A few years back, a friend tied things together for me in a single sentence. It was something I knew, but hearing a concise description often helps clarify. I had complained that Democrats and Republicans are mostly doing the same things, and things I disagree with, but the various supporters of these parties support the positions when their people are in power, then speak against these things when the other guys are in power -- even though the "things" are identical! My friend said, "It's a two-man con." He's exactly right.
And I found a great example of the con, although there are literally thousands of examples. Glenn Greenwald, the foremost journalist covering the Snowden / NSA leaks, said the following in yesterday's Reddit AMA:
Question for Glenn: Do you see the US Democratic Party as hopelessly corrupt in terms of orchestrating progressive change?
"When I first began writing in 2005, I was focused primarily on the Bush NSA program, and I was able to build a large readership quickly because so many Democrats, progressives, liberal bloggers, etc, were so supportive of the work I was doing. That continued to be true through 2008.
Now, a mere four [years] later, Democrats have become the most vehement defenders of the NSA and the most vicious attackers of my work on the NSA - often, some of the very same people cheering so loudly in 2006 and 2007 are the ones protesting most loudly and viciously now.
Gee, I wonder what changed? In the answer lies all you need to know about the Democratic Party."
It's safe to say I don't agree with everything Greenwald says and does, but in this, I agree completely. In part, I latched onto the above quote because it slams the Democratic party, which I have always viewed as the greater of two evils. However, I loathe the Republican party, too. It's Libertarian or nothing from now on, and I'll feel pity for the chorus of voices who mindlessly chirp, "But it's a wasted vote."