There is an enormous chasm forming among liberals, progressives, and leftists, and the reason why is obvious.
A quick perusal of the comments sections on many recent articles here at OpEd News demonstrates that traditional Democrats and more progressive or liberal leaning activists are no longer in agreement about the way forward for the United States. The primary reason for the lack of coherence in the movement to undo what Bush Co. have done can be laid squarely at the feet of the Democrats in Congress. They're hesitance to move forward with articles of impeachment have infuriated the left.
This obvious fact has apparently still not sunken in with the myopic congressional Democrats. They think that Bush Co. will destroy itself without any help from them. Yet history shows that the electorate rewards strong words followed by strong actions, and rejects weakness and capitulation when important principles are at stake.
There is also a history lesson that progressive activists should consider taking home as well. That lesson is that the Republican Party got where it did by holding together a tenuous coalition of completely disparate political groups including evangelicals, libertarians, corporate CEOs, and redneck Joe six-packs. These people not only have nothing in common, they would probably kill each other if locked in the same room for several hours.
I still feel that Democrats and progressives/liberals/leftists have far more in common than the Republican Party's factions do. What they don't have is organization. Instead we have many disorganized political and issue groups.
The Republican Party has never been in more disarray in my lifetime. This is the best opportunity that liberals and progressives have had in recent memory to crush the corporate controlled power structure that the Republicans have built up since the 1980s. But it is not going to happen if Democrats, liberals, progressives, and leftists spend as much time as they have been squabbling with each other rather than organizing and moving forward.
I am astounded at how much disarray the left is displaying now. If we can’t rally at times of such threat to our democracy, and instead argue back and forth about how we need a third party, then we will never take back the country. The Republicans didn’t take control by squabbling, they took control by organizing.
If you really are interested in taking the country back from the corporate puppet masters, then I urge that we start organizing far better than we have to date. If liberals and progressives organize well enough and early enough in the election process, they can shift the debate, and even make a huge difference as to which candidate we nominate to run for president. Don't like Hillary Clinton? Then organize to help Dennis Kucinich get the nomination. I’m with you. Don’t like corporate-loving Democrats? Then work to nominate someone who does not have such strong corporate ties. Think a third party candidate can win? Then you’d better start organizing right now, rather than arguing.
What I would like to see in response to this post is a series of suggestions for improving organization, and a list of candidates and issues that we can support. If a majority of responses are about how Democrats have failed us, with no suggestions for actually fixing the situation offered, then I’m afraid that we are doomed to more of the same.
Dr. John Moffett is an active research neuroscientist in the Washington, DC area, who has published articles on the nervous and immune systems. Dr. Moffett is also the author and webmaster of the political opinion website www.Factinista.org, and is a Managing Editor at OpEdNews.com.
Either it has to be a demand for trial of 9/11 or opening the case for Katirna criminal negligence, or Pelosi recall, or boycotting the recruitment centers or boycotting all Dem candidates or calling for the Emergency Convention of all anti- Bush forces- ONE effort must be commissioned,l done, performed and result obtained. Without it- there will be no oraganization. I would start with Katrina issue- there has to be a case opened against Bush, Chertoff and Brown on criminal negligence. Forget all politics and even the Iraq war. Get the case opened. Use all the force necessary: talk about it and only about it 24 hours a day, seven days a week. If it happens- the rusty wheel still rotates. If not- you better prepare to endure darkness.
by
Mark Sashine (42 articles, 19 quicklinks, 226 diaries, 3212 comments)
on Thursday, July 26, 2007 at 9:08:54 AM
But I think that going after one of Bush's criminal acts (e.g. dismantling FEMA) would require that the news media (4th Estate) actually function correctly. That isn't going to happen, unfortunately.
I was thinking more about all the progressive web site's (KOS, OpEd, Truth-out, MoveOn, etc.) start coordinating not only with “daily talking points”, but with media and Congress action alerts. That would just be a small start, but it would bring progressives together as a more coherent political faction to be reckoned with.
This would mean that each web site would have a media and a Congressional point-person in charge of coordinating activities across web sites.
by
John R Moffett (78 articles, 14 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 587 comments)
on Thursday, July 26, 2007 at 9:28:24 AM
have a look at the www.antiwar.com. They are conservatives and they are anti-Bush. They are openly figthing- Buchanan on the line all the time. Now, they also work with the foreigners. It is time to take their experience, open ONE project together and get it done. The gentleman below also asks for one victory. One would be enough. Hey, ask for money from Michael Moore Sicko profits. I am sure he will donate those for Katrina suiing. But it has to be one voice.
by
Mark Sashine (42 articles, 19 quicklinks, 226 diaries, 3212 comments)
on Thursday, July 26, 2007 at 9:57:13 AM
stopping the SPP, the next steps they are taking to get total control with no barriers to their agenda.
My comments to Rob's post wouldn't post YET .. working on that . but the anti SPP movement must be built in the US NOW. The landlord is stealing YOUR apartment.
Security and Prosperity for WHO ...?
is a kind of backwards rallying cry but that IS the rallying cry.
Set up a committee in YOUR Town to investigate, a website in the US to tackle this AND get the artistic activists INVOLVED.
Way over 50% of the population is against globalization and it will make "brave warriors" of us as we fight back.
links are NOT working on this site; so here is just the outliline of a recent email without the link.
Virginia
Dear Friend,
Once in awhile there is some good news!
I just released a commentary which you will actually like to read...
Global (this is the missing link)
There are a lot of people around the world who think just like you do! In fact, anti-globalization sentiment is the majority view.
On the U.S. front, Congressman Duncan Hunter (who is running for president, by the way) introduced an amendment that prohibits money to be spent on the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) or the NAFTA Super Corridor.
The Hunter Amendment to H.R. 3074, Transportation Appropriations Act, passed with an overwhelming majority of 362-63.
Please pass on this good news to anyone and everyone in your sphere of influence.
Regards,
Patrick Wood, Editor The August Review
by
ladybroadoak (37 articles, 20 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 384 comments)
on Friday, July 27, 2007 at 1:57:59 AM
John Moffett--Thank you for your article about the need for liberals to organize. I think we need to get one substantial victory under our belts, which could be the closing of the notorious School of the Americas (renamed WHISC). If you attend the annual vigil at Ft. Benning in November, you will see and hear the spirit of opposition to U.S. imperialism. Robert Thatch, Kansas City, MO
by
KCBob (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 2 comments)
on Thursday, July 26, 2007 at 9:51:08 AM
I am one of those alienated. After more than 350 letters to editors, the president, oped pieces in newspapers and letters to editors, a novel, and hndreds of phone calls, more than 90 articles here and elsewhere, I am frustrated because I know the source, it is the mad funder-raising stratgey of Rahm Emanuel and his influence on N. Pelosi. Moreover, it is the BS, but perhaps my ranting about Pointing a Special Prosecutor is begining to gain listeners. BiPartisan Senators are discussing Appointing one to go after A. Gonzo. That would be a shot in the arm. Riught now the Approval polls stand at:
Cheney 12% , Bush 22-24% and DeM Congress 29%. If Emanuel hasn't paid any attnetion to my emails, if he thinks the DEM's can rally from 29%, the nso can Bush Rally from 23%. They need one solid uniting force and that is INDEPENDENT PROSECUTORS, everywhere, snooping up and down the White House and their vigilanties.
Drop the impeachment charge and get on the bandwagon with me for Special Prosecutors for each crime. that will lead to impeachment and more. Gonzalez is now on the spot with the Senate. Let's hope they go to the SP. Then it will be only a matter of time.
I Nominate Elliot Spitzer!
by
Professor Emeritus Peter Bagnolo (144 articles, 1 quicklinks, 94 diaries, 1185 comments)
on Thursday, July 26, 2007 at 12:04:48 PM
I agree. But I also think that all the work of progressives is starting to produce results. Turning an oil tanker around is a slow process. Momentum is hard to reverse.
I see signs that all of our cries for sanity, justice, and change are starting to reap results. Contempt charges against Miers and Bolton moving forward, possible perjury charges against Gonzalez, Murtha gaining some traction in the House, etc.
When discouragement grows, work harder and smarter.
What I would like to see is progressives and liberals all across the Internet to form an organized social network that coordinates all of its activities. This is exactly what the Republicans have done for decades (albeit without the Internet).
I would like to see progressive web sites coordinate their efforts. For example, if progressive websites all around the world coordinated their daily messages the way Republicans do it would improve their ability to get a particular message across to the audience.
As the second step, progressive websites could assign specific officers who would act as media, congressional and corporate point-persons in charge of coordinating activities and action alerts across the various web sites.
It is these types of organizing activities that I believe progressives lack. Republicans have been organized for decades, progressives barely know what the term organizing means. It means working together rather than squabbling.
by
John R Moffett (78 articles, 14 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 587 comments)
on Thursday, July 26, 2007 at 12:33:32 PM
This is a discussion that must be had, & you deserve credit
for trying to initiate it. At the same time, however, you're implicitly trying to pre-determine the shape of the solution. Even in your article title, you're impatiently demanding a 'quickie' kind of solution. You're trying to force the whole matter to appear simpler than it really is. It's not really a "Sh*t or get off the pot" situation. It has much to do with the general level of political consciousness; one can't just assume that the requisite machinery is already in place, & that all we need to do is pick a candidate or issue, and march.
Some people will think that the task is simply to unite behind a Democrat. Some will think it's to unite behind a "progressive" Democrat. Some will insist that it's to unite behind a 3rd party candidate, or an antiwar candidate, or an explicitly socialist anti-imperialist candidate. It's an unfair trivialization of these differences to refer to them as "squabbling." They are immensely important differences, whose resolution (& unified acceptance by all) is essential to building a strong movement.
Your formulation implicitly demands a short timeframe for uniting behind some candidate or issue. You've expressed elsewhere your belief that "the (mainstream) Democrats are the only way forward," and here, you're explicitly requesting that responders refrain from critiques of Democrats. These are attempts to pre-determine the form of the solution.
Before you get too upset that I'm not responding in the way you specifically requested, let me toss you an answer more or less in your desired format. I would be willing to unite behind a program or candidate that included these seven points: 1) end the war 2) cut defense spending 3) universal single-payer health care access 4) a "Manhattan Project"-style all out commitment to convert to renewable energy sources & address climate change, & 5) a companion plan calling for rapid efficient mass transit. 6) Breaking up the media conglomerates 7) Extremely progressive taxation, intensely targeting the rich, including a full return of the estate tax.
By #1, I don't mean just pulling "combat" troops out of Iraq, I mean pulling ALL troops out of Iraq. I also mean an official public acknowledgement that the US government committed an immense crime in invading & occupying Iraq, and that it agrees to pay huge reparations to the Iraqi people. I also mean that not just the Iraq war be ended, I mean that the "War on Terror" be ended, and officially rejected as a basis for US policy. (This should accompany an acknowledgement that the "WoT" was simply a device to dominate the globe, & solve the US economy's energy problems by military aggression, because our rulers could see no other way of solving those problems, while maintaining the extravagant consumption required by our "lifestyle".)
Of course I'm well aware that no Democrat is going to say those things. Kucinich & Gravel could say some of them; the rest will say none of them. What I think important is developing the basis for a higher level of political consciousness than currently exists. People must start thinking in terms of the kind of policies I just outlined. Ultimately, those policies are not compatible with capitalism. Supporting Democrats actually means working to deny & defeat those kinds of ideas. Those who imagine that it's a simple matter of "Anyone But Bush," or "Anyone But Republicans," have already unknowingly made assumptions that are incompatible with longterm solutions.
What's needed is a movement based on a set of tenable ideas, such as those I've outlined. What's NOT needed is deluding ourselves that the current 2-party system is capable of producing longterm solutions -- specifically, that the Democrats can be any part of the solution.
by
Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1013 comments)
on Thursday, July 26, 2007 at 1:34:09 PM
If you read my comments below the article, you may change your mind about my intentions.
Plus, I would add #8) a Manhattan project on biomedical research funding. At least 1/3 of what is spent on the military now would be put into curing disease (NIH funding, not pharmaceutical research). I would have quite a few more additions, including public financing of elections (no private funding whatsoever), a federal sunshine law, elimination of secret lobbying (the people’s business would actually be public) etc.
If you can get a third party candidate like Robert Redford on the ticket, I’ll vote for them over a DLC Democrat without hesitation. Can you? I’ll go for Al Gore too. How do you get him to run?
by
John R Moffett (78 articles, 14 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 587 comments)
on Thursday, July 26, 2007 at 1:57:47 PM
I agree with you both for different reasons. I think that cowardice and a defeatist attitude has hit the Dems following unbelievable losses in 2000-2004 and now they are desperate and have turned in that desperation to the wrong person, any port in a storm sort of reaction. Because Emanuel is an outstanding money raiser, they are grasping at his slippery straw. He is not the answer. The answer was not the "Victory" last fall that was a reaction with a large moderate Republican crossover, not a Democratic surge and the result is now, of their "hands-off" impeachment, a 29% approval rating. Tan will not win any more seats. The moderate Republicans are gone, so are the Liberal Dems.
The only way to get them back, and it is a slim one is to take the sort of gambles the Republicans have taken, Get a few major investigations going, sack a few Neo-con asses into prison, Gonzo then Miers then Cheney before he unleashes a "terrorist" attack on a major Democratic City like Chicago or LA or Boston, or now even NYC.
I have successfully run campaigns, with a 5-0 record. Get a few convictions and the dike will burst and we will have another Watergate. 29% approval does not win elections against 24%; convictions and investigations win elections against fascism.
Forget the war, it is a hopelessly lost cause no one seems to care about the dead and suffering, so go after the living criminals. Strike now while the iron is hot, while REPUBS are in a mood bipartisan to nail Gonzo and make it up from there. Contempt of Congress with Him is a starting point.
Get Gonzo then go after Cheney, forget Bush he is impotent without Cheney. With Cheney gone he will do something very much stupider than he has already done and go to Jail forever
by
Professor Emeritus Peter Bagnolo (144 articles, 1 quicklinks, 94 diaries, 1185 comments)
on Thursday, July 26, 2007 at 2:02:43 PM
You have touched on the two great poverties of our age: our failure of imagination, and our passive subservience to the status quo. Combine this with the political famine of courage and ideas that blights our nation’s capital, and you’ve got the ingredients for a fascist state that, if not already existent, is laboring to be born.
Having said that, what I see as the greatest failing of the progressive movement in America, and liberals and progressives in general, is our self-injurious tendency to focus on dire consequences, and to frame our concerns in terms of doom and gloom.
Yes, things are dire, of that I need no convincing, nor do you. But most people wake up every day and try to reduce the number of things they have to worry about. Progressives and liberals try to increase them. The American electorate does not consist of 200 million policy wonks eager to digest the bleak news we have to deliver. Instead, we frighten them into inaction and cause them to be pessimistic about the possibility for real change.
We cannot win over the American people by daily presenting a laundry list of “facts” (“The Truth!”) and giving them “I have a nightmare” speeches. No quantity of books, articles, or rants about how bad things are will advance progressive power or grow progressive values in our culture.
The average citizen does not read policy papers, or subscribe to obscure journals. They don’t make decisions with a checklist of issues in their hands. That’s why Republican campaigns operate on a different level: Whom do you identify with? Whom can you trust? Who is strong, and who is weak? These questions transcend issues, which is why Republicans – who know that they are at a disadvantage on the issues – spend so much time talking about them.
Politics is not about issues. Politics is about identity. It’s about who you are, whether you stand up for your beliefs, take political risks, and don’t run scared and go invertebrate every time you get attacked by your opponents. The winners in politics are those who form a positive image in the public mind of who they are, and a negative image of who their opponents are.
Voters are looking for someone to say something courageous. There’s a hunger to be about big moral causes – causes bigger than our own self-interest. They want an end to partisan bickering. They want pragmatic solutions, and not ideological posturing.
Want evidence? Look no further than the public’s congressional approval rating of 29%, barely above that of Chimp McFlightsuit, though still well above that of Dick Vader. Are 71% of Americans dissatisfied with Congress because they’re not impeaching Bush, or because they’ve not succeeded in changing the nation’s course in Iraq? Largely, no. They’re unhappy that nothing seems to have changed since January. That the squabbling and bickering and posturing goes on just the same, regardless of which party holds power.
So I say to the Democrats: go after Gonzales, if he could possibly have committed perjury. Pass contempt of Congress citations against Bolten and Miers. Work furiously at bringing the troops – ALL the troops – home from Iraq. Continue the difficult and quite probably futile search for more co-sponsors to HR 333. Yes, all these things.
But these are all efforts (necessary ones, of course!) AGAINST something. We also need to be FOR something. And not many somethings. Just one or two BIG somethings. We need big, positive visionary solutions that solve multiple problems simultaneously while strengthening progressive and American values. We need to make issues fit into broad frameworks. We need a new philosophy that attempts to enlist citizens in large projects to which everyone contributes and from which every one benefits.
Though not so intelligent as others on this site to know “THE ANSWER”, I would offer one suggestion, something like “Healthcare and Energy Security For All Americans”. But the point is – finally! – that liberals and progressives do indeed need to stop squabbling, John, but not for its sake alone. We need to stop squabbling and work together to achieve common goals – large, comprehensive goals, and not just our usual grab-bag of small-bore proposals that bore Americans to tears and confirm their stereotype of liberal governance being little more than the million-little-pieces, interest groups approach to politics.
Whew, what a rant. If you’ve made it this far, you are to be congratulated, and thanked.
Keep up your good and provocative writing, John. Always a pleasure.
by
Todd Huffman, M.D. (80 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 109 comments)
on Thursday, July 26, 2007 at 3:21:36 PM
what is needed is cooperation, but even if everyone egrees that 'one thing' is worth participation from everyone that doesn't mean it has to be the only thing. And, in fact, it's not likely that everyone will work on 'project number one' -- and they don't all need to: just enough to get the thing accomplished. We don't have to be the Borg Collective to be effective.
You want Gonzales out? Good! Make a phone call today. OK -- that's 5 minutes -- what are you going to do for the rest of the day? (But if only a few people make the phone call then it's not going to help much.)
Look at things that organized in ways that work. You go the store -- the store works. Some people stock the shelves, some check you out, some do inventory and ordering, some do the accounting -- there's a division of labor, but it's all coordinated. All the employees of the store, however, smile at the customers and try to help when asked, they all report problems they see to the manager, they all (if they are part of a well-run store) look for ways to increase customer satisfaction, decrease waste, and increase profits -- even if not within their particular job descriptions. If a fire breaks out then everyone works on containing it, getting the customers out of danger, and so forth.
So, everyone does not have to do exactly the same things, but rather be a part of the overall effort and 'vision'. What is needed is a strategic plan. We need to list those specific things which need doing, come up with an overall statement of broad objectives which encompass those things, and then prioritize and make more specific plans, keeping in mind the time frames and critical paths.
Gonzales is a good thing to work on -- not because he is such a bum but because that has an effect on other things: getting people activated; restoring the rule of law and some civil rights; breaking the monopoly on power by the administration; opening up investigations which will expose corruption (if he can be replaced); hitting on torture, which he supported; exposing the voter fraud; giving congress a task they may be able to accomplish; improving the morale of the bureacrats, especially in the justice department; even helping to end the occupation by disrupting the corruption of the corporations and the myth of the legality of the invasion and the 'urinary executive'. And the timing for that is good -- it's a hot item. It touches on the environmental problems and corruption in all sorts of areas, so it's something that has a hook into the major concerns of many people.
There are other areas that need work, and could be centered, of course -- perhpas some are better. Impeachment comes to mind right off (but the Gonzo boob even helps with that). But people can STILL work on those other things, at the same time. Even those who may love Gonzales can work on issues which concern them -- such as proper care for veterans or re-establishing the industrial base and decent jobs.
Organizing doesn't mean everyone must do exactly the same thing, and only that thing. It means maximizing coordinated efforts and minimizing working on cross purposes. If someone is a dyed in the wool democrat, then let them work on reforming the party on the local level. I don't think it will much good at this point, but it MIGHT help, and it will keep them part of the overall movement, and a citizen in good standing, who is active. We do need to minimize active opposition to those doing something we don't think is important or helpful, as long as it isn't destructive to the overall goals and vision. Where there is disagreement on this, then we should try to work it out -- perhaps, for example -- by convincinging those who want to reform the Demcorats to work on the local level and not broadly defend all the Democrats do and attack those who criticize the party in any way.
There are lots of things to work out, of course, but we need to do systems thinking, in terms of overall goals and effective organization which can encompass -- and welcome -- diversity.
I think the environment is critically important, but I don't have the time and energy to even keep up with all what is happening there, much less put much effort into environmental activism: I can sign a petition or make a phone now and then, but my efforts are not concentrated there. Otheres are very involved with the environment, and I'd like them to sign a petition for impeachment or whatever, but I can't expect them to stop putting the bulk of their time in their own speciality -- and I wouldn't want them to. I don't think much about 9/11 either, but I'm glad there are people who do.
It's like a military -- not everyone is in the same place doing the same things -- but it's all one military, and hopefully working to win the same war.
by
Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 998 comments)
on Thursday, July 26, 2007 at 4:42:34 PM
You’re exactly right. One initial move that I would like to see is progressives working locally and nationwide to help figure out how to coordinate the message from the left across the alternative media spectrum. Progressive radio stations and major internet sites would need to have simple cross-communication networks set up to organize what priorities needed immediate attention, and to coordinate activities and message on a day by day basis.
Right now there is a very confusing message coming from the left. We need to keep up the diversity and intellectual depth of our message, but we must also strive to try and concentrate on specific themes that need urgent attention.
I agree that pushing hard on the Gonzales perjury issue, which looks like it is moving more quickly now, is a very critical tipping point. If this goes badly for Bush, and does so with obvious public support and attention, I think it will make step 2, impeachment of Cheney, much easier to proceed with.
It is a shame that none of this will help the troops in Iraq right now. Bush has sealed their fate for at least the next several months.
by
John R Moffett (78 articles, 14 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 587 comments)
on Thursday, July 26, 2007 at 5:59:49 PM
All such good points. All sort of different. All coming from liberals. They all really work. I have friends who work almost exclusively on the School of the Americas shutdown. They also show up at many other liberal events. I know one woman who made at least two trips to New Orleans to help rescue pets. Rich, your list of issues of the perfect candidate would be one I think ALL of us would support. But, I am thrilled to see the strength that Ron Paul is showing here in Greenville, SC. Not that he is my candidate, but he is sure stirring up the republican pot and by damn he doesn't mince words which can be nothing but good for politics. I am behind my candidate, Dennis Kucinich. Pete, I agree special prosecutor for Gonzo. May not work. Watched C-Span earlier, consensus of the faceless voice was that the Bush DOJ will never allow it. I, too think Gonzo and Cheney are the lynch pins. But, charge them all. Congress is trying. Blue Pilgrim is right, we are all working on a lot of different goals and I don't think they are at odds. The problem and the advantage at the same time is that there are so many corrupt targets at which to shoot. We need a shotgun of approaches.
I have promises from eager people here in Greenville to go with me to Congressman Bob Inglis'office to seriously press the case for impeaching Dick Cheney. I just need to make his office give me that appointment. We will just make it happen. Inglis will NEVER co-sponsor that resolution, but when we get through, he will know the particulars of the charges and be aware of the growing support for impeachment AND he will know that a goodly number of his constitutents are better informed than he is. Can't hurt. So, while I am all for pressuring all investigating House and Senate Committees to subpoena, charge, appoint special prosecutors, whatever they need to do, there is only so much that can be done once they do that and they seem to be doing that.
One other thing, and I am in the midst of writing an article to post on the subject, is the statement from Conyers to the effect that he favors impeachment, would like to co-sponsor HRes333, but is afraid of Fox. What the hell kind of situation is that? A congressman is afraid to take action on something that 54% of the people want done because Rupert Murdoch might take him out?!? The media is democracy's other enemy. It is not the fourth estate but the fourth arm of the government. I was up into the wee hours of the morning trying to perfect that article. I am going to finish it now and post it with my suggestion as to what people who visit websites like this one might want to do about this particular example of the dictatorship of the Foxes.
Thanks for a thought-provoking article. Maybe it is possible to herd cats. Or at least to get them all after the same rat.
by
Sheila Jackson (16 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 137 comments)
on Thursday, July 26, 2007 at 6:16:35 PM
Keep up the great work. Even if your congressperson is not going to co-sign or vote for impeachment, they will know that they will never get reelected if they put up too much of a fuss over it. I’m going to be working on Chris Van Hollen, my congressperson who is also the new chairman of the DCCC.
And you are exactly right, to heard cats, you just need to point them all toward a rat.
by
John R Moffett (78 articles, 14 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 587 comments)
on Friday, July 27, 2007 at 6:06:11 AM
I will keep everyone posted as to how my efforts to see and talk to Bob Inglis work out. I may be able to get to see him. I actually obtained an hour interview with him when I was working with a group trying to make a go of a liberal weekly newspaper way back when he served his first three terms in congress. I just called and asked for an hour of his time and got it. Back then he had pledged to limit his terms to three, resigned after three and ran against Fritz Hollings for the Senate and lost. Now he's back, having learned his term limit lesson. He may have learned his lesson about granting lengthy interviews also. We'll see.
by
Sheila Jackson (16 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 137 comments)
on Saturday, July 28, 2007 at 9:00:53 PM
Talked to Inglis' appointment guy in DC today. Told him I and a number of my friends needed an appointment with the congressman to discuss the issue of impeachment. We did not need to see him immediately but it was important that we see him. Aide is going to see if he can arrange an appointment on a Monday in September.
by
Sheila Jackson (16 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 137 comments)
on Monday, July 30, 2007 at 4:43:01 PM
This is a matrix of which illinois groups support what actions, and to what extent -- and they can support (or not) more than one. You can see at a glance how much support each idea has -- the key is at the bottom of the page. This should be a source of ideas, not just for actions, but a model for organizing even on an individual or area level -- or by regular members of a web site.
by
Blue Pilgrim (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 998 comments)
on Thursday, July 26, 2007 at 7:50:16 PM
I agree with you. First post here. Kinda intimidated by all the eggheadish arguments being bandied about. All very interesting, well conceived and eloquently written.
But, alas, time is not on our side. Deadeye dick could pull the trigger on Iran's "Gulf of Tonkin" moment any day. Then it's hello WW3 and their long wet dreamed of police state.
HR 333 is the key. Kucinich has 15 signed on now. A few more and MSM will no longer be able to ignore the 54% who want dick castrated from the white house and free society. We must all do what we can NOW to get a few more brave Reps. to bite the bullet, Fox be damned.
I respect all the wisdom and organizational accumen demonstrated but time is not on our side. Today is not a day to wax philosophic about how to get alternative media to use the same talking points or any of that.
TOADAY IS FOR ACTION.....by yourself if need be. I am going to Elijah Cummings office in Ellicott City MD, not expecting an audience, but for sure gonna stay until many people know about HR 333...folks in his office and people in the street where I plan to picket with a sign that says "Not signing 333=Complicity"
When the worm turns and war crimes trials are underway, those cowards who tremble at the thought of up holding their oath to the Constitution for fear of what Baba O'Reilly will say may just have to take their turns in the docket.
ACT NOW Philosophize when the criminals are behind bars or swinging from a rope(treason in a time of war is a CAPITAL offense)
by
CamusRebel (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 59 comments)
on Thursday, July 26, 2007 at 9:11:48 PM
