Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
California Voters Souring on Democratic Congress, Field Poll Finds
California voters, disappointed that Congress has been unable to change policy in Iraq, are now giving federal lawmakers their lowest approval rating of the past decade, according to a Field Poll released today.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also is taking it on the chin. Her popularity with state voters has tumbled as Democrats and independents grow impatient with her party's inability to force the White House to start to bring home U.S. troops, the poll showed.
Just 20 percent of California voters approve of Congress' performance, while 66 percent disapprove. That's worse than the 23 percent approval rating state voters gave the Republican-led Congress in May 2006 before the GOP lost its decadelong control in the November elections. It's the lowest rating for Congress since the Field Poll started asking the question in 1996.
"It's a historic low, and I think the main driver has to do with disappointment with the war," said Mark DiCamillo, who directs the poll. "The reason Congress changed hands in the last election was to try to send a signal to change the administration's policy in Iraq. To this point, the Congress has not been at all effective in that regard."
In March, two months after Democrats took power, voters appeared more optimistic: Thirty-five percent of state voters approved of Congress' performance, while an even stronger 47 percent backed the job Democratic lawmakers were doing.
That support has evaporated quickly: Now, only 33 percent of voters support the job Democrats in Congress are doing, while 54 percent disapprove.
The only consolation for Democratic lawmakers is that they aren't quite as loathed as their GOP counterparts. Only 19 percent of California voters approve of the performance of the Republican minority in Congress, while 69 percent disapprove.
Pelosi, who took office in January with great fanfare and a pledge to start bringing U.S. troops home, has seen her personal approval rating fall from a high of 48 percent in the March poll to 39 percent in the new poll.
It is mostly Democrats and independents who have grown sour. In March, 64 percent of Democrats and 55 percent of independents supported Pelosi; now just 56 percent of Democrats and 36 percent of independents back her. (GOP support for Pelosi fell slightly, from 24 to 19 percent.)
"It's primarily a fallout among Democrats and nonpartisans," DiCamillo said. "They are looking for some concrete results, and they haven't seen any changes in policy."
Pelosi insists Democrats have tried to force the White House's hand, but have been stymied by Bush's veto pen, opposition from most Republicans and the thin Democratic majorities, especially in the Senate, which make it tough even to start a debate over a timeline for withdrawal.
"People are very frustrated, and we share their frustration at the inability to end the war," Brendan Daly, Pelosi's communications director, said Thursday. "Republicans have stubbornly stuck by the president's failed stay-the-course strategy, although some of them have started to break from that message."
Daly pointed to Virginia Republican Sen. John Warner, a former chairman of the Armed Services Committee and Navy secretary, who urged Bush on Thursday to announce a small withdrawal of troops to signal to Iraqis that U.S. forces won't be there forever.
Warner became the most recent of a handful of Republican senators who have urged a troop pullout. The White House reacted coolly to Warner's statements, saying a withdrawal discussion is "inappropriate."
In a recent Field poll, 58 percent of voters said they want Congress to pass legislation requiring Bush to start pulling American troops out of Iraq this spring. But Bush has pledged to veto any timelines, and Democrats don't have the votes to override his veto.
Anti-war activists want Democrats to refuse to pass any spending bills that continue to pay for the war effort. Democrats are split over the idea, with many fearing the consequences in Iraq and political fallout of cutting off money while troops are still fighting.
The Field Poll's results mirror the findings of national polls showing declining support for the Democratic Congress. This week, a Gallup poll found Congress' ratings the lowest since the group started asking the question in 1974 - 18 percent approval, 76 percent disapproval. It tied a low reached in 1992, when Congress was embroiled in a check-bouncing scandal that led many states to pass term-limit laws.
The Field Poll found a bright spot for California's two Democratic senators. While the approval ratings for Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer dipped slightly, they continue to receive better marks than the rest of Congress or the president.
Feinstein, who has long been among the most popular California elected officials, saw her job approval fall from 61 percent in March to 56 percent in the current poll. Boxer's support slipped from 54 to 48 percent.
DiCamillo said both senators saw their ratings spike when Democrats took power, as many state voters were excited about the possibilities of a new Congress.
"The ratings have settled back to where they historically were - which for them is not bad," he said.
The poll of 536 registered voters, conducted Aug. 3-12, has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points.
FIELD POLL: APPROVAL RATINGS FOR CALIFORNIA LAWMAKERSMarch 48%
August 39%
March 54%
August 48%
March 61%
August 56%
E-mail Zachary Coile at zcoile@sfchronicle.com.
© 2007 The San Francisco Chronicle
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


91 Comments so far
Show AllWill there ever come a time when this nation is governed by grownups?
I'll try again. I posted two comments on Naomi Kleins article today and neither one took.???
Abbeywood: I watched Bill Maher before and Tim Robbins was great! Bill does his usual thing and the show was okay. Not one of the memorable ones, though.
Rebel Farmer: I think Maher's show on HBO is on the internet, because he usually says at the end of each show to go online for a chat or something. Play around and see what you come up with.
If I have to write in the name of Dennis Kucinich on the paper ballot which I request, I will, as he is the best of the candidates. By the way, as most of us are Kucinich supporters, listen up. On Sept. 12th, Ed Schultz is having Kucinich on for the three full hours of his radio show, and he welcomes callers. Check out the time and date in your time zone, as you can listen to big Ed's show on audio streaming.
I live in California, and have been outraged at these three legislative "enablers" of the Bush Regime for the past six years. I use to call their offices and send emails, but it is just a waste of my energy and time.
Like others, I am advocating peaceful strikes, and am spreading the word to at least start a one day action by not working or buying anything on Sept. 11. Can you imagine millions across the nation staying home or getting together with neighbors or like-minded folk and just relaxing and planning the next action? We will struggle together and shut the country down until the tyrants are out of power. Until the Constitution and the Bill Of Rights is restored and enforced, and our armed forces are brought back home and will no more be used for imperial ambitions, Until we have health care like our neighbors in Canada and Western Europe, until our pensions are fully restored, until the right to be in a union is respected and made easy, until every illegal and legal bill and signing statement that Dufus signed be ruled null and void and rescinded, we'll stay on the streets until this "mission is accomplished".
Peace, brothers and sisters. Workers of the World, Unite!
And this Political Ccoommercial has been brought to you by the Conservative Party/Republicans.
The ones that loje to devide neighbor against neighbors .so their puppeteers can grow richer .
People think before yoou go shouting down the Democrats. This was how Bush and company got in in the first place.
As far as a new party (What A Joke)all you will do is give the repubs an automatic win.
You want change work within and together
The Democratic Party had their hands tied, but they could have tried harder with some commitment.
Feinstein is the one who should be replaced.
I cannot tell if she is a Demo or a Republican these days. In the end, better to have a Demo than a Republican.
Anybody who claims that voting for a third party is throwing your vote away is simply making a SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY. Don't you understand? It's not about making change. It's about doing what you believe in. What happened to people who just did what they believe in? Why has everyone sold out?
53 electoral votes and there is talk about awarding these votes according to congressional district voters during presidential campaigns. Seems like another attempt by GOP to rig the game. Ironically, there is no call for such "electoral vote" reform for Texas or Florida. But yes, overall DEMS are a pretty sad group right now. At least the GOP keeps in goose step discipline, no matter how misguided the policy.
The shameless ruling elite would have never allowed Nancy Pelosi to get in power, if she was any threat to their establishment.
We're in desperate need a revolution... for peace, truth, justice & genuine democracy
Anxiously awaiting the total collapse of the empire's vulgar economic and political system,
Max
Well, the news lately suggests a division in the GOP (John Warner R-VA) suggesting the start of a pullout.
The real hope for ending the war may be within the Republican Party. There's signs of division there, whereas the Democrats seem united on doing nothing, taking the lead from the Republicans, or soothing us with rhetoric while the real decisions are being made in the other party?
Rebel Farmer August 24th, 2007 5:42 pm
"There is an elephant in the room, and it ain't a Republican or just the occupation of Iraq. Its the Constitution in chains, lying on the floor in its death throws. There is a monster at the door called the Unitary Executive that no one in Congress seems obliged to confine to the rule of law. It is an out of control animal in the DOJ that does not protect the Bill of Rights, and the Congress does NOTHING!
Congress has refused to use any of the tools in their Constitutional arsenal to represent and protect the people or the democracy of this country."
I believe it was William Shirer who said something to the effect that the United States will be the "first" country where fascism takes hold through democratic elections.
It seems the Unitary Executive is not the only monster at our door.
Dems out of touch, indeed. The other night, Stephen Colbert mentioned that pelosi has forbidden dems from appearing on his show!
Since colbert's show is very popular, and since he includes as guests right wingers and cons, what is pelosi afraid of? Of all the horrors today, the idea that the dems cower, on all fours, to the likes of limbaugh and o'reilly, and run from even their own shadow, is the thing that disturbs me most.
Stop begin afraid of criticism, nancy. Until you guys make yourselves MORE visible, not less; until you DEFINE THE DEBATE and RESPOND HEAD ON to MSM lies; until you TEACH and ENLIGHTEN Americans about your positions; until you begin to STAND UP for the citizens of this country--you, the democratic leadership, will be the entity most responsible for enabling a fascist dictatorship.
Unbelievably, holding impeachment hearings in order to investigate and stand up to this administration--never mind the outcome--is the most rational option we have to fight the coming fascism.
If DK is not nominated, then write him in!
More Dems out to lunch, this time Hilary echoing Republican talking points:
""It's a horrible prospect to ask yourself, 'What if? What if?' But if certain things happen between now and the election, particularly with respect to terrorism, that will automatically give the Republicans an advantage again, no matter how badly they have mishandled it, no matter how much more dangerous they have made the world," Clinton told about 100 people Thursday. "I think I'm the best of the Democrats to deal with that as well."
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/08/25/clinton_words_on_terror_surprise_some/
Our most popular solutions, the Greens, Kucinich and Mike Gravel's National Initiative are long shots, but there may be a way to turn this fascism on it's head right now:
How about we the people incorporate into a for-profit corporation with each present and future citizen as an equal shareholder of non-transferable stock? Instead of having an administration owned by other corporations and financial institutions like we do now, we the people would own our governing corporation! As equal shareholders we could all meet (online, by phone, by mail and in person) and vote to hire and fire our corporation's administration if they don't provide the maximum economic, health, education and environmental benefits to all of us.
I'll be pleased to know what intelligent people here think about this idea.
Contrary to common belief even among the educated, (Aldous) Huxley and (George) Orwell did not prophesy the same thing. Orwell warns that we will be overcome by externally imposed oppression. But in Huxley's vision, no Big Brother is required to deprive people of their autonomy, maturity and history. As he saw it, people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think." Neil Postman, 1985
Democrats=enablers.
Sorry people we need to throw them all out. America does need viable 3rd, 4th,and 5th parties. Every other western industrialized country has them. Why the hell we put up with this sham of a democracy I don't know.
Published on Friday, May 27, 2005 by CommonDreams.org
Nancy Pelosi Gives a Pep Talk to AIPAC
The Democratic leader in her own words
by Mark Gaffney
Rep. Nancy Pelosi's recent speech to the Israeli-American lobby (AIPAC) ought to be a clarion call for peace activists. Her address did not contain any big surprises. But it is, nonetheless, remarkable for its transparency. The speech (see below for the text) affords a up-close look at what Pelosi thinks about Israel, the Palestinians, the Mideast, and nukes.
It's worth a look too because Pelosi's beliefs on these matters are not a departure. Most of the Democratic Party leadership espouse similar ideas. The bipartisan voting record of Congress in recent years on Mideast issues proves this to be the case. Remember, this is the party that's supposed to represent the grassroots, i.e., we the people. So what is the Democratic leader of the House doing, anyway, giving a pep talk to the second largest lobby in Washington? Indeed, to the lobby of a foreign power? It's a question more Americans ought to be asking.
Most of the speech is the same old stuff. I draw your attention only to several points:
Pelosi denies that the key issue is Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza --- at a stroke repudiating numerous UN Security Council Resolutions that the US voted for and supposedly still supports. But clearly, that's no longer the case, and hasn't been for many years.
The real issue, she states, is the survival of Israel. This is the familiar mantra by which anything and everything becomes possible. Only, there's a minor catch: The statement isn't true and hasn't been since probably 1949.
If nothing else, Pelosi is well-versed. She recites another familiar line, the one about how there was no partner for peace until Arafat expired, when light suddenly came flooding in. Pelosi makes it clear that in her view the Palestinian leader Abbas' real job is to serve as policeman for Israel. Evidently, his legitimacy largely depends on this. Looking after the best interests of his own people comes in a distant second.
But her most revealing statements concern nuclear proliferation, and they show why the Democrats (who don't get it) are no improvement over the Republicans (who always get it wrong). In fact, the Democrats may be even more dangerous, precisely because there is still the perception in the land, however mistaken, that the Democrats are the party of enlightened ideas. I would be willing to bet that most registered democrats are not aware of how extreme their elected Democratic representatives are on these key issues. Nor can most thus have a true sense of how dire the situation is.
According to Pelosi, the biggest danger to Israel today comes from Iran, whose nuclear ambitions, though still unproved, also threaten the US. Her perspective contains the seed of ominous things to come, because, after all, something will have to be done about Iran, right? Yes, and soon.
Meanwhile, Pelosi manages to overlook Israel's brutal treatment of the Palestinians, which undoubtedly is the greatest danger to Israel, by far, and comes from within. Nor does she mention Israel's massive nuclear, chemical and biological weapons arsenal. But her statements additionally contain the tacit and troublesome assumption that the only people in the region who matter are Israelis and Americans. Everyone else, virtually the entire population of numerous countries, though no less imperiled by nuclear weapons (arguably even more so), simply don't count in this calculus. In fact, Pelosi's remarks are implicitly racist for this reason.
The shocker, though, also near the end, is where Pelosi takes the US and Israeli nuclear monopoly in the region for granted, as if this were a good and necessary thing. The purpose of the NPT in her view is to shut down the rogue proliferators, who by definition are always those other guys, never us. It's the stuff of which nuclear nightmares are made. I would also bet that the vast majority of people who live in the Mideast take sharp issue with Pelosi's thinking, and probably have a bone to pick with her about where the actual threat lies.
George Washington, our founding father, who warned against entangling alliances, must be turning over, about now. But don't take my word for it. Read Pelosi's speech (which follows) and draw your own conclusions.
Mark Gaffney is the author of Dimona: the Third Temple?, a pioneering 1989 book about Mordechai Vanunu and the Israeli nuke program. Mark's latest book is Gnostic Secrets of the Naassenes. Mark can be reached for comment at mhgaffney@sbcglobal.net
###
What about those of us who would loose our jobs by not working on Sept. 11? What about those of us who don't have the money to leave work and camp out in Washington until something is done? Even those of us who didn't buy into the insane mortgage economy and who don't have credit card debt are underemployed and wondering how to pay for healthcare and still try to save some money for a retirement that we're probably never going to be able to afford anyway. Simple economics limits the activism of a lot of people.
Dems didn't need to control congress to stop Bush before their victory in 06. They always had at least 40 senators to filibuster anything they chose to. But of course they never stopped Bush, since that would be like stopping one of their own.
The Democratic Part has no reason to exist. We don't need a Third Party, we need a SECOND.
I hope this news puts to rest any doubts about the viability of Cindy Sheehan's independent candidacy against Pelosi.
I can always count on Dem's to give me the shaft; but unlike Rep's, at least they smile when they're doing it.
Balderdash to anyone who thinks we have a legit two-party system.
ezeflyer, if we incorporate the US government, does that mean we inherit the $9 trillion debt as well? The corporations and the rich (admittedly the same) have emptied our wallets, so wouldn't they just run away with the money?
N. Pelosi does not appear to be genuine whenever she speaks. I do not see much difference between her and Hillary Clinton. They both are very good stage actors. In the Bible such people are called "HYPOCRITES".
THEREFORE, IT IS NOT SURPRISING THAT SHE HAS ALREADY FORGOTTEN WHAT SHE SHOUTED FROM THE STAGE ON THE DAY OF DEMOCRAT VICTORY. THIS IS WHAT IS EXPECTED OF ANY ACTOR ONCE HE/SHE CLIMBS DOWN THE STAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!
There are millions of people wanting to see Nancy Peloski take the impeachmment out of the bottom drawer. We must impeach her then we can get to President Cheny and Herr Bush
Colonel Murtha please step in, we need you now.Another former Marine Officer.
gesneri
I guess you just don't want peace badly enough. enjoy your job and home while they allow you to keep it.
Who are the 39% who like her?
REVOLUTION not EVOLUTION
To Jerremy West: Which socialist party out of the many?
To many others who will vote for Kucinich: What chances do you give Kucinich to be nominated? If he is not nominated (DMC and DLC will make it certain it does not happen) will he be true to his convictions and abandon the Denocratic party or, as he did last time, he will declare "party loyalty" and support the nominee of the democratic party regardless of who the nominee is and regardless of his program. Then all of you will have spend your energy for nothing and one more time you will fall into the trap of the "two" party system. Kucinich must clarify his position NOW. Will he declare his independence if he is not nominated? YES or NO?
A third option for all of you: Form a Peoples's Movement of all the socialist and progressive parties,
and social movements and organizations, who constitute the majority of the population. Run for commonly accepted goals, such as: End of the War;Demilitarization of Foreign Policy and International Disarmament; Defence of the Constitution by repealing all the enacted fascist laws and by impeaching Bush and Chenny; Economic justice and living wages; one payer universal health care and free education and any of the other demands included in the proposal of Jerremy Wells. Let Cindy Sheehan and many other tested and able activist ascend to the leadership of such a People's Movement. And if Dennis Kucinich is willing to abandon the Democratic Party
and join the Movement, that will be great.
Your comments will be very valuable contributions in developing a comprehensive thinking process for such an important subject. Perghaps the most important subject.
Pelosi PAP! No bill$; no veto. Senatorial filibusters and secret holds; no war funds, period. Not to mention taking the fight from the Bushists by Impeaching The Malignant Fascists Already!
To vangelaras,
As far as which socialist party, I suggest you do some research
and look at the various parties' platforms and ideology. Pick
one which most closely matches your own values. For me, the Socialist Party USA was good match. Check out their website at
http://sp-usa.org
When looking at socialist parties, you need to learn some new concepts and vocabulary. For example, 'democratic centralism' and 'vanguard party' are important in some organizations. Find out about those concepts and see if you agree with them. If so, then join, if not, find another group which is a better match.
Wikipedia is provides an accessible introduction to many of these groups and concepts. This is also a useful website:
http://reds.linefeed.org/groups.html
Good Luck,
WhiteRose
Resist Now!
TO: vangelaras August 25th, 2007 8:53 pm
RE: To Jerremy West: Which socialist party out of the many?
1. I do not advocate joining or trying to use any existing "third party" or existing "socialist party". They are all tiny, some so ideological that their ideas are almost incomprehensibe and even inappropriate to average Americans.
2. If Kucinich would joing with Cindy Sheehan (and many others) in calling for a founding convention of anew party (political movement) to be organized, it would welcome by everyone. DK has already lost, as he lost in 2004. But he is perhaps financially and intellectually "locked in" to the Democratic Party. I am not optomistic about this!
3. Your notion, instead of using a "third party" is basically what I am saying: "A third option for all of you: Form a Peoples's Movement of all the socialist and progressive parties, and social movements and organizations, who constitute the majority of the population."
The basic elements meeded to found a People's Movement (New Party) already exists. The basic elements needed: MILLIONS OF PEOPLE, who are well-educated in THOUSANDS of single-issue groups. We need a new political "umbrella" organization that will unite these elements into the new Movement (Party).
(These groups would not loose their indivudal group identity, but become supporters and activists of the new (organization) as a logical extension of their own work.)
Who are these people and movements and what issues?
(I will throw out some names only as example, impossible to
list all the organizations or people here!)
* GLOBAL WARMING: Many academic and scientific organizations have issued papers, warnings, etc. Such as Earth Policy Institute, — Lester Brown, President. WE MUST START NOW TO CONVERT TO AN ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY.
* ENVIORNMENT GROUPS - Many! such as NRDC National Resources Defense Council Robert F.Kennedy Jr. Many groups.
* ANTI-WAR, OUT OF IRAQ!, CONVERSION TO A PEACE-TIME ECONOMY-
ETC. End the Project for the New American Century. Cut the bloated and corrupt military budget by 50%. Shut down the over 700 military bases around the world that soak up Billions of dollars in money needed here. Restore the Bush tax-cuts to the wealthy individuals and corporations.
* The new federal government should end the privatized monetary control of the federal government. Money for the needs of the people, not for corrupt profiteering of the military-industrial complex to bemefit a few from unending war budgets!)
* Labor Unions and working people. Absolutely! Although the union leadership is very conservative at present, I think many union people realize that our living standards are plummeting. They would welcome a switch from the Democrats, who have taken their union dues money and provided little or nothing in return.
* UNIVERSAL SINGLE-PAYER HEALTH INSURANCE
* HUMAN RIGHTS, CIVIL RIGHTS, ECONOMIC RIGHTS FOR ALL PEOPLE.
This includes all undocumented working people. This is essential if we are to end poverty. End the vicious class-war that is turning this country into a third world country.
* END NAFTA, CAFTA, ETC. TREATIES. These were written to promote the profit of multi-national corporations, at the expesne of millions of people in Central America.
* MANY OTHER REFORMS TOO MANY TO LIST OR EVEN THINK ABOUT!
i.e. PRISON REFORM AND REPLACEMENT WITH TREATMENT (Mental health, drug addiction,etc), EDUCATION, REHABILITATION CENTERS, ETC.
* JOBS at a LIVING WAGE! There are many things that need to be done that provides millions of jobs to working people. The INFRASTRUCTURE of the country, after years of neglect (Katrina, MN bridge,etc.),is collapsing. We need a national urban plan to create massive affordable housing, public transportation to phase out and minimize auto traffic, create liveable unpolluted urban areas, etc.
*SUPPORT, MAINTAIN, AND EXPAND SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICARE, ETC.
THERE ARE TWO MAIN POINTS HERE:
1.THAT THE NEEDS MILLIONS OF PEOPLE (THE MAJORITY) HAVE BEEN ABSOLUTELY NEGLECTED BY BOTH DEMOCRATIC AND REPUBLICAN PARTIES.
THE MONIES NEEDED FOR THESE ESSENTIAL GOVERNMENT AND SOCIETAL PROGRAMS HAVE BEEN STOLEN BY THE CORRUPTION OF THE MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX, TO PROFIT AN EVER INCREASING TINY MINORITY.
2. THAT MANY AND VARIOUS GROUPS AND INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THESE PROBLEMS FOR YEARS! THEY NOW HAVE DEVELOPED HUGE AMOUNTS OF EXPERTISE AMONG THEIR MEMBERS. THIS EXPERTISE CAN BE TRANSLATED INTO THE PLATFORM OF THE NEW PARTY (MOVEMENT).
THESE SAME PEOPLE WOULD BE NATURAL CANDIDATES FOR ELECTED OFFICE AND FOR APPOINTMENT TO CABINET LEVEL DEPARTMENTS. SUCH PEOPLE WOULD BE RECRUITED INTO THE STAFFS OF A NEW GOVERNMENT.
THIS TAKING OF POWER SHOULD BE AT EVERY LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT FROM FEDERAL TO STATE TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
I THINK THE UN-LEASHING OF THIS IMMENSE POTENTIAL WOULD REALLY BE A RENAISSANCE REVOLUTION ... FOR THIS COUNTRY AND THE WORLD!
WE MUST DO THIS NOW! WE MUST DO THIS BEFORE BUSH/CHENEY DROWN US INTO ANOTHER WAR (IRAN) ABROAD AND TOTALITARIAN DICATATORSHIP AT HOME!
(IMPROBABLE YOU SAY? THIS COUNTRY IS ON THE VERGE OF ECONOMIC COLLAPSE TODAY. IF THERE WERE SOME NATURAL CALAMITY (such as a MAJOR earthquake in LA) IT WOULD BE THE OPPORTUNISTIC MOMENT TO SEIZE POWER INDEFINATELY.)
Cindy Sheehan --- There are thousands of well-educated people in "grass roots" activist organizations ready, willing and able to support you in re-making the country and the planet!
There are MILLIONS of people looking for some glimmer of hope, some action to take place, some self-education we must all do to make this happen.
An understanding of the economy (capitalism) and how it is now working to destroy the people and the planet is essential. A new form of social demcracy, economic democracy, social equality, some form of democratic socialism is needed now.
Thanks for reading.
Jeremy Wells
jeremy@infowells.com
I think it is pretty obvious what is taking place, anyone knows that power comes from those who control the money and that is a private institution called The Federal Reserve!
I bet the founders of this country is turning in their graves!
#
kathyodat said:
"ezeflyer, if we incorporate the US government, does that mean we inherit the $9 trillion debt as well? The corporations and the rich (admittedly the same) have emptied our wallets, so wouldn't they just run away with the money?"
If we incorporate the US government, we the shareholding public can decide who inherits what debt and it will likely not be us but the criminals who stole our money. And we the people can decide to make them pay.
If Nancy Pelosi doesn't understand that announcing that impeachment is off the table is the reason she can't get past Busholini's veto pen, she doesn't know jack squat about strategy. Her annoncement was nothing short of a Green light to BushCo to do whatever the hell he wants. She doesn't have the smnarts to be Speaker of the House for long, unless we have Martial law and no more elections, then she'll hang in there, I guess.
(A restatement of proposal for founding a "new party".
The "New Party" proposal above is not a proposal to create a new "third" party. Nor is it a call to recruit the masses to any existing socialist or green party. All existing "socialist" parties are identified by their long history, complex ideology, and are focused on matters that are basically incomprehensible and irrelevant to American working people today.
The concern of most working people today is on the problems of personal survival. These "personal" problems have become mulitiple social and political crises.
Many hundreds of "single issue" groups , involving millions of individuals, are now actively trying to address these multiple crisis.
The Iraq war, global warming, lack of health insurance, lack of "living wage" jobs, affordable housing, credit card debt, sustainable energy concerns, prison reform, etc. ...single issues groups have involved millions of people.
The "new party" proposal seeks to create an "umbrella" organization, a socialist political party, to unite these efforts.
The "new party" is identified socialist because the common thread that unites these crisis is the realization that they are ultimately caused by the corporate capitalist economics and regime now in power.
The Democratic party is fully a partner in maintaining the system of corporate domination. Cindy Sheehan is one individual who has realized this and left the Democratic Party.
There would hopefully be a call to have a founding convention of the "new party", with representatives of the many organizations and actvist individuals, to end the rule of corporate capitalism, that is facilitated by the Democratic/Republican bi-partisan dictatorship.
At the founding convention a name for the "new party" can be democratically decided.
Through another story on CD I discovered this link:
http://www.pelosiwatch.org
Jeremy Wells,
"The "new party" proposal seeks to create an "umbrella" organization, a socialist political party, to unite these efforts."
Thanks for taking the time to envision socialist alternatives, and for actually coming up with real practical advise. WE NEED ACTION !
How about inviting all the leaders of the multiple socialists parties to meet as a first step ? What next ?
Its even worse:
They are out-Bushing Bush. They gave him MORE war funds than he even asked for, with no timeline. They EXPANDED his warrantless surveillance capabilities - plus effectively nullified that as an impeachment alternative.
Instead of accepting his various vetoes with a smiling 'That's your call Bushie - we are not sending you funds in another bill and we won't give you anything without a warrant' they bowed down and gave him everything.
They are disgraces....
Go Cindy Sheehan!
Pelosi blew it long ago.
And Hillary? As if she is in a class by herself, we are instructed to fall in line.
Still, Katha Pollitt, of "The Nation" pens one Cindy Sheehan put-down after another, which was published in the San Francisco Examiner and attacked in a recent WSWS piece. And rags like "The Nation" have the audacity to whine about a weak and ineffective anti-war movement.
To Jeremy Wells,
I checked your website (http://www.infowells.com), and it has links (URL's) to the Socialist Equality Party (SEP) and the World Socialist Web Site (WSWS), but no other socialist organizations. Given that, it would seem that you are a supporter of that Party and the ICFI. This is OK, but I am having trouble understanding why then you are proposing a new umbrella socialist organization on Commondreams. It seems a little contradictory to seemingly endorse a particular party on one hand, but on Commondreams, discount existing parties, and propose a new group. Do you think the SEP's analysis or political program is lacking in some way? What is your strategy?
Just looking for clarification.
What is hard for me to fathom is the continuing high numbers for Feinstein. She is knee deep in conflict of interest problems with her husband's war profiteering. She voted for the war and for (self-serving) tax cuts for the wealthy. She makes big talk when it comes to fluff but is quietly in the background when she actually votes. All Democrat talk, no Democrat walk.