Why are we disputing who to vote for?

It is documented fact that 3 million African American votes were erroneously thrown out and never counted nationwide.

It is a fact that in the last 7 years and possibly longer. we haven't inaugurated the man we voted for anyway.

It is time to wake up to the FACT that the republicons have had us (dems, greens, socialists, liberals, progressives, radicals and all the other divisive spinoffs) outmaneuvered for a long time.

It is self evident that they have orchestrated elections and opinion polls for decades.

Anyone with a critical eye can see that they threw this last election. They were practically handing out republican scandals. They are trying to give us just enough rope to hang ourselves with in the next scandal they are brewing.

The real problems are not lack of Kucinich votes or lack of funds. The real problems are;

1. We are mistaking voting for participation.
2. We are mistaking voting for action.
3. We continue to divide ourselves into smaller and smaller "coalitions", while the opposition unites into a larger and larger lockstep, single minded mass. Is this because;
a. "free thinkers" are too "smart" to step in behind honorable leadership?
b. Honorable leadership vacuum?

If The Republican Party 5-1 supports Israel, the overwhelming majority of the Democratic Party representatives (party of the "Under Dog") are pro Israel and its undue influence over Iran policy. Pity America would never stand up to elect a true leader and man of integrity like General Wesley Clark into the office of Presidency. Despite all odds and what are left of the American democracy. Citizens standing up, collectively and simultaneously can and will put General Clark into the office. He is not running because America does not vote for a good man.

When this country, a LONG time ago, got to the point that ONLY the EXCEEDINGLY RICH could run for president, it got to the point that ONLY the ELITE FEW could run this country.

And those (greedy, exceedingly rich, elite) few, in no way, shape, or form represent us, the real people. Nor are they truly interested in doing so.

Furthermore, they all will say ANYTING to get elected. They have NO SCRUPLES.

None at all.

What now feels already like eons ago, when Bill Clinton was running against Bush and Perot, back in my working days, someone said they didn't know who to vote for, and asked my opinion.

I said vote for Clinton.

My reason, as a RN, was simple, I believed we would really get universal healthcare.

Bush, I had no confidence in.

Perot, scared me. I'd read too much about him investigating his employees.

Anyway, her response was, "But Clinton lies!" like as if that was really such a unique thing for a politician.

I replied, "So? You know what that means? It means he's a BAD LIAR! And that means he's EASY TO CATCH!"

I added a challenge for her, to tell me one, just ONE, politican, at ANY level, in city, state, or federal govenment, whom she TRULY believed did NOT lie.

She was DEAD SILENT.

That's the tragedy of all of this.

Anyone who has gotten to that level of power has been compromised enough, had to, to get to that level, lost every sense of scruples, and is blatantly untrustworthy.

It's nothing more than which is the least evil. The least dishonest. That's about the best we can hope for, when we vote.

Where to go? Where to go?

We must stop looking for answers to come from the Democratic Party. Sad, but that simple.

They cannot -- WILL not -- play anymore the roles proclaimed in their decades-old ideological claptrap: they are NOT on the side of working people, and in fact do all they can to make sure that any conscientious activists among us are put in "Free Speech" Pits, are silenced or sidelined altogether. Activists are good for turning out the vote, but please don't emit any opinions contrary to the Big Funders -- you'll rock the boat.

In just the last 20 yeas Dems have turned on women, labor, the elderly (Where's ERA, right to strike, bankruptcy; why is welfare only for coporations now, who pushed for NAFTA?

These observations may piss some off, but they damn well should -- they reflect a sad, screwed up reality of the good cop, bad cop Dem-Repug tag team.

To say there is no where to go, this is a 2-party system is the same as giving up. That reality must change, or good-bye to any inkling of democracy one day flourishing here.

It doesn't matter whether it's a Republican or Democrat, ALL war options MUST be taken OFF the table! Otherwise, we'll fall into the neo-con way of thinking and into their vision for "Pax Americana" and the attempt to be the world empire, which will ultimately (and possibly soon) be the end of our republic - - it can be closer than we think. Maybe that's what out leadership needs to do: think; perhaps OUTSIDE THE BOX!

We've got a huge problem when you consider that the establishment counts the votes. Word is Bush lost both presidential elections, plus the recent democratic senate victories were for the most part landslide wins. The bastards who tabulated the votes played it all down and made it look like it was much closer than it was. We need to get a handle on the tabulation situation. Millions of Iraqis have been crippled, because of Bush and his supporters of both parties. That is extremely uncool.

Oops. Correction: The quoted reference to Richardson above should say "correct" not "the right policy."

He said of the sanctions in the 1990s, led by Bill Clinton that

". . . our policy was correct."

Dear Joe the Green Dog Democrat,

Bill Richardson proved himself to be a non-progressive, corporate mlitarist on foreign policy in an interview on Democracy Now. Richardson thinks the sanctions on Iraq in the 1990s THAT KILLED OVER A HALF A MILLION CHILDREN were "the right policy" just like Madeleine Albright once admitted. See Amy Goodman's interview with him.

Here is the link:

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/22/1847207

>>AMY GOODMAN: To ask a question that was asked of U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Madeleine Albright, do you think the price was worth it, 500,000 children dead?

GOVERNOR RICHARDSON: Well, I believe our policy was correct, yes.>>

So a guy who thinks killing half a million children is a good progressive? A good progressive?

I heard it live. It is on the website. Listen to it yourself.

Who is blind here? Who will not see?

Joe, show us when Richardson apologized for his statement. Or refuted it. Or make the argument that we progressives, who believe in compassion for the innocent, and for non-violent solutions to conflicts, should support a guy who thinks killing half a million children is "the right policy."

If you read James Petras' book: THE POWER OF ISRAEL IN THE UNITED STATES, or the scholarly article:"The Israeli Lobby"
by professors Mearsheimer and Walt (The London Review of Books), you will understand WHY the U.S. is poised to attack Iran with nuclear weapons. My friend, Israeli professor Dr.
Israel Shahak, spelled it out in his book, OPEN SECRETS:
"Israeli strategies are aimed at establishing a hegemony over the entire Middle East, which it has always sought covertly, without hesitating to use for the purpose all means available, INCLUDING NUCLEAR ONES...By insisting on its nuclear monopoly, Israel aims at reducing all other Middle Eastern states to the status of its vassals." (p.45)

Senator J. William FuLbright stated in his book, THE PRICE OF EMPIRE:"We have lost our freedom of action in the Middle East and are committed to policies that promote neither our own national interests nor the cause of peace...The Israeli government dominates our policy in the Middle East." Thus Iraq
has been totally destroyed FOR ISRAEL; Iran faces the same fate unless We, the People, order our craven "representatives"
to stop the slaughter.

Decent Americans with the requisite Courage, Intelligence, Goodwill and Integrity need to rescue America, not only from the criminal and fall-down incompetent gang currently tashing our Constitution, alienating former international friends, slaughtering hundreds of thousands half-way around the world, and disgracing our history -- but from the "lesser-evil choice" the Democrats offer. We sent the Democrats into "power" in the last election only to learn that they don't know how to use it beyond endlessly blathering and then launching "non-binding resolutions." We need CHAMPIONS to stop the Iraq War and to scour out the People's House, not partisan aparatchnik nincompoops and ambition crazed aspirants a la Hillary. If the Dems cannot provide candidates of Champion caliber, we will go elsewhere to find the competence and integrity so desperately now needed.

At 11:18 p.m. on 4/12 Sucali asked where Bill Richardson stands on this.

He and others can take a look at my earlier posting at 9:48 p.m. and click on the petition link. The answer to Sucali's question is there.

And there's more about Richardson at the second link in my posting. Like the American Prospect writer opined in the article at the second link, anyone who is interested in having a Democratic president who appears best qualified to serve as the country's chief executive needs to take a closer look at Richardson and learn more about him.

None are so blind as those who will not see . . .

Kate Anne,

I have been coming around that way of thinking myself. I had been holding out hope for Obama to grow into a progressive champion, but he seems to be going backwards. And Kucinich is a wonderful fellow, but he never has had a snowball's chance.

But kivals, I worked for Dennis Kucinich in 2004 and instead got boring stodgy Kerry. We could have done somewhat better to begin with..... Nope. Have to be pragmatic. Edwards has been moving more left and I must go with electability even as I want Dennis to stay in and keep everyone honest (which means I must finds some cash to send $$ to him, too). Of the rest, I find John Edwards the most acceptable to my values afte Dennis. Sometimes in politics you gotta compromise. That said, I repeat: I am glad that Dennis Kucinich is there.

Hopefully the great majority of voters will recognize that there are an infinite number of degrees of evil. Unless you are some kind of demented or simple-minded sycophant, you will find fault with any candidate, and you must always look past a candidate's faults when you cast your vote. So vote for the candidate you like the most in the primaries, but in the November election it will be time to choose between the lesser of two evils. So many thought there was no difference between Bush and Gore in 2000 and voted for Nader (I was one of them), but have come to regret that decision. It can always get worse, as Bush has proved, and sometimes we just have to hold our nose when we go to the polling place.

Solomon has taken a quotation of Barack Obama's out of context--and unfairly so. By selectively quoting, he leaves out the most crucial part of Obama's argument--and potential policy direction--regarding Iran and nuclear weapons. Here is the phrase, quoted in full:

"And while we should take no option, including military action, off the table, sustained and aggressive diplomacy combined with tough sanctions should be our primary means to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons."

At no point does Obama advocate, in any sense, an "attack" on Iran, as Solomon implies. The Pentagon may desire a war--and Solomon may be rightly concerned about where the Democrats stand--but none of Obama's remarks support Solomon's drawing any firm conclusions about where the candidate stands on war with Iran. On the contrary, his favoured--and oft-repeated--approach is diplomacy...

The full text of Obama's remarks, made at an address to the AIPAC policy forum, can be found here:

http://www.palestinechronicle.com/story-03060774854.htm

We're not so different from Iran afterall. Nobody can run for president in Iran without the explicit permission of the Supreme Leader. Here in the U.S, the corporate media preselects those candidates it is most comfortable with, allowing them to be "front runners", and so its no coincidence that they all sound alike. Hence, all front-runners see war on Iran as an option.

Many courageous Jews have done so much work for progressive politics over the past century and continue to do so. So its very sad to see a small, but influential group of them(AIPAC - American Israeli Psychotic Action Committee, as well as Gentile allies)try to influence policy in the U.S in a way that makes them enemies of peace, freedom and democracy. They still think its 1945 at the end of the Holocaust. They are only part of the problem, since Christian Zionists, Big Oil and the rest are arguably even more powerful.

This war on Iran will come soon, unless its one huge bluff to terrify the Iranians, reassure the Israelis, and frighten Americans into submission.

saphne the only thing that I can say is that repeating the same action over and over and expecting a different result is a sure sign of insanity. Barack, Hillary, Edwards are all DLC. Not supporting the candidate that speaks to your sensibilities isn't democracy, it's herd mentality. Whoever wins in '08 - D or R - will not be able to continue the policies of the shrub. Disgraced, broke, and friendless, we'll have to make nice. Go Dennis!

I'm pleased that so many people see that Kucinich is a good alternative albeit a Democrat. But way up at the top, huckleberry made an important comment--that candidates are vetted before they are presented to us and anyone who threatens to provide an alternative is eliminated. Wellstone had the rare ability to stand up for progressive reform while looking and sounding like a mainstream American--so he's dead. Kucinich is still alive because he can so easily be ridiculed. I wonder if there is hope that we can get around that...yet if his campaign took off, I expect he woyuld be threatened, and if that didn't work he would die of a very sudden heart attack.

"not this time."

The problem is that every time is "not this time". In 1992 the States ended up with Bill Clinton and a legacy of environmental disaster and international conflict.

Where we fall down is that we are still talking about an election when we should be discussing a revolution.

They have to take the anti-Iran stance or the AIPAC polital machine will grind them up and spit them out. I do think Barack is the best hope though. Please be practical, don't throw away a vote on Kucinch etc., not this time, this may be the last chance we will have.

Maybe we should only allow people who live on or below the poverty line to run for elected office. They would only be allowed to collect a maximum of $1 per member of the public for campaigning. No TV advertising allowed. We might get a decently run America then.

This is what I don't understand of the american people. While yes, there should be some outrage at Don Imus comments 'nappy hos' where is the moral outrage on George Bush, Dick Chenney, Hillary, Barak: all moral hypocricy because we can allow [by just keep paying taxes] a nation to kill, rape other nations and yet we cry when someone makes insensitive comments....

I learn in first grade 'stick and rocks can hurt my bones but words will never hurt me'

At the end of the thread again. Told myself to STEP AWAY FROM THE KEYBOARD, your're becoming obsessed Vinnie. Soloman is always good but he could have condensed the point into a few simple lines.

All you need to do is tally the money figures that have been oficially released to understand who any of the "top three" will represent should they sit in the Whitewash. Corporate contributors always put their money on the expected winner, after all their agenda is money. When the R's looked like winners across the board, they got the money, now it is the D's.

I agree with the several posters above that we err when we belive the political system will lead. If we make change from the bottom, they will follow, kicking and screaming all the way.

Not perfect, as he holds some new-age ideas that are troubling, Dennis has been consistent all his carreer on a great many things. I'll do whatever I can to support him, knowing that the real effort has to be a paradigm change about our consumption driven society.

Again, though I am biased, as Alice said, if you want to be a part of a truly progressive and truly grassroots effort, one that has a strategy and the gumption to hold firm to progressive ideals, then it is time to move away from Move-on and join the Progressive Democrats of America. They have not waffled and are working both inside and outside the Democratic Party to build an authentic progressive movement. Google them, join, and start a chapter in your congressional district if there is not one, or join one in your district if there is one. It is time to move forward and not relent.

Even worse than their stance on Iran, their ideas about Venezuela are absurd.

The Democrat leadership has avoided questions on what they think about Chavez like the plague... but the few times they talk, they call him a "thug" and a "dictator" just like the propaganda media.

Why do they have to call a democratically elected leader, who nationalized his country's oil industry and uses the profits to help poor Venezuelans a dictator? I bet they even supported the CIA coup, although they'd never admit it.

The Dems may be better than Bush, but I'm not going to give any of them money for elections... it just supports the corporate media who in turn spread propaganda and perpetuate the system. It's a vicious cycle, and instead people should consider non-corporate direct-action media campaigns to inform the public.

These candidates pay $10,000 for 30 seconds on the 10 o'clock news. Then the news devotes 30 minutes to spread disinformation about the issues and candidates that matter. How is that a winning strategy?

It's all been said. We are in truth a one party state. I really don't care if he doesn't stand a chance in hell of becoming elected, my vote will be for Dennis Kucinich, former mayor of what we used to lovingly call, "the mistake by the Lake."

I fail to understand why so many Democrats hate people like Ralph Nader.

When will the majority of Democrats realize that the Democratic Party is just the other evil corporate party.

Instead of following the logo, it's a shame more Democrats don't seem to care that the candidates they work for, give $ to and vote for work directly against core Democratic Party beliefs....just so long as they are 1% less evil than the republicans

Long Live Ralph Nader and all who oppose The Corporate Reich

It's still 4 fingers

Until peace becomes profitable, any mainstream political candidate will do the bidding of their corporate sponsors. I would love to see someone like Kucinich be the president, and possibly be able to change the course of this country, if only by a degree or two. However, we will get the candidate of someone else's choice. And we will be forced to choose the apparent lesser of two evils. Personally, I think the Republicans have been in power too long, and need a time out. Shaking up the structure occasionally is a good thing, even if it is only a game of musical chairs.

Dennis Kucinich is the only one that has a sane & honorable plan on how to proceed. He outshines the other candidates by far and appears to be the only one capable of turning this severely f'd up nation of ours around.

It's good to see that lots of people here have also noticed him. Too bad that the "moveon.org" crowd appears to be supporting the clueless, business as usual - simply awful American status quote runners who are full of hogwash. Maybe a little less: beer, pot, or slaving for the corporation, and maybe a little more coffee and reading materials on Commondreams would help them wake up.

For some time now, Solomon has been lucidly observing/writing about Move0n's slide towards the Dem Leadership. Too bad.

I will again be supporting Dennis in the primaries. I do hope he stays with it a bit longer this time around.

Hey John Stewart, Colbert and you guys, can you knock off the "Mayor of Munchkin Land" stuff? Kucinich is a guy who is representing exactly what we want and has the ability to effectively express--if he is given a chance!!!

As to the suggestions above that AIPAC is influencing the posture of the leading Dems, I don't put so much stock into that. My guess is that the incessant (strategy?) to look "tough" (or tougher) than the rabid Repub's is driving this idiocy more than anything.

And where does Bill Richardson stand on this?

Edwards has said some very different things about Iran since receiving feedback about that provocative statement. I saw an article on Commondreams saying that he felt dialogue and negotiation were the route to take.

While Hillary is the consummate ambitious politician who will do anything she thinks might create the currently winning stance, and Obama seems willing to sell out on too many things for my taste, Edwards keeps sounding better, more real, more aware of what is needed for the American people (and the world) rather than just forwarding his personal aspirations. He's also the Democrat most likely to win a general election by a good margin-- Hillary and Obama would have a hard time doing better than Gore or Kerry did.

Pay attention to Edwards' growth and the ways he stands out from Clinton and Obama- he's not quite Kucinich, but he's the most progressive person w/a real shot at the White House.

I've been listening carefully, it's true, the special interest groups pull the strings in both political parties. Especially disappointing to me, are the positions of Obama, and Edwards. Hillary has made herself very clear, and indeed, likely would be doing the same thing a Bush. He language is frustration with the execution of the war, not a moral position that this was the wrong war, for the wrong reasons, and the wrong time. The special interest groups that control our political economy, supporting both parties and enforcing their agenda is achieving success in Iraq, and clearly is preparing for a crippling attack on Iran. The primaries are our last chance to make an impact. Question the front runners. Make sure they are responsible to the people, not just special interest groups. This is an important issue. Thank you Norman Soloman.

This is terrifying! Even so-called liberal Democrats speaking just like Bush and Cheney on the next war. Their saber rattling is so juvenile that it is contemptible. Maybe it's time for the Green Party to arise from the ashes of 2000 and pose an alternative for peace and sanity. I stopped many months ago sending any money to Moveon, because of their lick-spittle commitment to the destiny of the Democratic Party. To hell with both Republicans and Democrats!

It's interesting that Solomon and other political pundits keep wringing their hands over the failings of Clinton, Obama, and Edwards and ignore the candidate who displays few if any of the failings that create such anguish. That candidate is Bill Richardson. His view and policy re Iran? See his petition at http://richardsonforpresident.com/page/s/Iran

There's more about Richardson that makes even more inexplicible the lack of attention paid him by many pundits in an American Prospect commentary at http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=12502

As for MoveOn and the Democratic candidates, as reported by MoveOn today (April 12)in its e-letter, its members who watched the MoveOne Town Hall on Iran this past weekend voted differently for the Democratic candidates from those who did not watch and listen to what the candidates actually said. Here are how the folks who attended the event ranked their choices:

Sen. John Edwards -- 25%
Gov. Bill Richardson -- 21%
Sen. Barack Obama -- 19%
Rep. Dennis Kucinich -- 15%
Sen. Joe Biden -- 10%
Sen. Hillary Clinton -- 7%
Sen. Chris Dodd -- 4%

Native pragmatism re a Democratic presidential candidate and a new president who is is absolutely well-qualified to be the the country's next chief executive sure points this Green-Dog Democrat toward Richardson.

None are so blind as those who will not see . . .

To optimismwill:
I agree that "the Democrats are not our friends," and as a Green, I should know--because it is the donkey party--not the Republicans or the Libertarians or the (insert party name here)--which has used all sorts of dirty tricks to keep us off the ballot in many states, to discredit our candidates and our program, and to ban us from participating in debates.
However, the statement that the Greens are a "capitalist party" is not quite accurate. Although Greens do advocate a sort of small-scale, localized capitalism, we share many views with Socialists. I am a small "s" socialist myself, and would be a member of the Socialist Party if it were more broad based and less anthropocentric in its philosophy. As Todd Chretien, GP candidate for Senate here in California said when grilled by the notorious Bill'O, there are socialists and even communists--as well as ordinary liberals and probably an old-school conservative or two--within the party. We are no friends of corporations, factory farms, militarists, imperialists, racists, sexists or homophobes; we reject Taft-Hartley and fully support workers' rights to organize and to be protected from exploitation and injury in the workplace and to earn a living wage; and we support paid family leave and single-payer universal health care. We take no corporate or PAC money, and rely instead on contributions from individual supporters. These ideas are fully in sync with the socialistic viewpoint.
The entrenched corporate duopoly--the twin-headed servant of the patriarchal plutocracy and the real root of all the problems we face today--is our common adversary. And as the third-largest political party in the U.S., we are your friends, since we fully support a multiparty democratic system which would ensure that the type of socialist labor party you describe would have the right and the opportunity to gain ballot access, participate in debates, have the use of the public airwaves and engage in the political discourse. We are your natural allies in so many ways that to quibble about the very limited type of capitalism we accept is to miss the bigger picture and to forget that in order to create a system in which there are more voices and choices for voters, the third-largest party is in a unique position to crash through the gates of repression so that the fourth-largest and fifth-largest (and so on) political parties can also participate openly and fully in the political system.

If you think the political system can help us, or ever intended to help us, you are doomed.

They are the ones who put us here.

If you think holding a sign will change the world, you are not only wrong you are stupid.

I understand that people are paralyzed by fear. I understand they are grasping at straws, desperate for their voice to be heard. I understand that we as a nation have been dumbed and numbed to the point of gibbering. I understand that as long as we pawns continue to attack opposing knights and pawns, instead of the players who pit us against each other; then we will continue to be manipulated. If we choose to live in fear, then the terrorists in the white house have won.

The time has come for action, not activism.

Peace,
Permanent!

Hear hear for Kucinich in 08. Forget that losing notion of "electability" that deprived progressives of candidate Dean in 04. I am down with impeachment of Shrub and Big Time too and, as a committed Bokononist, know it will happen very soon.

Solomon's article is fantastic. He is drawing a line. He is separating what is progressive and what is miltiarist. His first three sentences do that. Here's why Solomon's key focus is so important:

Corporate militarists are attempting to co-opt "progressive" for their status quo policies of empire abroad and a police state and corporate domination at home. They are trying to seize the emerging identity of the progressive political movement--our name--"progressive." Norman Solomon is a true progressive. So is Kucinich. And Cindy Sheehan. And most of the writers on the Commondreams author list. But being a progressive must remain about ideas--and political tactics that retain our progressive ideas. Being progressive is about the solutions progressives offer to solve the problems we face locally, nationally and globally.

This is easy to pin down: the Kucinich issues section on his website; the Green Party 2004 Platform; Nader's Platform; the platforms of the emerging state progressive caucuses in the State Democratic parties; PDA's basic thrust; and what Chomsky says . . .

The simplest distinction at the level of foreign policy is this: empire versus Earth community, with the global rule of law.

Domestic policy: help the needy and turn Hood Robin into Robin Hood after all the corporate pilfering. And put EMPLOYEES on the Boards of corporations with a required federal charter. That's Nader's idea from the early 1990s.

Electoral Reform: make the will of the people the law of the land. That means a multi-party democracy with private money banned. Period.

The idea in the above comment about MoveOn becoming supporters of "blue dog Democrats" is just right. That is part of attempting to co-opt "progressive."

it is great that so many commentors get it at CommonDreams, the "Home of the Progressive Community."

Don't let the empire-supporting, war-promoting, corporate-supporting, militarists like Obama, Clinton, Edwards, MoveOn and the other corporate-regime Democrats co-opt "progressive."

Pelosi '07 Kucinich '08

Kucinich's platform is what, 98% of the Green platform? And he speaks it clearly and concisly and at a higher national level than anyone on the Green horizon. Even if he doesn't get to the White House, with Green support he could bring a progressive voice back to the national debate that has been missing for 60 years - a major victory.

And who knows, with the devastation to the working class going on Kucinich's humanity could be the winning touch compared to the disingenuous puppy dog eyes of Edwards and Obama.

But first things first. It appears the Neocons will be content to grind the all volunteer military into the ground and make it an all privatised Blackwater operation. This plus the unmitigated rape of the US Treasury make the removal of this mafia imperative.

Search Articles of Impeachment, construct your own Articles of Impeachment then hand deliver it to nieghbors and your Congressional office with a boisterous reading.

The call must come from the Citizens.

Pelosi '07 Kucinich '08

One Mind, One Heart, One Voice: Impeach!

Register Democratic so you cn vote for Kucinich in teh primaries then reregister Green and vote for either Kucinich or Nader in the general election (even if you have to write it in--no they aren't perfect just less dirty than anybody else.

Extending our welcome.

Instead of watching continued destruction of the human family and waiting for the bomb to drop, I hope that folks will come to understand that we are voting with every dollar and every moment we spend. Real democracy (derived from the Greek meaning 'Power of the people') has little to do with marking anonymous 'X's once every four years, it is economic (derived from the Greek 'Oikonomia' = 'Care and nurture of the home and family) as Consumers and as Producers.

We need to learn to stand still with the gift of life all around us, feel its power and consider how each of us is going to include each other in producing a better life together. Indigenous people know that peace begins in our systems of recognising each other. The system of the String Shell, used throughout the Americas, was based in the Time-based Accounting recognition of the Production Society, a form of progressive ownership in each specialty similar to the Guild system. We need to learn to group together with each other for producing life by recognising the complementation of our differences.

This form of 'livelihood' logic is partly what drives the right, even though they institute it as a form of 'exclusion for survival', they still have the right tendencies to incorporating (acting as bodies of people). If folks want to join together in order to extend our welcome, we will be pleasantly surprised that we already have the power.

We don't need to throw open the doors of our homes (security is important), but to begin the discussion with each other, local business and our companies on how to invest together for sustainable solutions? We can recognise and empower the diverse stakeholder Founder, Employee, Supplier and Consumer groups that form our economic relations. Acting economically is a body language that the system understands. Once we are walking the talk, we are easily understood.

Political democracy is part of the solution but only an incomplete understanding of the whole. Peace candidates will then have real people to represent.

I agree with Brown! Before you dissert the Democratic party, vote for Kucinich in the primaries! Send them a message they won't forget. Then, if Kucinich dosen't get the nomination, drop your Democratic Party registration and let them know LOUDLY why you are leaving.

Interesting Note: In the Virtual Town Hall given by Move On on Wednesday, their members put Hillary in 4th or 5th place behind Edwards, Kucinich and Richards! Wonder if they got a message there?

ScSchmidt - I love the duct tape idea! Never thought of that. The pictures in my head are wonderful. After all, duct tape is supposed to be a good solution in almost any situation. Gotta love your imagination!

To HELL with your "FIRST TIER" candidates and politics, fear, and aggression AS USUAL! Dennis Kucinich is the voice of peace and sanity in this horrible time in which we find ourselves. IT'S TIME FOR REAL CHANGE, damnit!

Go to www.kucinich.us and read and read and learn and learn, then say to hell with the media's "superstars" for president
and spread the word on this INCREDIBLE man! We need a real change! We need faith in leadership. We need hope instead of soundbites and apathy. DENNIS KUCINICH: He has "NO STRINGS" attached to corporate America or any right wing B.S. Amy Goodman loves this guy. Give him a look and you will too!

First Iraq, then Iran. The boy who cried wolf is doing it again.

Analyze Obama's 2001-2006 data: http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.asp?CID=N00009638&cycle=2006.

It may well be that AIPAC-friendly money comes via other sources also?

Look at the following article by Robert Brenner in the newest edition of the New Left Review:
http://newleftreview.org/?page=article&view=2652
Brenner details how the rise of the New Right has been achieved with the complicity of the Democratic Party, from the New Deal on. The DP has sucked the life out of one progressive movement after another, because just like the Republicans, they are the party of Corporate Capital. It's high time that "progressive liberals" begin to understand this: the Democrats are not our friends. They are part of the problem. We need a socialist labor party in the United States: not another capitalist party like the Greens.

Analyze Obama's 2001-2006 data: http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.asp?CID=N00009638&cycle=2006.

Yahoo (http://biz.yahoo.com/ic/40/40214.html) says that Henry Crown & Co. is a top competitor of the Carlyle Group.

As for the other top contributors to his past bid, I bet U of Chicago, Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal, Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase & Co are sort of AIPAC leaning. And so his mideast policy, like Hilary's will be a relfection of the people who paid to get him elected....I mean who he represents...I mean who voted for him...I mean, well, it depends on whether we still qualify as a democracy, or whether the office is largely sold to the highest bidder.

grandmaforpeace I hear you! I told the guy polling for the democrats on a NYC streetcorner that I had defected from the party after both my senators approved the Military Commissions act. With these clowns among the Democratic party, they're going to have to really work to convince me to believe anything they claim to offer.

I can't cast my vote so the govt. continues the policy of aggression abroad, and pays for murdering and torturing people off somewhere with our tax money.

I have long thought that the only option for peace is that We the People eliminate the profit to Corporate America that war brings. We are the largest exporter of war materiel in the world with bases in over 100 of the 135 countries on the planet. WE PAY FOR ALL THIS....thus, the death, misery and distruction is our responsibility. Unfortunately, if you ever stand outside a Wal-Mart and try to get a petition signed for an issue, you will find that the great majority of Wal-Mart shoppers are not actually registered to vote. There's a place to start, go to any post office and get some voter registration forms (I think once upon a time I also had to fill out a form that I was a registrar) and start doing your part to get others to do theirs. IF everyone who could vote would vote our world would be a much better place. The Republicans are WAY outnumbered....but they have a high instance of actually doing the work.

John Freeman

Senator Feingold has proposed legislation for funding Iraq for only as long as it takes us to leave -- no dollars for death, only for withdrawal. Sounds good to me.

Robert Fisk of the Independent.UK reports that the Petraeus plan for Iraq is to wall off or barricade neighborhoods after rounding up all the "bad guys." Some areas will have "joint security" bases with both Iraqi and American soldiers who will protect the citizenry from violence and win their hearts and mind. Citizens will need special id cards allowing them entry to their gated neighborhoods. And about 40,000 US military will be ranged across Iraq to guard against Iran. So, Bush Admin., how many decades will it take for THIS occupation to "win" Iraq for freedom and democracy or whatever the current definition of victory may be? About the same as the length of oil company leases now being negotiated?

I like the Feingold plan better.

I worked for Dennis in 2004 and ended up with Kerry. I'm compromising with John Edwards who I grew to like a lot during the '04 campaign. He has good programs for the working people and the preservation of the middle class, even though, as a peacenik, I have left messages about the Iran comment on the Edwards' campaign phone answering machine and have never received a response back. I think I will copy out the above article and send it to the Edwards campaign with a few notes.

Get real, U.S.A. -- we all supposed to be getting rid of nukes, not just Iran. That was part of the deal. I agree with Gary. We need the option of PEACE on the table. Are you listening John and Elizabeth??!!?

why doesn't anybodyput all options for peace on the table

i wish somebody,anybody would put all options for peace "on the table"

the economy of the modern world is a war economy - no war no modernity.

This is a great piece at exposing the TRUTH.

It would be helpful also at the end to note that Presidential Candidate, (grossly ignored by the media including Move-on), DENNIS KUCINICH is AGAINST military action against Iraq. Is it any wonder the media tries to ram Clinton & Obama down our throats and tries to silence KUCINICH?

DON'T LET THE RIGHT WING MEDIA PICK OUR NEXT PRESIDENT! They laugh when they fool us! Let's not be fooled again by Republicans in Democratic clothing.

If we want REAL CHANGE here, we must pick a REAL Anti-War candidate. DENNIS J. KUCINICH

There is at least one Democrat running for president who does have a true anti- war, pro peace platform and plan, Dennis Kucinich. He voted against the new funding for Iraq. He is the one progressives of any or no party should support. If he starts getting some real support, the media will stop ignoring him and the other canidates will have start acknowledging the issues he brings up. I urge all of you to check out his web site or interview with Amy Goodman on the Democracy Now website. He does not take funding from the corporatocracy. This should be one of our major criteria for anyone running for office.
Anyone who voted for Nader, don't let anyone make you feel guilty. The election was stolen by fraud both times mostly against minority voters. The Dems were too spineless or bought out to contest it like they do in other countries when this sort of thing happens. If anyone is interested in the details of these frauds read Armed Madhouse by Gary Palast. If we are not on our toes the same thing only worse will happen on 08.

kivals:

***AIPAC is not the only demon in US politics, as it is but one of many, and Bush and Cheney do not need AIPAC to tell them to dominate the Middle East, murder the population, and steal the oil. They would do it anyway.***

Yes, same ill wind filling the sails of this boat. All one needs to do is observe the roster of virulent ideologues Bush has surrounded himself with from the Pat Robertson School for government attorneys - motto being - a force for change in direction. Christian/Zionism! Yeah! Right onto the bloody rocks!

Peace, Best Wishes and Hope
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk1vEuhBuEU

Gravel and Kucinich need to get their dues. They are capable of leading this country and they are both peace candidates. They are not beholden to interests that will pursue war in the Middle East. Far too many of us constituents buy into the bogus media opinion that they are fringe or unelectable and that there are only three horses in this race.

Want an anti-war candidate? Start with Gravel and Dennis.

"Mikhail Bakunin, that object of worship of Libertarian, whose flag was black..."

I likewise laugh out loud when I meet a Bill gates/Steve Jobs - worshiping "Libertarian" who claims he is also an anarchist!

Vitaly Purto,

"The ranting about AIPAC"????? The administration may wish to divide and conquer, but AIPAC is on their side, or at least they are on AIPAC's side. AIPAC is not on the side of American progressives or the poor and oppressed of the world by anyone's calculation. AIPAC is for the abject subjugation of millions of Palestinians and Israeli domination of the Middle East. AIPAC is for nuking Iran. AIPAC is for wanton murder and genocide. And the Democratic candidates know that if they defy AIPAC, they can kiss their hopes goodbye.

AIPAC is not the only demon in US politics, as it is but one of many, and Bush and Cheney do not need AIPAC to tell them to dominate the Middle East, murder the population, and steal the oil. They would do it anyway. But I still believe there might be some electable Democrats who would not, if it weren't for AIPAC.

It is delusion to think that ANYone, regardless of political stripes, has risen to power without complicity. Everyone who is a true threat to the *system* has already been assassinated.

Democrats exist only to present the illusion of choice. They take their orders and their hush money from the same people as the republicons.

Pull your heads out of the sand.

One cannot attempt to decipher these events and circumstances with the assumption that none of it makes sense. It makes sense to those who are truly in power. They benefit from all these "mistakes", albeit indirectly.

One must study history and look much farther back than the current crisis. The POWERS THAT BE and their predecessors have been running the same play book for thousands of years. They have been playing Sims with us for generations.
However, the sky is not falling. All is not lost. They are predictable and can still be outmanuvered. But take warning, we paint targets on ourselves by merely dissenting. The *system*, The powers that be, do not have our best interests at heart and have already broken every law & every right to attain their power. To fight lawbreakers with more laws is ridiculous. And to listen to one word that their puppets say is foolish.

We cannot fight destruction with destruction. We must fight it with creation. It is up to us to make something better.

George W. Bush has spent months marshaling military and propagandist resources to train the American people to accept an attack on Iran. An attack without a formal declaration of war, predicated on the administration's assertion that Iran is behind assaults on U.S. troops in Iraq. An attack with precedent in the Cambodian and Laotian fronts in the Vietnam War.

Bush watchers know this. Likewise congressional Democrats. Hence, the wartime spending legislation in the House that fleetingly contained a provision barring unauthorized military force in Iran.

The House leadership reportedly succumbed to pressure from conservative Democrats, lobbyists from neoconservative groupings that want war with Iran and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. The authorization requirement vanished. Democratic opponents feared it tied the administration's hands when dealing with Tehran.

Someone, please tie the president's hands. Duct-tape him to a chair. Anything to keep his fingers off the trigger. Go down the hall or into the bunker or whichever shadow Dick Cheney is lurking in and tape him down, too.

Tie the hands of Clinton, Edwards, Obama and everyone else whose "no option is off the table" posturing by definition embraces a preemptive nuclear first strike against America's enemies.

Is there no end to these foreign policy hawks?

Vitaly Purto -

Sad, but true.

Wake up people!!! Nap time is over!

When a Great Light is turned into darkness, it can be - VERY - dark indeed.

Peace, Best Wishes and Hope
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk1vEuhBuEU

zeitgeist:
I think we are closer to that than we all imagine.
'Their' military still depends on uneducated impoverished class in Red States (Marx is rolling in his grave with that absurdity, as well as Mikhail Bakunin, that object of worship of Libertarian, whose flag was black).
Now, with Iraq, they will soon realize that dream of aerial or space bombing is just that: bloody but dream. They will need boots on the ground and a lot of them. The only magic to solve this problem is draft, no matter how loud they will deny it. With draft, presto, you have the whole Blue Nation up in arms and good bye to high tech murder technology. If kids can get into Pentagon computers, then imagine the real high-tech war. Chinese have just demonstrated the Act I of King US Lear, who divided their European knowledge inheritance between once despised Japanese, Chinese and Indian children.
Well, what cometh easy, goeth easy.

I have had it with all the above Candidates and thier line of crap! I am going to vote for the Individual who thinks of OUR children and grandchildren and who spends the least amount of money I might add ! This whole scenario is a nightmare ! I feel bad for my grandchildren who are going to live with wars, proverty, and global warming ! I am a activist from way back, and I am Proud to say a Member of the Green Party.. These candidates should get real and down to earth.. My screenname speaks for it self !

Vitaly Purto-

Cessation of the states from this xenophobic lunacy, driven by the fanaticism of neocon zealotry, appears to be the only way out from the clutches of these mad people.

Peace, Best Wishes and Hope
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk1vEuhBuEU

Perhaps it would suit us better if we were to gather together, from amongst us, a delegation of sovereign individuals, charter a dozen planes or so and fly our own ambassadorial voice of dialog to Iran, Syria, Lebanon and Palistine.

Peace, Best Wishes and Hope
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk1vEuhBuEU

Forget the Progressive Democrats of America, Alice. They are still Democrats and they will never change the donkey party from the inside. When large numbers of progressives change their registration to Green, Socialist, decline-to-state or ANYTHING but Democrat, the DLC and its corporate, militaristic candidates may begin to change their evil ways.
Join Dave Lindorff's effort by going to www.thiscantbehappening.net or check out a similar one dedicated to ending the occupation of Iraq and putting impeachment back on the table at http://switch2green.org.

The ranting about AIPAC is confirmation of my worries. Do not people see that 'divide et impera' is as solid foundation for any Empire as law of gravity for physics?
And while we are ridiculing Busheviks for their incompetency, why not to ask ourselves a simple question, What if chaos and violence in the Middle East is exactly their purpose? Did not England use the same recipe book to cook up her Empire the same way as Romans did? Did we all forget steering that our Government was, is, and will be selling arms to all 'belligerent' parties in the Middle East as well as everywhere around the world?
Are we so brainwashed that we cannot connect two simple dots that in our perfect society of disposable commodities, arms and soldiers, as well as infrastructure are the most disposable, and therefore, the most profitable commodities of them all. And if not the highest rate of return on capital, what else is the highest call in our blessed by Mammon society?

Norman,

We're going to nuke Middle-East. We always were. Bush promised it in his first speech after September, 11th, when he invoked memories of Pearl Harbor. Democratic candidates seem to want it as much as Republicans. Our mission has always been about military ambition and corporate domination--nukes guarantee a future where the military will control every part of our society, worldwide.

John Thomas Ellis

longingforsanity
"we (if I still identify with "we")" Well, we all have the same problem with that we. "We" was the title of the great anti-utopian novel written by Zamiatin in '20s, of which George Orwell was acutely aware. During my life in the Soviet Union 'we' call them 'they' and everybody knew who they were. It is not that simple in this new country. And by 'new' I mean literally NEW for all of us, especially for people around the world. In this new country, contrary to the 'The Beauty and the Beast', a great transformation is going in the reverse direction. One can compare our state to-day with that of processing in the dark room: gradual appearance of image that was already on the film but invisible to naked eye prior to applying appropriate chemicals.
Alas, unlike in old SU, where everybody knew who they were, much is still hidden in the brave new United States.
Our main and the most vital task ahead is to unveil the mystery and bring enough reason to develop Hidden Imam of what popularly was known as the US.
This is not an easy task. Meanwhile, spending our intellectual energy on differences between Baraka Clinton and Obama Hillary is wasting precious energy into deep vacuum; it would move an atom.

It's time for Progressives to move on away from MoveOn, and towards the Progressive Democrats of America. Look how long it took MoveOn to even MENTION the US occupation of Iraq as an issue. Finally, after more than a year of constant comments on their "feedback" line, they took Iraq up as an issue. Then, look at how they've joined the obfuscation around the Holt bill to get us out of the occupation. Now they're hyping Hillary? The front-running Republicrat? It appears that even MoveOn chooses not to recognize the meaning of the 11/06 election: the vast majority of Americans are absolutely sick of war under false pretenses. America sent the Democrats to a majority in both houses in the blind hope that the Dems would be a true Opposition Party. Look how wrong we were. Supporting Hillary is unconscionable, MoveOn. Let's move on. Join the Progressive Democrats of America to see the next step!

As someone else already stated on a post elsewhere, the predator in a domestic violence charge always blames the victim. Who is defending the victim against the rabid bully, flailing the largest intimidating arsenal of nukes, clutched in both hands, foaming at the mouth?

Peace, Best Wishes and Hope
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk1vEuhBuEU

I hate to beat a dead horse, but one five-letter acronym can easily explain all of this -- AIPAC. As long as AIPAC is around, Democratic candidates will continue to utter such nonsense. Why didn't the author mention AIPAC? Is Solomon afraid of AIPAC too?

Vitaly Purto: Thanks, I chose my screenname with this particular set of issues very much in mind. That, and the global climate change set of issues. I agree that short of something on the order of the Depression, change won't happen. And that's my despair. Not for me per se, my life is fine, though I wonder sometimes how well adapted any of us is to a world that may be so starkly changed; but for my son and all others who will have to live with the consequences of a nation (and those in Iraq now living with it, to whom I often wish I could just say "I'm so sorry" but which is so sickly inadequate to the situation)--the conseqeunces of a nation which like the Roman Emmpire before, is in decline and decadent. The "Christian right" is correct about that except that they blame the wrong people; the left is trying to pick up the pieces of a country/society already fragmenting from corporate-abetted greed. But when the center doesn't hold, we (if I still identify with "we") find someone to bomb.

It's called being stupid, and spineless. Wanting to have their cake and eat it, too, etc.

They all want to say just enough of the "right" stuff that they are being "advised" to say to maximize their votes, and being too dense to realize that they are merely upsetting us all and making themselves look...see above first two sentences.

longingforsanity:
I am afraid you will have to stick to your name for a long time to come, unless something on the scale of Great Depression will happen again. I do not think though that our system of government can manage coming disaster, least to avoid it. Designed in pre-nuclear era and left almost intact (including three fifth of the person clause) to benefit self-chosen few, it is beyond systemic repair, so thoroughly financial and military interests corrupted original design for the last 60 years, by itself not perfect.
So, we are ruled by fear that is by mechanism, which evolved to block normal reflection on environment and to instantly either attack or flee. When lasting more than an instance, fear becomes mental handicap.
Alas, lacking experience of lesser countries, gravely beaten, we did not developed reflex of fleeing, so we keep attacking and will do so until accumulated bloodshed will bring us back to sanity. Judging by current state of mind of people in once warrior nations such as Sweden, Denmark, France, Germany and Japan, I am very hopeful that the same bright future awaits our nation as well.
Meanwhile, to paraphrase famous maxim of War Secretary Don Rumsfeld, we have to live with whatever people we have. These are very wise words indeed. Whether sane people ruled by insane system will survive the latter is the whole different matter. But I am pretty sure that some will survive, when others will not.

Like Bill Moyers has said, it is not the new president that will change things, but the people. When Americans start to believe in democracy (after teaching themselves about it), that will happen.
Like my 22 year-old son (who is an Obama fan) has said, "A good president may not be able to change things for the good on his own, but a bad president can definitely screw things up!"
Out of all the Dem candidates, Obama is the only one that has any detail on their campaign website about serious diplomacy with Iran.
We all need to look at the big picture, and make sure we don't get another bad president; but in the meantime be educating ourselves and start acting like citizens of a democracy. No?

It is probably true that Iran is surrounded by countries with nuclear weapons (Israel, Pakistan and India), so why wouldn't they want to suggest, hint, that they too might someday get that capacity. But how likely are they to use them, given the overwhelming number of nuclear weapons possessed by the US (and Russia and who knows what other country), and the likelihood that if they did shoot any nuclear weapon at, say, Israel, that the US would in turn bomb them?

If they are developing nuclear power, they have the problem of waste disposal just like all the other countries. If they hope eventually to make weapons, it is surely at least three years in the future, probably more.

So why be so belligerent now and so stand-offish? Why not try to develop a relationship as time goes by so by the time the future gets here, they might reconsider that idea, and not bother to go forward? Why?

It does seem like a US attack on Iran may be coming.

Seymour Hersh and others have reported that plans are being readied and the Bush-Cheney administration wants to do it.

There may be many different outcomes from such an event. Some are discussed in:

"Will Bush, Cheney attack Iran? When and why?

PopulistAmerica.com
February 2, 2007

http://www.populistamerica.com/will_bush_cheney_attack_iran_when_and_why

- - -

"U.S. public relations on Iraq, Iran need truth and honesty"

PopulistAmerica.com
February 21, 2007

http://www.populistamerica.com/us_public_relations_on_iraq_iran_need_truth_and_honesty

If you think the Swift Boat Vets were crafty in their well funded effort against John Kerry, wait until you see what will happen when Republicans think they might lose the White House in 2008. It will be nasty, sexist, racist, homophobic, etc... with a bunch of well funded lies and smears.

The candidates are protecting their right flank to protect themselves against the smears so they have a better chance of taking power.

As citizens, we need to improve our democratic system so our candidates are not forced to run for President in an environment where well funded 30 second smear campaigns have the most sway.

No matter what they say during their campaigns (Bush once said he opposed nation building missions), we know that Hillary or Barack or John will make very different decisions compared to another four years of a GOP Presidency.

It is a difficult balance between what we want to hear and what candidates must say within the corrupt game of money politics and monopoly media.

MoveOn has done some wonderful things for the peace movement -- from the mobilization of thousands of citizen lobbyists to oppose Congressional authorization of the war to periodic campaigns linking activists and events around the country. But for some time now it has devoted itself principally to furthering the political ambitions of the Democratic Party. That would be all well and good if it confined itself to promoting the candidacies of anti-war and progressive Democrats, which is where it started out. But with the 2006 election, it climbed into bed with the Democratic leadership and become just another, but a very smart, yellow dog Democratic organization.

The truth is that the Democratic leadership, including its leading presidential hopefuls, don't have a strategy for ending the war in Iraq. They don't have a strategy for a more peaceful world and a more humble U.S. foreign policy. They only have a strategy for winning elections -- and not a very good one at that. As Laura Flanders points out, it amounts to ignoring (if not actively snubbing) their base in order to reach out to an imaginary "center" that is as likely to vote Republican as Democrat. That strategy will only alienate the very people the Democrats need in the streets at election time, and it can only lead to victory when the Republicans are so divided among themselves that they cannot put up a good fight.

In the meantime, we have presidential hopefuls committed to foreign policy business as usual -- militarism, bluster and intervention. Thanks Norman Solomon for laying out the dismal landscape.

This is what I find, over and over again, so scary. Where do we turn to stop this? I keep wanting to turn to the Democrats; I voted for Nader in 2000 only to find such a choice vilified--to find people saying any Nader voter had "blood on their hands" for helping Bush get in; so I voted Democratic in '04. (and I'm in an uncontested red state, so my vote doesn't mean anything anyway). I'm not shocked, but I am outraged. More than that, as I said, it's just scary. Where do we turn to stop this?????

Barack Obama says that the Iranian government is "a threat to all of us"

Threat to us all??? What is that Iranian Navy going to land on the East Coast and invade? Imaginary threats to motivate the population. This is basic propaganda, what a joke.

What of Isreal, Pakistan, India. You don't hear a work of their nuclear arsenal. None of which have signed the NPT, and of which Iran has signed. Absolute hipocracy!