It's a great step in the right direction that Pat LaMarche, the Bangor Daily News, and CommonDreams.org have helped bring this hidden hero to public attention, in spite of the media censoring him to the point of even eliminating him from several Democratic primary debates.

"Alone among members of congress," Noam Chomsky recently pointed out, Senator Mike Gravel released the Pentagon Papers revealing the lies of three presidential adminisrations to the American public, thus leading to the end of The Vietnam War, that had needlessly and unwarrentedly cost the lives of some 3 million Southeast Asians and 58 thousand US lives.

I've been covering Mike's campaign best I could since the end of October, including leaving from Southside, Virginia, and driving to Philadelphia when MSNBC excluded him on October 30, Las Vegas when CNN kept him out on November 15 and in New Hamphire in early January when he held an alternate debate there. I also had the privilage of interview former Senator Gravel, something I had looked forward to for weeks because I was given the chance to separate him from the pack of mass murderous puppets the media have thrown at us with such a spin as if they're decent caring human beings much less. Bigger lies have always gone over easier than smaller ones. As Marshall McCluhan stated, "Only the small secrets need be protected. The big ones are kept secret by public incredulity."

Http://overcomethemedia.com, links to videos of former Senator Gravel surely the mainstream media do not want you to see. We're all in this together, and I've tried to put together as concisely as possible key aspects of Mike Gravel's past, and how he wants bring sanity and reason to our government.

Mike has developed the National Initiative, which will serve as a Constitutional Ammendment giving the people the power to bypass the corporate puppets who stand in our way for the sake of their own greed as well as their puppeteer's. He has a plan to help us actually have a say as to what's going on in our government and in our lives. Mike's stated, "It's up to you," and that applies to each of us. We can get the public to know these hidden truths, and what will happen if we do?

Kenneth John - http://overcomethemedia.com

Truthie:

Who do you work for? Just asking.

To Walt, at 4:57 a.m.

Thanks for your early-morning jolt of reality. My electricity went off or I would have replied sooner.

Walt, I memorialized your comment on my blog, Remarcade, for posterity. You can see it here:

http://remarcade.blogspot.com/

I would be honored if you would pay it a visit and also leave a way to get in touch, as I have a great idea to share with you for sloughing off the Federal Reserve System from our backs, at least, and at best possibly repairing the entire unfairness of the current system of slavery that passes for democracy in this country. Thanks, Walt, and have a great day. You may be the real hero we've been looking for. Susan Jolly

It's certainly welcome anyway to see some reporting on Mike Gravel again, [finally]; been quite a long while since the last time I saw a few articles about him and his present campaign.

As with his idea on fair taxation, which I find to be very interesting, I would be wholly supportive of both this and his idea for how to ensure that every citizen gets UHC, as long as the poorest people are NOT left OUT again, as usual. F.e., with his idea for replacing income taxes with a required 20% sales tax would benefit (profit) a LOT of people who are citizens or other status of resident of the country, but NOT the poorest, who already don't pay income taxes anyway and would see taxation (in relative terms) wickedly increase for them; unless Gravel's plan includes the needed exemptions for poor citizens and residents. It'd also apply to or for many enough low-income people who do work full-time, for they pay income taxes, but very little, while a 20% flat sales tax would hit these people hard; because the little paid in income taxes, combined with whatever low sales tax these people already pay in their states of residence, amounts to much less.

It's not difficult to "iron out" the "wrinkles" in good plans, and it'd only be needed for Gravel's plan if it doesn't already have these above issues addressed. I seem to vaguely recall having read that he's factored in exemptions for one or both of the above groups of citizens (and other residents), but am not sure.

I'll emphasise that citizens mustn't forget that non-citizen'ised residents are still residents and need to be carefully considered with whenever citizens' choices could adversely impact these other residents, who should never be treated as undeserving, subhuman, ....

So, and so far anyway, these would be my sole two demands for plans like Gravel's fair taxation aimed at making sure the rich pay their share of taxes, and for ensuring UHC for all citizens and residents:

*) making sure not only citizens, but all residents are covered; and,

*) never making life more difficult for the poorest citizens and residents.

Seems Cuba is so great that it provides free medical care to even foreigners who are there for even a very short visit or trip. Cuba under the very serious economic sanctions imposed by the USA, ... psychopathic USA! It's something I learned from the following article.

"Cuba: Open-Armed Policy", by Cindy Sheehan, originally Feb. 21 2008,

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8192

Plenty of citizens might blindly oppose a 20% sales tax, but when it includes exemptions for poor and low-income citizens (and other residents), then all other citizens and residents would benefit, in the profit sense too. After all, the sales tax total paid depends on each, individual consumer's spending; not on a person's income or accumulated wealth.

Watch that flat sales tax get implemented, followed by the rich flocking or herding over to Wal-Mart in order to pay as little as they can in sales tax. Okay, so they are too snob to show their faces at such stores, unless it'd be to make much money for a little promo. "show" lasting some seconds, maybe. Okay, so then watch their chauffeurs or butlers or maids go do the shopping for their private employers, at these lowest-of-consumer-cost(s) stores.

After all, they pay poverty stricken workers 15, 20, 30, ... cents an hour to make merchandise that's then sold in the USA or North America, and I suppose Europe, for thousands of times more; like happened with the greedy schmuck who supposedly came from poverty-ranks USA, became a rap star and quickly rich, and was then caught selling "rapper"-promo. t-shirts for $20 apiece when the workers employed to make this stuff were paid pennies an hour and suffering in ... like total poverty, f.e.

For those of you who have not tried to start a new political party as Pat LaMarche and and other Greens are trying to do, the way "truthie" attacks is a typical disruption.
I wonder if these folks really think that if they repeatedly rant their version of history that reality will change. Like the myth they spread about the supposed unfairness of the Green convention in 2004, which operated by rules supported and voted for by Camejo's delegates... until they lost the political contest. They then proceeded to mount a campaign with Nader as the candidate against the Greens and to knock the GP off the ballot in two states through the same kinds of dirty tricks that the Dems used on them and the Greens.
Just thought you would want to know.

Walt,

Wise counsel sir. Thanks. Just one comment I'd like to add about third parties (or fourth parties, etc.) Clearly the Democratic and Republican "parties" are actually just wings of the CORPORATE PARTY. We don't need a third party: We need a SECOND one!

scroller:

Glad that I was generally able to clear up those questions of yours. One other point I must make, because I think you're taking it out of context:

Kucinich has not endorsed Obama. It was surprising enough when he threw support to Obama over Edwards in Iowa (unlike 2004), but that was an isolated incident. Who knows where Kucinich will lean, but bear this in mind: his office was visited by Pelosi and AIPAC's people, who Obama clearly aligns with above the impeachment and Palestinian sympathizers (meaning, people who want a real peace negotiation, not whatever the Israeli warhawks dictate). He also said at a debate that he WILL NOT support a candidate who uses war as an instrument of policy. Obama's no dove, we know that much.

Of course, back in 2004 Kucinich ended up bowing to the Democratic party, and his people at the convention were very upset. The Dems also did not allow him to speak his anti-war rhetoric there, because they wanted to appear "unified". Nader apparently wanted Kucinich to run independent in 2004, but he didn't, so Nader had to carry the torch. In summary, considering all that, plus the face that Kucinich supports Sheehan over Pelosi... what's to say he doesn't endorse Gravel or Nader?

Dennis HAS NOT endorsed Obama, but everyone seems to act like he did. I just wanted to clarify, as I'm sure Kucinich would not want anything taken out of context, either.

-------

Despite Truthie's venom, I encourage all to RESUME talking about MIKE GRAVEL. Talk about his courage, his policies, his National Initiative, just go to it!

I like Mike Gravel. Period.

yeah, I imagine it. I was 13 when Saigon was evacuated. It wouldn't have taken all that many more years before I'd have been of draft age. Not when you consider that that war had been going on for 10 years when it ended. And, kids my age were watching older brothers and older kids in the neighborhood deal with turning 18 with the war and the draft still going on.
---------
damn, as always disappointment when I realize the lady doesn't want to ask me out. :(
--------
Obama ain't gonna make a damn bit of difference. If he's too much of a political coward to say what he'll do during the campaign, he sure won't have the courage or mandate to do anything as President. I'm getting really sick of this hopeless dreaming that Obama is something that he himself refuses to say he is.

What Obama is saying is all about expanding the military and spending more on the Pentagon. He's all about acting tough and starting more wars in places like Iran and Pakistan. He's supported the Iraq war ever since he moved beyond being a state sen representing a district that strongly opposed the war.

And, the lesson of this Congress is that you CAN'T push him after he's elected. They don't listen. The only leverage you'll have is right now while he needs your votes. If you give those away for nothing, then you'll get nothing.

My brother was killed in Vietnam in 1968. At that time, at the age of 7, I remember lying awake at night, fearful that if the war did not end, I could suffer his fate. And then my mind became caught up in the isues of growing up, while the Vietnam War fizzled, and eventually ended.

Only now, forty years later, do I realize who rescued the worried kid from having to face the same dilemma my brother faced. And because of it, I am vehemently anti-war and pro-Veteran at the same time. Every face I see of a homeless Veteran is my brother. Were it not for Mike Gravel, the face beaten down by endless, unjustified war could have been my own. As a social worker these days, my battle is against social injustice, which includes the shameful way we treat our Veterans. Some days the anger is overwhelming, and yet it is just a tiny bit of the collective rage we should all be feeling against the corporate juggernaut of war.

www.raycarlson.com

Sorry to say, we're just going to have to hold our breaths and hope that Obama makes it and then work like hell to push him and the Congress to undo as much of the damage as we can caused by the Bush Regime and his allies in the Democratic Party. The Dems do have their fingerprints on all of these policies because of their failure to act as a true opposition. Mike Gravel won't be the President, but we should honor his service in Congress and his campaign this time.

>> Relax, I'm not going to ask you out.

Pat, we love you! Please ask us out!

Thanks for the great column.

Walt, that has got to be the most cogent, poignant, balanced, well-written comment I have ever seen on CD. The article's author even contributed a comment, but yours is the reason this page's getting bookmarked. Thank you. Please write more!

Talk about the Vietnam Era. We, in the progressive movement seem to have entered that troubling period of internecine warfare that so distinguished the aftermath of the "peace movement" and led to its ultimate disolution in the 70's.

Whether it's hard core Obama supporters threatening not to vote at all if HRC is nominated, or edgy progressives threatening not to vote for either party's nominee because there's "no difference between them", or all-out, pointless, rant-fests like this, we are bearing witness to the sad condition of our movement since the 60's ... when a few astute social observers described us as The "Me" Generation.

Self-absorbed, atomistic, uncompromising, progressives (a small but vocal few) have shown a toxic reaction to the more pertinent characteristics of pluralistic democracy ... namely, cohesion, compromise and solidarity.

I used to wonder if it truly was a progressive plague or an American one? At this point, the Republican party seems perched on the precipice of such self-immolation but - much as I hate to say it - I have been impressed by their ability to hold their noses, unify behind and support a candidate that they belive can win. Then they force that candidate to adopt their positions once he is elected. Remember how GWB, the "Great Uniter" turned on that promise and imposed his fanatical crypto-facist, Christian-fundamentalist, neo-liberal agenda on all of us? He was required to.

I trust - or rather fear - that all this stürm und drang about McCain breaking up the party's homogeneous composition is a temporary situation ... or a calculated farce. Now that he is the nominee, they will rally behind him.

They are better at this game than we are, but only because we refuse to play.

For the Right-wing it is not - nor has it ever been - about a candidate. For them, it is and has always been (for at least 30 very odd years indeed) about a concerted, anti-liberal agenda determined to reverse the works of FDR, LBJ and any progressive social programs implemented. They have, since Reagan, been appallingly successful at it.

For us, since JFK, RFK, MLK it has unfortunately – yet understandably - been about personality. We lost great leaders to violence and since Vietnam, we have had no unifying agenda to rally behind. We consequently depend on individuals to provide the vision instead of trying to build an ideological consensus among our selves that we can all get a piece of.

Largely it's because we are not as politically active as a body as we could be. Too many competing agendas and too much wasted energy. Casting vitriol on a journalist's character on a website is decıdedly NOT politcal action.

The progressive Democrats are tearing themselves to shreds arguing over whether it will be Obama or Clinton. One side resents the idea that such a candidate will be forced upon the other, ignoring the fact that the better candidates in the race - Edwards, Kucinich, Biden and Gravel - have either been driven out or marginalized. Yet no one seems too irate about the fact that THIS decision was made for them.

I am 60. I was drafted. I did "serve" and fortunately survived. But many of my brothers are inscribed on that wall (courtesy of the Tet Offensive) and many more are lost to all efforts to find them through the varagies of time and possibly homelessness.

This election is - as we once believed - critcal. The decisions we make for President will affect the lives of our children more than ours. I have come to believe that whether it is Obama or Clinton - and by and large this will be a decision made by the citizens of our pluralistic democracy, voting scandals and crooked "Supremes" aside - we had better, if we believe one bit of our identity as progressives - choose and support one against McCain.

I would like to add that depsite all his contributions - and setting truthie's tempest aside – it was not Gravel who stopped the war, any more than it was bourgois adolescents like Abbie Hoffman (OK I'll give you Dave Dellinger). If it was any one person, it was Ron Kovic, who along with dozens of other maimed and broken Veterans chained themselves to the gates of the White House. When their images of despair were beemed out all over the world, hearts broke ... as did the American people's will to believe the lies and go on. Politicians couldn't look away from that demonstration as they did so many others. No one could. That act, more than any other, altered the minds of the American people and it was the American people who ended the war by withdrawıng their "silent" support for it.

So it will be with Iraq and Health Care and Corporate Ä°nfluence and our Imperiled Planet. No inspirational "messiah" will take office and change things. Neither will an experienced "wonk" or a former POW. Ony Americans, actively participating in government can do this, no matter who is president. I just earnestly believe our chances of doing so are much better with a Democrat.

Nader could do it, but certainly not as President. That's the ultimate delusion. What he could do is return to his only valid reason for fame - reactivating interest in participatory democracy at the grass roots as he did with the PIRGs. That is what he is famous for and that is what he did best – better than anyone in my lifetime. He pulled us out of apathy into action.

I liked the suggestion that he draw Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich and others into some kind of consensus movement – not a third party, God help us, there's no time – but a political movement that any member of any party can support and that can put pressure on the President and Congress to reverse 25 years of anti-progressive legislation. Viable third parties evolve from that - over time. They don't come from disaffected voters getting more disaffected every 4 years.

Social action is the only solution. Anything else, like this endless hair splittng and tiresome in-fighting is nothing more than ... what we used to call bourgeois self indulgence ... which in the 60's, was the preferred course of action for those elite "liberals" least affected by the outcome of politics. They lived well no matter who won.

We have to elect a Democrat and then through organized action, we have to ween them off the corporate teat and "hound" them back to their roots – the protection of the unprotected. And there are millions of them out there. If you don't care who wins you are not one of them.

It can be done. It has been done. In my lifetime.

If you are too cynical or filled with despair and believe that it doesn't matter if a Democrat or a Republican wins you are too comfortable and cossetted to call yourself "progressive" or "liberal" or anything like it.

You are – as we old guard used to say – not part of the solution, but part of the problem.

Truthie, Pat LaMarche's alleged personal failings with respect to the Green Party convention, or her driving record, or the way she wears her hair, are NOT THE TOPIC HERE. Ad hominem means attacking the person of the author rather than discussing the issues of the article. The allegation about McCain, or your allegations about Pat LaMarche, have nothing whatsoever to do with the topic of LaMarche's article on the Gravel candidacy. You are engaging in bullying and baiting.

I am finished with this. I am sorry the behavior of this poster has effectively shut down discussion of the Gravel candidacy, the topic of the article.

So it's reprehensible when someone brings up some information that is a matter of public record about someone. When that individual ran for public office ? But it is not reprehensible when that same individual was involved in a scheme to disenfranchise Green Party members across the US who voted for Peter Camejo with the understanding that Ralph nader would be his running mate ? 72% of California Greens voted for Camejo. That is half of all registered Greens. So that isn't reprensible ? David Cobb had nothing to do with the formation or growth of the Green Party of California nor was the Green Party ballot qualified in Texas where he resided in early 2004. Yet to make his candidacy look legit he moves into the state like the Carpetbagger he is and leaves just as quick. That's not "despicable" huh ? The fact of the matter was Cobb couldn't high tail his azz into Ohio fast enough to support the DemocRATS after the election when in point of fact the Gren Party nor any other independent candidate had anything to do with the outcome of that vote.

Those who worked long and hard to build the Green Party over the previous 16 years will never forget the heinous act committed by LaMarche and her ilk in Milwaukee.

As to your sanctimonious BS about LaMarche's conduct it was just a couple of weeks ago on Super Tuesday that KPFA news host Larry Bensky railed away about the accusations surrounding John McCain being invovled in an affair. That was just an allegation mind you such is not the case here. And being involved in an affair is not a crime. How many Green Party delegates knew the backround of who they were voting for when LaMarche was nominated against the will of the voters ?

We will never forget !

Truthie, I am referring to your message of 2:09 pm in which you bring up a DUI charge, as if that has the slightest thing to do with anything under discussion. That is what is reprehensible. I know nothing about Pat LaMarche or a DUI charge but it is shameful for you to bring up something completely irrelevant in a forum such as this. I am not referring to on-topic points you make, but to your despicable ad hominems which are off-topic. Behavior such as yours, which looks a lot like internet stalking, has the effect of silencing its victims from speaking on relevant issues. Is that your intent?

scroller wrote: "I am also absolutely appalled by the ad hominem attack on Pat LaMarche by "truthie" which about scrapes bottom. Such an attack has the effect of immediately biasing me in favor of LaMarche."

Because the tenor of the message offends your sensibilities you take license to ignore the facts. Well if that is the way you operate there isn't much I can do for you now is there.

LaMarche says Gravel ended the draft in 1973, 50 year old males should rejoice and implies that everyone disenchanted with the dominant parties should work in his campaign.

I say that Gravel's fillibuster against the draft took place in 1971 and was unsuccessful. I also stated that Gravel was a very minor player of the events of that day.

It should be fairly easy to verify which account is correct. Are you capable of doing that ?

peaceczar, you and Pat LaMarche are right, Gravel is a good man. Thanks for your comments on my three points. I still strongly disagree on "b" but I should not have used the words "muddled mind" simply because I personally could not understand Gravel's opposing reasoning; unfortunately it is too late for me now to edit that which I regret. On "c" I see your point.

I am also absolutely appalled by the ad hominem attack on Pat LaMarche by "truthie" which about scrapes bottom. Such an attack has the effect of immediately biasing me in favor of LaMarche. In any case Gravel's voice in the debates before he was excluded was such a refreshing voice of truth (along with Kucinich's) in the midst of politics as usual, and his past actions on ending the draft and getting the Pentagon Papers into the public domain are epic accomplishments.
However I am with Kucinich in backing Obama as opposed to Gravel who is against Obama and seems to think Obama is the worst democratic candidate possibility (!?). But never mind that; Gravel is on the side of the angels on the issues that matter and I respect him.

Hello, Pat LaMarche here.

Wow. You know my column appears in a number of papers in different locals and I'm quite generally impressed that the common dreams folks are circumspect in their responses... thoughtful and thinking. For the most part, this week, that is still true.

I had initially contacted the great folks at commondreams.org that craft this site to ask that the untruths regarding me... that are silly at best and malicious at worst... be removed: like the claim that I can't vote. How absurd.

~~But then I saw these sadistic and unwarranted and fallacious attacks on Senator Gravel and gee, I can't stand aside while that stuff goes on.

I mean; I've run for vice-president -- my skin is so tough now I don't need a skeleton... but attacking gravel. Have you no decency?

Go to my website from the last race www.Pat2006.com and see my opinion of healthcare. Then go to the site of the supporters of HR676 www.healthcare-now.org and click on the Northeast. And see who their official spokes people are... Yep, sorry to disappoint... but it's me and a couple of other great intrepid hard workers for healthcare.

I'm not telling you to vote for Gravel. Although he's pretty fantastic ... and if you're a democrat he's your only hope for a real humanist candidate. I am, however, telling you that I think you need to respect him. Respect his self-sacrifice. Respect that a man who works as hard as he has doesn't have any other reward but his own self respect and the ability to sleep at night... and in that case he's a wealthy man.

Now for others who would attack me to get to him... I gotta tell you... when you feel the kind of goodness inside you that Senator Gravel must feel when he sees that he's protected even your right to lie about me and him... he must feel pretty good even in spite of your bile.

Peace Love and continued free expression to you all.
Pat LaMarche
PatLaMarche@hotmail.com

Truthie:

damn. wow. you need to tone it down.

Let me ask you. Are you even familiar with Gravel's plan, or are you just lumping it together with Obama & Clinton's for no good reason? I'm not claiming to fully understand it, but I do know it does not involve mandates ie subsidies to health insurance companies.

Gravel has been out of office for 25 years. How do you want him to support HR 676 when he's not in Congress, and he has his own views on how to cover everyone? Did I note his plan covers catastrophic and nursing care, two you'd be remiss to find in government care.

And your accusations of Gravel cowing to insurance companies or whatever you're going on about is just plain ignorant. What are you, some lobbyist for HR 676? Gravel has another plan for FREE healthcare to all citizens as a basic right. So stop breathing fire. And perhaps read and listen to Gravel on healthcare.

-----------

scroller, some answers to your questions:

a)Gravel issued a statement on Impeachment about a month ago, and has expressed support for it most of the time, except at that very early debate when everyone was asked whether they support it, I know what you're talking about. Ironically, I noted how it was also the day that Kucinich withdrew from the race:
http://www.gravel2008.us/content/impeachment-statement-presidential-candidate-senator-mike-gravel

b)I don't question Gravel's analysis that letting voters down and created a jaded generation of voters. He knows that Obama won't bring any real "change," especially not in a Congress as corrupt as ours. Gravel knows the only way to bring true social change is by direct democracy, and empowering the American people to make laws.

c)Kucinich didn't do anything to help or protect Gravel when they were trying to bully him out of the debates as early as June 2007. When Gravel was kicked out of the October debate in Philadelphia, Kucinich said nothing on his behalf, and then we saw his struggle against censorship post-Iowa. Gravel said to Kucinich, "Dennis why didn't you speak up for me? They'll kick you out next!" And so that was the case. So your question can be posed to Kucinich regarding Gravel, because I've heard Gravel answer the question numerous times.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=BSBz2D4fqp8

----------------

MeAlsoToo aRealist:

I think you're completely screwed up in the head, and I'm saying that politely. Check the wiring up there.

Wow! I didn't even know Mike Gravel was still in the race, and I'm a fairly regular visitor to sites like CD. I loved the guy during the debates. He was the only candidate who sounded as if he wasn't reading from a script. He is one of the people. One of us. If he's on the PA primary ballot, he's got my vote. When he read the Pentagon Papers into the Congressional Record, it was the ultimate "fuck you" to the war-pigs. A truly inspiring American moment. I wonder if Obama called him, "a gadfly" as he did to the late, great Paul Wellstone?

Thank you, Pat LaMarche, for that article. I was talking to an Obama supporter last night who said she didn't know Mike Gravel. In explaining I made the exact same point you did … that he probably saved her husbands life. My point was lost when she said she was divorced and would have been happy had he served in Vietnam. So I also told her about reading the Pentagon Papers into the Congressional Record at great personal risk and a few other things.

I voted in the Texas primary yesterday. With Texas's convoluted Primary / Caucus system the Caucus was held after the Primary voting ended. Since I was unable to vote for Mike Gravel in the Primary (he wasn't on the ballot because, like Kucinch, he refused to take the Democratic Party Loyalty Oath) I was able to select him as my candidate in the Caucus. Of the 74 people in attendance (39 for Clinton, 34 for Obama) I was the only one voting for anyone other than the Main Stream Media (MSM) selected candidates. I could go on and on about the MSM and how they selected these 2 long ago and the influence of the Military Industrial Complex, etc, but I won't.

There is something I would like anyone reading this to carry away. Mike Gravel got into the race to promote the National Initiative for Democracy. It's a visionary idea that when (notice I didn't say if) implemented will chance EVERYTHING. You can read more about it at the web site http://www.ni4d.org/. This will eliminate big money influence in our elections and the making of laws because "We the People" would become the 4th branch of government. This proposal takes a tremendous amount of faith in the American People to make good decisions when they have all the facts … a faith I have.

I'd like to see a 3rd Party made from this concept … call it the 4th Branch Party if you will. It would be a single issue Party whose sole issue was the empowerment of the American People to make laws. Anyone who has faith that the American People have better judgment than their elected and corruptible officials do can be a member … no exceptions. You can vote for this right now by going to the web site above. The major parties in power today will NOT make this happen for you … only YOU can make it happen.

We can afford useless missile silos in Poland, but we can't keep our veterans off the streets, help their PTSD, or deal with their disproportionately higher suicide rates? Shame knows no bounds.

At least we have a few individuals in the race with a take-no-shit attitude. Gravel and Nader.

Who knows what will come to fruition on the thinking, progressive, independent wing of the electorate.

Dennis Kucinich has been and continues to be for single payer also. He was a co-sponsor of HR 676.

peace czar, Kucinich dropped out in January to fight for his Congressional seat, in danger of a hostile corporate takeover (he won the primary last night).

Truthie, of course Mike Gravel supports a single payer system, go check out issues on his website. And if everyone on the left just quietly went away, the country would fall of the right side of the cliff.

Gravel is still running, totally ignored by the establishment, even before being squeezed out of debates for bringing up issues that made "major" candidates (and the media) squirm. Without financial support, he's reduced to taking the subway to his speaking engagements, but he's hanging in there. Throw some money at him as a thank you for public service and to keep it up.

kathyodat

Sorry, peace czar, my mind slipped a gear. You had it right.

kathyodat

Gravel is a true hero.
He's also the only one not trying to convince us he's the better anybody-but-bush.

kathyodat:

That's ok. Your first comment caught me for a loop, but you cleared that up.

----

Truthie:

Tone down the hostility and self-righteousness a bit, will you? Gravel supports universal healthcare as a basic right of all US citizens, just like the UN charters states healthcare to be a basic right. Don't you dare get antagonistic and prissy when you don't know what you're talking about. And guess what: Gravel IS a veteran, and he's outraged by the neglectful, cheapskate care, or total lack thereof, by our government. Adequate and respectful care for all our veterans would be a top priority in his healthcare system.

He doesn't have a universal government-provided system like Nader and Kucinich. When he was back in the Senate 30 years ago, he favored that, but his plan fuses government regulation with the free market. Healthcare certificates/vouchers. Designed by economist Laurence Kotlikoff, who also favors The Fair Tax like Gravel. This book explains it in full:

http://www.amazon.com/Healthcare-Fix-Universal-Insurance-Americans/dp/0262113147/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UT...

Kotlikoff in favor of Gravel and the Fair Tax:

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/02/24/why_democrats_should_love...

Mike Gravel actually has some principles, which automatically disqualifies him from being nominated by either party.

So we're stuck with Barack "Snake Oil" Obama and...

Hillary "I'm even meaner than Cheney watch me attack Venezuela unless the polls turn around on it" Clinton and...

John "The Dinosaur" McCain!

All three of them should be banging heads in some third-rate wrestling arena instead of running for President!

Until the two-party system is broken, democracy in the Unified State of Arrogance will become ever and ever more of a sham.

Truthie: Was the ad hominem attack necessary?

I was not happy about Tina Fey's on-air endorsement of Hillary Clinton, but
she has the right to say it, and I have no right to attack her ad hominem for it. The same applies to you.

I was a year too old to have been rescued by Sen. Gravel's efforts, but
I remember them with gratitude. Will I vote for him for President? No, but this was not the thrust of Pat's article.

Gravel, Kucinich and Nader should be out building a political force, a movement, that can actually exert some sort of significant influence on the political process, not indulging in these quixotic presidential runs. Having Gravel and Kucinich in the debates was good at first because they provided the few moments of common sense and decency in other an otherwise dreary spectacle of vacuousness, self-absorption and authoritarianism. But soon,even moderators as dim as Wolf Blitzer figured out that they could just ignore the two (and eventually sideline Edwards also). They won't let you speak the truth once you are inside the bubble, the hermetically sealed bullshit sphere in which our mainstream political process resides. The corrective pressure is only going to come from outside and it's a hell of a lot harder now than it was during the Vietnam era (a war so long it gets its own "era"). The political elite still believed that they had to listen to the people's letters, calls and marches at least to some extent back then. Now, they unleash the modern, national security state apparatus and otherwise they simply ignore us. I do not know what it will take but the Gravels, Kucinichs and Naders are going to have to be out on the barricades with the rest of us who still care. We will have to be strong enough to deny support to centrists, apologists and hacks even if they occasionally cast good votes. We will have be able to apply pressure at the level where we can deny success to members of the professional political elite, rather than trying to join them. We will have to draw lines and make demands, rather than acquiescing in an endless and utterly fruitless search for "access". We will have to be willing to stay outside the bubble because let's face it, If HRC gets back in the White House and starts renting out the Lincoln bedroom for $100,000 contributions again, you and I are not going to be getting those invitations; we are not members of that club.

When it is all said and done, the words of this election year will end as hollow as many in the past. Obama is the charmer without substance, Hillary the establishment incarnate.

This article highlights the immense plight of veterans of 35 years ago and those of today. Fighting an ignominious battle in a land where they are not welcomed and not understood and one they don't understand. Coming home to face new battles - the greatest battle of restoring their own dignity. Their battle wounds going untended and their honor in question due to the mud of greed, incompetence and lies that the commander and chief laid upon their mission.

Thank you Ms LaMarche for reminding us of the veterans who live on our sidewalks and for reminding us of one hero who should be honored by a generation that has nearly forgotten him and their lost fighters. I will be making a donation to Mike Gravel's campaign today.

I am humbled hearing about Mike Gravel. I didnt know.. This is rocking my world. He is the most worthy candidate so far in this entire race. Street cred is right for this fight! Wow the propaganda runs deep. The media repeats the same info every day like a drumbeat that we have these two characters to choose from as they dutifully host and comment on the race. This is a democracy, right?.. Mike, we need you more than ever! Maybe we could assemble a team of Superheroes to save the day; Gravel, Kucinich, Nader and Sheehan, McKinney and Lee.

Clinton's "health care" proposal is not just a voucher. It's forced insurance company tithing. She wants to skip the government middle man, unlike Bush, who hands our taxes over to his corporate buddies. Forget tax and loot. She supports personalized looting, direct from you to the insurance company.

People on this website didn't know about Mike Gravel before?

How can that be? Didn't this supposedly progressive run extensive coverage about those candidates that represent the viewpoints of many of the readers here?

I guess not.

There are no shortcuts to success. By voting democratic you are taking a shortcut and won't get to the goal of having a government that leads on a platform of peace and justice.

so it goes...

I respected Gravel's voice in the Democratic debates, and his past honorable history re the Pentagon papers. However Gravel has lost some points with me on three counts:

(a) he refused to support Kucinich's impeachment of Cheney for no articulate reason that I could ever find.

(b) he has attacked Obama as the worst of the democratic candidates precisely because Obama is raising hopes. I find this reasoning incomprehensible, a logical non sequitur, the product of a muddled mind. Raised hopes, if on a big enough scale, just possibly could be one means out of our morass.

(c) he showed no sign of expressing solidarity with Kucinich, his natural ally in terms of positions and agenda. This puzzled me. (Whereas Kucinich graciously publicly praised Gravel for his Pentagon Papers role in one of the debates.)

I sent money to Gravel, Kucinich and Ron Paul. The truth are they're the only people in the District of Criminals WORTH ANYTHING. Add Cynthia McKinney to the list too.

What Gravel accomplished was wonderful. It means that rich-kids like Bush needn't ever-again worry about being Drafted (only the poor, now with no real employment-prospects -- and the Nat-Guard [former haven for boys like Bush] is now on Front-Lines!). Thank goodness for Gravel -- else-wise someone like Bush would not have 'been-there' to soon actually-initiate the massive influx of neo/pseudo-Immigrant labor that Gen. Barnes was fired for not wanting to train...to be our new "boots-on-ground" in many else-wheres. When 35-million neo-Guest-Workers (who can't fuss, or go Union, or even 'complain') enter the USofA to join their friends already-here (to support formerly-rural families back-home -- starving due to corn-dumping, itself due to NAFTA-enabled Greed), they will also line-up for their only-shot at real-Citizenship -- live through 6-years of hell (maybe in mopping-up Venezuela?), and win the Prize!
Nice scheme, all-in-all...

I am even more impressed with Gravel knowing now what role he played in ending the draft. How sad that we voters know so little about the candidates -- except for the stuff that doesn't matter. Imagine that so many of us thought Gravel must have dropped out of the race. Even my son, who has favored Gravel from the early days of this campaign, thought he was out of the race. The mainstream media so ill serves the public to keep this secret -- Mike Gravel is (still) running for president.