Much of the chatter from Washington these days is about corruption, misplaced values and partisan politics. This has probably ever been so, but it's the last one, partisan politics, that truly colors everything one hears about the centers of power in the United States. Almost without exception, issues are discussed as if there are only two possible sides and those sides are adequately represented by the Democrats and the Republicans, whose opinions on all issues are diametrically opposed. It seems there is no topic on which the two agree---the extreme degree to which they oppose one another being surpassed only by the nearly unbelievable <i>fact</i> that the two sides completely cover the full range of American opinion. Things are ever so much easier in black and white. There's the Abramoff scandal, in which the focus magically swings away from the rather obvious fact that Abramoff is only one of many that has successfully purchased large swathes of legislation, and onto the insignificant issue of who he actually bribed. Were there also Democrats? No? Wow. Democrats must be clean and upstanding representatives whereas all Republicans are dirty, corrupt politicians. But wait ... Abramoff gave money to people who then gave money to Democrats, but they weren't direct dona....who the hell cares. The point is that a large number of the representatives of the US are horribly corrupt and are happily selling away the heart and soul of the country, its people and probably the well-being of much of the world for a generation or two of personal wealth and power. <img attachment="tr060116.png" align="right" caption="Ted Rall on the Alito Hearings">There's the Alito hearings. The coverage there also speaks of Democrats taking Alito to task, but a brief perusal shows that most are grandstanding with high-minded argumenteering. Their well-written arguments sound, admittedly, quite good---almost like campaign speeches. They are faking it because it's the votes at the end that count---and those votes will probably be overwhelmingly for Alito. Sadly shaking one's ursine head (I'm looking at you, Teddy) and lamenting that one finds Alito's ethics and constitutional interpretations <iq>troubling</iq> looks great for the constituents back home. It makes one look very liberal and upstanding and righteous. That's for the cameras. That's the part that will get covered. Will it be noted which Democrats "crossed the line" when the vote happens? Not so's you'd notice. These guys all know how the game is played. Why don't the Democrats go at Alito with guns a'blazing? <i>Because they're conservatives too.</i> Repeat after me: there are no fundamental policy differences between Republicans and Democrats. They parties agree on almost all foreign and domestic issues, publically disagreeing on such side issues as abortion or the right to bear arms or other stupid bullshit that doesn't affect the majority of the population. Abortion is legal in America. If somebody needs one, they can have one. If somebody find the idea abhorrent, they don't have to have one. Easy-peasy. It is <i>not</i> a significant issue. <img attachment="wpnan060115.png" align="left" caption="Nick Anderson on Wal-Mart Business Practices">National health care, protection of national lands, reduction of oil dependence, less agressive foreign policy. These are all things that the majority of Americans will agree on. Neither one of the parties represents those opinions, no matter how much they or their media cheerleaders try to convince us that they do. Stop gutting social programs ... there's another one. Medicare was recently overhauled, restricting benefits even further. Wal-Mart, the biggest employer in the country has about 46% of its employees either uninsured or on some form of public aid. Both the Democrats and the Republicans see no problem with letting Wal-Mart and its ilk continue to transform the country. It's the free market, after all. Most Americans, however, would rather have social welfare than corporate welfare, given the choice. Our representatives? All evidence points to another opinion---as long as there's some left over for a kickback. Even the protest against the war in Iraq---a war many people today are against---has no party support. Representative Murtha came out strongly for immediate withdrawal. Where did the Democrats go? They tore him apart faster than the Republicans could. Why? Because most of them voted for the war, too. They wish they could be the ones executing it instead of Bush. That's the party line: we would do the same thing, but better. Even the War on Terror, the current excuse for rolling over the world with our military (remember those pesky communists who kept trying to take over the world?). Iraq is not the war on terror, it is a land grab for some extremely valuable land. The ever-increasing number of people who think so are not represented by either party, who are falling all over themselves to funnel money into the military-industrial complex using the new catch-all buzzword: "Al-Qaeda". None of that stops the Republicans from maintaining their 180º opposition to the Democrats and claiming that Murtha was speaking for <i>all</i> Democrats. Those cowardly Democrats, always running away from a fight, even when they mysteriously voted for and supported it. It's such a shame, because a character like Murtha could really have started something if there was actually an organized opposition to join instead of a party that purports to be liberal but all the while simply sucks away the will to resist into a black hole from which no political action ever emerges. Murtha's snappy retorts to the administration members, listing all of their deferrals during Vietnam while he was serving multiple tours of duty made some of us smile---those of us who manage to fall outside of the wide range of political thought encompassed by the US political landscape (to repeat, there's extreme right and right). And just as there is no room for liberals, there is also no room for conservatives. Fans of smaller government have landed in the wrong party with the Republicans who have more of a "smash and grab" philosophy when it comes to ruling a country. The US government has rarely represented the will of the majority, prefering to cozen up to elites who promise baubles and island getaways---this process is accelerating, estranging ever more people from the ruling process and turning the country ever farther from its founding principles. <n>Tirade inspired by <a href="http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/30487" source="AlterNet" author="Noam Chomsky">There is No War on Terror</a>.</n>