quote unquote: Eisenhower on militarism



"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children." -- Dwight David Eisenhower

TSA Excesses: Sometimes you just gotta laugh

The Long War: Without lies, could ruling elites justify their wars?

The Real News interviews David Swanson on his new book War Is A Lie, a much-needed counterweight to the mass of disinformation that distorts our understanding of American politics and history. For the United States, war is an economic enterprise, enormously profitable for those engaged in it, crushingly expensive for the rest of us. We didn't listen when Eisenhower warned us about the danger we faced from military-industrial power. It will be interesting to see if, after 40 years of increasing control over American life, corporate power can be arrested now.
.
A coalition of antiwar groups has proposed a major action for April 9, 2011.

Media: The Maddow/Stewart Interview Uncut

Rachel Maddow and John Stewart had a conversation Thursday night that was comparable to the sort of intelligent, respectful, uncontentious dialogue that was the staple of Bill Moyers's Journal (it wouldn't be a bad thing if the too-often-smug Maddow morphed into a philosopher-journalist along the lines of the greatly missed Moyers). For his part though, Stewart still doesn't get why the Left objected to his characterization at the Can't We All Just Get Along Rally of conservative and liberal as opposite sides of the same coin. He's probably right that it may be more effective rhetoric to describe George W. Bush, say, as engaging in criminal acts than it is to call him a criminal. But if Stewart's intention was, as he says, to turn down the heat of partisan debate in the media, he didn't get the job done.

This may be a product of bad analysis. Stewart misreads Fox News, for example, when he argues that the network isn’t a partisan organization. In fact, Fox is the marketing division of the Republican Party, speaking in the same voice as the Party of No in its opposition to anything proposed by the White House or the Democratic leadership in Congress no matter how closely those proposals hew to free market or other traditionally conservative ideological positions. There are interesting conservative arguments to be made in favor of communitarian approaches to issues like taxes, the environment, foreign policy, military spending, and so on, but you won't hear them articulated on Fox. A news network with a conservative ideological bent would find much to like in Barack Obama's pro-corporate approach to governing, for example, but not Fox (in 2008, you couldn't go to a Democratic rally without tripping over conservatives for Obama); Fox isn't interested in ideology, just politics, specifically in advancing the fortunes of the Republican Party.

In any event, the thoughtful and, more unusually, civil exchange between Maddow and Stewart was a pleasure to watch. Stewart may even be correct that Maddow's use of comedy to illustrate points on her show may be counter-productive. If last night's conversation is any example, her pleasant personality may be enough to get the audience to sit still for explications of complex or controversial ideas. She doesn't need schtick.

No Comment Department: Safe Streets

From the BicycleLaw.com blog:
In the Netherlands, the law imposes a rebuttable presumption of liability on drivers -- if a motorist is involved in a crash with a cyclist, the law presumes that the motorist is liable for the crash, unless the motorist can rebut that presumption with evidence to the contrary. The reason for this shift is that the Dutch recognized that the cyclist will virtually always be the injured party in a collision with an automobile, and by putting the onus of fault on the driver, have provided motorists with a powerful legal incentive to pay more attention to the presence of cyclists.

It needed to be said: The Rally to Restore Sanity was about nothing

As the absurd Keith Olbermann contretemps underscored, the idea of Left-Right equivalency is a fantasy, a right wing myth deliberately fabricated by the same conservative disinformation machine that has driven our politics increasingly fringeward. As Jon Stewart surely knows, there is no Liberal media conspiracy, no death panels, no $200M-a-day trips to the Taj Mahal, no Socialist in the White House, blah blah & blah. For Stewart to position himself equidistant between the Left and Right is to do a disservice to the very political sanity he was nominally attempting to revive. As Bill Maher put it on his show the other night:
The message of the rally, as I heard it, was that if the media stopped giving voice to the crazies on both sides, then maybe we could restore sanity. It was all nonpartisan and urged cooperation with the moderates on the other side forgetting that Obama tried that and found out...there are no moderates on the other side. When Jon announced his rally, he said the national conversation was dominated by people on the Right who believe Obama's a Socialist and people on the Left who believe 9/11's an inside job, but I can't name any Democratic leaders who think 9/11's an inside job. But Republican leaders who think Obama's a Socialist? All of them.
Here's the full clip:

The rest of the story: The Left vs. Jon Stewart? by Nick Baumann (Mother Jones 2010-11-08).

Activism: The United States is at the crossroads.

We will come out of the next two years a very different country, one way or the other. If we continue on as we have since the early 1970s, the forces of reaction will complete the incrementally paced revolution that has enabled the corporate elite and the super-rich to appropriate an ever greater share of public wealth and power. Or they will be stopped, and the nation will get back on the path to expanded freedom, justice, and equality that leads from the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights through Emancipation and universal suffrage to Social Security and Medicare.

The corporations relied on fear and ignorance to win the latest round. The next round could be the last.

Although some members of Congress are wholeheartedly committed to the struggle for political and economic reform, most elected officials in both parties are too compromised or too timid to be counted on as allies in this struggle.

Alternative organizations are needed to develop new leaders, to formulate new solutions, and to fight fear and ignorance. Many progressive institutions already exist, of course, from foundations, research centers, academic journals, magazines, newspapers and websites, to activist groups organized around action against war or poverty or in favor of affordable universal health care or equal rights -- People for the American Way, the makers of this video, is one, and there are many others on the links section to the left of this page -- but all their efforts together have not added up to nearly enough. We may need to develop new organizations. We may need to merge existing outfits into bigger entities. We may need umbrella groups to help existing institutions better work together. We may need to form a progressive political party. But, for sure, more people must participate if the resistance to corporate power is to succeed. This means you -- joining, funding and actively spreading the word about the fight for progressive values.

Economic Policy: Foreclosuregate in 30 seconds

At Mother Jones, Andy Kroll neatly summarizes the complex mess otherwise known as "Foreclosuregate:"
You've got "robo signers," the mortgage servicing employees who scrawled their signatures on hundreds of thousands of crucial legal filings without knowing what they said (violating federal rules), and "foreclosure mills," the full-steam-ahead law firms that cut corners and allegedly broke the law in foreclosing on homeowners quick and dirty (and are now facing multiple investigations). There's trusts and mortgage-backed securities and securitization itself. The list goes on and on.
Or, he says, you can cut to the heart of the problem as Damon Silvers, policy director at the AFL-CIO and member of the bailout watchdog Congressional Oversight Panel, did in recent  testimony:

The Right's disinformation machine: "It must be true. I read it on the Internets"

If the truth will set you free, what will lies do for you?

2010: A mind-clearing exercise for an election day morning

Ralph Nader discusses what's at stake in the midterm elections in an interview on Democracy Now! with Amy Goodman.

Democracy Now! election results live tonight at 8pm (eastern): http://ow.ly/337rp
Twitter: follow #FSvote.

2010: Friends don't let friends vote Republican

Vote. By all means, vote. Just don't vote for Republicans.

California: 2010

Since the Ballot Initiative to End Ballot Initiatives is not on the ballot again this year, here's what we're left with:
Propositions
(summarized here by the California Voter Guide):

Prop 19
would legalize and permit the taxation of marijuana. Pot should never have been criminalized in the first place, and you'd have to be stoned not to be outraged at how racist has been the prohibition's application. In addition to being worthwhile on its merits, adoption of Prop 19 might help to bring about a cessation of the failed War on Drugs. Though it was initially very popular, a lot of money has been spent by the Right and the political establishment to defeat Prop 19; we'll see on Tuesday whether George Soros' last minute $1M donation to the proponents of legalization funded a push back in the last week big enough to stem the tide of misrepresentation, misinformation and fear. YES.

Prop 20, written by a right wing multi-millionaire activist with the intent of further reducing democratic control over redistricting (in California that means, in effect, weakening Democratic control over redistricting), would give the power to draw the boundaries of the state's electoral districts to a panel of 14 randomly selected volunteers who, bizarrely, must, by law, have no experience in government or real-life redistricting. Not that California shouldn't end gerrymandering, but this is just nuts. NO.

Prop 21 is a holding action to save the state's long-neglected parks, which are in danger of being shut down if the measure fails. Public goods like libraries and parks should be paid for out of general revenues, but until we have fair and responsible taxing in California, we need to keep public services going. Prop 21 would establish stable funding for the park system, improve bicycle access and, for most vehicles, provide free admission to the state's 248 parks by introducing a new and unfortunately regressive tax in the form of an $18 registration surcharge on most vehicle registrations. If this proposition fails, you will see plans to privatize park administration or to divest parkland entirely. This is a reluctant but crucially important YES.

Prop 22 is ridiculous; as the LATimes says, it asks voters to referee a dispute between local and state politicians: go do your jobs, people. The measure would bar California from delaying payments to local agencies for transit, public services and redevelopment, the kinds of projects so dear to local pols; but it is being opposed by professional firefighters, the California Teachers Assn. and other worthies because they fear its passage would also result in further cuts to education and public safety. So, NO.

Prop 23. Let's see. Big Texas oil firms, Valero and Tesoro, put this on the ballot and are shelling out millions of dollars in deceptive advertising in an effort to repeal California's landmark global warming legislation and wreck the state's burgeoning clean energy economy. A job killer and a boon to polluters. Um, NO.

Prop 24 "Repeals Recent Legislation That Would Allow Businesses to Carry Back Losses, Share Tax Credits, and Use a Sales-Based Income Calculation to Lower Taxable Income." In other words, Prop 24 jettisons some ill-considered and unnecessary tax breaks affecting a minority of businesses and returns $1.3 billion a year to the state coffers for the next three years, so it seems like a no-brainer. But this is the just the sort of policy-making that should never be the subject of a ballot measure. Only the Legislature can fully assess the pros and cons of budget and tax proposals and weigh the outcome of one set of policy variables against others. This initiative uses a battle mace for an operation that requires a scalpel. If the proposal fails, the Ledge still has time to do what it should have done in the first place: consider these taxes deliberately in open hearings. A reluctant No.

Prop 25, establishing majority rule over the state budget, is long overdue. It would eliminate the requirement of a 2/3 super-majority in the Legislature to pass the annual state budget. Unfortunately, it will leave intact the 2/3 requirement for raising taxes, meaning the crazy right wing minority in the Ledge will still be able to stymie rational budgeting. What good is it to tell legislators they must pass a budget, then not give them the tools to do it responsibly? All the good government types (League of Women Voters, et al) support this proposal. Both fair-tax advocates and anti-tax cranks say that Prop 25 is a doorway reform that will result ultimately in a recalibration of property tax laws to correct the unfair advantage given to corporations by Prop 13. This would be a swell outcome, but unlikely; if 25  passes, it will make it even easier to defend Prop 13's inequities with emotional appeals to "no new taxes." If 25 is defeated, the reform movement will be forced to come back next time with a proposal that restores democracy to both budgeting and taxing; linked as it should be to budget reform, the democratization of the revenue side of state financing would have a much better chance of passing. Without democratic taxing, rational budgeting will still be all but impossible. So I'm casting a very reluctant NO, but acknowledge that the argument that a small step is better than none is not without merit.

Prop 26 is another right-wing special interest play, this time with the goal of shielding environmental criminals from legal remedies by subjecting certain fees and penalties to the 2/3 rule. If you don't like Prop 23, you're really going to hate 26.  It's a wrong answer to the perennial question of who pays for environmental clean-ups, taxpayers or polluters. The corporate swineherds have found that it is much cheaper to stick us with their bills by spending a few tens of millions of dollars on ballot initiatives than it is to clean up their messes themselves. Privatize profits, socialize problems: it's the American Way. A lot of out-of-state oil money is being spent on this one, too. NO.

Prop 27 would eliminate the "nonpolitical" redistricting commission, a dubious reform adopted by the voters two years ago that would in effect empower shadowy experts and power brokers, and instead restore redistricting to the hands of democratically elected representatives. Prop 27 has been endorsed by the California Democratic Party, the California Labor Federation, the teachers' union, the state's biggest conservation group and other trustworthy folks. 27 will cost less than the commission to administer, provides voters with the authority to reject proposed district boundary maps, and requires populations of all districts for the same office to be the same size. As an added bonus, if it gets more votes than Prop 20 it also renders that odious contraption moot. YES.

Governor: Jerry Brown
: He has his limitations, but he is the best choice by far.

Senator: Although Barbara Boxer is infinitely superior to Carly Fiorina, the truth is that the incumbent senator has been an uninspiring backbencher rather than a leader. I plan on voting for Marsha Feinland, the Peace & Freedom Party candidate. Aside from being the better choice on issues, a vote for her will help keep the Peace & Freedom Party on the ballot. Plus, in the astronomically unlikely event that she won, Bernie Sanders would be less lonely and the upper house could sport a Socialist Caucus.

Congress: As John Nichols writes in The Nation, there is one race in California, between Speaker Nancy Pelosi and John Dennis, a Libertarian running on the GOP line, where reform-minded voters could have a real impact.  Dennis' Randian economic casuistries would be irksome if they weren't so wildly impractical and, well, radical. But his unrealizable ambitions for the economy are insignificant when weighed against the very real excesses of the Democrats' foreign military adventurism and domestic assaults of civil liberties. My guess is the political beliefs of a majority of the district's inhabitants are better represented by Dennis (he endorses Prop 19, for example) than Pelosi.

On military policy, Dennis favors "ending both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and withdrawing our troops as safely and quickly as possible....I do not believe that our troops should be forced to be policemen of the world. Our troops, first and foremost, should protect Americans where they live—in America."
Ironically, given that he is running against the legislator-in-chief, Dennis's stance would serve to strengthen the power of the legislature vis-à-vis the executive: "The Constitution is clear on who bears the responsibility of the power to declare war, i.e., the Congress. I am strongly opposed to Congress passing resolutions granting the president the authority to use force. Unless there is an imminent attack, the Congress should never disregard its constitutional obligation over the war power. A decision to declare war requires debate, a process that clarifies the country’s situation and leaves a clear conscience whatever is decided."

Progressives like former San Francisco Board of Supervisors president Matt Gonzalez, and Cindy Sheehan who challenged Pelosi in 2008 and could have usefully run again this year, are speaking favorably of Dennis who is, as the San Francisco Chronicle put it, "running to the left" of Pelosi. On matters of militarism and civil liberties, he certainly is: "The Constitution was written to restrict the actions of the government, not individuals. That is why we call ours a limited government. Unfortunately, American political vocabulary is filled with a lexicon of different types of liberty: civil liberty, economic liberty, sexual liberty, financial liberty, etc. Yet, in the end, there is only liberty. And if we support some types of liberty but not others, ultimately we will be left without liberty at all." This would just be so much rhetoric, though, if it wasn't reduced to specifics: Dennis opposes "warrantless wiretaps," "the creation of extra-judicial systems to deal with enemy combatants," "waterboarding and other forms of torture," and calls for respecting "the 800-year foundation of the law embodied in the principle of habeas corpus."

Closer to home, in the 30th CD where Henry Waxman is unbeatable, a vote for his opponent offers an opportunity for progressives who don't want to risk losing a seat to the Party of No to still cast their ballot for a peace candidate, Peace & Freedom's Richard Castaldo, who as a bonus is also critical of Waxman's sellout of Medicare for All. There is no palatable alternative to imperialist warmonger Jane Harman in the 35th, although the Libertarian entrant, Herb Peters, does include "Bring Home Troops; End Treacherous Wars" in his platform (I'm assuming what seems to be a promise to "out" the U.S. Constitution is a typo).

Many progressives are mad at the Democrats and at Barack Obama for not aggressively pursuing a more liberal agenda. In his campaign for president, though, Obama never -- well, except for the implications of that whole "change" business, Obama never promised to be anything more than the centrist he has governed as. And by now, after 40 years of feckless leadership, unless you live politics like Bill Murray lives "Ground Hog Day" starting out fresh every other November as if it was a new beginning, you know that the Democrats are not going to challenge the corporate oligarchy any more strenuously than the GOP will. If you expected more of the Democrats than they've delivered, it's probably more realistic to blame your own naivete. Real change will come only when people -- collectively -- demand it. That means building a movement that can't be ignored, that can't be defeated, that can fight with a reasonable possibility of victory. Don't get mad, as Joe Hill didn't say. Organize!

Where possible in races for Congress and local offices, it seems to me in our best long-term interest to give support to third parties. With the country increasingly militarized, the infrastructure suffering forty years of neglect, education and other public services falling apart or closing down, the economy in decline, the Bill of Rights under attack, and economic justice ever further out of reach, it's hard to buy the argument that we owe any particular allegiance to the Democrats, beyond thanks for programs, like Social Security and Medicare, now generations old. A vote for a Green, P&Fer or independent is a reminder to the Democratic Party that there is a constituency for change that it needs to court if it expects to win close contests. In addition, local offices are terrific venues for political experimentation and training, and third party office holders can be counted on to support campaign finance and electoral reform (instant run-offs, proportional representation, etc.). In the event that there is an opportunity for radical political change in the future, the existence of third party lines on the ballot could be vital.

quote unquote: more Lincoln on political virtue

"I am not bound to win, but I am bound to be true. I am not bound to succeed, but I am bound to live by the light that I have." - Abraham Lincoln

Change Watch: Excuses, excuses.

President Obama's defenders claim that his administration's failure to turn his campaign promises into policy should be laid at the door of  an obstructionist legislature and "the party of no." Jane Hamsher has been asking what actions Obama can and should take now as chief executive that require no action by Congress. Responses: Glenn Greenwald here; Alan Grayson here; James Galbraith here; Bill Black here.

2010: Barbara Boxer is lucky in her opponent

It's beginning to look like California may be the only parish to dodge the teabagger onslaught on Nov 2:

Well, okay, and maybe New York.

2010: Triangulation -- third way, bipartisanship -- was a mistake.

How different this election season would have been if two years ago the Obama administration and the Democratic leadership had come out with guns blazing. Affordable, universal health care -- Medicare for all. Meaningful financial regulation. A stimulus program built around job creation, infrastructure spending, and protection of state and local governments. These are the specifics of "hope" and "change."
What I hear on the ground is, people didn't say you went too far on health care. They say "You didn't do enough. You should have had a public option. You should have had this; you should have had that. You didn't go too far on job creation, you should have created more jobs." No one has said to me, "You know, Rich, you guys went too far in regulating Wall Street." Most people want to tar and feather them for what they have done. -- AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka
The rest of the story: Trumka: Primarying Lincoln Was 'Priceless', Dems Will Realize Their Timidity by Sam Stein (Huffinton Post 2010-10-05).

Politics: Those Wacky Republicans - a series

Here's an Alabama Republican state senate candidate with the least-needed policy proposal ever: Castrate Democrats.

YouTube

Politics: The End of Democracy?

Since the sixties, one party -- systematically and untiringly -- has sought to delegitimize democracy. Have we reached the tipping point?:
As a result of a twenty-eight-year-long deregulatory spree, we've reached the point where it's painfully difficult for government to undo the damage done to our economic infrastructure by a few thousand millionaires and billionaires playing Monopoly.

And the destructive shift of power in this shift in cultural assumptions isn't just limited to the economy. We have reached the point in the United States where corporatism has nearly triumphed over democracy. If events continue on their current trajectory, the ability of our government to respond to the needs and desires of humans -- things like fresh water, clean air, uncontaminated food, independent local media, secure retirement, and accessible medical care -- may vanish forever, effectively ending the world's second experiment with democracy. We will have gone too far down Mussolini's road, and most likely will encounter similar consequences, elements of which we have already experienced: a militarized police state, a government unresponsive to its citizens and obsessed with secrecy, a ruling elite drawn from the senior ranks of the nations largest corporations, and war.
From Threshold: The Crisis of Western Culture (2009) by Thom Hartman.
It ought to be shocking to anyone that in the wake of the recession the number of Americans living in poverty has jumped to 44 million -- one in seven citizens is now living below the poverty line, more than at any time in the past 50 years. More specifically, one in five American children, more than a quarter of African Americans and Latinos, and over 51% of female-headed families with children under 6 is impoverished. According to poverty expert Peter Edelman, 19 million people are now living in "extreme poverty," defined as under 50 percent of the poverty line, or $11,000 for a family of four. "That means over 43 percent of the poor are extremely poor."

But Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor of The Nation, argues there are ways to attack the problem:
Half in Ten, a coalition working to cut poverty by half in 10 years, is pushing Congress to renew the TANF Emergency Fund, which is set to expire on Thursday. Thirty-six states and the District of Columbia have used the program to provide 250,000 low-income and long-term unemployed workers with subsidized jobs. The coalition is also pushing to make the Obama administration's Recovery Act reforms to the child tax credit and the earned-income tax credit permanent. These progressive policies keep families from falling into poverty and reduce long-term costs such as crime, public benefits and lost consumption. Estimates of costs associated with childhood poverty run at $500 billion annually, or 4 percent of gross domestic product.
The rest of the story: As 44 million Americans live in poverty, a crisis grows by Katrina vanden Heuvel (The Washington Post 2010-09-28).

Politics: There'll be no hope of "change" until we change the system

Historian Paul Street is interviewed by Truthout's Mickey Z.

Independent policy researcher, historian, journalist, activist, political commentator and speaker Paul Street harks back to the day of the public intellectual, a quaint time when facts and reasoned analysis were essential components of our political life.
Mickey Z.: So much of the American experience is based on myths like the two-party system, "land of opportunity," and more. How do you offer a more nuanced view of US history in your work?

Paul Street: I agree on the power of those great American myths and would add some other and related ones: the notion that the United States is a benevolent force for democracy and good in the world; the idea that that the profits system is a form of freedom and democracy; the myth that we can achieve significant democratic change simply by voting in quadrennial corporate-crafted and candidate-centered elections; the notion that we live in a "post-racial" era wherein racism has been mostly defeated; the myth of an independent and objective media. What I try to do to explode these and other key national legends is fairly similar to what you and other American dissidents like Bill Blum and Noam Chomsky and the late Howard Zinn do. I try to rescue from what E.P. Thompson called "the enormous condescension of posterity" (and from what George Orwell termed "the memory hole") some of the many inconvenient facts that do not fit the official narrative imposed by the dominant fables. And I try to fit the doctrinally inappropriate alternative facts into a compelling, accurate counter-narrative that links past to present and vice versa.
Read Obama, Democracy and the "Drum Major Instinct": Interview With Author Paul Street by Mickey Z. (Truthout 2010-09-28).

Books b Paul Street:
The Empire's New Clothes: Barack Obama in the Real World of Power (2010); Barack Obama and the Future of American Politics (2008); Racial Oppression in the Global Metropolis: a Living Black Chicago History (2007); Segregated Schools: Educational Apartheid in Post-Civil Rights America (2005); Empire and Inequality: America and the World Since 9/11 (Cultural Politics & the Promise of Democracy) (2004).

The Long War: Just end it.

Bob Woodward reports that Pres. Obama made the political decision to announce a date certain for withdrawal from Afghanistan out of fear of angering the base if he left the impression that the adventure is open ended. This is being taken in some quarters as evidence of the left's influence on policy. But there is nothing to suggest that the pledge to withdraw is anything more than dressing up as Gandhi for Halloween: the loose costume leaves plenty of wiggle room.

If the left really wants to influence the Democratic Party, there are ways. 1. Contribute and work for members of Congress who have a record of opposing the war. And only them. Do not work for or contribute to any candidate who actively supports militarism. 2. Contribute to and work for -- and field -- primary challengers to Blue Dogs and other Democrats representing the Pentagon and the security state. 3. When no antiwar Democrat is available, support libertarians like Ron Paul who are willing take on military spending, no matter what party colors they sport. 4. Support -- and vote for -- third party candidates who make opposition to the war machine central to their campaign. In California, for example, the Peace & Freedom Party offers to disgruntled Democrats third party candidates for Congress who are not only antiwar, but as a bonus also favor policies promoting economic justice.

2010: Bye Bye Boehner?

It could happen.


Even though the Democrats apparently have settled on running against "Speaker Boehner" as their principle strategy for November, the national party has offered no help to its candidate in Ohio's 8th district. Justin Coussoule has been forced to rely almost entirely on small contributions from rank & file Democrats, but, as blogger Howie Klein reported, the returns
are minuscule compared to the $4,504,493 Boehner’s campaign has collected so far this year. And we’ve begged the DCCC and the DNC for help. We could have been begging the NRCC and the RNC. They flatly refused every time. Even apart from the serious problem sleazy sugar industry shill and DCCC power-behind-the-throne Debbie Wasserman Schultz has with veterans and with progressives, the DCCC is determined to spend all the money they suck out of concerned Democrats on the actual Blue Dogs who have voted most frequently against the Democratic agenda and crossed the aisle to vote with Boehner– reprehensible anti-Choice, antigay, anti-reform, anti-healthcare conservatives like Frank Kratovil (Blue Dog-MD), Bobby Bright (Blue Dog-AL), Walt Minnick (Blue Dog-ID), Travis Childers (Blue Dog-MS), Mark Critz (Blue Dog-PA), Harry Mitchell (Blue Dog-AZ), and Chris Carney (Blue Dog-PA). Financial help for Alan Grayson? Not. One. Dime. Financial help for Justin Coussoule? Well, they don’t even invite him to Democratic events down the road from his own home.

Thank God for independent-minded Members of Congress like Alan Grayson, Barney Frank, Raul Grijalva, Henry Waxman, Bob Filner, Earl Blumenauer, Mary Jo Kilroy and Betty Sutton and for organizations like the AFL-CIO, DFA, Vet-PAC and People For the American Way, who have endorsed Justin and have been trying to help him get his message across.
The Clinton HRC Legacy PAC has given him its endorsement and is working on his behalf.

Justin Coussoule has a real chance to defeat John Boehner. Click on the banner if you'd like to help:
boehner

Change Watch: Forget "hope." Get mad as hell -- and do something about it.

Change, as we may have finally learned for good in 2008, is more than a matter of electing sweet-talking liberals. Bringing permanent change to this nation, in the form of economic and social justice, will take a lot of dedicated effort by many thousands of ordinary people. Jamie Court's new book, "The Progressive's Guide to Raising Hell," shows how. Using examples of actions that have succeeded in the past, Court has created a handbook for citizen activists to use at every level of government. When he was president, Franklin Roosevelt once met with a group of activists who pressed him to adopt a variety of reforms. "I agree with you, I want to do it," FDR said, "now make me do it." Court shows how to lead the way. The "leaders" will follow.

Buy The Progressive's Guide to Raising Hell: How to Win Grassroots Campaigns, Pass Ballot Box Laws, and Get the Change We Voted For -- A Direct Democracy Toolkit by Jamie Court.

Reproductive Health: Programs and policies that could actually lessen the need for abortion.

Here, from an article on RH Reality Check, are a few simple actions that if taken would be guaranteed to result in fewer untimely pregnancies, and hence fewer abortions:
1. Make long-acting, effective reversible birth control methods like IUDs available free of charge to any women who want them. These birth control methods are effective for 5 to 10 years and don’t require a woman to remember to do anything in order to be protected from pregnancy. They can be used by women of any age. If a woman wants to get pregnant, she simply has the IUD removed and her normal fertility returns. This birth control method is widely used in Europe, but quite expensive and less frequently used in this country.

2. Cover all reproductive health care including all methods of birth control, infertility, tubal ligation, and vasectomy, under affordable health insurance.

3. Create excellent and affordable childcare so that women who want to have children can also make a living to support them.

4. Make sure young people learn how to create successful relationships as well as how to be responsible with their sexuality. That will give them the tools to create healthy families and be good parents with enough resources to care for their kids when the time is right.

5. Promote vasectomy as a very safe and inexpensive method of permanent birth control for men. This would be especially helpful for couples who have completed their families so that a late and unexpected pregnancy doesn’t throw everyone into emotional turmoil.

6. Increase research into developing safer, more effective and long lasting methods of birth control.

7. Make sure the Morning After Treatment is easily available, inexpensive, and covered by health care insurance.

8. Require by law that all pharmacies either fill prescriptions for birth control and Morning After Treatment, or else inform over the phone, in advertisements, and by posted signs that they are Anti Choice Pharmacies, and the location of the nearest pharmacy that respect a woman’s choices.
These sensible proposals have little chance of becoming policy because so many  anti-abortion leaders are more interested in imposing their crabbed moral vision on the society at large than they are on helping unwed mothers and unwanted children. As Barney Frank once said, the anti-abortion movement's concern for "life" begins at conception and ends at birth.

The  rest of the story: The Anti-Choice Hoax of the Century by Charlotte Taft (RH Reality Check 2010-09-15).

Politics: Bluedog Day Afternoon

Here are some of the Democratic voices plumping for continuing the Bush tax giveaway to the richest 2% of Americans. If you want to know why the base is alienated from the party, give a listen. Many of these folks are running for reelection. Don't help them; there are plenty of progressive Democrats in tough races who need your money and time.

Letter from Reps. James Matheson (D-UT), Melissa Bean (D-IL), Glenn Nye (D-VA) and Gary Peters (D-MI) to Speaker Pelosi: "In recent weeks, we have heard from a diverse spectrum of economists, small business owners, and families who have voiced concerns that raising any taxes right now could negatively impact economic growth. Given the continued fragility of our economy and slow pace of recovery, we share their concerns."

Rep. Ron Klein (D-FL): “Every day, I hear from families that are still struggling with bills and people who can’t find a job no matter how hard they try, so I believe right now, our top economic priority has to be job creation. In order to achieve that, we need tax credits for small businesses that will help create new American jobs, while also promoting investment and growth. As we work to rebuild the economy, I support a one-year extension of the so-called Bush tax cuts.”

Rep. Jim Himes (D-CT): "The economy has by no means fully recovered, so my bias is that those high-end tax cuts should be extended."

Rep. Bobby Bright (D-AL): “I don’t care if it’s the wealthiest of the wealthy, you don’t raise their taxes,” he said. “In a recession, you don’t tax, burden and restrict. The economy is like a ship, and if you sink the ship, all the good you might do goes down with it.”

Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA): “We are managing a very fragile recovery, and now is not the time to raise taxes on anyone. The timing is wrong and we should not do anything at this juncture that could jeopardize or slow the nation’s economic growth.”

Rep. Gary Peters (D-MI):Extending the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for all earners is the right thing to do as anything less jeopardizes economic recovery.”

Rep. Harry Mitchell (D-AZ):I strongly believe that this is the wrong time to let key tax cuts expire.  We need to encourage investment, not discourage it by letting these cuts expire. Extending these cuts would bring some much needed certainty and predictability to our tax code."

Rep. Michael McMahon (D-NY): "We're not creating jobs, and raising taxes now would not be a great idea."

Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-IN): "I think in this fragile economy, now is not the time to send that message to business owners and those who are fortunate to have the wealth in this country, because indeed they are the ones that make investments, that start businesses investing in companies."

And we shouldn’t forget the Senate Democrat opposition:

Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND): "The general rule of thumb is that you do not raise taxes or cut spending during an economic downturn. That would be counterproductive."

Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA): "I don't think they ought to be drawing a distinction at $250k.”

Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE):I support extending all of the expiring tax cuts until Nebraska’s and the nation’s economy is in better shape, and perhaps longer, because raising taxes in a weak economy could impair recovery.”

Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN): “The economy is very weak right now. Raising taxes will lower consumer demand at a time when we want people putting more money into the economy.”

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT):I don't think it makes sense to raise any federal taxes during the uncertain economy we are struggling through.”

You'll find progressive candidates who need your help at ActBlue.

Democratic Congressman Fights To Save Cancer Victim’s Home From Foreclosure by Union Bank

Despite the preponderance of evidence to the contrary, not every Democratic member of Congress is a spineless quivering blob.
[The] progressive vision was on full display yesterday during a vigil led by Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA) that halted, for now, the foreclosure of a cancer victim’s home. For months, Bonita, California resident Luz Maria Villanueva had been facing impending foreclosure on her home by Union Bank. Villanueva’s situation was especially dire due to the fact that her son has a kidney disease as well as cancer. As medical bills began to pile up, Villanueva had to choose between the life of her son and her home, and she chose her son....Comparing the struggle of families trying to keep their homes to the civil rights struggles of the 1960s which landed him in a Mississippi jail for two months, Filner announced that he’d be holding a community vigil on the steps of Villanueva’s house on the day a local sheriff was scheduled to come foreclose on her. He warned that doing so “may result” in his arrest, but that he was willing to risk it to help her save her home. Thanks to the publicity Filner and the surrounding community brought to the case, Union Bank decided to call off the foreclosure, for now.
Note to Bluedogs and other lily-livered Donkeys terrified of angry voters: here's how to get reelected. Fight like a pit bull for your constituents; stop shivering like a fear-maddened cur at every bleat from Fox News and the Chamber of Commerce.

The rest of the story: Bob Filner Risks Arrest To Save Cancer Victim’s Home From Foreclosure By Zaid Jilani (Think Progress 2010-09-14).

Action: Jobs Emergency National Day of Action Tomorrow

Protest Senators (and their corporate backers) who are blocking good jobs and a real recovery.
We will not accept a “Jobless Recovery”!

We demand:
  • Full and Fair Employment. Congress must recognize the jobs emergency. Pass legislation like the Local Jobs for America Act, extend the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families emergency fund jobs subsidies program, extend unemployment insurance, heed President Obama’s call to renew the countries’ infrastructure and create a national infrastructure bank, and other bills that will create jobs, protect public services, and help get our economy going again.
  • Wall Street must pay their fair share for the crisis they created. A tax on financial speculation could raise $200-$500 billion every year.

The Jobs Emergency:
  • Fifteen million workers – about 10% – are unemployed
  • There is only one job opening for every 5 people seeking work
  • Cuts to vital public services that will put another half million+ people out of work are looming
  • Without a major Federal investment, jobless rates will be 8-13% into the next decade
  • This jobs deficit is deeper and longer-lasting than any post WWII recession.
We need government intervention
to lift this country out of deep joblessness.
While the Corporate agenda is creating hysteria about the federal budget deficit, Congress – particularly the Senate - is doing nothing to help the REAL crisis: the JOBS DEFICIT. When Wall Street was in crisis, Congress found hundreds of billions of dollars to bail them out. We need to respond to the jobs crisis with the same urgency. The best way to get our economy going again is to put people back to work.

Over the next 3 months, JwJ coalitions are mobilizing in multiple important ways to redefine what’s possible and make job creation a federal priority, including:
Take The Pledge: I'LL BE THERE TO DEMAND JOBS WITH JUSTICE

Learn more about our campaign to win Full & Fair Employment and an economy that works for everyone.

September 15 Jobs Emergency Day of Action is organized by Jobs with Justice. National endorsing organizations include:

American Federation of Government Employees
Americans for Democratic Action
BanksterUSA.org
Center for Media and Democracy
Communications Workers of America
DefendEducation.org
Grassroots Global Justice
National Domestic Workers Alliance
National Employment Law Project
Progressive Democrats of America
Right to the City
Service Employees International Union
United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America
United Food & Commercial Workers
US Action
US Student Association

Environment: Never has greenwashing been quite so moving

Afghanistan on Life Support

I'll consider our occupation of Afghanistan a success if we avoid having to airlift the last Americans off the roof of the U.S. embassy.

"Almost 10 years of U.S. and allied occupation, development, mentoring, reconstruction aid, and assistance has taken the country from unbearably dismal to something markedly poorer. And yet even worse is still possible for the long-suffering men, women, and children of Afghanistan. As the U.S. war and occupation drags on without serious debate about withdrawal on the Washington agenda, questions need to be asked about the fate of Afghan civilians. Chief among them: How many more years of 'progress' can they endure, and if the U.S. stays, how much more 'success' can they stand?" -- How Much “Success” Can Afghans Stand?: The American War and Afghanistan’s Civilians by Nick Turse (Tom Dispatch 2010-09-12).

The Long War: A decade of war has intensified the militarization of American society

Veteran military correspondent David Wood reports in Politics Daily that in 10 years of continuous fighting since 9/11 the United States has created a class of professional warriors separate from and in many ways alienated from their fellow citizens.
This is an Army that, under the pressure of combat, has turned inward, leaving civilian America behind, reduced to the role of a well-wishing but impatient spectator. A decade of fighting has hardened soldiers in ways that civilians can't share. America respects its warriors, but from a distance.
The consequences are many: the rise of a new warrior class; a sharp decline in the number of Americans in public life with the sobering experience of war; a fading respect for civil authority; the declining ideal of public service as a civic responsibility; a perilous shrinking of the common ground of shared values that have shaped the way Americans think about war.

The rest of the story: In the 10th Year of War, a Harder Army, a More Distant America by David Wood (Politics Daily 2010-09-11).

R.I.P.: Irwin Silber

There was a time, not so long ago really, when the Left actually made a difference, not only politically, by fielding an army of citizens passionately determined to make the lives of ordinary people better and by providing the intellectual foundation and institutional muscle behind progressive change, but also by helping to shape popular culture. The passing of folk music champion Irwin Silber this week gives us a chance to look back on an era when a group of avowed lefties like The Weavers, for example, could be stars.

Here's an interview with Silber from 2002.

The Long War: Rethinking U.S. Strategy in Afghanistan

Nine years in, the American war against Afghanistan is the longest in our history. With the surge, it is costing taxpayers nearly $100 billion per year, a sum roughly seven times larger than Afghanistan’s annual gross national product of $14 billion and well more than, for example, the total annual cost of the new U.S. health insurance program. Thousands of American and allied personnel and countless thousands of Afghanis have been killed or gravely wounded in the conflict.

The centralized government we have attempted to impose on the highly decentralized Afghan polity has failed to take: "President Karzai has had nearly six years to build a legitimate and minimally effective government, and he has manifestly failed to do so," says this report sponsored by the New America Foundation. "His re-election last year was marred by widespread fraud. Karzai has been unable or unwilling to crack down on corruption or rein in the warlords on whom his government still depends."

It's clear that the current occupation is a failure, amounting to not much more than a Kissingerish policy of destroying a society in order to save it. To avoid being thrown out, you might think we should end our involvement preemptively by leaving of our own volition, but that is not something the foreign policy establishment is willing to contemplate, so we have this attempt to come up with an alternative plan:

The way forward: A five point approach

  1. Emphasize Power-Sharing and Political Reconciliation
  2. Scale Back and Eventually Suspend Combat Operations in the South and Reduce the U.S. Military Footprint
  3. Keep the Focus on Al Qaeda and Domestic Security
  4. Promote Economic Development
  5. Engage Global and Regional Stakeholders.
The authors of the report, holding to conventional faith in western-style economic and security arrangements, believe the United States should not "abandon" Afghanistan even though "U.S. interests at stake in Afghanistan do not warrant this level of sacrifice;" instead they argue it's time to rethink the current strategy. Trying to pacify Afghanistan by force of arms has not and will not work, but even if you accept the premise that America’s vital security interests are engaged there, the costly military campaign is more likely to jeopardize than to protect them. Although the authors continue to find the invasion justified because the attack was initially targeted at al-Qaeda, they admit that "there are only some 400 hard-core al-Qaeda members remaining in the entire Af-Pak theater, most of them hiding in Pakistan's northwest provinces." Since we can't attack Pakistan for various reasons, Afghanistan will have to do, but at least the U.S. should ratchet down its goals to ones that are both more consistent with what the authors define as America’s true interests and that, being more modest, are more likely to succeed.

A New Way Forward | Re-Thinking US Strategy in Afghanistan is a report of the Afghanistan Study Group sponsored by the New America Foundation. Read the report on-line or download it (pdf) to find out what some of the more rational members of the foreign policy establishment are thinking about the war.

Is an infrastructure bank a practical proposal?

This week President Barack Obama announced steps to boost economic growth and job creation, including a national infrastructure bank. The Brookings Institution's William Galston reviews the proposal and the various factors that will contribute to whether it is successful.

The rest of the story: Infrastructure Bank Proposal Would Spur Economic Growth by William A. Galston (The Brookings Institution 2010-09-07).

Change Watch: U.S. trying to cram DRM rules down the world's throats

The ardor of the romance between the Obama administration and big business is undiminished, their latest tryst occurring in secret at negotiations on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement to adopt a copyright treaty that US corporations hope will bring oppressive American-style copyright rules (and worse) to the whole world.
Particularly disturbing is the growing support for "three-strikes" copyright rules that would disconnect whole families from the Internet if one member of the household was accused (without proof) of copyright infringement. The other big US agenda item is cramming pro-Digital Rights Management (DRM) rules down the world's throats that go way beyond the current obligations under the UN's WIPO Copyright Treaty. In the US version, breaking DRM is always illegal, even if you're not committing any copyright violation -- so breaking the DRM on your iPad to install software you bought from someone who hasn't gone through the Apple approval process is illegal, even though the transaction involves no illicit copying.
. -- Latest leaked draft of secret copyright treaty: US trying to cram DRM rules down the world's throats by Cory Doctorow (Boing Boing 2010-09-06).

See, also: Unintended Consequences: Twelve Years under the DMCA (Electronic Frontier Foundation 2010-03).

Economy: The United States of Inequality

Slide Show: The Great Divergence In Pictures. Click image to launch.
Must read: The Great Divergence 2010: What's causing America's growing income inequality? by Timothy Noah (Slate 2010-09-03).

Change Watch: Glory, glory, hallelujah!

Speaking of our colonial war in the Philippines (see Peace Games, below) that followed in the wake of our defeat of Spain, in protest of that folly, an angry opponent of empire, Mark Twain, composed in 1901 this still-timely lyric to the melody of The Battle Hymn of the Republic:

The Battle Hymn of the Republic (Brought Down to Date)

by Mark Twain

Mine eyes have seen the orgy of the launching of the Sword;
He is searching out the hoardings where the stranger's wealth is stored;
He hath loosed his fateful lightnings, and with woe and death has scored;
His lust is marching on.

I have seen him in the watch-fires of a hundred circling camps;
They have builded him an altar in the Eastern dews and damps;
I have read his doomful mission by the dim and flaring lamps--
His night is marching on.

I have read his bandit gospel writ in burnished rows of steel:
"As ye deal with my pretensions, so with you my wrath shall deal;
Let the faithless son of Freedom crush the patriot with his heel;
Lo, Greed is marching on!"

We have legalized the strumpet and are guarding her retreat;*
Greed is seeking out commercial souls before his judgement seat;
O, be swift, ye clods, to answer him! be jubilant my feet!
Our god is marching on!

In a sordid slime harmonious Greed was born in yonder ditch,
With a longing in his bosom--and for others' goods an itch.
As Christ died to make men holy, let men die to make us rich--
Our god is marching on.

* NOTE: In Manila the Government has placed a certain industry under the protection of our flag. (M.T.)

(Btw, that is Twain's version of the imperial flag illustrating the note on O's withdrawal speech.)

Press Release: Public Transit Projects Create More Jobs than Highways

(Washington DC 2010-09-02) New data released today by the Transportation Equity Network reveals that investment in public transit can create hundreds of thousands more jobs than highway projects.

More Transit Equals More Jobs examines official project lists from 20 federally authorized Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and concludes that “if [they] shifted 50 percent of their highway funds to transit, they would generate an additional 184,801 jobs over a five-year period without spending any more money.”

“This report reveals just how much more bang we can get for our buck if we invest in transit,” said Dan Smith, a transportation associate for U.S. Public Interest Research Group (U.S. PIRG). “Transit provides important benefits to communities and, with unemployment so high, this is data that should not be ignored.”

Previous studies, including examinations of federal Recovery Act spending, have consistently found that public transportation creates more jobs than highways. Investment in public transit tends to be more labor-intensive than highway projects because the work is generally more complex, involves the purchase and maintenance of vehicles, and requires much less spending on land acquisition.

More Transit Equals More Jobs makes a broad case for larger investments in our public transit systems. More money for transit not only means more jobs but would additionally lead to less traffic congestion, hazardous pollution, and global warming emissions. # # #

U.S. PIRG, the federation of state Public Interest Research Groups, is a non-profit, non-partisan public interest advocacy organization. For more information visit http://www.uspirg.org.

Part of the way with... oh, never mind.

"You all are combat troops not doing a combat mission, although it looks, smells and feels and hurts a lot like combat." -- Lt. Col. Andy Ulrich, Hawija, Iraq (August 31, 2010).

You may remember a time when Barack Obama was widely admired for a speaking style that was compelling and forthright. Even when you disagreed with him, as I did during his late run for the White House, you admired the clarity, directness and emotional uplift of his addresses. So you had to be disappointed with his uninspiring performance last Tuesday, even as you sympathized with the spot he's in. The chasm between the American self-image as the defender of freedom and justice and its true role as the enforcer of class and property rights around the globe has become so vast that no U.S. politician can be clear and forthright about anything.

The president's immediate problem Tuesday was that he was trying to paint the lipstick of withdrawal on the pig of our continuing occupation of Iraq. However you describe the actions of the 50,000 plus troops and many more thousands of "security contractors" who remain in Iraq, "it looks, smells and feels and hurts a lot like combat."

A mission statement is a form of marketing: it is meaningless without action. The new mission statement for Iraq can't alter reality; as Matthew Yglesias wrote yesterday on American Prospect, "there's simply no redeeming an irredeemable mission." All Obama's version of "mission accomplished" really offered was another opportunity for George Orwell to roll over in his grave.

The most chilling aspect of the speech was its unequivocal embrace of American militarism (the expenditure of "vast resources abroad at a time of tight budgets at home," as he accurately put it). Even as he admitted that "our most urgent task is to restore our economy, and put the millions of Americans who have lost their jobs back to work," the president had no concrete proposals to take us from making war to creating jobs.

Somehow in the past two years the Iraq war has mutated in Obama's mind from something illegal and "dumb" to the penultimate stop in an unbroken line of heroic actions "that stretches from Lexington to Gettysburg; from Iwo Jima to Inchon; from Khe Sanh to Kandahar," an "unbroken line" that the president presumably knows includes a barbarous civil war and almost continuous episodes of territorial expansion, genocide, colonial brutality, war crimes and unprovoked aggression. Khe Sanh, for pete's sake (along with the Tet Offensive, it was Khe Sanh that turned the tide of public opinion against the war in Vietnam).

Ultimately the speech was less about the conclusion of military operations in Iraq than it was a billboard for American militarism in general ("the steel in our ship of state") and in particular this Democratic administration's embrace of permanent war in Afghanistan ("As we speak, al Qaeda continues to plot against us" -- all four or five dozen of them). The peace movement and the left in general have some tough decisions ahead. It is clear by now that taking sides reflexively with the Democrats in every fight ends with being taken for granted by the party's leaders on every front. There may be times when supporting a pro-military Democrat makes sense -- because he or she has been a reliable ally (in the fight for affordable, universal health care, say, or for equal rights under the law), but it is becoming increasingly difficult to take seriously on economic justice issues those Democrats that support aggressive militarism and runaway DOD spending.

The Democratic Party needs to learn that progressives are serious about change.

Are we?

Peace Games: Part of the way with... oh, never mind.

"You all are combat troops not doing a combat mission, although it looks, smells and feels and hurts a lot like combat." -- Lt. Col. Andy Ulrich, Hawija, Iraq (August 31, 2010).
You may remember a time when Barack Obama was widely admired for a speaking style that was compelling and forthright. Even when you disagreed with him, as I did during his late run for the White House, you admired the clarity, directness and emotional uplift of his addresses. So you had to be disappointed with his uninspiring performance last Tuesday, even as you sympathized with the spot he's in. The chasm between the American self-image as the defender of freedom and justice and its true role as the enforcer of class and property rights around the globe has become so vast that no U.S. politician can be clear and forthright about anything.

The president's immediate problem Tuesday was that he was trying to paint the lipstick of withdrawal on the pig of our continuing occupation of Iraq. Mark Twain's U.S. flag - Obabam could have said...from Chattanooga to Wounded Knee, from Mindanao to, oh, GranadaHowever you describe the actions of the 50,000 plus troops and many more thousands of "security contractors" who remain in Iraq, "it looks, smells and feels and hurts a lot like combat."

A mission statement is a form of marketing: it is meaningless without action. The new mission statement for Iraq can't alter reality; as Matthew Yglesias wrote yesterday on American Prospect, "there's simply no redeeming an irredeemable mission." All Obama's version of "mission accomplished" really offered was another opportunity for George Orwell to roll over in his grave.

The most chilling aspect of the speech was its unequivocal embrace of American militarism (the expenditure of "vast resources abroad at a time of tight budgets at home," as he accurately put it). Even as he admitted that "our most urgent task is to restore our economy, and put the millions of Americans who have lost their jobs back to work," the president had no concrete proposals to take us from making war to creating jobs.

Somehow in the past two years the Iraq war has mutated in Obama's mind from something illegal and "dumb" to the penultimate stop in an unbroken line of heroic actions "that stretches from Lexington to Gettysburg; from Iwo Jima to Inchon; from Khe Sanh to Kandahar," an "unbroken line" that the president presumably knows includes a barbarous civil war and almost continuous episodes of territorial expansion, genocide, colonial brutality, war crimes and unprovoked aggression. Khe Sanh, for pete's sake (along with the Tet Offensive, it was Khe Sanh that turned the tide of public opinion against the war in Vietnam).

Ultimately the speech was less about the conclusion of military operations in Iraq than it was a billboard for American militarism in general ("the steel in our ship of state") and in particular this Democratic administration's embrace of permanent war in Afghanistan ("As we speak, al Qaeda continues to plot against us" -- all four or five dozen of them). The peace movement and the left in general have some tough decisions ahead. It is clear by now that taking sides reflexively with the Democrats in every fight ends with being taken for granted by the party's leaders on every front. There may be times when supporting a pro-military Democrat makes sense -- because he or she has been a reliable ally (in the fight for affordable, universal health care, say, or for equal rights under the law), but it is becoming increasingly difficult to take seriously on economic justice issues those Democrats that support aggressive militarism and runaway DOD spending.

The Democratic Party needs to learn that progressives are serious about change.

Are we?

Balance of Payments?: Exporting Terrorism

A no-longer-secret memo, prepared by the so-called "CIA Red Cell," an entity "charged by the Director of Intelligence with taking a pronounced 'out-of-the-box' approach that will provoke thought and offer an alternative viewpoint on the full range of analytic issues," suggests that "Al-Qa’ida" (after 9 years, you'd think at least we could settle on a spelling) may be increasingly looking for American citizens to operate overseas, undoubtedly recognizing that Americans can be great assets in terrorist operations in other countries because "they carry US passports, don’t fit the typical Arab-Muslim profile, and can easily communicate with radical leaders through their unfettered access to the internet and other modes of communication" (although on that latter point, who can't?). The Red Cell seems genuinely worried that our reputation could be damaged if the U.S. were "to be seen increasingly as an incubator and 'exporter of terrorism.'" Sounds soft-headed, soft-hearted and positively un-American. Can it be there are actual Reds in the CIA Red Cell? -- CIA Red Cell special memorandum on ”What If Foreigners See the United States as an ’Exporter of Terrorism’” (Wikileaks pdf 2010-08-25).

quote unquote: William Dean Howells on American virtue


"What a thing it is
to have a country
that can't be wrong,
but if it is,
is right, anyway!"

-- William Dean Howells.

Saturday Catchup 2010-08-28

Capitalism, Threat or Menace: "Now, anyone can look at China's rapid economic growth and react with wonderment and awe. They have surpassed Japan, and are outranked only by the U.S. -- for now. Plus, they are the largest owner of American debt at the better part of a trillion dollars. China shows what you can do with a little industrial planning, policy and guidance from the government. But then again, many things are possible when you don't have those annoyances, those minor nuisances like environmental regulations, workplace safety, worker's rights, and democratic government. Chinese-style capitalism seems to be a purer form than its U.S. counterpart, and therefore a Republican nirvana, minus the part about government planning. And for now, we wait for a nascent labor movement to kick into gear and transform a country that responds to massive public unrest with military crackdowns. While Chinese workers jump out of windows, Americans are dying as well. In the U.S., workers die on exploding oil rigs and in deathtrap coalmines because their regulation-hating employers want to maximize profits. And besides, they say, regulations are dumb. Consumers die from unsafe food because food companies want to cut corners. Just like the Great Depression days when people lacked a safety net, the unemployed, foreclosed and student debtor-prisoners of today are turning to suicide at an alarming rate, with an increase of calls to suicide prevention hotlines." -- Capitalism Is Killing Us by David A. Love (Huffington Post 2010-08-25).

Hey, Glenn Beck: Here's how Martin Luther King described Jesus at the end of an essay published eight months after the civil rights leader was assassinated: "A voice out of Bethlehem two thousand years ago said that all men are equal.... Jesus of Nazareth wrote no books; he owned no property to endow him with influence. He had no friends in the courts of the powerful. But he changed the course of mankind with only the poor and the despised." King concluded this final essay, titled "A Testament of Hope," with a strikingly radical claim, indicating his strong identification with society's most disadvantaged and outcast persons. "Naive and unsophisticated though we may be," King said, "the poor and despised of the twentieth century will revolutionize this era. In our 'arrogance, lawlessness, and ingratitude,' we will fight for human justice, brotherhood, secure peace, and abundance for all." -- Martin Luther King, Democratic Socialist by Paul Street (The Black Commentator 2006-02-02).

And btw, Beck, it's not like we haven't seen your likes before:


The Tea Party is no joke: "There’s nothing in the world more tired than a progressive blogger like me flipping out over the latest idiocies emanating from the Fox News crowd. But this summer’s media hate-fest is different than anything we’ve seen before. What we’re watching is a calculated campaign to demonize blacks, Mexicans, and gays and convince a plurality of economically-depressed white voters that they are under imminent legal and perhaps even physical attack by a conspiracy of leftist nonwhites. They’re telling these people that their government is illegitimate and criminal and unironically urging secession and revolution." -- Tea Party Rocks Primaries by Matt Taibbi (Rolling Stone 2010-08-26).

The legendary Budd Schulberg told the Glenn Beck Story more than half a century ago:

In the end, though, you reap what you sow.

A step back for the security state: The New York state law mandating the removal from NYPD computerized databases of personal information of many thousands of entirely innocent citizens stopped and frisked wholly without reasonable suspicion, is a clear refutation not only of the policies of mayor Mike Bloomberg and NYPD commissioner Ray Kelly, but also of the Bush-Cheney-Obama insistence that national security and public safety trump individual constitutional liberties. If any civics classes still remain in public schools, NY governor David Paterson's signing statement is especially worth hearing and discussing in the context of a 22-page July 29 ACLU report card: "Obama Administration in Danger of Establishing 'New Normal' With Worst Bush-Era Policies." In office, Barack Obama has not only continued but expanded the disabling of the Bill of Rights begun by George W. Bush. "In a democracy," Governor Paterson said, "there are times when safety and liberty find themselves in conflict. From the Alien and Sedition Acts [opposition to which gave Thomas Jefferson the presidency] to the Patriot Act, we have experienced moments where liberty took a back seat."  As president, Barack Obama has not done anything to rein in the excesses of the USA PATRIOT Act ("Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001" -- got to admire the Right's knack for clever marketing of bad ideas) . Indeed, when Democrats on the Judiciary Committee tried, once Obama was in the Oval Office, to enact a few reforms, the president helped the Republicans block most of them. -- What Obama Could Learn From Paterson: Lame-duck governor's inspiring words in defense of liberty by Nat Hentoff (Village Voice 2010-08-25).

Some very mean bugs are looking for you: The era of antibiotics is coming to a close. In just a couple of generations, what once appeared to be miracle medicines have been beaten into ineffectiveness by the bacteria they were designed to knock out. Once, scientists hailed the end of infectious diseases. Now, the post-antibiotic apocalypse is within sight. -- Are you ready for a world without antibiotics? by Sarah Boseley (Guardian UK 2010-08-12).

All your PowerPoint are belong to us: "I have been assigned as a staff officer to a headquarters in Afghanistan for about two months. During that time, I have not done anything productive. Fortunately little of substance is really done here, but that is a task we do well. We are part of the operational arm of the International Security Assistance Force commanded by U.S. Army Gen. David Petraeus. It is composed of military representatives from all the NATO countries, several of which I cannot pronounce. Officially, IJC was founded in late 2009 to coordinate operations among all the regional commands in Afghanistan. More likely it was founded to provide some general a three-star command. Starting with a small group of dedicated and intelligent officers, IJC has successfully grown into a stove-piped and bloated organization, top-heavy in rank. Around here you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a colonel. For headquarters staff, war consists largely of the endless tinkering with PowerPoint slides to conform with the idiosyncrasies of cognitively challenged generals in order to spoon-feed them information. Even one tiny flaw in a slide can halt a general's thought processes as abruptly as a computer system's blue screen of death." -- PowerPoints 'R' Us by Col. Lawrence Sellin, U.S. Army Reserves (Breitbart/UPI "Outside View" 2010-08-24). See, also: Colonel Kicked Out of Afghanistan for Anti-PowerPoint Rant by Spencer Ackerman (Wired/Danger Room 2010-08-27).

Our adventure in Afghanistan, as seen by the other side in Kunar Province:


Aw, how can we leave now?: Gitmo, the next Galapagos? It's a mighty ill wind that blows absolutely no good. Guantánamo Bay may be best known for its U.S. military base on Cuban soil and its unconstitutional prison, but to scientists at New York Botanical Garden's Caribbean Biodiversity Program it's a prime spot for ecological research. -- Guantánamo Bay, Site of Important Ecological Research by Julie Schwietert Collazo (Discover 2010-08-06).

Bon voyage: Perhaps you've had a good laugh over seasteading, the scheme hatched by rich libertarians to escape the clutches of democracy by living on giant metal platforms in the middle of the ocean. But as it turns out, seasteading is something of a wet dry run for some libertarians’ ultimate escape plan of uploading their brains into robot bodies and blasting off into space. This is also known as “transhumanism,” which is (very) loosely defined as a movement of people/future androids who are promoting the adoption of technologies that will eventually help “humans transcend biology,” in the words of Objectivist futurist Ray Kurzweil. -- The Ultimate Escape: The Bizarre Libertarian Plan of Uploading Brains into Robots to Escape Society by Brad Reed (AlterNet 2010-08-27).

Hey, they're cartoons anyway: A roundup of GOP candidates in the midterm elections as animated by NMA World Edition in Taiwan:

Can't help it. Love these guys. 美國反伊斯蘭情緒太超過?


Norman Rockwell's America was real: During World War II, the women in the small town of North Platte, Nebraska touched the lives of thousands of young soldiers on their way to war. It's not a bad model to keep before us now, as so many Americans deal with economic anxiety by demonizing their fellow citizens. -- Simple Gestures, Lifelong Memories by Abigail R. Esman (Forbes 2010-08-09).

Milestones: "Elizabeth Sargent, a poet, answered an advertisement to 'live and work in Carnegie Hall' 46 years ago and moved in with a recommendation from the literary critic Malcolm Cowley. Half a lifetime later, on Thursday, she was the last resident to move out of the 116-year-old studio apartments in Carnegie Hall Towers, which once percolated with creativity and personality Mark Twain used to smoke his pipe in the author’s club across the hall from Ms. Sargent’s studio; Marlon Brando entertained guests in the apartment directly below; and Leonard Bernstein read scores on the same floor. Norman Mailer penned works in her apartment, and Isadora Duncan danced down the hallway. 'This was a magical place,' Ms. Sargent said. 'Artists really had a freedom here; they developed here.'” -- In Apartments Above Carnegie Hall, a Coda for Longtime Residents by Liz Robbins (New York Times 2010-08-27).

George David Weiss, composer of Elvis' "Can't Help Falling in Love," "The Lion Sleeps Tonight" by The Tokens and "What a Wonderful World," Louis Armstrong's greatest hit, has died.
 
Related Posts with Thumbnails