On May 28, Robert B. Reich, Labor Secretary for President Bill Clinton, posted a blog post on his own blog, “Why Democrats Can’t be Trusted to Control Wall Street.” The last line is, “Democrats can’t be trusted to control Wall Street. If there were ever an issue ripe for a third party, the Street would be it.”
I’ve seen a couple of other news articles and blog posts like this in the last few months. My first thought is always the same: isn’t the Green or the Libertarian Party or another decently organized minor party good enough for them, or do they somehow not know that other parties even exist? Especially given this specific article, because one of the biggest issues addressed in the Green Party’s overall platform is Wall Street/corrupt bankers. Why doesn’t this guy just abandon the Democrats for the Green Party given his similar view of Wall Street? Again, it makes me think that, somehow, he’s never heard of the Greens.
Joshua H. –
Does Reich’s statement rule out supporting the Green party? He says the issue is ripe for “a third party.” Could that not be the Green Party, or the Libertarian Party?
This guy doesn’t want another political party. He’s just contributing to traditional odd year griping about politics as usual. It goes on and on and on. Folks who have connections to the major political parties say things like this from time to time when it’s safe to do so. What he’s really saying is that it’s time to come up with new justifications for the perpetuation of the two party state and we need to make sure that we wrangle up everyone who might think of straying from the fold by using a ploy. He’s basically saying the he understands the temptation that people experience from time to time to vote other. But ultimately he’s intending to give a cautionary tale of that possibility in the interest motivating Democrats and Republicans to deal with the problem. He only believes there should be two specific parties.
Gee what is the national debt at the moment ???
What percentage of such debt has been due to the gerrymander Donkeys in the Congress since 1914 — start of WW I ???
i.e. during the following regimes
Wilson – 8 years
F.D.R.-Truman 20 years
Kennedy-Johnson 8 years
Carter – 4 years
Clinton – 8 years
Obama – 4 plus years and counting
Looks like the new method to keep out the spam has failed.
Congratulations to Maine product 28th Prime Minister Benjamin Meiklejohn [Green Independent] of the 9th USA Parliament for being elected to both seats previously held by Roseanne; Prime Minister and Founding Executive of the All Party System Co. on 5/28/2013.
Roseanne held “Central Prime Minister” (because she wanted to be the center of attention) and she was one of four founders of the company, who filed as a unique corporation in the state of Delaware. Our bylaws require one half the BoDs to be elected by the workers through proportional representation, the 2nd half to be holders of voting common stock shares and the tie-breaker vote held by the executives of whom Benjamin is one.
http://www.usparliament.org
Wow spam! Yeah, if you want a third party, grow the Libertarian Party, Green Party, Constitution Party, etc. I don’t see much sense in starting another new one.
Yeah…maybe Richard Winger could consider bringing back the old method of posting comments…there was never spam like this before. Wow…
That does make sense now that I’ve been thinking on it for a while. After all, he acts like there’s no minor parties in existence right now, and yet a quick Google search still brings up lists and websites of minor parties.
One of the major points of my first comment was to point out the similarity between his views on Democrats/Wall Street and the Green Party’s views on them. Although, on further reflection, they’re also similar to that of the Justice Party’s. It just begs the question, Why doesn’t he admit that minor parties with such views already exist?
As I have previously suggested on this thread, I think Clay is on to something. Robert Reich is not being sincere in his wish for a third party.
Joshua –
I think this is an issue of some very picky semantics. He said it’s an issue that could be made by a third party – not a “new” third party. If the Green or Libertarian party has already made an issue of this, Reich’s statement could be read to say “turn up the volume on this one.”
And if he’s a toadie for the “duopoly” why would he make this statement at all?
Maybe this is why:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-30/special-irs-prosecutor-favored-as-obama-support-drops.html
If the ruling elites want a new party they’ll create one for the peasants to support. Otherwise it won’t happen. Reich’s post is just more “boob bait for the bubbas.”
And maybe it isn’t.
What’s your point, if you have any?
Despite Richard’s misleading header to this thread, Reich does not argue for a “new” third party in his post.
On a totally unrelated matter, Richard…the recaptcha feature in this new interface will diminish he number of comments your site gets.
Maybe that’s a good thing?