|
|
Add to My Group
Dear Senator Obama: Thank you for graciously reinstating and welcoming all California delegate hopefuls, including me, Marcy Winograd, and many others who helped build the Progressive Caucus in the California Democratic Party. (scroll for Obama campaign letter) Tonight, we are thrilled you embrace our support. Grassroots anti-war activists and young Obama campaigners will have their vote on Sunday, when caucuses in California congressional districts decide who will proudly represent you at the National Democratic Party convention in August. Thank you, Barack Obama, and thank you, grassroots activists, for blogs, calls, and emails to the Obama campaign, urging a reconsideration of the delegate pruning announced just 24 hours earlier. Though I would be a faithful Obama delegate at the convention, I recognize there are many deserving delegate candidates, only some of whom will realize the privilege of rallying for you and a new America. I hope to be among those organizing on the floor of the convention, reminding the super delegates that you garnered the most popular delegates, cheering you on to victory, all the while championing a Party platform calling for an end to the brutal occupation of Iraq, passage of the Employee Free Choice Act, development of clean alternative energy, and quality health care for all. Onward to victory in Pennsylvania! Sincerely, Marcy Winograd Dear Marcy, There has been an extraordinary outpouring of grassroots support for Senator Obama among Democrats and Independents in all 53 California Congressional districts. In recognition of this tremendous enthusiasm, our campaign has asked the California Democratic Party to allow all persons who have filed to be a district delegate candidate for Senator Obama at the Democratic National Convention to participate in the caucuses this Sunday, April 13, 2008. We are confident that delegates elected from this pool will reflect the Senator's commitment to a diverse and unified delegation at the National Convention. An overwhelming number of supporters have signed up to run for delegate, so there will likely be lines and tight space at the caucus locations. We ask for everyone's patience and cooperation. Most of all, please enjoy this opportunity to meet other Obama supporters and elect delegate candidates to the Convention in Denver. pdla.org Marcy Winograd is an Executive Board member of the California Democratic Party, representing the 41st Assembly District (Santa Monica, Pacific Palisades, Topanga, Malibu, and Brentwood). In 2006, she garnered 38% of the vote in her congressional peace challenge to Jane Harman. At the last California Democratic Party convention in San Jose, she lobbied successfully for Party platform amendments calling for prison sentencing reform and card check certification in union-organizing drives.
Good Play Such drama, the passion, the soap!!! Congratulations. by
Jeanette Doney (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 304 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 8:09:07 AM
Not that it matters..... From the essay The Schools to War Collision: Whither the Resistance? by Rich Gibson and E. Wayne Ross: We should not be fooled in the current media theme park that is the national election in which we will get to choose which person, from the executive committee of the rich, will oppress us best. This is a structural crisis that goes beyond any chance that a "good person from the ruling class" is going to soften the hit. They will not. If anything, the billion-dollar election is being used to build nationalism and turn whatever there has been of democracy, reduced in every way to capitalist democracy, into a new religion, a hothouse for nationalism, ethnic separation, mysticism, and hollow demagoguery. The empty promises and absence of analysis from all candidates shows, once again, real weakness among elites who truly have nothing to offer people but endless wars, bad jobs, and an assault on reason itself. And this: The Senator While walking down the street one day a U.S. Senator is tragically hit by a truck and killed. The Senator's soul arrives in heaven and is met by St. Peter at the entrance. "Welcome to heaven," says St. Peter. "Before you settle in, it seems there is a problem. We seldom see a high official around these parts, you see, so we're not sure what to do with you." "No problem, just let me in," says the Senator. "Well, I'd like to, but I have orders from higher up. What we'll do is have you spend one day in hell and one in heaven. Then you can choose where to spend eternity." "Really, I've made up my mind. I want to be in heaven," says the Senator. "I'm sorry, but we have our rules." And with that, the Senator is escorted to the elevator by St. Peter goes down, down, down to hell. The doors open and the Senator is in the middle of a green golf course. In the distance is a clubhouse and standing in front of it are all the Senator's friends and political colleagues. Everyone is very happy and in evening dress. They run to greet the Senator, shake hands, and reminisce about the good times they had while getting rich at the expense of the people. They play a friendly game of golf and then dine on lobster, caviar and champagne. Also present is the devil, who really is a very friendly guy who has a good time dancing and telling jokes. They are having such a good time that before the Senator realizes it, it is time to go. Everyone gives the Senator a hearty farewell and waves while the elevator rises... The elevator goes up, up, up and the door reopens on heaven where St. Peter is waiting. "Now it's time to visit heaven." So, 24 hours pass with the Senator joining a group of contented souls moving from cloud to cloud, playing the harp and singing. They have a good time and soon the 24 hours have gone by and St. Peter returns. "Well, then, you've spent a day in hell and another in heaven. Now choose your eternity." The Senator reflects for a minute, then answers: "Well, I would never have said it before, I mean heaven has been delightful, but I think I would be better off in hell." So the Senator is escorted to the elevator by St. Peter goes down, down, down to hell. Now, the doors of the elevator open and the Senator is in the middle of a barren land covered with waste and garbage. The Senator's friends are now dressed in rags, picking up the trash and putting it in black bags as more trash falls from above. The devil comes over and puts his arm around the Senator's shoulder. "I don't understand," stammers the Senator. "Yesterday I was here and there was a golf course and clubhouse, and we ate lobster and caviar, drank champagne, and danced and had a great time. Now there's just a wasteland full of garbage and my friends look miserable. What happened?" by
Mark E. Smith (20 articles, 26 quicklinks, 64 diaries, 767 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 8:23:40 AM
I am very pleased to hear this..... Coming from California and having been a twenty year witness to the California democratic machine, I have seen some pretty poor judgement on a whole lot of important issues. In all of these 20 years I have seen much gridlock concerning our most important social interests and a lot of mutual cooperation on the interests of big business. I have also seen a senator from my district run unopposed decade after decade then siding for the most part with the neocon right. I refer to Diane Feinstein of course. In all fairness, many of California's problems can be blamed on the voters too. We have in many cases essentially disempowered our reps(and ourselves) by calling for a mandatory 2/3rds vote on every issue. Seems like it always comes easy to put in the worst possible legislation, but when it comes to getting rid of it, well that's another story. What in God's name were "we" thinking of falling for that trap? An even better question would be "What in God's name was the California democratic party thinking of when it purged these delegates? They worry me sometimes! On a far better note, we do have some really good representatives like Barbara Boxer, who like Barrack, opposed this war from the start and good old Sam Farr, congressman extraordinaire. Now I'd like to see that guy in Barrack's cabinet. I am also so glad Obama stepped up and did the right thing. It is very reassuring to me that I have chosen to back the right candidate. by
Michael Shaw (7 articles, 1 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 292 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 1:22:28 PM
Won't it be nice To have a president who will take responsibility for his admiistration's actions, and not be too insecure to admit a mistake or change course when a policy has failed or proved to be counterproductive. by
Robert Sargent (10 articles, 0 quicklinks, 24 diaries, 290 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 9:31:00 AM
Okay, Professor Droopy Drawers.... In response to your linked article, and your attitude, I have these thoughts. Public education is in the toilet. Henry Adams knew that at the turn of the century. More recently John Taylor Gatto has made it clear that the whole notion of "public" education has its roots in Prussia, empire and official indoctrination. The finest presidents of the United States, and even this nation's founders, were, by today's standards, educated to a level that most US student's never see until graduate school -- and this was their pre-University educational experience! All were home-schooled. I spent 13 years of my professional life working in educational testing. In the trenches, what becomes painfully obvious is that we not only do not have the infrastructure to conduct the kind of mass-testing that No Child Left Behind (NCLB) mandated, but that the whole act was designed to destroy what remained of the public education system in the United States. After 20 years of Reaganomics, state departments of education were salivating at the notion of getting their hands on actual federal funding and of getting their hands on the reverse-funding that comes from the educational testing industry when "penalty clauses" take effect due to non-delivery or inaccuracy in testing reports. So the state departments, starved to death by Reagan's policies, went on spending sprees in advance of our war with Iraq. Once the war with Iraq was in play, NCLB had just mandated, de facto, that every state fund its own public education system according to guidelines that would be impossible to achieve. In a good Spring scoring season, the United States has the infrastructure to provide timely test results for, perhaps, 6 million school children PER educational testing provider. We only have three educational testing providers, so our total educational testing infrastructure accomodates only 18 million children. We had approximately 40 million public school children enrolled in the Fall of 2002. Can you see the formula for destruction in play here? But there is a more important, overarching theme evidenced not only in a cherry-picking of the facts, but in the attitude behind the idea that intellectual oppression produces, somehow, superior academic results to economic oppression. Anyone who has worked in and around the Academy knows that human beings are treated with rampant disrespect and gratuitous classism to an almost subhuman extreme (in Texas we have our goals so this extreme is, "happily," achieved). Pouring money into this "system" is literally flushing it down the toilet. So while I do not agree that we should simply dispense with public education, I sympathize with those who refuse to fund a top-heavy bureaucracy while teachers and professors are paid peanuts and children are served a sub-standard curriculum of abstract experiences. The problem, I believe, is oppression -- period! It does not matter what form that oppression takes, any form will manufacture and perpetuate a counterproductive byproduct that eventually overtakes, and then destroys, the very host upon which the oppression grows. Democracy 2.0 needs to seriously consider the primary purpose of an institution and to take steps to manage the ill effects of creeping bureaucracy when that institution is handed over to the present cohort of human beings to implement. Bureaucracies, like any life form, exist to serve themselves. That is THEIR primary purpose. If we rely on pure bureaucracy to implement a healthcare system, we will only manufacture, eventually, a steady stream of sick people! That should NOT be the primary purpose of healthcare at any time. Nor should it be the primary purpose of an educational system to manufacture a steady stream of ignorant, uneducated gnaves. With respect to the present situation, we have politicians who attempt to portray themselves as public servants but who are actually, in fact, simple bureaucrats. How does Democracy 2.0 address this issue? If I applied the attitude, and the cherry-picked data, you have placed on display, I would never bother. The situation as the Alexander Cockburn's of the world have defined it is quite hopeless: pass the roach, let's party now because tomorrow we may die. There is no answer, so let's baffle them all with complete bullshit, take over the vernacular, and compete to stay in control in this Neitzschian nightmare of nihilism. Or we can vet our candidates as best we can with an eye towards separating out the public servants from the bureaucrats. Obama is a public servant. Clinton is a bureaucrat. On this score, it's really that simple. But clearly Jimmy Carter was a public servant, too. The bureaucrats ate him alive. The climate the public servants have in their favor this time that they did not have in Carter's time is the fact that the Nixonian surrogates, this time, have actually attacked the intelligence services and the diplomatic core of the bureaucracy. In Carter's time the Nixonians actually tried to utilize the intelligence services and were, eventually, betrayed by them. That certainly wasn't going to happen again. My friends. And that means that the bureaucrats in the intelligence services and the diplomatic core will tend to be on the side of the candidate coming in to power. If that candidate is Obama. If the candidate is Clinton or McCain, the Nixonian contingent -- the minority -- will continue to destroy the intelligence and diplomatic corps in its internecine attempt to recreate a corporatist state where the accumulation of wealth becomes the de facto religion. The danger in all of this is that the fascists who brought down the decade of the 1960's and broke it into its component parts will attempt to fortify their hold on power and attempt to murder Obama or otherwise destroy his candidacy. In that regard, Clinton is serving their needs quite well. Such is the life of a bureaucrat. We the People need to show up at this election and we need to support the candidacy of Obama. No other candidate is capable, or has the bonafides, to save our democracy from CERTAIN destruction. Should Obama lose the primary or the general election, a second Civil War is all but certain. All the metrics that the corporatists have relied on throughout the Reagan Era have been based on a suppressed voter turnout and a poisoned public spirit. If we the people show up for this election and continue to support our candidate, we will overwhelm the opposition to their complete and total surprise. It's a surprise worth fighting for. Like no other. by
Richard Volaar (14 articles, 0 quicklinks, 54 diaries, 189 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 11:11:37 AM
A writer is a rogue goose. All other gees fly in a flock formation; every goose knows his place and time for honking. The rogue goose is undisciplined. He leaves the formation indiscriminately to have a look at it from aside. He roams back and forth, takes a peep at the leader, honks a little bit from behind, distracts everyone and writes on what he sees. Time passes and as he wants to return back to his place he discovers someone else there. Thus he either has to wait until they land for rest...
I agree that Obama could be the right one. It is especially interesting that www.antiwar.com, the tradiitional Republican conservative site practically endorsed him. But I have to warn again- it most likely will not happen: 1. It had been obvious before and it becomes even more obvious now that a deal was struck on the highest levels of the politicos so that BOTH parties make McCain a president. In order to fulfill that the Demparty on its side killed the legitimate- all-round winning candidate Edwards and sought for Hillary and Obama- both highly conrtoversial in the eyes of the public. 2. It becomes also obvious that Hillary is McCain in skirt. Thus if she becomes a candidate the public will vote 'negatives' that is whom they hate more and that gives McCain a Presidency. 3. It is highly unlikely that the Dem establishment will let Obama to become a candidate. But even if he becomes one- you can expect a violent backlash of the worst order from the Religious Right. The fact that they have not yet done so proves that their leader know about the deal and they just sit on the fringes waiting to be called into battle if necessary. To win Obama then would have to ignite a populist vote which he does not not seem to be inclined to do. That means McCain will win either way. 4. I bet here that Hillary will be announced a candidate. There will be then ' debates as usual', all show and McCaine will win. 5. In case Obama becomes a Dem Candidate I predict there will be no presidential debates because Dems will be seen as violators of the deal. Racist rant of ( properly flagged) here is a symptom. In case the dogs are called to bark they will bark just that and even more. Obama, to win must take a greatest risk possible- he has to take over the Dem. Party. That surely can be done but I doubt it. by
Mark Sashine (42 articles, 19 quicklinks, 227 diaries, 3219 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 11:30:54 AM
Zan is an actor, dancer, choreographer, writer, designer and artist. He is a director of a major national civil rights organization, one of the youth founders of the Progressive Caucus of the California Democratic Party, and an organizer of political rallies and events. He is responsible for many of the most liberal resolutions adopted by the California Democratic Party in recent years.
Marcy, you don't like obama and neither does PDA Why do you want to be delegtes for someone you don't like? by
Zan (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 13 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 12:32:55 PM
Main passion is making cultural anthropology scientific.
My heart's with Obama but my pocketbook says "McCain" Even without the shenanigans you expect, the Red Phone argument says it all. Too many of us are bloody-minded, nationalistic, and easily frightened. I'm supporting Obama but I'm betting on McCain. by
F T (Ted) Cloak Jr (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 12:34:20 PM
I Agree... ...that if what you say is true, you need to cut to the chase, put the gun in your mouth, and pull the trigger. What is the POINT, really, of being RIGHT when the extinction-level event (ELE) is bearing down on the planet? I told you so? Put everything you have in what you CAN DO TODAY, in the here and the now, and let the process dictate what comes next. As individuals we are powerless to do anything but screw up our lives and the lives of those dumb enough to hang around us. I am sorry that most people do not get this very simple fact and continue to pursue ridiculous postures in defense of what is no longer worth defending. The house IS on fire, it WILL burn to the ground, so leave it or die. Together we can build something truly great, but, as individuals, we are fetid egoes with delusions of grandeur. And, yes, there will always be something beyond if we lose our chances and our hopes for a brighter future...on this side it looks like death and destruction, but before that inevitable day, we DO have each other to share and enjoy a few moments of ancient sunshine with. If your brain keeps telling you that it's hopeless, change your mind. It's not that your brain is lying it is that what you think is relevant t'ain't necessarily so. by
Richard Volaar (14 articles, 0 quicklinks, 54 diaries, 189 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 2:47:31 PM
Please see http://www.myspace.com/jim_pivonka for bio.
John Taylor Gatto It's a pleasure to see a reference to JT Gatto's work, here or anywhere. I hope readers will followup on it with at least a Google search, and even a visit to http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/ The work and site are a welcome antidote to the fascist and parafascist bunk that typifies current "educational" theory, especially among the private schooling industry entrepeneurs running "alternative" institutions based on Platonist philosophy and Schmitt/Strauss social theory. by
Jim Pivonka (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 1:17:00 PM
Zan is an actor, dancer, choreographer, writer, designer and artist. He is a director of a major national civil rights organization, one of the youth founders of the Progressive Caucus of the California Democratic Party, and an organizer of political rallies and events. He is responsible for many of the most liberal resolutions adopted by the California Democratic Party in recent years.
John Taylor Gatto John Taylor Gatto is a great teacher. One of the best things he's taught us is not to trust teachers or leaders. I suggest everyone read "The Underground History of American Education." He has documentation for eveyrthing he says. by
Zan (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 13 comments)
on Saturday, April 12, 2008 at 7:15:02 PM
Please see http://www.myspace.com/jim_pivonka for bio.
Thank you Mr. Volaar, and Zan I much appreciate Richard Volaar's comment, which I consider exceptionally astute, and helpful to me. I hope it is to others, as well. Zan raises a very important point about the extent to which the "Progressive" movement will be willing to align itself, as a reliable ally, with the democratically oriented, concensus building focused movement which is the base and strength of the Obama candidacy. I am a moderate Democrat, strongly supportive of Obama because of his inclusive, community based, democratic, and non doctrinaire approach to his campaign, his political background, and the tenor of his policy objectives and suggested direction as President. The Progressive movement, which I had been aligned with, has lost my support because of what seems to me to be excessively doctrinaire policy preferences and communications styles, an eagerness to substitute litigation and the courts for straightforward and head on debate and dispute in the arena of democratic coalition building, and an attachment to near, and sometimes even straightforwardly collectivist economic policies. I do sincerely hope that the Progressives' recently discovered affinity for the Obama message is deep and abiding,and that they are willing to give up some ideological purity and policy urgency in exchange for political effectiveness and full participation in the democratic process - and even in the Democratic Party coalition, within an Obama Administration. by
Jim Pivonka (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 1:39:41 PM
I'm supporting Dennis Kucinich for President.
Obama Obama is no different than Clinton or McCain. They're all globalists and fascists. by
Ty Shlackman (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 534 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 12:37:15 PM
Zan is an actor, dancer, choreographer, writer, designer and artist. He is a director of a major national civil rights organization, one of the youth founders of the Progressive Caucus of the California Democratic Party, and an organizer of political rallies and events. He is responsible for many of the most liberal resolutions adopted by the California Democratic Party in recent years.
It's called fake support. Why lower yourself to that? What is going on in California is that people who hated Obama before the primary are pretending to support him now that he has delegate positions open. If you check, you will learn that their support came LATE. And I suspect that, with the reinclusion of the people who opposed Obama before the primary, most of his California delegation will not be supportive of Obama at the convention. I hope this doesn't mean that Brad Parker, Jo Olson or Ahjamu Makalani who wrote strong attacks against Obama are eligible to be Obama delegates. This is a reason to drop out of PDA and PDLA Neither one stands by its principles. by
Zan (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 13 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 12:44:30 PM
Delegate selection MUST be democratic.... Marcy... You're a progressive hero. I know you well. I've watched you act with honor and commitment to progressive ideals on COUNTLESS occasions. You take on enormous tasks for peace and progressive values and ALWAYS see them through. You deserve to be considered for a delegate position in a democratic and honest selection process, and I, for one, support you as a delegate for Obama to the nominating convention in Denver. Thank you for ALWAYS fighting the good fight. For going beyond the call of duty. For taking on Jane Harman and her countless millions and the power of her incumbency during the 2006 Congressional campaign to push for peace and the reinstatement of our Constitution. Barack Obama may be our Presidential candidate -- but you, my friend, are the true progressive. Mr. Obama is lucky to have your support, despite the fact that his own campaign honchos made an egregious error in purging progressives -- hence progressive values -- from his list of delegate candidates. The fact is -- the instant any campaign and candidate deviate from the democratic process they MUST be stopped! Undemocratic actions must be instantly quashed before they set precedents for further and more disastrous erosions of democracy. The Obama camp has learned an important lesson. This IS THE PEOPLE'S CAMPAIGN!! I congratulate the Obama campaign staff for having the decency to see the error of its ways. Much love, Linda by
Linda Milazzo (98 articles, 0 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 121 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 12:44:59 PM
Ty is right. Ty wrote: "Obama is no different than Clinton or McCain. They're all globalists and fascists." You don't get to be a major party candidate without the support of the military-industrial complex and the big multinationals. Obama's mentor was Joe Lieberman, so the first thing Obama learned was how a neo-con can pretend to be on the side of the people. When Obama threw his support to Lieberman in 2006, people should have questioned why somebody who claims to care about people would support a war-hawk Bush crony like Lieberman. As a personal favor to repay a debt, perhaps? How many other debts remain outstanding and to whom? As long as much of the country remains gripped in the general delirium, mob hysteria, and mass psychosis of election season, there is no reasoning with them. In February or March of 2009, once the new administration settles in and, whoever is elected, people see that nothing has changed, they will once again be open to reason, but only until the next election season. To educate people you have to reach them during their lucid moments. During campaigns it is a waste of time to try. by
Mark E. Smith (20 articles, 26 quicklinks, 64 diaries, 767 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 4:33:20 PM
The Nice Thing About Watching Other People Sleepwalk... ...is that you don't have to own the fact that it is YOU who is doing the sleepwalking -- they are just mirroring what you, in fact, WANT TO SEE. If we listen to people who insist on remaining cranky and hopeless, we'd never seize anything but a handful of sleeping pills and some rum. If it really is as bad as you insist it is, what the f*k are you doing still pushing air in and out? Are you an oxygen thief? Or are you that much of a coward you have to commit suicide by letting everyone else know how unworthy this world is of your continued presence? I thought I was captain of all buzz-killers, but, alas, I must pass the torch to you, my friend. I have been outdone. Your depression has wrapped itself around your cortex and now you are cherry picking the snapshots of your day that most reflect your view of this fetid, imperfect world we live in. Snap out of it, Professor Droopy Drawers! Get off your cross, we NEED the wood for kindling. We have an entire establishment we need to burn down and you're hogging our lumber. The world is not this linear, straight-line place your depression tells you that it is. It is part of a SYSTEM, and that SYSTEM wants to stay ALIVE. It wants to heal itself, just as your body heals itself just fine without YOUR brilliant thoughts informing it that it just isn't worthwhile to heal -- we're all going to die anyway. Right? I know what it feels like to be betrayed and disillusioned. My problem then, and my challenge now, comes from recognizing when something afoot is BIGGER than the candidate/person who seems to be orchestrating the play. Obama is playing a ROLE and is playing it very well. But the forces driving him are BIGGER than anything he, or the corporatists, can control. They are bigger than anything this government can create to try to oppress or discourage us. What we are seeing in Obama's candidacy really has NOTHING to do with Barak Obama, personally. We are seeing OURSELVES. We are feeling OUR POWER. We'd like to make Obama responsible for it, but it's not him. He's just a vessel. He's the occasion to get us on our feet and our heads out of the sand. The only reason you are seeing a bunch of sleepwalking lemmings is because that is what YOU ARE...that is what you are identifying with out of the field of infinite possibilities. The pay-off to you is that you don't have to make yourself vulnerable to yet another untenable disillusionment as long as you can convince yourself that resistance is futile. We are the Borg, the Borg is us. Long live the Borg. Of course the stand-down in Dallas was designed to scare Obama into toning down his rhetoric. Of course the Federal Reserve families have the power to make our lives miserably uncomfortable for an extended period of time. But we have each other, Mark. We have our unified vision and our unifying goal of our Founding Fathers. The WORLD will be on our side if we choose to stomp all over this fake money-machine that is tearing the world a new one. They can not bomb us all. And there is one thing more dangerous than a revolutionary and that's a revolutionary who has nothing left to lose. If I had less than a week left to live, I know PRECISELY what I would do, and I'd do it for my sister's children, my brother and my other sisters. I'd do it for the world because there are some things that aren't worth living through and there ARE some things worth dying FOR. Snap out of it. Everybody dies, but not everybody lives, first. Write yourself a better story and then jump inside of it. by
Richard Volaar (14 articles, 0 quicklinks, 54 diaries, 189 comments)
on Friday, April 11, 2008 at 9:00:14 PM
Midwesterner, veteran of VietNam era naval service, I still feel an obligation to defend the Constitution against "all enemies, foreign and domestic."
Now, THAT... is inspirational! Well done! by
John Sanchez Jr. (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 834 comments)
on Saturday, April 12, 2008 at 6:55:40 AM
As Buckaroo Banzai said "No matter where you go - there you are." And as Werner Erhardt said, "Think of all the bad things you have experienced - the one thing they all have in common is the fact that YOU were there." While Krishna Murti says the way to change the world is to change yourself, I find it difficult to see what change I can make in myself that will result in the impeachment of Bush and Cheney! If these men are not impeached they must be indicted! I'm 72, divorced and widowed. I...
Senator's Oath of office The amazing lack of response from our elected officials to our call for impeachment hearings suggests it might be due in part to the flaccid ignorance of the majority of our citizens. 98% of citizens have no idea about what the Constitution does for them and what they have lost due to the actions of the Bush/Cheney regime. The politicos stand to benefit from Bush/Cheney's expansion of Presidential powers, as do the corporate funders of the electoral process. The press seems to be stifled in their pocket as well. What recourse have I as a citizen if my efforts and the efforts of tens of thousands of my fellow citizens who share the outrage at the abuses of the Constitution committed by the Bush administration cannot move our Representatives in the Congress to undertake investigations into the many credible allegations of impeachable offense? How will the men who led us into a tragic and foolish adventure in Iraq, who failed to care for the victims of hurricane Katrina, who illegally spy upon us, who vindictively expose undercover intelligence agents, who politically dismiss attorneys in the Justice Department, who claim the right to torture, kidnap, and deny the ancient right of habeas corpus – how will these men be called to account? If our representatives cannot bring themselves to honor their oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution as their first responsibility, if the press refuses to call this treasonous betrayal to the attention of the voters, who seem unconcerned about what they do not understand – what action will enlighten a sufficient number of citizens to apply the pressure necessary to move Press and Politician to principled action? Many attribute much of Bush’s early popularity to his “common man” persona. One aspect of this “common man” persona is unfortunately shared by much of the world, and now comes back to diminish us in the eyes of the world. Bush’s “with us or against us” bravado, meant to present a tough, uncompromising stance against “terrorists”, has a “blow back”. The World, regarding America and Americans from their “common man” point of view, has begun to believe that the failure of the American Citizenry, through their democratically elected representatives, to censure, repudiate and IMPEACH George W. Bush and Richard Cheney must mean that We The People are “with ‘em” – that we support waterboarding, preemptive aggression, kidnapping, warrantless domestic surveillance, and all the other horrors that will leave these men vulnerable to prosecution for war crimes when they leave office. Indeed every one of us who has not repeatedly petitioned his congressperson, demanding that they honor their oath of office, and that they immediately instigate hearings into the many recognized allegations of impeachable offence, demonstrates his support for the crimes and failings of these men. Has citizen Hillary Clinton, has citizen Barak Obama, has citizen Ted Kennedy or John McCain petitioned their congressperson with such a demand? Their oath of office is to protect and defend the Constitution – not their office, not their political party, not their legislative agenda – The Constitution! by
William Bassett (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 2 comments)
on Sunday, April 13, 2008 at 3:02:48 AM
|
|
