Dear Howard, I'm writing to say goodbye

By Seeya, J. L. Mann

03/07/06 -- --

Howard Dean Chairman Democratic National Committee

Dear Howard,

I'm writing to say goodbye. I'm off to join the Greens or Ralph Nader and the CUIP bunch, even the Libertarians-anybody who'll fight what's going on. It hurts badly, but I just can't stay with you anymore.

I thought I owed you an explanation because of our courtship during the presidential campaign. During that time I detected in you a fair measure of a quality that's been sadly lacking in Democrats for much too long, that being a willingness to grapple with an opposition that's fostering the ascendance of fascism. And wonder of wonders, you seemed willing to combat their effort with as much vigor as Democrats usually approach infighting among themselves. I was elated again when you were made leader of the Party. My hopes were rekindled, even if ever so slightly.

But at a moment in history when the separation of powers and genuine allegiance to a living Constitution were literally on the line in the Alito Supreme Court nomination, Senate Democrats morphed into a collective Neville Chamberlain and chose appeasement at the cost of personal freedom and recognition of the Constitution as a lawful constraint on executive power.

The failure to stave off Alito's nomination will likely prove critical in its acquiescence of real power to the executive branch, a branch of government now dominated by elements willing to implement policies demonstrably akin to some of the worst employed by the enemy during WWII and the Cold War. This loss of power seems likely to be rendered permanent under the authority of recently confirmed Chief Justice Roberts, especially as indicated by his vote in the Oregon Death With Dignity case.

Some of this administration's wholly self-authorized behavior includes interrogation and imprisonment policy that was found to constitute crimes against humanity at the Nuremburg Tribunals. And Alito's opinions regarding the unitary executive, along with scores of existing opinions authored and joined by Justices Scalia, Thomas and Anthony Kennedy, can be expected to herald further instances of the court 'legitimizing' ever more serious violations and shifts in real power.

This isn't simply a hard turn right, either, Howard. It's a historic, landmark departure toward a unitary executive corporatocracy. That sounds exactly like Mussolini's Italy to me.

Among other things, there's been a systematic erosion of the well-demarcated line that ostensibly separates the public and private sectors. Already real political power, until recently held exclusively by public governing bodies, is being exerted on a routine, daily basis by private corporations- entities that exist for the sole purpose of exacting a profit that's now become the responsibility of taxpayers to provide. Military and police powers embodied in the mercenary and penal operations of Blackwater Security and Wackenhut Corporation bear this out, as do many of the varied and highly questionable practices of Halliburton's wild child, Kellogg Brown and Root.

How could you possibly let this happen, Howard? How can there possibly be a debate on whether or not the president has power to conduct warrantless clandestine NSA surveillance on American citizens? Common Americans held in thrall by fear intentionally propagated by administration officials and corporate media may have some doubts, but Howard, you and I know full well that the American Revolution was fought in very large part to remove this misuse of power from the hands of our nation's original "unitary executive," formerly known as "king."

And Howard, it's not just warrantless surveillance. It's outrageous, paranoid intrusiveness joined with secretiveness and an utter dearth of accountability. It's Capitol Hill lobbyists composing the actual verbiage of critical legislation directly and positively impacting their clients. It's teetering health care stretched to its limits by insatiable dollar demands put on it by the insurance industry- a parasite intermediary that now dominates medical practice and altogether too often dictates life or death dispensation of treatment. It's corporate welfare and destruction of the middle class and the environment. It's the weaponization of space and the spurning of viable international treaties. It's the deterioration of domestic infrastructure and a failing educational system. It's an incessant pursuit of war and human exploitation.

You see what I'm getting at Howard? Simply put, it's evident that way too many Democrats care more about their political status and sinecures than they do the their personal honor-when it's called into play for upholding and defending the Constitution, genuinely serving the people of the United States and securing our freedoms.

Virtually all the serious Democratic presidential pretenders are in favor of the Bush Doctrine of Preemptive Warfare. That's just great. Among other things, it clearly indicates that just because Democrats don't have a current poster boy for corruption in the same league as Jack Abramoff, they've consciously opted to continue their dependence on the oceans of easy special interest money to which political survival holds them equally hostage.

So I'm out of here Howard, gone. Wish I could say it's been fun. Starting well before Bill Clinton the Democrats had become GOP Lite. Today the Republic is reeling toward a completely totalitarian fascist state. In truth we've become a foreign invader seeking conquest and empire, the mortal enemy of a peaceful Earth. So I'm off to find political leadership that's got some true moral integrity and courage fight left to fight with.

You were OK Howard; you had some of it personally, but most of your friends and colleagues.Hoo boy!

Seeya, J. L. Mann

PS. I sent copies of this letter to Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. I also sent it to everyone I care about who has an email address.

John L. Mann - takedeadaim@hotmail.com

The Link

Thank You!

The Democrats have to get the message somehow that if they fail to reform they are going to lose their own political base (what they have left of it, that is).

By the way, I'm calling for a stretcher to carry Sky out in after he reads this.

Guys, above all else, I understand the plight within the Democratic party, but their foe is a far larger beast and will consume the Democrats complety if you get any more weaker and at this time of politcal air, there needs to be something to oppose the Republicans.


This has got to be one of the hardest choices we have to make this year. Take the chance to send a clear message to Republicans and vote anything but them or punish the foolish Democrats who have betrayed us and allow the Republicans to win.

I want to help Sky and yet I want to help Left too, but what really needs to be done is to do away with both and there is only one way I can think of to do that before 06.

For the non-Republican voters, it seems to be a case of "Damned if you do, Damned if you don't". But it need not be that way if the gutless, "politics-minded" Democrats would get some courage, stand up, and change things.

The only way we voters can make the Democratic party reform itself is with our votes. If we vote the "party line" as Sky wants, we get what we have today, and are stuck for yet another term with a party that is in no way eager to change. Is anyone satisfied with the status quo? Because that is just what you will get for another two, four, or six years by rewarding these Democrats with re-election who have done nothing but sell us out time and time and time again.

I believe a lot of Americans are getting fed up with the Republicans and will vote against them as a backlash to their policies (certainly the Democrats have done nothing worthy of getting votes on their own). So the Democrats will gain some votes on backlash only. If we vote to send a message only against the worst Democrats who make it past the primaries, we can:

1. Purge these people from Congress.
2. Send a strong message to the other members that people are fed up.
3. Limit the amount of weakening.

The result of this can be a Democratic Party much more in-tune with how we progressives want it to be.

This can be done, but it will take a great amount of courage and resolve on the part of the people to do it.

How bad do you want change?

Again, I have asked this quesiton a million times with no answer. Why dont we make a party that truly represents Progressives?

Oh, did I mention AFW that I am a Republican? I vote what is best for the peopel and screw party lines. Republicans have a far bigger plight then the Democrats have this election, whether we realize it or not.

Lefty.


I hear your anger, disgust, resentment, and lost faith.


You will do what you will do, but I'm tellin you the truth!
Unless you can get every Liberal on board,
a vote for a green is a vote for the Repubs!

I respect you and your work Lefty,
and because of this, I am very concerened for my sons future!


Division is exactly what "they" want, what "they" actively work for consistantly!
(shaking my head) This is one of K Roves most basic rules!

And it's working!



And AFW will be your poster boy!
If this forum is a representation of this country,
sorry, but we're screwed!
Screwed as long as you let emotion make your decisions.

You'll see. I'll say I told you so.
And there won't be squat we can do about it!



Be afraid, be very afraid!
Because we are our own worst enemy!

Does anyone else get the feeling of being a puppit on a string? That no matter what we do, we are just really entertainment for the super wealthy? All our little dramas, whines, moans, tears. Are we the modern gladiators, fighting in the modern arena they have made for us?

I dunno bout the super rich,
but I feel Karl all over everything!

I realise by continuing to attempt to get Sky to understand what I am saying is proving myself to be a gluton for punishment, but I will keep on. Mostly because I feel that what you are advocating, Sky, is no different than what the republicans do.

What I am saying is that if I vote for a Democrat, just because they are a democrat, doesn't do any good for anybody. For instance, say ALL dems are elected in the coming elections and they take both the house and the senate. What does that change? NOT A FUCKING THING. All the old timers are still there, all of the problems still exist. Democrats have become NO MORE than a slightly different version of the most repulsive of republicans. A democrat who votes for the patriot act is EXACTLY the same creature as a republican who votes for the Patriot act. What makes you think that some magic wand will be waved and all of the sudden (or after a few hard years of fighting as you claim) the democratic party is going to reform into what it once was? I will bet you something, Sky. When and if the Dems gain control and freak-Bush pushes some new "law" about how we must somehow abdicate one of our few precious liberties that are left, the fucking law will still get passed. What makes you think that they 'yea' dems are going to do any fucking differently than they do now? You say, give them a chance. I say, cross the line and you no longer have my support. Vote for the patriot act and you can guaranfuckingtee that I will NEVER support you again. Once you kill a baby, and then say your sorry, the fact still remains that you are a babykiller. The democrats that have licked the ass of Bush and his cronies for the past few years don't do so because their hands or tied or because they HAVE to. THey do it because they DON'T GIVE A SHIT about regular Americans like myself. NOTHING YOU SAY, NO HOPE YOU HAVE is going to change that. You say we are the ones who are delusional and don't understand the strategy. I say you have fucking fell for the lies like so many other sheeple republicans out there. Don't rub your little taunts in my face because they don't scare me and I DO NOT BELIEVE them. NOT because I am confused or angry, but because I am NOT FUCKING BLIND. I can see something and very coherently interpret the broader meaning of a fact. To support BUSH is to support something I DO NOT BELIEVE IN. I may very well vote for a green candidate, or an independent. ITS NOT THROWING MY VOTE AWAY. I actually believe in a FUCKING DEMOCRACY. That doesn't mean only republican or democrat. It means that if I don't like either, I find an alternative and support it as best as I can. You, on the other hand, suck the teet of democratic stupidity when you suggest that the only way is to follow the party. Help the party. VOte the party. Stay the course. Fuck that course. Don't use the example of my work to find pity for me. I work my ass of for THIS project because I believe in something that I don't even know for sure that you know exists. And don't PM me and ask me what my fucking problem is because my problem is that I am a sick and tired of the state of this country today. Democrats who betray my interests are EXACTLY the same as republicans who do. I don't fall for the party line, Sky.

Yes, absolutely.

Lefty, right on! You tell 'im.

What is the median age of the Democrats in Congress anyway? Congress in general? You know Conyers has been up there for 40 years?!?!?!?

If the Republicans support black, I want the Dems to scream WHITE. If the Republicans support Day, I want the Dems to scream NIGHT!

Instead, the Republicans support white, and the Dems whisper Eggshell.

Lefty,

I DO understand what you are saying!
And I'm sorry, but I don't agree!


I'm also sorry, and like you will continue to attempt to get YOU to see MY position!
It's my opinion that your latest decision reflected here is based more on emotion that reality.

Your pissed the Democrats were nearly all on board with the pat act!
That was your breaking point, and that's a purely emotional decision!
The realities have not changed, you have!

Your emotional reaction is exactly what the Republicans depend on as well!
They can't win on facts, they can only win by making liberals mad!
The devisive issue is all they ever had!
They depend on our lack of unity!

So, if I can open YOUR eyes, maybe that event will open those of others?
I do have to try don't I?
America as we know it depends on it!



lemme do a little supposing!

using very easy and extremely general numbers,
Lets say 1/3 of the voters are Republican, 1/3 are Liberals, and 1/3 are fence sitters.
The Republicans are not going to change their vote, and neither are the liberals.
In that aspect they are balanced.
We all know that the Repugs are losing support big time, so that must be the 1/3 in the center.
They are not running towards anything, they are running away from the Republican lies, corruption and incompetance.
So, where are they gonna wind up? They gonna vote for the Green party candidate?
C'mon, your a realistic person.
The centrists far and away will vote for the democrat.
As the lesser of two evils yes, but when the votes are counted, why does not matter!

So, you can't vote for the Republicans, and you won't vote for the Democrats, because they're just as bad.
Does anybody but me see how these numbers work for the Neo-cons to maintain power?

Does anybody but me see this division demonstrated here on this forum as a classic Rovian tactic seen over and over again?


Don't be a tool! (This is a general comment, not intended for any individual)

To be honest, the only division I see on this forum is your repeated attempts to get everyone to agree with everything you say.



Edit:

It is astonishing to me that you are so very blind yourself.

No one here has ever appeared to me to be a tool.

Next edit:

Since you are so determined and try so much to inform all of us dumbasses to the rightness of your words. Explain IN EXCRUTIATING DETAIL for my slow and stupid mind, how it is any different to have Democrat neo-cons in power vs. Republican neo-cons. Seriously. Don't just keep giving me the same bullshit line you've used so many times. Tell me specifically how a Neo-con democrat is any different than a neo-con republican.

I didn't say anyone was a dumb ass, and I resent your attempting to frame me with those words.
That's pretty chicken shit!

Lefty,
I have specifically stated that I respect you and your efforts. What more do you want?
I'm really curious why you decide to feel so defensive to react with such hostility?



Please tell me which democrats are neo-cons, and gimme proof.
Then I will AGAIN remind you, its about the Letter D, when they count up letters to see who runs the house and senate!

I am not suggesting, never have suggested, that we consider all democrats as saints worthy of respect.
On the contrary!
But, first things first!
I want to USE them in our attempt to win control back!
That control is the crux of every issue.
With out it, nothing else matters!


I am sorry this upsets you so much Lefty,
but if i have to say it a thousand times,
then I guess that's what I'll do!




I'm nobodies whimp.





If any of us does anything that either directly or indirectly helps the Republicans to maintain power
in DC, then I will consider those individuals to be Tools of and for the Republican Cause.
It's just that simple.
If this offends anyone, though I might wish it otherwise, I will not accept that responsibility.

I can't speak for anyone but myself...but I'm going to watch, listen, and LEARN everything I can (all over again) about those Dems who are wanting us to vote for them...again. I'm also going to do the same thing regarding the GREENS, the LIBERTERIANS, and anyone else that says "Vote For Me."

It seems to me that we've got a good deal of time between now and November. If we exert all of our energies trying to change minds that aren't going to change for whatever reason, there may be nothing left for us to draw on for the summer and into the fall, when the campaigns will really heat up.

Know what my biggest concern is right now? The fucking voting machines! It doesn't matter WHO is running for what office, folks, IF the voting is rigged in favor of the Repubs. We need to scream the loudest about this major problem within our nation. What state(s) is/are likely to join the states of Florida and Ohio so it/they can start wearing their club tie? Which one or two or three states will make sure the Repubs maintain control of both the House and the Senate in November...please take a look to find the answer to that question....first.

There are quite a few good posts about this problem in the ELECTIONS forum, and I ran across this article awhile ago. It's not so much about voting machines but it's about a new strategy the Dems are looking at trying: Will it work? Who knows? But, in a way, it's doing basically what the repubs have been doing since 9/11...making political hay out of so many peoples' "anger points."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11718475/


Catherine

Thank you Cat!!!!

Read her words.

For the record,
I completely agree with what Cath said!
I'm afraid though that my saying this will confuse some people.

Not really... I think we're all on the same page about , ya know, those really bad rigged gizmos .

Yes, but with "them" in charge, diebold will be protected and work FOR them.
Granted many Dems are not much better, but some are really good Progressives!

I don't see anyone being able to do much of anything about Diebold before November.
Hopefully I'm wrong, but I doubt it!

And in this case, the only other option I can see,
is to overwhelm the rigged system with Votes for the Democrats!

If the vote is close, say with in a few points, Diebold can push the numbers!

But, if the Dem is out front by say 10%, even diebold can't do that much and get away with it!


Overwhelm the corrupt system!
Put the Dems in charge of the house, and then there might be some reforms!

If the Repugs ramain in charge, you know damn well there won't ever be!

First of all, I agree with Cat 100%. Secondly, I realize that I am far to the left of most Americans and it's very unlikely that a party that represents my worldview and political philosophy is ever likely to be a viable alternative. And some of you guys are far to the left of me! So be realistic and work with what ya got! Some Dems like Kucinich, Dean, Feingold, and most of the "thirty somethings" I like a lot, and while they'll likely never be president they'll continue to be a strong voice if we win some seats. Neocon Republicans are not the opposition, they are the enemy, and getting rid of them is the most important task we have. The surest way NOT to get rid of them is to not support Democrats because they aren't liberal enough for us, nobody ever will be. Let's get back to making sure everyone's vote counts, and if the country's in more of a conservative mood than we like, then the majority should rule. A little bit of light is starting to shine through, don't slam the door on it by being unrealistic.

Amen!

Somebody give me a Hallelujah!

I still ask Lefty's question:

What's the difference between a Dem who votes for the Patriot Act and a Repub who votes for the Patriot Act??

i will once aga8in answer the question.


It's about taking the house, and hopefully the senate back!
It's about taking the power away from the Republicans!


What's the difference?


D -vs- R


That's the difference!
The majority in the house, controls the house.
Those who control the house, have the power!
If you don't think it matters, talk to a Texas Republican!


After the Democrats have the power, then we can work to vote the bastid Democrats out!
If the Republicans maintain control, it won't matter! It just won't matter!

This makes no sense.

Vote the Dems in, and then kick out the ones you don't like?

Who will you replace them with?

More Repubs?

Your idea has merit, but the endgame falls apart.

C'mon Scorp, yer smarter than that!
If not, grab yer wife and start making a few good Democrats!



Look, there are LOTS of good, but unknown Progressive Democrats!
Hopefully some will run in the primaries before November, and shake things up a bit!

Unfortunately 6 months is not enough time to work these unknown forces
to do battle and expect to win against the money and established power bases.

In my state, one of my Senators has somethines been a good Democrat,
but has sometimes been a terrable Progressive. She needs to be replaced!
And I have contacted the Gentleman that will run against her in the primaries and told him I'd be pleased to volunteer to help his campaign in my county.
He's a fine Progressive. In fact, his bio sounds like a short hair hippie!
No matter, he won't win. But if the man can get enough votes, he will put the fear of the electoral god into Cantwell.
Then come November, even though I am not pleased with Cantwell, I will vote for her. Because he carries one D with her.
And if she doesn't straighten up, I will continue to support other progressives who seek to take her seat from her!

We can and will do the same with ALL elected officials,
but first, we MUST remove the Republican Power Machine!

Because, (c'mon class, let's all say it together)
If we don't take power from them in November,
nothing else will matter because THEY will have the power.
and anything WE try to do, THEY will simply shut it down!


Priorities and Timing,
and a good realization that not all of America is as progressive as we are,
and majority does rule, even if you don't like it!

However, we're making real headway!
Dispite some hard setbacks, we really are making headway!

Don't you see the inherint contradiction in this very statement?

You claim that this new guy cannot win, and yet, he is supposed to be able to send a message.

If his cause is hopeless, the only message to Cantwell is that he can continue the same as before.

I can't spell it out any simpler than that.

Is there just ONE person (other than me) on this forum who can explain this concept to this man?


Doesn't ANYONE play chess?

I love chess. In fact, I enjoyed a game of Shogi (Japanese chess) with one of my co-workers this afternoon.

It's not just me Sky.

Why do you refuse to see my point?

Simply not supporting somebody, then supporting them at a later eletion sends no message, or, at the very least, a message that it doesn't matter how badly somebody screws up, because in the end, you'll side with them again anways.

Why is it that If I don't agree with you, so many of you people so consistantly insist I am refusing to see something?

Fuck! I see, and understand what you said quite perfectly!
The reason I will not "See it" is because I do not agree!
And as long as I don't, I will continue to try to tell you why you are mistaken!


That does not mean my opinion cannot be changed!
But, just because you said so, doesn't mean it's so!

When you say it so that the little light in the back of my head flashes on,
THEN i will "see it".

Similarly, I fail my communication, when that same light does not come on in your head!
But I'm gonna keep trying anyway.

I have something you don't have Scorp.
Perspective of age.
In the Japanese culture they respect the wisdom of that perspective.
That's not to say you are stupid or other wise lacking.



I have spent many years knowing I was a leader, yet chose to follow.
Now in the second half of my middle age I have rediscovered who I am,
and I really do like who I am, and I believe in me!
This means if I have to swim against the currect for something I believe in strongly,
so be it!


To tell you the truth?
I hope I'm wrong and you all got the right idea!
I hope that in a few months we'll begin to turn this fucked up ship of state around,
and in the process manage to kick all those who failed to represent the people oput onto the streets,
never to return to american politics again!

I hope your idealistic dreams all come true, and being pissed off was all that was needed to make it so.
I hope I'm wrong and you're correct.
For all of us,
but especially for my 16 year old kid, who I really do not want sacrificed to the New world Order.




That said, if any of of you ever again tells me I'm just being stubborn and refusing to see your point,
I think I might have to put my fist into my monitor, and I can't afford a new one!
So please, don't do that to me.

Fists in the air.



Solidarity. The right fist btw. An international thingy.
Ya'all'll get it, someday. Well, most of ya. Many already have, as can be witnessed
in the preceeding posts and most everywhere else on the blogosphere.

Left gatekeepers never will get it. There's no use in trying to move them from their
steadfast positions....in the middle of the left gate. They haven't noticed all the
people passing them by on their way out.

The gate is open. True progressives are leaving the pasture. No closing the gate now.

And age, does not make a man wise. Wisdom is not something solely available to
the elderly. Age does have a way of making us outdated & in many ways, obsolete.

Democracy is a great thing. The following is from a poll I posted on my forum
a few days ago. Be fair with yourselves. Re-evaluate the situation. Be honest.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Keeping Diebold and stolen elections in mind...

which of the following fits best to what we now have in the USA ?

Corporatocracy - (sometimes corporocracy) is a neologism coined by proponents of the Global Justice Movement to describe a government bowing to pressure from corporate entities. While anyone can become a shareholder in principle, in reality it is frequently only the wealthy who can afford to own enough stock to directly influence the voting (and hence the activities) of a corporation. Hence the corporatocracy might be considered somewhat synonymous with plutocracy, government by the rich. Some would argue that a real corporatocracy can only appear when (and if) a government makes it legal to bribe politicians. That quickly makes politicians very corporate-friendly, and makes it easy for corporations to pass laws as they see fit. Many people in the United States believe the allowance for campaign contributions has created such a situation and view the contributions that prompted the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act as evidence. Also, many argue that when the major media outlets are controlled by large corporations, access to information tends to become limited to what serves corporate interests, and corporate interests in turn are able to define the national political agenda. Finally when the majority of wealth of the politicians is invested into corporations, that gives politicians incentive to support the corporations.

Democracy - (from Greek δημοκρατία (demokratia), δημος (demos) the common people + κρατειν (kratein) to rule + the suffix ία (ia), literally "the common people rule") is a system where the population of a society controls the government. It may be narrowly defined as that of nation-state government specifically, or more broadly to describe a society as a whole, which can also exert political power and social power.
Democratic government aspires to serve under "the people" rather than ruling over them. This ideal is pursued by implementing some form of a voting system, usually involving indirect representation.

Oligarchy - a political regime where most or all political power effectively rests with a small segment of society (typically the most powerful, whether by wealth, family, military strength, ruthlessness, or political influence). The word oligarchy is from the Greek words for "few" (oligo) and "rule" (arkhos). Some political theorists have argued that all governments are inevitably oligarchies no matter the supposed political system. Oligarchies are often controlled by a few powerful families whose children are raised and mentored to be heirs of the power of the oligarchy, often at some sort of expense to those governed. In contrast to aristocracy ("government by the 'best'"), this power may not always be exercised openly, the oligarchs preferring to remain "the power behind the throne", exerting control through economic means. Although Aristotle pioneered the use of the term as a synonym for rule by the rich, for which the exact term is plutocracy, oligarchy is not always a rule by wealth, as oligarchs can simply be a privileged group.

Plutocracy - a form of government where all the state's decisions are centralized in an affluent wealthy class of citizenry, and the degree of economic inequality is high while the level of social mobility is low. This can apply to a multitude of government systems, as the key elements of plutocracy transcend and often occur concomitantly with the features of those systems. The word "plutocracy" itself is derived from the ancient Greek root ploutos, meaning wealth. The term plutocracy is generally used to describe two unrelated phenomena. In writings about history, plutocracy is the political control of the state by an oligarchy of the wealthy. Examples of such plutocracies include some city-states in Ancient Greece and the Italian merchant republics of Venice, Florence, and Genoa. Kevin Phillips, author and political stategist to U.S. President Richard Nixon, argues that the United States is a plutocracy in which there has been "the fusion of money and government".

(all definitions derived from Wikipedia. For the complete definitions, see http://en.wikipedia.org/ )

Play nice sky! It's not your monitors fault!

I know! And I kinda like this 17 incher!

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12251.htm

NEWS YOU WON'T FIND ON CNN



Enough of the D.C. Dems

By Molly Ivins

03/08/06 "The Progressive" -- Mah fellow progressives, now is the time for all good men and women to come to the aid of the party. I don’t know about you, but I have had it with the D.C. Democrats, had it with the DLC Democrats, had it with every calculating, equivocating, triangulating, straddling, hair-splitting son of a bitch up there, and that includes Hillary Rodham Clinton.

I will not be supporting Senator Clinton because: a) she has no clear stand on the war and Terri Schiavo and flag-burning are not issues where you reach out to the other side and try to split the difference. You want to talk about lowering abortion rates through cooperation on sex education and contraception, fine, but don’t jack with stuff that is pure rightwing firewater.

I can’t see a damn soul in D.C. except Russ Feingold who is even worth considering for President. The rest of them seem to me so poisonously in hock to this system of legalized bribery they can’t even see straight.

Look at their reaction to this Abramoff scandal. They’re talking about “a lobby reform package.” We don’t need a lobby reform package, you dimwits, we need full public financing of campaigns, and every single one of you who spends half your time whoring after special interest contributions knows it. The Abramoff scandal is a once in a lifetime gift—a perfect lesson on what’s wrong with the system being laid out for people to see. Run with it, don’t mess around with little patches, and fix the system.

As usual, the Democrats have forty good issues on their side and want to run on thirty-nine of them. Here are three they should stick to:

1) Iraq is making terrorism worse; it’s a breeding ground. We need to extricate ourselves as soon as possible. We are not helping the Iraqis by staying.

2) Full public financing of campaigns so as to drive the moneylenders from the halls of Washington.

3) Single-payer health insurance.

Every Democrat I talk to is appalled at the sheer gutlessness and spinelessness of the Democratic performance. The party is still cringing at the thought of being called, ooh-ooh, “unpatriotic” by a bunch of rightwingers.

Take “unpatriotic” and shove it. How dare they do this to our country? “Unpatriotic”? These people have ruined the American military! Not to mention the economy, the middle class, and our reputation in the world. Everything they touch turns to dirt, including Medicare prescription drugs and hurricane relief.

This is not a time for a candidate who will offend no one; it is time for a candidate who takes clear stands and kicks ass.

Who are these idiots talking about Warner of Virginia? Being anodyne is not sufficient qualification for being President. And if there’s nobody in Washington and we can’t find a Democratic governor, let’s run Bill Moyers, or Oprah, or some university president with ethics and charisma.

What happens now is not up to the has-beens in Washington who run this party. It is up to us. So let’s get off our butts and start building a progressive movement that can block the nomination of Hillary Clinton or any other candidate who supposedly has “all the money sewed up.”

I am tired of having the party nomination decided before the first primary vote is cast, tired of having the party beholden to the same old Establishment money.

We can raise our own money on the Internet, and we know it. Howard Dean raised $42 million, largely on the web, with a late start when he was running for President, and that ain’t chicken feed. If we double it, it gives us the lock on the nomination. So let’s go find a good candidate early and organize the shit out of our side.

I dispise Hillary! (Liked Bill, dispised his wife, don't blame much him for messin about)

Hillary does more harm to the Progressive movement than any other single American Politician!

Ah, but they have so done their job "witchifying Hillary" because of their fear of her...especially when it comes to national health care. dubya: ahhhh global market, uhh gadda cahmplete, uhhh outsourcing is good fohhhlks (She's not my fav, to wishy-washy, but christ they've lampooned her to death.) That damn cookie baking comment....

Truly I'd rather see Barbara Boxer than Hillary but most dems are too frightened of being called unpatriotic, as you said to go that blatently liberal.....

Yes? You rang? Oh, I thought you were talking about me.

NPR did a story a day or so ago about one of the testers for the machines in Ohio...prior to the election to see if they could be hacked, he went in a bunch of them, and found they already had preset rep votes. Election stealing.....the american way! F'd up isnt it?

Yes, and "THEY" also have managed to promite Clinton as the most likely to face their prefered,
McCain in 08!

Everything I see in the Press that refers to the most likely candidates in 08,
consistantly places Hillary opposite McCain.
The Neo-cons have already selected Hillary to run against McCain,
in the same way they harpooned Deans run and instead gave us Kerry!
Kerry may not have been terrible, doesn't matter!
They just knew he could not win!
And they know Clinton can not win!

It;s all a set up!

Hopefully we can get a Dean, or another REAL progressive who CAN win to bounce Hillary out early!
Only this time, we won't let the Neo-cons choose someone else for us.

[quote]It;s all a set up!

Hopefully we can get a Dean, or another REAL progressive who CAN win to bounce Hillary out early!
Only this time, we won't let the Neo-cons choose someone else for us.
[/quote][/quote]

I have to agree with you sky; its always Limbaugh & Focks Gnus (fear & unbalanced reporting) saying Hillary's gonna be the candidate. Like they can make it happen by sheer will. She is not electable, so they hope she'll be nominated. Not sure Dean is the answer, either. We need a loud fearless progressive free thinker to be bold enough to say Enough of this shit America, these arent your values...lets kick this Corporate State of America on its ass & take it back!!!! Yeah, I inhaled, grew up & got over it...lets MOVE ON (dotcom LOL) If we could throw Micheal Moore & the fictional Bartlett in a blender....yeah I'd vote for 'em in ANY party!

Exactly.
I had started donating to the DNC (How can you say "no" to Howard?) and then they sent me a survey to find out what issues were the most important facing our nation. Voting integrity wasn't even on the list!

So I wrote in what I felt thay should be focusing on and told them to screw themselves and not to count on another cent until they make that the primary issue. I'm still waiting.

All I'm saying TJ,
is about priorities.


At the moment I dispise everything that smells Republican!
They gotta go!

That's not to say there isn't plenty of stink to go round.
But they gotta go first!

I wrote this on another thread, but really you guys:


I've read so many of you bantering about whether or not voting party lines is a profitable endeavor, or the merits of voting for only a true candidate who is un-electable. About true democracy as a process. All these brilliant minds in here; and we still lack focus.

My closest answer is this. They learned early on (circa 1970's) that cointelpro works and division means defeat. (those of you who are young enough to need a history lesson read any book by Ward Churchill, it wasn't only the American Indian Movement they quelled; they infiltrated every student dissenting society)

We need to make a true coalition of Greens, Progressives, and Dems. We need to be calm, sure, true and, as they have taught us STAY ON MESSAGE! Until we can do this, we are defeated.

The current Democratic party is so out of touch with common American values. Do they really need a survey to tell them what people want?

AFW?
Which winger group are you working for?




But but but, what about the group division?
What about them wedge issues?

Gotta Link? Thanks....

Catherine

But, if she's the Democratic Party's nominee, you'll be telling us to vote for her, right?

Hillary wants America to have permanent military bases in Iraq and is in favor of invading Iran. Just look and see who gives her the most money now, same people that give to the "Neo-Cons". I believe they are already in the midst of changing their face from Bush to McCain and Hillary will serve the same purpose as Kerry, just some more good cop bad cop. I think McCain will appear to be bring the party back to into the middle right, but in reality take us further then Bush into a dictatorship.

Yes Ma'am I sure will!
I dispise the woman and her politics,
But need the D that comes after her name when they figure out who will run the house and Senate!

And I will say vote fer Hillary in her Senate Race,
for only that reason, and that reason only!



08?

Damn, that's a lot tougher!
Hillary or McCain?


Damn!

Thanks for the warning, as I was considering donating. I did give to moveon.org and true majority.

Out of all posts on this thread, this one stands out with the most effective way of going forward. Bravo Wiretap ! Bravo !! I've read a few of Ward's books, heard a few of his CDs. Noone else comes even close to putting it straight like Ward does. Ted Nace comes in second with his book "Gangs of America". CointelPro is still alive and kicking. It amazes me how most people continue to ignore the facts and rant on about how we need to get the Republicans out of the White House when all that will do is pass the control over to a Democrat who is in the same business and working off the same sheet of music !!

But Wiretap, you may as well save your energy here as most (not all) members here are still stuck on 1st base.

With what you wrote, you hit a homerun.