I don't know how to take that...

...so I'll accept it in the humorous vein in which I think it was intended.

Do you think Steph and CC have a chance?

[ronnykmarshall]

13. Of course they do.

They gonna win.

[SavageDem]

14. Will you have...

...Jim Ward as Secretary of State and Chris Lavoie as Secretary of Defense?

[michaz]

22. We should blame God if people in this country are stupid?

I think not!

[xchrom]

24. some people see the being a democrat and the democratic party as

a religious experience.

they fundamentalist in their thinking and their faith that the democratic party is right no matter -- they are divine.

well that kind of thinking is frightening.

loved the way the OP started -- and the discussion quickly devolved to a fevered theological washing.

[SavageDem]

26. And the funny thing is...

...that I really was trying to be funny to start off. I thought it was evident that I wasn't really depending on God to get involved. As if. I didn't realize how thin-skinned some folks out there were, and how two words - Repub Lite - could raise such hackles.

Totally off track of where I started.

[Lucinda]

29. You may have better luck in the future if you don't start

insulting candidates and their supporters in your opening statement. Though there are many who will chime in soon and agree with you. :)

Welcome to DU.