GOP Mocks Public Service
Speaking Wednesday at the Republican National Convention, former New York Governor George Pataki sneered, "[Barack Obama] was a community organizer. What in God's name is a community organizer? I don't even know if that's a job."
Then former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani delivered his own snickering hit job. "He worked as a community organizer. What? Maybe this is the first problem on the résumé," mocked Giuliani." Then he said, "This is not a personal attack. It's a statement of fact. Barack Obama has never led anything. Nothing. Nada."
A few minutes later, in her acceptance speech for the GOP vice presidential nomination, Sarah Palin declared, "I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a community organizer, except that you have actual responsibilities."
The party of Ronald Reagan was touting government experience over civic engagement.
At a convention whose theme was "service," GOP leaders ridiculed organizing, a vital kind of public service that involves leadership, tough decisions, and taking responsibility for the well-being of people often ignored by government.
But the controversy surrounding these snide remarks may have backfired. Within hours, Obama sent an e-mail to his supporters, challenging the Republicans who "mocked, dismissed, and actually laughed out loud at Americans who engage in community service and organizing" and soliciting funds for his campaign. His campaign manager David Plouffe sent another fundraising e-mail, saying, "Let's clarify something for them right now. Community organizing is how ordinary people respond to out-of-touch politicians and their failed policies."
Palin, Giuliani and Pataki denigrated not only the tens of thousands of community organizers who help everyday citizens to participate in shaping their society and the millions of Americans who volunteer as community activists but also a long American tradition of collective self-help that goes back to the Boston Tea Party.
Visiting the United States in the 1830s, Alexis de Tocqueville observed in his Democracy in America, how impressed he was by the outpouring of local voluntary organizations that brought Americans together to solve problems, provide a sense of community and public purpose and tame the hyper-individualism that Tocqueville considered a threat to democracy. In the same speech in which Palin ridiculed Obama's organizing work, she touted her own experiences as a PTA volunteer and "hockey mom"--the very kinds of activities that Tocqueville praised and that community organizers support.
The Republicans' nasty attacks on grassroots organizing reflect another longstanding tradition in American politics--the conservative elite's fear of "the people." Some of the founding fathers worried that ordinary people--people without property, indentured servants, slaves, women and others--might challenge the economic and political status quo. In The Federalist Papers and other documents, they debated how to restrain the masses from gaining too much influence. To maintain their privilege, the elite denied them the vote, limited their ability to protest, censored their publications, threw them in jail and ridiculed their ideas to expand democracy.
But grassroots activists wouldn't give up. Every fight for social reform since colonial times--including battles to abolish slavery, promote workers' rights, fix up slum housing, strengthen civil rights, clean up the environment, expand women's rights and protect consumers--has reflected elements of that self-help tradition.
Modern community organizing, an important strand of grassroots activism, began with Jane Addams, who founded Hull House in Chicago in the late 1800s and inspired the settlement house movement. These activists--upper-class philanthropists, middle-class reformers and working-class radicals--organized immigrants to clean up sweatshops and tenement slums, improve sanitation and public health and battle against child labor and crime.
In the 1930s, another Chicagoan, Saul Alinsky, sought to organize residents the way unions organized workers. Drawing on existing groups--particularly churches, block clubs, sports leagues, and unions--he formed the Back of the Yards Neighborhood Council to get the city to improve services to a working-class neighborhood adjacent to meatpacking factories.
A half-century later, in 1985, 23-year-old Barack Obama moved to Chicago to work for the Developing Communities Project, a coalition of churches on the city's South Side. His job was to help empower residents to win improved playgrounds, after-school programs, job training, housing, and other concerns affecting a neighborhood hurt by large-scale layoffs from the nearby steel mills and neglect by banks, retail stores and the local government. He knocked on doors and talked to people in their kitchens, living rooms and churches about the problems they faced and why they needed to get involved to improve their communities.
Obama often refers to the valuable lessons he learned working "in the streets" of Chicago. "I've won some good fights and I've also lost some fights," he said in a speech during the primary season, "because good intentions are not enough, when not fortified with political will and political power."
There are at least 20,000 paid organizers in the United States, according to Walter Davis, executive director of the National Organizers Alliance. They work for community groups, environmental organizations, unions, women's and civil rights groups, tenants organizations, churches and school reform efforts--touching the lives of millions of Americans every day. They work long hours, usually for low pay. Organizers identify people with leadership potential, recruit and train them and help them build grassroots organizations that can win victories that improve their communities and workplaces.
They force cities to put up stop signs at dangerous intersections, organize crime-watch groups and make sure their churches or synagogues shelter the homeless. They force slumlords to fix up their properties, challenge banks to end mortgage discrimination and predatory lending, improve conditions in local parks and playgrounds, increase funding for public schools, clean up toxic sites, stop police harassment and open community health clinics. They even help parents organize hockey and soccer leagues and get local governments to let them use municipal fields and rinks.
As mayor of New York, Giuliani had many confrontations with community organizations. One was East Brooklyn Congregations (EBC), an affiliate of the Industrial Areas Foundation network of community groups. In the 1990s, EBC, comprised primarily of religious congregations and their working-class members, pressured Giuliani to provide city-owned land so the group could expand its nonprofit Nehemiah housing development of affordable single-family homes.
Giuliani agreed to provide a large swath of vacant public land in a neglected part of Brooklyn. At the groundbreaking ceremony for the Nehemiah homes (depicted in the documentary film The Democratic Promise) Giuliani, surrounded by hundreds of EBC activists, lavished praise on the group. "Most of the political establishment in this city opposed them [and] tried to undercut them," he said. Then he lauded EBC because "they do not pay homage to political figures.... They require you to answer their questions. They remind you that you are a public servant."
Giuliani has since forgotten those words of praise, but he was correct. Community organizers make democracy work by mobilizing people to inject long-ignored issues onto the public agenda and hold politicians accountable. They help give people the confidence they need to use the tools of democracy. In a society where wealth and income is concentrated in a few hands, grassroots organizations make it possible for ordinary Americans to find their civic voice and exercise influence in politics.
Our democracy works best when people come together to solve problems, not simply by voting every few years but also by participating in a wide array of voluntary organizations--the "civil society" that serves as a mediator between the power of business and money and the authority of government. Politicians need to listen to people's problems, help them forge solutions, and give voice to their hopes, rather than stoke people's fears and prejudices.
At critical moments, Presidents have embraced activist movements and helped propel them forward.
To win the right to vote, the suffragists combined decades of dramatic protest marches and hunger strikes with lobbying and appeals to the consciences of legislators--some of them the husbands and fathers of the protestors. Woodrow Wilson, no friend of feminism, reluctantly changed his position and supported women's suffrage.
During the Depression, Franklin Delano Roosevelt recognized that his ability to push New Deal legislation through Congress depended on pressure generated by organizers. He once told a group of activists who sought his support for legislation, "You've convinced me. Now go out and make me do it."
Lyndon B. Johnson, initially unsympathetic to the civil rights movement, later recognized that the nation's mood was changing because of the willingness of activists to put their bodies on the line against fists and fire hoses, along with their efforts to register voters against overwhelming opposition. That activism transformed Johnson from a reluctant advocate to a powerful ally.
To win significant reforms, organizers and politicians need each other. Voter drives, boycotts, strikes, civil disobedience and mass marches help inject new issues on the agenda, dramatize grievances, generate media attention and get people thinking about things they hadn't thought about before.
Today, we need grassroots organizing more than ever.
"The last thing we need is for Republican officials to mock us on television when we're trying to rebuild the neighborhoods they have destroyed," said John Raskin, a community organizer in New York. "Maybe if everyone had more houses than they can count, we wouldn't need community organizers. But I work with people who are getting evicted from their only home. If John McCain and the Republicans understood that, maybe they wouldn't be so quick to make fun of community organizers like me."
Now comes Obama, a one-time community organizer, who consistently reminds Americans of the importance of community activism. If he's elected President, he will have to find a balance between working inside the Beltway and encouraging Americans to organize and mobilize. He understands that his ability to reform healthcare, tackle global warming and restore job security and decent wages will depend, in large measure, on whether he can use his bully pulpit to mobilize public opinion and encourage Americans to battle powerful corporate interests and members of Congress who resist change.
Republicans thought they were being smart mocking community organizing. But what they didn't understand is that their smug comments weren't simply an attack on Barack Obama but on the entire grassroots chain of change that has, for over 200 years, made America a more democratic and humane country.
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
146 Comments so far
Show AllRic Abreu [September 8th, 2008 12:22 am] wrote: "Sorry RSJ I completely disagree. Dems need to pay a price ..."
Except the Dems won't be paying any price -- it's this country and people like us who will pay the price for a President McCain. I care about my nation, and especially my children and grandchild, too much to leave them facing an abysmal future of Disaster Capitalism and Christian Theocracy that McCain will guarantee.
Ric Abreu [September 8th, 2008 12:22 am] wrote: "Our hope to get to the magic 5% that qualifies us for matching funds. Then we have four years to try and convince intelligent people like you that they are wasting their time with Democrats and when enough are convinced it will be revolutionary to say the least."
For the reasons mentioned above, I don't have the luxury of hoping for a catastrophe that may or may not change the public mind and make them finally support a Nader or McKinney. After all, it could very well go the other way and put us in the grip of a tyrant, as it did in Germany in 1933. A few more right-wing votes on the SC, as promised by McCain, and you may not have any matching funds available next election no matter how well Nader or McKinney do -- for that matter, there may not even be a next election. We are that close to total fascism; too close to indulge political fantasies.
Nannie [September 7th, 2008 8:03 pm], Nader got less than 1 percent of the vote nationally in 2004, less than in 2000. You can't seriously think he's going to do better this time. In those battleground states you mentioned "8 percent in New Mexico, 7 percent in Colorado, 7 percent in Pennsylvania, and 6 percent in Nevada," Nader's percentage, if it holds up, is enough to hand McCain the election. You really think this country would be better off with a President McCain and religious crackpot Sarah Palin one heartbeat away from the presidency? I don't think even Ralph believes that.
translucent [September 7th, 2008 11:33 pm] good point; Nader's been running for president since 1996 and things have 'progressively' gotten worse. I wish he'd run for a senate or Congressional seat and build up some credibility as a legislator -- he'd do more good that way, and he'd be harder for the Big Media to ignore as a candidate for president. Instead of opposing the Dems, why not join forces with Edwards, Kucinich, Feingold, et al to take over the Democratic Party?
toad_goddess [September 8th, 2008 12:15 am], America has its share of idiots and, like everything else here, we tend to grow them big. We've also made the enormous blunder of treating corporations like individual people, and corporate profits as sacred, which has vastly, and detrimentally, influenced many Americans' ability to think rationally about their fellow human beings and the world. I'd like to say the people from Europe, the UK, Ireland and Canada I've met had the same inclinations toward stupidity that some of my fellow citizens do, but I can't. They were all intelligent and polite people, well-read and well-versed on the issues. We're only a little over two hundred years old -- I think we need more time to grow up socially.
Ric Abreu [September 8th, 2008 12:29 am], that's nonsense and you know it. Obama is not running for emperor.
getreal [September 8th, 2008 2:42 am], good post and, as I've said before, if you can find the perfectly progressive man or woman who has a chance of being elected president in 2008, tell me and I'll gladly vote for him or her. In the meantime, it's either Obama or McCain and Obama is clearly the better, albeit imperfect, choice.
scheiber6923 [September 8th, 2008 9:26 am], some of this was out of our hands. The sophisticated corporate marketing machine which has quietly taken control of our politics since 1968 (read Joe McGinniss' "The Selling of the President 1968"), and the surreptitious consolidation of our national media -- approx. 85 outlets in 1980, down to 6 now -- has not been much reported on here, so average Americans aren't aware of how much propaganda they are shoveled on a daily basis. (Of course, the BM corporations and their owners are receiving nice tax cuts from the GOP, so they aren't likely to kill the goose with that golden egg.) Combine that with the rise of the corporately-financed Christopublicans, another victory by the neocons; the corporate takeover of our voting equipment; and the propensity for outright lying by the Right-Wing Noise machine and you have the recipe for the state we are in today. Those who saw it coming back in the '60s were relegated to the sidelines by our BM and both political parties, dismissed as kooks and commies. As Mark Twain said, "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." The Republicans have been counting on this to get elected since the days of Nixon; Atwater and Rove simply refined the process based on the teachings of Edward Bernays, an amoral PR man who actually made that nasty skinflint John D. Rockefeller appear generous and kindly by having him pass out dimes to street urchins. In the same way, today neoconservatives are selling a system of government that reduces the citizenry to peonage and servitude, rewards the wealthy at the expense of everyone else, and props up strawman enemies to conduct wars for profit, making them seem like moral crusades conceived by God. Sinclair Lewis: "When Fascism finally comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross."
It's too bad we can't sell our National Political BS to the world -- we'd be able to pay off the deficit and have money left over for universal health care and a chicken in every pot.
"The ultimate leftoid illusion of having a better analysis than all other progressives"
Not sure if you're speaking to me here, but if I didn't think my analysis was better, it wouldn't be MY analysis. It is still America, isn't it ? Abdicating our responsibility to stand up for our ideals and beliefs is what has gotten is into our current predicament, "Father Knows Best" et al. There are many things in our way, the few that stand out here are the aforementioned affliction, the compunction to believe that real change is NOT possible, and the belittling of our fellow progressives in an attempt to indimidate them into accepting a "lesser" view point. I respect your view, I just don't agree. That's more than I can say for your angry
post.
scheiber6923 I think he/she's talking to me. But only someone not far from a right winger would attempt to discredit another by calling them a "leftoid" or a "radical leftist" for not voting for Obama.
Who is a "radical leftist? Nowadays, for a Democrat, it must be someone to the left of Rush Limbaugh. Anyway that beats the hell out of being called a "Republican troll" as some bloggers used to do.
Contrast getreal with RSJ. I thoroughly disagree with RSJ but he makes fairly logical and sound arguments. RSJ doesn't belittle or berate posters that disagree with his view point. I can respect that. RSJ can teach some of us a lesson on civility.
These posts are crawling with Rove ass....s pretending to be radical leftists. Plus, some ridiculously naive, holier-than-thou, over-educated, self-flattering, little leftoids whose inflated little egos push them towards a tiny minority of self-righteous dweebs who claim to be better than all the other people who are realistic and understand that Obama will be a big improvement on Bush/Cheney and McCain/Palin. The ultimate leftoid illusion of having a better analysis than all other progressives.
Nader has certainly done some good things, but he could really help by building an effective grassroots movement. But instead his giant ego makes him run for president where all he can accomplish is to allow a continuation of the fascist rule. We all understand the problems with US democracy, the failings of the Dems, and the limitations of Obama. But some of us are realistic enough to understand that voting for Obama is by far the most realistic thing a progressive can do. If you little leftoids can organize something to bring about real positive change, do it instead of bleating about the horrors of Obama. In the meantime, could you help limit the damage or get the f..k out of the way.
getreal writes, "But instead his giant ego makes him run for president where all he can accomplish is to allow a continuation of the fascist rule."
-per chance could you be talking about the same fascist rule the Democrats allow by not using their Constitutionally granted power to impeach? Or the fascist rule that spys on its citizens and Democrats like Obama vote to legalize? Is that what you mean by fascist rule?
If we had a genuine opposition party, Bush would have been impeached or locked up by now and the illegal/immoral wars/occupations would have never even started or would have ended by now. Now that's the truth!
Gee, getreal needs to get real or take a chill pill. Posters like getreal don't need to be to responded to because they don't really have an argument. Like Arry said, getreal is a small tweaking away from being an anti-free speech, fascist, Rush ditto head.
Getreal's attack is almost wholly ad hominen abusive and thoroughly patronizing. It's the DPA staple argument #6 "You leftist need to grow up and.... we adults understand how the real world works so just shut up and get the F..K out of the way."
Oh...okay. Ha! One tiny problem with your "analysis" and "advice" is that we still have the first amendment in spite of Obama's vote to squash the 4th after promising to filibuster against FISA.
If you don't like free speech go to Obama's web site where you can fawn all over the place and others will enthusiastically join you.
You see my "friend" we have just as much right to be disappointed, if not outraged with the Democratic Party establishment and express our opinion as you do yours.
LONG LIVE FREE SPEECH! LONG LIVE THE BILL OF RIGHTS!
getreal -- With just a tiny twist, you could get a job writing for Rush.
What? Obama didn't say those things? Best for us all to pretend? Get the f.k. out of the way for what?
"I do believe that Obama cares for people."
Yeah, I want to believe that too, but when he talks about expanding The military, and taking the WOT back to Afghanistan, I can't believe he really cares. maybe, like many Americans he can only afford to care about certain people, not all people. That's just not good enough for me, wish it was......
Asking Obama to not seek imperialistic global domination would be like asking the quarterback on a football team to not run or throw the ball. It's their job! That's what Emperors do; invade other countries and then rape and plunder them. Meanwhile Big Oil, Big Mercenary, and the Military Industrial Complex grows ever richer and more powerful.
That is why Obama wants to increase military spending and rebuild the military in preparation for more wars. If elected that will be his main task. He has saber rattled Iran, Pakistan and even Russia. Threatening Russia is particularly grave because it could spark another Cold War.
Obama: “And so my job as the next commander in chief is going to be to make a decision what is the right war to fight, and, and how do we fight it?”
Obama: “We’re going to have to provide them with logistical support, intelligence support,” Obama continued. “We’re going to have to have a very capable counterterrorism strike force. We’re going to have to continue to train their Army and police to make them more effective.”
Obama:”Expand the Military: We have learned from Iraq that our military needs more men and women in uniform to reduce the strain on our active force. Obama will increase the size of ground forces, adding 65,000 soldiers to the Army and 27,000 Marines.”
Obama: “We need more troops, more helicopters, more satellites, more Predator in the Afghan border region…etc.
We have been to the USA a couple of times: 1977 (East Coast, from Vermont to the Carolinas and Florida), 1985 (Washington State to the Mexican border, then across Arizona, Texas, Louisiana, Tennessee to Georgia) and 1998-99 (Ohio, all along the Mid-West, the "Bible Belt" and again the Western States). We have seen the vast differences between living standards on "both sides of the tracks". Also, the huge differences between the states, certain regions and of course down the "colour scale". Glaring!!
We have spent every time almost a year. Our son went to high school there, as an exchange student, later studied at one of your Ivy League Universities for his Masters and got his PhD.
We were born in Eastern Europe (Hungary) and seeing the discrepancies between the propaganda (US=marvellous in every aspect; rest of the wold=serious shortcomings in every aspect) and the sad reality was sobering for us.
We did see some good sides to your country and some bad. Everyone we met was either condescendingly nice and generous towards us, or suspiciouly cautious. Not really curious, because they had their mind mostly made up about the homo socialisticus. We tried our best to change their perceptions, but who knows if we've succeeded.
We have always followed closely your internal politics, but lately we get the shivers just by listening to some hypocritical nonsense spouted by an ignorant governor, who has been chosen because... why, really? What are her qualifications? What is her record on issues that matter? And please don't even mention old man McCain!!! And Giuliani? And the other jokesters? And what about the hollering and cheering and sneering crowd??? Pls don't tell me that it is only the politicians! On this forum there are a lot of decent people, but I have the impression that you folks are a small minority.
What hope is there for the rest of the world? Who is the next to be bombed into freedom and democracy? Iran? Syria? Maybe even Russia???? China?????
We are not young any more, but this kind of world is not what I've envisaged for my grandson - who is incidentally just turning "draftable"...
We are not young any more, but this kind of world is not what I've envisaged for my grandson" Nor are we. Ours turns 4 next month. I fear for us all. Thank you for your post.
.
If Democrats cannot beat the Republicans without the votes of the folks who vote Independent, then that is the Democrats fault, not the fault of the people who chose not to vote for them.
http://www.votenader.org/index.html
.
Is this Nader's fourth or fifth "run' for president?
He's been "running" for about 20 years.
And just look at the last eight years of war and torture and horror! If anyone doesn't think Ralph wanted Bush in office,
Then please note the Nakedly Republican posts exhorting people to vote for Nader in 'Swing' states. That is as in between McCain or Obama.
So when 'Nader lovers' chant 'help swing Pennsylvania or Colorado,' they mean help swing it to Ralph's old friend McCain. Nothing less, nothing more.
So let's be honest; if you want McCain, say so; or would that be too ugly on CD? So it's the old stand-by Nader chant, try to get that dog to bark one last time.
But that dog ain't trying to sic Johnny Boy the Republican, just Obama, just the Democrat.
Vote Obama. Or vote Mcain or Nader-same thing.
Excellent. Right on.
.
About the Nader/Gonzalez Campaign
The Nader/Gonzalez independent presidential candidacy will be on the ballot in 45 states, is polling at 5-6 percent nationally, and a new Time/CNN poll shows Ralph Nader polling 8 percent in New Mexico, 7 percent in Colorado, 7 percent in Pennsylvania, and 6 percent in Nevada -- all key battleground states.
For more information on the Nader/Gonzalez campaign, visit: votenader.org.
.
ldnearthesea [September 7th, 2008 10:51 am], I couldn't agree more. Nader and McKinney aren't on enough state ballots to get the necessary electoral votes to win the presidential election, so that's a pipe dream. Popular vote, as Al Gore well knows, means nothing on the national level -- it's the electoral vote that counts. (BTW, most of the electors are Republicans or Democrats and have the option to reject the vote of the majority in their state. Think they're going to meekly vote for Nader, should he win the lion's share of the popular vote in, say, Oregon? Keep dreaming.)
If Nader had kept his promise in 2000 to devote his time to building the Greens into a viable third party, there might presently be some Greens in Congress and in various state offices to establish a foundation for a third party president. As it is now, even if Nader or McKinney by some miracle became president, the Congress would pass laws to stop their progressive agenda and make them powerless figureheads. (Don't worry, they'd easily have the 70 votes in the senate necessary to override presidential vetoes. Theoretically, Congress could even declare war without the president's assent.)
Yes, we should have a more representative democracy with a parliamentary system, proportional representation instead of winner-take-all, and better ballot access for third parties -- but that's not going to happen until the third parties start getting Senators, Representatives, Governors, etc. elected and stop wasting their time and money on the presidency where the decked is stacked against them.
Support independents such as the progressive Cindy Sheehan to keep pressure on President Obama to do the right thing, but forget about wasting your energy on a third party president this year -- it's just not going to happen.
Thanks, Tree-lady and dnoll, I have sent it to the Obama-Biden camp and haven't heard back yet. Tree-lady, feel free to use the script in any way you see fit.
Sorry RSJ I completely disagree. Dems need to pay a price for among many other things:
1. Their refusal to end the wars/occupations
2. Their refusal to impeach Bush
3. The FISA amendment granting Bush and the Telecoms immunity and making it retroactively legal to spy on us in spite of the 4th Amendment.
We that vote 3rd parties aren't under any illusion they are going to win and know full well the duopoly would thwart any attempt to implement a progressive agenda. All the more reason to vote against them. Dems and Pugs represent the status quo we want to shake up. We see them both as rotten to the core and beyond hope.
Our hope to to get to the magic 5% that qualifies us for matching funds. Then we have four years to try and convince intelligent people like you that they are wasting their time with Democrats and when enough are convinced it will be revolutionary to say the least.
-tailcap
Shake it up by doing some real organizing instead of using easy/sleazy Rovian tactics to hurt Obama and allow the Rove/Bush/Cheney/McCain repugs to win again.
Yeah, 4 years of McCain/Palin continuing and amplifying Rove/Bush/Cheney, while you sit on your behind pontificating on blogs. At that rate...
You all sound like Karl Rove to me.
I keep hoping the McCain-Palin ticket will collapse of its own nasty weight and drown in its own bile, but I'm concerned that some of our fellow citizens who have been politically dumbed-down and indoctrinated by right-wing cultural talking points for 30 years will buy yet another up-is-down Republican smear and turn 'community organizer' into an object of scorn.
While I appreciate Obama's emails on the subject, that's just preaching to the choir -- he needs to start running national TV ads refuting this latest GOP slam. Here's a suggestion:
Spot Title: 'Community Service'
IMAGES: Montage of candy stripers helping senior citizens and feeding disabled vets; volunteers serving food at a disaster relief shelter, piling up sandbags during a flood, handing groceries to a family at a food pantry.
VOICE-OVER: "Every day, all over America, volunteers willingly give up their free time to help their fellow citizens, a proud tradition of service that has made America great…"
CUT TO IMAGES & AUDIO: Clips of Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin snickering over Obama's community service at the GOP convention.
V.O.: "Yet, to hear the Republican Party, their selfless efforts to help their fellow Americans and honor our long tradition of aiding those in need is only worthy of snide laughter…"
CUT TO IMAGE: Ask the Republican Party – what do they have against community service?
V.O.: "Ask the Republican Party – what do they have against community service?"
CUT TO IMAGES OF OBAMA & BIDEN
V.O.: "Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe in service to America – not only in Washington, but in local communities across the land. They believe this country was built on Americans helping other Americans. Why does John McCain, Sarah Palin and the Republican Party have a problem with this?"
CUT TO IMAGE: Elect Obama-Biden in 2008 – if you believe in helping America.
If Obama doesn't run an ad like this soon, and make it a regular talking point, Thom Hartmann will be right – the GOP will paint community service as some kind of far-left liberal tripe to be snickered at, and President Flyboy and the Ice Princess will further our march backwards to the Dark Ages.
Great comment! suggestion: Why not make this commercial yourself and put it up on Youtube and MySpace and anywhere else on the web you can, then send a link to Keith Olbermann and see if he would run it on Countdown. You only need to note that you are not affiliated with Obama/Biden '08, are a private citizen and not a 527. this will get it out there faster and you will not get a generic e-mail from their campaign. It is about the only thing that drives me crazy about Obama's campaign - they only send you a generic e-mail when you contact them and they do not seem to have time to have someone actually address whatever you submit, so it is up to us to make it clear to the American People what the truth is about McCain/Palin:
They are against free choice for women and their bodies.
The first gun control law of any significance - the Brady Bill - was written and pushed through by Republicans - NOT DEMOCRATS! They forced Bill Clinton to sign it, and then claimed the Dems were trying to keep guns out of people's hands so they could carry the South in 1994 and take over Congress! Once they did that, they let key parts of it lapse as they quietly passed laws for the FBI NICS background check, which they then blamed on the Dems, counting on the fact that most Americans do not know about the daily process in Congress.
They want more war, not less; more borrowing, not repayments; they want to privatize Social Security and Medicare while the economy is going down the toilet
They want a theocracy to justify continued wars for oil and natural gas.
They want to gut the environmental protections of animals and land to keep their corporate sponsors happy, and killers like Sarah Palin in planes with automatic weapons
Make as many commercials as you can everyone, and put them up all over the Internet, and let's show that cow Palin and her senile partner just what kind of community organizers we are - just like our Founding Fathers who organized the first civil disobedience movement in Boston Harbor!
This is an excellent suggestion, and a great script. Thank you!
It wouldn't hurt to send it to the Obama-Biden campaign people both nationally -and-locally. While we would all prefer that Obama deal with this directly and immediately, that shouldn't be the end of our efforts. There's access TV and local campaign headquarters that can be contacted too.
I'm from Delaware and so Biden is one of my senators. I'd be glad to forwarda copy of this comment to his office. It might be ignored--and it might not.
---
Actually I read the article and went down to the comments in order to ask a question.
Which Bush campaign was it that suggested "faith-based initiatives" (aka community service headed by community organizers) should take the place of government programs to help those less fortunate? Was it Bush senior, W1 or W2?
In any case, how convenient it is to forget what we don't want to remember we said.
Tree-Lady,
Terrified in Delaware
p.s. By the way, if you are supporting a local third party candidate, they and their people might have a few choice words to say about community service too.
Right on! And Thom Hartman has been making a case for voting for Obama instead of a third party candidate for months now on his radio show. Third party candidates are rarely seen running for local offices, or winning them, and that's where a real third party needs to start. There might be some Green office holders here and there (Matt Gonzalez being one in San Francisco), and running for seats on the board of supervisors or city council. More have to run and win to become a viable party; and for anyone to think some third party candidate has a chance to win at the top of the food chain is fantasy!
Other than that, it's unfortunate that the Federal system was set up at the Constitutional Convention so that a parliamentary system did not take hold. Winner take all is the usual voting rule. The rules need to be changed. So, if these Nader and McKinney supporters were really serious about things, they'd clamor for either a new Constitutional Convention to change to a parliamentary system like in Canada or the UK, or get local and state rules changed for runoff elections at all levels and all offices, or clamor for an amendment to the Constitution for runoff elections, because with runoff elections, third party candidates could have more of a chance of winning seats for offices throughout the land, especially for local and state seats. By the way, I'm a social studies teacher, and I have taught government classes, so I know what I'm talking about!
The Green Party has been advocating and working for Instant Runoff Voting and other election reforms for years. Please don't think the Greens are just about getting votes in presidential elections. I haven't been listening to Thom Hartmann, but I hope that isn't what he's been saying.
Trouble is, there is so much noise and hysteria about Obama, Nader, etc. that much good work is unnoticed.
The Greens have never "thrown" the election to the Republicans (working on your assumptions). That agent of that affair would be the Supreme Court.
Vote McKinney/Clemente, register Green, and get to work. We can't put off forever building a robust and active counter-structure to the corporate monster.
Well, the repubs disconnect with the rest of the planet is pretty well complete. They really do believe what they say. I'm convinced of that. The only people who matter are the white faces in the upper income bracket. The middle class is the sink or swim Darwinian battle ground, the under class are flawed losers who deserve no help from anyone at anytime.
To actually disparage community organizing, in a national venue, is quite a step, though.
(Hmmm. I wonder what Jesus, the quintessential community organizer, would think of it all.)
Ladies and gentlemen I understand the passion for third party voting here. I really do. I'm not under any illusion that Obama is anywhere near the progressive I want him to be. Indeed, as far as I'm concerned, if he does succeed, it's the responsibility of us all to start kicking his ass the day after the election to let him know just how strong we are. He's a politician and politicians respond to noisy demographics. Why do you think the Dems did protect Social Security and Medicare?
The only thing that will make his administration more progressive is community organization.
I do believe that Obama cares for people.
The Republican party has declared, in no uncertain terms, that it really doesn't give a sh*t whether you live or die. We, here, already know that.
That's a significant difference between the two parties.
If Obama wins, I start writing like mad. It's what I do best.
If McCain wins, I back up my hard drive, zip lock the family photos, and make sure the family passports are available at a moment's notice.
I know what I will feel in a McCain/Palin America: (and what the powers that be that brought you this staggering ticket want the most is for McCain to die in office)
Despair.
The end of all hope for the American ideal.
You know I do not understand all of this hatred directed at Ralph Nader. He has done more for the American people than all of the other democrats and republicans put in office.
I guess some are taking their present safety for granted. Or maybe some here are too young or obtuse to remember from whence the seat belt and air bags came from. And... the car manufacturers were kicking and screaming all the whole way.
Ralph…..the one-man crusader…..how many lives has he saved as compared to these two candidates.
Starting with George Herbert Walker Bush's "thousand points of light" campaign I started to understand that touting service work was shorthand for the idea that all necessary helping functions should come from philanthropy and people. This was a dressed up way to divest the government of the obligation to help people. Instead you get private sector interests providing this and that part of the service and a large reliance on volunteer agencies--from the Red Cross, to local food pantries to church soup kitchens.
(In actual function it leads to an incomplete and patchwork service net for communities.)
So you can imagine how Republicans would want to diss the practice of community organizing.
What if the people organized and started to demand that government of the people and by the people serve the people--instead of the corporations? Ooh that could be bad news for the feeding trough of corporate greed.
And I hope that Obama understands that when he becomes one of them,he's no longer one of us. That is I hope that community organizers are fully prepared to pressure his government to provide government for the people and of the people for the people.
Because neither party has a great record on that.
This is what democracy looks like. Our common dreams are facilitated by our communities working and demanding action of our city, state and government. It is not a job for sissies. If it t is the will of the people, it is to be obeyed and it demands that the good of the people be put foremost by ALL candidates and elected officials. They are but our servants
These are signed, and ratified treaties and they are the law of the land and can they be enforced by this or any other nation. It just takes the will to do so. This is what THEY are afraid of, that the BEAST will awaken and “organize”.
UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Article 25.
(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection
In typical fashion, a couple of sideliners use 1,700 words and a trumped up headline to defend a job where the primary function is demanding taxpayers pay for something they have seen fit not to pay for.
“His job was to help empower residents to win improved playgrounds, after-school programs, job training, housing, and other concerns affecting a neighborhood hurt by large-scale layoffs from the nearby steel mills and neglect by banks, retail stores and the local government.”
Said differently, Obama received early training in grievance politics, extortion, and other ward politic follies. Apparently this passes for public service in some circles.
We can expect more of the same with an Obama presidency.
“He understands that his ability to reform healthcare, tackle global warming and restore job security and decent wages will depend, in large measure, on whether he can use his bully pulpit to mobilize public opinion and encourage Americans to battle powerful corporate interests and members of Congress who resist change.”
Ignoring the fact that none of these are enumerated functions of the office of the president, a short stint extorting taxpayers doesn’t come close to preparing Obama for the fights each of these would require.
When making a mountain out of a molehill, the molehill is usually noteworthy in some way; in this case, it’s difficult to see the noteworthiness of Obama’s work. 28 years later, the neighborhoods he worked in are basically the same with the same basic grievances.
The kind of limp-minded thinking that envisions a sitting president “restoring job security” is the kind of thinking required for extrapolating beltway success out of unsuccessful ward politics.
Don't take my word for it;
Google; Nader Fidelity Magellan.
The sixth hit by Reidblog, breaks down "Halliburton Ralph's" investments*.
*Know him by the companies he keeps. *Follow his money to General Dynamics too!
Obama does not have any investments in WEAPONS. Or cluster bombs, unlike Nader.
The heck with 'Raytheon Ralph!'
Obama '08 for sure.
Nader acknowledges all that. But at least he takes the money from those companies and donates it to worthwhile causes. I doubt you could say the same of the Republicans or even most Democrats.
Nader is invested in Halliburton, Raytheon (cluster-bombs), Wal-mart and more via Fidelity Magellan.*
Ralph is invested in Cisco which works "hand in glove" with China on Surveilling it's citizen's.*
Nader has been running for president for twenty years and look where we are!
His TOTAL lack of organizing between elections, when he has had so much support, has emasculated the 3rd party movement. Intentionally.
Nader is a Republican Tool. Like his supporters; "hint' if it makes Rove happy it's not good.
Obama. Not World War Three.
Nader should be stumping for McKinney and Green Party candidates around the country. It was a huge mistake for the Greens to put so many of their chips in Nader's corner. Now, Nader is such a "big name" that this obvious fact seems invisible to many people.
As translucent correctly states, if we are interested in building a strong third party, we have to build and organize and nurture new talent. I myself did this for years, but Nader sure as hell didn't. (As far as I know, Nader still hasn't even registered Green.) If someone can provide some evidence that Nader is interested in building a green movement, I'd like to see it.
The totality of Nader's career strongly points to an obvious sincerity, so I'm not quite sure what to make of obstructionism; but, be that as it may, there is still room for a strong, truly progressive party and it will take work, not "celebrity".
Vote McKinney/Clemente, register Green, and start working. We'll need momentum to keep up the necessary organizing as Obama (if he wins) and the Democrats try to siphon off progressive energy.
What are you afraid of?
Nader acknowledges all that. But at least he takes the money from those companies and donates it to worthwhile causes. I doubt you could say the same of the Republicans or even most Democrats.
Obama would have had my vote if he hadn't spent time pandering to the GOP issue after issue vote after vote. How do you like his latest appearance on the Bill O'LIEly show BETRAYING his base yet AGAIN on the issue of the costly war-turned-occupation in Iraq by now saying that "the surge in Iraq was a success"? And he allowed O'LIEly to BULLY him into rightwing submission. If this is the kind of weak leadership Obama is displaying now, how can people expect him to stand up to rightwing bullies when he's president? He won't and he'll be blamed for all the damage Bush/Cheney has done to the country. At this point, voting for Obama is getting more moot be it on the economy, religion, war, guns, environment, etc ... you name it. Sorry.
The only public service republicans like is when it involves them building careers and making big money for themselves and their friends by using taxpayer paid funds to enrich themselves. Why do you think Tom DeLay's party was so popular at the RNC? They love corruption and probably laugh at how stupid the american public has been to go along with all of their adsurdities over that last thirty years. Democrats are not far behind in all of this.
Can anyone on this forum answer one simple question:
The GOP has been mocking public service for decades against the working class so why is this all of a sudden being discussed just because the guy in question just so happens to be a presidential candidate?
Of course, Obama could have gone on the offensive and countered that the GOP has destroyed the working class for all the public service that it has done to keep this country alive but I understand that Obama and the rest of the party have become more GOP-ized over the years so no problem with that. At this point, Nader is looking far better than ever.
votenader.org
Geez, I just saw Obama's campaign manager on Fox going on the "offensive."
Go ahead, waste your vote, and then feel really smug and holier than thou about it afterwards, claiming you voted on principle and all that rot! Nader has his skeletons i his closet too, and again, comparing Obama to McCain, saying that Obama is in the pockets of the corporatists just as much, is lying as much as Repugs lie, which is just about every time they move their lips! Just pray this country, four years from now, hasn't devolved into a Yugoslavia type civil war if McInsane wins because the election is that close, and a repeat of 2000 and 2004 occurs!
.
Why would you vote for Obama?
Why would you vote for McCain?
I haven't seen ONE reason to vote for either. Not one...
.
How about 5 reasons to vote for Obama (in descending order of importance)
1) Scalia
2) Thomas
3) Alito
4) Roberts
5) Kennedy
Nader has ZERO chance of winning. He can only take votes away from Obama and turn over the choice of supreme court nominees to McCain, which will probably result in the overturning of Roe v. Wade.
By all means vote for Nader if you must, but please stop trying to persuade people to follow your misguided lead.
HOW ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT?
This is a DPA (Democratic Party apologist) staple argument, the "HOW ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT?". How about the vote on Chief Justice Roberts?
All 55 Republicans voted to confirm Roberts; 22 Democrats, including Senate Judiciary Committee ranking member Patrick Leahy of Vermont, also voted to confirm Roberts, as did the one independent (Jim Jeffords). 22 Democrats, including Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, voted in opposition.
22 Democrats voted to confirm Bush's Supreme Court Chief Justice.
The "HOW ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT?" argument is a staple DPA red herring because enough Democrats always vote with the Republicans to allow the confirmation. If the Dems had filibustered against those justices they wouldn't be there.
I can guarantee Republicans will not allow Democrats to confirm anyone percieved as a liberal. They will filibuster. Unlike Democrats Republicans don't betray their base.
HOW ABOUT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL?
Remember the Dems voted to confirm Mukasey, who claimed he isn't sure what water boarding is, let alone whether it's torture. They helped confirm him in spite of knowing this. Democratic Senators Schumer, Nelson, Lieberman, Landrieu, Feinstein, Carper, Bayh voted yea on Mulkasey. Obama, Dodd, Clinton and Biden didn't bother to vote.
Mukasey was confirmed 53 to 40 with 7 not voting. Republicans needed Democratic votes and got them.
If these seven Senators had voted against Mukasy and Obama, Biden and Clinton had bothered to vote he wouldn't have gotten confirmed.
Even when Dems control the Congress Republicans call the shots because Dems have no principled opposition to Republicans. Both big parties of business represent the same wealthy and powerful interests. If they didn't Republicans wouldn't be getting their way. If they didn't Bush would have been impeached and the war would have ended.
DPAs can bury their heads in the sand with these very inconvienient truths. They can delude themselves and pretend Democrats are the answer when in reality they are the problem.
I have seen lots of reasons to vote for Obama. One really good reason: the thought of Sarah Palin being vice president to a 72 year old with melanoma!
There are too many fixed minded voters. That's the problem. Tell the pee-brained Hillary/Obama supporters to give Nader or any 3rd party candidacy a chance and they'll be no less nasty than the pee-brained staunch Republican voters being asked to give Ron Paul or even Bob Barr a chance. It's about as "easy" as trying to teach a pig to sing.
Unless Nader wins, this country is heading for a SUPER CRASH and is already going DOWN IN FLAMES. I don't see the other 3rd party candidates being as bold as Nader or even dealing with a multitude of issues except perhaps McKinney but the Green Party is still in shambles and has yet to unite.
GOD IS SEVERELY PUNISHING AMERICA TO ETERNAL DAMNATION !!
Reformed Maverick
http://www.wilypython.net/Reformed%20Maverick.asp
Utah Phillips helped start the Hospitality House in my town which assists Homeless People. Shelters them in the winter.
Volunteers from our community prepare and bring food and volunteer our time.
And to a one, we are voting for Obama.
So is my son. And the ex-sheriff down the street.
And the single Dad across the street. And the guy I saw in front of the thrift store today.
Even with Diebold and Nader, it will be;
Obama this fall.
There are a few Cynthia McKinney voters in your town I happen to, ahem, know.
They are there to keep 'em honest.
Good comment, as usual, mujeriego.
How could those snide eels who propose that EVERYTHING should be solved by voluntarism not recognize the need for people in a community to band together to solve problems? It is a great American tradition. Benjamin Franklin was the epitome of a community organizer.
Sierra says he worked to get sidewalks in his neighborhood. So did Ben Franklin. That is literally a concrete example of what community organizing does.
As the article points out, without community organizers, mostly volunteer like Sierra, some paid like Obama, we would be much worse off. If you live in a community that lacks amenities, then community organizing is a healthy response. Community organizing has gotten women the right to vote and made voting rights a reality for African-Americans. Labor organizing is another form of community organizing. It has brought us such nice things as weekends and benefits. I have done a lot of volunteer organizing to get improvements in schools.
We talk about how we have a "right to this" or a "right to that". These rights are just vapor unless people organize to make them real.
We cannot pay lobbyists, but we can organize. Get it now Palin, Giuliani and Pataki?
Joe
The GOP prefer to be Community Disorganisers....particularly oil rich foreign communities. They sure have disorganised the hell outta Georgia, Afganistan, Pakistan and Iraq.
One thing they do like to organise is perverted Abu Graib/Gitmo/Black Site sex, humiliation and torture parties.
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
John and Sarah McPain are sure showing their Rovian contempt for the lower 99% of the American people. This assault on the American people by the ChristoCorporate NeoCons will take generations to heal. These wounds may fester for the rest of the Neo American Century.
We are seeing the consequence of making government work like business. This causes goverment to become belligerent towards public.
I am tired of using business services with automated services between me and a person who can directly help me. We have choice which business service we are willing to tolerate. We do not have that option with government. We have one government. And it should not behave like a business.
I mean, Government is no longer a public service but just service. It expects its customers to talk to automate answering service when we call for public service or use disfunctional web sites to get any type of service.
I am hoping that the final paragraph written by the author comes true. As this will tell me if public understands diffrence between public service and business service.
toophat for you!
.
About Matt Gonzalez
Matt Gonzalez was elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in 2000 representing San Francisco's fifth council district. From 2003 to 2005, he served as Board of Supervisors President. A former public defender, Gonzalez is managing partner of Gonzalez & Leigh, a 7-attorney practice in San Francisco that represents individuals and organizations in mediation, arbitration, and administrative proceedings before state and federal regulatory bodies. Gonzalez graduated from Columbia University and received a JD from Stanford Law School.
About the Nader/Gonzalez Campaign
The Nader/Gonzalez independent presidential candidacy will be on the ballot in 45 states, is polling at 5-6 percent nationally, and a new Time/CNN poll shows Ralph Nader polling 8 percent in New Mexico, 7 percent in Colorado, 7 percent in Pennsylvania, and 6 percent in Nevada -- all key battleground states.
For more information on the Nader/Gonzalez campaign, visit: votenader.org.
.
.
About Ralph Nader
Attorney, author, and consumer advocate Ralph Nader has been named by Time Magazine one of the "100 Most Influential Americans in the 20th Century."
For more than four decades NADER has exposed problems and organized millions of citizens into more than 100 public interest groups advocating solutions.
NADER led the movement to establish ...Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Consumer Product Safety Commission,
Nader was instrumental in enacting the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Motor Vehicle Safety Act, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and countless other pieces of important consumer legislation.
Because of RALPH NADER we drive safer cars, eat healthier food, breathe better air, drink cleaner water, and work in safer environments.
Nader graduated from Princeton University and received an LL.B from Harvard Law School.
http://www.votenader.org/issues/
.
.
If Democrats cannot beat the Republicans without the votes of the folks who vote Independent, then that is the Democrats fault, not the fault of the people who chose not to vote for them.
http://www.votenader.org/index.html
.
Yeah, and you are quite willing to hand McInsane the presidency on a silver platter!
Are you a quisling Karl Rove plant? Just thought I'd ask!
Idnearthesea: You are a teacher of young people and should know better than to think that the republicans are financing Ralph Nader. Ralph will not steal the election from Obama. Obama will sabatoge his own campaign or it will be stolen like it was from Kerry and Gore. Every democrat that has run against Reagan and the BUshies campaigned from a center right position. It can be argued that Obama should listen to the poor and the disenfranchised if he is really a man of the people. WHy has he not addressed the needs of folks in New Orleans, the overcrowded prisons that serve as dumping grounds for many of our youth, the need for universal health insurance, responding to the plight of the homeless etc.? Do we continue to vote for the lesser or two evils? Does our country's populace deserve a choice? Do you think that an anti-war candidate that continues to support funding the debacle is truly anti occupation? Where is the outrage against torture and extraordinay rendition? Why support our govts. continuance of a spy program? How can progressives in the USA believe that a President Obama will listen to our concerns when he refuses to address these issues during his campaign?
.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638
OBAMA TOP CONTRIBUTORS
” You gotta dance with the one who brung ya ”
Read this also...
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2008/07/hbc-90003343
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/05/america/bundlers.php
.
I took the sarcastic comments made at the Republican Convention personally. In my neighborhood, it took quite a bit of community organizing to get us some sidewalks so our kids wouldn't arrive at school with mud up to their knees. So, too, we finally got the streets paved and some lights placed on various street corners, so that the folks who walked home from the bus would feel safe. My brother saw to it that some bumps were placed on his street to slow down the cars coming off the highway into his street making the children at play on their front yards, or exiting the school bus much more safe. These changes were not made because one person went to his or her alderman or councilperson to complain, but because entire neighborhoods stood together and claimed their rights to city and state and federal services. It was the community organizer in each case who took the responsibility to listen to the complaints, and see that they had the opportunity to the information that they needed to make changes in their daily lives. That is what makes Obama the best presidential material this country needs.
Together then!
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0731-23.htm
A community organizer IS A LEADER. As usual, the extreme right gutter party is cultivating/exploiting its followers' ignorance as they are unable to equate organizer and leader. AFTER their enlightenment they will realize that each individual leads him/herself toward a collectively shared goal: The people's victory over class war oppression. Toward this goal, everyone is starting to "vote third party" in all of our exchange/association.
annabelle The Rovian concepts of fair play include accusing the opposition of their own dirty deeds, repeating those fabrications over and over until their spin becomes believable. Question their darling Palin and the media is not only liberal but biased. Question anything the GOP has done in the last seven and a half years and you are toast. Speak out against their unending wars and you go to jail. If the top ten percent of this nation who claim the majority of the wealth are in the minority then the bottom ninety percent of people who are stuggling in this world of haves and have nots have a giant majority, 90% - 10%. That is an overwhelming out-of-the-park majority, When push comes to shove there shouldn't be any doubt that this vast majority will be fed up with present policies and set the record straight once and for all, no matter who wins this so called election. This country is a mess and the GOP is simply proving with each and every spin that the circus they call responsible government is about to close on the road. Their spinmaster, Karl Rove, may have been a master at what he does, but he is no longer a magician, only a clown. It is time for the GOP to fold their tent and disappear in the night to let Common Sense return to front and center stage.
Nannie, I know all that but HE IS NOT GOING TO WIN. Can't you see that? Vote Obama.
.
Nader can win....... The voters will decide.
Nader will change things.
Nader is our only hope.
Nader is the only choice.
Fight the Two-party system.
VOTE NADER 2008… You’ll be glad you did and so will I…
.
Apologies in advance for "spamming" the comments sites with this message, but I'm trying to maximize exposure of this note to the CD community and get everyone to DO SOMETHING besides gripe on this website.
If the Obama campaign won't go negative on Palin, we must encourage the MSM to do so. They are showing all signs of backing off since the McCain campaign whined about the "unfair treatment."
Here’s a copy of the nasty note I sent to CNN and MSNBC, plus the Washington Post, to try to motivate them to do their job for once. Here’s the links to contact CNN and MSNBC, if you want to plagiarize my note and send them an equally angry message. I encourage everyone at CD to not only complain to these media outlets about their failure to expose Palin for what she is , but their local newspapers as well. These media outlets are hearing from the right - if we on the left are not willing to try to have our voices heard then we deserve another eight years of GOP rule.
If you don't like my note - then come up with your own - but quit your complaining here at CD and start letting the media outlets have it. Do something! And tell all your friends to write to these outlets as well...
http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form1.html?35
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10285339/
"CNN has performed its duty to the public in the past by providing reports on John McCain's involvement in the Keating Five affair, as well as details on Senator Obama's relationship to Reverend Wright, his views on patriotism, and whether or not his "Bittergate" comments reflect an attitude of elitism. I therefore look forward to CNN thoroughly reporting on the following issues that have already arisen regarding Sarah Palin. What does she have to say about the following? And why won't the Republican party allow her to be approached and questioned?
1. She is being investigated in Alaska by a Republican legislature for improperly terminating the employment of a public safety official who refused to fire or accelerate the investigation of her ex-brother in law.
2. As mayor of Wasilla, she apparently tried to fire a librarian in her home town for refusing to ban "bad books."
3. She claims she opposed the "Bridge to Nowhere" when she apparently actually supported it during her campaign for governor. She only came out "against" it when it became clear it was going to be killed anyway.
4. She is claiming she is against corruption and "politics as usual" when she apparently actually hired consultants to help her bring federal dollars into Alaska.
5. She cites as an accomplishment the sale of the governor's jet on ebay. Senator McCain has stated that she personally sold it "at a profit." The plane was actually sold months after the attempted internet sale, for a loss of some half million dollars.
6. She apparently wants to teach creationism in the public schools.
7. She apparently not only doesn't believe global warming is being caused by man, she doesn't even acknowledge that it is occurring.
8. The minister at her Assembly of God church has made numerous controversial political statements. How much of his world-view does she share? Obama ultimately disavowed most of what Reverend Wright had to say. Will Palin be willing to do the same regarding her minister, or will she embrace his positions?
Failure to subject Governor Palin to the same level of scrutiny as other candidates, i.e., providing her with special treatment, constitutes sexism of the worst kind. CNN must not back off just because the GOP is trying to argue that she is being treated unfairly. An ABC poll shows that while some 50% of the county view her favorably , almost 40% do not. (These numbers do not make her "popular" BTW.) Suggest you do your job and keep the 40% provided with the information they seek. It's a sorry state of affairs that we have to rely on the international press, Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, and of all things, the National Enquirer, to conduct proper investigative journalism.
Obama has to defend community service and organizing. Any man or woman that puts down the will of the people and expresses it as below contempt is fair game in my books.
McCain bears the responsibility for showing extremely bad judgment in his choice for the one-heart-beat away running mate. McCain used to have at least my respect, but no more. His convention was an embarrassing exhibition of George W. Bush's in-your-face bravado which carried him and us into 8 years of bad management, judgment, and disaster. With seven homes and a father who was an admiral, well we can see that he was cut from the same George W. Bush pattern of privilege, and will do anything to achieve something beyond the old man, even if it hurts the people and this great nation that they purport to love.
about PUBLIC SERVICE...
Ralph Nader, attorney, author, and consumer advocate Ralph Nader has been named by Time Magazine one of the "100 Most Influential Americans in the 20th Century."
For more than four decades NADER has exposed problems and organized millions of citizens into more than 100 public interest groups advocating solutions.
NADER led the movement to establish ...Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Consumer Product Safety Commission,
Nader was instrumental in enacting the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Motor Vehicle Safety Act, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and countless other pieces of important consumer legislation.
Because of RALPH NADER we drive safer cars, eat healthier food, breathe better air, drink cleaner water, and work in safer environments.
Nader graduated from Princeton University and received an LL.B from Harvard Law School.
.
Ralph is doing us a great service by speaking out on issues the Dem/Pugs would rather ignore. Nader is awesome on issues but he isn't trying to build up a party, When he ran as a Green I believe he didn't even join the party. At least the Greens have a party going for them. Ralph is a one man show. We need a 3rd party not a man on a mission. I voted for Ralph in the past but this time I'm going Green.
"Republicans have only two choices, to lie or lose"
Where did that quote come from?
Sound about right. If a Republican can't hob-nob with somebody richer than he is, better connected than he is, or hatch with other lowlifes some scheme to grub money by some dishonest means, they consider their time wasted.
The concept of doing something for your neighbor or community or country with the incentive of enlightened self interest strikes them as being stupid.
If a Republican cannot perform some act without being a social parasite, he considers that an activity for suckers only.
Ah, so now we who critique the "democrats" Obama and Biden are "fifth columnist Rovians", according to idneearthesea. She or he forgot the standard slander "trotskyite Bukharinist petty boojwah wreckers" or some other such nonsense from the partyline playbooks of the 1930s. But just for the record,
idneearthesea, your candidate Obama MAY believe in evolution and a woman's right to choose, but he is also a firm supporter of faith based initiative, which, in today's context, involves handing over taxpayer dollars to religious institutions in order to better enable religious bodies to set the terms under which evolution, education, and the right to choose are approached in public discourse. He has publicly disavowed on two occasions religious institutions that contain within their theology Afro-centric perspectives of God and the country's history, and he has gone out of his way to repeat slanders of African American families that have been standard fare in public discourse in the United States since the 1920s.
In case you hadn't noticed, he has also now declared the Bush "surge" doctrine in Iraq "successful beyond our wildest dreams", which is fine if you're one of those "progressives" who believes the richest and whitest countries in the world have an unquestionable right to wage aggressive war on the poorest and darkest peoples, but I never have been so I believe the man supports war criminal gangsterism just as McCain does, and what is more, his actions underscore my argument. Apples and oranges? No, the choice is hot death or lukewarm death. The war Mr. Obama supports is wasteful and destructive of the environment, has displaced four million people, created a civil war that has cost the lives of over a million, killed four thousand plus U.S. servicepeople and mangled thousands more.
I will vote for McKinney with a clear conscience, knowing full well that in a few short years, whoever gets in, folks like you hopefully are going to look back on this nonsense and wonder how you ever came to be so snookered. In short, I have a lot more faith in you than you do in me. So back off.
Fiddler Jones: a warning to you: I am not going to forget if McCain steals away this election because it is that close, and the votes that should have all gone to Obama were wasted on McKinney or Nader. If you really want McInsane and Caribou Barbie to be president and VP, and finish off the job started by Bush/Cheney in making what they called that god-damned piece of paper, otherwise known as the Constitution, meaningless, just come out and say so!
I don't know if a shooting civil war would ever break out in this country, but believe me, it could if the Repugs totally shred what's left of the Law of The Land.
Yugoslavia had a civil war some fourteen to eighteen years back. Three sides fought each other; Serbs vs. Croats vs. Bosnians. In our civil war, it's going to be Progressives vs. Repugs vs. the turncoat extreme left. I could be pointing my gun at people like you who handed McCain the presidency, as well as the Repugs!
Don't warn...organize.
Idnearthesea - Please calm down. We are all scared but mustn't go off the deep end.
Joe
Did you watch those jack-booted fascists yelling and chanting at the RNC! I'm not calming down. Unfortunately too many Americans calm down. Too many Americans don't vote either! And too many Americans waste their votes on third party candidates who do not have a chance to win! I'm all for third parties, if we had a parliamentary system. We don't! Want third parties to be viable? Start running Greens or Peace and Freedoms at the local levels, then for state offices. I don't see many Greens or other third party candidates in too many places running for board of supervisor, mayor, city council, etc! How can anyone even think third parties can be successful when they don't even win very many local seats anywhere? To attempt to get a third party candidate into the presidency is just ludicrous!
You're threatening to kill people who don't vote Democrat? I guess I see why you like Obama.
He has threatened the people of Afghanistan, Russia, Iran, Iraq and Pakistan. Just in the election. Who knows who he'll kill once elected.
ldneartheseafinish you seem to believe fanatically in the two party duopoly. Sorry to disappoint you but in the US it is legal to have more than two parties.
Democrats do not own progressives. Democrats have betrayed progressives. I plan to vote for Cynthia McKinney. I have a right to, this isn't a two party only system. We vote for who we like. If Obama had not voted for war and capitulated on FISA there was a possibility he wouldn't hemorrhage left votes. Why should I vote for a candidate I don't like? I am not a lesser-evilist. Obama doesn't deserve my vote.
ldneartheseafinish you wrote: "...and off the job started by Bush/Cheney..."
-okay if the Dems oppose Bush/Cheny why don't they impeach him? Why did the leader of the Dems say impeachment was off the table? Could it be Democrats are sell outs? Why don't Dems uphold the law? Why do they let Pugs get away with murder?
ldneartheseafinish you wrote: "...it could if the Repugs totally shred what's left of the Law of The Land."
-if the Dems weren't sell outs they would be holding the Repugs accountable not protecting them.
ldneartheseafinish you wrote: "Progressives vs. Repugs vs. the turncoat extreme left..."
-the turncoats are the Democrats. What pisses off DPAs (Democratic Party apologists) is that we on the left actually want to hold the Dems accountable.
If all of us were DPAs the Democrats would feel absolutely no pressure and would continue their lurch to the right. You should be thanking us, because we are the ones applying the pressure on Obama. DPAs actually encourage Dems to keep taking the left for granted and tacking to the right.
I say punish the Dems for becoming like Pugs. Once enough of us vote for 3rd parties to make them viable Dems will immediately veer back leftward, just long enough to win an election. Then it will be business as usual. Doing the business of Big Business Inc. Big Oil and the Military Industrial Complex. Those that refuse to see this are self deluded, fearful, lesser-evilist that deserve to get what the Dems will give; one sell out after another.
I will not vote for Nader for three reasons:
1. Because his campaign claimed to be for the little man and then tried to hire a Republican consulting firm that represented the same corporations he rails against.
2. Because the Nader faithful still haven't explained to me just how he would get his agenda to pass a Democratic or Republican congress.
3. The Nader faithful actually seem to worship him. I am genuinely suprised that Naderites don't prostrate themselves in the direction of his house each day: "O Ralph, you have all the answers!". "O Mighty Ralph, protect us from ourselves", "O vengeful Ralph, smite thy enemies!"
I doubt any Nader supporter actually believes he will win. I voted for him in 2000 but this time I'm going with the Greens. Trust me, we know our candidate isn't going to come within a mile of winning.
We vote for 3rd parties to display our extreme displeasure with Democrats which we see and enablers and protectors of Republicans. It is a protest vote and a hope we can get the 5% we need to get matching funds.
We hope to convince others to dump the Dems and vote 3rd party so we can grow and eventually become a viable party. That will take time but it's worth the effort. Dems are completely discredited in my eyes.
We hate Republican policies as much if not more than Democratic Party supporters that is why we can't forgive them for what we see as betrayals. I list three MAJOR betrayals:
1. The refusal to end the wars/occupations
2. The refusal to impeach Bush
3. The FISA amendment granting Bush and the Telecoms immunity and making it retroactively legal to spy on us in spite of the 4th Amendment.
You may not agree with our thinking but I just want you to understand where we are coming from. Crying wolf about McCain doesn't scare us because the Dems did nothing to Bush when he broke the law and we don't see a HUGE difference between them.
We know they are not the same but to us they are close enough that we want no part of either party. If the Dems are so against Bush why haven't they impeached him? That to us is unforgivable and something no Democrat has given me a satisfactory answer for.
I just posted: There's way more progressive Dems in the Congress and Senate than you'd like to believe. If Rahm Emmanuel, Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, Hillary Clinton, and Joe Lieberman want to form a Middle of the Road Bullshit Party, perhaps that's what THEY should do! There's plenty of Dems who want impeachment, but when the leadership says no, kinda hard to buck her, and I bet if Obama wins, she might not be back as Speaker! By the way, I support Sheehan defeating her as her just punishment for being a collaborator!
I'll stand by everything I posted, and again, I'm warning any and all who say they want to throw away their votes when so much is at stake. I will not forget what quislings and turncoats have done if the election is so close that McInsane steals it ala Bush in 2000 and 2004! One Better hope that this country doesn't devolve into a shooting civil war like in Yugoslavia in the 90's!
Obama is not the perfect candidate, and just who the hell is? Nader? When he ran a magazine in the mid-70's he screwed over his staff and wouldn't let them organize, and that's a fact! He fired people. Don't get me wrong, I love what he's done as someone who has stepped up to the plate and spoken truth to power on a number of occasions, but really, he's nothing more than the Eugene V. Debs of our time. Gore Vidal has enough sense not to run for office, but that doesn't keep him quiet about creeping fascism brought to you by Bush and Cheney! Think of how Nader could actually help Obama if he stopped this nonsense of running for president where he gets literaly a tiny fraction of the whole vote, where he is not even on the ballot in every state, and gave Obama a boost in the right direction toward being a more progressive candididate.
Unfortunately, third parties really don't work when there's few places in the USA, mostly for local elections, where runoff elections of the highest vote getters take place. We don't have the parliamentary system of Canada and the UK where third parties are possible and there's coalitions between parties quite often. You want change? Start making noise to have a new Constitutional Convention, or a call for an new amendment making runoff elections at state, fed, and local levels. Then third parties might have a chance. Until then, I'm voting with the Democrats, as a loyal Democrat, and as someone who will stand up to McInsane and Caribou Barbie and fight, fight, fight!
Your support of Sheehan over Pelosi indicates that you are not completely tied to the duopoly. Now, if only you'd take it to the presidential level. I respect the progressive/liberal Democrats who are trying to kick the traitors in the party out. However, we the people must help even if that means voting 3rd party and forcing the turncoats in the party to behave properly.
I understand where you are coming from and respect your decision to support Obama. I am way out there to the left of you and most Dems. I will not vote for Obama and choose to vote for the Green Party candidate Cynthia McKinney. I'm sure you've heard this one: If the Dems can't beat an almost senile, warmongering, George McBush III without our tiny number of votes they deserve to lose.
Remember votes need to be earned, not automatically granted to the less worse candidate. Bush "won" Florida by around 534 votes but over 200,000 Democrats voted for Bush and almost half of them didn't bother to vote at all. If the Dems lose again they need to look in the mirror and stop lurching right.
I don't believe in the Democratic Party so I'm not voting for them. To those that do and if he wins, I'll be saying, "Told ya so!" in four years when we are still in Iraq and elbow deep in Afghanistan fighting and dying for Big Oil and the MIC, drilling off the coasts and even more of our civil rights have gotten stripped away.
Remember the Republicans that Dems so despise didn't operate in a vacuum and Dems, as the "opposition" party, bear responsibility for helping Republicans with their war and police state agendas and for refusing to impeach him. There is such a thing as the filibuster which allows 41 resolute Senators to stop just about anything. If only the Dems had wanted to.
Don't forget Nancy Pelosi their leader didn't become their leader without their consent and they are not clamoring to get rid of her. If the majority of Democrats were against her she wouldn't be their Speaker. Democrats chose Pelosi because they believe in her and she best represents what they stand for. Kucinch and the few other progressives in the party are red herring and give them political cover. Political parties don't choose leaders they oppose. To deny this is to delude yourself. And that's the truth!
Ric Abreu September 6th, 2008 10:59 pm,
thank you for your understanding of those of us who will vote for obama to prevent a further descent into a fascist state. i realize there are candidates that may better represent my personal views - but to gain my support , they must demonstrate that tactically they're capable of winning, or even going beyond 5-6% of the electorate.
i understand where you're coming from, and i'll honor 2 points in the future.
1. i will not blame independents (nader/mcckinney) if obama loses...(although many of us didn't blame nader for the 2000 debacle).
2. i will continue to march in the streets and organize for a better world, especially if obama is elected. i will march for social and economic justice and against war. i'm positive many supporters of 3rd parties will join me and other progressive democrats, in the streets after the next president is inaugurated.
i cannot in good conscience vote for anyone who is incapable of defeating the repubs.
vote your conscience
...peace...
Good post. I have come to the same conclusion after last week. A bunch of friends have volunteered to work for the Obama campaign in swing states. I would rather march against Obama's policies than be incarcerated or hunted down. I think the rest of the world is on board supporting Obama over McCain.
Then comes the part where we start organizing some movements here and there, and running independents for local office. As stated above, Nader seems to forget about this between Presidential elections. Maybe the Greens. Maybe just some local heroes or community organizers, whatever that is.
Joe
Thanks for your excellent post. In the big scheme of things we are on the same side. Peace be with you too.
indearthesea,
So you are issuing terroristic death-threats against us if we don't vote for Obama?
And when Obama pursues virtually the same policies as McCain, will you still be interested in armed insurrection and civil war?
Maybe that should be progressives vs. faux-progressives. Whatever.
Look for the ol' 51% to 49% for McCain in the swing states, and it won't be Nader and McKinney who are responsible.
Yeah, you could be right, because maybe so few people will actually want to vote for MCKinney or Nader. I hope so. It'll be 51% to $49% for McInsane if the corpporate media continue their act as the ministries of propoganda for the Repugs and Bush and McInsane as they've been so far. At least there is some progressives on the AM talk radio scene now, and Democracy Now is on some 700 FM stations, and Air America had only been on for half a year when the 2004 election took place. Repugs blame their Congressional losses in 2006 in part to the role that people like Tom Hartman, Randi Rhodes and Ed Shultz played, and you don't think they knew who Amy Goodman was last week in St. Paul? so I hope you are dead wrong!
Funny, all these postings by so-called progressives who bash Obama so much, compare him to his opponents, and don't give him any credit for, say, voting for the new GI Bill of Rights, or for wanting to give tax subsidies to solar and wind and hybrid technology in autos, or having EVERYONE pay into social security and medicare, even the filthy rich and upper middle class who don't as of the present. and they go on and claim the Dems are just as evil as the Repugs: horseshit, and I've listed a number of Dems that DON'T FIT YOUR DESCRIPTION OF EVIL DOERS! It's either people acting like they are oh-so-holier than thou left wing, " never buy anything with a corporate label" on it types, who will prove their phoniness in voting for two sure losers; or some Rove agent provacateur 5th columnists who want to stir up shit and throw it into the faces of people like me who will vote for Obama. I'm just wiping my face off and chucking the shit right back into your faces!
Actually, I meant vote-rigging which almost certainly happened on a massive scale in 2004 if Stephen Freeman's statistical analysis is right. (Plus the anecdotal things like strange computer breakdowns with one result and when they bring them back up - voila - 51% to 49%...numerous times.) File it in "Things People Would Rather Not Think About".
I'm sure I'm a disappointment, but what is phony about not buying anything with a corporate label? What's radical left wing about it? What's phony about pointing out what Obama's stated positions are?
As I was discussing on another thread, people may think it is necessary to vote for Obama, but spare us the "progressives should unite behind him". He's not progressive. Isn't it kind of phony to "unite behind him"?
"Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy." Variation of a theme from world famous humanitarian Dick Cheney.
Rove-publicans live in fear of the word "organizing," whether it's community, union, or activist. Because there's always the chance a large group of organized Americans might realize they've been getting super-royally f**ked for the past eight years and then decide to actually do something about it.
Can't have the rabble doing any rousing, now, can we?