Thursday, February 28, 2008
Monday, February 25, 2008
Wednesday, February 06, 2008
CLINTON WON'T COMMIT TO RENEW CONSTITUTION...Illinois Senator Barack Obama has finally signed the American Freedom Pledge, joining his fellow Democratic presidential candidates in encouraging the restoration of basic Constitutional principles after the battering they have taken during the Bush-Cheney era.
All the Democrats, that is, except New York Senator Hillary Clinton.
The effort to get presidential contenders to sign on the American Freedom Pledge has been promoted by organizations ranging from the Center for Constitutional Rights to Human Rights Watch, MoveOn.org , Amnesty International USA, the Brennan Center for Justice, the Campaign to Defend the Constitution, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and True Majority.
The pledge is anything but radical. It simply asks candidates to affirm a statement that reads: "We are Americans, and in our America we do not torture, we do not imprison people without charge or legal remedy, we do not tap people's phones and emails without a court order, and above all we do not give any President unchecked power. I pledge to fight to protect and defend the Constitution from attack by any President."
The often embarrassingly cautious Obama campaign had been slow to sign on to the pledge. Earlier this week the American Freedom Campaign, which is promoting the pledge, revealed that New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd, Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich and Alaska Senator Mike Gravel had signed the pledge, while former North Carolina Senator John Edwards and Delaware Senator Joe Biden had responded with supportive statements. After a release from the freedom campaign noted that Obama and Clinton had not committed to the Constitution, Obama's aides moved quickly.
My buddy in Oregon send my a link to the neonatal political party Unity08. Catchy, what?
Now there a couple of things I like about Unity08's agenda, but, of course, being "bipartisan" and "centrist" there should be something for everybody. I do, for example, partially agree with the following statement:
Unity08 divides issues facing the country into two categories: Crucial Issues – on which America’s future safety and welfare depend; and Important Issues – which, while vital to some, will not, in our judgment, determine the fate or future of the United States.
In our opinion, Crucial Issues include: Global terrorism, our national debt, our dependence on foreign oil, the emergence of India and China as strategic competitors and/or allies, nuclear proliferation, global climate change, the corruption of Washington’s lobbying system, the education of our young, the health care of all, and the disappearance of the American Dream for so many of our people.
By contrast, we consider gun control, abortion and gay marriage important issues, worthy of debate and discussion in a free society, but not issues that should dominate or even crowd our national agenda.
In our opinion – since the disintegration of the Soviet Union – our political system seems to have focused more attention on the “important issues” than the “crucial issues.” One result: The political parties have been built to address the interests of their “base” but have failed to address the realities that impact most Americans.
Well, I'll give'm that. Gun control, abortion and gay marriage are "...not issues that should dominate or even crowd our national agenda." In fact I wouldn't even consider these "Important Issues". They're just plain stupid. Anyone who votes for a political candidate based on what Unity08 calls "Important Issues" is stupid and deserves to get screwed.
As for Unity08's "Crucial Issues", yeah, they sound good but watch out. If you take a gander at the group's "Founders Council" you'll see that it's heavily larded with disaffacted Republican moderates, entrepreneurs, (probably rich) college kids, a sprinkling of lawyers and Carter administration chief-of-staff Hamilton Jordan (pronounced Jerr-dan). So don't expect any denunciations of a "free market economy," or anything that might fundamentallly upset the socio-economic status quo, i.e. Rockefeller Republicans and the "New" Democrats of the Democratic Leadership Council.
But what is most destrubing, to me at least, is this statement:Goal One is the election of a Unity Ticket for President and Vice-President of the United States in 2008 – headed by a woman and/or man from each major party or by an independent who presents a Unity Team from both parties.
This is my worst nightmare. But, of course, Unity08 is honest in dissolving the illusion of a "two-party system." But what man, and what women fit Unity08's bill?
In the time that I posted the above how little has changed. The corportocracy and its lapdogs the Mainstream Media, in the space of 18 months, has maneuvered the electorate back to the snide. I mean what are the meaningful differences between the laughing witch and the man with the lopsided face? Both of them voted with Bush on the Iraq war resolution and both of them are against the Bush tax cuts for the idle rich. Yippee-fucking-skippee.
There is one difference between June 7, 2006 and now. Unity'08 has suppended operations. It seems a couple of the group's big-wigs are pushing New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg as a "third-party" alternative. Total and unmitigated bullshit. Bloomberg's just the third pea in the pod.