The US House of Cowards

Roll Call 513 passed this last July in the US House of Cowards. In effect, it was a bullying proposal from the White House that was meant to be a vote on whether to go to war with Iran, or not?
 
Only 2 Congressmen, Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich, voted to not go to war with Iran. The rest in this House of Cowards voted to not try to stop the Bush/ Cheney team’s rush to spread more destruction, war, and terrorism. Here is Roll Call 513 showing how the vote went.

The separation of education and thought

Kucinich 2008Would you entrust your children to the care of a teacher who didn’t have a Kucinich 2008 bumper sticker on their car? Or a sign in their window reading “What are you doing about global warming?” I know another elementary school teacher who distributes peace buttons wherever he goes, and another who teaches at peace camp during the summer.
 
What do the other teachers think they’re doing? Worrying about not getting fired by school administration lackeys, to hell with the children?

What teacher would not by nature be an activist? As our children’s guides to a better future, their function is one and the same. What kind of farmer doesn’t care if pollution is flowing into his fields? What kind of rancher feeds his herd in a cesspool? If teachers aren’t worried about the state of the world, they’re not showing any optimism for the fate of our children.

It’s time to be more discriminating about whose voices we mean to subject our children. And subject ourselves, from the media for example. Anyone in the visual or audio media, who reports about President Bush without a knowing intonation that Bush is a moron or crook, is clearly a crook or moron themselves.

If a door to door salesman tried to sell you the Brooklyn Bridge, you’d laugh him off the stoop, perhaps you’d call the police. What if he reappeared everyday, several times a day even, to repeat his pitch, without even a hint of admission that he’s been discredited. If neither the police, nor your politicians, are going to protect you from his fraud, and you want to preserve your sanity, you’ll have to close the door in his face.

Impeach! Goodbye Dems.

Bush is claiming Executive Privilege in refusing to shed light on the possible nefarious dealing of his underlings. The press describes any investigation at an impasse “until one side or the other blinks.” Nonsense. Impeach!
 
Cheney surprises everyone by declaring that the Vice-Presidency is actually a fourth branch of government, out of reach of the checks and balances familiar to all. Congressmen want to joke about cutting off his funding, etc, meanwhile Cheney’s boys elude oversight. Impeach!

The Justice Department acting politically? Impeach! The Supreme Court behaving like cronies? Impeach.

Congress pretending to oppose endless war, yet refusing to cut off the funding? And eschewing that power, preferring false “impasses” to the option(s) above?

Apparently it’s the best they can do, at least that’s how the corporate media has it. But why let the corporations tell us what is or isn’t our prerogative? It’s time to impeach the lot of them. If the Democrats don’t want to do what they were elected to do, let’s leave them. And turn away from the TV.

It’s time for real bipartisanship. Real conservatives and real progressives need to bail from the two imposter parties and opt for representatives of their own. If big-oil interests can conspire with big-pharma, insurance, multi-national, communications and agri-biz to plunder America’s wealth, I’d hope from the people’s side, the Greens could join the Socialists could join the Libertarians could join the Reformers could join everyone else, Ross Perot’s upstarts perhaps. We can address our differences after we’ve wrestled the reins from the corporate greed parties. If even that will be possible. But we’re not going to see national health care, less war, or more equitable and just policies until we do.

And to those Democrats who fear that abandoning their so-called representatives will release them to the dark side, it shows what little faith you had in your candidates in the first place. The results are already in from last election: having a Democratic representative in Congress, unless it’s John Conyers, is like having no one at all. If the politician you elected really has firm intentions, he’ll have them without you. It’s time to nurture someone else, someone with potential, into power.

Have you seen Barack do anything? Hillary? You’ve seen Edwards capitulate to a fraudulent election. Gore too. You’ve seen Kucinich pretend that the Democratic tent was inclusive enough for voices against the war and that turned out to be a lie. The Dems have no one unsuited to do their bidding, and what a surprise, it’s not yours.

Democracy Now on KRCC

Mini fliers to urge KRCC listeners to actionThis week the Pacifica news program Democracy Now was added to the KRCC lineup on weekdays at 7pm. After listening this week when I could, I came away thinking: for the Colorado Springs community, the sudden juxtaposition of Democracy Now to the regular NPR and BBC-lite news programming has got to be turning some heads. Local critics had anticipated that Democracy Now would perseverate on only the bad and the ugly, but this inaugural week proved very much the opposite.

What happened this week? The Democrats ran roughshod over Congress. They introduced some key legislation ahead of their 100 hour pledge, leaving time even for a non-binding resolution on Iraq. In brief, they behaved quite the opposite of how the mainstream media would like to portray Democrats. On NPR, just as on the networks, we were given only brief summaries of what the Dems did. The little interest the reporters paid to the stories played into the inferrence that accomplishments in Congress this week were of little consequence. And the Senate’s non-binding resolution damns itself with its ineffectual appellation, if that’s all you say about it.

Contrast that with Democracy Now’s coverage. DN aired Representative Lynn Woolsey’s full address on behalf the corresponding bill in the House, the Bring Our Troops Home and Sovereignty of Iraq Restoration Act. To hear her rational and sober words left you wondering how anyone could still think otherwise about what to do in Iraq. American listeners are not accustomed to hearing politicians unspun. These days when a speech such as Rep. Woolsey’s reaches the public unfiltered, we think that person should run for president. The media doesn’t want to empower politicians like Woolsey if they can help it. Better for Americans to be impressed with TV celebrities than real public servants.

And so Democracy Now’s reports this week were affirming. They offered the ray of hope that the new House and Senate will move forward in spite of whether the mainstram media, including NPR, make light of their work.

The liberal media unmaskedI saw NPR’s Political Correspondent Mara Liasson speak at Colorado College back in 2004. She spoke about the likely contenders for the Democratic nomination. Asked afterwards why, incredibly, she never once mentioned Dennis Kucinich, she told us it was because she assumed we were interested in the candidates of consequence.

Now in Colorado Springs, like over 500 other communities in America in which Democracy Now is airing side by side with NPR, reporters like Mara Liasson are going to know they can’t play gatekeeper with the news. Although Fox and the MSM will be there to corroborate the mainstream NPR line, public radio listeners will be hearing other voices, such as Amy Goodman’s, pulling the cat from the bag. Increasingly, Mara and company will no longer get to decide for their listeners what persons or which issues are of consequence.

Colorado Springs’ first week of Democracy Now began with a memorial to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. The DN special was broadcast live from the media conference in Memphis and The Indy’s publisher John Weiss was there. Amy Goodman congratulated him on DN’s having broken into the Colorado Springs market. It was news to John, but it’s true he played a key role. At the end of the day though the credit goes to KRCC’s new station manager Delaney Utterback for all the right reasons.

The other George

After going over all the official Democratic Party web sites what comes to mind, is how much America needs the other George. I’m talking about the George of RESPECT, not the George of MURDER INC. on this side of the Atlantic. Contrast the best known member of RESPECT, George Galloway, with all the US politicians of the party I will call LACK OF RESPECT though they are better known as the Democratic Party.

If George Galloway’s site above is down, then see Galloway’s Israel’s Lebanon invasion interview at youtube, where he gives the Murdoch media a whipping.

About the only DP presidential contender site I could even begin to stomach, was that of Dennis Kucinich, though what’s he doing in the DP instead of bolting it, anyway? And you certainly won’t hear a peep out of him on his website about the need to get out of Afghanistan or Colombia, say. Still, he’s a saint compared to Hillary, Obama, or Edwards.

If you are sick of all the mealy mouthed, slimy rhetoric from all the officially announced DP presidential candidates, then check out the video section of George Galloway’s web site! You certainly won’t see the likes of Dennis Kucinich denouncing Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, like George does in the lead video there on his site. Or could one imagine Kucinich, or any of the Democrat Party politician slimeballs, standing up like George Galloway did to the US Senate, when a Senate Committee tried to make him out as tied to Saddam Hussein’s regime? This appearance before the Senate can be seen in 5 parts on the website.

Why was Galloway testifying there? Simply because he had opposed the Clinton sanctions against Iraq, that through 8 years murdered about a million Iraqis, mainly children. I am talking about the Democratic Party sponsored sanctions that paved the way to Bush’s invasion, and continued occupation of that country. He had been the most vocal critic for years of Blair and Bush in both the US and Britain, and has always been an outstanding opponent of Israeli Apartheid where all others had feared to speak out. For this, they were trying to besmirch him and his reputation for integrity.

Democrats, you vote for the PARTY OF DISRESPECT, disrespect for you, the liberal. We need an organization like RESPECT here in the US, and if George Galloway ever tries to set up an American branch of the Respect Unity Coalition, then I’d be the first to join. The other George…. We could use some of that spunk here in the US.

Watch parts 2-5 here.

Kucinich announces he will herd wimpy and prayerful DP Peaceniks back inside church again

The best candidate who does not represent the Democrats 
 
Dennis Kucinich announced Wednesday that he is again running for president as a supposedly antiwar Democrat within his prowar party. Yawn. This time around, unlike before, one can cut the palpable unenthusiasm of the mascoshist antiwar element of the Democratic Party with a knife.

Rather than inspiring any hopes for leadership change amongst this faithful crowd, the announcement of his candidacy seemed more to have dashed any hope at all. The faithful believers are on to Dennis, it seems, and now know his role in the DP is to be merely that of a DP herd dog serving to keep the flock together. Together to get sheared of the wool over their eyes, we would hope.. lol.

But more likely to again just to get entirely group fucked in the deepness of the dark, depressing night. Or, for those more inclined to visualize romantically in this manner, a faithful flock to get completely reemed (in mass) underneath the light of the full moon…. Oh well, the prose here doesn’t really matter, it is the faith that does, they say.

More seriously now. If Kucinich was sincere about rallying Americans to end the US bipartisan government Iraqi and Afghan war fiascoes, he would run as an independent and not as a Democratic Party perennial loser. In short, he would denounce the Democratic Party as not fit for any patriotic American to participate in. That would be easy to do, too.

Imagine if instead of announcing his Democrratic Party fealty at thsi time, he had instead approached Ralph Nader, Bernie Sanders, Cynthia McKinney and Noam Chomsky, say? Approached them and asked ALL for their endorsements in an independent run for president? Now that would be sincerity, rather than a false and hollow parody of it by going forth as some sort of pretend New Age George McGovern, or New Age Clean Gene pied-piper. Yes, Dennis could push the antiwar cause ahead. Just not by the action he has chosen to undertake.

These are times that test faith, are they not? Sane secular people can watch this contest of liberal vs conservative religious faithful from the side, and place our bets once again on which of these 2 dogs will persevere. Will Hound dog Haggard’s followers at New Life Church stay in that arena the following year in group more cohesive than the Democratic Party antiwar flock will be tempted to continue to be herded, by Pastor Dennis Kucinich? Me? I’m betting that the liberal DP religious faith is much stronger than that of the the RP-worshipping, ‘New Life’ certified, idiot big top tent mob. How ’bout you?

Religion is something else, isn’t it?! I’m thinking about converting to Islam!

Close the School of the Americas

Click for more pictures on SOA press conferenceDennis Apuan and Genie and Bill Durland, pictured at right, head to Fort Benning Georgia to make an annual plea to close the S. O. A. aka School of Assassins, where Central and South American military death squads are known to receive their training.

Here is the address which Dennis Apuan delivered:

Friends in the struggle,
For almost 60 years, the School of the Americas has trained over 60,000 Latin American soldiers in tactics that are used to wage war against their own people. Courses taught at the school include counterinsurgency techniques, sniper training, commando and psychological warfare, military intelligence and interrogation tactics. Among those targeted by SOA graduates are educators, union organizers, religious workers, student leaders, and others who work for human rights.

Despite this targeting, large social movements throughout Latin America fight for justice and have successfully brought popular change to their countries. For 15 years, tens of thousands of people in the United States have worked in solidarity to close the SOA through a variety of means.

On November 17-19, 2006, at least three Colorado Springs residents will converge with tens of thousands on Fort Benning – one of the largest military bases in the world and home to the notorious School of the Americas – to confront injustice, to speak out for peace and to change oppressive U.S. foreign policy. This is a time of great change in our world, and justice is within our reach when we stand up in numbers too big to be ignored.

We will close this school that has created so much death and suffering.

History is made by movements – mass movements of people who organize themselves to struggle collectively for a better world. An increasing number of people have realized that U.S. government policy is out of alignment with their values. The movement for justice and against war and exploitation is growing stronger.

So many around the world continue the struggles for justice and human rights: peasants, indigenous and black communities, trade unionists and students are taking to the streets. By standing up and standing together, we can overturn any injustice. By standing up and standing together, we can change the world.

The movement to close the School of the Americas is a nonviolent force to change oppressive U.S. foreign policy as represented by institutions like the SOA. It is made up of people from many backgrounds who work towards a positive and fundamentally different alternative to the racist system of violence and domination.

We at the peace movement have been tremendously successful. The SOA issue has educated thousands about the reality of U.S. intervention in Latin America and U.S. foreign policy in general. Thousands have mobilized and engaged in nonviolent direct action. Because, as Arundhati Roy writes, “the trouble is that once you see it, you cannot unsee it. And once you’ve seen it, keeping quiet, saying nothing, becomes as political an act as speaking out. There’s no innocence. Either way, you’re accountable.”

SOA Watch made history on June 9, 2006 when the House of Representatives voted on our amendment to cut funding for the SOA. Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts and Rep. John Lewis of Georgia introduced an amendment to the Foreign Operations Appropriations bill that would have cut funding for the notorious school.

While the amendment failed by a vote of 188 to 218, this vote was a major victory for our movement. After 6 years without a vote in Congress, we gained ground with bipartisan support for opposing the school despite the vote occurring in one of the most conservative Congresses in recent memories. Some more of our victories include:

Securing support of 29 Republican Members of Congress.

Attracting the interest of powerful members of Congress to speak in favor of our amendment including Rep. Lee (CA), Meehan (MA), Lowey (NY), Kucinich (OH), and Schakowsky (IL).

Forcing the opposition to win by only 218 votes; the bare minimum to win the majority of the House.

Gaining the support of many new members of the House, as well as retaining previous supporters.

Surprising the opposition with the amendment, and forcing them to concede time in the House floor debate due to a lack of support on their side

These victories have undoubtedly energized our movement. We are grateful to our sisters and brothers in Latin America for their inspiration and the invitation to join them in their struggle for justice. The Americas have a strong legacy of resistance. As activists and organizers in North America, we have a lot to learn from our companeras in Latin America who have been fighting oppression for the past 514 years. To do so, we must come to grips with our own privilege and recognize how it shapes our assumptions about struggle and the future.

-Dennis Apuan, Colorado Springs, November 14, 2006

Republicans didn’t trust Kerry

Doesn’t Kerry’s prompt concession kinda make him look like a SHILL? He and the Democratic party hijacked the grassroots progressive movement and sold us down the river.

Holding off a concession might have lead to questions about the vote suppression and the legitimacy of our election methods. Why was anyone forced to wait for ten hours for example?! Instead Kerry concedes and tells us how much he’s been touched by all our support.

There is no Democratic party. We all owe Ralph Nader profuse apologies and we need another party, if not a military coup. If we could not unseat an idiot-chimp with only blunders to his credit, with a record turnout of new voters, there is something wrong with our electoral system.

This was a media coup d’etat, a rigged election, a fascist putsch featuring a straw man to pretend to lead our cause. Bush is a despotic moron. Kerry is despicable.

I had as much hope as anyone that Kerry might have lead our nation into brighter times. He seemed earnestly anti-war when he testified before congress in 1971. He seemed to champion the best causes in his many years in the Senate. I excused his centrism as necessary to getting elected. And I figured that his wife, a billionaress, would not have married Kerry if he was only a common profiteer. What would they need with more money? Indeed I thought they both wanted to change the world.

I was wrong. Nader was right. In the early debates Kucinich, Sharpton, even Dean, were the only chances we had.

Mara Liasson, Washington gossip

NPR correspondent Mara Liasson spoke at Colorado College last night. What we thought would be an insider’s glimpse of the primaries turned out to be just that. Ms. Liasson spoke only of Kerry, Edwards and Dean. When asked about the other prospects, she countered that she expected we only wanted to hear about the candidates who would prove to matter.

How is a candidate like Kucinich, who is trying to bring issues such as health care, fair labor, environment, an end to war, and a return to human rights, to the fore, how is such a candidate to get covered by reporters who only want to report dispassionately about a candidate’s odds of winning? I mean, you tell us that “a candidate who wins in W state, but fails to win X and Y has never won Z,” that’s reporting? That’s more like Sports Talk.

Why not have reported about who won the debates? Edwards and Kerry, your favorite subjects, came off very stiff in the debates. Kucinich and friends ran circles around them, wouldn’t that have been worthy of reporting?

Isn’t the only thing standing between Kucinich and a viable candidacy, a media that’s refusing to consider him viable? Can you separate Kucinich’s chances from the tough chance he has with networks bent on keeping his issues invisible? What about your own sense of responsibility to report on every candidate, especially if you know their platform will resonate with the American public, if only given some visibility?

You dismiss the Bush AWOL charges as having been reported in 2000. For the record they were ignored in 2000, and you’re doing it again by suggesting they’re old news. They’re 30 years old news! Members of the National Guard today who have gone AWOL from Iraq are sitting in the brig, they’re not out snorting cocaine, even dealing cocaine, and then serving community service for having been caught. But Bush’s records have not only gone missing, they’ve been erased or sealed in the name of National Security. Wouldn’t that merit reporting? But that’s not your beat? Crime? Issues? The environment?

My question? Shouldn’t NPR consider covering the presidential election with correspondents who want to report more than just political gossip and primary statistics like it’s a horse race?

No, my real question: How much does FOX and MSNBC’s framing of the news, like the New York Time’s “all the news that’s fit to print,” determine what NPR can report? Is NPR too anxious about looking into the margins for fear it will marginalize itself? I guess that’s rhetorical. More constructively: How can the mainstream framing, that focus, be increased to include the interests of the American middle class, progressives, and peace-loving peoples around the world?