Tom Engelhardt argues that beginning with the vigils led by Cindy Crawford soon followed by the spectacle of the inept response to Katrina the Bush administration has lost its ability to shape the political conversation. The fear card no longer works, leaving the administration reacting to events rather than providing leadership to the Republican coalition. This is a tipping point in the political balance of influence, those who speak clearly for progressive values will be heard.
Engelhardt writes; If you want to wet an index finger yourself and hoist it airwards to see which way the winds are blowing, then just check out how the media has been framing in headlines the recent spate of administration attacks. Headline writing is a curious in-house craft -- and well worth following. Changing headline language is a good signal that something's up. When the President attacks, it's now commonly said that he's "lashing out" -- an image of emotional disarray distinctly at odds with the once powerful sense of the Bush administration as the most disciplined White House on record and of the President and Vice President as resolutely unflappable. (Read the rest of the article.)
This radical change in public sentiment is not the work of Democrats, they have shown themselves to be followers rather than leaders. Last summer I wrote about the role of the prophet. Cindy Sheehan is not the spokesperson that many would have chosen, but the Wizard has been exposed, and the Right wing is in disarray, and that is due to the actions of tens of thousands of grass roots prophets speaking and witnessing for a vision beyond practical power and imperial interests.
Current Affairs: November 2005 Archives
Adam Frankl quit his graduate studies and went to work for the Kerry Campaign in 2004. He writes of the lessons he learned in that campaign:
Back in the primaries, I was drawn to John Kerry for the same reason lots of other people were. I thought he was the electable candidate. He was a veteran, and that was important, I thought, during a wartime election. He was a moderate and that was important, I thought, for a centrist country. Howard Dean was true to his heart, and I admired him for it, but I still thought he just wasn't "electable." Well, the 2004 election proved that maybe I'm not as good at judging a candidate's electability as I thought I was.
In fact, if you go back a few years, some of our best presidents didn't seem all that electable when they were candidates. Not long before he became president, no one thought Bill Clinton was electable. When John F. Kennedy set out for the presidency, all the party leaders and influential democrats were against him. The lesson I learned is this: you should pay just as much attention to your heart as to your head when it comes to selecting a candidate.
This is the link to the other lessons he learned.
Mobilizing people to the kind of make change that Unitarian Universalists aspire to in our principles and purposes, in our hymns and poetry, and yes in our resolves at Assembly requires leaders with a vision, who can make passionate connection to the suffering that people are experiencing, and who can speak about those concerns with conviction. The calculation that the United States is "a centrist country" and we must compromise our values if we are to be effective in politics is a statement that we don't have faith that our values are transformative, and constitute good news for a suffering world. Wasn't it Tolstoy who responded to the objection that Christianity had failed, with the observation that it had never been tried. And if we were arrested for being a Unitarian Universalist, would there be enough evidence to convict us?
Its a scandal that our science teachers have become rigid, teaching only evolution theory, when they could be teaching the alternative theory that a divining intelligence preordained things just the way they are in this most perfect of worlds. The movement to turn old fashioned one-paradigm-at-time science classes into forums for discussion of every interest groups favorite theories is only beginning.
from the Institute for Stork Research and Science
Two different theories exist concerning the origin of children: the
theory of sexual reproduction, and the theory of the stork. Many
people believe in the theory of sexual reproduction because they have
been taught this theory at school. In reality, however, many of the
world's leading scientists are in favor of the theory of the stork.
If the theory of sexual reproduction is taught in schools, it must
only be taught as a theory and not as the truth. Alternative
theories, such as the theory of the stork, must also be taught.
Evidence supporting the theory of the stork includes the following:
1. It is a scientifically established fact that the stork does exist.
This can be confirmed by every ornithologist.
2. The alleged human fetal development contains several features that
the theory of sexual reproduction is unable to explain.
3. The theory of sexual reproduction implies that a child is
approximately nine months old at birth. This is an absurd claim.
Everyone knows that a newborn child is newborn.
4. According to the theory of sexual reproduction, children are a
result of sexual intercourse. There are, however, several well
documented cases where sexual intercourse has not led to the birth of
a child.
5. Statistical studies in the Netherlands have indicated a positive
correlation between the birth rate and the number of storks. Both are
decreasing.
6. The theory of the stork can be investigated by rigorous scientific
methods. The only assumption involved is that children are delivered
by the stork.
submitted by Linda Sherry to the open UUMA Huumor List.
On November 8, I reported that "the IRS has initiated an investigation into the tax-exempt status of All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena. This investigation was prompted by an anti-war sermon given by George Regas in the run up to the 2004 election. I believe that you share my concern about the chilling impact this investigation may have on religious critics of government. People of conscience must remain free to stand up for their beliefs in public while refraining from endorsing any particular candidate. To show support for All Saints,
I join with Faith Voices for A Common Cause in encouraging you to electronically sign a letter of concern that can be found at the following address:
http://interdependencedeclaration.org/allsaints/statement.html
Liberals lament the nomination of a right wing ideologue to replace retiring Sandra Day O'Connor. After the re-election of George W. Bush and the right wing control over both branches of Congress, and the possibility of a right wing Supreme Count are seen putting the government firmly in control of reaction.
But Howard Zinn reminds us:
It would be naive to depend on the Supreme Court to defend the rights of poor people, women, people of color, dissenters of all kinds. Those rights only come alive when citizens organize, protest, demonstrate, strike, boycott, rebel, and violate the law in order to uphold justice."
and
"The Constitution gave no rights to working people: no right to work less than twelve hours a day, no right to a living wage, no right to safe working conditions. Workers had to organize, go on strike, defy the law, the courts, the police, create a great movement which won the eight-hour day, and caused such commotion that Congress was forced to pass a minimum wage law, and Social Security, and unemployment insurance."
Zinn might also point out that it was movements of the people who created public schools, overcame Slavery, and a century later Jim Crow. He argues that our political culture tries to narrow our consciousness, so that we focus on who is running for President, or who the President is nominating for the Supreme Court. Thus instead of being active in shaping policy, we become victims of the decisions of the political elites.
Samuel Alito can be defeated, but not by depending on politics as usual. Democracy depends on "an aroused citizenry, demanding that the promise of the Declaration of Independence--an equal right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness--be fulfilled.
Howard Zinn, Creating Justice and below is from Evan Derkacz in his The myth of the conservative nation
"And so it is with Alito and Roe. The surfacing of Alito's clear opposition to Roe v. Wade -- that it's not supported by the Constitution -- has been downplayed by conservatives. Some warn that this single issue shouldn't be the focus of opposition to Alito, that it won't fly.
They're only partly correct.
Noting that previous to the surfacing of Alito's clear opposition, Americans believed, 33-29% that Alito wouldn't overturn Roe (with 38% unsure), and that a majority would oppose Alito 53-37%, were they to believe that he would overturn it, Chris Bowers writes: "Never has obfuscation become more important for a Supreme Court nominee. If the country begins to believe in large numbers that Alito would overturn Roe, his nomination is sunk."
In today's New York Times, Gail Collins writes "Another election has come and gone, and with it yet another demonstration of American voters' fascinating indifference to the sexual behavior of their public officials."
. . . .
"The terrible truth is that great public leadership and domestic fidelity do not really go hand in hand. Some of our favorite national leaders were unreliable on the domestic front. Franklin Roosevelt comes to mind, as does John F. Kennedy. And the current mood of the electorate seems to clearly favor the argument that things were better when the worst thing the president did wrong was have sex with an intern in the Oval Office."
But all the examples that history provides (and there are many come to mind) are male politicos. Is this really and example of public indifference to sexual misconduct by public officials, or is one more sign that "the old double standard" of ancient patriarchy is still a part of the expectations of moral Americans? Is it really "what one does in ones own bedroom is one's private business" or is it "boys will be boys." Gail Collins begins to explore this in her editorial column asking whether the voters would extend a similar latitude to a female politico. Her conclusion, probably not.
Molly Ivans gives us an interesting insight into federal management styles including former FEMA director Michael "Heckuva Job" Brown.
For example Ivans writes:
As Katrina sent a 30-foot wall of water toward Mississippi, Brownie, steeped in disaster relief work at his former job with the International Arabian Horse Association, asked a top aide the burning question: "Tie or not for tonight? Button-down blue shirt?"
Read the rest of her article here.
Back in Oct 2004, on the eve of the election Rev. George F. Regas of All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena, California preached a sermon, in which he imagined how Jesus would admonish Bush and Kerry if he debated them. Regas never urged parishioners to vote for one candidate over the other, but he did say that he believes Jesus would oppose the war in Iraq, and that Jesus would be saddened by Bush's positions on the use and testing of nuclear weapons. In his sermon, Regas, who from the pulpit opposed both the Vietnam War and 1991's Gulf War, imagined Jesus participating in a political debate with then-candidates George W. Bush and John Kerry. Regas said that "good people of profound faith" could vote for either man, and did not tell parishioners whom to support.
Now the IRS is threatening his church that it may be endanger of losing its tax exemption. The present Rector J. Edwin Bacon said the church had retained the services of a Washington law firm with expertise in tax-exempt organizations. And he told the congregation: "It's important for everyone to understand that the IRS concerns are not supported by the facts." The tax law provides non profit status to religious organizations but forbids the endorsement of candidates, and pending legislation, Speaking about public issues of concern to a religious body is protected by the Constitution. The religious right flagrantly violates the law by specific instructions to congregants about who to votes for, and what legislation to support or oppose. Thus this appears to be a case of political interference with a church that opposes the Bush administration.
In an October letter to the IRS, Marcus Owens, the church's tax attorney and a former head of the IRS tax-exempt section, said, "It seems ludicrous to suggest that a pastor cannot preach about the value of promoting peace simply because the nation happens to be at war during an election season." Owens said that an IRS audit team had recently offered the church a settlement during a face-to-face meeting. "They said if there was a confession of wrongdoing, they would not proceed to the exam stage. They would be willing not to revoke tax-exempt status if the church admitted intervening in an election."
The church declined the offer. "I'm appalled," said 70-year-old Anne Thompson of Altadena, a professional singer who also makes vestments for the church.
"In a government that leans so heavily on religious values, that they would pull a stunt like this, it makes me heartsick."
Joe Mirando, an engineer from Burbank, questioned whether the 3,500-member church would be under scrutiny if it were not known for its activism and its liberal stands on social issues. "The question is, is it politically motivated?" he said. "That's the underlying feeling of everyone here. I don't have enough information to make a decision, but there's a suspicion."
The above is adapted from Common Dreams Newsletter, the full story by Patricia Ward Biederman and Jason Felch
There are Kanjobal Indian refugees living in near me in Indiantown, Florida. They have fled from Guatemala to Florida seeking asylum. (See below for more information.) I have a previous entry on the Maya, as does Hafidha Sofia.
My poor, poor country
people trying to escape
not knowing what direction
all points look the same
the boom of the bombs
drives them
c
r
a
z
y
Planes flying over sad
towns throwing bombs
on innocent people
Poor, sad, sad people
destroyed by the arms
of rich countries
and though
gentle,
have served the killers
Oh sorrow, sorrow, sorrow
LAND OF THE QUETZAL
By Jose Lows Perez-Aguirre
16-year-old Mayan refugee boy in Florida
Guatemala,
land of corn
of wheat
which feeds your impoverished children.
Oh Guatemala beautiful land
land of the hormigo
musical tree
of which your children
have created
the marimba
marimba of the sweet notes
which resound in the Huehueteca
Mountains
where the quetzal cries bitterly
seeing your children
banished
by the stranger.
Your children set on the rocks
where, unfortunately
you cannot feed them
While the cruel strangers
exploit your children
and enjoy
your riches.
As Kanjobal Indians, direct descendants of the ancient Mayan civilization, "the struggle," as the elder chose to call it, has indeed been a long one. IN 1524 A.D., Spanish officials arrived in Guatemala and set in motion a 450-year era of exploitation. In the absence of rich gold and silver deposits, Indians bore the burden of Spain's colonizing efforts, working as virtual slaves on their buildings, cities and roads. Native states were dismembered and Indians concentrated into local communities tightly controlled by Crown officials and priests. Exhaustive labor incarceration and disease leveled the indigenous population to less than 40 percent of its preconquest total. The ensuing colonial period and even Guatemala's own independence in 1821 did little to change the plight of the Maya. Expropriation of communal lands, debt bondage, vagrancy laws and the absence of meaningful land reform in this century have left Guatemala's indigenous people impoverished.
Consumer groups have been lobbying to pass new laws requiring restaurant chains to place basic nutrition information on menus and menu boards. This would fill "a gaping hole in consumer information."
Advocates argue that Americans eat half of all meals outside the home. Restaurants should be required to provide calorie, fat, and sodium content on menus and menu boards, before consumer buy the product? "Marketers call such placement at the "point-of-purchase" and recognize that it's the most effective way of influencing consumer behavior with information."
Read how MacDonald's move is an attempt to fend of such laws with a meaningless gesture.
How will New Orleans be rebuilt? And by whom? Some of the plans of some very powerful people look forward to eliminating poverty by eliminating poor people! There is already rampant real estate speculation that is working to drive the price of housing up. Can the city that gave us Jazz,and so much more, become a community of equality and justice?
A collection of environmental, political, and academic leaders share their unique visions for reconstructing the Big Easy post-Katrina
"Don't mourn, organize!" wrote Joe Hill. In these times when politicians lead us into senseless wars, and fail to promote the general welfare, when Presidents nominate reactionaries to fill judicial appointments, there is a lot of "what can we do, we are so powerless" expressed in liberal circles.
Some writers have some ideas about how we should organize to assure that the United States becomes a country that resembles the ideals of Unitarian Universalists enshrine in principles and put on tee shirts.
Ruth Conniff writes about encouraging progressive candidates so that reactionaries don't win by default.
Molly Ivans writes about a simple campaign to convert the spending priorities of the United States from the military to quality education. She writes that this would be a revolution in values and consequences.
Young adult John Bravo DiMicoli writes about running as a candidate for the New York City Council and the lessons he learned. If only the Democrats could learn from DiMicoli.
