Poetry, Open Mic Nights, wild, passionate debates, walking amongst the city, aimlessly traveling checking out little eccentric shops, touring american cities, politics, philospophy, dirty dancing,
A Hodgepodge of Progressive Politics, Church-State Issues, and all the things you were taught never to discuss with others-all in one.
So, while the majority of the nation and blogosphere was buzzing about the possibilities of Gore's movie, An Inconvenient Truth, and his possibilities as president in 2008, yet another atrocious attack was quietly placed upon our country with little energy being placed upoin it.
General Hayden, Bush's appointee for Director of the CIA has been confirmed, and not with a struggle, but overwhelmingly by a 78-15 vote after Hayden promised he would follow the law after breaking it. This is of course coming form a man who didn't know the text to the 4th amendment, ran the NSA wiretapping program, believes the CIA needs less public scrutiny, and has been the deputy chief for Negroponte, a Bushbot.
How could our Senators be so incredibly stupid, so incredibly, yes I'll say it, treasonous? What makes them believe ANY Bush appointee is going to follow through on his testimony to Congress? Has any really thus far? No.
The entire debate on Hayden has centered around whether or not a military man, after 25 years of civilian direction, should be allowed to be director. But that was a small potatoes issue compared to what a Hayden confirmation would mean to the constitution to civil rights, to finally getting an investigation into wiretapping.
Democrats and Republicans alike should be impeached for dereliction of their oath. At a time when only 24% trust Bush and only 3% trust Congress , Senators should have no desire to even be rubber stamp politicians. Why are our Senate Committees anymore, simply jokes, they are, simply ruses. Ay, what a corrupt time we live in.
Here's a list of politicians who voted in Favor of a Hayden Nomination: Taken From Senate.gov
I'd tell you to bombard the offices of the Yes politicians, but I doubt that will do any good, their tin ears have already been turned to America and lost in the beltway have they become. Instead remember this list come 2006 and 2008, and let them hear your voice then.
On Sunday, conservative Washington Post columnist Richard Viguerie wrote an article about Bush's Base Betrayal which was lauded with a resounding cheer on nearly all progressive websites, and used by democrats as yet another example of the political fallout that Bush and all those attached to the RCC will be facing this upcoming election.
Seeing respectable progressive websites like HuffingtonPost, Raw Story, Thinkprogress and multiple others proclaim Viguerie's article as some wondrous sign, as if Viguerie were some ally in our fight against the Republican misleadership was just, another example of the inferiority complex we democrats are facing these days.
Because in no way should this article be lauded. There is very little in this article a democratically inclined voter should be excited about.
Viguerie is angry that Bush is not conservative enough. He wants Bush to step it up to a new level, to mix even more extreme social conservatism with the blind Reaganomics that swelled the deficit. Viguerie's article is not the conservative refutation we would look for in someone who has 'seen the light' and noticed that conservatism these days is anything but. His biggest complaints are that Bush hasn't been heavy handed enough in getting his judicial nominees passed, that the Medicare drug bill was far too costly and that the No Child Left Behind Act was an intrusion of the government on both a state and federal level. Viguerie argues that it was merely the immigration issue that tipped conservatives over not the corrupiton, the lying, the breaking of federal law. No, of course none of that.
Some of the demands Viguerie has for the Republican leadership show the beginnings of what the party would look like if the extremist evangelicals had full run.
Viguerie asks 'where are the serious efforts by Republicans to protect unborn children from abortion? Where is the campaign for a constitutional amendment to prevent liberal judges from allowing same-sex marriage?'
And later says:
'Instead of conservative action on social issues, the Republican-controlled House has approved more taxpayers' money for an embryo-killing type of stem cell research. And it passed a "hate crimes" measure that could lead to the classification as "hate" of criticism of homosexual activity. '
We won't even go into the fallacy and pure bigotry of his statements, because all I want to know, is why, are we as progressives rejoicing over a man who, in his opposition of the Republicans under the Bush way, has no desire whatsoever to ally with democratic positions, and instead is calling for a political party even more at odds with our values?
Did anyone even notice the gaping silence about the NSA wiretapping issue? No. Apparently that's not even an issue in Viguerie 's vision for the party.
Viguerie's article is not a rallying cry for democrats to rejoice in, instead it's a warning sing, a prediction of what we could see running our country if democrats don't step it up. Democrats can;t even say that theymade a big to do over this piece because it shows a dangerous division and an insight into the party infighting of the Republican Party, but they should realize thatRepublicans still hold the upper hand with control of essentially all three branches of government, don't seem to play by the rules and have no qualms in raising the very wedge issues Viguerie mentions to keep them in power. And if they do stay in power for these reason, you can bet they are going to be implemented.
Democrats should be more cautious on what republican defectors we support. Only pure repentance of the Repuglican way should be accepted.
This issue has alredy been touched on by member ToddHill but I wanted to also add my own two cents into the issue:
The Democrats have finally come out with a national security plan, and it's only, you know, about two years late to save them from being labeled weak on security during last years elections. You would never know that the democrats released anything out into the public , even though they had a good, 40 minute press conference on this very subject yesterday, because as O'Reilly screams, the media is so liberally biased. But at least there is a platform now that state democrats can take to their local races and use as a way to shove down the all too predictable Republican Orwellian doublespeak claiming 'If you want to keep the terrorists away and save your little children! Vote for us!' you can bet they are going to be spewing to save their majority come this November's election. The Republicans sure must have thought they had the whole security debate shored up after the last election because there sure haven't been any raises or drops in the color coded terror alert system in the past year and a half.
However, I'm not going to give the democrats too much credit for their plan. If anything, in my opinion, it doesn't go nearly far enough.
Democrats surely get kudos for these sections of their National Security Plan:
• Enact a GI Bill of Rights for the 21st Century that guarantees our troops -- active, reserve, and retired -- our veterans, and their families receive the pay, health care, mental health services, and other benefits they have earned and deserve.
• Eliminate Osama Bin Laden, destroy terrorist networks like al Qaeda, finish the job in Afghanistan, and end the threat posed by the Taliban.
• Immediately implement the recommendations of the independent, bipartisan 9/11 Commission including securing national borders, ports, airports and mass transit systems.
• Prevent outsourcing of critical components of our national security infrastructure -- such as ports, airports and mass transit -- to foreign interests that put America at risk.
• Eliminate terrorist breeding grounds by combating the economic, social, and political conditions that allow extremism to thrive; lead international efforts to uphold and defend human rights; and renew longstanding alliances that have advanced our national security objectives.
I personally think these are great ideas that have been thrown around before, usually on the fringe of the debate, but are lost in the shrill attack dog mentality the Republicans have used to control national security discussion. I love how they mention Osama Bin Laden in there, because catching him was not only one of the initial purposes of the war on terror, but also reminding the American people that Bush has all but forgot about Bin Laden and rarely mentions him anymore will dramatically affect the republicans stance All of these are great ideas, and even though I know to deal with the average joe America you need to reduce political plans to near slogan like statements, I would definitely like more specifics on how they are going to implement these things.
Democrats however, definitely have a few weak spots/unrealistic spots in their plan I do not agree with:
On Iraq they would:
• Ensure 2006 is a year of significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty, with the Iraqis assuming primary responsibility for securing and governing their country and with the responsible redeployment of U.S. forces. Insist that Iraqis make the political compromises necessary to unite their country and defeat the insurgency; promote regional diplomacy; and strongly encourage our allies and other nations to play a constructive role. Hold the Bush Administration accountable for its manipulated pre-war intelligence, poor planning and contracting abuses that have placed our troops at greater risk and wasted billions of taxpayer dollars.
While they mention a responsible redeployment of US forces, does that mean they are going to follow Senator Murtha's plan and withdraw troops and redeploy them to Kuwait and other areas off the coast of the gulf? This doesn't say. I also think defeating the insurgency is a highly unrealistic plan if we are going to keep American forces in Iraq at all.
On Energy Independence: • Increase production of alternate fuels from America's heartland including bio-fuels, geothermal, clean coal, fuel cells, solar and wind; promote hybrid and flex fuel vehicle technology and manufacturing; enhance energy efficiency and conservation incentives.
That's nice but there are smarter ways of saving energy and reducing our dependence on Mideast oil. How about reviving our cities and making them more livable thereby reducing the need for a McMansion suburban, commuter lifestyle. One of the biggest wastes of energy I believe our nation faces is so many people flee cities to live 10, 20, 30 or more miles away. America needs to face the fact that we as a people destroy our own country, and increase our dependence on oil, through our insistence that we should have huge houses and acres upon acres of lawn, and that we shouldn't need to have a neighbor near us for miles if we so choose. While the suburban lifestyle has surely spread to other countries, this doesn't excuse America for its flagrant waste of energy and the pollution it creates by encouraging such a uneconomical lifestyle. What's worse, is that as more Americans move out of the cities, people keep moving farther and farther out sot that they can have the room they so crave. It's been shown countless times that the 8million plus populated New York uses far less electricity than entire states in the Southeast and other areas.
I'd like to see democrats bring up legislation that will increase mass transit, economic incentives for businesses in cities; and legislation that help city councils and mayors with proposals that will help in crime reduction, in affordable housing, in cultural opportunities, in progressive education for kids, amongst other things. That's an important energy idea that is missing in the debate today.
Also some issues not even mentioned in the Democratic Plan I'd like to see included are:
• A renewal to international law and treaties such as the Geneva Convention that have been flagrantly disregarded under the Bush Administration.
• Create a multinational alliance of nations, similar to NATO that would assist each other in working to eliminate terrorist groups upon multiple levels, including influencing the political, economic, and cultural scene in regions of hostile activity-as well as militarily..
• The elimination of the idea that America must spread democracy as its legacy, but rather should allow nations and the people to choose their own type of government
• Paying back foreign debt and the trade deficit, especially loans given to us by hostile regimes and China so that we will be less at risk for a foreign government being able to dictate policy issues in our country simply because they own so much of us.
• Closing Guantanamo bay and the prison camps in Eastern Europe.
• Dispute and change the debate back from a good versus evil war to a war faught on rational thought.
These are just a few ideas of mine. I am glad the democrats are out there with a platform that can battle the Republican national security vision and hopefully remove their last stronghold on the body politics support, but I really do think we need to farther, that we could go much farther into reshaping America and how we handle the threats of the 21st century, At least though, this is one step there.
It is finally official: Senator John McCain (R-AZ) has sold his soul to the corrupted Republican base. It is not like the signs of this happening haven't been staring us straight in the face for quite some time now, for surely McCain's stumping for Bush in the '04 elections was a precursor of a political soul rotting to come- so we shouldn't be surprised. It's just that, independents and progressive democrats alike, two groups who are large supporters of McCain, once saw him as a shining light in the Republican Party and now must realize what he has become
For it's time progressives and independents alike shun McCain for his blatant disregard for our values, and to shove him like political chaff aside and realize his ambition for the presidency, for shoring up the Republican Base has gave the death knell to his independent streak.
McCain has become a political liability to any of us who support a move away from the denigration of our democracy and the move to a theocracy that we have seen occurring under the Bush Administration.
Still, McCain, speaking recently to the Arizona Daily Star claimed that he has the background and experience to take on the challenging issues of contemporary American society.
Really? He does, does he? Sure could have fooled me with the way his decisions and political support has been falling lately.
McCain has supported everything from extending Bush's tax cuts (even though he voted against them-and yet claims he knows how to take a fiscally responsible approach to government) to an Arizona Anti-Gay Marriage constitutional amendment (after getting reamed by the party faithful for voting against the US Constitutional amendment of the same ilk) to advocating for the teaching of Intelligent Design in schools. McCain was also one of the few lone Senators pushing for the UAE Port Deal claiming that, 'Hey, at least it's freer than China!'
McCain can even be spotted soon here speaking at Jerry Falwell's Liberty University's Graduation even though McCain once said
"Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right"
Yet now, Falwell is out there claiming that McCain is just 'mending fences with the Evangelicals'. This is ironic of course considering even the Republican Party is getting wary over the Religious Right's Control on the party.
However, the last straw for me, was McCain's pathetic, political play at the recent Souther Republican Leadership Conference where he wouldn't let delegates vote in support of him in the straw poll and asked them to vote for Bush instead because it was a much needed shoring up of support for a president at war.
And so, in my opinion, if there is any doubt that McCain is still one of the few clearheaded thinkers out there in American politics-I think it should be long gone by now. It's a tragedy to see the passing of a sane political voice, as far back as a few years ago, a great contender for the presidency, pass his legacy up for a risky dip into Bush Land. But if you support the American democracy, all of you independents, democrats, and the republicans not blinded by the Religious Right, should cut off any support for a McCain presidential run.
Please remember that Campus Progress' terms of use do not allow promoting or endorsing any particular political party or candidate for office. Posts or comments that do this will be deleted.
Posts
!
