dish free network new satellite york

free ringtones verizon

I’m looking around to see who really has the determination and the courage to keep on fighting. And most of the Dems I see are playing it safe. Clinton, Reid and Obama totally lost my respect by their waffling and by their half-hearted “support” of the filibuster. This was a chance to stand up and be counted as DEMOCRATS. And what did they do? They slunk into the back of the room and timidly raised their hands to vote “no” on cloture. That’s crap. Give me a Barbara Boxer or a John Kerry or a Ted Kennedy, thank you.

Gore had a better case against concession in 2000 than Kerry had in 2004, and where did Gore’s fight get him? A beard and a long vacation. I’m happy to have him back among us, but let’s face it: Al Gore wasn’t here for us for a very long time.

As for Senator Kerry, after his concession speech, he hit the ground running. He didn’t stop for a heartbeat before going to Iraq and the Middle East to get the lay of the land. And he’s been at the forefront or deeply ensconced in all the important battles of 2005: fighting against Drilling in ANWR, for Veterans benefits, for legislation to protect small business, for health care for children, for better medicare benefits, for alternate fuel research incentives, for stimulating jobs and the economy, for a pro-active agenda against global warming, fighting to keep Social Security from being privatized and for getting us out of Iraq. He’s done more for the people suffering from the devestation wrought by Katrina than the Senators of the states directly involved! He’s fought Bolton, Roberts and Alito. And what about all the money his PAC, Keeping America’s Promise has raised for Democrats around the country? What about the tireless campaigning he did last year for fellow democrats, the majority of whom were ELECTED, in no small part because of Senator Kerry’s efforts? There isn’t one issue he hasn’t worked his ass off on since that concession.

And if you really want to understand why Kerry conceded the election, you should think back to all the lawyers he had on staff. Okay, 500 lawyers are wrong and you are right. If Kerry only stamped his feet and protested it all would have ended differently. Yeah, right. I believe that. And what about the legal action the Kerry campaign still has pending in Ohio? Or doesn’t that count? And could it be that these suits have been pending such an awful long time because the state is filled with Republicans in positions of power? Could it be that 2006 is the year that could make or break any progress with regard to election fraud and reform? If we don’t get the Republicans out of office, we might as well pucker up to the closest Diebold machine because we’ll be married to the damn things till Hell freezes over!

I’m just tired of listening to people whine about concession. Not a damn thing he could have done at that point in time. What do you think, Senator Kerry was afraid to contest the election? Are you trying to tell me, the guy who protested with the VVAW, was a tough Assistant District Attorney and exposed the Iran-Contra scandal was afraid to make waves? I don’t think so. Alito proves that. He hasn’t changed one iota in all these years. Clearly many supporters were devestated by the outcome of the election. Yeah, it hurts like hell. Sure I’d like to have seen JK take a baseball bat to the voting machines, in my dreams. But I’d have been horrified to see him act in any other way than he did: with logic and dogged pesistence. He’s still fighting for election and voting reform and there are still lawsuits pending in Ohio.

I don’t know if John Kerry will run in 2008. Looking around at the party and seeing as much spinelessness and whining, I wouldn’t blame him if he wanted no part of it. There isn’t a single Democrat who can hold a candle to Senator Kerry in courage, knowledge, hard work or in determination. He will never give up or give in.

I would argue, however, that you need both, just to keep things honest. You need people working the inside games so that you can, as you put it eloquently, be power and power-brokers.

Similarly, you need people on the outside to agitate and create the conditions for change.

Neither is exclusionary; they can be complementary.

Me? I’m all about sitting at the table and being power.

Thich Nhat Hanh is a true buddha. You may know that in the early 1960s in Vietnam, it was his monks who, protesting the Nhu regime, set fire to themselves. TNH and his monks were protesting in Vietnam before there was a protest movement here. TNH was committed to nonviolent resistance (in spite of the burning monks; I think there were only a couple of them, who did the immolation thing on their own). Martin Luther King admired him and, I understand, nominated TNH for a Nobel Peace Prize. But when the antiwar movement got going in the U.S. the Kool Kids here wouldn’t have anything to do with TNH and his group in Vietnam because they weren’t politically radical enough.

I recommend Aldon Morris’ Origins of the Civil Rights Movement (1986). “What?? recommending a print book on the blogosphere??” Or see if your local high school or library has the “Eyes on the Prize” video series. What I remember is learning that Rosa Parks had already been part of an extensive planning effort, not a spur-of-the-moment protester. Even the impact of a genius orator like Dr. King grew out of a base, and the pillars of that base (forgive stretched metaphors) were ordinary people. The kind that always cook extra food for the church/synagogue/etc pot luck. Was that base unified under a banner of “left” or “right” or “center”? I don’t know.

I’m too young to have seen the history (re: Vietnam) that Maha is analyzing, but I have participated in some similarly mixed-message-y recent events. And I take to heart Thich Nhat Hanh’s point (somewhere in Being Peace) that screaming at soldiers is not a very effective way to wage peace from the heart.

But I don’t have answers.

Some questions:

1. How can we do anything to get more press coverage of, say, an expert-studded, burningly relevant Veterans for Common Sense press conference when on the same day there are some (were there more than two?) lovely Breasts not Bombs spokeswomen to photograph?

2. How many times had Reagan been divorced? (that’s just for #35) Seriously, I wonder if part of our problem on the progressive side is that we work so hard to bring in everyone’s voice… leaving us with “America can do better”, which is not going to knock down swift boats full of Rovian smears. Do folks on this list like Lakoff’s Don’t Think of an Elephant?

Thank you Maha for this forum, and extra thanks if you read this. I call the closeness of the Alito vote (second closest ever!) a win for progressives. And when I called 10 senators, I didn’t say “I’m calling from the Left”, I said, I think anyone who cares about checks and balances should be mighty worried! Dogmatism is not helpful; the reverse requires working alongside of people you might not 100% agree with.

That’s exactly right. I’ve been struck by the number of “professional protester” types in the Left who can’t grasp that we have as much right to power as anyone else. We’re not kids any more; we can sit at the grown-up table.

Yesterday I told a guy we needed to get beyond “speaking truth to power”; we need to BE power. And this guy had no idea what I was talking about. He seemed to think I was saying we should shut up and accept the status quo. Then he went on a nostalgia trip of Great Moments in Protesting. He wasn’t interested in government, just in protesting. It’s that kind of attitude that’s holding us back.

That way instead of practising this shit-to-the-left, suck-up to the right stuff you can just be yourself?

If someone can explain to me how anyone could have interpreted what I wrote as “shit-to-the-left, suck-up to the right” go ahead and explain it. Or should I just assume DavidByron is drunk and/or illiterate?