Advertisement

In 2008, the ACLU estimated the US 'No Fly List' to have grown to over 1,000,000 names -- heck, even Cat Stevens and the late Senator Ted Kennedy were on it -- and it continues to expand. But, suspected terrorist Abdul Farouk Abdulmutallab, who was curiously able to obtain military-grade high explosives --80 grams of PETN (Gee, where'd he get that?) -- managed to escape airport security and detonate his underwear bomb!

In April 2009, American authorities reportedly refused an Air France flight from Paris to Mexico entry into US airspace because a left-wing journalist writing a book on the CIA was on board. Hernando Calvo Ospina, who works for Le Monde Diplomatique and has written on revolutionary movements in Cuba and Colombia, figured on the US authorities' 'no-fly list.' Air France said the April 18 flight was forced to divert to the French Caribbean island of Martinique before continuing its journey (telegraph.co.uk).

On rare and welcome occasion we meet uncompromised green activists and writers completely focused on winning, and utterly void of bullshit.

Two such specimen are Mike Roselle and Jeffrey St. Clair. Not surprisingly, their recent books are pleasures to behold.

My long-time Greenpeace co-conspirator, Roselle is a “legend in his own crime” who exceeds his advance billing and then some. His TREE SPIKER (St. Martin’s Press) tells of a hard-scrabble Louisville childhood well-suited to the gritty green activism required to save forests and stop nukes. From a race along the edge of juvenile delinquency to some of the funniest jail tales you’ll ever read, Roselle constantly amuses and inspires.

From the wrong side of the logging camps to the tops of tripods meant to save those very trees, Roselle sings a song of guts and glory without pomp or guile. Like all good organizers, Mike knows Rule One is “never be boring.” Then there’s the one about knowing you can win---and doing it.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska is launching a potentially devastating attack on the Clean Air Act. Majority Leader Harry Reid has granted her a vote for January 20 that would block the EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions from coal plants and other polluters in 2010.

The vote -- on an amendment to a must-pass bill to lift the debt ceiling -- will remove the EPA's enforcement funding and power so big polluters like the coal industry can ignore the Clean Air Act.

You think this would be easy to stop, but the vote is predicted to be close with many Democrats considering voting for the bill. This attack is a rerun of the successful efforts by Newt Gingrich to hamstring the Clinton EPA in the 90s.

"Congress must not block the Clean Air Act's limits on global warming pollution."

Republican and Democratic senators alike need to hear from you. The coal industry has been working furiously to close deals with senators across the political spectrum, including those who say they want to protect the environment. We cannot underestimate the Senate's vulnerability to cynical attempts to handcuff the EPA.

As the health care bill goes to conference, whether through formal committee or informal negotiation, there's obviously a tension between a pretty decent House bill and a Senate one that's better than nothing, but contains some seriously problematic elements. Senate negotiators will no doubt try to keep their version over that of the House by using the specter of Senators Lieberman and Nelson filibustering if the House holds firm on issues like the public option or paying for the bill by taxing the wealthy rather than those with decent health insurance. If they do, Lieberman and Nelson might indeed go with the Republican team and vote against cloture. But that's not guaranteed, despite all their bluster. And testing their willingness to sink the entire bill for regressive principles gives the Democrats a lot to gain.

Whenever I write about U.S. politics, people ask me "Don't you have any good news?" (Unless the Republicans are in power, in which case people ask me "Who are you going to vote for?") But I do have good news, boatloads of good news, if Americans want to hear it.

If a city or state next to yours were to achieve a dramatic breakthrough for democratic representation, environmental sustainability, healthcare, education, peace, or justice, wouldn't that be good news? Wouldn't you trumpet that news where you live and demand the same of your elected officials?

When the United States gets something right nationally, and even when we don't, we're happy to assume that others around the world would like to imitate it. Some of us think bombs are the best way to help them do so. Others prefer diplomacy. But we all pretty much believe in sharing our wisdom.

But what if another country, or a large block of other countries, were to solve the most vexing problems facing the United States? What if they were to show us a general outline of how we could fix all the troubles that most trouble us?

In ten years of a new Century, U.S. systemic dysfunction became more dramatic. The government responded by retreating down the ancient Egyptian River. Millions of Americans drink “unhealthy” water; military suicides escalate; schools erode and health programs collapse. -- The New York Times

The Senate passed a $626 billion “defense” budget without discussion. Since 1947, when the War Department became the Defense Department, Congress has allocated trillions of dollars, but all for offense and with dubious results: Korea (1950-53), Vietnam (1964-74), Iraq and Afghanistan. None of those countries attacked or threatened us.

In Copenhagen, Obama reflected the denial mood of Congress, banks and corporations and offered platitudes to reduce global warming while admitting the perils of growing climate change. Raising unpleasant future scenarios signifies unacceptable political pessimism. The press, predictably, abdicated on all issues not connected to celebrity scandal.

As you flip through a range of channels on your TV or browse through a stack of newspapers and magazines at a newsstand, you may feel lucky about living in a world where such a plethora of viewpoints is available. It might also seem that the apparent increase in media choices also increases the chances for the public interest to be understood and served fairly. Unfortunately, this is far from the case. The media world is shrinking by the day.

Welcome to 2010.

The coming year might go down in history as that of major media consolidation, as in concentration of media ownership in the hands of a few large conglomerates and powerful media moguls. Predictions regarding mergers of media companies are very bleak, and to a degree frightening.

Pages

Subscribe to Freepress.org RSS