With the Republicans in control of the executive, legislative and, increasingly, judicial branches of our federal government, it is time for progressives to face up the sad truth that they are losers. Only when we know where we stand can we begin to make wise choices about where we should be going. In this issue we provide two perspectives on… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (28)Page 1 of 1 pagesI’m a conservative who is neither rich nor Christian, my sympathies are with the efforts of individuals and not the efforts of groups. Nevertheless,the Bush administration is deeply troubling to me and I’m concerned with the direction of the republican party. The corrective is a strong progressive movement. I don’t agree with most of the views, but the influence is overall healthy. You progressives are awfully weak and that weakness hurts everyone. A debtors’ movement - yeesh, count me out, but if it can raise your numbers and efficacy, go for it. Alienating a few more people like me won’t matter.
Posted by Toadvine on Mar 22, 2005 at 8:44 AM I keep hoping media organs democratize, the corporate elite lose control of communications technologies, the prominent viewpoints come from working people abroad and south of us, and that we move from debates about “truth” to an all-out and frankly confrontational war against compromise and oppression. Voting means little, the multiple ways to exercise power is preferred to taking it, and radical direct action, while failing to round up more more pliant supporters, forces the changes that are on the way.
Posted by Bernie Roddy on Mar 22, 2005 at 11:25 AM First, progressives have to tell Americans how much worse off they are than they think they are – but before they can do this progressive have to figure it out themselves – the numbers are lying about waiting to be picked up – I am a high school educated cabdriver and I picked up on them.
NUMBERS: The best progressives do with numbers is their favorite family income chart where lower family quintiles don’t keep half way pace with highest quintile growth since 1973 (12-35% compared to 65%).
This chart leaves out: (a) that Census practice of top coding out income over a million a family may hide half the real income growth of the top quintile; (b) that most of the growth of the bottom four quintiles – since 1973 – is a result of more people working more hours; (c) the more optimistic “private brand” of inflation that the Census uses (CPI-U-RS) may much exaggerate “how good” the picture is; (d) all the above took place in the context of income in America growing 70% since 1973 (more than the top quintile!)! – on the average (per capita).
The poverty rate supposedly dropped a couple of points since 1967, but if you compare what it costs to buy the same basket of goods and services now that constituted poverty then – instead of being guided by the crackpot federal formula of three times an emergency diet (established in 1955 and presumably not extremely off the mark by 1967) – actual poverty may have doubled by 1967 – as average income doubled!
Everyone to whom I relate that the minimum wage was $9/hour in 1967 (adjusted for inflation – CPI-U, “standard brand” of the BLS) nearly jumps through the roof – why doesn’t every last person in America know this? All the while average income doubled.
CATCH-UP MONEY FOR THE FROZEN-WAGE MAJORITY IS WAITING FOR THE ASKING – W/O EVEN GIANT INFLATION: (a) average income is up 70% since 1973 (whence hourly wages stopped keeping up with productivity, except for the dot.com breather); (b) average income is up 90% since 1967 (CPI-U – 110% according to CPI-U-RS); (c) ditto for average income since 1968.
Raising the minimum wage to $12/hour would add all of 4% cost to GDP output (inarguable back of the envelope stuff). Another 2-3-4% inflation for one year might be caused by other wages being pushed up. This is using inflation to re-re-distribute the overall income growth which trickle-up economics has been sending to the happy few.
SOLUTION – PERMANENT SOLUTION: (a) much higher union density; (b) much higher union density; (c) much higher union density.
HOW TO ACHIEVE THE PERMAENT SOLUTION – WITHOUT A GENERATIONAL STRUGGLE – THE OH, SO EASY WAY: mandate unionization or seriously outlaw (perhaps criminalize) restraint of labor combination by intimidation (organizing is a serious human right – ask the Pope) or mandate union elections: whatever you do, use legislation to do your heavy lifting (done elsewhere in the world – may be the wave of the future, the world tending to imitate the USA).
Progressives have to start by telling – high pressure selling—the income dropout story to the public – we have as shocking a story to tell as any reform movement ever did – and its all eight grade arithmetic that even a non-college educated, American born cab driver can understand. :-)
Posted by Denis Drew on Mar 22, 2005 at 1:18 PM Unfortunately, people will have to learn for themselves. Trying to convince conservative, evangelical (anti) christian Bush voters that their beliefs are in fact specious and delusional; kind of like trying to convince them that, in fact, “the sun isn’t yellow, it’s chicken!”
Posted by Winston Obrien on Mar 22, 2005 at 3:13 PM Winston:
Guess what? Conservative, evangelical Christian (that’s with a capital “C” :-]) Bush voters voted Democrat before Bill (et al) convincned them the Dems were never going to do anything serious for them by pushing NAFTA ($7.25/hour min. wage, after 3 years?—break out my I-LIKE-IKE buttons for the 1956 inflation adjusted replay). Bush voters figure they might as well go with the side who will at least do their cultural bidding.Show Americans how really seriously bad off they are (literally a trickle up economy; they really belive this is the best country to work in)—show them you have a serious plan in mind (outlaw union busting as the economic crime it is—mandate unions) and watch them come running back.
BTW, as you might have guessed by my capital “C” joshing I am prolife as can be and even support the Vietnam war—and I voted for Kerry. Bush in a way is a Godsend—waking average Americans up to how bad things are going their way. Gore would have put them back to sleep w/o ever scratching the service of the numbers I quoted above—not they are at least awake.
PS. Can you imagine Bush vetoing a minimum wage level that Eisenhower signed into law 50 years ago—he would really be between a rock and a hard place if we ever get it passed (better than the literal 1939 minimum wage take home the minimum wage pays now—adjusted for inflation, no tax back then).
Allow me to go on one more paragraph: back when we had sufficient union density, Republicans were not so bad; they tried to help labor a little—while Democrats helped a lot. Today, Dems help you a little while Repubs try to hurt you a lot. Its all about resurrecting our bargaining and political clout and that means only one thing that Americans with their “self-reliant individual” culture have been fatally slow to understand. The numbers quoted above should wake them up like a screaming alarm clock—then the “coservative, free market” solution is rebalancing the labor market with union power.
Posted by Denis Drew on Mar 22, 2005 at 3:41 PM I vote issues. I could care less about political parties.
The most crucial issue, in my view, is energy. Everything is tied to energy production, distribution, and use. The economy and jobs, environment, public health, and global warming, foreign policy, and especially this country’s obsession with stability in the Mideast.
Democrats have weakly supported a change in how we deal with the energy issue, but some Republicans are now beginning to pick up on the issue. For example, James Woolsey recently advocated buying hybrids because U.S. money ending up in Saudi pockets helps fund terrorism. James Baker also recently told an convention of oil interests in Houston that global warming is a real phenomenon, and that when several of the world’s largest oil companies accept that as fact, it is time to begin listening. John McCain is co-sponsoring legislation on reducing CO2 emissions - the Climate Stewardship Act.
If Democrats don’t soon begin to strongly support serious movement to renewable energy sources - including hammering the idea in the corporate media - then Republicans may do just that. Personally, it makes no difference to me whether Republicans or Democrats push an revolution in our energy practices. Whichever party does that will have my support.
Posted by ricochet on Mar 22, 2005 at 8:27 PM Joel writes:
“With the Republicans in control…Though technically correct, this statement is in realty is both deceptive and IMO certainly not the way Progressives should be talking and thinking. The reality is the neocons have taken over the good name of the Republican party. It is the Neocons that are in control not the Republicans They do not act like either conservative or liberal Republicans. They act like radicals drunk with power, doing what ever it takes to destroy any opposing political force that dares to challenge it.
I think it is a travesty that real Republican liberals and conservatives continue to allow this cabal of pseudofascists to usurp their good name and political heritage. To equate these unfeeling and uncaring power mongers with American Republicanism is using the wrong approach. They should be called what they are; NEOCONS! Republicans as well as Progressives should be working together to expose these frauds for who they really are.
In my view, discussing the “issues” and talking for hours about the facts will not get to the heart of the problem. This approach only detracts and obscures what is really happening. Somewhat like dragging a red herring across your path to mislead the dogs pursuing you. The political problem we have today is that we have lost BOTH the Republican and the Democratic parties and we don’t know that yet! The Neocons are like a parasite that feeds on its host (the Republican party) until it no longer needs it, devouring it in the process.
What needs to be done IMO? Essentially, the Progressives need to put together an agenda based on who they are and what they stand for, (which is not the Bush Lite DLC of From, Lieberman and Kerry et al.) They then need to get a backbone and stop trying to appease everyone. In other words “stand up and be counted.” And we need to stand together. Party loyalty is not very visible these days. Recent votes have seen too many defections based on self centered interest.
The Republicans need to clean their house of the vermin infecting it and destroying it. They need to “take back the Right.” They need to risk (something that conservatives are frightened of) seeing the travesty that Bush and his neocon cabal are creating. That would entail recognizing the lying by deception and the damage done to our Democracy that their secrecy is causing. After all, this is the most secretive Presidency in our history. Read John Dean’s book “Worse than Watergate.” Dean is a Republican from the Nixon Administration.Unless we people of good faith, both Republicans and Progressives, work together they, the Neocons, win and we lose!
Posted by Merlin on Mar 22, 2005 at 11:49 PM Forget the Dems and Greens. Libertarians are the real progressives.
It is counterintuitive, but the overwhelming majority of people (everyone except the politically-connected super-rich and their media shills) would be better served by minimal government. The sad facts are that (a) politics attracts the darkers side of humanity and (b) politicians and business leaders are natural allies in looting the general public. As government expands, politicians and business leaders only become more and more brazen in this regard. Looting takes the form of clever tax evasion schemes, corruption and corporate welfare. Corporate welfare takes many forms that most people don’t even recognize as such—-public works projects and war, for example.
The upshot is that the general public loses much more as a result of these things than it gains from social programs.
You would certainly approve of a large state apparatus so long as virtuous people are at the controls. But how do you ensure this when the possibilities for looting are so great? And how do you ensure that vicious people won’t take control at a later date?
The answer is you can’t. The solution is to get this simple message out to the general public and clamor for smaller government at every opportunity.
Libertarians provide the most insightful analysis of today’s events in a historical context. For more information, visit www.lewrockwell.com and www.mises.org.
Posted by Stephen Marsh on Mar 23, 2005 at 4:29 AM Libertarians as the new progressives? I don’t think so. They are Libertarians, and only covet the progressive banner. Who can blame them, as all progressives have been abandoned by both branches of the Republocrats.
If you are looking for a “real” progressive party, go to www.neitherparty.org and check out the party platform planks, especially Truth and Reconciliation, civil rights, etc. and also visit the blogs and reference library.
Then get back to us as to whether the Libertarians are the new progressives or not.
Posted by John Rice on Mar 23, 2005 at 6:41 AM Why don’t the Democrats have any guts?This results from the other tactic,besides The Big Lie,the Re-party uses:The Big scare.The Big Scare dictates that if your views are different from the Re-party,or at least not placatory,you are unpatriotic.
The Re-party has done their best to milk 9/11 to suit this method.As a result,the Democrats continually find themselves compromising
with Re-partisans to supposedly keep their remaining power.Subsequently,Democrats,compromise on the issues which,for the Re-party,is victory.If Kerry had had the bravery at the debates he had in Vietnam he would have confronted our lying,opportunistic,big-business’puppet-in-chief and discussed how sorry our economy,as well as this administration,really is.Alas,he didn’t.I still can’t believe the Re-party used war records as an issue.Have they no shame?Oops,stupid question.
Unfortunately,the Democrats have not realized,or at least not publicly declared,that they are no longer dealing with Republicans,they are dealing with FASCISTS,a party which lives for eternal struggle.When there is no trouble,they invent it-just look at their talk-radio mouthpieces.They either gloat or fume,dredging up non-issues to anger their audiences.The only way Democrats will gain back their power is to do what one must do to any bully:confront and beat them.When Clinton stood up to Re-partisans in the early months of his administration,the Re-party backed down,like the cowardly bullies the are.When he began worrying about being re-elected,the Re-party sensed fear and went back on the atack.Hence,all the foolishness that was Re-partisan politics of the 90’s. We need to support a person like Hillary Clinton,who will confornt them when the Re-party attempts to their invented high ground.I can’t wait for the debates.
The Re-party has nearly complete control of the country.They won’t be satisfied until their control is total,just like any other dictatorship.
Merlin,It’s not neo-con,it’sReparty.
Reactionary,repressive,repugnant,revolting,reprobative,recidivistic,revisionist, ,reptilian,recrudescent-and,hopefully,replaced.
Posted by wwoods on Mar 23, 2005 at 8:46 AM The neitherparty seems better than most, I’ll give you that. But you seem to have too much faith in government per se and therefore not enough faith in the power of voluntary organizations to effect positive change. There are some other things I disagree with as well:
1. Your party would presumably keep the Federal Reserve System intact, whereas Libertarians would abolish it.
2. Why use electronic voting at all? The old system of paper ballots is most corruption-resistant. Any ballots with hanging or dimpled chads should just be thrown out. That’s my personal opinion.
Posted by Stephen Marsh on Mar 23, 2005 at 9:17 AM We need to support a person like Hillary to confront Repubs? You mean the Hillary who talked lame duck Bill out of the Repub-Bankruptcy law only to switch sides herself after being elected (according to the author of the Two Income Trap)—who then “bravely” became the only one in the whole entire Senate who DID NOT VOTE ON THE BILL!
Hill’ is just canned politics.
Do libertarians seek less government regulation of the securities market too—even as regulators run from fire to fire? Democrats should see regulating the labor market to keep the big fish from eating the little fish as a modern parallel to laying down the law on Wall Street after 1929.
Republicans behaved when labor was strong—Nixon came up with federal revenue sharing for the states and relied on D.P.Moynihan for (questionable) advice. Today’s Republicans are like something out of the 1800s—and today’s Democrats are like Nixon and Eisenhower (the best of them are even pushing Eisenhowers $7.25/hour minimum wage, after 3 years of course—don’t want to re-raise standards all the way up to 1956 in shocking blow).
Denis Drew
denis.drew@netzero.com
Posted by Denis Drew on Mar 23, 2005 at 10:58 AM A principled libertarian would view government regulation of the securities market as just another form of corporate welfare that should be eliminated.
The principle would be “Buyer Beware,” with no shortage of organizations and individuals acting as whistleblowers when problems arise.
Business is more benign when business leaders see little or no benefit from allying with government, i.e., when government is minimal.
Posted by Stephen Marsh on Mar 24, 2005 at 1:36 AM Finally someone admits the progressive’s greatest folly the belief that most Americans are progressive in their hearts.
When or how this nonsense thinking started I do not know, but is the singular most stupid and inane assumption and most damaging assumption ever taken to heart by any progressive.
It’s time we dismiss this nonsense, and I only hope that when we do, we start realizing we are NOT preaching to a sympathetic audience in the US.
Accepting this truth will allow progressives everywhere to learn to argue their positions from the correct perspective, free of the smug feeling of superiority that so many feel now that “we get it,and those who don’t need our help.”
I do believe progressive values are superior, and more right. We need to come together and figure out a way to sell our agenda.
Free of this “high and mighty” feeling about our positions, perhaps we will also lose the aversion to conflict and passion about anything related to our positions.
We have a job to do people, and we won’t do it as long as we pretend that everyone is naturally on our side.
Posted by John Morales on Mar 24, 2005 at 9:46 AM John,
Since most Americans are unionless in this dog eat dog free market, most Americans are getting bitten on the a__ finacially; more like bled to death—making progressive legislation that will fairly re-balance the free market—by protecting (or even mandating) the process of collective bargaining in almost all Americans’ interest.
Posted by Denis Drew on Mar 24, 2005 at 10:55 AM Weirdly suggestive of a dog attempting to interpret it’s dead master’s voice emanating from a gramophone - or am I the only one that doesn’t feel like a loser?
That part about assumptions was good though. Assume nothing. And to answer the gentleman that asks where such assumptions of the heart could have possibly sprung: perhaps from the so-called baby boomers, like myself, that experienced the sexual revolution and the civil rights movement and rockets blasting off for the Chrono Synclastic Infundibulum—and expecting the future to hold more of the same wild ride. Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps.
Earlier this evening I read somewhere that Howard Dean was suggesting to followers that they should “speak from the heart”… and then later this evening, while searching for a lost episode of M.A.S.H., I stumbled upon that bobble head (snarky) comedian I’ve never cared much for, you know the one, the dog so ugly he shaved his behind and trained himself to walk backwards: he quoted Dean’s “speak from the heart” statement and then declared it a contradiction “because [Dean] always talks through his ass,” and after which his running dogs could be heard barking with hysterical schadenfreude, off camera. What’s wrong with this picture?
You write: “Only when we know where we stand can we begin to make wise choices about where we should be going.” —Whaaaaaaat?
Heart to heart, what hollow victory prevails when forced to choose between straw dogs, and conversely, why should we suffer for that which was not of our making in the first place? What is apparently perceived by many here as ashes, I see as gold. And who should better realize that than progressives steadfast in harmony with nature; knowing that the current world view along with it’s thoughtless dogmatism is destined to eventually fall like a house of cards—the outcome of which should not be to feast upon it’s misery but instead have offer a truer recipe for living together.
With every sorrow, the heart knows more compassion. With every defeat, a victory in it’s wake; the stronger we become. And that, is the true nature of survival.
‘Dog’ by Lawrence Ferlinghetti:
http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/88/dog.html
Dog Eat Dog Films:
http://www.dogeatdogfilms.com/
Posted by Tim Christopher on Mar 27, 2005 at 12:01 AM Joel Bleifuss quotes Garret Keiszer of Mother Jones, “Had Howard Dean been an evangelical Christian with an evangelical Christian base, would his followers have deserted him because his Iowa holler made him ‘unelectable’? Or would they have closed ranks behind him because his stand on the Iraq war made him right?”
Actually, I doubt if anything any Democrat could have said before the 2004 election would have made any difference in the outcome. In spite of the voter fraud in key states like Ohio and Florida, Dean’s most obtuse comment came when he said that Democrats should try to tap into the area of the South where good old boys drive pickup trucks and fly the Stars and Bars flag of Dixie.
There is no way on God’s green Earth that the deeply-entrenched, anti-Northerner, racist Bible Belt South will ever vote for Democrats, not even another Zell Miller. Even Bill Clinton was a Southerner whose pandering and dealmaking with the Republican elite powerbrokers cost Democrats both houses of the US Congress and undoubtedly many of the governorships during his 8-year tenure in the White House.
Republicans can take the South as much for granted today as the Democrats did over thirty years ago. Why? Because the South has been essentially locked into the Dixiecrat political mind set for most of their history since the Civil War. Strom Thurmond, the 1948 Dixiecrat presidential candidate, recognized this trend much earlier, early enough that he changed parties.
Election results in 2004 showed clearly that 26 of the 28 poorest states in America voted for Bush. Democrats were not competitive in a single Southern state with the exception of Florida. But, in Florida there is little doubt that the computers were hacked into, especially in heavily registered Democratic counties that recorded a huge margin of victory for Bush.
Most political experts and analysts predict that whoever the Democratic candidate is in 2008 he/she will start off with a handicap of 200 electoral votes, all below the Mason-Dixon Line. Add in a few other Republican slam dunk states like Utah, Idaho, Indiana, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Ohio and West Virginia which comes to 59 more EV, and one can see the daunting, almost impossible task for Democrats winning in a national election.
When that many people who said that jobs, education, war, Social Security and health care ranked below the perceived sense that Bush and the Republicans have superior “moral values” then there is no chance that Democrats will succeed in winning in a national general election.
After the first four years of the Bush administration record nobody can doubt that this country is locked into spending upwards of $100 billion a year for funding the Iraq/Afghanistan wars, $400 billion to $500 billion per year in record budget deficits, the continued fall in the dollar against the euro, massive corporate corruption, more (permanent) tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% of the population and continued outsourcing of jobs to cheap labor in foreign countries, namely the Chinese government, which is one of the biggest violaters of human rights as well as the biggest violater of international copyright laws.
Yet, the so-called Christians and their “moral values,” blind-faith Bush loyalists continue to give overwhelming support to the most morally bankrupt, fiscally irresponsible administration in America’s 219-year history.
With every branch of government now controlled by Republicans and a judiciary clearly being packed by Bush with anti-Constitution, anti-Affirmative Action, racist judges, prospects for Democrats winning or taking back our democracy are nil.
Posted by Richard on Mar 28, 2005 at 2:04 PM Generally good comments all around, including from presumed conservatives. Although I would point out progressives have been supporting a sensible energy policy and the most consistently moral agenda of any groups for years. They simply have no standing media mechanism the way conservatives do, to bolster their base, get the talking points out and slander and humiliate the opposition, the way the conservative noise machine does with it’s incessant Washington Times/Drudge Report/Ann Coulter/Rush Limbaugh/Joseph Farah/Neil Boortz/Sean Hannity/Bob Novak/David Bossie/Richard Mellon-Scaife spin machine!
Posted by Stephen Kriz on Mar 28, 2005 at 2:44 PM Stephen Kriz wrote:
“They (Progressives) simply have no standing media mechanism the way conservatives do to bolster their base,...”Your post is quite correct in my view as well. However, the above quote is not the problem. What needs to happen is that the Republican party (Liberal and Conservative,) needs to see that the GOP has been hijacked by a cabal of neocons. The idea of a Progressive/Republican dialog is at this point in time a fantasy. Worse perhaps! As a Progressive, these days I am arguing against neocons not Republicans, yet they think I am arguing against them! These neocon pseudofacists are like a parasite using the host Republican party to attain their ends. Their agenda is driven by Machiavellian means.
The last election was very close. Considering that the extreme radical right is but a small part of the Reparty, it would take just a small percentage of those real Republicans voting their best interests, to swamp the neocons and throw them out. So appealing to our “base” is not the answer in my view. Our base is solid! Let us appeal instead to those good adversaries who do not see the damage being done to their party and their country.
Posted by Merlin on Mar 28, 2005 at 4:27 PM Richard wrote:
“...prospects for Democrats winning or taking back our democracy are nil.”I appreciate your feelings, and were this March of 2004 I would be agreeing with you in my misery. However, today, things are changed and are changing in our favor every day, IMO. Here are the trends, as I feel them now, that have created a new found optimism in me for the 2006 elections and beyond.
1. The Bushies have been overextending themselves and this is becoming evident to more and more pundits. (I.e. The Schiavo debacle, the DeLay fiasco, the social security privatization scam and the continuing quagmire in Iraq. The American public has been judging these events (i.e. polls) as they really are, instead of being hoodwinked by the right wing media and Administration’s lies or distortions.
2. We are beginning to see cracks in the “solid” front in the Republican party in the Congress over the issues above. I sense an unraveling in the works.
3. Of late, on blogs like this one, I read people on both the progressive and Conservative sides searching for the common ground and state a desire for real debate instead of the polarization that this neocon cabal has engineered.Granted, these are only my feelings and not facts, or even my opinions. Never the less, these things plus other positive happenings (i.e. the trend away from placating the right, and the From/Lieberman/Kerry DLC sell out centrism .) give me a positive feeling for the months ahead.
Posted by Merlin on Mar 28, 2005 at 6:27 PM Merlin, you make some excellent points. From what I’ve seen in the last several years the Democratic Party voice, what little they had, has been totally muted. They are far too weak to do anything.
Tim Russert and the New York Times editorial both said a little over a week ago that they found it almost preposterous and incomprehensible that there was almost no opposition to the Terri Schiavo bill that was ramrodded through the House by Tom DeLay. This bill which was written to apply only to Terri Schiavo and to no other person in a similar vegetative state, according to most political savants, was absolutely political in its structure and highly questionable constitutionally. Yet, the Democrats made hardly a whimper before it passed.
Can the Progressive arm of the Republican Party stop this Bush Kleptocracy? As far as I can determine, we have a one-party rule whose leadership uses every trick in the book to abuse their power by attempting to ignore and completely circumvent laws that do not agree with their views. In the true sense of the meaning, that is a dictatorship.
Posted by Richard on Mar 28, 2005 at 6:33 PM Hi Richard,
Richard said:
“Tim Russert and the New York Times editorial both said a little over a week ago that they found it almost preposterous and incomprehensible that there was almost no opposition to the Terri Schiavo bill that was ramrodded through the House by Tom DeLay.”I believe that Russert and the Times are looking for ways to denigrate the left. I believe that it is preposterous that they express that view!
An interesting take on the lack of Democratic response in the Schiavo case is this. Why say anything that the “right” can use to deflect the problem they were obviously digging themselves into? By saying nothing the extreme position that they were championing was shown for what it really is. They were left all by their lonesome to be shown as the emperor without clothes. The silence from the left was deafening. I think that sort of justice can’t be beaten!
For Russert to say what he did shows a complete lack of understanding how to best “win a won game!” Perhaps he should watch the current NCAA tournament and see how the coaches plan strategy in the closing seconds of the game! There are no knee jerk reactions there, like the one Russert gives.
As for the Times, what would you expect from the paper that pushed the Iraq war through the wrongful reporting of Judith Miller? (The Times later published a weak apology regarding her work on it. Better than nothing, but way, way late. To believe that the Times is “Liberal” is a fantasy. (Perhaps I could call them LINO. Liberal in Name Only.)And an interesting note on the “Great Russert.” If you have not visited the blog by Bob Somerby called “The Daily Howler,” do so. He has been on a campaign to skewer the main stream media for the weak, uninformed and unprepared folks that they are. He has recently skewered Russert on Feb 14 and 16, for instance. You won’t find this kind of blogging anywhere else! Take a look. He is really worth the daily read.
http://dailyhowler.com
Posted by Merlin on Mar 28, 2005 at 7:40 PM Merlin, thanks for that link. I’ve seen it before but never got around to saving it in my daily updates. The Howler is now on my permanent list.
I agree wholeheartedly with your comment about Judith Miller. I still have the article she wrote for the NY Times from over two years ago. It is quite lengthy, and of course, it is cleverly secretive as to the sources concerning the “slam dunk, smoking gun” proof of Iraq’s WMD, especially the ones buried in the backyard of a former Saddam Hussein scientist. Wouldn’t want to let the enemy know her sources now would we?
It turned out, however, that the source was the ever unreliable Dr. Ahmad Chalabi, once the darling of the Bush administration and choice for Iraq’s Prime Minister who soon fell from grace after it was revealed he was pulling double duty as an Iranian informant on the payroll of the CIA. What strange bedfellows indeed!
Miller resurfaced last year when Tom Ridge raised the terrorist threat level up a notch, but only for Washington, D.C. and the Wall Street financial district in New York City. Her hysterical outpourings can only be described as breathtaking in her description of the drawings made two years earlier by a suspected Saudi or al Qaeda terrorist, but which had only recently been discovered when US Army personnel in Iraq uncovered them during a search of a residence.
Miller insisted, once again, that this was proof beyond a doubt that more bombings against the US were imminent (maybe mushroom clouds?)—almost as if to vindicate herself from being chumped by Chalabi two years earlier in her now discredited story. But, as we know, Bush controls the mainstream media and Fox News Network certainly makes no apologies for being the official state-sponsored ministry of disinformation.
After all, that’s what well-managed propaganda is supposed to do. It does make you wonder though, if perhaps more than a few on FNN or the New York Times are also on Bush’s paid list of reporters? We may never know.
This may all come out some day, but first we need to find investigative powers outside of the gutless, rubber stamp Republican-controlled US Congress. That isn’t likely to happen any time soon.
Posted by Richard on Mar 28, 2005 at 8:38 PM Hi Richard,
Well, I guess I am a perennial optimist. You said:
“...but first we need to find investigative powers outside of the gutless, rubber stamp Republican-controlled US Congress. That isn’t likely to happen any time soon.”Here is a much belated story noted by kos in the daily kos blog. Things do keep coming out, even if late as in this case. At the time the rumors were flying but without definitive proof. As kos notes this puts an end to the “crazy Michael Moore-driven conspiracy theory.” And he also notes that “the flights DID take off BEFORE the nation’s commercial fleet was allowed to resume flying.”
Regardless of the lateness of the stories verification, the truth can no longer be denied. It happened and they did it! Period. And there in lies the problem for the wingnuts. The weight of evidence continues to build against them, and as I mentioned in another post I feel the momentum is picking up speed.
Trust (by the American public,) is a fragile thing. Look at a parallel sort of scenario. That of a lover cheating on his/her partner. The first time something looks wrong (comes home late, say) it is easy to lie and get away with it. But after a few more “odd” episodes, a question begins to form in the cheated lovers mind even while denying that anything is wrong. Soon the evading and weak answers lead to demanding proof of fidelity, and if that is not forthcoming in a very believable way, the loss of trust ensues which really cannot be rebuilt.
The litany of “odd” happenings is building up. Note, for instance, the evangelical “friend” who taped Bush admitting drug use, and recently released that info only to try and bury it later, turning the tapes over to the Administration! Another lie exposed that won’t go away. I sense that a turning point is in the works where more and more people will begin to question the veracity of Bush and his cabal of neocons.From the dailykos
Saudis did get early flights out, post 9-11The FBI played an active role in arranging chartered flights for dozens of well-connected Saudi nationals—including relatives of Osama bin Laden—after the 9/11 terror attacks.
The New York Times reported that the documents show Federal Bureau of Investigation agents gave personal airport escorts to two prominent Saudi families who fled the United States, while several other Saudis were allowed to leave the country without first being interviewed, citing newly-released US government records.
The Saudi families, in Los Angeles and Orlando, had requested the FBI escorts out of concern for their personal safety in the wake of the attacks.
Oh, and the flights DID take off BEFORE the nation’s commercial fleet was allowed to resume flying.
Posted by Merlin on Mar 28, 2005 at 11:40 PM Merlin, I agree with everything you say. But, I do not share your eternal optimism concerning this invidious, anti-democracy, anti-civil liberties Bush mob now controlling our country.
I have read many other articles (as most of us have) by pundits and political analysts comparing the overreaching power grab by the Bush administration with the Nixon years but the parallel ends there when you look at the differences in the makeup of the US Congress.
Then, the pressure on the Nixon administration to come clean was applied by good investigative reporting (Washington Post) and a US Congress, though Democrat-majority, was still bipartisan and bicameral enough to root out the crooks in the Nixon administration.
Both a bipartisan congress and an independent press are now only anachronisms. Party loyalty and obeisance to Bush edicts are all.
The mainstream media, once the watchdogs and “beacon of truth” for our citizens and a principled US Congress, have been sufficiently intimidated and emasculated to the point that both have become ineffective in representing the interests of democracy and the American people.
Corporate corruption is massive and pervasive. All you have to do is look at the tort, bankruptcy and environmental legislation, all of which favors big business, passed by this US Congress to see the Kleptocracy which has wormed its way into, and now owns our government.
I’m sure you’re as avid a follower of NY Times columnist, Paul Krugman, as I am. But he is far less optimistic that this totalitarian mob in the White House will ever be called to account for anything they do. His column this morning simply underscores the overwhelming power and control that the Bush autocrats have.
I tried my best to put aside my deepest gut feelings that the 2004 general election would turn out the way it did. I volunteered countless hours to help register new voters and made calls to make sure they made it to the polls on November 2. Deep down, however, my worst fears were realized. Bush took both Ohio and Florida, states that had been considered tossups right up until election day.
Finally, if you haven’t read the Knight survey taken at the end of January, here is the URL website for the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation:
http://www.knightfdn.org/default.asp?story=news_at_knight/releases/2005/2005_01_ _31_firstamend.htmlThis study of 112,000 only reinforces my pessimism. With an entire generation of Bush-brainwashed kids whose interest in preserving our democracy has fallen so low is it any wonder we are where we are? Here is a quote that best represents the current trend and growing group-think: “If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn’t thinking.” --General George S. Patton
In spite of polls showing that Bush is at his lowest approval ratings ever at 45%, he made it quite clear his 2.5% victory in November that the public’s decision to reelect him was a ratification of his approach toward Iraq and that there was no reason to hold any administration officials accountable for mistakes or misjudgments in prewar planning or managing the violent aftermath.
Even if Bush’s approval ratings were 10% he would continue to wield his authoritarian power just as easily as he did following the disputed 2000 election. And nobody, least of all the gutless, jelly-spined Republican-controlled US Congress seems to care. After all, they are part and parcel of the avarice that has been so amply rewarded by the corporate monoliths.
Posted by Richard on Mar 29, 2005 at 10:49 AM Hi Richard,
I would like to read the Knight survey. Unfortunately the URL does not work. I found the info on the survey but not the survey itself. If you have additional info I would appreciate it.Yes, I agree with all you say regarding the happenings. We just see the future differently. It is better IMO to light one candle than curse the darkness. (Old Christopher saying.) Perhaps you are familiar with the poem by Longfellow:
“A Psalm of life”
Tell me not in mournful numbers,
Life is but an empty dream!
For the soul is dead that slumbers,
And things are not what they seem.Not enjoyment and not sorrow,
Is our destined end or way;
But to find that each tomorrow
Find us farther than today.Let us then be up and doing,
With a heart for any fate;
Still achieving, still pursuing,
Learn to labor and to wait.There will be more damage before this is all done but the neocons will fall. Just not as fast as I would like them to. And here the last line of the poem above applies to me: “Learn to labor and to wait.”
Posted by Merlin on Mar 29, 2005 at 2:08 PM Merlin, those are very uplifting words from Longfellow. As an English major you hit a concordant note with me. However, I spent over 30 years in the scientific field of meteorology, the mathematics of which were doubly more difficult to master.
No question, things will turn one way or another. One way we will see the emergent strength and power of the Religious Right as they are claiming a direct line to the White House, or we will see the voters’ tolerance pushed beyond the limit and demand a sea change in 2006. There may not be any in betweens.
Here is another link to the same Knight survey. It appeared in the San Diego Union Tribune (Cox News Service, Feb. 1, 2005): http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050201/news_1n1freedoms.html
If that doesn’t work, just go to Google or some other search engine and type in John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. The full study was conducted at the University of Connecticut and there are probably far more details in the full document.
I found it stunning and terribly disturbing, mainly due to the large numbers of students (112,000) who were surveyed in this report.
In many ways it doesn’t surprise me at all since other surveys on the evolution Vs creation science/intelligent design debate (which shouldn’t even be a debate) point out indisputably the scientific illiteracy of the population.
The recent focus on this issue has been promoted by the Religious Right in an attempt to eviscerate our entire system of public education. There is no question, however, that they have found a sympathetic ear with a like-minded protagonist, G. W. Bush, who has stated on record that “the jury is still out on this issue.”
Posted by Richard on Mar 29, 2005 at 5:03 PM Many of the ‘Religious Right’ have little or nothing to do with the real message and teachings of Christ. With their pursuit of mammon and perception of the cosmic ‘get-out-of-jail-free-card’, they are deaf and blind to the spiritual obligations of both Christianity and the Judeo tradition from which it came. That is not to say that there are not also many conservative Christians who maintain a sincere belief. There are, and here in the heartland, many are disturbed by what is increasingly being recognized as the high-jacking of their Faith and they are not accepting it. The dissatisfaction is being expressed more and more everyday. Not everything fits conveniently into left/right terms. Many here are finally reconciling themselves to the notion that Jesus might have been a lefty. It may not be carried much on the news, but, it is nevertheless occurring.
It should not be forgotten that great progressive movements of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were begun here, in the heartland, by people of Faith trying to be true to their beliefs and message. Change can happen once again, but, only through solidarity of purpose. Christians and the Left have more in common than Karl Rove would like to admit. His most effective ploy has been to exploit and maintain division throughout the political spectrum.
It is time to undo that.
We mustn’t yield to despair and give up. Let us once again find and establish unity of purpose.
Above all maintain Hope.
J H Bushwah
Posted by J H Bushwah on Apr 2, 2005 at 3:57 AM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Joel Bleifuss
- United We Fail
- Keep the Heat on Obama
- EPA on Trial
- Bush’s Selective Mourning
- Piling it High
The sewage sludge industry meets the light of day - Political Vice Squad
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1972 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
459 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2005 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
