Someone who can call out to the throngs of disaffected and disenfranchised people; Democrat or Republican, black, white, brown, red, yellow, rich or poor, young or old. Those who are completely and utterly fed up with the current political system.
The revolving door in the White House has ruined politics, ruined countless lives due to the malfeasance of the people in charge, ruined the hopes of lower middle class and lower class peoples who want to better themselves, ruined our national reputation among our allies overseas, ruined our ability to back up our words with actions when need be.
What we are witnessing today isn't the result of George W. Bush's mistakes and utter disregard for the rule of law. On the contrary, this country has been on a slow downward decline and it began not just 8 years ago, but over 40 years ago when Nixon was running for office in 1968.
Last Thursday, Rep. Linda Sanchez called for Karl Rove to be arrested for failing to comply with a Congressional subpoena and appear before her Committee. While I applaud Congresswoman Sanchez's sentiments, I seriously doubt Karl Rove will face such action and I blame Sanchez and her ilk in Congress. Sanchez wrote:
"After my ruling that Mr. Rove's claims of immunity are not legally valid, Congressman Conyers and I gave him one last chance to comply with the law. He ignored us. As he let yet another deadline slip by this week, Mr. Rove's disregard for Congress has become intolerable..."
Translation: "I subpoenaed Mr. Rove and he didn't show up. Then I warned him and gave him one last chance, and he still didn't show up. Then I double warned him and he still didn't comply. If he refuses to comply any longer, I may have to super-duper double-secret warn him and see if he complies then..."
It is unfortunate that our media completely fails at articulating anything that requires nuance or a complexity of understanding. Instead of taking time to explain. They dumb it down to a neat little packge for easy consumption. In many cases, the thought, the idea, the quote, loses its context or meaning entirely.
Sometimes it looks as though this is done intentionally to support the ideology of the news conveyor.
I want to touch on what this "clinging" thing is. The Iraqi man clings,
A good story about union rank and file and on creating an effective populist movement in the U.S.:
There are thousands of activists of one type or another who want to change society and recognize that we need a movement to do that.
Too often, the Unions are seen, and not without justification, as fighting only for our own members. I was on picket lines during the five month grocery worker’s strike in California three years ago and while the Union negotiators were giving away as much as they could at the negotiating table, they had picketers in Northern California asking shoppers to boycott the stores in order to pressure the bosses not to cut medical benefits. Many of the people that crossed the line made it clear that they don’t have medical benefits themselves. The Union had no answer to this.
http://www.indybay.org/...
We've learned the hard way over the past seven years that George W lives in his own fantasy world-a place in which reality is whatever he wants it to be, facts notwithstanding.
If you see all those good qualities in Barack Obama, good, but I can tell you I do not think he has lived up to those ideals on the campaign trail in Iowa against John Edwards. There was one man who showed the gift of character and leadership in Iowa, and throughout; and that was John Edwards. He showed the greatest degree of ethics, whereas Obama was very unfair in characterizing John Edwards' record as newly populist, and showed questionable ethics in bussing all those students in from Illinois and Indiana. Don't think he was so ethical toward Ms. Palmer in Chicago some time ago either. No, there has been one person who has not compromised his principles and ethics and that has been John Edwards.
With only 4% of the delegates chosen; the "score", so far, is Obama 25, Clinton 24, and Edwards 18.
It's way too early to ask Edwards to "drop out" as some here have called for.
I've actually said (as I recall) that if Edwards were to fail to win South Carolina (his birthplace) he should drop out and throw his support to Obama. It seemed sensible enough on the surface. After all, wouldn't all of Edwards voters then rush to support Obama over Clinton?
As it turns out, that may not be the case. Here's.
an interesting set of exit polls in which New Hampshire Edwards voters express their second choices/preferences.
I must admit that the seven-year reign of Bush & Company makes me yearn for the years of Ronald Reagan, when the term "conservative" merely meant right wing, rather than full-tilt, bull-goose loopy.
I'm breaking this implicit net roots rule and attacking Obama, not personally, but professionally, and also because he and his supporters need it. I believe Obama and his people are running a lightweight campaign far outside Democratic progressive-populist traditions, holding hands with the financial establishment - afraid to offend them, and completely unready for a general election.
Obama is the Brand of the Financial Establishment
Obama and Clinton are both moderate establishment-bankrolled candidates. But, Obama is definitely advertised differently than Clinton. The financial establishment is bankrolling Obama to avert retribution from a perfect storm brewing in our economy. Obama reached an bargain with the financial establishment. He created his brand based on this bargain. Implicit in the bargain is the agreement to drown-out populist voices by poaching the rare air and substantively not being a populist voice, yet appealing to populist leaning voters. It was the illusion of change and anti-Bush change sold instead of real economic change that fit the actual priorities of the Democratic Party. He reflects the viewpoints of his high-profile donors.
With so many MSM outlets and pundits (and no shortage of Kossacks) buying the line that Huckabee is a "populist", it was refreshing to see the NY Times call the bluff.
Karl Rove and the ubiquitous Wall Street capital interests created their latest Frankenstein, Mike Huckabee, unintentionally. Now, they want to destroy it. The GOP has committed rank usury of the social conservatives for decades. Instead of helping them destroy their creation, I propose we sit back and enjoy it a little first.
Schadenfreude is a perfect (if not slightly sadistic) German word describing the pleasure one derives from someone else’s misfortune. Today, I admit my open schadenfreude regarding Mike Huckabee. However, everywhere I turn, it seems progressive news/blogs are assisting the GOP corporate attack aka Huckacide. Believe me, I understand this instinct. I indulged in it myself after reading a Huckabee article on Salon. But, this time, I’m learning to temper my knee-jerk reaction and enjoy this deeply ironic Rovian moment.
Spread the word! There is only one candidate who can effect the big change we need, John Edwards!
Big Change, small change, no change.
Those are our choices, and John Edwards represents Big Change, and will need all our help to do it.
This week has been pivotal, absolutely pivotal.
I feel it in my bones, I tell you. Thursday's debate, the recent ads, curiously even the Des Moines Register action, John Edwards' interview on Face the Nation, even Krugman's great analysis, has framed the debate in the starkest terms.
Europe had its Reformation. Now it's time for ours! The Democratic Party, per se, is not and never has been the problem. The problem is that it's being trashed and destroyed by beltway, DLC, Clinton/Carville pseudo Democrats. That "once upon a time" Democratic Party truly represented the will of the people -- more specifically, the will the the middle and lower classes. It was our only protection from the vampire elites.
