Will of the people
According to statistics, a majority of Americans want universal health care. Even if that's true, that's never stopped government from maintaining the status quo. Most Americans favor the legalization of marijuana, but again, we see the current administration seemingly ramping up efforts to return to the failed "war on drugs." Most Americans favor immigration reform, and efforts to counter climate change. But again, government rarely agrees with the citizenry.
Government in America has a history of ignoring the people, or at least those with whom it disagrees, which is often represented by a majority of citizens, which is supposed to be the authority on which our government bases its actions. That's how a democracy works. However, some might argue that in the United States we seem to be digressing when it comes to government carrying out the "will of the people." If, in fact, government isn't carrying out the "will of the people," then whose will is being imposed?
That's an easy question to answer. Government is carrying out the will of the big-money interests. This is being done by the so-called "mainstream" politicians in both major parties. One might make a case for the Republicans being more representative of this scenario, but the Democrats have their share of corporate lap dogs as well.
The majority of Americans who want changes made in this country must begin lending their support to populists candidates, preferably to those on the left. The current administration in Washington is a good example of a risk taken on a "populist" candidate from the right, hopefully a risk we won't take again.
From the web
In response to last week's cover story, "The health of a hospital":
I remember when Baxter Regional Medical Center CEO Ron Peterson was against Obama. Now that the ACA is working Peterson likes it. A lot of employees were against it. I tried to tell them that the old system was going to crumble. So many voted for Trump despite him saying he was going to get rid of it. If the AHCA becomes law, kiss this hospital goodbye. A lot of retirees will be leaving the area, too. BRMC was a big draw for them to come here. Glad to see this article.
In response to Autumn Tolbert's May 25 column, "Not leaders":
U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton is the most dangerous person in politics.
I like Autumn Tolbert's articles. She uses logical reasoning and makes some good points. Why should I show respect to Vice President Mike Pence, when he has treated women like breeding cows or personal property with his lifelong crusade to put chastity belts on women? He has pushed horrible health care laws, as Indiana's governor and as vice president, that endanger women's lives. He defended President Trump for his sexual assault remarks about women. Why on earth would I sit like a lump on a log and show respect to someone who gloats, smiles and claps for the camera, when harmful women's health care bills are passed? He has no respect for me, my voice, my civil and human rights, my brain, or my health. He hides behind a hypocritical religion. He has proved this over and over. He hates women and gays and lesbians and refugees and immigrants and Muslims and poor people. I am sure I left out some groups. His small, self-righteous mind is dangerous to society and he is offensive to me. He does not deserve my respect, nor has he earned it. He will continue to support laws that stifle free speech, promote discrimination, and mimic a Putin style of government. It is OK with me if some graduates sat through his speech and it is OK with me that some graduates walked out. For the past four months, I have watched state legislatures, the U.S. Congress, Pence and President Trump attack the civil and human rights of everyone on earth. They ignore the First Amendment, try to rewrite the U.S. Constitution and have shut out the news media and journalists, while they ignore the courts and laws. Getting upset about a few graduates walking out on a speech seems trivial compared to having your civil rights and government destroyed.
In response to the May 26 post, "Confederate statues: Arkansas has them, too, of course":
Rather than Confederate monuments these are perhaps more correctly termed Democrat historic symbols. It is apparent the Democrat past is an abject failure but understandable and a pity they would wish to avoid, erase and reimagine rather than learn from history.
Come on, baker, surely you are well read about the GOP's "Southern Strategy" as formulated by Strom Thurmond, Barry Goldwater, Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan as a way to get rid of the Northern leadership of the GOP and recruit Southern politicians who were fed up with the Democratic efforts for civil rights of minority Americans. LBJ predicted this when he signed the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
One can see the results by looking at the leadership of the GOP in Gingrich, DeLay and other Southerners. In 1972, Nixon carried all the Southern states as did Trump in 2016.
Ronald Reagan announced his candidacy in 1980 in a speech in Philadelphia, Miss. Bet you get the significance of that. By 2010 GOP leaders acknowledged the GOP had pursued such efforts for decades. Northern control of the GOP is gone, replaced by Southern tea-baggers and others who once were part of the Democratic Party you correctly refer to, much like "Gone With The Wind" of Margaret Mitchell's day and time.