All of us who are concerned for peace and triumph of reason and justice must be keenly aware how small an influence reason and honest good will exert upon events in the political field. - Albert Einstein
What is conservatism? Is it not the adherence to the old and tried against the new and untried? - Abraham Lincoln
Politicians are the same all over. They promise to build a bridge even where there is no river. - Nikita Khrushchev
A liberal is a man or a woman or a child who looks forward to a better day, a more tranquil night, and a bright, infinite future. - Leonard Bernstein
When decorum is repression, the only dignity free men have is to speak out. - Abbie Hoffman
Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber. - Plato
While some of us spent Thursday eating and spending time with our loved ones, others we trying to get by with much less. Thankfully, there are many in local communities who are willing to help those in need.
Katherine Ullmer writing for The Dayton Daily News notes:
Beerman Family Thanksgiving Day Dinner served thousands this Thanksgiving. Olivia Dammann's family, New Orleans natives and refugees from Hurricane Katrina, were particularly grateful. Having lost their home to Hurricane Katrina, they were located to Dayton by The Living Word Church.
While so many have been donating time and resources to help others, the upcoming Christmas season brings other difficulties.
Regardless of what you might think of the current military conflicts or the military in general, what the Marine Corps is doing is noble. Toys for Tots mission is to collect new toys and distribute them to needy children in local communities. If you have the means, please donate to help some children have a brighter Christmas.
If you find you have a little extra this holiday season, please think about donating to a food kitchen to help those less fortunate.
As the organization Feeding America notes: one in eight Americans is fighting hunger, and Feeding America needs your help to join in the fight to end this national struggle.
READ MORE
Katherine Ullmer writing for The Dayton Daily News notes:
Local food banks and pantries have been busy. As I called Epiphany Lutheran Church on Nov. 17 to find out what their needs might be, I found they were in the midst of receiving enough food to feed 400 four-member needy families for a week. Social agencies were picking up the food at that very moment.
I drove out and found 50-some volunteers, most of them senior citizens — the younger church members were at work, someone said — having a good time moving heavy boxes of food around...
...Most of the volunteers were members of Epiphany, but I came across volunteer Priscilla Stapleton of Centerville who belongs to Southminster Presbyterian Church. She said she donated clothes to the pantry and then started volunteering one day a week there to help sort items.
"It's a great opportunity to serve the community," she said.
Beerman Family Thanksgiving Day Dinner served thousands this Thanksgiving. Olivia Dammann's family, New Orleans natives and refugees from Hurricane Katrina, were particularly grateful. Having lost their home to Hurricane Katrina, they were located to Dayton by The Living Word Church.
Having a Thanksgiving Day meal with all the trimmings "makes it easier," this year, she said.
Economic difficulties have made for a rough year, the single mom added. "Everything is tight. They (the children) won't get as much for Christmas this year, but they'll get something."
The dinner, she said, "helps a lot of people out."
While so many have been donating time and resources to help others, the upcoming Christmas season brings other difficulties.
The Marine Corps' Toys for Tots program is faced with 4,000 needy kids this year and half the normal donations so far, said Master Sgt. Kip Gibel.
Regardless of what you might think of the current military conflicts or the military in general, what the Marine Corps is doing is noble. Toys for Tots mission is to collect new toys and distribute them to needy children in local communities. If you have the means, please donate to help some children have a brighter Christmas.
If you find you have a little extra this holiday season, please think about donating to a food kitchen to help those less fortunate.
As the organization Feeding America notes: one in eight Americans is fighting hunger, and Feeding America needs your help to join in the fight to end this national struggle.
The United States is the world's biggest market for the automotive industry. As sales plummet, more companies are tightening up their belts.
While American's are not only holding back on purchasing new automobiles, they are also driving less with the one's they currently own.
What's the problem? Well, the Wall Street Journal is claiming that the unions are killing the industry.
The big bad unions. What have unions in general or the UAW specifically done for anyone?
Well, as The Nation points out in an article entitled Hands Off the UAW they have managed to acheieve a few things over the past seventy-plus years.
I'd say that is quite a bit, really. It isn't as though the UAW is standing in the way of GM getting back on its feet. In July, the UAW allowed GM to defer $1.7 billion of payments for the VEBA for two years -- in exchange for a note paying 9 percent interest. VEBA is the Voluntary Employee Beneficiary Association which is a trust created to take over the estimated $80 billion retiree health care liability of the big three automakers in Detroit and safeguard retiree health care for 80 years.
In addition to the VEBA, the UAW has voluntarily reduced hourly pay and benefits for new hires cutting down to roughly $26 from about $78.
In the ten years they have been working together, the UAW and the Make-A-Wish foundation have granted 10,000 wishes for ailing children. I'd say that is giving something back to society.
Of course, it is common to need to point to a bad guy. It is even more common for the large corporate interests to claim the problem is with the lower classes. With the workers. But it just isn't true.
The workers aren't the problem here. Blaming them is just avoiding the truth and scapegoating the people who are getting hurt the most already.
READ MORE
Next year will "definitely be a tough year for all automakers," Yoon Mong Hyun, Hyundai's planning director, told reporters in Hong Kong today. Under the company's most optimistic forecast, U.S. sales may hit 14 million, he added.
U.S. auto sales plunged to the lowest monthly total in 17 years in October, as rising job insecurity and higher borrowing costs caused drivers to slash spending on new vehicles. Still, Hyundai has sidestepped the worst of the market collapse as consumers are favoring its fuel-efficient small cars over General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. sport-utility vehicles.
While American's are not only holding back on purchasing new automobiles, they are also driving less with the one's they currently own.
...gasoline consumption has fallen compared with a year earlier in every month from March through September of this year, according to data from the Energy Information Administration. Vehicle miles traveled -- the wonky term for how much we drive -- have dropped for 11 straight months, and fell 4.4% in September, according to the Department of Transportation.
What's the problem? Well, the Wall Street Journal is claiming that the unions are killing the industry.
....why Ford and GM managed to build viable auto businesses all over the world but not in North America.
You don't need the Hubble telescope to tell the answer: The UAW is present only in the U.S., not all over the world.
The big bad unions. What have unions in general or the UAW specifically done for anyone?
Well, as The Nation points out in an article entitled Hands Off the UAW they have managed to acheieve a few things over the past seventy-plus years.
It was the UAW that fought for national healthcare and pensions and, when those policy initiatives were blocked by reactionary Congresses, forced corporate America to create a social safety net for workers and retirees that would form the model for union and nonunion workplaces across the country. It was the UAW that fought government- and corporate-sanctioned racial discrimination, integrating Southern factories, supporting the 1963 March on Washington and bailing the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. out of jail in Alabama. It was the UAW that withdrew from the AFL-CIO in the 1960s and '70s rather than take labor's big right turn; the UAW that opposed the Vietnam War; set up a research department that studied the cost of bloated military budgets to domestic progress; opposed apartheid in South Africa with such passion that when Nelson Mandela toured the United States after his release from prison, he insisted on celebrating with Dearborn's UAW Local 600.
I'd say that is quite a bit, really. It isn't as though the UAW is standing in the way of GM getting back on its feet. In July, the UAW allowed GM to defer $1.7 billion of payments for the VEBA for two years -- in exchange for a note paying 9 percent interest. VEBA is the Voluntary Employee Beneficiary Association which is a trust created to take over the estimated $80 billion retiree health care liability of the big three automakers in Detroit and safeguard retiree health care for 80 years.
In addition to the VEBA, the UAW has voluntarily reduced hourly pay and benefits for new hires cutting down to roughly $26 from about $78.
In the ten years they have been working together, the UAW and the Make-A-Wish foundation have granted 10,000 wishes for ailing children. I'd say that is giving something back to society.
Of course, it is common to need to point to a bad guy. It is even more common for the large corporate interests to claim the problem is with the lower classes. With the workers. But it just isn't true.
The workers aren't the problem here. Blaming them is just avoiding the truth and scapegoating the people who are getting hurt the most already.
In California, a coalition of minorities is challenging the passage of Proposition 8.
Recall that it wasn't until 1967 that the landmark civil rights case Loving v. Virginia was settled by the United States Supreme Court outlawing anti-miscegenation laws. This ended all race-based legal restrictions on marriage in the United States. At the time, there were still 16 states with laws on the books banning interracial marriage.
It doesn't matter if you are gay or straight. This issue isn't about whether or not you personally want to see legalized same-sex marriage. This issue is bigger than any single person or that person's viewpoints. This is about equality. There is right and equal and then there are personal opinions.
There were many people who were against abolishing slavery...but those people were wrong. There were (and unfortunately still are) people who were against interracial relationships. Those people, too, were wrong.
As the United States Declaration of Independence states: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
All men (and women) are created equal. We are all entitled to be happy and free.
Friedrich Otto Hertz once said:
If you substitute "anti-semitism" or "homophobia" for "racism" in that quote, the message is equally true. Nobody is a "mistake". Some of us may look or act different than others, but we are still equal.
One final thought. As Martin Niemöller once said:
READ MORE
"The entire purpose behind the constitutional principle of equal protection would be subverted if the constitutional protection of unpopular minorities were subject to simple majority rule," read a brief by black, Asian and Hispanic groups challenging the ban. "This case is not simply about gay and lesbian equality."
Recall that it wasn't until 1967 that the landmark civil rights case Loving v. Virginia was settled by the United States Supreme Court outlawing anti-miscegenation laws. This ended all race-based legal restrictions on marriage in the United States. At the time, there were still 16 states with laws on the books banning interracial marriage.
Legal scholars say the measure, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman, breaks new ground by limiting the courts' ability to protect minorities.
"They could take away any right from any group," said University of Southern California Law Professor David Cruz, who filed a brief in favor of gay marriage in an earlier case.
It doesn't matter if you are gay or straight. This issue isn't about whether or not you personally want to see legalized same-sex marriage. This issue is bigger than any single person or that person's viewpoints. This is about equality. There is right and equal and then there are personal opinions.
There were many people who were against abolishing slavery...but those people were wrong. There were (and unfortunately still are) people who were against interracial relationships. Those people, too, were wrong.
As the United States Declaration of Independence states: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
All men (and women) are created equal. We are all entitled to be happy and free.
Friedrich Otto Hertz once said:
At the heart of racism is the religious assertion that God made a creative mistake when He brought some people into being
If you substitute "anti-semitism" or "homophobia" for "racism" in that quote, the message is equally true. Nobody is a "mistake". Some of us may look or act different than others, but we are still equal.
One final thought. As Martin Niemöller once said:
In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up.
Why Socialism? Can you explain for those who aren't familiar with the platform you ran on?
Brian Moore: Because we want to achieve a radical systemic change of economic systems that will better serve the common good, and bring a more egalitarian and quality life than under capitalism. Under capitalism, only a small elite of owners, senior company officers and investors reap the rewards and profits, and they do it on the backs of the common every day worker. They do not share the benefits with those who have worked the most.
Our platform is based on social justice, egalitarianism, and world peace. We have a communal responsibility to our fellow man, and not the concept of "self-interest" that capitalism pushes and tries to legitimize as part of our nature and noble. It is selfish, egotistical, and unfair. It is based on a small group inheriting the wealth and the power, or on those who compete against their colleagues and neighbors.
When and how did you become a Socialist?
Brian Moore: I only became a Socialist two years ago, but realized I was a "closet socialist" for the last ten years. As a political candidate I always promoted a national socialized health plan, antiwar, favored a guaranteed annual income, advocated worker control and elimination of corporate control. However, I also grew up in a traditional Irish Catholic family where we were instilled with the spirit of fairness and equality by our parents and religious teachers. I trained in a catholic seminary in the Franciscan Order in the Missions of California, which was dedicated to serving the poor and impoverished peoples of the world.
I also spent almost three years in the U.S. Peace Corps in Latin America and was exposed to the poverty, and inequities of society, and of our country's economic policies on other third and fourth world countries.
What benefits do you feel that Socialism offers to society as opposed to other philosophies like Capitalism?
Brian Moore: Fairness, equality, equal opportunity and economic rights of full employment, access to full education through university participation, access to quality housing and comprehensive medical, dental and mental health benefits. Society is more democratic under socialism, with workers and citizens owning, managing and controlling the companies and communities they live and work it. Decisions are made locally and on a group basis.
Whereas, capitalism is an economic system where decisions are made at the top and come down in a dictatorial fashion. The companies are owned and controlled by a select few. Communities are usually run by a strong local government, or by political leaders who have been bought off by corporations. There really is no participatory decision-making by the majority as is under socialism.
Socialism also de-centralizes government, and takes the power out of the hands of government bureaucrats and a strong military. Socialism relies on citizen input and control, it directors government employees to implement the citizen councils and commissions who set policy and make the decisions.
A new Labor Department report states that employers cut 240,000 jobs in October - bringing the year's total job losses to nearly 1.2 million. Does Socialism offer a solution to the growing unemployment problem?
Brian Moore: Yes, confiscate and ration all for-profit corporations. We transfer ownership, management and control over to the workers, and thus eliminate the big salaries and stocks and dividends that go to a select few at the top who traditionally have inherited the wealth and the power. We decide on the value of the products and services, their prices, and then share in any nominal profits with the workers. More importantly, we reduce drastically industries and institutions that do not contribute to the welfare of our society. We no longer use the "for-profit" motive as rationale for the existence of developing a product or service.
Instead we use "improving the quality of life" for all citizens and our communities as the rationale for production and the distribution of services. We eliminate, or reduce drastically the defense budget, all overseas bases, end the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, phase out our nuclear power plants, shut down our for-profit corporations, the 1600 private insurance agencies, the intelligence agencies, the homeland security agency, etc that taxes our economy and annual budgets. We free up billions of dollars for the development of mass transportation systems, small farms in the rural areas, schools, more medical facilities and providers to adequately serve the 305 million Americans, end the wars, and downsize our military and their subsequent expenses.
We radically transform our society from a military-industrial economy, based on wars and defense contracts, to a more social society to promote more leisure time, shorter work weeks, longer vacations, child care, etc. We salary our physicians and medical providers, own the hospitals and clinics, and free up 30% of the health care dollars that traditionally went to private companies in the form of profits, administration, paper work, advertising, etc.
We will retrain all defense industry people to learn how to develop and produce social products and services that benefit the society and the common good.
Your platform stated that you would "Nationalize Oil Industry, Pharmaceutical Industry, Banking and Insurance Industry, Railroad and Automotive Industries, and Entertainment and Sports Industries". How do you feel this would benefit the country?
Brian Moore: As mentioned in the previous answer, we would free up and re-distribute the profits and availability of new dollars for products and services that better benefit the community and the general welfare. Right now those "extra" dollars are kept in the pockets and bank accounts of 5% of the nation, the business leaders, who control the power a nd wealth and abuse the rights of 95% of the population by underpaying them, depriving them of full access to health care, pensions, time off, social services for their family, plus not to speak of the harm these for-profit companies have down to our natural resources for the profit motive. They have violated our waters, our land and our air, to their selfish ends, that many times ends up in perennial wars to protect their economic interests at the expense of peoples' welfare.
How do you respond to critics who claims that "income sharing reduces individual incentives to work, and therefore incomes should be individualized as much as possible"?
Brian Moore: To the contrary, workers have a greater incentive to work in order to make MORE money, plus improve their families' and the society's well-being. In addition, they participate in setting criteria, determining the production and distribution of the products and services, and thus participate in such a democratic fashion that they feel a part of the outcome. They now, for the first time, like owners, take pride in their work, because they are the real owners. They can see the result of their labors, and know they had a full participatory role.
Furthermore, the workers will be the judges of their co-workers, and citizens in their society who have handicaps and limitations. Usually, juries and co-workers are harder on themselves. So anyone who abuses the system, will suffer the consequences.
How do you respond to people that say Socialists just want to punish those who are successful by taking their money away and giving it to others?
Brian Moore: Socialists want a more egalitarian society where everyone is given an equal opportunity to live a quality life and to fulfill their aspirations. We also believe that citizens have an obligation to the common good and the general welfare of society, and that we should share our benefits with our fellow citizens, within reason.
We are still willing to have managers, administrators and CEO's of companies and institutions make more money per their responsibilities, but we wish to cap the ratio of 5 to 1, or, at the most, 10 to 1. However, now in our society we have small groups of people who inherit the wealth and the power, and make in excess of 100 to 1 or even 1,000 to 1 compared to their workers. This is pure greed, selfishness, and undemocratic.
If people do not uphold their end of the bargain in a socialist society, they will not be given a free ride. They, too, will suffer the consequences.
Do you think America will move closer to Socialism any time in the future?
Brian Moore: Yes, we are now. Look at the bailout, the automotive industries, the teetering economy under capitalism, putting us on the verge of collapse. In addition, we have social security, public transportation, public schools, Medicare, Veterans Administration services, etc, which are elements of socialism in our society.
If the economy collapses, we will have a watershed toward socialism. We just have to have the infrastructure ready.
What are your views on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq?
Brian Moore: We should pull out of both countries immediately. I would give them no more than three months for the three major tribes to assemble, knock out a constitution, hold a vote, and take office. We should not only pull out all of our troops from both countries, but also shut down the military bases, the private reconstruction contractors, and bring them home as well.
We should pursue those responsible for the attack on the World Trade Centers and the Pentagon, and the other failed flight disasters, as criminals, just like we did on the Lockerbie incident in Scotland.
Those responsible should be pursued and prosecuted as criminals, instead of declaring a war on terrorism, and going after entire countries or cultures.
Do you feel that America will move closer to conflict with Iran? If so, what are your views on that potential conflict?
Brian Moore: Not if I have anything to say about it. We should withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan, and begin to offer Nuclear Disarmament treaties to every country who possesses them, in order to begin an immediate and comprehensive phase out of all nuclear weapons.
If we are unwilling to disarm, then Iran should be entitled to commercial development of nuclear power, just as we do, and the nearby Pakistanis, Indians, and Israelis have now as well.
There is absolutely no reason for the United States of America to even come close to a potential war with Iran. They have no military to speak of comparable to ours, and we can monitor, if not cease the nuclear development if we take the leadership in disarming our own nation.
In 2006, you ran as a Green Party-endorsed Independent candidate for Bill Nelson's Florida Senate seat. Were you an advocate of Socialism at this time already or did that come later?
Brian Moore: I was a closet Socialist, without knowing it. I supported a socialized health care system nationwide, a guaranteed income for all citizens, a sharing of the authority between the corporate owners and the workers; and the cessation of the initiation and the actual invasion of Iraq.
However, I really did not become a strong advocate of the Socialism until about 18 months ago, and it has grown monthly, as I become more immersed in the socialist culture, mindset, and campaigns.
Another aspect to keep in mind is that I was brought up in a Irish-Catholic family, where we were taught about right and wrong, justice and fairness, and the importance of one adhering to their principles. I also entered the Franciscan seminary to study to become a priest in an Order dedicated to the cause of correcting poverty in the world. To help the downtrodden, the poor, and the huddled masses.
I also entered the U.S. Peace Corps and became knowledgeable and familiar with worldwide poverty and destitution, and the inequities of our society, and of our own unfair foreign policies and economic practices.
I have read that you were nominated by the Mississippi Natural Law Party for President in August of 2008. You also ran for the Peace and Freedom Party nomination which ultimately went to Ralph Nader. Were you already running on the Socialist Party USA ticket at this time? If so, were you simply trying to amass a larger political base by pursuing the other nominations as well?
Brian Moore: Yes, I was. That is correct, I was attempting to obtain a larger political base in order to attract media and press attention and to become a known entity with as many states as possible.
You received 6,563 votes in the 2008 Presidential election. Knowing that this election had people riveted between Barack Obama and John McCain, did you feel that any third party candidates had a chance to garner any appreciable amount of votes?
Brian Moore: I suspected early on, because of the Obama phenomenon, the fear of a Republican winning, and the negative experience of Nader in the 2000 election, that people had the "spoiler" situation on their minds.
On the other hand, I felt that the country was not happy with the choices that they had; an untested, relatively unknown candidate, who was also black for the first time; plus, a more conservative, more elderly candidate whose changing loyalties to the issues, caused confusion in the minds of the voters.
Sine we were official "write-in" candidates in 22 states, we also believe we will garner additional votes, and possibly put us over the 8.000 to 8,000 vote range.
However, all third-party candidates, to my knowledge, or their parities, received substantially less votes than in the previous two or three elections. Nader, McKinney with the Greens, Barr with the Libertarians, Baldwin with the Constitution Party, etc. all received from one-fourth to one-eight the votes they had received in previous elections.
Do you have an opinion about anything specific that may have hampered the success of your campaign?
Brian Moore: Lack of money, resources, unsupported by my political party and members, and their failure to assist us in petitioning and signature collection In approximately 5 to 10 other states where we could have gained ballot access.
Secondly, the press and media blackout, mostly, and its concentration on just the two major party candidates. The debates without third-party candidates, etc.
And the nasty image of socialism in our country, reinforced by the red-baiting and fear-mongering of John McCain and Sarah Palin; plus all the political pundits referred to socialism as negative, wrong, communist, unpatriotic, unrealistic, and unacceptable.
Was there anything about your campaign that you would consider a disappointment? Is there anything you achieved that you didn't foresee?
Brian Moore: Yes, I was very disappointed in the press and media's continued blackout of minor party candidates; and other minor party or independent candidates not including us in their requests to participate in presidential debates, or include us in their criticism of not being included in the national debates that only included the two major candidates.
I was also disappointed that the press and media's concept of "socialism" is still in the past. They have contributed to and reinforced their biases and false images of the socialist philosophy and economic system, and of the Socialist Party. The fourth estate falsely equates the SP with big government and the sharing of personal possessions and property.
Our campaign also expected more national support from the Socialist Party and membership as well as the collection of signatures for ballot qualification from the membership in individual states.
Do you have any intention of running for office again? If so, what office would you be pursuing?
Brian Moore: Who knows. We need to assess the results of this election, since the votes are still coming in. We just gained 910 write-in votes from Texas today, so we are now around 7,610 total votes. We hope to reach the 10,000 vote mark when all the write-in votes come in by late December or January, 2009.
We want to promote socialism, and we also believe that the capitalist system is on the brink of collapse, so I would say more focus will be more on setting up some concrete plans for a sudden transformation to socialism, and to continue to promote the new image of socialism, and educate the public about its rich heritage in our country.
While congressional and a U.S. Senate races are coming up in my home state of Florida in 23 months, I have more of an interest in building the locals in Florida and nationally, and also educating myself about socialism is other parts of the world, especially on the partial successes in the Netherlands and Scandinavian countries.
Your campaign bio has an impressive list of civic involvement. Is there anything specifically you feel particularly proud of achieving?
Brian Moore: In Washington, DC I helped bring heating oil to low income minorities in the inner city over several cold winters; the city of Wash. DC erected fence barriers with roofs, over all the freeway overpasses as a safety measure for pedestrians and children on bikes due to my initial letters to the DC government about one such bridge across the street from the HUD building on 7th & E Streets, SW. Multiple bridge overpass fences throughout the city were implemented soon thereafter.
I lobbied against the construction of an International trade center for Union station, with my writing letters-to-the-editors, personal editorials and guest columns, resulting in the project's stoppage for Union Station. In its place there is now a highly successful Union Station store and shopping and restaurant center.
I then followed up with organizing my neighborhood in the southwest section of DC to fight the construction of the International Trade Center on the southwest DC waterfront. We ultimately won, after several years of meetings and demonstrations, and the new International Trade Center, called the Ronald Reagan Building, was moved to 14th and Pennsylvania Ave, NW, and constructed there.
This was a great environmental achievement on the part of our neighborhood in protecting our neighborhood identity and environment, which I lead and we succeeded in.
What is your opinion on the passage of Proposition 8 in California and the various protests that have followed its passage?
Brian Moore: I favor the recognition that marriages between same-sex partners are legitimate and should be recognized and treated as such.
Thank you very much for your time and I wish you luck in any future political endeavors.
READ MORE
Brian Moore: Because we want to achieve a radical systemic change of economic systems that will better serve the common good, and bring a more egalitarian and quality life than under capitalism. Under capitalism, only a small elite of owners, senior company officers and investors reap the rewards and profits, and they do it on the backs of the common every day worker. They do not share the benefits with those who have worked the most.
Our platform is based on social justice, egalitarianism, and world peace. We have a communal responsibility to our fellow man, and not the concept of "self-interest" that capitalism pushes and tries to legitimize as part of our nature and noble. It is selfish, egotistical, and unfair. It is based on a small group inheriting the wealth and the power, or on those who compete against their colleagues and neighbors.
When and how did you become a Socialist?
Brian Moore: I only became a Socialist two years ago, but realized I was a "closet socialist" for the last ten years. As a political candidate I always promoted a national socialized health plan, antiwar, favored a guaranteed annual income, advocated worker control and elimination of corporate control. However, I also grew up in a traditional Irish Catholic family where we were instilled with the spirit of fairness and equality by our parents and religious teachers. I trained in a catholic seminary in the Franciscan Order in the Missions of California, which was dedicated to serving the poor and impoverished peoples of the world.
I also spent almost three years in the U.S. Peace Corps in Latin America and was exposed to the poverty, and inequities of society, and of our country's economic policies on other third and fourth world countries.
What benefits do you feel that Socialism offers to society as opposed to other philosophies like Capitalism?
Brian Moore: Fairness, equality, equal opportunity and economic rights of full employment, access to full education through university participation, access to quality housing and comprehensive medical, dental and mental health benefits. Society is more democratic under socialism, with workers and citizens owning, managing and controlling the companies and communities they live and work it. Decisions are made locally and on a group basis.
Whereas, capitalism is an economic system where decisions are made at the top and come down in a dictatorial fashion. The companies are owned and controlled by a select few. Communities are usually run by a strong local government, or by political leaders who have been bought off by corporations. There really is no participatory decision-making by the majority as is under socialism.
Socialism also de-centralizes government, and takes the power out of the hands of government bureaucrats and a strong military. Socialism relies on citizen input and control, it directors government employees to implement the citizen councils and commissions who set policy and make the decisions.
A new Labor Department report states that employers cut 240,000 jobs in October - bringing the year's total job losses to nearly 1.2 million. Does Socialism offer a solution to the growing unemployment problem?
Brian Moore: Yes, confiscate and ration all for-profit corporations. We transfer ownership, management and control over to the workers, and thus eliminate the big salaries and stocks and dividends that go to a select few at the top who traditionally have inherited the wealth and the power. We decide on the value of the products and services, their prices, and then share in any nominal profits with the workers. More importantly, we reduce drastically industries and institutions that do not contribute to the welfare of our society. We no longer use the "for-profit" motive as rationale for the existence of developing a product or service.
Instead we use "improving the quality of life" for all citizens and our communities as the rationale for production and the distribution of services. We eliminate, or reduce drastically the defense budget, all overseas bases, end the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, phase out our nuclear power plants, shut down our for-profit corporations, the 1600 private insurance agencies, the intelligence agencies, the homeland security agency, etc that taxes our economy and annual budgets. We free up billions of dollars for the development of mass transportation systems, small farms in the rural areas, schools, more medical facilities and providers to adequately serve the 305 million Americans, end the wars, and downsize our military and their subsequent expenses.
We radically transform our society from a military-industrial economy, based on wars and defense contracts, to a more social society to promote more leisure time, shorter work weeks, longer vacations, child care, etc. We salary our physicians and medical providers, own the hospitals and clinics, and free up 30% of the health care dollars that traditionally went to private companies in the form of profits, administration, paper work, advertising, etc.
We will retrain all defense industry people to learn how to develop and produce social products and services that benefit the society and the common good.
Your platform stated that you would "Nationalize Oil Industry, Pharmaceutical Industry, Banking and Insurance Industry, Railroad and Automotive Industries, and Entertainment and Sports Industries". How do you feel this would benefit the country?
Brian Moore: As mentioned in the previous answer, we would free up and re-distribute the profits and availability of new dollars for products and services that better benefit the community and the general welfare. Right now those "extra" dollars are kept in the pockets and bank accounts of 5% of the nation, the business leaders, who control the power a nd wealth and abuse the rights of 95% of the population by underpaying them, depriving them of full access to health care, pensions, time off, social services for their family, plus not to speak of the harm these for-profit companies have down to our natural resources for the profit motive. They have violated our waters, our land and our air, to their selfish ends, that many times ends up in perennial wars to protect their economic interests at the expense of peoples' welfare.
How do you respond to critics who claims that "income sharing reduces individual incentives to work, and therefore incomes should be individualized as much as possible"?
Brian Moore: To the contrary, workers have a greater incentive to work in order to make MORE money, plus improve their families' and the society's well-being. In addition, they participate in setting criteria, determining the production and distribution of the products and services, and thus participate in such a democratic fashion that they feel a part of the outcome. They now, for the first time, like owners, take pride in their work, because they are the real owners. They can see the result of their labors, and know they had a full participatory role.
Furthermore, the workers will be the judges of their co-workers, and citizens in their society who have handicaps and limitations. Usually, juries and co-workers are harder on themselves. So anyone who abuses the system, will suffer the consequences.
How do you respond to people that say Socialists just want to punish those who are successful by taking their money away and giving it to others?
Brian Moore: Socialists want a more egalitarian society where everyone is given an equal opportunity to live a quality life and to fulfill their aspirations. We also believe that citizens have an obligation to the common good and the general welfare of society, and that we should share our benefits with our fellow citizens, within reason.
We are still willing to have managers, administrators and CEO's of companies and institutions make more money per their responsibilities, but we wish to cap the ratio of 5 to 1, or, at the most, 10 to 1. However, now in our society we have small groups of people who inherit the wealth and the power, and make in excess of 100 to 1 or even 1,000 to 1 compared to their workers. This is pure greed, selfishness, and undemocratic.
If people do not uphold their end of the bargain in a socialist society, they will not be given a free ride. They, too, will suffer the consequences.
Do you think America will move closer to Socialism any time in the future?
Brian Moore: Yes, we are now. Look at the bailout, the automotive industries, the teetering economy under capitalism, putting us on the verge of collapse. In addition, we have social security, public transportation, public schools, Medicare, Veterans Administration services, etc, which are elements of socialism in our society.
If the economy collapses, we will have a watershed toward socialism. We just have to have the infrastructure ready.
What are your views on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq?
Brian Moore: We should pull out of both countries immediately. I would give them no more than three months for the three major tribes to assemble, knock out a constitution, hold a vote, and take office. We should not only pull out all of our troops from both countries, but also shut down the military bases, the private reconstruction contractors, and bring them home as well.
We should pursue those responsible for the attack on the World Trade Centers and the Pentagon, and the other failed flight disasters, as criminals, just like we did on the Lockerbie incident in Scotland.
Those responsible should be pursued and prosecuted as criminals, instead of declaring a war on terrorism, and going after entire countries or cultures.
Do you feel that America will move closer to conflict with Iran? If so, what are your views on that potential conflict?
Brian Moore: Not if I have anything to say about it. We should withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan, and begin to offer Nuclear Disarmament treaties to every country who possesses them, in order to begin an immediate and comprehensive phase out of all nuclear weapons.
If we are unwilling to disarm, then Iran should be entitled to commercial development of nuclear power, just as we do, and the nearby Pakistanis, Indians, and Israelis have now as well.
There is absolutely no reason for the United States of America to even come close to a potential war with Iran. They have no military to speak of comparable to ours, and we can monitor, if not cease the nuclear development if we take the leadership in disarming our own nation.
In 2006, you ran as a Green Party-endorsed Independent candidate for Bill Nelson's Florida Senate seat. Were you an advocate of Socialism at this time already or did that come later?
Brian Moore: I was a closet Socialist, without knowing it. I supported a socialized health care system nationwide, a guaranteed income for all citizens, a sharing of the authority between the corporate owners and the workers; and the cessation of the initiation and the actual invasion of Iraq.
However, I really did not become a strong advocate of the Socialism until about 18 months ago, and it has grown monthly, as I become more immersed in the socialist culture, mindset, and campaigns.
Another aspect to keep in mind is that I was brought up in a Irish-Catholic family, where we were taught about right and wrong, justice and fairness, and the importance of one adhering to their principles. I also entered the Franciscan seminary to study to become a priest in an Order dedicated to the cause of correcting poverty in the world. To help the downtrodden, the poor, and the huddled masses.
I also entered the U.S. Peace Corps and became knowledgeable and familiar with worldwide poverty and destitution, and the inequities of our society, and of our own unfair foreign policies and economic practices.
I have read that you were nominated by the Mississippi Natural Law Party for President in August of 2008. You also ran for the Peace and Freedom Party nomination which ultimately went to Ralph Nader. Were you already running on the Socialist Party USA ticket at this time? If so, were you simply trying to amass a larger political base by pursuing the other nominations as well?
Brian Moore: Yes, I was. That is correct, I was attempting to obtain a larger political base in order to attract media and press attention and to become a known entity with as many states as possible.
You received 6,563 votes in the 2008 Presidential election. Knowing that this election had people riveted between Barack Obama and John McCain, did you feel that any third party candidates had a chance to garner any appreciable amount of votes?
Brian Moore: I suspected early on, because of the Obama phenomenon, the fear of a Republican winning, and the negative experience of Nader in the 2000 election, that people had the "spoiler" situation on their minds.
On the other hand, I felt that the country was not happy with the choices that they had; an untested, relatively unknown candidate, who was also black for the first time; plus, a more conservative, more elderly candidate whose changing loyalties to the issues, caused confusion in the minds of the voters.
Sine we were official "write-in" candidates in 22 states, we also believe we will garner additional votes, and possibly put us over the 8.000 to 8,000 vote range.
However, all third-party candidates, to my knowledge, or their parities, received substantially less votes than in the previous two or three elections. Nader, McKinney with the Greens, Barr with the Libertarians, Baldwin with the Constitution Party, etc. all received from one-fourth to one-eight the votes they had received in previous elections.
Do you have an opinion about anything specific that may have hampered the success of your campaign?
Brian Moore: Lack of money, resources, unsupported by my political party and members, and their failure to assist us in petitioning and signature collection In approximately 5 to 10 other states where we could have gained ballot access.
Secondly, the press and media blackout, mostly, and its concentration on just the two major party candidates. The debates without third-party candidates, etc.
And the nasty image of socialism in our country, reinforced by the red-baiting and fear-mongering of John McCain and Sarah Palin; plus all the political pundits referred to socialism as negative, wrong, communist, unpatriotic, unrealistic, and unacceptable.
Was there anything about your campaign that you would consider a disappointment? Is there anything you achieved that you didn't foresee?
Brian Moore: Yes, I was very disappointed in the press and media's continued blackout of minor party candidates; and other minor party or independent candidates not including us in their requests to participate in presidential debates, or include us in their criticism of not being included in the national debates that only included the two major candidates.
I was also disappointed that the press and media's concept of "socialism" is still in the past. They have contributed to and reinforced their biases and false images of the socialist philosophy and economic system, and of the Socialist Party. The fourth estate falsely equates the SP with big government and the sharing of personal possessions and property.
Our campaign also expected more national support from the Socialist Party and membership as well as the collection of signatures for ballot qualification from the membership in individual states.
Do you have any intention of running for office again? If so, what office would you be pursuing?
Brian Moore: Who knows. We need to assess the results of this election, since the votes are still coming in. We just gained 910 write-in votes from Texas today, so we are now around 7,610 total votes. We hope to reach the 10,000 vote mark when all the write-in votes come in by late December or January, 2009.
We want to promote socialism, and we also believe that the capitalist system is on the brink of collapse, so I would say more focus will be more on setting up some concrete plans for a sudden transformation to socialism, and to continue to promote the new image of socialism, and educate the public about its rich heritage in our country.
While congressional and a U.S. Senate races are coming up in my home state of Florida in 23 months, I have more of an interest in building the locals in Florida and nationally, and also educating myself about socialism is other parts of the world, especially on the partial successes in the Netherlands and Scandinavian countries.
Your campaign bio has an impressive list of civic involvement. Is there anything specifically you feel particularly proud of achieving?
Brian Moore: In Washington, DC I helped bring heating oil to low income minorities in the inner city over several cold winters; the city of Wash. DC erected fence barriers with roofs, over all the freeway overpasses as a safety measure for pedestrians and children on bikes due to my initial letters to the DC government about one such bridge across the street from the HUD building on 7th & E Streets, SW. Multiple bridge overpass fences throughout the city were implemented soon thereafter.
I lobbied against the construction of an International trade center for Union station, with my writing letters-to-the-editors, personal editorials and guest columns, resulting in the project's stoppage for Union Station. In its place there is now a highly successful Union Station store and shopping and restaurant center.
I then followed up with organizing my neighborhood in the southwest section of DC to fight the construction of the International Trade Center on the southwest DC waterfront. We ultimately won, after several years of meetings and demonstrations, and the new International Trade Center, called the Ronald Reagan Building, was moved to 14th and Pennsylvania Ave, NW, and constructed there.
This was a great environmental achievement on the part of our neighborhood in protecting our neighborhood identity and environment, which I lead and we succeeded in.
What is your opinion on the passage of Proposition 8 in California and the various protests that have followed its passage?
Brian Moore: I favor the recognition that marriages between same-sex partners are legitimate and should be recognized and treated as such.
Thank you very much for your time and I wish you luck in any future political endeavors.
In the state of Ohio, through October the unemployment rate increased to 7.3 percent. Nationally, it was 6.5 percent.
As a result of this, for the first time in 20 years, Ohio will have to borrow hundreds of millions of dollars from the federal government to pay benefits to unemployed workers.
As in any economic situation, some are hurt more than others. Unfortunately, the American system is institutionally uneven in the way that various people are treated.
An AP article entitled Racial disparities persist notes:
As I wrote previously, the Obama election has spurred race crimes around country and ignorance is popping up everywhere.
Many others have commented on this as well.
Millions are hurting in this economic climate. Now is not the time for petty ignorance. White, black, gay, straight, latino, etc. we are all Americans and we are all feeling the sting from the actions of the current White House administration and previous ones.
This is a time for unity. For solidarity, not division and ignorance. We all need to help each other if and when it is in our means to do so. If you find you have a little extra this holiday season, please think about donating to a food kitchen to help those less fortunate.
As the organization Feeding America notes: one in eight Americans is fighting hunger, and Feeding America needs your help to join in the fight to end this national struggle.
READ MORE
As a result of this, for the first time in 20 years, Ohio will have to borrow hundreds of millions of dollars from the federal government to pay benefits to unemployed workers.
The state has asked U.S. Labor Secretary Elaine Chao for a $550 million advance to cover shortfalls in December, January and February in the state unemployment compensation trust fund.
...About 128,000 Ohioans are receiving benefits now, nearly a 60 percent increase from last year.
As in any economic situation, some are hurt more than others. Unfortunately, the American system is institutionally uneven in the way that various people are treated.
An AP article entitled Racial disparities persist notes:
A typical black household makes just 62 percent of the income of a typical white household _ a gap that has changed little in 30 years. In 2007, the median household income was $33,900 for black households and $54,900 for white households.
Blacks are nearly three times as likely as whites to live in poverty. In 2007, 24.4 percent of blacks had incomes below the poverty line, compared to 8.2 percent of whites.
As I wrote previously, the Obama election has spurred race crimes around country and ignorance is popping up everywhere.
Many others have commented on this as well.
White supremacy is a primary enemy of working class solidarity. The recent racist attacks are purposeful attempts to divide working people against each other.
Millions are hurting in this economic climate. Now is not the time for petty ignorance. White, black, gay, straight, latino, etc. we are all Americans and we are all feeling the sting from the actions of the current White House administration and previous ones.
This is a time for unity. For solidarity, not division and ignorance. We all need to help each other if and when it is in our means to do so. If you find you have a little extra this holiday season, please think about donating to a food kitchen to help those less fortunate.
As the organization Feeding America notes: one in eight Americans is fighting hunger, and Feeding America needs your help to join in the fight to end this national struggle.
A new survey amongst women 18-29 by the YWCA shows that more than three-fourths of those known as Generation Y want incoming President Barack Obama to make civil rights and racial justice top priorities of his administration.
Unfortunately, as I noted in a previous blog, that isn't going to happen. Not in the first year at least. Two Obama advisers have stated that Barack Obama will not move for months, and perhaps not until 2010, to ask Congress to end the military's decades-old ban on open homosexuals in the ranks.
The YMCA survey further found:
It absolutely great that more young people are able to see beyond themselves and be concerned with the quality of life for others. Discrimination breaks down when we all see each other as people and not as "different". Not an "us" vs. "them" situation.
While he has many plans for the economy, Obama advisor Bill Daley has already stated:
While he won't immediately increase taxes on the wealthy (which was a major part of his campaign) his advisers have promised that Obama will "do what's necessary" to fix economy.
We need more jobs. We need better schools. I don't think any rational person can argue against creating more sources of alternative energy.
I just hope he sticks to these proposals and doesn't waffle as he is already doing on the Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell policy or the tax increase on the wealthy. These were major campaign promises and he is dropping them, or at least "delaying" them, and he hasn't even stepped into office yet.
Obama needs to listen to the people who voted for him. Much ado was made about Obama courting and getting the youth vote. With 77 percent of Generation Y women surveyed saying that civil rights and racial justice should be top priorities...then Obama's administration should make them top priorities. When 92 percent say the financial crises need resolution, then Obama should listen.
One final point from the survey:
During the campaign, Obama stated that he wanted to more progressively tax the wealthy to aid those with greater needs. If most women feel that their personal economic situation is worrisome, then I think Obama should rethink waiting until 2011 to put his campaign promises into effect.
American's overwhelmingly voted for change. Let's see some.
READ MORE
Lorraine Cole, chief executive officer of YWCA USA, said she didn't know why 77 percent of Generation Y women want civil rights and racial justice to be top priorities in Obama's first year — again, more than older women. Slightly more than half, or 54 percent, of women ages 30-70 said the same.
Unfortunately, as I noted in a previous blog, that isn't going to happen. Not in the first year at least. Two Obama advisers have stated that Barack Obama will not move for months, and perhaps not until 2010, to ask Congress to end the military's decades-old ban on open homosexuals in the ranks.
The YMCA survey further found:
...that half of these younger women say ethnic- or religious-based discrimination will be a "major obstacle" to their progress as a whole, compared with 31 percent of older women.
"I don't think that the election of Obama in anyone's eyes has given anyone the belief that racism has ended in this country," Cole added.
Obama's transition office had no comment.
It absolutely great that more young people are able to see beyond themselves and be concerned with the quality of life for others. Discrimination breaks down when we all see each other as people and not as "different". Not an "us" vs. "them" situation.
Nine in 10 women, or 92 percent, say Obama and the new Congress should make solving the U.S. financial crisis the No. 1 priority in the first year. Obama has said the economy will be his top priority.
While he has many plans for the economy, Obama advisor Bill Daley has already stated:
Obama will "more likely than not" postpone a tax increase for the rich until 2011, when the Bush tax cuts expire, rather than pushing to repeal them now.
While he won't immediately increase taxes on the wealthy (which was a major part of his campaign) his advisers have promised that Obama will "do what's necessary" to fix economy.
Obama on Saturday offered an outline of his economic recovery plan to create 2.5 million jobs by 2011, saying American workers will rebuild the nation's roads and bridges, modernize its schools and create more sources of alternative energy.
Details of the plan are still being worked out by his economic team, Obama said, but he hopes to sign the two-year, nationwide plan shortly after taking office January 20.
We need more jobs. We need better schools. I don't think any rational person can argue against creating more sources of alternative energy.
I just hope he sticks to these proposals and doesn't waffle as he is already doing on the Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell policy or the tax increase on the wealthy. These were major campaign promises and he is dropping them, or at least "delaying" them, and he hasn't even stepped into office yet.
Obama needs to listen to the people who voted for him. Much ado was made about Obama courting and getting the youth vote. With 77 percent of Generation Y women surveyed saying that civil rights and racial justice should be top priorities...then Obama's administration should make them top priorities. When 92 percent say the financial crises need resolution, then Obama should listen.
One final point from the survey:
Most women say personal economic problems present the biggest barriers to their success in the next decade, including lack of retirement savings (10 percent), major illness or medical expense (68 percent), job losses because of layoffs or jobs sent overseas (63 percent) and the cost of higher education (60 percent).
During the campaign, Obama stated that he wanted to more progressively tax the wealthy to aid those with greater needs. If most women feel that their personal economic situation is worrisome, then I think Obama should rethink waiting until 2011 to put his campaign promises into effect.
American's overwhelmingly voted for change. Let's see some.
US elected officials scored abysmally on a test measuring their civic knowledge, with an average grade of just 44 percent...
Oh why am I not suprised?
Asked about the electoral college, 20 percent of elected officials incorrectly said it was established to "supervise the first televised presidential debates."
So, this archaic system of elections is even a mystery to the people who stand to benefit by it.
Among the questions asked of some 2,500 people who were randomly selected to take the test, including "self-identified elected officials," was one which asked respondents to "name two countries that were our enemies during World War II."
Sixty-nine percent of respondents correctly identified Germany and Japan. Among the incorrect answers were Britain, China, Russia, Canada, Mexico and Spain.
This is where things become amazingly clear.
Education.
Education.
Education.
Ostensibly, these "elected officials" graduated high school, right? These same people who have greater contact with the international world than the average American apparently couldn't pass a basic (emphasis here on BASIC) highschool History or Civics/American Government class.
Delightful. And we wonder why the rest of the world thinks that the United States is filled with a bunch of privileged buffoons?
Of course, this may not be entirely thier fault. If the American society was one that valued an actual education, not just how fast someone can run or throw a ball or even how a face appears on the "big screen", we'd have a better education system.
When watching television, how often do you see an interviewee from a foreign country that doesn't speak better English than Americans?
Most Americans couldn't even ask "Where is the bathroom?" in another language.
Why aren't our young people being held to higher standards? Why aren't we holding the education system to higher standards. For that matter, why aren't their better national standards? Students in Alaska have a right to same quality of education a students in Florida.
Of course, I don't mean to pick on those "elected officials."
Ordinary citizens did not fare much better, scoring just 49 percent correct on the 33 exam questions compiled by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute (ISI).
America is called the land of opportunity. We have a lot of opportunity for improvement.
READ MORE
Oh why am I not suprised?
Asked about the electoral college, 20 percent of elected officials incorrectly said it was established to "supervise the first televised presidential debates."
So, this archaic system of elections is even a mystery to the people who stand to benefit by it.
Among the questions asked of some 2,500 people who were randomly selected to take the test, including "self-identified elected officials," was one which asked respondents to "name two countries that were our enemies during World War II."
Sixty-nine percent of respondents correctly identified Germany and Japan. Among the incorrect answers were Britain, China, Russia, Canada, Mexico and Spain.
This is where things become amazingly clear.
Education.
Education.
Education.
Ostensibly, these "elected officials" graduated high school, right? These same people who have greater contact with the international world than the average American apparently couldn't pass a basic (emphasis here on BASIC) highschool History or Civics/American Government class.
Delightful. And we wonder why the rest of the world thinks that the United States is filled with a bunch of privileged buffoons?
Of course, this may not be entirely thier fault. If the American society was one that valued an actual education, not just how fast someone can run or throw a ball or even how a face appears on the "big screen", we'd have a better education system.
When watching television, how often do you see an interviewee from a foreign country that doesn't speak better English than Americans?
Most Americans couldn't even ask "Where is the bathroom?" in another language.
Why aren't our young people being held to higher standards? Why aren't we holding the education system to higher standards. For that matter, why aren't their better national standards? Students in Alaska have a right to same quality of education a students in Florida.
Of course, I don't mean to pick on those "elected officials."
Ordinary citizens did not fare much better, scoring just 49 percent correct on the 33 exam questions compiled by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute (ISI).
America is called the land of opportunity. We have a lot of opportunity for improvement.
Let no one be discouraged by the belief that there is nothing one man or one woman can do against the enormous array of the world's ills -- against misery and ignorance, injustice and violence... Few will have the greatness to bend history itself; but each of us can work to change a small portion of events, and in the total of all those acts will be written the history of this generation...
It is from the numberless diverse acts of courage and belief that human history is shaped. Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring, those ripples build a current which can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance. - Robert F. Kennedy
It's never too late to be what you might have been. - George Elliot
When we are really honest with ourselves, we must admit that our lives are all that really belong to us. So it is how we use our lives that determines what kind of men we are. It is my deepest belief that only by giving our lives do we find life. I am convinced that the truest act of courage, the strongest act of manliness, is to sacrifice ourselves for others in a totally nonviolent struggle for justice. To be a man is to suffer for others. God help us be men. - César Chávez
War will exist until that distant day when the conscientious objector enjoys the same reputation and prestige that the warrior does today. - John F. Kennedy
During the election (and even since Obama's win) there was much discussion about Barack Obama being a Socialist.
Accuracy in Media, a conservative media monitoring organization, claimed that Obama had "International Socialist Connections".
WorldNetDaily even went so far as to blatantly ask "Is Obama a socialist?" claiming "unmistakable similarity between Obama's political beliefs and the beliefs of the Socialist Party USA". Brian Moore, 2008 Presidential candidate for Socialist Party USA, made it very clear that this isn't true at all.
As a quick aside, I think my favorite part of the WorldNetDaily article is this:
I love the scary quotes around the word right. Damn those Socialists wanting to make sure people have adequate housing!
People claimed that his support of universal health care was further evidence of his plan to push Socialism on America. But as Salon.com pointed out:
Anyone terrified of Socialism can relax. Obama isn't and never was a Socialist. Anyone who considers him or herself a Socialist can now get sad. Obama isn't and never was a Socialist.
This couldn't be made any clearer than his recent actions. As The New York Times reports:
On his selection of Timothy Geither, The New York Times said this:
I've previously pointed out that he is already waffling on promises made during his campaign and he hasn't even been sworn in yet!
Obama's first Cabinet selection was Rahm Emanuel as his chief of staff. Emanuel is a centrist Democrat and former member of the Clinton White House. Contrary to ring-wing views, Clinton wasn't Liberal. He was a moderate. Clinton was only a Liberal if your basis for comparison is the late Ayatollah Khomeini. Clinton was definitely more Liberal than Khomeini.
Obama will most assuredly bring change from the Bush administration. He will do that by simply not being Bush. But positive and progressive change for America? We will have to wait and see. Thus far, it isn't looking too promising.
READ MORE
Accuracy in Media, a conservative media monitoring organization, claimed that Obama had "International Socialist Connections".
WorldNetDaily even went so far as to blatantly ask "Is Obama a socialist?" claiming "unmistakable similarity between Obama's political beliefs and the beliefs of the Socialist Party USA". Brian Moore, 2008 Presidential candidate for Socialist Party USA, made it very clear that this isn't true at all.
As a quick aside, I think my favorite part of the WorldNetDaily article is this:
The Socialist Party USA recognizes the "right" of adequate housing for everyone
I love the scary quotes around the word right. Damn those Socialists wanting to make sure people have adequate housing!
People claimed that his support of universal health care was further evidence of his plan to push Socialism on America. But as Salon.com pointed out:
McCain and Palin claim that Obama's proposed healthcare system is socialist. It is nothing of the sort. It is a variant of the employer-friendly, insurance-friendly "play-or-pay" scheme discussed in the 1990s. Employers will be given the choice of providing tax-favored health insurance to their employees or being taxed to support a public insurance system. Over time the latter might expand, but for the foreseeable future our dysfunctional private insurance system will survive.
Anyone terrified of Socialism can relax. Obama isn't and never was a Socialist. Anyone who considers him or herself a Socialist can now get sad. Obama isn't and never was a Socialist.
This couldn't be made any clearer than his recent actions. As The New York Times reports:
Now, his reported selections for two of the major positions in his cabinet — Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton as secretary of state and Timothy F. Geithner as secretary of the Treasury — suggest that Mr. Obama is planning to govern from the center-right of his party, surrounding himself with pragmatists rather than ideologues.
On his selection of Timothy Geither, The New York Times said this:
"He’s no liberal," said a former colleague at the Treasury Department, where he managed the American response to the Asian financial crisis in the 1990s.
I've previously pointed out that he is already waffling on promises made during his campaign and he hasn't even been sworn in yet!
Obama's first Cabinet selection was Rahm Emanuel as his chief of staff. Emanuel is a centrist Democrat and former member of the Clinton White House. Contrary to ring-wing views, Clinton wasn't Liberal. He was a moderate. Clinton was only a Liberal if your basis for comparison is the late Ayatollah Khomeini. Clinton was definitely more Liberal than Khomeini.
Obama will most assuredly bring change from the Bush administration. He will do that by simply not being Bush. But positive and progressive change for America? We will have to wait and see. Thus far, it isn't looking too promising.
Republicans who control the Ohio Senate have crafted a plan to move back the voter registration deadline to 65 days before Election Day. The current deadline is 30 days before the election.
The reason given is:
What do you wanna bet most of those 13,000 votes didn't go their way?
Most states have a deadline around 30 days before the election. I'm no expert of each states election registration deadlines, but it this list is accurate then pushing it back to 65 days would be the earliest deadline in the nation.
This is the states where in 2004, Republicans prevented more than 350,000 voters in Ohio from casting ballots or having their votes counted - enough to have put John Kerry in the White House.
No surprise that they want to make registration even more difficult and get it through before they lose control of the House. Lose control because they lost in the last elections. So now they will change the rules in an attempt to stop that from ever happening again.
Maybe these guys need to reacquaint themselves with the word "Democracy".
READ MORE
The reason given is:
That would eliminate the overlap between the beginning of absentee voting, which is 35 days before the election, and the current registration deadline, which is 30 days before the election.
About 13,000 Ohio voters — about 0.2 percent of registered voters — used the overlap period before this year's election.
What do you wanna bet most of those 13,000 votes didn't go their way?
Most states have a deadline around 30 days before the election. I'm no expert of each states election registration deadlines, but it this list is accurate then pushing it back to 65 days would be the earliest deadline in the nation.
Senate Republicans want to get the bill passed before the legislative session ends and a new, Democratic-controlled House takes over in January.
Republicans control the House now, 53-46.
This is the states where in 2004, Republicans prevented more than 350,000 voters in Ohio from casting ballots or having their votes counted - enough to have put John Kerry in the White House.
No surprise that they want to make registration even more difficult and get it through before they lose control of the House. Lose control because they lost in the last elections. So now they will change the rules in an attempt to stop that from ever happening again.
Maybe these guys need to reacquaint themselves with the word "Democracy".
Sean Penn stars in an upcoming film about Harvey Milk. Milk was the first openly gay man elected to San Francisco's Board of Supervisors. He was later slain by Dan White, another city supervisor.
Milk fought against an anti-gay rights proposition 6....which eerily mirrors the current brouhaha over proposition 8.
Some have wondered if an earlier release date could have changed the California election results. Maybe. Maybe not. In any case, here is the trailer.
READ MORE
Milk fought against an anti-gay rights proposition 6....which eerily mirrors the current brouhaha over proposition 8.
Some have wondered if an earlier release date could have changed the California election results. Maybe. Maybe not. In any case, here is the trailer.
In the earlier The Obama-Biden Plan, I wrote about the various promises being made by Obama and Biden. One of them is quoted below:
Except that one is already being "delayed".
..which is a kind of a nice way of saying "it turns out we are wusses".
As I noted previously, there are already more than 100 retired generals and admirals calling for the repeal of that policy but the Obama team somehow feels that they should wait and craft a consensus?
They call it "building consensus". I call it "already breaking campaign promises".
READ MORE
Repeal Don't Ask-Don't Tell: Barack Obama agrees with former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili and other military experts that we need to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. The key test for military service should be patriotism, a sense of duty, and a willingness to serve. Discrimination should be prohibited. The U.S. government has spent millions of dollars replacing troops kicked out of the military because of their sexual orientation. Additionally, more than 300 language experts have been fired under this policy, including more than 50 who are fluent in Arabic. Obama will work with military leaders to repeal the current policy and ensure it helps accomplish our national defense goals.
Except that one is already being "delayed".
President-elect Barack Obama will not move for months, and perhaps not until 2010, to ask Congress to end the military's decades-old ban on open homosexuals in the ranks, two people who have advised the Obama transition team on this issue say.
Repealing the ban was an Obama campaign promise. However, Mr. Obama first wants to confer with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and his new political appointees at the Pentagon to reach a consensus and then present legislation to Congress, the advisers said.
..which is a kind of a nice way of saying "it turns out we are wusses".
As I noted previously, there are already more than 100 retired generals and admirals calling for the repeal of that policy but the Obama team somehow feels that they should wait and craft a consensus?
They call it "building consensus". I call it "already breaking campaign promises".
President-elect Barack Obama has a website called Change.gov. On that website, he outlines his plans after his inauguration. Recently, a civil rights agenda was posted.
The Obama-Biden Plan includes:
Good. Passage of the Fair-Pay act would be a massive step in the right direction. I also like how it seems that Obmama leans more towards using the justice system for rehabilitation and not simply punishment.
The Obama-Biden Plan also has a whole section labeled "Support for the LGBT Community". That section includes:
It's about time the Don't Ask-Don't Tell policy was eliminated. The Associated Press reports that currently more than than 100 retired generals and admirals are calling for the repeal of the policy so gays can serve openly in the military. I know it was seen at the time and the only workable step forward, but frankly it was a weak dodge from the beginning. Full equality doesn't require bizarre qualifications like not asking questions.
The plan also calls for a better wage.
Hopefully, inflation wouldn't render a raise like that moot. Minimum wage isn't a living wage and it is absolutely stupid that the government mandates for the least amount of money a person can be paid doesn't even elevate you from poverty.
Check out The Living Wage Calculator and prepare to be disappointed with how much money it requires for a basic standard of living.
READ MORE
The Obama-Biden Plan includes:
Combat Employment Discrimination: Obama and Biden will work to overturn the Supreme Court's recent ruling that curtails racial minorities' and women's ability to challenge pay discrimination. They will also pass the Fair Pay Act, to ensure that women receive equal pay for equal work, and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity or expression.
End Racial Profiling: Obama and Biden will ban racial profiling by federal law enforcement agencies and provide federal incentives to state and local police departments to prohibit the practice.
Reduce Crime Recidivism by Providing Ex-Offender Support: Obama and Biden will provide job training, substance abuse and mental health counseling to ex-offenders, so that they are successfully re-integrated into society. Obama and Biden will also create a prison-to-work incentive program to improve ex-offender employment and job retention rates.
Expand Use of Drug Courts: Obama and Biden will give first-time, non-violent offenders a chance to serve their sentence, where appropriate, in the type of drug rehabilitation programs that have proven to work better than a prison term in changing bad behavior.
Good. Passage of the Fair-Pay act would be a massive step in the right direction. I also like how it seems that Obmama leans more towards using the justice system for rehabilitation and not simply punishment.
The Obama-Biden Plan also has a whole section labeled "Support for the LGBT Community". That section includes:
Fight Workplace Discrimination: Barack Obama supports the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, and believes that our anti-discrimination employment laws should be expanded to include sexual orientation and gender identity. While an increasing number of employers have extended benefits to their employees' domestic partners, discrimination based on sexual orientation in the workplace occurs with no federal legal remedy. Obama also sponsored legislation in the Illinois State Senate that would ban employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
Support Full Civil Unions and Federal Rights for LGBT Couples: Barack Obama supports full civil unions that give same-sex couples legal rights and privileges equal to those of married couples. Obama also believes we need to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and enact legislation that would ensure that the 1,100+ federal legal rights and benefits currently provided on the basis of marital status are extended to same-sex couples in civil unions and other legally-recognized unions. These rights and benefits include the right to assist a loved one in times of emergency, the right to equal health insurance and other employment benefits, and property rights.
Oppose a Constitutional Ban on Same-Sex Marriage: Barack Obama voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2006 which would have defined marriage as between a man and a woman and prevented judicial extension of marriage-like rights to same-sex or other unmarried couples.
Repeal Don't Ask-Don't Tell: Barack Obama agrees with former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili and other military experts that we need to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. The key test for military service should be patriotism, a sense of duty, and a willingness to serve. Discrimination should be prohibited. The U.S. government has spent millions of dollars replacing troops kicked out of the military because of their sexual orientation. Additionally, more than 300 language experts have been fired under this policy, including more than 50 who are fluent in Arabic. Obama will work with military leaders to repeal the current policy and ensure it helps accomplish our national defense goals.
It's about time the Don't Ask-Don't Tell policy was eliminated. The Associated Press reports that currently more than than 100 retired generals and admirals are calling for the repeal of the policy so gays can serve openly in the military. I know it was seen at the time and the only workable step forward, but frankly it was a weak dodge from the beginning. Full equality doesn't require bizarre qualifications like not asking questions.
The plan also calls for a better wage.
Raise the Minimum Wage to $9.50 an Hour by 2011: Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe that people who work full-time should not live in poverty. Even though the minimum wage will rise to $7.25 an hour by 2009, the minimum wage's real purchasing power will still be below what it was in 1968. As president, Obama will further raise the minimum wage to $9.50 an hour by 2011, index it to inflation and increase the Earned Income Tax Credit to make sure that full-time workers can earn a living wage that allows them to raise their families and pay for basic needs such as food, transportation, and housing -- things so many people take for granted.
Hopefully, inflation wouldn't render a raise like that moot. Minimum wage isn't a living wage and it is absolutely stupid that the government mandates for the least amount of money a person can be paid doesn't even elevate you from poverty.
Check out The Living Wage Calculator and prepare to be disappointed with how much money it requires for a basic standard of living.
I was reading an interesting article by Frances Fox Piven over at The Nation entitled Obama Needs a Protest Movement. Here are a few excerpts:
Read the rest at The Nation
I highly recommend reading the article. It raises some interesting points.
READ MORE
...Let's face it: Barack Obama is not a visionary or even a movement leader. He became the nominee of the Democratic Party, and then went on to win the general election, because he is a skillful politician. That means he will calculate whom he has to conciliate and whom he can ignore in realms dominated by big-money contributors from Wall Street, powerful business lobbyists and a Congress that includes conservative Blue Dog and Wall Street-oriented Democrats....
...The parallels between the election of 2008 and the election of 1932 are often invoked, with good reason. It is not just that Obama's oratory is reminiscent of FDR's oratory, or that both men were brought into office as a result of big electoral shifts, or that both took power at a moment of economic catastrophe. All this is true, of course. But I want to make a different point: FDR became a great president because the mass protests among the unemployed, the aged, farmers and workers forced him to make choices he would otherwise have avoided. He did not set out to initiate big new policies. The Democratic platform of 1932 was not much different from that of 1924 or 1928. But the rise of protest movements forced the new president and the Democratic Congress to become bold reformers.
The movements of the 1930s were often set in motion by radical agitators--Communists, Socialists, Musteites--but they were fueled by desperation and economic calamity. Unemployment demonstrations, usually (and often not without reason) labeled riots by the press, began in 1929 and 1930, as crowds assembled, raised demands for "bread or wages," and then marched on City Hall or local relief offices. In some places, "bread riots" broke out as crowds of the unemployed marched on storekeepers to demand food, or simply to take it.
Read the rest at The Nation
I highly recommend reading the article. It raises some interesting points.
Representative from the U.S. automotive industry were in Washington Tuesday and Wednesday to plead their case for government assistance.
On Wednesday, United States Senator Sherrod Brown talked tough about the Bush Administration, Treasury Department, and his fellow members of Congress for the lack of support to aid ailing domestic automakers.
According to the Ohio Department of Development, the auto industry employs 127,000 people in Ohio.
Good man, Senator Brown. I can't say enough about my support for helping the auto industry to save jobs here in Ohio as well as across the nation.
READ MORE
The day's featured hearings, before the House Financial Services Committee, got off to a rousing start when panel Chairman Barney Frank asked how the government could justify a bailout for banks and insurers, but not the automakers.
"Frankly, there seems to me to be an inherent cultural bias," Frank said. "Aid to blue-collar employees is being judged by a standard different than white-collar employees."
On Wednesday, United States Senator Sherrod Brown talked tough about the Bush Administration, Treasury Department, and his fellow members of Congress for the lack of support to aid ailing domestic automakers.
"If they don't receive assistance, auto suppliers, auto dealers, related industries in every state will soon feel the impact," Brown said.
...Brown said he wants the Senate to approve a measure that would extend federal unemployment benefits by seven weeks nationwide and extend them by 13 weeks in states where the jobless rate exceeds 6 percent.
This would include Ohio, where the unemployment rate has surpassed 7 percent, he said.
According to the Ohio Department of Development, the auto industry employs 127,000 people in Ohio.
Good man, Senator Brown. I can't say enough about my support for helping the auto industry to save jobs here in Ohio as well as across the nation.
In an earlier entry entitled GM is probably screwed, the impact of losing GM was briefly touched on.
Today, CNN ran an article, GM plant's closing like death knell in Dayton, which really shows how losing industry can kill cities.
That is 5,200 jobs lost in a city with a census population of 6,897. Unfortunately, even if Congress greenlights a bailout plan for GM, these jobs are lost.
What is happening in Ohio is eerily reminiscent of what happened to Flint, Michigan.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the unemployment rate in the Dayton area was 7.5 percent as of September.
When mass employers like this go under, it becomes a larger local problem than the obvious problems for those newly unemployed workers. There is a ripple effect through the entire town. Unemployed workers don't have disposable income so they cannot effectively contribute to the local economy. The other businesses in town are then running on fumes with sales and profits falling. Additionally, with an influx of unemployed workers needing jobs, the job market shrinks exponentially as do wages. When there are more potential workers then there are jobs, employers need not offer higher wages and/or benefits to fill those job openings.
For many in the Dayton area, Christmas will be less than cheerful this year. If you happen to find that you have a little extra in your wallet, please consider donating your time, and or money to The Dayton Food Bank and help the less fortunate through the holiday season.
READ MORE
Today, CNN ran an article, GM plant's closing like death knell in Dayton, which really shows how losing industry can kill cities.
Jamestown Moraine warehouses prepare and deliver parts to the General Motors Moraine Assembly truck plant. When the GM plant closes for good on December 23, so will Jamestown Moraine. Sixty-four people will lose their jobs at the supplier, the last of a workforce that once numbered 200.
GM Moraine Assembly once employed about 5,000 people, churning out Chevrolet Trailblazer, GMC Envoy and even Saab SUVs. About 1,000 will clock out for the last time next month.
That is 5,200 jobs lost in a city with a census population of 6,897. Unfortunately, even if Congress greenlights a bailout plan for GM, these jobs are lost.
...even if Congress acts, Moraine is done two days before Christmas. GM announced its closure -- along with plants in Janesville, Wisconsin; Oshawa, Ontario; and Toluca, Mexico -- in June.
What is happening in Ohio is eerily reminiscent of what happened to Flint, Michigan.
"Flint was a thriving town before GM pulled out of there, and when GM pulled out, Flint died. Same thing is going to happen to Dayton," Murphy said. "It makes me feel kind of sad, because as I was growing up, Dayton and the surrounding communities were thriving. ... I've been here 53 years, and I never thought I would see this city completely die like it is now, but it's just about there."
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the unemployment rate in the Dayton area was 7.5 percent as of September.
When mass employers like this go under, it becomes a larger local problem than the obvious problems for those newly unemployed workers. There is a ripple effect through the entire town. Unemployed workers don't have disposable income so they cannot effectively contribute to the local economy. The other businesses in town are then running on fumes with sales and profits falling. Additionally, with an influx of unemployed workers needing jobs, the job market shrinks exponentially as do wages. When there are more potential workers then there are jobs, employers need not offer higher wages and/or benefits to fill those job openings.
Minechelle Washington came to Dayton from GM's hometown Detroit, Michigan, eight years ago to work at the Moraine plant.
"We think crime is bad now? It's going to get worse if there's no jobs here, even for younger people," she said. "I can't even say what the future will be for our kids behind this company and any other company that has closed in the last year, and it's getting awful."
Washington's 27-year-old son was laid off from his job in February and still hasn't found work. Her 22-year-old daughter couldn't afford to stay in college and moved back in with Washington.
Washington's eyes became misty when she mentioned that her 9-year-old daughter's birthday is coming up, and the plant is closing during the holidays.
"The cake they gave the people on second shift said, 'Good Luck and Goodbye,'" she said, shaking her head. "We're losing our jobs two days before Christmas. That's bad."
For many in the Dayton area, Christmas will be less than cheerful this year. If you happen to find that you have a little extra in your wallet, please consider donating your time, and or money to The Dayton Food Bank and help the less fortunate through the holiday season.
California Attorney General is asking the California Supreme Court to consider whether a gay marriage ban passed by voters this month was legal. Where things get legally hazy is that Gay rights proponents contend that ...a constitutional change that rescinds individual rights must first be passed by a supermajority in the Legislature before being submitted to voters.
As Kermit Roosevelt notes that Proposition 8 is perceived by Gay right's advocates as an illegal constitutional "revision," fundamentally altering the guarantee of equality – not a more limited "amendment." He further states: This suit raises a serious question: When should a majority have the power to take away a constitutional right granted by a court?
And that, I believe, is a very good point.
Leonard Pitts Jr. of The Miami Herald after noting that African Americans were crucial to the passage of the bill, supporting it by a margin of better than two to one. further pointed out:
Many of the groups who lobbied for the passage of Proposition 8 did so under the guise of "protecting marriage". Of course, this would be the institution where among adults who have been married, the study discovered that one-third (33%) have experienced at least one divorce.
Even those who deem themselves to be conservative on social and political matters have a 28% divorce rate.
Yeah. That solid institution.
Many heterosexual people don't even see the institution of marriage as something worth aspiring to.
In 2006, Joy Jones wrote an article for The Washington Post entitled "Marriage Is for White People" about her experiences teaching a career exploration class for sixth-graders.
USA Today notes:
In 1967, Mildred Jeter and Richard Loving got married.
Eventually, the Supreme Court heard the case and decided:
Marriage is for everybody. It is everyone's right to spend their lives with the people they love. Period. Regardless of race, sexual orientation, age, etc.
As wrong as the anti-miscegenation laws were, Proposition 8 and similar laws are wrong, too.
READ MORE
As Kermit Roosevelt notes that Proposition 8 is perceived by Gay right's advocates as an illegal constitutional "revision," fundamentally altering the guarantee of equality – not a more limited "amendment." He further states: This suit raises a serious question: When should a majority have the power to take away a constitutional right granted by a court?
And that, I believe, is a very good point.
Leonard Pitts Jr. of The Miami Herald after noting that African Americans were crucial to the passage of the bill, supporting it by a margin of better than two to one. further pointed out:
When, for instance, they use an obscure passage from the Bible to claim God has ordained the mistreatment of gays, don't they hear an echo of white people using that Bible to claim God ordained the mistreatment of blacks?
When they rail against homosexuality as ''unnatural,'' don't they remember when that word was used to describe abolition, interracial marriage and school integration?
When they say they'd have no trouble with gay people if they would just stop ''flaunting'' their sexuality, doesn't it bring to mind all those good ol' boys who said they had no problem with ''Nigras'' so long as they stayed in their place?
Many of the groups who lobbied for the passage of Proposition 8 did so under the guise of "protecting marriage". Of course, this would be the institution where among adults who have been married, the study discovered that one-third (33%) have experienced at least one divorce.
Even those who deem themselves to be conservative on social and political matters have a 28% divorce rate.
Yeah. That solid institution.
Many heterosexual people don't even see the institution of marriage as something worth aspiring to.
In 2006, Joy Jones wrote an article for The Washington Post entitled "Marriage Is for White People" about her experiences teaching a career exploration class for sixth-graders.
I was pleasantly surprised when the boys in the class stated that being a good father was a very important goal to them, more meaningful than making money or having a fancy title.
"That's wonderful!" I told my class. "I think I'll invite some couples in to talk about being married and rearing children."
"Oh, no," objected one student. "We're not interested in the part about marriage. Only about how to be good fathers."
And that's when the other boy chimed in, speaking as if the words left a nasty taste in his mouth: "Marriage is for white people."
USA Today notes:
Younger adults tend to worry less about the stigma attached to having a child or living together without being married, finds new research that shows a generation gap in behaviors related to marriage, divorce, parenthood and cohabitation.
In 1967, Mildred Jeter and Richard Loving got married.
They went home to Virginia, there to be rousted out of their bed one night by police and charged with a felony. The felony was that Mildred was black and Richard was white and they were therefore guilty of miscegenation, which is a $10 word for bigotry. Virginia, like a number of other states, considered cross-racial matrimony a crime at the time.
It turned out that it wasn't just the state that hated the idea of black people marrying white people. God was onboard, too, according to the trial judge, who wrote, "The fact that He separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix."
Eventually, the Supreme Court heard the case and decided:
"Marriage is one of the basic civil rights of man," the unanimous opinion striking down the couple's conviction said, "fundamental to our very existence and survival."
Marriage is for everybody. It is everyone's right to spend their lives with the people they love. Period. Regardless of race, sexual orientation, age, etc.
As wrong as the anti-miscegenation laws were, Proposition 8 and similar laws are wrong, too.
I just read an article from the Associated Press entitled Obama election spurs race crimes around country which outlined behavior such as "Cross burnings. Schoolchildren chanting "Assassinate Obama." Black figures hung from nooses. Racial epithets scrawled on homes and cars."
A 46-year-old white Georgia native named Grant Griffin stated: "I believe our nation is ruined and has been for several decades and the election of Obama is merely the culmination of the change...If you had real change it would involve all the members of (Obama's) church being deported,"
Other incidents mentioned in the article include:
Four North Carolina State University students admitted writing anti-Obama comments in a tunnel designated for free speech expression, including one that said: "Let's shoot that (N-word) in the head." Obama has received more threats than any other president-elect, authorities say.
At Standish, Maine, a sign inside the Oak Hill General Store read: "Osama Obama Shotgun Pool." Customers could sign up to bet $1 on a date when Obama would be killed. "Stabbing, shooting, roadside bombs, they all count," the sign said. At the bottom of the marker board was written "Let's hope someone wins."
Second- and third-grade students on a school bus in Rexburg, Idaho, chanted "assassinate Obama," a district official said.
University of Alabama professor Marsha L. Houston said a poster of the Obama family was ripped off her office door. A replacement poster was defaced with a death threat and a racial slur. "It seems the election brought the racist rats out of the woodwork," Houston said.
A friend of mine, I'll call her "Rachel", has been telling me that since the election, she is learning that more and more of her friends have turned out to be quite virulent racists. The venom she has been hearing about Barack Obama winning is just shocking.
Rachel is more and more distraught that there are people she has known for years and spent time with...and they turn out to hold horribly offensive beliefs.
If I am recalling it correctly, she told me one friend was so extreme in her views that Rachel simply asked "So what? Are you a racist now?" and the friend replied "Yes. I always have been."
There is a gas station near my home that I go to quite often. Sometimes I am lazy and instead of taking the time to make a list and go to the grocery, I will just shoot up to the gas station and procure some quick food items. Tombstone Pizza, SPAM, Wonder bread, etc. I will often stop and chat with the middle aged man that works there. I'll call him "Jim".
Jim is opinionated. Then again, most of us are. Jim and I disagree on many things but we still talk.
Until last week. The subject of the election came up and suddenly Jim used the N word. Often.
He used it to describe President-elect Obama, the people who voted for him, etc.
"Jim, clearly we disagree about the election, but you don't have to use that word" I said.
Jim replied, "Hell yes I do."
"No," I said more forcefully, "No you don't."
Jim just glared at me and we both realized we should just stop talking now. We each said goodnight and I exited the gas station.
Ignorance is one of the worst traits a person can have. A society, too. I know sometimes when we hear someone say something offensive, the knee jerk response is to ignore it or pretend we didn't hear it. But by not confronting the ignorance, we are silently condoning it.
Speak up. Don't allow this kind of behavior to spread and be some commonplace as to become acceptable. It isn't. Educate others.
READ MORE
A 46-year-old white Georgia native named Grant Griffin stated: "I believe our nation is ruined and has been for several decades and the election of Obama is merely the culmination of the change...If you had real change it would involve all the members of (Obama's) church being deported,"
Other incidents mentioned in the article include:
Four North Carolina State University students admitted writing anti-Obama comments in a tunnel designated for free speech expression, including one that said: "Let's shoot that (N-word) in the head." Obama has received more threats than any other president-elect, authorities say.
At Standish, Maine, a sign inside the Oak Hill General Store read: "Osama Obama Shotgun Pool." Customers could sign up to bet $1 on a date when Obama would be killed. "Stabbing, shooting, roadside bombs, they all count," the sign said. At the bottom of the marker board was written "Let's hope someone wins."
Second- and third-grade students on a school bus in Rexburg, Idaho, chanted "assassinate Obama," a district official said.
University of Alabama professor Marsha L. Houston said a poster of the Obama family was ripped off her office door. A replacement poster was defaced with a death threat and a racial slur. "It seems the election brought the racist rats out of the woodwork," Houston said.
To live anywhere in the world today and be against equality because of race or color is like living in Alaska and being against snow. - William Faulkner
A friend of mine, I'll call her "Rachel", has been telling me that since the election, she is learning that more and more of her friends have turned out to be quite virulent racists. The venom she has been hearing about Barack Obama winning is just shocking.
Rachel is more and more distraught that there are people she has known for years and spent time with...and they turn out to hold horribly offensive beliefs.
If I am recalling it correctly, she told me one friend was so extreme in her views that Rachel simply asked "So what? Are you a racist now?" and the friend replied "Yes. I always have been."
At the heart of racism is the religious assertion that God made a creative mistake when He brought some people into being - Friedrich Otto Hertz
There is a gas station near my home that I go to quite often. Sometimes I am lazy and instead of taking the time to make a list and go to the grocery, I will just shoot up to the gas station and procure some quick food items. Tombstone Pizza, SPAM, Wonder bread, etc. I will often stop and chat with the middle aged man that works there. I'll call him "Jim".
Jim is opinionated. Then again, most of us are. Jim and I disagree on many things but we still talk.
Until last week. The subject of the election came up and suddenly Jim used the N word. Often.
He used it to describe President-elect Obama, the people who voted for him, etc.
"Jim, clearly we disagree about the election, but you don't have to use that word" I said.
Jim replied, "Hell yes I do."
"No," I said more forcefully, "No you don't."
Jim just glared at me and we both realized we should just stop talking now. We each said goodnight and I exited the gas station.
But suppose God is black? What if we go to Heaven and we, all our lives, have treated the Negro as an inferior, and God is there, and we look up and He is not white? What then is our response? - Robert F. Kennedy
Ignorance is one of the worst traits a person can have. A society, too. I know sometimes when we hear someone say something offensive, the knee jerk response is to ignore it or pretend we didn't hear it. But by not confronting the ignorance, we are silently condoning it.
Speak up. Don't allow this kind of behavior to spread and be some commonplace as to become acceptable. It isn't. Educate others.
Racism isn't born, folks, it's taught. I have a two-year-old son. You know what he hates? Naps! End of list. - Denis Leary
In an earlier entry, (Paul Broun calls Obama a Marxist) I attempted to briefly explain why Socialism isn't evil.
With all the political commentators fomenting fears that "Obama is a Socialist", others are feeling the need to speak out, too.
In the article Experimenting With Socialism?, Margaret Wiltshire of The Mountain Mail stated:
In a letter to the editor entitled Democracy's opposite is not socialism, Tom Brandt wrote:
In an article entitled Facing Socialism in America, Gene Messick writes:
Back in October Daily Kos ran a blog about this very subject entitled The Time Is Now. It is definitely worth a read.
I have been conducting an interview on behalf of The Modern Left with Brian Moore the 2008 Presidential candidate for Socialist Party USA. He will further explain what Socialism is and what it can mean to people. That interview will hopefully be up sometime this week or early next week.
READ MORE
With all the political commentators fomenting fears that "Obama is a Socialist", others are feeling the need to speak out, too.
In the article Experimenting With Socialism?, Margaret Wiltshire of The Mountain Mail stated:
"Some people a long time ago realized that by living and working together, they would have greater success surviving and improving the quality of their lives. When we speak of those times, we don’t call it socialism. We call it civilization."
"Socialism has made life easier since the first people banded together and moved into a cave for warmth and for safety. Socialism should not be confused with military dictatorships."
In a letter to the editor entitled Democracy's opposite is not socialism, Tom Brandt wrote:
"Though I am not a political expert, and I have NO party affiliation, I did stay at the Holiday Inn Express last month in Indio. The opposite of democracy is not socialism; to me, all government is socialism. Should we disband the Fire and Police Departments? Stop building roads? End the space program? Dump public schools? The opposite of democracy in my mind is a dictatorship. There are many democracies all over the world with socialist agendas that are our allies and partners. In this civilized world, we should all do what we can to benefit society in general, and if you look close, you can almost see 'society' right there in the actual word 'socialism'."
In an article entitled Facing Socialism in America, Gene Messick writes:
Some that are most astounding are from folks who work for local governmental agencies. Clearly, they have a warped notion about what Socialism is. Somehow, they've developed a screwball disconnect with reality."
"Public highways are one of the finest examples of Socialism in America. So are public schools, public parks and public libraries. Not to mention Social Security and Medicare. And police departments and town garbage collections and public health care and so on and so on. Even benefits provided for Congress Members are a form of Socialism."
Back in October Daily Kos ran a blog about this very subject entitled The Time Is Now. It is definitely worth a read.
I have been conducting an interview on behalf of The Modern Left with Brian Moore the 2008 Presidential candidate for Socialist Party USA. He will further explain what Socialism is and what it can mean to people. That interview will hopefully be up sometime this week or early next week.
They have always taught and trained you to believe it to be your patriotic duty to go to war and to have yourselves slaughtered at their command. But in all the history of the world you, the people, have never had a voice in declaring war, and strange as it certainly appears, no war by any nation in any age has ever been declared by the people. - Eugene V. Debs
Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle. - Franklin Delano Roosevelt
There can be no equality or opportunity if men and women and children be not shielded in their lives from the consequences of great industrial and social processes which they cannot alter, control, or singly cope with. - Woodrow Wilson
If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. - John F. Kennedy
On a July day in 2006 in Brandenberg, Kentucky, Jordan Gruver, an American citizen of Panamanian descent was approached by Ku Klux Klansmen. He was called names, spat upon, doused with alcohol, knocked to the ground and punched and kicked.
When the blows stopped, Gruver had a broken jaw and left forearm, two cracked ribs and cuts and bruises.
With the help of the Southern Poverty Law Center, Gruver decided to sue.
"We want to win justice for Jordan to compensate him for his injuries and put this group out of business," said center spokesman Booth Gunter. "We've won a number of these suits in the past."
And win they did. The all-white jury of seven men and seven women deliberated for five hours and awarded Gruver $2.5 million in damages.
At one point the court testimony revealed an alleged Klan plot to kill the Southern Poverty Law Center's attorney, Morris Dees.
Former Klansman Kale Kelly, once a member of Edwards' inner circle, testified he was told to kill Dees because of the center's lawsuit in Idaho against the Aryan Nations, a neo-Nazi supremacist organization.
The plot was thwarted by the FBI in 1999, according to testimony.
After winning the case, Dees stated: "We look forward to collecting every dime that we can for our client and to putting the Imperial Klans of America out of business"
According to the CNN article on the case, The Anti-Defamation League estimates there are more than 40 different Klan groups, with as many as 5,000 members in more than 100 chapters, or "klaverns," across the country.
Which is just about the saddest statistic I have read today.
"Racism is man's gravest threat to man - the maximum of hatred for a minimum of reason." - Abraham Joshua Heschel
READ MORE
When the blows stopped, Gruver had a broken jaw and left forearm, two cracked ribs and cuts and bruises.
With the help of the Southern Poverty Law Center, Gruver decided to sue.
"We want to win justice for Jordan to compensate him for his injuries and put this group out of business," said center spokesman Booth Gunter. "We've won a number of these suits in the past."
And win they did. The all-white jury of seven men and seven women deliberated for five hours and awarded Gruver $2.5 million in damages.
At one point the court testimony revealed an alleged Klan plot to kill the Southern Poverty Law Center's attorney, Morris Dees.
Former Klansman Kale Kelly, once a member of Edwards' inner circle, testified he was told to kill Dees because of the center's lawsuit in Idaho against the Aryan Nations, a neo-Nazi supremacist organization.
The plot was thwarted by the FBI in 1999, according to testimony.
After winning the case, Dees stated: "We look forward to collecting every dime that we can for our client and to putting the Imperial Klans of America out of business"
According to the CNN article on the case, The Anti-Defamation League estimates there are more than 40 different Klan groups, with as many as 5,000 members in more than 100 chapters, or "klaverns," across the country.
Which is just about the saddest statistic I have read today.
"Racism is man's gravest threat to man - the maximum of hatred for a minimum of reason." - Abraham Joshua Heschel
I would imagine that this has flown slightly under the radar due to the United States being in the midst of a seriously unpopular war, but Ann E. Dunwoody, a 33 year veteran of the Army just became the first female four-star general.
Her stars were presented at the Pentagon ceremony by her husband Craig Brotchie, a retired air force officer, and General George Casey, the army chief of staff.
There are 21 female general officers in the Army — all but four at the one-star rank of brigadier. It was not until 1970 that the Army had its first one-star: Anna Mae Hays, chief of the Army Nurse Corps.
As much as I think we need to get the hell out of Iraq, I have no animosity towards the people in the military. I applaud Ms. Dunwoody for breaking yet another glass ceiling for women.
READ MORE
Her stars were presented at the Pentagon ceremony by her husband Craig Brotchie, a retired air force officer, and General George Casey, the army chief of staff.
There are 21 female general officers in the Army — all but four at the one-star rank of brigadier. It was not until 1970 that the Army had its first one-star: Anna Mae Hays, chief of the Army Nurse Corps.
As much as I think we need to get the hell out of Iraq, I have no animosity towards the people in the military. I applaud Ms. Dunwoody for breaking yet another glass ceiling for women.
Anti-Vietnam War activist William Ayers is coming forward to speak about his connection to Barack Obama.
Ayers claimed in an interview on ABC's "Good Morning America," Ayers told anchor Chris Cuomo that he doesn't know Obama any better than "thousands of other Chicagoans" and that "a secret link" between the two men is a "myth."
I don't think Ayers has any notable connection to Obama. Two people knowing each other doesn't mean a thing. I was talking with a friend of mine who is a die hard Republican. I, clearly, am not. I told him it would be the same as if someone called him a Socialist simply because he has been to my house and we have had dinner together. That wouldn't be true and it wouldn't be fair.
I don't care about some mythical Ayers-Obama connection.
Some people have rushed to defend Ayers: "It’s true that Professor Ayers participated passionately in the civil rights and antiwar movements of the 1960s, as did hundreds of thousands of Americans"
Not exactly. Bill Ayers was never convicted of harming anyone. The organization he helped found, however, was far more militant that being simply anti-war.
The Weathermen was a radical organization that literally declared war against the United States in 1970. Their initial manifesto, entitled "You Don't Need a Weatherman to Know Which Way the Wind Blows", was signed by eleven inaugural members. One of which was William Ayers.
They felt that violence was not only necessary, but completely justified. Former member Naomi Jaffe claimed: "We felt that doing nothing in a period of repressive violence is itself a form of violence. That's really the part that I think is the hardest for people to understand. If you sit in your house, live your white life and go to your white job, and allow the country that you live in to murder people and to commit genocide, and you sit there and you don't do anything about it, that's violence."
Former member Bernardine Dohrn claimed: "There's no way to be committed to non-violence in one of the most violent societies that history has ever created. I'm not committed to non-violence in any way." Dohrn and Ayers were married during the 1970's while underground and on the run from the police.
Some highlights of the Weathermen:
October 8, 1969, they blew up a statue in Chicago built to commemorate police casualties incurred in the 1886 Haymarket Riot. When it was rebuilt and unveiled in May 4, 1970, the Weathermen waited a few months and blew it up again on October 6, 1970.
On February 21, 1970 the home of New York State Supreme Court Justice Murtagh was attacked with Molotov cocktails. Murtagh was presiding over a trial of Black Panthers accused of plotting to bomb New York landmarks.
March 6, 1970 members Diana Oughton, Ted Gold, and Terry Robbins died when a bomb they were constructed exploded. The townhouse they were in was demolished. The New York Times reports that "members have said the explosives at the town house were intended for an officers' dance at Fort Dix in New Jersey and for Butler Library at Columbia University." Supposedly, "an F.B.I. report...noted that the young people had enough explosives on hand to level everything on both sides of the street."
In San Francisco in 1970, a pipe bomb killed one police officer and injured another. The action was attributed to the Weathermen.
Ayers himself admitted in his book Fugitive Days that he participated in a series of bombings: New York City Police Headquarters in 1970, the United States Capitol building in 1971, and The Pentagon in 1972. No one was killed in these blasts.
These were not merely civil rights and anti-war protesters.
The organization the radicals in the Weathermen broke away from, Students for a Democratic Society, was a civil rights and anti-war organization.
The Students for a Democratic Society, or SDS, led rallies, marches, sit-ins and teach-ins. The SDS were part of the Columbia University protests of 1968. From April 23 until April 30, 1968, "leftist students took over Columbia University, NYC occupying five buildings on the campus before forcibly being removed by the police."
But they didn't throw Molotov cocktails. They didn't build bombs.
Abbie Hoffman was a civil rights advocate and anti-war activist. Hoffman was known for his deliberately comical and theatrical tactics. In 1967, he brought together roughly 50,000 protesters to attempt to levitate the Pentagon.
Also in 1967, Hoffman and some compatriots visited the New York Stock Exchange. While there, they threw handfuls of money down onto the trading floor from the gallery above. Watching the traders scramble to collect the money, they felt they were making a theatrical point about greed and capitalism.
Hoffman was one of the founding members of a highly theatrical and anti-authoritarian political party known as The Youth International Party (YIP) whose members were affectionately called Yippies. In 1968, they tried to run a pig for President. Unfortunately for the Yippies, Pigasus the Immortal didn't garner any electoral votes.
Hoffman was later one of The Chicago Seven.
But he never threw Molotov cocktails. He never built bombs.
There is a difference between a civil rights activist and someone who throws Molotov cocktails at the home of a judge. There is a difference between an anti-war activist and a bomb maker.
I don't think Ayers has any appreciable link to Obama and I don't think it is at all fair to paint Obama with the Ayers brush. Ayers himself is in no way responsible for any actions done under the Weathermen name except in those that he himself participated.
Whether or not you agree with the actions of the Weathermen, you have to admit that dismissing the actions of Ayers and the Weathermen as simply being civil rights activists and anti-war protesters is being less than honest. They were far more than that.
READ MORE
Ayers claimed in an interview on ABC's "Good Morning America," Ayers told anchor Chris Cuomo that he doesn't know Obama any better than "thousands of other Chicagoans" and that "a secret link" between the two men is a "myth."
I don't think Ayers has any notable connection to Obama. Two people knowing each other doesn't mean a thing. I was talking with a friend of mine who is a die hard Republican. I, clearly, am not. I told him it would be the same as if someone called him a Socialist simply because he has been to my house and we have had dinner together. That wouldn't be true and it wouldn't be fair.
I don't care about some mythical Ayers-Obama connection.
Some people have rushed to defend Ayers: "It’s true that Professor Ayers participated passionately in the civil rights and antiwar movements of the 1960s, as did hundreds of thousands of Americans"
Not exactly. Bill Ayers was never convicted of harming anyone. The organization he helped found, however, was far more militant that being simply anti-war.
The Weathermen was a radical organization that literally declared war against the United States in 1970. Their initial manifesto, entitled "You Don't Need a Weatherman to Know Which Way the Wind Blows", was signed by eleven inaugural members. One of which was William Ayers.
They felt that violence was not only necessary, but completely justified. Former member Naomi Jaffe claimed: "We felt that doing nothing in a period of repressive violence is itself a form of violence. That's really the part that I think is the hardest for people to understand. If you sit in your house, live your white life and go to your white job, and allow the country that you live in to murder people and to commit genocide, and you sit there and you don't do anything about it, that's violence."
Former member Bernardine Dohrn claimed: "There's no way to be committed to non-violence in one of the most violent societies that history has ever created. I'm not committed to non-violence in any way." Dohrn and Ayers were married during the 1970's while underground and on the run from the police.
Some highlights of the Weathermen:
October 8, 1969, they blew up a statue in Chicago built to commemorate police casualties incurred in the 1886 Haymarket Riot. When it was rebuilt and unveiled in May 4, 1970, the Weathermen waited a few months and blew it up again on October 6, 1970.
On February 21, 1970 the home of New York State Supreme Court Justice Murtagh was attacked with Molotov cocktails. Murtagh was presiding over a trial of Black Panthers accused of plotting to bomb New York landmarks.
March 6, 1970 members Diana Oughton, Ted Gold, and Terry Robbins died when a bomb they were constructed exploded. The townhouse they were in was demolished. The New York Times reports that "members have said the explosives at the town house were intended for an officers' dance at Fort Dix in New Jersey and for Butler Library at Columbia University." Supposedly, "an F.B.I. report...noted that the young people had enough explosives on hand to level everything on both sides of the street."
In San Francisco in 1970, a pipe bomb killed one police officer and injured another. The action was attributed to the Weathermen.
Ayers himself admitted in his book Fugitive Days that he participated in a series of bombings: New York City Police Headquarters in 1970, the United States Capitol building in 1971, and The Pentagon in 1972. No one was killed in these blasts.
These were not merely civil rights and anti-war protesters.
The organization the radicals in the Weathermen broke away from, Students for a Democratic Society, was a civil rights and anti-war organization.
The Students for a Democratic Society, or SDS, led rallies, marches, sit-ins and teach-ins. The SDS were part of the Columbia University protests of 1968. From April 23 until April 30, 1968, "leftist students took over Columbia University, NYC occupying five buildings on the campus before forcibly being removed by the police."
But they didn't throw Molotov cocktails. They didn't build bombs.
Abbie Hoffman was a civil rights advocate and anti-war activist. Hoffman was known for his deliberately comical and theatrical tactics. In 1967, he brought together roughly 50,000 protesters to attempt to levitate the Pentagon.
Also in 1967, Hoffman and some compatriots visited the New York Stock Exchange. While there, they threw handfuls of money down onto the trading floor from the gallery above. Watching the traders scramble to collect the money, they felt they were making a theatrical point about greed and capitalism.
Hoffman was one of the founding members of a highly theatrical and anti-authoritarian political party known as The Youth International Party (YIP) whose members were affectionately called Yippies. In 1968, they tried to run a pig for President. Unfortunately for the Yippies, Pigasus the Immortal didn't garner any electoral votes.
Hoffman was later one of The Chicago Seven.
But he never threw Molotov cocktails. He never built bombs.
There is a difference between a civil rights activist and someone who throws Molotov cocktails at the home of a judge. There is a difference between an anti-war activist and a bomb maker.
I don't think Ayers has any appreciable link to Obama and I don't think it is at all fair to paint Obama with the Ayers brush. Ayers himself is in no way responsible for any actions done under the Weathermen name except in those that he himself participated.
Whether or not you agree with the actions of the Weathermen, you have to admit that dismissing the actions of Ayers and the Weathermen as simply being civil rights activists and anti-war protesters is being less than honest. They were far more than that.
 |  |  |
While Barack Obama has yet to take office, the attacks are already pouring in.
Rush Limbaugh claimed:
So, he isn't even President yet but somehow the recession that has been building is all his doing. Really? Limbaugh even admits that Obama "hasn't done anything yet" but somehow he is responsible for "killing the economy".
People actually listen to this guy. How sad.
Ann Coulter said: "Sounds like there's going to be a lot more Waco raids, Elian Gonzalez snatchings."
And she bases this on....?
Of course, this is the same person who stated "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." The same woman who called John Edwards "A faggot". And the same person who claimed a personal fantasy of hers was to remove women's right to vote.
So we should probably just go ahead and ignore her.
Fox News' Sean Hannity asked: "Do we wait until he makes a mistake?"
Um...yes, Sean. We wait until somebody does something worthy of criticism before we criticize. That's kind of how it works.
Of course, this is the same Sean Hannity that took Democratic Congressman Earl Blumenauer of Oregon to task:
Because he is in no way describing his own actions right now. Hannity isn't trying to undermine President-elect Barack Obama. And he isn't doing it for political gain. Wait. That's exactly what he is doing. But I'm sure it's different when he does it. Right?
He further stated:
But I guess he only uses that argument when he actually agrees with the people who won the election.
Hannity also had Andy Martin on his show to criticize Obama. Martin was denied admission to the Illinois bar due to a psychological evaluation that found him to be "moderately severe character defect manifested by well-documented ideation with a paranoid flavor and a grandiose character." Martin later attempted to run for Congress in Connecticut with a campaign "to exterminate Jew power".
Of course, you can see much more of Hannity's work here.
As much as these are merely partisan political attacks, part of it is fear mongering. The right wing is again claiming that Obama wants to bring back the Fairness Doctrine. Which he doesn't....but why let facts get in the way?
These are the same kind people who are pushing idiotic paranoia about Obama taking guns. The ones who claimed that if you don't support the President you were un-American. Of course, that was when they agreed with the President. A Democrat President is something else entirely. Right?
No worries. A new CNN poll shows that the Democrats are seen favorably by a margin of 62% to 31%, while the Republicans are seen unfavorably by almost as great a margin, 54% to 38%..
I'll take the factual statistics about what people really want over the ravings of partisans who are just pissed that the election didn't go their way. But frankly, these guys are doing damage. That kind of hateful rhetoric is hurtful for America.
If the left attacking a Republican President is un-American and wrong, then the right attacking a Democratic President is equally un-American and wrong. You can't have your cake and eat it to. These guys need to show a little bit of consistency before anyone can take them seriously.
READ MORE
Rush Limbaugh claimed:
"...the Obama recession is in full swing, ladies and gentlemen. Stocks are dying, which is a precursor of things to come. This is an Obama recession. Might turn into a depression. It's -- he hadn't done anything yet, but his ideas are killing the economy. His ideas are killing Wall Street."
So, he isn't even President yet but somehow the recession that has been building is all his doing. Really? Limbaugh even admits that Obama "hasn't done anything yet" but somehow he is responsible for "killing the economy".
People actually listen to this guy. How sad.
Ann Coulter said: "Sounds like there's going to be a lot more Waco raids, Elian Gonzalez snatchings."
And she bases this on....?
Of course, this is the same person who stated "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." The same woman who called John Edwards "A faggot". And the same person who claimed a personal fantasy of hers was to remove women's right to vote.
So we should probably just go ahead and ignore her.
Fox News' Sean Hannity asked: "Do we wait until he makes a mistake?"
Um...yes, Sean. We wait until somebody does something worthy of criticism before we criticize. That's kind of how it works.
Of course, this is the same Sean Hannity that took Democratic Congressman Earl Blumenauer of Oregon to task:
"...And what I find frankly repugnant about you and some of your fellow Democrats – you have undermined our president, you have undermined our troops, you have undermined our war effort from day one and you’re doing it for the sinister reason of political gain..."
Because he is in no way describing his own actions right now. Hannity isn't trying to undermine President-elect Barack Obama. And he isn't doing it for political gain. Wait. That's exactly what he is doing. But I'm sure it's different when he does it. Right?
He further stated:
"you didn’t win the election. You don’t make that decision. The president got the approval of Congress. He’s the Commander-in-Chief."
But I guess he only uses that argument when he actually agrees with the people who won the election.
Hannity also had Andy Martin on his show to criticize Obama. Martin was denied admission to the Illinois bar due to a psychological evaluation that found him to be "moderately severe character defect manifested by well-documented ideation with a paranoid flavor and a grandiose character." Martin later attempted to run for Congress in Connecticut with a campaign "to exterminate Jew power".
Of course, you can see much more of Hannity's work here.
As much as these are merely partisan political attacks, part of it is fear mongering. The right wing is again claiming that Obama wants to bring back the Fairness Doctrine. Which he doesn't....but why let facts get in the way?
These are the same kind people who are pushing idiotic paranoia about Obama taking guns. The ones who claimed that if you don't support the President you were un-American. Of course, that was when they agreed with the President. A Democrat President is something else entirely. Right?
No worries. A new CNN poll shows that the Democrats are seen favorably by a margin of 62% to 31%, while the Republicans are seen unfavorably by almost as great a margin, 54% to 38%..
I'll take the factual statistics about what people really want over the ravings of partisans who are just pissed that the election didn't go their way. But frankly, these guys are doing damage. That kind of hateful rhetoric is hurtful for America.
If the left attacking a Republican President is un-American and wrong, then the right attacking a Democratic President is equally un-American and wrong. You can't have your cake and eat it to. These guys need to show a little bit of consistency before anyone can take them seriously.
