Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
New Year’s Resolution: Don’t Apologize for Democrats
For the new year, let's resolve: Don't defend Democrats when they don't deserve defending. And that certainly includes President Obama.
Let's further resolve: Put principles above party and never lose our voice on human rights and social justice.
When we mute ourselves as a Democratic president pursues corporatist or militarist policies, we only encourage such policies.
If it was wrong for Bush to bail out Wall Street with virtually no controls, then it's wrong for Obama. If indefinite "preventative detention" was wrong under Bush, then it's wrong under Obama. If military occupation and deepening troop deployments were wrong under Bush, then they're wrong under Obama.
Imagine if McCain had defeated Obama in 2008 and soon tripled the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan. I have little doubt that activists would have mobilized major opposition, denouncing the reality of more U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq combined than even Bush had deployed.
But as Obama goes about tripling the troops in Afghanistan, with more U.S. soldiers in war zones that Bush ever had -- and proposes the biggest military budget in world history -- many activists have lost their voices.
When Obama's West Point speech on Afghanistan paid lip service to benchmarks and a timeline (as even Bush learned to do on Iraq), how did the once independent MoveOn react? Its leaders sent out a muted petition urging -- benchmarks and a timeline. The email might as well have been written by Rahm Emanuel in the West Wing.
Taking cues from the Obama White House, liberal groups went quiet on Wall Street bailouts and bonuses -- thus helping rightwing teabaggers and corporate-fronts to pose as populist saviors of the middle class.
By going soft on the White House or Democratic Congressional leaders, most netroots groups have undermined genuine progressives in Congress -- on issues from Iraq and Afghanistan to Wall Street and health care.
Instead of launching their health care reform efforts behind an easily-explained, cost-effective "Enhanced Medicare for All" bill co-sponsored by dozens of progressive Congress members, netroots leaders meekly made a "public option" their starting demand and pretended not to notice when Rahm Emanuel began signaling last spring that the White House had no intention of pushing for it.
Predictably, we've ended up with corporate-enrichment legislation that forcibly delivers tens of millions of customers to big insurers and big pharma -- with almost no cost controls because of private deals cut in the White House . In the New York Times before Christmas, beneath an accurate header "Corporate Glee," a news article asserted: "The insurance companies were probably among the merriest of industries last week . . . But the drug companies were certainly joyful, too." Insurance stocks are soaring on Wall Street.
It's tragically ironic that netroots forces joined Democratic leaders in killing Medicare for All as an unrealistic starting demand and now are belatedly urging "kill the bill."
I'm old enough to remember that when Democrats are in majority power -- controlling both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue -- they are capable of horrific policies. With Lyndon Johnson in the White House, most Democrats in Congress went along with Vietnam escalation. And with President Clinton, some leading Congressional Democrats joined mostly Republicans in backing the anti-worker, anti-environmental NAFTA.
The good news -- during the eras of Vietnam and NAFTA -- is that large numbers of progressive activists stood fast to their principles and vocally opposed those wrong-headed Democratic policies. They didn't follow Democratic leaders over the cliff or pretend that Democratic presidents are automatically "on our side" or well-intentioned.
And back then we lacked the most awesome tool ever invented for independent grassroots mobilization: the Internet.
The Net has helped unleash a golden age for independent media -- and for journalists unafraid to challenge leaders of both parties: folks like Glenn Greenwald, Jeremy Scahill, Arianna Huffington, Matt Taibbi and Amy Goodman, to name a few.
Thanks to the Internet and independent media, progressive activists are more fully and more quickly informed about national and global issues than ever. Yet many activists are poorly represented by national netroots groups that often function as appendages of the Democratic leadership.
While independent progressive media are booming on the Internet, the largest netroots political-action groups are sorely lacking in independence.
Be it resolved: In 2010, we will not apologize for indefensible Democratic policies, and we will no longer support netroots groups that fail to resist such policies.
- Posted in
142 Comments so far
Show AllAll believers in the two political parties have fallen for the ruse. I'm undecided whether a third party would help, but it might be a start. It would still take a super-majority to accomplish anything, and we would still be stuck in a capitalistic system.
We don't need a third party, we need a second.
good 1
A super-majority is NOT necessary to accomplish important things.
The most needed are 41 Senate seats held by a disciplined party or unified coalition. Both current parties have demonstrated this repeatedly. You know, obstructionism.
I only wish that HC reform could have found 41 Nays. They might have been Nays for the wrong reasons but HC reform in its current, obscene guise would have been defeated. The issue would be out there roiling the polity, motivating stump promises etc. Now it will take 10 years at least for this abomination to reveal its true colors and stir the infinitely plastic populace to loud complaint and put the issue back into play politically.
Sad aside: Best way to end filibuster tradition in the Senate ... elect 41 third (fourth, etc.) party Senators. This will also bring about a strategic alliance between the D's and R's at least in the Senate.
This would stop bad legislation but wouldn't produce any good bills.
Please provide one example of a "good bill" that has come out of Congress during the past 20 years, Buck !
One Democratic Party Senator has followed nearly every one of her votes during the past decade with the statement "any bill is better than no bill".
Not only do the Obama faithful need to stop apologizing for the godfather and his lieutenants in Congress, they need to be criticizing the Democrats and Republicans on every issue.
I'm in total agreement and can't think of anything worth mentioning.
But the 41 isn't enough to start passing good legislation.
That's all I'm sayin'.
"It would still take a super-majority to accomplish anything"
Once they're threatened at the ballot box, they will either get with the program of We the People or they'll be booted out. Talk about accomplishment! We can complain, beg, cry, and even march in the streets, all to no avail, as we have seen time and again.
A third party would force them to either bend in our direction - the majority! - or find another job. It's simple. Sure, we'd have to keep it up for more than one election. You see, they don't believe us. Remember 2000, then 2004, then Obama! They successfully killed third parties. After 2000, they went after Nader big time after he won close to 10% in California. They were terrified of a progressive uprising. Time to resurrect the movement.
Words will not chasten or redirect their actions. They are impervious to threats. They think we will vote for them when all is said and done because the Republican alternative is worse. The Democratic party will not change its mind until it has its nose rubbed in a stunning electoral loss. Even then the party leadership will learn the lesson that it moved too far left--remember 94. The only hope I see is to move as a voting block to a third party. If the movement is strong enough the Democrats, having thrown out their existing discredited leadership and president will ask what it takes to get us back. If the movement is even stronger we will not have to listen to them, we will take power for ourselves.
tammons: I'm a lifelong (recovering) Democrat but I'm coming round to your view that a "stunning electoral loss" (which the congressional elections of 2010 are likely to produce WHATEVER progressives might do--because of the "tea-bagger" influence) is the only way out of the political quagmire of our times. I say we work our tails off for "independent" and "third party" congressional candidates not in "safe" districts in which their votes could not deprive Democrats of their seats, but precisely in those "unsafe" ones in which a Republican challenge is most credible. To be sure, this strategy is more likely to produce Republican winners than those of our own candidates, but these "spoiler" candidates would provide exactly what the Democratic Party so desperately needs: principled progressive voters who will spoil their biennial game of jerking them around with vague rhetorical promises that are quickly forgotten when the pedal hits the metal and they vote with the other side of the corporate duopoly for those measures that most benefit the military/industrial complex. To be sure, as you say, the party may react as it did in its last "stunning electoral loss" of congressional control in 1994 by moving further right in the manner of blue dog Democrats. If the party "moves" that way, it so moves, but it risks the permanent disaster of putting forward empty suit candidates for President the likes of Gore, Kerry and Obama. The party survived the 94 disaster because it could re-elect the entrenched Clinton and then blame stolen elections for the losses of Gore and Kerry; but it won't survive the unmitigated disaster of an Obama presidency. Even though Democratic loyalists will continue to blame non-Democrats like Lieberman and your Republican-villain-of-the-day for their inability to pass progressive legislation, the public may not accept another round of their playing the game of unwilling compromisers with "reality." They may (just may) turn to that progressive party (or those parties) that stand ready to take over leadership from the genuine "left": that is, that side of the political spectrum that reflects the values and aspirations of the majority of the American people.
Seems like a convoluted way to arrive at a true democracy, but hey didn't I say it's a quagmire, and one doesn't extricate oneself in a day from those conditions.
NO, DEFEAT Democrats AND MISEREPUBLICANS AND DEM Independents (e.g., LIEberman & Sanders)! Re-elect NO INCUMBENT, CONgressional (OR Presidential)!!
Lieberman is just an example of the power one person may have. No sane person would vote for him.
No sane person would vote for (Lieberman).
There must be a lot of psychotics in Connecticut.
Citizens arise January 13 th .........
Everyone changes their party registration to a third party .......
Just as a spoiler candidate can have great impact so can a very small minority party, like Lieberman...
No more nice dames and guys .....
Go for your power ..........
Join the true movement to the left January 13 th change to a third party
After getting a phone call from my state's democratic party reps hitting me up for a donation to fight the "lies coming from the republican side" I was stunned. The person on the other end of the phone did not seem very surprised at my reaction when I asked how they were exactly going to use my money to fight these lies. I asked about the lies we were told-why we were not getting the health care we were promised without mandates and with at the very least a public option, why we were escalating wars and not prosecuting war crimes, why our education system is falling apart, why the economy is such a mess for regular people while the banks are getting away with murder (probably literally in many ways) and she did not seem surprised, but almost sympathetic. (She probably was just doing her job-lucky she had one!) When December 24th rolled around and all I got for Christmas was a lump of healthcare coal the Senate wanted me to sit on and turn into a diamond for Blue Cross, I decided that was the last straw. I printed out my voter registration card and decided it was time to switch parties. I am so glad to hear there is an organized date so that we can do this in a way to get across to the Dems, of which I will NEVER be one again (sorry Dennis, but I feel like you were just a carrot the Dems held out to keep us hoping), that their reign along with their Republican brothers is OVER.
Hey gramps, if everyone switched to third party, practically no incumbent would get re-elected.
I believe we could live with Sanders as the only re-elected, and Conneticut is a state of pyschopaths if they re-elect lieberman.
It's simple: Identify. Support, Develop and then Elect Progressive Independents in 2010.
Simple ... but not easy ... but the only course remaining.
Jeff Cohen is right on the mark on this one, As the Australian Labor campaign said in 1972 "Now is the time," Actually Martin Luther King Jr said it before then, but then Dr King tended to be ahead of the curve,
Oh, and that was an Australian party which brought an end to the White Australia policy which had been in effect, put through health care for all citizens of the country, provided free university education for citizens, brought Australian troops home from Vietnam, and put through legislation for equal rights for women, and same for indigenous people, It also put an end to support for a racist South African regime,
AD
Anyone who's paid the slightest attention over the past 8 years or so knows MoveOn has been less than useless as any kind of alternative net organizing tool. They're nothing but a tool of the Dems and don't even pretend otherwise. Besides, all the internet really does for progressive/left causes is provide a forum, like this one, for dissidents to "voice" their protests.
We really don't HAVE a voice, we merely have endless rivers of verbiage which thus far have had ZERO effect on policies from ANY White House or Congress. Occasionally an online petition might get a modicum of attention from some legislator or other, but Obama is as indifferent to our typing habits as Bush was.
Until we begin to mass together PHYSICALLY, in the streets and around Washington centers of power, as well as in front of and inside corporate headquarters, and begin confronting our tormenters and social criminals face to face, we are just spinning our wheels, however much the spinning makes us feel "empowered" for isolated moments. Sitting in front of our keyboards, we are as fragmented as we were before the internet existed--maybe more so.
MoveOn, DailyKos and their kin have been magnificent in maintaining the illusion that we're all empowered because we can type messages to each other about how immensely disappointed we are with our phony leaders and their corporate-friendly policies. But neither these political shills for corporatism nor the CEOs they carry water for could care less about out electronic preoccupations. They haven't been listening, and they never will if we don't stir from our isolated cubicles and learn how to ACTUALLY organize to overthrow these assholes and create new institutions that answer to the peoples' REAL needs.
Like, you know, real health care reform that completely eliminates insurance companies from the face of the earth, as Medicare for All would do. That would be a start. Then we could actually Move On to eliminating the perpetual war mentality that absolutely rules Washington, both wings of the Business Party being happy hostages to the Pentagon and military contractors.
None of this will ever happen if all we do is "sign" online petitions and bitch at each other on blogs, expecting miracles from "netroots leaders" that only want a piece of the action, when it's the action itself that is hopelessly corrupt.
Very well said. MoveOn, DKos are useless tools.
"Until we begin to mass together PHYSICALLY, in the streets and around Washington centers of power, as well as in front of and inside corporate headquarters, and begin confronting our tormenters and social criminals face to face, we are just spinning our wheels, however much the spinning makes us feel "empowered" for isolated moments."
I kept driving to d.c. to add a body for the count. The protests were always on Saturdays when the smiling puppets weren't there. I came to the conclusion that it was an exercise in futility. They didn't see us. They didn't hear us. They don't care anyway. So, to get to the point; if demonstrations are planned, then do it on a weekday. Disrupt traffic, make noise that the media can't ignore, make their days miserable. If you're feeling froggy, throw tomatoes at them.
And don't forget that conservative minded people are just as disgruntled as you. Bush betrayed them, Obama stiffed you. Include them in your plans, make peace with them. Find common ground. Maybe, just maybe, a third party could grow from the ashes.
Otherwise, you'll have to wait until the masses are starving to find commonality.
"Include them in your plans, make peace with them. Find common ground. Maybe, just maybe, a third party could grow from the ashes."
This is it! this is our way out of the electoral hostage situation we're in. Start building those bridges! We have more in common with the teabaggers than we do Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton.
I can't claim any idea that leads the way out but one,
and that isn't guaranteed either.
Snark if you must, but actually you do have more in common with them than B.O. or HRC. This is class war and the uppers are masters at dividing the lowers.
The difference between the Dems and Repubs
Clinton oversaw the death of somewhere between 1.5 million- 3 million Iraqis. We will never know the exact number.
Bush the younger has between 2- 5 million Iraqi deaths on his hands. We will never know the exact number.
That bloody story, ongoing and bi-partisan, about sums up the difference between the Dems and the Republicans.
If you had to guess how many Iraqi deaths Obama will ultimately sign off on what number would you throw out there?
If you had to guess how many Afghani deaths will Obama sign off on...?
If you had to guess how many Pakistani-Somali-Yemeni children do you think will be slaughtered during an Obama presidency?
etc...
Should we start a betting pool? Color it red.
Democrats suck. They are worse than Republicans in that they pretend to be something other than what they are. Those that believe in that pretense are either completely naive'- they often refer to that naivete' as "dealing with reality"- or they do in fact, though they may not openly admit this, identify closely with the oppressor class and the project of American Empire.
___________________________
Many people involved in US anti-war movement(s) have this naive belief that Democrats are not imperialists, that US imperialist policies, such as those pursued by the Bush administration, are just a recent deviation or limited to Republican administrations. In fact, the Democratic Party has a long and bloody history of imperialism. Democrats are imperialists and mass murderers. Nor is this limited to the more conservative democrats; left-liberals have done the same. Liberal governments have slaughtered millions.
The death toll of the Democrats is quite large:
Greek Civil War: 160,000 (Truman)
Korean War: 3 million (Truman)
Assault on Indochina: 5 million (started under Truman, accelerated under Kennedy & LBJ)
Coup in Indonesia: 1 million (LBJ)
East Timor: 100,000 (Carter)
Kwangju Massacre: 2000 (Carter)
Argentine Dirty War: 30,000 (mostly Carter)
Iraq sanctions: 1.5 million (mostly Clinton)
Turkish Kurdistan: 40,000 (mostly Clinton)
The Democratic Party, the party of slavery, has a long history of mass murder and empire building. They are not an alternative to the American Empire. Especially on foreign policy, there is remarkable consistency between republican and democratic administrations.
"The death toll of the Democrats is quite large:
Greek Civil War: 160,000 (Truman)
Korean War: 3 million (Truman)
Assault on Indochina: 5 million (started under Truman, accelerated under Kennedy & LBJ)
Coup in Indonesia: 1 million (LBJ)
East Timor: 100,000 (Carter)
Kwangju Massacre: 2000 (Carter)
Argentine Dirty War: 30,000 (mostly Carter)
Iraq sanctions: 1.5 million (mostly Clinton)
Turkish Kurdistan: 40,000 (mostly Clinton)"
If you go back and look at the elections, these were not the Quote liberal or progressive candidates. These were all the corporate candidates of the time.
.
Exactly, and they're the ones that ALWAYS get the nomination.
The only time the pattern was broken was McGovern's insurrectionary candidacy in 1972. He was abandoned and sabotaged by the party machinery and lost (to Nixon!). After that, the party put in firewalls against that sort of candidate, and none has gotten even close since.
While Obama APPEARED to be a left-field candidate, in fact he'd been vetted and endorsed by party apparatchiks long before - hence his keynote speech at the Convention, the beginning of his march to the Presidency. You don't think they put loose cannons on that podium, do you?
Either the Clintons had made some serious enemies, or the party apparatus recognized that Hillary was a poor bet.
His performance since makes clear his real loyalties. It's in accord with his record in the Senate and most of his campaign positions. (He's also trashed some promises, like "transparency.") Only the tone was "progressive."
Your reference to George McGovern's 72 campaign is spot on... and I'll take the passion and unwavering commitment of the "McGovern Army" over the Kool-Aid drinking "post-racial" (LOL) simpletons marching for the Empire's new war criminal.
Great post, backed up by facts and numbers. I've always said that Democrats are the people's real enemies. At least we can identify the scumbags that call themselves Republicans much easier.
How about not attacking Democrats that are trying to get US back on track?
I have yet to see people at this site or anywhere else on the Left for that matter, that defend Democrats when they do right. And you know damm well there are plenty of sites devoted to attacking the Dems and defending the GOP. This is all helping the worst elements of the GOP to continue as if they won in '06 and '08.
This morning, the Obama administration reversed the Bush/Cheney policy on ever-increasing government secrecy. Declassifying masses of historic documents and stopping the practice of retroactive classification. Does that register? Of course not. And it's only a matter of seconds before someone here claims that it's a sham or that it is insignificant..or.. look over there, HE'S A BAD MAN!
Too many Lefties have picked up the tricks of Spin and Demonization and Distraction and have bought into the GOP/Corporate meme that the goons will ride back into power.
And as for Third Parties?
Well, I'm a Green, sitting in the remains of the Green party. We've had a terrible decade where our party was used and abused, losing it's ballot line, splitting it's membership (on racial/gender lines). We, here in eastern CT have elected a couple Greens to local government in an effort to rebuild our party, but in "Liberal" CT, out of almost 2 million voters, we have about 3000 Greens. Total. Not enough to land a statewide office, no mention of National office. That's not enough to effect any kind of real change for the positive.
And I would be stunned if even that kind of density holds in the center of the country.
The Progressive Movement, if there is such a thing, is intertwined with the Democratic Party and slamming the Dems for everything they do, only hurts the Progressives that are in place and helps the regressives that are waiting to get back into power.
That doesn't mean making excuses for Bad Dems, and there are a few of them, but too broad a brush can only help the very people that Progressives are trying to defeat.
Think (and work) strategicly.
Working strategically is what the dems have done best. They have put on a sham. They are the wolf in sheep's clothing. They are playing a game with the Repuglicans in which they are in these "opposing" roles, but their goals are the same. Unless we separate ourselves from their foolishness, we will become part of it.
You can't really believe "...there are only a few "BAD DEMS"!
Thank you CV. Your joke made me, LOL and was probably the best joke of the year!
You surely meant "...there are only a few "GOOD DEMS"!
If the former, please read Chris Hedges article posted earlier this month on "Why Liberals (like you) are useless"!
www.commondreams.org/view/2009/12/07
Happy New Year
RichM: Perfect response...thanks!
'I have yet to see people at this site or anywhere else on the Left for that matter, that defend Democrats when they do right. '
'Obama Quietly Changes U.S. Immigration Policy' - today's article.
'too broad a brush can only help the very people that Progressives are trying to defeat.'
Be careful with those broad brushes.
That's bad news from Connecticut. We have a lot more registered Greens than that in Oregon, which I think is smaller. And enough reliable voters to keep our ballot line.
You have a lot of work to do. Good luck. I wish I knew more about what happened to the Ct. party, but I couldn't do anything about it from Oregon, anyway.
However: I don't think apologizing for the Democrats will help you grow the party. We have to be seen to have the courage of our convictions to attract people, just as the major parties do. Greens endorse "good" Dems by not running against them.
It's true that positive changes should be acknowledged and celebrated; but the record of this administration is that they talk pretty and do just like Bush, so don't celebrate until we see concrete changes. And this is not the Green Party's business - leave it to the interest groups that monitor these issues. We're the whip.
The Oregon party has been pretty healthy since I've been on the Coordinating Committee; not my doing, more a matter of good working practices. If you want to know about them, contact us through the website. Bottom line is your ballot line. What does it take to get back on the ballot?
Oh, yes: Ralph Nader is talking about running for the Senate next year. It's a great idea. Contact him and offer to help. He just might get you on the ballot in order to run. It would be very, very, good to have Nader running as a Green again.
It's hard to imagine Nader running as a Green in Connecticut. The leadership of the CT Green Party played a leading role in rigging a convention to get unknown David Cobb on the Green Presidential line in 2004, which took the party's vote total down from 2.8 million to 100 thousand in a single election cycle, probably the largest single election cycle collapse in American history. A lot of Greens in CT would love to forget this, since landing Nader is their last hope for resuscitation, but it's very unlikely that Nader will forget it. Since the Greens don't have a Senate ballot line in CT and therefore no advantage to Ralph to accept their offer rather than just run as an independent with no baggage (which, as Ralph knows, is a lot in the Green Party), nobody should expect Ralph to run against Dodd as a Green.
For those who don't know the whole sorry, soggy story, the short version is this: David Cobb ran for the Green nomination in 2004 touting a "safe states" strategy -- that is, not even trying to get on the ballot in "swing states" so as not to "spoil." Nader insisted on a 50 state campaign. The National Committee of the Green Party couldn't stand for that. They circled their wagons around "safe states." They levied personal attacks against Nader. The better-known Greens with progressive media access, like Medea Benjamin, Ted Glick, John Resenbrink, et al all went all out in public in the "Greens Against Nader" drive (to make Dems like them) and argued vigorously for "safe states." I got elected to the National Committee from New York State just after the fiasco. After spending a year trying to help steer party policy away from "safe states" and utterly failing, I quit and became independent. So did almost all the Nader supporters, leaving an inept, literally rag-tag (I'm talking about their clothes) crew of hippies, witches, and faux-radicals to quibble over whether requests to write a press release opposing genocide in the Sudan was really a Zionist plot.
If you're looking for a fighting outfit to seriously flip the bird to the Dems, the Green Party isn't it, and they're not going to become it, either. There are numerous new progressive third parties throughout America started up by Greens who quit. Look them up. For activists, whatever is left of the Green Party is a black hole in space. You can't get anything useful for civilization done there, and if you manage to get out, you're probably too beat to go back into organizing, and too depressed over the prospects for success.
Let me translate this into reality.
"The leadership of the CT Green Party played a leading role in rigging a convention to get unknown David Cobb on the Green Presidential line in 2004"
The bylaws of the Green Party state that the Green Party ONLY nominates and endorses candidates that are MEMBERS of the Green Party. So "Rigging the Convention" was working within the rules of the Party, established and re-affirmed by votes of the membership.
"which took the party's vote total down from 2.8 million to 100 thousand in a single election cycle" Because Nadir's Republican Sponsored run split the Green Party vote. There are only a very limited number of Progressives that are going to vote third party and that election demostrated exactly how limited that resource is.
As a result of the 2004 disaster, The Greens lost their automatic ballotline. That means, from then on, we've had to collect up Petition signatures from all the towns in our district to field a candidate. And the required number of signatures for Statewide candidates is about three times the number of Registered Greens in the state.
"I quit and became independent. So did almost all the Nader supporters" Let me guess, you are a White Guy, right? Because that was the basic split in the party. That "rag-tag crew of hippies, witches, and faux-radicals" and brown people and women, the incompetents that your are so discursive of, ARE THE PEOPLE THAT BUILT THE GREEN PARTY in this country. The ones that earned that ballotline. And it was the White Guys that assumed that they should be in charge, by virtue of their white guyness, that went off with Nadir after he trashed the party.
This part is unfortunately true: "If you're looking for a fighting outfit to seriously flip the bird to the Dems, the Green Party isn't it, and they're not going to become it, either" But, to date, the only other third parties that comprise more than 1% are all way to the Right of the GOP, Libertarians, America Firsters, Border Vigilantes and now Tea Baggers. I don't see any effective third party even beginning to form on the Left.
Because basically, our system is winner-take-all, majority wins. And when that gets broken down, when a Ross Perot steps up and pulls in 15%, a Clinton comes in with less than a majority, less than a mandate and effectively, is a lame duck from day one.
"if you manage to get out, you're probably too beat to go back into organizing, and too depressed over the prospects for success" Or, you could clear your head and learn the lessons, take a look at the real world that just kicked your 4ss, and figure out a way to be more effective.
Oh, and someone else on this thread mentioned creating a third party of Libertarians and Progressives.
You might want to read up on the Libertarians before you hitch your star to that. That is, if you consider yourself to be Progressive or Liberal. Their agenda, aside from having a serious paradox at it's core, is as far as you can get from Progressive. Complete deregulation of all commerce. And removal of all corporate taxes. And personal taxes as well. Because there's no revenue after all that, and there's no regulation, there's no need for regulatory agencies, like the FDA or EPA or DOT or OSHA or..you get the point. In fact since there's no money coming in, there's no function of government at all. And here's the paradox. They are real adamant about "Defending our Borders" But there'd be no money for a border patrol. Oh and they would be OK with legalizing all drugs, but Abortion would be outlawed and somehow, that would be enforced, with no Department of Justice?!
Libertarianism has this paradox at it's center because it is not a political philosophy, it is a rationalization by the ultra rich corpos that worshiped Ayn Rand, that they cooked up to cover their avarice. And they made it sound real cool to people that didn't dig too deeply. To do that they are very selective about what they put out as soundbites. Everyone has heard Ron Paul's call for closing all 725 miltary bases in 125 countries (and many of US agree, myself included, regardless of the fact that that's got less than a snowball's chance of actually happening), But have you ever looked at his Immigration stance? Or Gun Control? Libertarians make Cracker Republicans blush. So before you hook up w/ them, look carefully at their program, if what you see is OK with you, you aint no Progressive, baby.
Your national vote collapsed in 2004 because you intentionally nominated a cipher who refused to campaign vigorously in all states to help get Kerry elected.
Don't scapegoat others for your own party's cowardice and toadyism toward the Democrats.
Um . . . Steve--you left out something here. You quit the Green Party and registered as a DEMOCRAT, not as an independent.
http://archive.recordonline.com/archive/2005/10/25/antihill.htm
Playing fast and loose with the facts like that isn't going to attract many followers to your blog!
And you reproach OTHERS for disguising their true identity! Tsk, tsk, and lol.
"But as Obama goes about tripling the troops in Afghanistan many activists have lost their voices. "
That is exactly why the "powers that be" decided to let the Dempublicans win this time, instead of the Republicrats.
Fascism with a better vocabulary.
Yes, so many believe in the pendulum principle.
"Oooo, my team won this time."
the others say
"Dang, wait til next year."
and the ruse goes on year after year
The real question is not third party,or Democrat,but whether to vote at all. If I'm correct most net-geners didn't bother to vote for Obama (or otherwise)... and probably they were JUST to look elsewhere (see Zizek for further theoretical discussion on no-vote practise).
Dems are as vile as Repuglicans; they just talk better.
Some of us haven't just been typing; we/ve been in the streets since before the first bomb hit Afghanistan in 2001. It didn't make much difference. That's why I believe the only thing that might work is to attack where they hurt: their wallets.
I was very disappointed to see that the Christmas spending was up this year. Do we really want to make Walmart, Target, Sears, Nike etc. etc. richer? Stop shopping. Buy second hand or do without. Stop travelling. Who wants to deal with the airlines longer queues for less service anyway? Airlines are among the very worst polluters. Don't fly anywhere except perhaps to a loved one's deathbed.
They keep telling us we're 70% of the U.S. economy. Let's kill the economy. The money we don't spend we can put towards supporting someone who has lost their job. Raise your hand if you've taken an unemployed or sick person into your own home.
Get rid of your IRAs or pension plans. Stop giving the banks more of your money to play games with.
Kill the economy. The sooner the Empire is completely broke the sooner it ends.
Just a thought: why not start a progressive/libertarian party and name it the "republican party"? That's right, republican with a small "r". republicans would be those committed to a program of U.S. military disengagement around the globe, the "depersonalizing" of corporations, the establishment of environmental and energy policies compatible with sustainability, single-payer medical insurance, increased funding for education, the restoration of constitutional rights and processes, etc. Basically, an anti-Empire and pro-Republic party. It would drive the mainstream parties nuts and would give disaffected Democrats and independents some candidates worthy of their support...OK, so I just suggested renaming the Green Party...the republican party!
That would be REALLY confusing.
That would've been a more useful resolution in 2008, but I guess better late than never.
How about a pledge not to VOTE for any Dems in 2010? Otherwise what's the point?
There are really no Dems or Repugs only,with very few exceptions, attorneys calling themselves Representatives for the people when the only people they represent is the very wealthy, 1% elite, but the silver tongued devil has done a good job of convincing people otherwise. CON gress is right! Folks,most of these people are nothing more than sychophants and corporate soldiers for the corportocracy. I see the problem, but wish I had some answers other than supporting third party candidates, which I have done for years.
Can't add much to what Jerry Rose and RichM already said.
Just one minor point:
"The Net has helped unleash a golden age for independent media -- and for journalists unafraid to challenge leaders of both parties: folks like Glenn Greenwald, Jeremy Scahill, Arianna Huffington, Matt Taibbi and Amy Goodman, to name a few."
Arianna Huffington? Please!
· Yr Obd't Servant
Good catch! I've never seen Arianna ruffle a feather on the Sunday morning talk shows and her website is a magnet for Democratic apologists.
The Democrats are the piss that "sets" the cloth.
The Romans built dye shops with vats outside that served as free public toilets. Not only did they act as your basic "rest area" for passersby, but the urine was used to "set" cloth that had been recently dyed - the same way that vinegar is sometimes used today with natural dyes.
So too the Democratic Party. Since FDR, the move of the Democratic Party toward Social Democracy was stillborn; a casualty of McCarthyism which was as much a Democratic Party invention as it was anyone else's. The old coalition, such as it was, essentially fell apart under Kennedy and LBJ. Since Nixon, the "modern" form of the two party system has emerged.
Each Republican president dyes the political fabric a deeper shade of reactionary brown, and each succeeding Democratic president pisses on the new shade to set the color. Thus with Carter, Clinton, and now, Obama.
All of it is maintained through the ambiguity of middle-classdom and the rest, but people can be forgiven for thinking that the shirts are increasingly brown, all talk not withstanding, and that the whole scheme reeks of piss.
Of course the Romans used various scents to mask the process. Our assholes call it the smell of success and don't even bother with perfumes.
- anaxarchos