On Election Day 2004, I was at Green Party Headquarters in Baltimore. I was one of the organizers for our Presidential candidate, David Cobb, and I of course knew that we’d lost the election, so for me, there was little suspense to the evening. The pundits were doing endless on-the-fly analysis preceding the vote counts coming in, and it struck me how much like a sporting event the whole atmosphere was – one in which my team wasn’t playing. I felt drained from campaigning, and the actual event seemed a distant footnote. Someone had made popcorn, and after a bit of consideration, I decided to – somewhat symbolically – get myself a very large bucket of it. I then planted myself in front of the TV, and when Kerry would win a state, I’d take a handful and munch…and when Bush would win a state, I’d do the same thing.

In a similar set-up, I found myself in D.C. two days after the election of Barack Obama in 2008, walking down the street with a big box containing the contents of my desk at work. A brief number of hours before, people had been dancing in those streets, celebrating Obama’s election…while I noticed that “…success was being defined as the absence of evil. Nothing good was or is being necessarily proposed.”

My good friend Pat LaMarche recently found one of her old campaign fliers. She was a Green candidate for several offices in her political career, but her first run for higher office was in 1998 for the Governorship of Maine, her home state, and that was where this particular flier came from. It was a little card with her bio and an endorsement on one side, and bullet points for her campaign on the other – a standard, simple-to-understand setup – and what struck me about it when she posted it on the Internet a few days ago for her friends to see was that all of the points could be run on today. Creating jobs with a living wage? Sure, that’s still needed, more than ever. Clean water, air, un-poisoned land? All of those are still a concern. Equal rights without exception? Still fighting for them. Energy self-reliance? Not even close to being a reality in 2012.

In between 1998 and now, we’ve had throngs in the streets, dancing, cheering, sometimes even crying…tears of joy that all their hopes would be realized with the election of their favored candidate. There’s been angry rhetoric, doom-saying, and vicious propaganda against those perceived as the enemies of all that is good in this country. And through all of the confetti and all of the signs carried in anger…what we needed in 1998, or even before, is still what we need now.

Fast-forward to today, and the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the individual mandate of President Obama’s health care plan. The real story on this was established back in March by Kevin Zeese, another former Green Party candidate, who described his experience as a protester in front of the Supreme Court between two partisan lines. It should be required reading for all who question why a two-party system should be opposed – or why the recent decision won’t be prompting any confetti from my side of the street:

"My colleague, Margaret Flowers, asked two women carrying an Americans for Prosperity sign (a group opposed to Obama’s law) whether they were on Medicare. They said yes. “Do you like it?” Again, yes. “Do you know Medicare is a government program?” A confused look. “Do you know the Republicans want to end Medicare, make it into private insurance?” “You don’t know what you’re talking about. You probably support Obama,” they answered, and started to walk away. “No, we oppose ObamaCare.” The women stopped and listened again. “We think everyone should have Medicare. Don’t you think it would be a good idea if every American could have the Medicare you have and like?” “Hmm, yes…” but then, more confusion in their faces.

Talking to the Democrats showed equal partisan confusion. I explained: “We oppose the Obama mandate because we want to end insurance control of health care. We support single-payer, Medicare for all.” Response: “So do we.” I asked: “Single-payer ends insurance control of health care, and Obama’s law entrenches insurance more deeply. Aren’t those opposites?” Their response, obviously not understanding what ‘opposite’ means: “It’s a step in the right direction.” I asked, “How can it be a step in the right direction when it is going in the opposite direction?” No longer able to say it is the right direction, they spout another talking point: “This is the best we can get. We can build on this.” I, trying to figure out what the Democrat thinks there is to build on, then asked, “But if we want to end insurance domination, how do we build on a law that is based on insurance?” Unable to explain it, the Democrat answers, “We can’t get what we want.” “Of course not,” I said, “if people like you and organizations like yours who support single-payer spend their time advocating for the insurance industry. If that’s the case, we can’t get what we want. But if people who support single-payer work for it, we could.” Answer: “But we have to re-elect President Obama.”

Zeese correctly surmises that if the tables were turned – which was very easy to imagine, given that the individual mandate was invented by the right-wing Heritage Foundation and implemented in Massachusetts by Republican Governor Mitt Romney – the same partisan protesters would be in place in front of the Supreme Court, carrying each other’s signs.