Advertisement

What They Should Fight For

Harold Meyerson has an interesting article in the Spring 2005 Dissent Magazine called "Beyond The Consensus: Democrats Agree on How to Play Defense, but What Are They Fighting For?" (http://www.dissentmagazine.org/)  

Meyerson encourages Democrats to "go to war against Democratic Wall Street elites," to win back the white working class through progressive economic policies.  I completely agree, but want to quibble with how Meyerson proposes we do this.

Meyerson begins by claiming that Democrats are all agreed that they presented a strong unified front in last year's elections, that "minorities are not complaining that the party's voter mobilization efforts were insufficient," that "Kerry was surely the strongest candidate in the Democratic field last year." 

Already, before he's begun his argument, Meyerson has lost a lot of activists.  He goes on, quickly, before presenting data and arguments about economics, to prescribe positions on abortion, religion, and national security, without justifying them in any way. 

You have to pick your team

Every day presents infinite reasons to believe that change can't happen, infinite reasons to give up. But I always tell myself, "Sonya, you have to pick your team." It seems to me that there are two teams in this world. And you can find evidence to support the arguments of both. The trademark of one team is cynicism. They'll tell you why what you're doing doesn't matter, why nothing is going to change, why no matter how hard you work, you're going to fail. They seem to get satisfaction out of explaining how we'll always have injustice. You can't change human nature, they say. It's foolish to try. From their experience, they might be right.

Then there's another group of people who admit that they don't know how things will turn out, but have decided to work for change. I see Martin Luther King on that team, Alice Walker, Howard Zinn. I see my chaplain from college and my activist friends. They're always telling stories of faith being rewarded, of ways things could be different, of how their own lives have changed. They'll give you reasons why you shouldn't give up, testimonials why we've yet to see our full potential as a species. They

Cooper Stadium

Another example of corporate welfare. $55 million dollars of county money to take a baseball stadium away from loyal fans on the West Side and build a new unneeded one where the Dispatch wants it. This is at the same time when the government is cutting all kinds of programs (such as funding for the homeless and the mentally ill). That's $55 million dollars for MINOR LEAGUE baseball. The county commissioners have tried to explain this nonsense by saying that it will be paid off with bonds. Bonds--DEBT--must be paid off. The people of Franklin County will be left footing this bill.

Quite frankly, the Clippers are fine where they are. What this issue truly boils down to is this: 1. Yuppies and soccer moms think they're too good to drive their SUVs from Dublin to the West Side; 2. The Dispatch wants a stadium in the Arena District (which they are part owner of). What the Dispatch wants, the Dispatch gets.

I know that Bob Fitrakis was the man who defeated the 1990's Arena/Soccer stadium corporate welfare give-away. Hopefully he will tackle this issue as well. If this issue ever made it to the ballot, then the people of Franklin County would vote it down.

I like conservatives

AUSTIN, Texas -- Spring fever is taking a weird form this year. Politicians say nice things for political reasons and then revert with a vengeance -- a sort of political Tourette syndrome, they can't help what they say.

Tom DeLay, of all people, recently issued a fatwa on the need for good manners, a concept so bizarre there is no metaphor for it. It is itself a metaphor: "... as weird as the time Tom DeLay gave us all a lecture on manners."

In his new role as the Emily Post of politics, DeLay informed us, "It is unfortunate in our electoral system, exacerbated by our adversarial media culture, that political discourse has to get so overheated, that it's not just arguments, but motives are questioned." Did someone question his motive in taking an all-expenses-paid vacation from a lobbyist?

This would be the same Tom DeLay who said, "Screw the Senate," when he learned Bob Dole had cut a deal with Clinton to end the government shutdown caused by Newt Gingrich.

"We're in charge. We don't have to negotiate with the Senate." Same as above.

When Media Dogs Don’t Bark

The recent decision by General Motors to pull its advertising from the Los Angeles Times has not gone over very well.

“Blame the press,” Daily Variety scoffed in mid-April, after several days of publicity about the automaker’s move. “That’s the latest coping mechanism for General Motors, whose slumping share price and falling profits have generated a wave of negative media coverage. ... GM isn’t the first Fortune 500 company to retaliate against a newspaper’s editorial coverage by taking a punch at its ad division. But most companies understand the tactic just doesn’t work; it only generates more bad coverage.”

In the Motor City, the Detroit News business writer Daniel Howes told readers that the monetary slap at the L.A. Times exposes “GM’s thinning corporate skin.” Boston Globe columnist Alex Beam had this to say: “On the one hand, the decision, which may affect up to $20 million in ad spending, sends a powerful message to the Times. On the other hand, it sends a powerful message to the country about the idiots who are running GM.”

Drawing more attention to GM’s financial woes, the ad-yanking

... for life

Electoral reform groups call for James Baker's resignation from electoral reform commission

Scores of voting rights and electoral reform organizations nationwide have united to demand real electoral reform proposals from the private, blue ribbon Baker/Carter Commission on Elections. They are organizing a visible presence at 10:00 a.m. in front of the Kay Center on the American University campus where the Commission is planning what they call "public hearings."

These groups, including Progressive Democrats of America, United Progressives for Democracy, Code Pink and Velvet Revolution, are opposed to the inclusion in any form of James Baker III on the Commission. Baker was the lead attorney in Florida for the 2000 Bush/Cheney campaign who engineered Bush's selection as President by five Supreme Court justices who demanded that America's votes NOT be counted.

The pro-democracy groups are also strongly opposed to at least two other members of the Commission who have direct ties to Mr. Baker's law firm, Tom Phillips and Robert Mosbacher, and to Ralph Munro, Chairman of the Board of VoteHere, a voting machine manufacturer. 

Is the US Navy vulnerable in the Gulf? The myth of US invincibility

During the summer of 2002, in the run-up to President Bush’s invasion of Iraq, the US military staged the most elaborate and expensive war games ever conceived. Operation Millennium Challenge, as it was called, cost some $250 million, and required two years of planning. The mock war was not aimed at Iraq, at least, not overtly. But it was set in the Persian Gulf, and simulated a conflict with a hypothetical rogue state. The “war” involved heavy use of computers, and was also played out in the field by 13,500 US troops, at 17 different locations and 9 live-force training sites. All of the services participated under a single joint command, known as JOINTFOR. The US forces were designated as “Force Blue,” and the enemy as OPFOR, or “Force Red.” The “war” lasted three weeks and ended with the overthrow of the dictatorial regime on August 15.

At any rate, that was the official outcome. What actually happened was quite different, and ought to serve up a warning about the grave peril the world will face if the US should become embroiled in a widening conflict in the region.

A kick in the pants...

It's unfortunate that Bush doesn't understand what is happening in the world he so arrogantly believes he owns. The European trip he's on now is a barely concealed attempt to strong-arm support for his upcoming invasion of Iran. An invasion, according to former UNSCOM weapons inspector Scott Ritter, that Bush has already approved, and is slated for June 2005.

Although the mainstream media is steadfastly refusing to investigate or report this startling news, Ritter, speaking on Feb. 19 to a packed house in the Capitol Theater in Olympia, Wash., maintains that "an official involved in the manipulation" was his source. In a release from United for Peace of Pierce County, Wash., reporter Mark Jensen wrote that Ritter said this announcement would "soon be reported by a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist in a major metropolitan magazine -- an obvious allusion to The New Yorker reporter Seymour Hersh."

Jewish nuclear terrorism

The State of Israel is the 4th largest military power in the world. The State is believed to possess the largest and most sophisticated nuclear arsenal outside of the 5 declared nuclear powers- the USA, Russia, France, China and the UK. A nuclear reactor and plutonium production facility was built by France back in the late 1950's and early 60's in the southern desert of Israel called the Negev Nuclear Research Centre, or simply "Dimona".

Since that time, the state has subsequently developed an extensive array of tactical nuclear weapons, nuclear artillery shells and nuclear-tipped medium range ballistic missiles (the Jericho 1 and 2). Arsenal estimates range in the order of between 2000-5000 warheads- many of them FIRST STRIKE weapons, most of them nuetron bombs, designed to maximize human kill ratio and minimize physical damage, since Israel is such a small nation.

The United States provides the State of Israel with an annual US$4 billion in financial and military aid- by far the largest recipient of US foreign aid of any country in the world. Extensive nuclear and military collaboration has

Pages

Subscribe to Freepress.org RSS