Hold Politicians’ Feet to the Fire
Fires rage through Southern California. Massive rainstorms drench New Orleans. The Southeast U.S., from Tennessee across the Carolinas and into Georgia, is in the midst of what could be the worst drought on record there. Atlanta could run out of water. While the press does an admirable job bringing us live images of extreme weather, it doesn’t explain why these events are happening. What links these crises? Global warming. Two words that have all too often been vacuumed off government Web sites and erased from government scientific studies.
If the press isn’t making the connection, Bill McKibben is. In 1989, he wrote the book “The End of Nature,” one of the first books to describe global warming as an emerging environmental crisis. Now, almost 20 years later, he is leading a campaign to draft mass grass-roots participation to publicize the potential catastrophe of climate change and to demand federal action to “Step It Up.” The first Step It Up day of action, April 14, 2007, organized in local communities through a central Web site, saw 1,400 coordinated activities pulled together in just three months. The second day of action is planned for Nov. 3, organized through the Web site stepitup2007.org.
“What’s important to remember and the reason that we spend all our time organizing now, trying to change all this, is that so far human beings have raised the temperature of the planet about one degree Fahrenheit,” says McKibben. “The computer modeling makes it very clear that before the century is out, unless we take very strong action, indeed, we’re going to raise the temperature of the planet another five degrees Fahrenheit. So, take whatever you see now, multiply it by five, and then toss in all those cascading effects that come, as we exceed one threshold after another.”
The cascade effect is what is so important to understand. How could one degree Fahrenheit make such a big difference? One immediate, measurable impact of that seemingly slight temperature rise, according to University of Arizona scientist Tom Swetnam, is the increase in the frequency and duration of large wildfires in the U.S. West. Swetnam and his team have linked a warming, drying trend since the 1980s to the incidence of fires, like the more than a dozen that are raging out of control in Southern California.
The predictions are not good. Trees take in carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, releasing oxygen. In his August 2006 Science article, Swetnam reports that western U.S. forests remove 20 percent to 40 percent of the carbon dioxide in the U.S. As forests burn, McKibben notes, carbon is released into the atmosphere. Fewer trees then remain to take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere, making warmer conditions, supporting more and longer fires, and so on, creating a positive feedback loop. A central warning of the scientific community is this: At some point, if Earth’s temperature rises much more, maybe three degrees, maybe six degrees, an irreversible feedback loop will overwhelm the planet’s climate, with cascading impacts leading to a warmer and warmer planet.
Corporate America is feeling the heat. Carbon-emitting industries like the oil companies, chastened by the experience of Big Tobacco and asbestos, see that in the future they might be held accountable-especially since they are funding junk science and “Astroturf” (i.e., fake grass-roots groups) to cast doubt about the effects of global warming. Insurance companies can’t afford to ignore the consequences of global warming, as extreme weather causes billions of dollars in damage.
McKibben and the Step It Up campaign lay out three basic demands:
- Green jobs now, for all: 5 million green jobs conserving 20 percent of our energy by 2015. Green jobs are those created by transforming the economy from a coal- and oil-burning one to a sustainable economy built on a new set of energy sources, ensuring that the same people left behind by the last economy are not left behind again.
- Cut carbon 80 percent by 2050: Freeze climate pollution levels now and cut at least 80 percent by 2050, and 30 percent by 2020.
- No new coal: a moratorium on new coal-fired power plants.
McKibben explains: “We need a movement as strong, as willing to sacrifice, as morally urgent, as passionate as the civil rights movement was a generation ago. If we don’t get it soon-and we have a real time limit here-if we don’t get it soon, then we’re not going to be able to force the changes that we need over the power of the very strong vested interests that would like to keep things the way they are, even though it’s now destabilizing the planet in the most powerful and most tragic ways.”
People are taking action. On Monday, 60 people were arrested in Washington, D.C., as part of the No War, No Warming days of action, linking the war in Iraq, post-Katrina recovery and climate change, and demanding action from Congress, holding elected officials’ feet to the fire. Humans are causing global warming. For a short time, we have a chance to limit the damage. But time is running out. Step it up.
Amy Goodman is the host of “Democracy Now!,” a daily international TV/radio news hour airing on 500 stations in North America.
© 2007 Amy Goodman
Impeach the cheerleader, save the world.
A few days ago Congressman Stark was a knight in shining armour, having blasted Bush, and rightfully so.
This House/Senate policy about having ‘respect’ for fellow congressional reps, Bush, etc, is crap! Bush, Cheney, and others
in the dictatorial regime deserve no respect.
I don’t know why good congressional dems and republicans aren’t willing to separate themselves from Bush/Cheney, and hold them accountable in a court of law for their crimes against American citizens and humanity.
We need more voices like Stark NOW before the pathetic deciders in charge DESTROY AMERICA.
What an embarrassment to our country when people like Stark and congressional reps cave in to dictators.
Yes IMPEACH NOW or many democrats and republicans are off the table as far as voters of either party are concerned. It may come as a surprize to Bush, Cheney, and congressional reps in general, but
ordinary citizens know The US Constition backwards and forwards; and I’ve heard it first hand at local township meetings on critical issues.
the (D)s don’t care because fundamentally there is little difference between them and the (R)s. and they believe they will get our votes because they keep hearing us say “well, whoever the (D)s put forward will be better than any (R).”
NO MORE!
if the (D)s do ALMOST as much damage as the (R) party, then i say let the (R)s rule for another 4 years and see if they don’t completely self-destruct, finally opening the door for 3d (and 4th and 5th) party candidates. meanwhile, maybe the steny hoyer/nancy pelosi/harry reid/clinton/kerry GOP-lites (i.e., the DLC crowd) will FINALLY get the message.
Also see bio-fuels for what they reaaly are: a scam to fill the pockets of corporate agribusiness, land speculators and taking food out of the mouths of people and into cars. The corporations have had plans on the shelf to steal the whole environmental movement using shills for the nuke industry, clean coal (imagine the gull), bio fuels and all this nonsense. The names, taxonomy, fake sciense and all is prepared for public consumption. British Petroleum (BP) is now beyond petroleum? Who are hey kidding? Beware!
Amy, how about more to expose these scams on your show?
kgarry,
Do the Democrats want to end net neutrality as the Republicans do? Do the Democrats want to allow even more media consolidation as the Republicans do? Do the Democrats want to make it more difficult for kids to afford college the way the Republicans do? Do the Democrats want to gut the Bill of Rights the way the Republicans do? Do the Democrats want to put a fifth fascist on the Supreme Court the way the Republicans do?
I too would love to punish the Democrats, as they are mostly feckless craven scum, but if progressives allow the Republicans the opportunity to destroy our means for improving our political position in the future, what have we gained by helping them?
I know there are good arguments on both sides (voting Democrat or third party), but either way it is a gamble, and there is no “slam-dunk” (though there are plenty of progressive George Tenets to make that claim).
Amy neglects a very important report that came out yesterday in the british press. The carbon sinks are no longer absorbing as much as they used to — ie, oceans (which are now so acidic they’re thinning lobster shells and causing a lot of problems for them). This indicates that we have reached the positive feedback loop from which, under current conditions of political will and technological innovation, there is no point of return. Meaning a serious state of ecological disequilibrium.
Bravo for the green jobs and cutting carbon. But it may not be enough. Also, there was a Rolling Stone piece featuring Lovelock who states as much.
Thank you kivals!
It’s good to acknowledge that the philosophical agenda of Democrats is not the same as Republicans. As for why voting for Democrats is better than voting for third parties, The Democrats CAN win. Not only that, one only needs to look at the term of Gov. Jesse Ventura to understand that third party candidates are not exactly empowered to do all the good things they want to do when they actually get to office. They end up bartering with party forces, just like every one else, and they soon discover that their legislative body is NOT made up of coalitions that will join them EXCEPT as Democratic gangs or Republican gangs.
As for Green concerns, per the article, environmentalists will find these days that there are quite a few disenchanted former Republican voters in the churches who will actually join them on voting for politicians who advance care for the earth, provided the far-left greens don’t get goosey about that and default to Christian-bashing so as to drive them away.
Stark has now recanted.
For reasons inexplicable, no one in the U.S. government dares stand up to the most distrusted president of the century.
Hold Politicians’ Feet to the Fire
When we’re ready to do that — LITERALLY — we may get somewhere.
Liberty & Justice,
sj
www.spartacusjones.com
Daniel David,
I think progressives generally hold one set of values, while mainstream Democrats hold a somewhat similar set of values with some significant overlap, and Republicans hold yet a different set of values that have some overlap with the values of mainstream Democrats and virtually no overlap with those of progressives.
What is really frustrating is watching progressives at CD, who hold almost identical values, get into nasty fights about strategies and tactics with regard to implementing a progressive vision, especially when it is far from possible to prove that any strategy or tactic is optimal, as they are based mostly on guesswork.
All this group identity, progressive, (D), (R) is so depressing. I refuse labeles like that. They narrow the discussion needlessly. Can one have some ideals in line with Progressives, some with (D) and some with (R), and retain some self respect? I am against greed, militarism, preemptive wars, fascism, zionism, globalization, the military industrial complex..but at the snme time for more state rights and individual righrts vs. fed. gov. over-reaches, and do not have a problem with the second amendment. I am suspisious of all these labels and group identities, which by definition are exclusive. I just can’t forget George Washington’s admonition to the nation about this on his way out, he warns against all party loyalties. He made a lot of sense to me. I do read the constitution ofetn enough to know what it says. And I like it. Why can’t I look at the positions of individual candidates regrdless of their party affiliation (I have none)? Hillary and Obama would not rule out troops out of Iraq by 2013, they would support nuclear power, they to go on pilgrimage to AIPAC, etc. etc. And I don’t want to go on an rant about the (R) candidates here. Are these labels helpful to me? I doubt it.
re Joel S. Hirschorn:
please do not listen to this bizarre argument. refusing to vote is not a form of punishment, it’s exactly the outcome (apathy) TPTB are striving to create. refusing to vote doesn’t mean the eventual winners have no “mandate,” it means they won with a smaller number of votes and have power anyway. refusing to vote will not restore our sovereignty (the Ds fumbled that away when they allowed shrub to steal the presidency twice.) refusing to vote is self-defeating narcissism and a slap in the face to all who have fought and died for the right to vote.
So, I’m sitting here watching the Democrats be the craven messenger boys for the Telecom industry. The Telecom industry is a bit worried that their massive, unconstitutional lawbreaking might end up costing them in court. So naturally they turn to the Democrats in Congress, to whom they’ve paid big bucks in bribes, uh contributions, and ask that they pass a law granting them retroactive immunity for unconstitutional actions that they knew were illegal at the time.
After watching almost the entire Democratic Senate decide to come rushing to the defense of these telecom companies, I’m now supposed to believe that the Democrats will oppose the Telecom companies when they say they can make more money without this pesky ‘net neutrality’ idea? Yeah right.
That ‘yeah right’ takes on extra meaning when you realize that both the consolidation of the media and the technical ability to do all this eavesdropping stem from the 1996 Telecom act that was supported by the Democrats in Congress and pushed for and signed by a Democrat President.
Please, give me a break. The Democrats will sell us out for a buck anytime, anyday, anywhere. If the telecom companies say ‘Jump!’, the only question the Democrats will ask is ‘how high?’
If you want a government that represents your interests, PLEASE STOP VOTING DEMOCRAT.
kivals,
I actually fall in with the goals of the progressives more than with those of the traditional Democrats. I just know at nearly 60 years old that Democrats can be elected and a whole slate of progressives cannot be. And, for that practical observation, I’m regularly attacked here as a Dem “shill” and other things.
But, as you say, watching the arguments at CD is “frustrating”. Half or more of the posters here are bent on griping their way into political self-destruction and irrelevance while name-calling the rest of us.
There’s even now some guy above with an out-sized post calling for us advocates from the left to boycott the elections. I’m gonna bet that you’re one who has enough life experience to know that conservatives don’t boycott elections. They simply outvote the naive sheep who fall for silly stunts. And that’s the danger.
kivals
Thanks for your post.
I’ve heard a lot here saying they won’t vote for the Dems and understandably they don’t deserve the vote based on their performance as of late, but I have yet to hear a good argument as to why voting third party would yield a better result for our country in the next 4 years and beyond.
Many scientists believe we are at, beyond or near a point of no return ecologically. We have most likely reached peak oil and it’s nearing $90 a barrel. The Supreme court can’t handle another conservative.
Joel S. Hirschhorn
Where’s your proof that you will successfully pull off a majority of the populace to not vote by 2008? How do you plan to rally such a plan practically?
If the answer is so, or none, this is mere fantasy and your argument is moot.
Please all you no voters or 3rd party candidates provide your realistic speculation of the 2008 election and the 4 years to follow.
Third parties have had 8 years to get their shit together for this election and they’re no where near a formidable force to challenge the powers that be, though I wish they were.
Hassan,
I think those labels can aid in communication and provide shorthand methods for conveying a great deal of information, though they are certainly inexact and messy. My stab at comparing/contrasting progressive (P) values with mainstream Democratic (D) values would be, in a short list:
P: universal health care is a right, meaning universal insurance on a Medicare model;
D: requirement of everyone to have health insurance, using private insurers, with some government help for the low-income;
P: corporate capitalism almost inevitably leads to polarization of income, benefiting the few at the expense of the many, and to the corruption of the political system and the culture;
D: corporate capitalism can be very positive and healthy if it is sufficiently regulated and controlled;
P: “free markets” are actually predatory markets or rigged markets that benefit the well-connected and the most unprincipled and ruthless;
D: “free markets” are difficult to create and maintain but to the extent they are created they benefit humankind as they reward productive behavior and thus make it more common;
P: the US should shut down the empire, immediately withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan (to be replaced by international non-US forces from the region), and close virtually all US bases on foreign soil, and cut the military budget by 75+ percent;
D: the US has a duty to police the world and so the defense spending should stay the same, and the bases should stay, but the US should withdraw from Iraq and renounce the policy of preemption;
P: the US should immediately stop spying on Americans, repeal the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act, stop all torture and close Guantanamo and any secret prisons, and stop the use of rendition;
D: the US government has an interest in monitoring communications, so it should consider revisions to FISA and modify the Military Commissions Act and the Patriot Act;
P: the US should move immediately to gather together all nuclear nations to begin talks on the implementation of total nuclear disarmament;
D: the US should not make it worse by motivating non-nuclear countries to become nuclear;
P: the US should immediately become signatories to treaties banning landmines, setting up the international criminal court, and banning child labor;
D: support banning child labor;
P: the US should begin a worldwide conference to sign an international treaty to significantly reduce CO2;
D: the US should move cautiously in reducing CO2 emissions, considering costs to the US economy;
P: the US should immediately stop using DU munitions and should set up a team to recover DU from Iraq;
D: none
P: the US should stop backing the Likud position in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and adopt an even-handed approach;
D: whatever AIPAC wants;
P: huge investments in solar and other renewable energy are long overdue, with the provision of significant incentives for consumers, and a moratorium on nuclear and coal plants is advisable;
D: all energy options are on the table;
P: every child should have equal educational opportunities;
D: every child should have quality educational opportunities, though the wealthy should be able to send their kids to superior schools and colleges;
and on and on.
All of us want to participate but sometimes not participating feels like the only option. None of us want to feel powerless, but increasingly we are with a government that fails to represent the country–or claims, as Hillary does of Murduch, that special interests that act against the common good, are just constituients like any other on an equal footing.
What do you say Daniel David? Somewhere, sometime, someone has to be the first to say No, we are not going to accept this anymore. Otherwise, where is the incentive to ever change? Everything will continue on the road we are presently on- the Democrats just drive slower. Is that okay with you?
Gore/Nader Green Party 2008! Am I clutching at straws here?
ezeflyer,
Unfortunately I believe you are.
I am astounded at the haze obscurring people’s sight. So if you don’t like what republicans have done then give them another four years so they can make things worse and this will accomplish what exactly? Oddly one would think a republican might posit the argument that the way to teach the dems a lesson is by voting republican? Nah …I must be too suspicious!
Amy writes (oh yeah gee whiz …her article was actually about global warming posters…ahem) reminds us we haven’t much time. There is never enough time when it is already too late. Depressing? Not really. We will soon see just why too late is actually really quite different from doing too little when it is too late …until it worsens and you need to do too much and find you can’t. Think of a kid playing with matches and starts a fire. It’s too late to stop the fire from starting but now imagine doing too little to put it out and it blazes up and causes the building to burst into a conflagration.
Now imagine that building is the firehouse!
Now imagine that burning firehouse is near San Diego and a forest fire ignites. Depressing?
Now imagine people allowing the global warming denying republicans the white house again. Okay that is really depressing.
What a joke. They don’t count the votes people! It will be whomever they choose in 2008, not who is elected by the people, unless of course by some fluke we actually elect the same one they control. It was clear with Gore and Kerry what is up.
One party, world government, of by and for the corporations in the flavor of Enron, the Carlyle Group and Haliburton and Blackwater. Despicable trade deals designed to empower the powerful at the expense of what is in the best interests of the people worldwide.
The world bank, imf, cia, nsa, kgb, etc., the lot of them need to be diffused, disbanded, leaders prosecuted, jailed. But how do you even begin to diffuse a worldwide mob? WWIII? Bush is right - bring em on, but on him. Pure scum. Pure evil. Cheney. Bush. Rumsfeld. Dead and in hell. Picture it, everyone.
kivals,
“while mainstream Democrats hold a somewhat similar set of values with some significant overlap”
True - but it’s not about the overlap, that’s a given. It’s about being told for well over 15 years now to piss off and go away, when in fact progressives make up a large part of the left wing of the Democratic Party. You wouldn’t guess that though from the duck and cover attitudes from so many so-called leaders in the DP. The abysmal approval rating of Congress is a wake up call; scoring lower than the White House pretty much speaks for itself - they were given a mandate, and they’re waffling. Time for a change.
Sometimes in the movies (like the classic “Stagecoach”) there’s a female character who’s pregnant. When she goes into labor, they send the husband/father out to boil water.
We never see them USING the water for anything. I think it’s just to give him something to do, keep him busy and out of the way while the doctor/midwife/whoever actually does the delivery. But it gives the dummy a sense of participating in some important way.
Seems to me voting is a lot like that.
Gives you something to do, keeps you busy and out of the way and gives you a sense of participating in some important way.
But it has nothing to do with what gets delivered.
Liberty & Justice,
SJ
www.spartacusjones.com
Viability and a plausible chance of winning are needed for a third party to do little more than deliver the election to another gang for rape and plunder. As a strategic ploy it may be best to support the Dems in hope that the Repugs with tear themselves apart over “conservative social and moral issues”. If they don’t dissolve perhaps more of the electorate will reject their dogma.
Given that the public has progressive leanings we need a non-strident presentation of positions which will expose the Dem-Repug club for what they truly are. Positions stated in a manner will will withstand swiftboating and bumper sticker catch phrases. A long tiring journey, but worth it should the opportunity preent itself.
Inute the movement at http:// peacesource.net
We need a movement as strong, as willing to sacrifice, as morally urgent, as passionate as the civil rights movement was a generation ago. If we don’t get it soon-and we have a real time limit here-if we don’t get it soon, then we’re not going to be able to force the changes that we need over the power of the very strong vested interests that would like to keep things the way they are, even though it’s now destabilizing the planet in the most powerful and most tragic ways.”
“Third parties have had 8 years to get their shit together for this election and they’re no where near a formidable force to challenge the powers that be, though I wish they were.”
This has not happened in a vacuum. The Democrats have stifled the Greens and anyone outside their party at every turn.
If you’re going to point your finger at anyone, get in the picture, else you’re merely being disingenuous.
Government has nothing to do with changing anything that matters.
http://tulcidious.blogspot.com
voting for politicians is useless, the dems are no different than the reps and any potentially progressive third party candidate doesn’t stand a chance in this rigged race. in america the only chance you have of making a change is voting with your dollars. try not to support immoral, unjust corporations and banks. maybe we can affect them…but most likely not. i guess we’ll have to wait for them to self destruct.
Your team, the Democrats, don’t represent your interests.
They won’t end the war.
They won’t provide single payer universal health care.
They won’t bring charges against the criminals in this white house.
They won’t represent the workers by demanding we stop outsourcing jobs to all areas that have cheap labor.
They won’t investigate all the corruption in no bid contracts.
I could go on and on.
Tell me why would you vote for a party that does not represent your interests? I don’t get it. It is not logical.
Do you just want to feel like you have won something, anything. Like when your team wins the Super Bowl. You have not really won anything but you can say, “that is my team.”
Your wages have not gone up. Your children’s college education has not gotten cheaper. Your health care has not become universal. But hey, my team, who does not represent my interests, has won.
OK
I agree with spartacus jones and bluesky. Put their feet to the fire or burn them at the stake. But the government will never change except to become more Fascist with every passing hour.
Let’s not waste our time deciding between Coke and Pepsi. Democrats or Republicans, they only represent two versions of the same thing.
“Feet to the Fire?”
Yawn,
Wake me when you get to “Burn at the Stake!”
It’s the money.
As long was our elections are all about who can kiss the most corporate ass for the most money we will never have democracy. I’m surprised more people don’t see this. Why would even the democrats act against the interests of those that pay them? (And I’m not talking about congressional salaries).
Publicly funded elections with strict limits on how much you can spend. A shorter election cycle. An actual meritocracy in terms of electing candidates.
It’s probably take a civil war to make it happen, but it’s one of the only ways were going to get democracy. It would give candidates like Kucinich and Paul a chance to get their ideas heard as much as Hilary and Giuliani.
No Climate Left Behind
Vern:
“What do you say Daniel David?”
I say it’s fine for all who want to stand up and say “no more” to do so, as long as they don’t merely assemble a coalition of protesters who manage to take 2 or 3 points off Hillary or Barack, and give the whole thing to the Republican successors of Bush as a result. And I respectfully see that as a real (even likely) risk. Indeed the Democrats do cooperate with corporations, and even with their “friends across the aisle” as they say, but as you point out, they drive us there slower, and they’re effective when in the majority at keeping some concepts off the agenda altogether. Had they been in control at a pivotal time, we would have a less onerous Patriot Act, for instance, something that now needs trimming back, when, in fact, it was easier to avoid in the first place–but the wrong party was in The White House and Congress.
I like Kucinich and everything he says. I also know a recent poll by Public Opinion Strategies in today’s news has him and Bill Richardson each at 2.1%, behind even the spoof candidate, Stephen Colbert, who got 2.3% in a poll of likely primary voters. Hillary got 40%. Barack got 19%. Dennis ain’t gonna make it this time. I need to support the liberal, if any, who is gonna make it. And I need to ask anyone else who will help to help.
“Feet to the fire.”
Yawn.
“Burn at the Stake.”
yawn.
Wake me up when you get to the “haul away the ashes.”
Ways we can slow global warming and pinch Halliburton’s wallet:
Recycle everything.
Ditch your old lawn mower and buy a “reel type” lawn mower.
Walk or ride a bicycle wherever you can.
Know how small of a car you can drive and drive that car, not an SUV. OK, soccer moms, so that little econobox may not seat 6 people, but do you really NEED to seat 6, on the average, for your average every-day use of your car? How many of your soccer kids can walk or ride their bicycles to soccer practice, and end up in better health as a result?
When you do drive, consolidate your trips and hit several different sites in the same area or region all at once instead of making several trips to separate locations.
Eat organic foods and drink organic drinks. The extra few dollars you spend on that food, for certified organic food, mean that the food you eat has not been treated with petrochemical pesticides, and that purely natural means of pest and bacterial resistance are used. Frankly, they taste better, too. Remember what happened to the Bald Eagle, and why DDT is banned? Grubs ate plants sprayed with DDT, then as a result ingested the DDT into their bodies. Grown Eagles ate those grubs, and ate the fish that ate those grubs or absorbed DDT runoff into waterways. Though they survived, the shells from the eggs they laid became so soft and weak that the eggs broke when the Eagles tried to roost, dwindling the Bald Eagle population. With petrochemical pesticides, human children are now experiencing similar health problem results which our grandparents and great-grandparents never experienced.
Avoid using petrochemical pesticides yourself on your lawns and flowers and gardens.
When you must buy petrochemicals, such as gasoline or auto oil, buy them from companies with a good track record for ecology and human support. CITGO and to a lesser degree Sunoco have reasonable track records for these; Shell, BP, Texaco, ExxonMobil, Valero, Lukoil, and other Halliburton and/or mafia entities do not — and yes, LUKOIL is run by at least former Russian mafia.
Do not use artificial sweeteners. Use stevia root instead, or reduce your use of regular organic sugar to meet your dietary and diabetic needs.
Do what you can to reduce your petrochemical usage, not just with your car, but with your bodies. Our bodies, our souls, our homes, our bank accounts, our lives, and our earth all depend on it.
Frankly, it’s not their feet I would like to hold to the fire… something more centrally located anatomically would be better.
The vast majority of our politicians are playing a shell game with the voters… while collecting big corporate and lobbyist donations for NOT doing anything worthwhile for the public.
It is way past time to vote ALL of the incumbents out of office and show the new crop that we mean business.
Kivals,
Thank you, I get that. Commonality of purpose comes from recognition of common interest. And that eeds engagement and some command of multi-faceted, complex issues. Having paid attention to what has gone on here the last number of years, I fear that we need no help from outside when it comes to taking the ax to our own roots.
For some it is gay mariage and abortion that is going to decide things. For me the stakes are much higher: Either we change our ways (shutting the door on the empire, foreign bases, wars unless truly defensive, interventionism, predatory economics of blow-it-up-and-rebuild-it model), either we work for social justice our national affairs or we are doomed as a nation. I can’t beleive the rest of the world is just going to sit around and watch us screw them forever. I agree with many positions you list as (P), but the (P)s seem to have decided that they are throwing their lot in with the (D)s. This I get from scanning what is written by so many here. I just think that is not going to go anywhere, if we are truly interested in fixing this place. The same old tired stuff. Blank checks for the war etc. Isn’t there a blue print here, our constitution? We seem like the idiots who get lost but refuse to look at their map. If the politicians just upheld their oaths of office, I would go to bed with peace of mind.
I am not going to beleive that all is lost, and let’s take our toys and go home and trow a party on election night. Neither do I think that every member of congress is an a-hole, on AIPAC dole. Many, many are corrupt, yes.
No politician is going have all the answers, but what are we demanding of them? When AIPAC ( I only mention them as an example of effectiveness) wants something( aid or diplomatic cover for Israel, overthrow of a foe, whatever) they get it, why? They know and use our system. They don’t just write, they get out thousands of letters. They don’t just call, they jam the phone lines. They have their ideologs sitting behind senators, reps, secretaries, the president, advising candidates, they are ever present in the media, you name it. If the people who don’t want this place implode and fall in on itself don’t take similar actions, and reach similar positions.. what chance is there? Surely many tens of millions must love this place as their homeland, care enough, and capable enough to want to save it.
Ron Paul consistently addresses the systemic problems that must be fixed, particularly the corruption that is rampant in the corporate governance of our country right now.
He does not wave some crazy banner (poor people or whatever). Instead, he carefully describes the problems and the reasons for them. He makes alot of sense. Although I hate Republicans, the Democrats are no better. I cannot vote for Hillary, or the other Democrats. They don’t seem to have the guts to say what is really wrong, because it’s not in their financial interests to do so.
Ron Paul is a libertarian. He should be heard by Common Dreamers. He could help “undo” the dangerous trends that have occurred for the past half century. He has no illusions about “American the Great or Beautiful”. He says “blowback”, unintended consequences have been around for a long time due to our short-sighted foreign policy goals — Korean, Viet Nam, and he puts 9/11 into the same category.
Let’s give him a chance.
While it is true Paul takes a reasoned stand against the Iraq war and American imperialism in general, and should be applauded for it, I have a hard time with his literal, extreme reading of the 2nd Ammendment. He supports repealing ALL laws that in any way inhibit anyone from owning any firearm of any kind. I just can’t get past that one.
I believe the 2nd Ammendment is no longer relevant in the 21st century. The fact is, the goverment DOES draw a line SOMEWHERE when it comes to arms control. Private citizens are not allowed to own B-1 bombers or nuclear submarines. Why should assualt weapons then be considered essential to the maintenance of liberty? I don’t think that they are. Paul does.
Oh yeah, and he also absolutely rejects a woman’s right to control her own body. Think that one’s going to be another big hurdle for this crowd, pfutrell.
Daniel David October 24th, 2007 10:53 pm
“Had they (the Democrats) been in control at a pivotal time, we would have a less onerous Patriot Act, for instance, something that now needs trimming back, when, in fact, it was easier to avoid in the first place–but the wrong party was in The White House and Congress.”
The Democrats were in charge when they voted for a more onerous Patriot Act just before the August recess.
Lobo Gris
As the conversation continues, it’s still the money.
Politicians serve those that put them into office. Corporations. Period.
Votes are secondary, then can (95%) of the time be bought with above mentioned corporate donations.
Keep talking folks. And we will, talk and talk,
But if we ever actually decide we want democracy, we’ll have to deal
with the total influence of money in politics.
It is impossible to reason with anyone who accepts the homogenized MSM planned spin to manufacture consensus as the conventional truth. With the onset of media consolidation and wealth and power increasingly dominated by special interests, a single ray of light of truth is quickly denounced if it is inconveniently conflicting with those interests. So, the horserace is all about who raises the most money and manipulated polling and the medias complicit part in ignoring, denouncing dismissing, ridiculing those who actually are focusing on the issues. As long as we continue to play along with it, be satisfied with it, not oppose it, participate in it, be resigned about it–why should we ever expect anything better, improved, progressive, honest, accountable, conscientious, ethical? Because the polling of the voters on the issues themselves are the ones of least consequence compared to the issues of the special interests who fund the campaigns. Under the circumstances, your polling stats are deliberately amplified for the intended result of creating the bandwagon effect- counting on the suckers to hop onboard, while the candidates who actually are in sync with the voters, according to the polls are scorned, ignored, dismissed. Mark Penn has repeatedly been accused of fudging the numbers for Clinton, while Kucinich is ignored although the majority support him in blind taste tests he is framed as “unelectible”. It is all about who they select as the electible one for us:
http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071023/NEWS03/710230386/-1/NEWS04
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5196
If the Right has evolved into fascism, the Democrats have enabled it every step of the way. And for that, I actually hold the Democrats in lower esteem. I will remained registered D to support Kucinich in the primaries but don’t count on my vote of support for Clinton. Even if Kucinich asks. No.
“Third parties have had 8 years to get their shit together for this election and they’re no where near a formidable force to challenge the powers that be, though I wish they were.”
Progressives hold third parties to an impossible standard. They expect the Green Party to go rocketing up from nothing to victory in one election cycle. That’s just not going to happen. When the Republican Party replaced the Whigs, they lost the 1856 election to the Democrats. Even when Lincoln won in 1860, he wasn’t on the ballot in most Southern states.
Yes, the Greens have their problems, but they’ve been told in one election cycle after another that “Now is not the time.” In every election cycle that this happens, it keeps the party from being built up. I see how bad things have gotten under the two-party system, and I ask when is the right time if not now? Things will just keep getting worse if we don’t.
In 1996, Clinton vs. Dole was a worse choice than Clinton vs. Bush in 1992. Dole was worse than Bush, and the 1996 Clinton was worse than the 1992 Clinton.
In 2000, Gore vs. Bush was a worse choice than Clinton vs. Dole. I’m not talking about what Al Gore has done as a PRIVATE CITIZEN since then. I’m talking about the actual VICE PRESIDENT Gore that we had in 2000.
In 2004, Kerry vs. Bush was a worse choice than Gore vs. Bush. As bad as Gore was in 2000, Kerry was worse, and the 2004 Bush was much worse than the 2000 Bush.
In 2008, it is likely that we will have an even worse choice than Kerry vs. Bush. While Kerry was strongly pro-Israel, Hillary Clinton is blindly pro-Israel. I would have trusted Kerry to not go after Iran. I can’t say the same for Clinton. She scares me, and so do her Republican opponents.
The “Assault On Reason” has reached the point the late Dr. Carl Sagan warned us about in his book, “Science as a Candle in the Dark” .
People who don’t require observational proof rely on authority figures to tell them what is real. Competing spin-doctors, with their own short-term selfish interests in mind, vie for the public mind. And the public are prone to believe the rose-colored versions of events, since they are incapable of perceiving objective truth. This is the reason Reagan was so popular in spite of his general incompetence.
People believe that it is only the opinion of some scientists that human-caused global warming is happening now: whereas, other experts offer other explanations. Moreover, they tend to believe in the superman view of technology e.g.s, scientists can cure cancer if they try harder or our military leaders can save us from any WMD attack. Likewise, they will find a way to save us from global warming without inconveniencing us too much.
kivals-as usual, thanks for your posts. We seem to think almost exactly alike, except your brain is in gear and mine generally sticks in neutral. Edwards is my most realistic hope. I’m also toying with support for the darkhorse, Colbert.
Drift:
In response to your response to my post on Ron Paul — I also don’t like his stands on the two issues mentioned (women’s right to choose, and gun ownership).
If this country weren’t in such dire straits, I would never vote for him for those two reasons. (And also I should mention, if there were a credible alternative to him, I would not be looking at him either.)
But those two things can wait to be addressed until the system is fixed. And Ron Paul wants to fix the broken system.
Ron Paul is a strict constructionist. He does not believe the federal government should get involved in either a women’s right to choose (leave it to the states) or gun ownership. It’s important to note that he IS NOT a hypocrite… he’s not taking money from the NRA while talking out of the side of his mouth. He also returns a portion of his salary to the US Treasury, and he has voted against salary increases for congress persons.
He’s consistent and principled. The way I look at it, once he’s cleaned things up, then we can address gun ownership (with the concomitant consequences of gun violence) and women’s reproductive rights.
But first things first. Paul has zeroed in on what is really wrong. Nobody else that I’ve heard of has. They spend their time throwing around slogans and metaphors.
I can’t believe I’m saying this because I truly hate Republicans, but I don’t think he’s a Republican by the definition of what they represent today. He believes in smaller government (and spells out details of the “hidden tax” that happens on middle to lower class peoples due to the our goverment’s deficit spending, printing excess money, and inflation). He would truly clean things up and the economy as well as personal economic situations would improve greatly with him at the helm.
(Of course, we’d get the hell out of Iraq too.)
Please listen to all the videos of him and give him an honest hearing. And also, keep in mind the seriousness of our broken system, and the priorities we must undertake to fix it. While reproductive freedom and gun control are important, I believe they can be de-stressed for the next four years while we repair the underlying structure.
Ron Paul only looks good because the rest of the repugnant lot are so goddamn awful.
Kucinich is the best of the dems, but he needs to wear elevator shoes before he will be considered a serious candidate.
Regarding the original proposal, “feet to the fire”, the dems seem to think that progressives have no choice and will vote for them however far to the right they posture. With a few honorable exceptions, the whole congress is already in the war machine’s pocket. I’m inclined to let them go down in flames.
As for the “stake” someone mentioned, maybe the lamp post would be a more effective image. The neofascist war criminals should know what awaits them.
agronomo:
You seem to have ruled out all the candidates. You won’t be voting then? Is emigration an option for you?
You have fallen into the trap that all of us do, and that is particularly prevalent in postings on “common” dreams — that there is no positive step to take, that there is nothing that we can do. It’s all just so f-ed up, let’s swap our frustrations and leave it at that.
Sorry to pick on you, but you epitomized the reasons for my discouragement with people here. I feel anger, frustration, etc. etc., and I’m guilty of venting on Common Dreams, but when I see a ray of hope, I’d like to investigate it. The option to that is despair. I’m on the brink of that, to be honest.
If it’s so bad that all we can do is “vent”, then how the hell do we fix it? Who are we going to elect to help fix it?
SCIENTIFIC BETRAYAL
Never before have Americans experienced such dangerous manipulation of essential scientific data, as used by this administration to derail vital environmental reforms, conservation, family planning– and the list goes on. The resulting long term environmental and social damage are beyond measure, and can only worsen if not curtailed.
Despite their clandestine cloak, or environmental friendly disguise, these sellouts have been evident since Bush first was handed the presidency. They have been exposed by defectors from the EPA, health & human services, etc; and have been documented and chronicled by numerous dedicated environmental organizations including The Union of Concerned Scientists.
The gravity of these unprecedented betrayals eclipses the Monica Lewinski scandal which led to an impeachment, and pose greater dangers than Watergate which terminated a presidency. Blame falls mainly on the populace and our legislators for tolerating this reckless and arrogant occupant of the White House.
Thanks Greg R, Hassan, Daniel David, and Umlaut for your comments.
It seems that whether a progressive is willing to vote for Democrats or not in 2008 is in part dependent on the perception of the urgency of the situation.
It appears that most progressives who want to vote third party in the next election believe that there is nothing special about 2008 and if progressives can send Democrats a message or start building up a third party in 2008 then their long-term goals will be served. Progressives who are for doing lesser evilism and voting for Dems in 2008 have a sense of urgency, and believe that Republicans just need four more years to put the final nail in the coffin of the US democracy and constitution and all future elections will be completely meaningless.
I must admit that I find myself more in the second camp than the first for five main reasons:
(1) Net neutrality: The Internet has become a wonderful medium for communicating and organizing and the Republicans, not the Democrats, want to end that while sumultaneously pleasing the big telecoms by ending net neutrality;
(2) Media consolidation: The Republicans, not the Democrats, want to help continue the trend of media consolidation until just a handful of mega-corporations control virtually all media in the US;
(3) The Supreme Court: There are currently four fascists on the Supreme Court who are willing to give a Republican President Hitler-like powers (unitary executive) and to gut the Bill of Rights — Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Roberts. If you add just one more to that mix, with a Republican President, the Bill of Rights is finished and the transformation to fascism is complete (and there will be no going back without a tremendous amount of bloodshed);
(4) The privatization of military forces: Blackwater and similar companies could be used by a fascist government in ways similar to those of Nazi Germany with the Brownshirts; and
(5) The use of electronic vote counting machines: With Republican control, electronic vote counting machines, run by Republican cronies, will become the standard, and anyone suggesting that their results are questionable will be labeled by the corporate media as a major loon.
If the Republicans retake control of government in 2008, then it looks likely that 2008 will be the last meaningful election in the USA (and Rove will be acknowledged as a true political genius as the election of 2006 will be viewed as a mere hiccup). The Democrats are pro-corporate and pro-empire like the Republicans, but they are more civilized, more risk-averse, and more pro-constitution, and progressives will most likely have opportunities to spread their messages and grow their movement under Democratic control. If Republicans win in 2008, you can probably forget about change through ballots in future elections while street protests will be met with police, private army (e.g. Blackwater), or even military violence, which will go unreported on corporate media, and communications of protestors and activists will be monitored, even more so than today.
On the other hand, even accepting that the Democrats must win, maybe progressives should vote third party anyway because if the Democrats cannot win without progressives in 2008, given the disasters of the past seven years, then the Democrats and the US political system are absolutely hopeless and it is time to begin thinking about more drastic changes.
So rational and reasonable people can come down on either side of the debate.
Please don’t mention coal fired power plants without also mentioning nuclear power plants in the same sentence. The nuclear power industry has succeeded in convincing many people that nuclear wears the white hat and coal wears the black hat when it comes to climate change. They say nuclear doesn’t produce greenhouse gas (even though uranium mining, processing, transportation and disposal creates lots of greenhouse gas, not to mention vapor from the nuke plants).
To mention coal without mentioning nuclear just gives more credibility to the nuclear industries massive propaganda campaign.
pfutrell,
I agree with you. Paul is definitely principled and his character is beyond reproach. It’s truly refreshing to have his voice in the contest, and I’m completely suprised that I feel this way about a Republican. However, it’s not the man I have a problem with, it’s some of his positions. And at this point, I have no reason to support him because there’s already a candidate that best represents my views: Dennis Kucinich. And by the way, Vern, good to hear you’ve come on board. I know we had a few exchanges on an earlier post, but it seems like to me we agree 100%. And about Hillary, too. I promise I won’t be voting for her, even against Guliani, and even if Kucinich endorses her (which I do hope he would not). I’ll write-in someone else instead, or just vote for Colbert.
But, and this brings me back to pfutrell, if it did come down to Clinton v. Paul, then I’d happily vote for him. And that may not be completely unthinkable. The Repugs could very well go to a brokered convention this time around, and when that happens, anything can happen.
“What a joke. They don’t count the votes people! It will be whomever they choose in 2008, not who is elected by the people, unless of course by some fluke we actually elect the same one they control. It was clear with Gore and Kerry what is up.”
How did the Dems take Congress in 06 then?
since everyone seems to address the fact that there is a problem, but offer no practical viable solutions for this election one must concede to the logical.
here’s one practical step, start voting Green in gubernatorial elections and start working our way through the system. keep working towards third party viability and substitution of the Democratic party by the Greens if that is possible, or work towards coalitional legislature like we see in Parliamentary systems as the Greens don’t seem to be a majority even in more enlightened systems like you see in Western Europe.
“This has not happened in a vacuum. The Democrats have stifled the Greens and anyone outside their party at every turn.”
and what have they done about that?
“If you’re going to point your finger at anyone, get in the picture, else you’re merely being disingenuous.”
be specific about “get in the picture”
Please people stop talking in generalities or we’re just sitting around saying what’s wrong. Say specifically what should be practically viably done right now, for now and tomorrow, and what to do tomorrow.
Also, look at all the bills that have been vetoed this year and imagine not only that they would be passed without a Rep heading the executive, but that those bills would have been sent there with far less compromise if the Exec was held by a Dem.
1. Hey, if there are about equal numbers of Reshrubicrats, and we get the same governance no matter which major party has a majority, how about
VOTING ALL INCUMBANTS OUT EVERY TIME!!
IF THEY’RE IN, VOTE THEM OUT
EVERY TIME UNTIL WE START TO GET THE REPRESENTATION WE WANT AND NEED:
People before profit, peace, environmental responsibility, on and on.
If they were good they could get voted in the next cycle, but never two in a row. That’s almost like a national referendum, and since not all offices are changed each year (2,4, or 6), the ones still in might wake up and smell the coffee.
And a panel from commondreams, nader and green peace, etal, could re-certify a candidate for his/her next run…
Food for thought.
Please comment