Wednesday, November 5, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the empire gets a new ruler, Nouri al-Maliki claims credit, the treaty remains stalled, Iraqis are far from overwhelmed and more.
Yesterday the US elected a new ruler for the empire, War Hawk Barack Obama. David A. G. Fischer (Dissident Voice) reports on an election night panel independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader took part in:
He goes on to contrast his campaign with that of Obama as not having any hoopla, hope or rhetoric; Ralph continues to campaign on the real issues affecting the people in spite of overwhelming odds -- he is a champion despite Obama's victory.
Along the same line and with applause, his lack of hoopla and rhetoric is still so out-of-sync with the media cartel's disinformation campaign that he was once again ignored by the mainstream. What we have here is a man who refuses to sell out and complacently surrender to the status quo, he is a man based on strong principle who perceives reality for what it is -- a sham directed by the controlling institutions of power, of which Obama is just another cog in their finely-tuned machine.
But what do we really know about Mr. Barack Obama? Here we have a candidate who received hundreds of millions in campaign donations by corporate America and Wall Street. Nader sensibly asks something I've pointed out many times, "Why are the corporations investing in Obama?" By looking at his voting record it is obvious who he supports with approbation for illegal surveillance, a permanent presence in Iraq with a potential spread to neighboring countries, offshore drilling which he used to be against, an economic bailout lacking oversight and transparency, and so forth. Where is this great change that he has been spewing forth to the public for the past twenty months? It is likely just more of what the public wants to hear, but it's apparent by voter turnout that they fail to feel the hot air blowing by them.
Part of the problem with Obama, as Nader points out, is that while Obama is pulled to the right by the corporate establishment, there are no demands being put on him by organized groups such as labor and unions to pull him the other direction and thus "make him better."
We have learned that Black politicians and activist-poseurs have an infinite capacity to celebrate not having engaged in struggle with Power, and that the Black masses can be made drunk by the prospect of vicariously (through Obama) coming to power. Having failed to make even the mildest of demands on Obama in return for unquestioning support, Black misleadership vowed they would press for firm commitments on issues of importance to African Americans once Obama had passed the final hurdle. (White progressives who were similarly self-neutered during the campaign also promise to begin acting like real people's advocates, any day now...just you wait and see.) We have already learned that "Progressives for Obama" of all ethnicities, who failed to put pressure on the candidate early on, when it might have made a difference, are full of crap.
Yes, they are full of crap. Including the Agency-fronted political closet case who has already shown up with a pep-talk about how the economic crisis is a good thing, a really, really good thing! Those in the closet politically might want to check their language so they don't expose themselves by accident. But lets' move to the economy. The San Francisco Business Times observes, "A day after the United States made history by electing Barack Obama president, the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 486 points Wednesday, ending at 9,139.27." The Phoenix Business Journal notes that news as well: "The election is over and the Dow Jones Industrial Average has taken a dive of nearly 500 points." No, there was no magical 'cure' nor was there going to be. Any zowie-wowie article on the election today notes in cautionary tales how things will have to be scaled back or dropped. That's your preparation for expecting nothing from the man who promised even less. Larry Pinkney (Information Clearing House) offers a list of things to expect:
In relative short order - inside the United States itself - under a Barack Obama presidency, the living conditions of the majority of Black, White, Brown, Red, and Yellow peoples will continue to steadily and massively deteriorate while the corporate Wall Street barons prolong their glut of the every day people's finances, resources, hopes, and dreams. Under an Obama presidency those non Blacks who stand in opposition to Barack Obama's de facto pro Wall Street backers and their blood-sucking policies will be branded as racists and traitors, while those Blacks who oppose Obama's policies will be ignored and/or branded as fringe radicals and traitors. Thus, the horrors of the U.S. Empire will continue unabated, and in many respects, under Barack Obama, actually worsen. The blame for the deteriorating economy and continued war will of course quickly be laid by the Obama / Biden regime and the Democratic Party Republicrats on the previous Bush / Cheney regime, despite the fact that it was the complicity of the Democratic Party itself with the Bush / Cheney Republican Republicrat regime that facilitated the despicable policies and practices of the Bush / Cheney regime. The fact is that the Democratic and Republican Parties are de facto Republicrats with the objective of exploiting the majority of people and maintaining U.S. Empire abroad.
After the Democratic Party Republicrats so-called election euphoria and celebrating is over, the Obama / Biden Republicrat regime will get down to the business of placing the ongoing exploitation of the every day people of this nation on fast track. The masses of Black Americans, along with the oppressed and exploited Brown, Red, Yellow, and White peoples of this nation will learn first hand that, notwithstanding the deceptive Obama rhetoric, exploitation nationally and internationally will be intensified. The "clash between those who want freedom, justice, equality for everyone and those who want to continue the system of exploitation" about which Malcolm X referred, will be intensified under Barack Obama, with Obama representing the interests of the oppressors. The political contradictions in this regard will also be increasingly obvious.
Those so-called leftist and progressives who were and are collaborators with U.S. Empire will, for a time, try to pretend that their support of Barack Obama was not a sell out, and that they simply need more time to persuade the U.S. Empire's colored corporate emperor to do the right thing. Meanwhile, Black, Brown, Red, Yellow, and White peoples will be enduring an unprecedented rate of economic and social suffering. The anger of the people will ultimately peak and explode, as a result of having bought into false hope and raised expectations. This is precisely why the U.S. corporate government has already made military contingency plans to contain and massively quash dissention within the United States. Barack Obama will serve to provide his corporate / military masters with colored political cover for political repression in this nation; and he will have already provided a small respite of wiggling room for them in this regard. Nevertheless, as brutal reality forces the proverbial scales of blindness to drop from eyes of the masses, it will become crystal clear that the supposed "change" to which Barack Obama referred in his campaign rhetoric, was nothing more than a vicious ruse of double-speak by him, backed by his corporate and military handlers. Indeed, the emperor will be shown to "have no clothes." But what of the fate of millions of Black, White, Brown, Red, and Yellow peoples inside the U.S.? How many horrible sacrifices will have been, and will yet need to be made by the people in order to get the boot of economic blood-sucking and political repression off their / our necks?
"And to all those watching tonight from beyond our shores, from parliaments and palaces, to those who are huddled around radios in the forgotten corners of the world, our stories are singular, but our destiny is shared, and a new dawn of American leadership is at hand."
In other words: Don't worry, world. The bad old days of George Bush are over.
"To those -- to those who would tear the world down: We will defeat you."
In other words: Under my administration we Americans will continue to simplistically conceptualize the existence of an enemy that is pure evil and wants to destroy the world, and imagine we can "defeat" it through the War on Terror.
Exit polls demonstrate that the economy was the number one issue, ahead of the illegal war. Going unnoticed is how Iraq was taken off the table by All Things Media Big and Small. When the faux activists of CODESTINK are protesting Wall St. -- not for the war machinery they manufacture and sell but over the economic meltdown -- and Jodi's given everything but her uterus to Barack's campaign, don't pretend anyone's being encouraged to give a damn about ending the Iraq War. To really ensure that it be a non-issue, did someone else take it off the table? Damien McElroy (Telegraph of London) reports that Nouri al-Maliki is claiming to "close aides" that he gave the election to Barack because "he took the Iraqi issue 'off the table' for Obama by endorsing his timetable during his visit to Baghdad in July." Don't be too angry with al-Maliki, CIA assets tend to face very violent rub-outs when they've exhuasted their usefulness and al-Maliki's pretty much squeezed out. al-Maliki reportedly believes he can get further concessions from Barack on the treaty between the White House and the puppet government. At the US State Dept today, Sean McCormack was asked about the treaty and the spokesperson stated that the US has not yet responded (officially) to the amendments suggested by Iraq and that US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker will convey communications to al-Maliki. As for whether the amendments will fly or not, McCormack declared, "Well, again, I go back to what -- you know, what I've said and what Dana Perino has said over at the White House in terms of the bar for any changes. You know, it's a pretty high bar for any changes. But again, we'll take a look at what is suggested. We're formulating our responses. The Iraqis took some time to think through what they wanted to provide us by way of comments, and we're taking our time in providing that response back to them."
One thing Ambassador Crocker already conveyed to the Iraqi government was, "While this historic election has changed a great many things, we will also have full continuity of policy and purpose as we move through our transition." NPR's Corey Flintoff (All Things Considered) reported that today and on the reaction of Iraqis to the election results with Abu Osama stating, "We don't know whether he'll change now that he's elected" and
Rana Sa'ad Diyab stating she's not seen any improvements in six years and "she'll wait and see whether Obama's policies bring any changes in security or her family's standard of living, but she doubts that will happen." Hameed Kamil Hilal tells Leila Fadel and Corinne Reilly (McClatchy Newspapers), "We have seen nothing positive from any American president, and McCain and Obama are two faces of one coin, one policy." Meanwhile Demetri Sevastopulo (Financial Times of London) explains that it's not just Iraqis who are doubtful that any 'change' will take place, "On Iraq, the Illinois senator campaigned on a pledge to remove US combat troops within sixteen months, but some military officers privately argue that he will show more flexibility on timing after assuming responsibility for the war started by George W. Bush."
In some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad car bombing where the driver killed him/herself and 4 people with nine more wounded, a Baghdad roadside bombing where three people were wounded and a Mosul roadside bombing that claimed 1 life with three more wounded.
In peace news, Cindy Sheehan ran for the US Congress from California's 8th district. She lost to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi yesterday. While others tried to hop a bandwagon and refused to challenge Democrats, Cindy had the strength to stand up. At Information Clearing House she shares her thoughts:
This past month, I kept on saying to my supporters, staff, interns, volunteers and myself, that no matter what happened on November 4th that we could hold our heads up high and be very proud of our campaign. Until yesterday, I wasn't sure that what I said would be true, but I feel an incredibly sense of peace and pride in our accomplishments. There were so many victories over the last year that the American paradigm of "winner-take all" just doesn't fit.
We moved into San Francisco a little over a year ago with less than nothing. We used savings and credit cards to open our office and sometimes to keep it open. We transformed a former "sex shop" to a fully functioning and vibrant campaign office. Our "natural base" never materialized, so we had to build a foundation in less than a few months.
In August, we historically gained ballot access as only the 6th independent campaign in California history to do so. Our platform based on humane economics was in place long before the recent collapses and resultant bailouts. Our labor platform was hailed all over the world, while unions here in SF supported the corporate "rescuer" Nancy Pelosi.
Cindy for Congress never once sold out our solid principles based campaign and would never sell out the voters of San Francisco like Nancy Pelosi has. Nancy Pelosi ran from my campaign and our demands to debate me and we persevered and did so amazingly well after a near total media black out and several attempts at political intimidation.
We got to the end of this stage with a barrel full of integrity and a boatload of dedication and love. Dozens of activists came from all over the country to be here to help us spread our progressive, peace based message and thousands donated to help keep our campaign afloat.
We have moved right through November 4th because this is a movement for peace and against corporate control of our political system. Movements can't stop, we must keep moving.
The elections will feature political races heavily influenced by Iraq's complex and sectarian conflicts. They could exacerbate tensions in southern Iraq between U.S.-backed Prime Minister Nouri Maliki's nationalist Islamic Dawa Party and the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, the two main Shiite Muslim parties in the country. The results of the internal Shiite rivalry are likely to determine whether Iraq is broken up into semiautonomous regions or retains a strong central government. The Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council wants to push for the creation of a nine-province federal region, which Dawa fears could jeopardize Iraq's unity. "Much is at stake in Basra and other oil-bearing governorates," said Joost Hiltermann, an expert on Iraq for the International Crisis Group think tank. "And Baghdad is the prize for those who seek the restoration of strong central government in Iraq."
The above is from Ned Parker's "Iraq looks ahead to provincial, national elections" (Los Angeles Times) and will the Iraqi elections receive even a fourth of the attention worldwide that the US elections did? No, of course not.
I am sure that there are many who might feel disappointed in these results, but I have to ask if you are really all that surprised by them? Cynthia McKinney was the only major candidate left off of CNN's radar, and what "main stream media" coverage she did get (Washington Post, FoxNews) were hit pieces meant to further discredit the campaign. Cynthia McKinney is a 6 term Congresswoman with more experience in government than Obama, but she got less coverage than Chuck Baldwin, a radio minister. Wayne Allyn Root got more coverage than Cynthia McKinney. Why? Why the Blackout? It can’t be because she is an African American, can it? It can’t be because she is a woman, can it? Was it her message? Was it her lack of money?However, I am not depressed by the outcome. The results of the Presidential election are of course disappointing, but on the other hand, over 150,000 Americans, of those who even had the opportunity, voted for Cynthia McKinney, despite the lack of coverage, despite the ballot access, and despite the politics of fear.
McKinney may have received more votes. The same is true for Ralph Nader, Bob Barr, Chuck Baldwin and other presidential candidates. Write-in ballots aren't a first priority when it comes to counting so the 150,000 referred to above is the preliminary count.
That said, Cynthia was savaged and she was stabbed in the back. Look at (Democratic) Women's Media Center. Supposedly a site highlighting and making women visible. They ignored Cynthia and Rosa's run and only did a story on them (October 31st) finally due to (a) pressure (including the site being called "racist") and (b) they thought it would serve as counter to Robin Morgan's latest foaming at the mouth insanity against Sarah Palin. WMC can't endorse candidates but they damn well did, didn't they? When you cheerlead one campaign over and over and ignore another (one article on Cynthia the entire election?), you are endorsing.
Like every other woman who wouldn't whore herself out for Barack in 2008, Cynthia had to be ignored and demonized at the same time. That's just the way it worked. And the feminist 'leadership' is so damn pathetic that they not only allowed it to happen, they took part in it. They did so when it was Hillary, they did so with Palin and they did so with Cynthia. They sent the message very loud and clear that no woman was good enough and that they will always suck up to a man. It's a message they made clear in 1972 as well and why Shirley Chisholm had a great deal to say about what passed for 'leadership.'
'Leadership' is too old and out of it to lead anymore and expect major shake ups in the near future. It's really amazing that the likes of Robin Morgan elected to go out this way. Susan Faludi's Backlash is an amazing book but the Sleepless in Seattle reference becomes more true every day. Had most actually read the book, they'd know what lies ahead. Backlash didn't just call out the Newsweek lie re: marriage. Backlash called out all the women who contributed to the backlash and, yes, that did include Ms. magazine. The next major feminist book will do the same and when Robin's called out for lying, a few years from now when young women are finding out that Robin Morgan (who they won't give a damn about and really shouldn't because she hasn't done anything of great value since 1972) used lies to tear apart a woman and build up a man, it won't be pretty. And if it's further noted that Morgan's (Democratic) Women's Media Center ignored Cynthia McKinney, it will be down right ugly.
We're not talking the 1800s here. Feminists are damn well aware of the charge (usually incorrect) that the feminist movement is a White movement. So a few years from now when feminists discover that Robin Morgan blacked-out Cynthia, it won't be pretty. It will be the sort of thing that moves her to the list of others who fell into disrepute over racial issues (some of the feminists from the post-Civil War era). Because feminism isn't about telling someone how to vote (though Robin Morgan -- Socialist that she is -- never learned that lesson). Feminism is about opportunities and access. When a so-called feminist outlet like WMC refuses to cover the presidential campaign of a woman (while filing non-stop garbage on a male running for president), opportunities and access for women have been limited.
It's all the more appalling when we're speaking of a woman who stood up for women's rights, reproductive rights and more during her terms in Congress. But she got written off because it was so much more important (and so much more 'feminist') for women to go gaa-gaa over a man. This was Shirley's point, by the way, all those years ago: When women won't even support a woman's right to run, what does that say about the feminist movement?
Thirty-six years later and we're left with the same question.
A visitor e-mailed to complain about Greg Palast. When I have time, his tired ass is pulled from the links. We haven't linked to him in an entry here in years. Yeah, Greggie went and endorsed Barack even though he damn well used Cynthia for years. It really doesn't matter with Palast, he's trash. Only trash choose to publish in H**tler magazine. Had I known he'd done that, he'd never have been added to a link. He's trash. He's human trash. He was never going to endorse Cynthia, his thoughts on women are clear by his decision to be Larry F**nt's buddy.
But back to the issue of the failure of 'leadership.' Here's reality, in the past, 'leaders' didn't hang on so desperately. Current 'leadership' has been in place since the last years of the 60s and need to step their asses down. They wanted 'change' and the 'youth' was so important -- they said. That's why they endorsed Barack.
Well get your tired asses out of 'leadership.' Who the hell are you anyway, Fidel Castro? Goodness, how long are you going to desperately try to hold on? Really, it's past time for all of you to take your asses onto the golden years and let other women step up. If you can't do that, you'll be shoved out of the way and that's what should be happening right now.
It's that baby boomer stranglehold. No other generation has ever been allowed to control and impose for so very damn long. Come on, gals, show us some 'change' -- 'change we can believe in!' Sit your tired asses down, and stop repeating the same talking point you've made for nearly forty years. It's time to go.
We live in a society where women are conditioned to be 'nice' and to put others 'first.' As a result, women's reactions are rarely immediate. They build slowly. We saw that with Anita Hill and we'll be seeing in the near future with regards to what went down this year.
2008 saw open season on Hillary Clinton. She was the first. And some, like Robin, might think that defending Hillary means they accomplished something. Robin accomplished nothing. In her defense of Hillary, she rightly said that Hillary is not responsible for Bill's actions and shouldn't be held accountable for them. But when it was time to rip apart Sarah Palin, Robin was more than fine with snarling over Todd Palin's two decades old DUI or DWI. (I don't know which and I don't give a damn, something that happened 20 years ago and wasn't done by the candidate? Not interested in that gutter nonsense.) That's what Robin still can't grasp and why women are so furious with her right now.
It's not about politics. It's about feminism. And feminism didn't require that any woman vote for Hillary in the Democratic Party primary or that they vote for Cynthia in the general election or for McCain because Palin was on the ticket.
Feminsim did require that we all stood up to sexist coverage in the media. Not just for our personal favorite but for all women running on presidential tickets.
Robin made it very clear that you could stone Sarah Palin and she'd never call you out or even be bothered by it.
That's not feminism.
In two pieces, she trashed Sarah Palin -- "trashed" in the feminist sense of the word. She used gossip and lies and she behaved like the stereotypical "harpy" -- she didn't just embarrass herself, she embarrassed all feminists and the movement itself.
Though she could blather on and on about Barack, she never wrote a word about Cynthia. Actually, she did. She didn't name Cynthia, but she ridiculed Ralph (by name) and all candidates not of the two-major parties. Remember, no one ever carries as much water for the Democratci Party as a Socialist (Robin) or Communist trying to fit in.
In 2012, a woman may run again. Why she'd bother is a question many might have after 2008.
But it needs to be noted that the tired 'leadership' of the feminist movement has made it very clear that women can be ripped apart in the press and attacked for their clothes, for their hair, for their looks and for the gender. It's been made clear that unless you're a feminist 'fave' (Hillary), you won't be defended. Even if you're a feminist -- and all three women are feminists: Hillary, Cynthia and Sarah -- you won't be defended strongly.
So what women can expect is three types of treatment:
1) The Hillary: You're old and unattractive! We want a young man! You married your way in! You pimp your daughter! You're calculating and ambitious! Power-hungry! Look at your clothes!
2) The Sarah: You're an idiot! You're a beauty queen! You're calculating and ambitious! Power-hungry! (Ava and I will be going into this in great detail at Third Sunday.) Look at your clothes!
3) The Cynthia: You don't exist! You're not even worthy of my time! You are invisible! You need to drop out of the race because you could hurt the man! Look at your clothes!
That's the message that was sent. 'No woman is worthy, therefore there's no point in the feminist movement defending any woman.'
"Leadership" failed women and the first thing they should be doing right now is apologizing for that. The seeds were sewn early in the year as non-Democrats like Eve Ensler and others stuck their noses into a Democratic Party primary and started questioning Hillary's gender. That should have resulted in the Red Queen Evie being sent packing. She's not really a feminist and she's never done anything but line her own pockets with that bad 'play' she 'wrote.' But she and others were allowed to rip apart Hillary in the 'name of feminism' and do so in the most sexist manner.
"Leadership" failed women by playing favorites when they offered minimal media criticism. Sexism was all over the airwaves. It was not confined to MSNBC. But they became the Whipping Boys.
I think we'd all agree that making racist remarks is racism. I think we'd also all agree that refusing to include accomplishments by people of color is racism. And yet, MSNBC got called out for sexism while so many others walked free. Some of whom made sexist remarks but all of whom (and especially focus on PBS here) were happy to refuse the accomplishments of women.
Leadership needs to apologize to the grassroots for:
A) Refusing to stand up for women B) Joining in the attacks on women C) Refusing to lead
Leading is not bullying people into voting for a candidate.
I'm biting my tongue because of a piece Ava and I are doing but one thing this week, if you caught it, on TV, may have underscored how low women have fallen. And that happened due to 'leadership' focusing on other things.
Instead of fretting over presidential candidates or hoping they could get Bob to ask a question at the debates, feminist 'leaders' should have been calling out the fact that women were marginalized. That happened in debates, that happened in panels. No, it's not a new development but it has never been this bad.
When nearly ten people were discussing First Ladies and women's advances on PBS during the Republican Party convention, feminist 'leaders' damn well should have made a huge issue out of the fact that not one person was a woman. But they didn't even notice. "Don't call out PBS, it's our friend!"
There are no passes. Feminism is independent movement. That's always been the case. Women couldn't matter in 2008 because feminist 'leaders' didn't act as if women mattered.
Apologies need to be made to the grassroots and resignations need to be offered.
So many different kind of people Trying to be the same "No way," baby He said Baby there's no way
So the breakdown currently is 62,509,207 votes for Barack and 55,438,509 for McCain making it 349 electoral college votes for Barack and 147 for McCain. Not the blow out they wanted and not a landslide by any real definition of the word. It's not all that different from the election it resembles in so many ways, 1968's where Tricky Dick got 301 electoral votes and Hubert Humphrey got 191.
As in that year, the presidency flipped parties. As in that election, an illegal war started by one party's president was turned over to another and continued.
Exit polls showed that voters were deeply anxious about the economy and dissatisfied with President Bush. They haven't been thrilled by Democrats in Congress, either, largely because the new majority could not agree on how to end the Iraq war as promised. Exit polling showed that the war remains unpopular, and distaste for the conflict helped Obama. Nearly two-thirds disapprove of the conflict, and that group overwhelmingly backed the Democrat. But that issue faded this year. Politically, the economy was the number one issue with voters and nothing else came close, exit polls showed. That hurt McCain and trickled down-ballot, hurting some Republican candidates.
The Democratic Congress (2006 to 2008) couldn't end the illegal war and doesn't plan to now. Get used to it. Get used to more lies from them. More reasons they just can't -- though they really, really, really want to, honest! -- end the illegal war. Get used to them continuing to play dumb about what's going on.
It's not just that in two years they couldn't end the illegal (and highly unpopular) war they were elected to end, it's that they couldn't impeach the Bully Boy who leaves office with the lowest approval ratings in polling history. And they said that control of even one house would mean this amazing investigative power (as heads of committees) and what the hell have they done?
The only thing that there's been any improvement has to do with veterans care and that did not result from Congress. That resulted from the Washington Post (with their expose on Walter Reed) and CBS News (with their expose on the actual suicide rate as opposed to the number Veterans Affairs wanted to emphasize). There have been many for-show hearings but when did anything actually happen? Never. Not with Blackwater, not with anything. For-show hearings that resulted in nothing.
Oh, they grabbed some headlines, they just didn't do any actual work. The for-show Congress continues. The Dems didn't see the huge increase they wanted (and some races are still not called) but they got an increase.
In the process, the illegal war just got a little longer. President John McCain would have meant what passes for the left in this country could have been active and active from day one of the next adminsitration. President Barack Obama means more passes, more 'tingles,' more whores offering excuses and throwing hissy-fits when the Christ-child is expected to meet the same standards as any other adult.
The hallmark of this decade will not be the financial crisis. That's not saying that mess is over because it's not. But that's pointing out that the illegal war will be the hallmark. The Iraq War, more than any other event, will sum up this decade in the history books and it hits year six in March. The Katrina vanden Heuvels, the Matthew Rothschilds, the Amy Goodmans and all the other losers of Panhandle Media don't give a damn about ending the illegal war. Like the Democratic Party, they raked it in over the illegal war. It gave them a certain level of fame. And when it came down to actually have to do something, they moved on. But when they -- like Democrats -- could make some superficial remarks against the illegal war and get some loud cheers and applause, they were more than happy to ride it to what passed for fame.
And their failure to end the illegal war, their failure to build any serious opposition to the illegal war is the reason their broadcast audience and readership shrinks and shrinks. In 2003, they were posing as something they weren't -- independent and journalists.
They're just more hucksters trying to stick their hands down someone else's pocket to steal a wallet and their actions have prolonged the illegal war.
They're all failures. Abject failures who couldn't succeed at real jobs and couldn't even succeed in the fringe world of 'journalism via begging.'
Remember that a few didn't lie and they actually are journalists. The list includes: John Pilger, Glen Ford, Margaret Kimberley, Bruce Dixon, Paul Street, Chris Hedges, Joshua Frank and a few others.
So the war drags on for much longer as a result of liars tricking the American people into believing that Barack would end the illegal war. (Ten months! cried Tom Hayden. At the end of ten months, that would be November 1, 2009, start booing Tom Hayden in public and give the little nothing something to cry about.)
The War Hawk will be president and that's when every liar will have to answer and that will include one little liar who rode 2004 to greater fame by calling out their peers but, you'll note, despite tossing out that lecture in 2008, the liar did just as their peers did.
In 2000 and 2004, it was Republicans who used thuggery and hate to win the presidency. In 2008, it was Democrats. Congratulations, Democrats, for a job well done. And for setting back respect for women more than 50 years. Bro's before ho's. You wanted it, you got it. Now, we'll all have to live with it.
If we could start again Well who knows Have we really changed Some say we have Reflecting our past Who can say Who can say
2008 when Democrats truly became Republicans. It wasn't that difficult, just grab even more corporate money (and, in the process, destroy public financing) while knowing that the likes of Katty-van-van and Matty Roth would never, ever call you out or hold you to any standard of human decency. Democrats couldn't transform into Republicans without Panhandle Media agreeing not to hold them accountable.
Races are run Some people win Some people always have to lose
Tuesday,
November 4, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the illegal war is not
ending anytime soon judging by most signals, Talabani and Barzani
continue to have conflict, the treaty is said to be progressing . . .
to a national referendum (?) and more.
In the US voting takes place today. It does not mean life stops or that the entire world does. Gina Chon (Baghdad Life, Wall St. Journal) writes
of "Samir Ahmed, a government employee, said he had also once assumed a
different U.S. administration would mean a different policy towards
Iraq. The presidential race he was thinking of was between Bill
Clinton and the first George Bush. Mr. Clinton won, but continue a
tough stance against Iraq. Today, he expects that no matter who wins
the current race, American policy toward Iraq will remain the same."
Mariam Toma agrees and tells Chon, "Both of them will not withdraw U.S.
forces. In contrast, maybe the will actually find another reason to
stay even longer in Iraq." Meanwhile Stephen Farrell, Mudhafer al-Husaini and Abeer Mohammed (Baghdad Bureau, New York Times) did a snap-poll,
"an informal snapshot of Iraqis living or working in the Green Zone.
Of 200 Iraqis spoken to after they streamed out of two Green Zone
exists into the 'real' Baghdad on Monday, just over a third of them
wanted the Americans to leave Iraq as soon as possile while just under
half wanted them to stay. The remainder offered options somewhere in
between." These are Green Zoners and they do fear the fall of the Green
Zone and the puppet government. They're protected while, everywhere
else, Iraqis aren't so lucky.
Meanwhile Germany's increasingly pathetic Der Speigel
(which has been justifying and supporting the illegal war for sometime
if you'd bothered to pay attention) runs the craked musings of Peter
Ross Range who just knows Barack will win the presidency and calls
for him to "revise" the 16-month 'plan' for 'withdrawal.' PeePee Ross
Range is a DLC-er (Der Spiegel calls him "moderate") and he cheerleader
the illegal war before it started and justified it for years and
years. As late as July 22, 2005, he was whining that 'liberals' and
'progressives' needed to praise Saddam being disposed and be less
criticisl ("Liberal's War" published in the DLC bible). January 8,
2004, he was writing that the US shouldn't withdraw or even "pull-back"
("Remembering the Middle Class," ibid). October 21, 2005 PeePee was
whining, "Many war opponents, often still traumatized by Vietnam, are
preoccupied with what invading Iraq says about America rather than what
it does for the Iraqis" ("War of Conscience"). Der Spiegel's
become an embarrassment but for those who know PeePee's work, it's
probably worth a chuckle -- September 30, 2002, he was wondering if
Germany was "Anti-American" or "Anti-Bush"? Translation, the two
deserve one another.
Barack's 'plan' for withdrawal? Are we actually back to that lie? Droping back to a Third editorial from June:
Stephen
Sackur: You said that he'll revisit it [the decision to pull troops]
when he goes to the White House. So what the American public thinks is
a commitment to get combat forces out within sixteen months, isn't a
commitment is it?
Samantha Power: You can't make a commitment in
whatever month we're in now, in March of 2008 about what circumstances
are going to be like in January 2009. We can'te ven tell what Bush is
up to in terms of troops pauses and so forth. He will of course not
rely upon some plan that he's crafted as a presidential candidate or as
a US Senator.
When
Power gave that interview, she was still his foreign policy advisor.
And backing up her claims that promises weren't really promises, here's Barack speaking to Candy Crowley June 5th on CNN when asked about his 'promise' to withdraw (combat troops):
Well,
you know, I'd never say there's 'nothing' or 'never' or 'no way' in
which I'd change my mind." Obviously, I'm open to the facts and to
reason. And there's no doubt that we've seen significant improvements
in security on the ground in Iraq. And our troops, and Gen. Petraeus,
deserve enormous credit for that. I have to look at this issue from a
broader perspective, though.
In
April Power tells the BBC that Barack's 'pledges' and 'promises' on
Iraq are non-binding and, if elected, he'll decide what to do then.
June 5th, Barack echoes that to CNN. And Panhandle Media works overtime
to ignore reality. And if you like being played, you'll love what they
have planned.
--- End of excerpt. Get it. No
'plan,' no 'promise.' That's reality. So why is PeePee asking Barack
to rethink a non-pledge? Because PeePee's audience isn't Barack, it's
you. PeePee wants to soften the public up to the idea that Barack in
the White House doesn't have to mean an end to the illegal war. If
elected, Barack can't break what so many wrongly believe was a
'promise' on his own. He needs a lot of liars who can soften up public
opinion.
There's no rush to leave Iraq or
even a desire. That needs to be grasped. Iraqi General Nasier Abadi
made that pretty clear during Sunday's press conference in the Green
Zone. Questioned by the Washington Post's Mary Beth Sheridan
as to when the Iraqis would be able to handle "their own internal
security . . . how many years are you away from reaching that goal,"
Abadi tried to distract by listing duties before declaring, "We have no
duties or missions to protect the air on the borders of the country.
But in case we have this responsibility, there is a brief that -- to
the minister of defense, if he ask us to -- task us with that, a
reportw ent also to the Prime Minister, what are the capabilities and
the army's specifics to do those duties?" Asked how many years again,
he responded, "Building an aerial force, building an Army is not easy,
but it's still easier than building naval and air force. The naval
force, as I said before, that the first ship will come in 2009 and the
fourth will arrive in . . . at the end of 2011. In regard to 200- . .
. Air Force, the first aircraft we will receive in 2011 until 2015.
And that depends on the support and the help that the coalition forces
can secure to Iraq so we can be able to maintain and defend our
airspace and territories. Without that, there will be also agreements
with the neighboring countries on the security of Iraq. But it's
possible that we will go with those missions without having an air
force or naval force because this is a common battle, it's not just an
army's duty." Setting aside the naval force and focusing only on the
air, if the period they'll be taking possession of aircraft will last
from 2011 through 2015, how likely is it that they will be prepared to
handle their own airspaceby the end of 2011?
At
the Pentagon today, spokesperson Bryan Whitman informed reporters that
there was a plan in place for transition from the Bully Boy to the
winner of today's election. A comparison was rightly made between LBJ
and Tricky Dick. Nixon didn't end the illegal war, he only continued
it. Whitman declared, "One of the important components of this is
ensuring that we've identified and highlighted some of the key
department events, actions, milestones that a new administration will
face in its first 90 days."
Turning to the topic of the Status Of Forces Agreement masquerading as a treaty, CNN reports Sami al-Askari (Nouri al-Maliki adviser) states
that the White House "has signaled to Iraqi officials that it is
seriously considering proposed changes to an agreement that would set
the terms for U.S. troops in Iraq". Al Jazeera notes
that al-Askari has no official response from the White House and that
Iraq's Sunni vice president Tareq al-Hashemi is advocating that the
treaty be put up for approval to all Iraqis (not just the Parliament),
"This agreement is an important and sensitive subject . . . Iraqis
should have their say." Khalid al-Ansary, Missy Ryan and Kevin Liffey (Reuters) add
that al-Hashemi is indicateing that the agreement be placed on the
ballot with "provincial elections scheduled to take place by the end of
January." At which point, who would be in Iraq? The United Nations
mandate that governs the occupation expires December 31st at which
point, if no new agreement has been reached, there is no legal
authority for foreign forces to be on Iraqi soil. The White House has
attempted political blackmail insisting that they will cut off this and
that if Baghdad won't sign off on the treaty. Richard Tomkins (UPI) notes,
"Iraq, with no air control capability at present, nonetheless would
have to take over air traffic control and also assume total
responsibility for guarding its borders." Al Bawaba notes
that today's "Baghdad edition of the London-based newspaper Asharq
Al-Awsat said the Americans had agreed to three of the five latest
changes proposed by Iraq. It said, quoting unnamed sources, that
Washington had dropped the clause that authorises Baghdad and
Washington to seek an extension for retaining troops in the cities
beyond 2009 and in the country beyond 2011." Maria Appakova (UPI) explains:
However,
Americans are in no hurry to raise this question at the U.N. Security
Council. Staying in Iraq in accordance with an international mandate
is one thing, but having a strategic partnership treaty and receiving
dividends from it is quite another matter.
Yet
Washington has no choice -- it cannot take offense at Iraqis and pull
out its troops from Iraq. It won't be able to attach the blame for
withdrawal to Russia, since Moscow does not mind Americans continuing
their presence there for a while, and Russia is not in favor of an
upsurge of terror in the region, after all.
[. . .]
[US}
House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton stated that he is
"deeply concerned" with what he heard. Skelton is referring to the
agreement's provisions that recently leaked to the press, which
include, for example, the Iraqi government's ability to put American
servicemen and private security companies' personnel on trial for
cirmes they committed while on leave and outside military bases.
It must be said that if this provision really has been included in the draft, it is quite a victory for the Iraqi government.
Meanwhile Gulf Daily News notes
continued conflict between the Baghdad government and the Kurdish one
with the country's President Jalal Talabani stating the US cannot set
up bases anywhere in Iraq "without the approval of the central
government" in Baghdad which was a strong rebuke to KRG president
Massud Barzani who stated last week that, should the US and Baghdad not
sign off on a treaty, the US could just set up bases in the Kurdish
region. The tensions between the Kurdish region and Iraq are never not
on display. Last Wednesday, at the White House, Barzani was being translated when he cut in to correct the translator:
Translator: And in terms of SOFA, we do believe that it is in the interest of the Iraqi government --
Massud Barzani: Iraqi people.
Translator:
-- it's in the interest of this country and we have been and we will
continue to support it and support its ratification.
Hoda Abdel-Hamid (Al Jazeera) notes
that the US popularity in the Kurdish region is sinking (after years of
sucking up) and quotes Barzan Mohamed stating, "America was not honest
with the Kurds. They've let them down in the past and they only follow
their interests. They can leave the Kurds any time and I don't trust
having an alliance with them or even friendship. Yes, they rid us of
dictatorship, but they came here to control the region and the Middle
East." Iran's Press TV states
that Talabani made a point to praise Iran Sunday for their help with
Iraq's security and that Talabani also cited Syria and that, on the
treaty, Talabani "said that Iraq is a unified country and no one has
the right to object the Iraqi government's decision, should it refuse
the security deal. Talabani was referring to a recent interview by
Massud Barzani, the president of the local government of Iraq's
Kurdistan during which he said that the Kurdistan region would provide
the U.S. with military bases if Baghdad refuses to sign the security
deal with Washington."
We've noted
the Iraqi Air Force twice in today's snapshot. 1) It's not due to be
ready until 2015 at the earliest and 2) the US is using the lack of one
to threaten Baghdad into signing off on the treaty. For those not
grasping how "shambles" is too mild a word to be applied to IAF, let's
drop back to October 24th. M-NF trumpeted "Iraqi Air Force celebrates another milestone."
Sounds good, right? Yeah, as long as you don't go beneath the
headline. If you do, you find: "The Iraqi Air Force surpassed another
milestone Oct. 22 when an all-Iraqi flight crew took to the air in the
King Air Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance aircraft for the
first time in support of an Iraqi Special Operations Forces training
exercise." Five years after the start of the illegal war (six this
March) and that's where the IAF is? They've just finished their first
"all-Iraqi flight crew" flight?
Moving on to some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
a Baghdad sticky bomb wounded three people (all family members),
another Baghdad sticky bombing reulted 1 person being killed and seven
more wounded, a third Baghdad sticky bombing claimed 1 life and left
five wounded, a Baghdad roadside bombing resulted in 4 deaths and eight
people being wounded and another Baghdad bombing claimed 7 lives with
eighteen people wounded. Ned Parker (Los Angeles Times) updates the seven dead by 4 for eleven and notes that the bomb was "hidden in a car at a bus stop" (wounded rose to twenty-one). Reuters notes
a Mosul roadside bombing that claimed 1 life and left one person
wounded and another Mosul roadside bombing resulted in five people
being injured and a Mosul "suicide car" bombing left four police
officers injured.
Shootings?
Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
1 Iraqi police officer was shot dead in Baghdad (three more wounded)
and 1 "Lieutenant Colonel working for the ministry of interior affairs"
was shot dead in Baghdad. Reuters notes 2 police officers was shot dead in Mosul while 2 civilians were shot dead in different incidents.
Today Michael Birnbaum (Washington Post) reports
that DoD "announced yesterday the death of Pfc. Bradly Shane Colemn of
Mratinsville, VA, who had been serving in Iraq" and whose October 29th
death is under investigation. His death brings the toll to 14 for the month of October.
As Katharine Q. Seelye (New York Times) points out, "The
fact is, there is plent of mystery -- nad there is only one poll that
counts." It is election day and anything can happen. Kimberly Wilder (On The Wilder Side) will
live blog the election tonight beginning at 8:00 p.m. EST. So check out
her site which will go beyond the D and R to include other letters in
the alphabet. Including "G" (Wilder is a Green.)
Starting with independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader and his running mate Matt Gonzalez. Team Nader notes:
We're having a party!
A Nader/Gonzalez party!
Tonight, we celebrate.
If you are a skeptic, you might be asking -- what, pray tell, are you celebrating?
To which we answer --
The power of the people.
The power of you -- our loyal supporters.
Against all odds -- and in the face of a major media blackout -- together, we have given the American people a choice today.
For the Nader/Gonzalez shift the power agenda.
With eight months of hard work, we have put that agenda on the ballot in 45 states and the District of Columbia.
Ralph has campaigned in all 50 states.
And
together we have organized a network of American citizens to press
onward for single payer health insurance, a living wage, a cut in the
bloated, wasteful military budget, for a reversal of U.S. policy in the Middle East -- everything the Nader/Gonzalez campaign stands for.
So, today, if you haven't already done so, vote with pride for Nader/Gonzalez.
And then, no matter what the outcome tonight, celebrate!
Congratulations!
With the coming disintegration of two party domination of our politics, you have chosen to be on the winning side of history.
So, celebrate tonight!
And while celebrating, follow Ralph's results on the net or television.
(Unfortunately,
most of the major news outlets apparently will not include third party
and independent candidates in their result totals -- but Fox News' map
apparently will (fair and balanced?) -- county by county
and nationwide.
How much money did you raise for your campaign? "Insufficient."
Why do you keep running for president? "Justice."
Will you be elected president? "No."
When do you think you will win? "Sometime."
What should Bush do on his last day in office? "Surrender."
Will Obama be able to provide tax cuts to 95 percent of the population? "Impossible."
What is your opinion of the media? "Servile."
John
McCain is the Republican presidential candidate, Sarah Palin is his
running mate. John and Cindy McCain have four children and Meghan
McCain is the one who blogs online (at McCainBloggette.com and has also written a book for children about her father) and she notes today:
What
a long strange journey it's been. Dad I love you so much and am so
proud to be your daughter every day. If you need to know why you should
vote for Dad, click here.
Thank you to everyone for everything... And yes, we will be posting
about election night. You didn't think I would leave my loyal readers
hanging, did you? Now get out and vote!
After
campaigning coast to coast on Monday, Sarah Palin caught a few winks on
a red-eye flight to her home state, where fresh snow glistened in the
early-morning moonlight as the temperature hovered around 14 degrees.
Palin
voted early this morning inside the tiny City Hall building where just
six years ago she presided as mayor of this once unknown frontier town
outside Anchorage. Proudly donning her "I Voted Today" sticker, the
Alaska governor delivered a short statement to reporters and took a few
questions before she heads to Phoenix to find out whether she'll become
the first female vice president of the United States.
It's
been a whirlwind couple of months for Palin, who has fallen under
perhaps more scrutiny than any vice presidential candidate in the
nation's history. But as usual, she portrayed an almost mystifying
sense of calm, considering all that she has been through in such a
relatively short time.
And Kimberly Wilder (On The Wilder Side) notes,
"Green Party Presidential Candidate Cynthia McKinney will be spending
Election Night with California Congressional Candidate and Peace Mom
Cindy Sheehan. There will be live streaming here starting at 8pm."
Iraq? Find the coverage. It's not in the New York Times. Do you see it anywhere? Reuters runs an article
claiming that October had the lowest death toll for US service members.
Oh really? No, they're lying through their teeth. 13 is the death toll
for US service members. 13 was the death toll in July and when you
embarrass yourself by claiming you're referring to X-type of deaths,
you damn well better grasp that some deaths from October are still
under investigation. Translation, you don't know how the service
members died so stick with the data, don't go inventing.
Remember that? It's from Saturday's "Robin Morgan's homophobic candidate"
and we're starting with that because, golly goodness, M-NF sat on a
death. 13 wasn't the lowest (July also had 13) but the number was
actually 14
for the month of October. Why so many enjoy being punked by M-NF month
after month is anyone's guess. Maybe they believe it makes them Charlie
Brown attempting to kick that football? (Though why anyone would want
to be sad sack Charlie Brown . . . ) Staying with the issue of deaths
of service members, this is from Michael Birnbaum's "Va. Soldier's Death Under Investigation" (Washington Post)
The
Defense Department announced yesterday the death of Pfc. Bradley Shane
Coleman of Martinsville, Va., who had been serving in Iraq. Coleman,
24, died Oct. 29 of noncombat injuries, and the death is under
investigation, according to a department news release. He was assigned
to the 51st Transportation Company, based in Mannheim, Germany. Yolanda
Coleman, his stepmother, told the Martinsville Bulletin on Sunday that
he died of a gunshot wound. She declined to be interviewed yesterday.
From
electricity and health care to education and the economy, Iraq has many
needs, and safe drinking water is among the most urgent. "The
water situation in Iraq is a crisis," said Bushra Jabbar al Kinani, an
Iraqi lawmaker and a member of the parliament's services and public
works committee. "We see the consequences in the health of our people,
and they are very bad." Waterborne
diseases such as cholera and typhoid are endemic. A cholera outbreak
this summer sickened hundreds in Baghdad and Babil province. Diarrhea
is among the leading causes of childhood illness and death in Iraq,
according to the Iraqi Red Crescent Organization, a nonprofit aid
agency. "Everywhere there is
not clean water there is disease," said Jalil al Shimari, a doctor with
Baghdad's health directorate. "We see a steady number of people still
getting sick from the water problems."
"There
has been some improvement in recent months, both in terms of security
and essential services. More people now have access to health services
and clean water. But far too many Iraqis still have no choice but to
drink dirty water and live in insalubrious conditions," said Juan-Pedro
Schaerer, the ICRC's head of delegation for Iraq. "This leads to more
sick people seeking treatment in a health-care system already stretched
to the limit."
The ICRC is particularly concerned about people
living in households not connected to a water network (some 40 per cent
of the total, and mainly in the countryside and suburbs). They must
either buy water -- at an average cost of 50 US cents for 10 litres --
or, if they are too poor to do so, collect it from rivers and wells,
which are often polluted. Even households that do have piped water
regularly experience problems owing to a chronic lack of maintenance
and innumerable illegal connections to the network. Furthermore, many
Iraqis have to live with the health hazards of uncollected household
waste and untreated sewage.
As a result, many people contract
water-borne diseases, further straining hospitals and clinics already
struggling with a lack of resources. "My daughter is here because she
drank dirty water," said a mother at Abu Ghraib General Hospital, near
Baghdad. "We have no clean water at home. The only water we get is from
the river."
Medical staff are struggling with chronic shortages
of supplies and equipment. Dilapidated and sometimes outdated medical
facilities lack proper maintenance and sanitation. Electricity
shortages are common and many facilities have to rely on back-up
generators. Many Iraqis simply cannot afford the treatment they need.
Specialized surgery and treatment for diseases such as cancer are often
available only in certain hospitals in the main cities.
Imogen Foulkes (BBC) spoke
with the ICRC's Beatrice Megevand who noted the cholera outbreak (the
now yearly cholera outbreak) and "said she was especially concerned
about the lack of clean water supplies. Ms Megevand Roggo said even the
most basic infrastructure in Iraq is not functioning."
Reuters notes a Baghdad bombing today has claimed at least 13 lives.
A
masked gunman who was waving an American flag on a 101 Freeway overpass
in Santa Barbara was in police custody after an hours-long standoff
that shut down the freeway in both directions and caused a rush-hour
traffic snarl this morning, officials said. Edward
Van Tassel, a 28-year-old Army veteran who served in Iraq, first
surrendered his handgun to police, officials said. As part of the
negotiation, Van Tassel asked authorities for a Barack Obama sign,
which he posted on a chain-link fence on the overpass along with the
flag he was holding, said Sgt. Lorenzo Duarte of the Santa Barbara
Police Department.
Turning to the US presidential
race. It is election day. Finally. As Katharine Q. Seelye notes on the
front page of today's New York Times ["Election Night (Popcorn Included)"], "The fact is, there is plent of mystery -- nad there is only one poll that counts." Anything can happen. Kimberly Wilder (On The Wilder Side) will
live blog the election tonight beginning at 8:00 p.m. EST. So check out
her site which will go beyond the D and R to include other letters in
the alphabet. Including "G" (Wilder is a Green.) The McKinney -
Clemente website remains down but we will note this from Rosa Clemente's personal website:
We are not the alternative ; we are the imperative.
M1 from dead prez speaks about Cynthia McKinney & Rosa Clemente
Rosa A. Clemente released the following statement:
"I
am honored and excited to accept this invitation to run with Cynthia
McKinney. Cynthia McKinney is a hero to me and many others across this
country and around the world for her courage in standing up to George
Bush while the Democratic Party establishment caved.
"This
campaign is the opportunity the Hip-Hop generation has been working
for. This is our time to address the issues affecting our communities –
rising unemployment, the high cost of food and housing, a lack of
quality public education and access to higher education, the
prison-industrial complex, and unaccountable corporate media. These
issues are not being addressed by either the Republican or Democratic
nominee.
"I choose to do this, not for me, but for my
generation, my community and my daughter. I don't see the Green Party
as an alternative; I see it as an imperative. I trust that my Vice
Presidential run will inspire all people, but especially young people
of color, to recognize that we have more then two choices. Together, we
can build the future we've been dreaming of."
Hip-Hop
artist M1 says, "I've never voted in the Presidential election; I've
never felt strongly enough about a candidate to. Knowing that Rosa
Clemente is down with Cynthia McKinney's run, I feel that now is the
greatest opportunity for the Hip-Hop community to put our collective
strength and power to the test and vote for someone who represents who
we are and what we stand for."
John McCain is the Republican Party presidential candidate, Sarah Palin is his running mate. Vernon notes this from McCain - Palin '08:
McCain-Palin Campaign Launches Honest and Open Election Hotline
ARLINGTON,
VA -- The McCain-Palin campaign launched the Honest and Open Election
hotline to help citizens learn the location of their polling place, as
well as report any instances of irregularities at the polls, including
voter fraud, intimidation, violence and electioneering. The hotline can
be accessed via phone at: 866-976-VOTE.
"With
the tomorrow's election, our Honest and Open Election hotline will
serve as an informative guide for all Americans participating in the
electoral process," said McCain-Palin National Political Director Mike
DuHaime. "The hotline will allow us to learn about and take steps
toward remedying any voter irregularities at polling places across the
country. While we are hopeful that Election Day will be free of any
wrongdoing, allies of the Democrat Party, such as ACORN, have shown a
willingness to commit fraud in both this election cycle and in 2004.
Given the tightness of the polls, all examples of fraud must be
addressed to preserve the integrity of the election."
In
2004, multiple forms of voter fraud occurred, including voter
intimidation, fraudulent registrations, multiple ballots cast and votes
bought for money. Already during the 2008 election cycle, a dead woman
in Missouri cast an absentee ballot, individuals were arrested for
voting twice in Florida and people in Ohio registered and voted on the
same day.
Ralph Nader is the independent presidential candidate and Matt Gonzalez is his running mate. Lewis notes this from Team Nader:
*Election Day - Nader to Hold One-Word Press Conference
Press Release FORIMMEDIATERELEASE Contact: Marc Abizeid, 202-471-5833, marcabizeid@votenader.org
TUESDAY, NOV. 4 - Nader to Hold One-Word Response Press Conference
*NOTECHANGEOFDATE
Special questioning/interview opportunities for members of the foreign media
In
deference to the sound bite journalism that dominates presidential
political media coverage, independent presidential candidate Ralph
Nader will host a press conference at which he will only issue one-word
responses to questions for the first 30 minutes.
Who: Ralph Nader
What:
Special One-hour Press Conference. For the first half of the Press
Conference, Mr. Nader will answer all questions with just a one-word
response. For the second half of the press conference, foreign press
credentialed media will be given priority.
Where: National Press Club, Murrow Room, 13th Floor - National Press Building, 529 14th Street NW, Washington, DC
The
Iraqi parliament approved legislation Monday that allocates six seats
in provinces to small ethnic and religious communities in the upcoming
provincial elections, but Christians, Yazidis and Shabaks asked for the
law to be overturned on the grounds that they remained underrepresented. A
similar provision guaranteeing minority representation in provincial
councils was taken out of the recent provincial elections law before it
passed. This time, the parliament chose from three proposals and passed
the one that gives religious or ethnic communities the least
representation: one seat for Christians in each of three provinces --
Baghdad, Nineveh and Basra -- and one seat each for Yazidis, Sabeans
and Shabaks in various provinces.
The story many outlets
who make some time to cover Iraq are offering today is the issue of
religious minority representation. The above is from Leila Fadel's "Iraqi minorities 'insulted' by new provincial assemblies law" (McClatchy Newspapers) and it's the place to start since it was among the earliest filed yesterday. Sam Dagher and Mohammed al-Obaidi's "Iraq Attacks Include One on Oil Official" (New York Times) notes that we're speaking of bill and not a law:
In
passing legislation that could stoke further tensions between Iraq’s
fractious ethnic and sectarian groups, Parliament voted to guarantee
minorities significantly fewer seats on provincial councils than had
been recommended by the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq. The
bill would give Christians a single seat on councils in Baghdad, Basra
and Nineveh, instead of the three seats in Baghdad, three in Nineveh
and one in Basra that were proposed by the United Nations mission. The
Yazidis, a Kurdish-speaking minority who, like Christians, have been
reeling from attacks and displacement since the start of the war in
2003, would get one seat in Nineveh, instead of the three proposed. Two
other minorities, the Shabaks and the Sabeans, would get one seat
apiece. The new bill is
supposed to be a compromise following the controversy that erupted in
late September when Parliament passed the elections bill but deleted an
article that had provided 13 seats in six provinces for Iraqi
Christians, Yazidis and other minorities. The new bill would grant only
six seats. The United Nations mission had proposed 12.
The
article stripped out of the provincial election law was Article 50.
Parliament removed it, supposedly due to the fact that a census was
never done. Nothing was said by Parliament. Protests began after
Parliament sent it on up the chain. At which point Nouri al-Maliki made
some for-show noises that only demonstrated hos uninformed/ignorant he
remains about the parliamentary process. President Jalal Talabani also
objected to it but that didn't prevent him from approving it as a law.
But
Christian lawmaker Younadam Kanna denounced the vote as an "insult" and
said it showed the "fanaticism and racism" of Arabs fearful of Kurdish
influence. He said Arabs had feared that Christians would ally
themselves with the Kurds and sabotaged this possibility by blocking
the larger quotas. Kurdish
lawmakers said they had opposed the bill because it did not give
Christians more guaranteed seats. "The voting of today showed who is
fighting the Christians and who is supporting them," said Arif Tayfur,
a Kurdish political leader and legislator. The
deal must be approved by the nation's three-person presidency council,
and Kanna said he would demand a veto. Kurds succeeded in putting plans
for provincial elections on hold when President Jalal Talabani vetoed
an election bill that had been passed over Kurdish objections. That
forced a renegotiation of the law and led to the version passed in
September and tweaked in Monday's voting. There
was no indication that the Christians could force another veto,
although their bitter objections raise the specter of heightened
tensions in the north, which is at this point the country's most
violent region. The rest of Iraq has seen a sharp decline in bloodshed
in recent months, but Monday's attacks showed the lingering instability.
Related, France 24 offers a video report on the situation for Iraqi Christians in Baghdad by Lucas Menget and Guillaume Martin.
Republican
John McCain's presidential campaign sued the Virginia election board
Monday, claiming absentee ballots weren't mailed on time to military
members serving overseas. The
complaint asks the U.S. District Court in Richmond to order the state
to count absentee ballots postmarked by Tuesday and received by Nov.
14. It contends that thousands of troops' ballots -- many of which
would go to McCain -- will not be counted. The deadline for ballots to be received is 7 p.m. Election Day, which is Tuesday.
John McCain is the Republican Party's presidential nominee, Sarah Palin is his running mate. Becky notes this from McCain - Palin '08:
The Case for John McCain
The Maverick We Need Now: George Pataki Makes The Case For John McCain By George Pataki New York Daily News November 3, 2008 NY Daily News
Today our country stands at a critical juncture. Our economy is in
turmoil, we have thousands of our brave men and women fighting abroad
and America's confidence has been eroded.
In Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain, we have two candidates with very different visions for the future of our nation.
To me the clear choice to guide us through the challenges we face is John McCain.
Over and over again, in times of crisis and on the issues that matter most to Americans, McCain has been there.
It's no secret that our economy today is in trouble.
To recover from this economic crisis we are going to need the right
policies. If Obama is elected the question isn't if he is going to
raise taxes - the question is how much he will raise taxes.
Obama believes in raising taxes so Washington has more of our money to "spread the wealth around."
For John McCain, working hard, paying your own way and keeping your hard earned money is the right policy.
On the front page of today's New York Times
(bottom of the front page) is the news that Governor Palin was cleared
in the firing scandal. William Yardley and Serge F. Kovaleski's "Palin Proper in Firing of Official, Report Says" documents the Alaska Personnel Board's findings.
Ralph Nader is the independent presidential candidate, Matt Gonzalez is his running mate. Micah notes this from Team Nader:
In case you missed it: The Real VP Debate
Posted by The Nader Team on Monday, November 3, 2008 at 10:30:00 PM
Monday,
November 3, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the treaty is still
iffy, Syria still wants answers, Article 50 comes back . . . maybe, a
Democrat 'explains' Barack's mentor, and more.
Starting with the treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement. Sameer N. Yacoub (AP) quotes Iraqi
news editors Ahmed Abdul-Majid ("Out coverage of the U.S. election is
not heavy because we believe that the result of the elections will not
have a direct impact on the future of Iraq") and Adbul-Halim Saleh ("In
the end, strategic policies made in the United States will not
be affected by the changing of the administrations") on the US election
and explains, "The agreement, under negotiation for months, would keep
American troops in Iraq for three more years but give Iraqis a greater
role in deciding U.S. military operations." China's Xinhau notes
al-Sabah (Baghdad newspaper) is reporting three of the five amendments
have been agreed to by DC. Among the rejected are supposedly the issue
of immunity for US troops and among the agreed to changes is that US
forces would leave in 36 months and that the treaty will be called
"agreement on withdrawal of US forces." Indo-Asian News Service adds, "British
Ambassador in Iraq Christopher Prentice told the Kurdish newspaper
al-Taakhi that Britain was keen on reaching an agreement with the Iraqi
government since 'very little time remains until the end of this year'." The United
Nations mandate allowing foreign forces to be on Iraqi soil expires
December 31st. Without something in place, there is no legal
authorization for foreign forces on Iraqi soil. This mandate covers
the occupation, there was no mandate that allowed for the illegal
invasion. The UN Wire notes the Washington Times
story that "American officials are looking to the UN Security Council
to extend the mandate for U.S. troops to remain in Iraq beyond Dec. 31
as direct negotiations with Iraqi officials on a deal remain plagued by
'numerous' differences." At the White House today, spokesperson Dana
Perino addressed the negotiations and talk of seeking an extension on
the UN mandate:
We are working
towards responding to the Iraqis. Our negotiating team, led by
Ambassador Crocker, is finalizing that and we expect to be talking with
the Iraqis over the next week. And I think that their parliament is
back in session starting next Tuesday, so hopefully we'll make some
progress soon. And I think reports about us looking at an alternative
are overwritten. We are focused on getting this agreement done. I
think the Iraqis recognize that it is their interest, and it's
certainly in America's national security interest for us to finalize
it. So we're working through all the requested changes that they had,
and there might be some that we can support, there might be some that
we won't be able to support. I'll just let the negotiators work that
out with them privately.
At the US
State Dept today, spokesperson Robert Wood said of the SOFA, "Nothing
new to report. We're taking a look at the material we got from the
Iraqis last week, and we'll be replying in due course. But I don't
have anything further than that." Iran's Press TV maintains
the treaty allows for attacks on foreign countries: "Under the US
-sought agreement, American military and civilians planes will be able
to use Iraqi airspace without Baghdad's oversight." The treaty faces
more hurdles as a result of the US creating a crisis two Sundays ago by attacking Syria, AP reports
that Walid al-Moualem, Syria's Foreign Minister, has used the word
"painful" to describe the responses from Syria to the US should the
White House and its agencies continue to stonewall regarding the
attack. Iran's Press TV quotes
al-Moualem stating: "Syria may resort to more painful measures if the
United States does not give an official explanation for the attack."
Meanwhile AKI reports
that the US Embassy in Syria reopened yesterday (it was closed Thursday
due to protests and closed Friday as well although the State Dept
maintained that was due to a holiday). The US school has been closed
and Sami Moubayed (Asia Times) explains,
"A belated victim of the United States raid on Syira on October 27 was
the American school in Damascus. The institution has been a
controversial satellite of US interests in Syria since its founding
more than a half-century ago, and it has often been featured as
political football during the two nations' turbulent, often bitter
relationship." In the US, the White House, Defense Dept and State Dept
have refused to speak publicly about the attack -- despite the fact
that the US is supposed to be a democracy with leadership answerable to
the people -- and Phil Sands (UAE's The National) explains that the stonewalling has taken place in Baghdad as well:
US
officials would stand in the safety of the Green Zone and lecture
journalists -- lecture Iraqis -- about all the progress that was being
made even as, out there beyond the concrete barriers, the country
collapsed and descended into a sectarian chaos that has claimed tens of
thousands of lives. Regardless of what was actually said,
however, the Americans were at least willing to stand up and publicly
answer questions. It was something. Last week, however, they finally
made a mockery of even that basic principle.
The
usual press conference was held, as planned, on Wednesday afternoon and
was attended, as always, by the dwindling Baghdad press corps. Brig Gen
David Perkins, the US military spokesman for Iraq, sat down in front of
an American flag and read out a bland statement. It mentioned the
Status of Forces Agreement negotiations, interference by Iran and
progress in training Iraq's security agencies. He failed to address
just one small issue: the cross-border attack into Syria by US forces
that took place on the Sunday before.
Given
that the airborne assault, which left at least eight people dead, was
carried out from Iraqi soil and supposedly targeted an al Qa'eda figure
who was helping launch attacks inside Iraq, you might consider it worth
talking about. In light of the fact that it was technically an act of
war by both the US and Iraq on Syria and made international headlines,
you might imagine something would be said. Instead, there was a
deafening silence.
After reading his
opening statement, Brig Gen Perkins asked if there were any questions.
One of the Iraqi reporters duly asked about the attack on Syria. The
officer's response was brief and to the point: "Umm," he said, "I've
nothing to add on that." A few minutes later, another reporter,
this time an American, asked about the poor quality of water supplies
in Iraq and the US attack on Syria. Brig Gen Perkins entered into a
lengthy treatise on the improving security situation and reconstruction
efforts, before stating: "I have nothing to add on any other
subjects."
In the course of the press
conference, two more reporters asked about the raid inside Syria and
Brig Gen Perkins simply pretended as if the questions had not been
asked. He did not so much as acknowledge them.
The
US Embassy in Syria remains the only US outlet issuing statements. Last
week, it announced the Embassy would be closed due to protests (and
later that day the State Dept refused to confirm that announcment).
Today the Embassy's website
displayed: "Public Announcement, November 3, 2008 In response to the
Syrian government's request, the American Cultural Center is
unavailable to the Syrian public as of October 30, 2008 until further
notice, and classes at the American Language Center have been cancelled
until further notice." Asked about it and if that meant that the
Cultural and Language centers were only closed to Syrians, Robert Wood
declared, "Well, that's right. It is closed to the Syrian public. But
we still -- we have, you know, officers, officials there." Associated
Press' Matthew Lee pursued this.
Matthew
Lee: What if you're not Syrian? What if you're -- if you're not a
Syrian citizen and you happen to be living in Damascus, can you still
go to the American Cultural Center?
Robert A. Wood: Well, if -- it's closed to the general -- the Syrian general public and so --
Matthew
Lee: Yeah, but I -- you know, I'm sorry. When the Syrian government
came to you, they didn't just say to close it to the Syrian public, did
they? They said to close it down.
Robert
A. Wood: Well, it's -- let me just say, Matt, it is closed to the
Syrian general public, as far as I know, to the general public at
large. But our work continues. We have people who are there who work
at the Cultural Center, and they'll continue to do their business. But
it is closed to the public.
Matthew
Lee: So your interpretation of their request is not that they told you
to close the thing down, but rather they just told you to close it to
the public.
Robert A. Wood: THe only thing I can say, Matt, is it is closed to the public.
Meanwhile IranVNC reports
that country's Foreign Minister, Manouchehr Mottaki, visited Syria
today for a meet up with Bashar al-Assad (Syrian President) and Faroq
al-Shar'a (vice president) during which he declared, "Instead of being
a show of American strength aiming to weaken Syria, this action
demonstrates Washington's own weakness and desperation." Yesterday
Iraq's Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced:
"Syrian Foreign Minister Waleed Al Moallem, made a phone call with His
Excellency Foreign Hoshyar Zebari on Saturday 1st November, 2008. Both
sides discussed the ways to encircle and contain the repercussions of
U.S. military raid against the Syrian region Albu Kamal. The two sides
stressed their joint keenness to support and strengthen the bilateral
relations between both brotherly countries and peoples and the need to
pass the tension on the relations after the raid. The understanding
between both sides was discussed on the practical measures to correct
the path of Syrian-Iraqi relations and placing those relations in its
proper frame to serve the interests of both brotherly countries."
The
unrest comes at a time when the puppet government tightens the economic
belt (around the neck of the average Iraqi) and when the security
situation grows more iffy internatlly. Yesterday the New York Times finds Suadad al-Salhy and Katherine Zoepf explained
the price of oil per barrel going up and slightly down has Iraq's
concerned about their budget for next year and have cut it by $13
billion dollars. And what do they plan on cutting? It's not detailed;
however, Liz Sly (Chicago Tribune) reported:
"The Iraqi government plans to cut salaries for the estimated 100,000
members of the Awakening movement whose revolt against Al Qaeda in Iraq
played a key role in bringing about the sharp fall in violence in
Iraq. The move is certain to aggravate building tensions between the
Sunni volunteer force and the Shiite-led government, which assumed
responsibility for the Awakening movement from the U.S. military
earlier this month."
Sly notes $300 is how much members were
paid but leaders were paid $400 to $500 a month and that both are being
cut. Gen David Petraeus (now over Centcom but until recently the top US
commander in Iraq) has credited the "Awakening" movement with the fall
in violence as has US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker. October 1st, the
central government in Baghdad took over payment of approximately 50,000
"Awakening"members and one month later (next checks go out November
10th), they can't even maintain the payment level. It's not as if they
didn't know how much the US was spending. So obvioulsy, just as they
never planned to absorb the "Awakening" into police, military and
security forces, they never intended to pay them. Sly notes the hopes
of one "Awakening" who believes the US will pick up the difference.
However, that's not going to be the case according to the article.
That, however, was supposed to be the case when the handover was made.
That was one of the promises the US made to the "Awakenings." Not even
a month later and the handpicked and handtrained "Awakenings" are
seeing the US go back on their word.
Now
might not be the best time for Iraq to monkey around with it's internal
security. Iraqi Christians have been under attack since they protested
the dropping of Article 50 in the provincial elections law. Hurriyet reports:
"Iraq's parliament voted on Monday to guarantee religious minorities
seats on provincial councils to be selected next year, but drew ire
from Iraqi Christians by setting aside fewer spots than a U.N. proposal
had urged." China's Xinhau provides
the breakdown the vote (106 out of 150 MPs voted for it) and notes that
it's six seats: "A seat will give to each Christians and Sabeans in
Baghdad, and a seat for each Christians, Yazidies and Shabak in
Nineveh, and a single seat for Christians in Basra." Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
that the religious minorities say the number is too small and quotes
Yonadem Kanna (Assyrian Democratic Movement) stating, "They failed in
the examination of democracy. . . . Getting nothing is better than
this insult." On the topic of Iraq's Christians, CNN reports
Iraqi President Jalal Talabani has promised $900,000 (US
equivalent)will be spent in some manner on protecting Iraqi Christians
and that the distribution of the money will be supervised. Saturday in
London, there was a demonstration in support of Iraqi Christians. Independent Catholic News reports protestors
marched to No 10 Downing St on behalf of Iraqi Christians. A petition
was presented and citizens and residents of Great Britain who wish to
sign the petition can click here.
In some of today's reported violence . . .
Bombings?
Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports
a Baghdad bombing not far from Sahib Salman ("under secretary of the
oil ministry") which wounded Salman and "one of his guards," 4 Baghdad
roadside bombings that claimed 6 lives and left twenty-nine people
wounded, 2 Baghdad sticky bombings that wounded five people, 2 Mosul
roadside bombings that claimed 2 lives and left four wounded and a
Baquba roadside bombing that wounded nine people.
Turning to the US presidential election. To The Contrary's Bonnie Erbe (US News & World Reports) notes, "The only prediction I have made, and with which I shall stick, is that Tuesday is going to be a long, long night." Erbe also notes, "If nothing else is obscene about this presidential election (and plenty is IMHO), then the fact that together the candidates will be spending $8 per vote
to win the White House clearly meets and exceeds the obscenity
descriptor." Erbe's referring to the Democratic presidential ticket
and the Republican ticket only. There are other candidates. But
starting with the Republican presidential ticket, John McCain is the
nominee and Sarah Palin is his running mate. Scott Conroy (CBS News) reports
Palin's agenda today was "six cities in five states" and that she flies
late tonight back to Alaska to vote Tuesday morning only to fly to
Phoenix later Tuesday. At the McCain - Palin '08 blog, Matt Lira offers:
This
is a historic election and, because of your activism and support, we
will achieve victory on Election Day. Our campaign has defied
expectations, not because of beltway pundits, but because of people
like you who have always been there when it mattered most.
"America
is worth fighting for" is my favorite line of my father's speech. I
think it is so poignant, and essentially, it captures the reason why I
have always loved, supported and believed in my father. It is why I
believe he would be the best President for our country now, at a point
where we face many challenges abroad and also at home, where so many of
our fellow Americans are going through difficult times. The fact that
our country is and always will be worth for fighting for is the essence
of why I have been so inspired to participate in this campaign, and
throughout this process I have been even more inspired by the people
and the places I have encountered along the way, around our great
country.
We
are truly the luckiest people in the world, and I have been very
fortunate to be a part of this experience on the campaign, and to be
able to share it with so many of you. The next three days will fly by
and no doubt be pretty crazy, so let me just say thanks right now for
getting involved too. This is what was at the heart of what I hoped to
achieve with my blog, and it has gone beyond my expectations. Stay
tuned for more from the trail tomorrow!
John and Cindy McCain issued a statement today:
"We offer our deepest condolences to Barack Obama and his family as
they grieve the loss of their beloved grandmother. Our thoughts and
prayers go out to them as they remember and celebrate the life of
someone who had such a profound impact in their lives." Meanwhile
Brian Montopoli (CBS News) reports that Democratic Party presidential
candidate Barack Obama finally found an 'issue' he could sink his teeth
into: "Having said that, brothers should pull up their pants. You are
walking by your mother, your grandmother, your underwear showing.
What's wrong with that? Come on." Come on, indeed. Barack with an
issue that matters to him and finally a concrete plan for an issue. It
only took until the day before the election for the fashionista and Men's Vogue cover boy to find an issue.
But
the press bias towards Obama doesn't represent a simple revulsion for
the Republican party. It was on display in the Democratic primaries
with the persecution of Hillary Clinton. Worst of all, in the
primaries, the press let the Obama campaign get away with continuous
insinuations below the radar that the Clintons were race-baiters.
Instead of exposing that absurd defamation for what it was - a nasty
smear - the media sedulously propagated it.
Clinton
made the historically correct and uncontroversial remark that civil
rights legislation came about from a fusion of the dreams of Dr Martin
Luther King and the legislative follow-through by President Lyndon
Johnson. The New York Times misrepresented that as a disparagement of
King, twisting her remarks to imply that "a black man needed the help
of a white man to effect change". This was one of a number of
manipulations on race by the Obama campaign, amply documented by the
leading Democratic historian, Princeton's Sean Wilentz. Clinton came
close to tears in a coffee shop in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, which
many thought helped her to win an upset victory there. MSNBC television
gave a platform to the Chicago congressmen, Jesse Jackson Jr, where he
questioned her tears and claimed that she'd not shed any tears for the
black victims of Katrina, and that she'd pay for that in the South
Carolina primary, where 45% of the electorate would be
African-Americans.
In fact, MSNBC ran a
non-stop campaign for Obama propelled by the misogyny of its anchors,
Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann and David Shuster. Chelsea Clinton
joining Clinton's campaign prompted Shuster to report she was "pimping"
for her mother.
Meanwhile Democrat Jerry Nadler raised the issue of Jeremiah Wright in Florida. Jake Tapper (ABC News -- link has video) quotes
Nadler stating, "Think of the history here. You have a guy who's
half-white, half-black. He goes to an Ivy League school, comes to
Chicago . . . to start a political career. Doesn't know anybody. Gets
involved with community organizing -- why? Because that's how you form
a base. OK. Joins the largest church in the neighborhood. About
8,000 members. . . . Why did he join the church? . . . Because that's
how you get to know people. Now maybe it takes a couple years [before
Barack's thinking] 'Jesus, the guy's a nut, the guy's a lunatic.' But
you don't walk out of a church with 8,000 members in your district. .
. He didn't have the political courage to make the statement of
walking out."
FORIMMEDIATERELEASE Contact: Marc Abizeid, 202-471-5833, marcabizeid@votenader.org
TUESDAY, NOV. 4 - Nader to Hold One-Word Response Press Conference
*NOTECHANGEOFDATE
Special questioning/interview opportunities for members of the foreign media
In
deference to the sound bite journalism that dominates presidential
political media coverage, independent presidential candidate Ralph
Nader will host a press conference at which he will only issue one-word
responses to questions for the first 30 minutes.
Who: Ralph Nader
What:
Special One-hour Press Conference. For the first half of the Press
Conference, Mr. Nader will answer all questions with just a one-word
response. For the second half of the press conference, foreign press
credentialed media will be given priority.
Where: National Press Club, Murrow Room, 13th Floor - National Press Building, 529 14th Street NW, Washington, DC
My name is Pat and I am a resident in Nutley, N.J.
Today, I took my ten year old son to the Nutley Public Library, where a
mock election was being held for all elementary school students. Over
the last two weeks, flyers came home with my son's homework about the
event. The flyer promoted the event to kids and told them they could
have their photos taken with their favorite candidate.
My
son, who is aware of my support for Mr. Nader, said me "Dad, I bet they
don't have a picture of Mr. Nader there at the library." I agreed with
him and he deceided he wanted to participate in the mock election on
November first.
We left for the library
with our camera in hope of seeing Mr. Nader. Upon arrival, we were
directed to the Stockton Room, where the election was being held. As we
entered the room, two life sized cardboard cutouts of Sen, Obama and
Sen, McCain were in the center of the room. I laughed to myself when I
saw that Sen. McCain was standing on the left and Sen. Obama on the
right. Mr. Nader's cardboard cutout was nowhere to be found. We were
greeted by two women and a young girl, who were poll workers.
They
greeted us and asked my son his name. They had him sign his name in a
book and proceeded to give him a ballot. This ballot contained only two
names: John McCain and Barack Obama. Again, Mr. Nader's name was not on
the ballot. The children were not even given a place for write in
candidate. After giving my son the ballot , he was directed to one of
three voting booths, where he could make his selection. From behind the
cutrtain my son called to me, "Hey Dad, how do you spell independent."
I told him I-N-D-E-P-E-N-D-E-N-T. He told me he wrote that below the
other choices and placed a large check mark next to the word. He also
wrote down Mr. Nader's name and placed his ballot in a collection box.
Upon
emerging from the voting booth, my son was asked if he would like to
have his picture taken with his candidate. He said he would and he
stood off to the far left away from the two cardboard cutouts, next to
an American flag standing in the corner. As, I flashed the picture, the
two women said, "No, stand next to your candidate and take the picture"
With that my son said, "But my candidate is not here" All we heard from
the women was a puzzled "Oh!!"
Obama's
job is to present a benign, even progressive face that will revive
America's democratic pretensions, internationally and domestically,
while ensuring nothing of substance changes. Among
ordinary Americans desperate for a secure life, his skin colour may
help him regain this unjustified "trust", even though it is of a
similar hue to that of Colin Powell, who lied to the United Nations for
Bush and now endorses Obama. As for the rest of us, is it not time we
opened our eyes and exercised our right not to be lied to, yet again?
And
finally, Cynthia McKinney is the Green Party presidential candidate and
Rosa Clemente is her running mate. We'll again note Kimberly and Ian
Wilder's "Vote Green Party On Tuesday!" (On The Wilder Side):
November 1, 2008 This is an exciting time for us! The Green Party has never been as relevant as it is today. As Congress offers trillion-dollar bailouts to Wall Street, people living on Main Street struggle to stay in their homes and pay for basic needs. Why is Congress bailing out corporations while the public slides into economic insecurity? Because the industries that will benefit from the bailout are some of the largest campaign contributors to political campaigns. But never fear because you can VOTE GREEN on Tuesday and choose People Power over corporate power. Support Cynthia McKinney for President and Rosa Clemente for Vice President; and, support other Green candidates running in your community. Greens are running for office across the country for 60 types of office. Check them out! To find out who's running in your community, click here. Once elected, Greens will not betray the public interest for corporate cash. We accept no corporate money because we believe corporate influence is what's wrong with politics. If you believe healthcare is a right for all, not to be governed by the profit motive of insurance companies, support the Green Party and our campaign for Single Payer Healthcare. If you believe offshore drilling furthers our national addiction to fossil fuels;
and want to see positive solutions like renewable energy, local food
production, local businesses and better public transportation- Help elect Greens who will make it a reality. If you believe every vote must be counted, that higher education should be available to everyone, that climate change is real, that the war on drugs is racist, and that the privatization of public goods and services is wrong and that we need to BRING OUR TROOPS HOME NOW stand up and support the party that will stand up for you The Green Party. If you want to see a clean, healthy future for our children, make sure we have a strong Green Party today
In
the past year, Khudaer Muhammad Abdullah, 49, endured the loss of his
two older sons. On Sunday he lost his last son, and his 4-year-old
daughter is now hospitalized with serious wounds. His last son,
Muhammad Khudaer Muhammad, 7, was killed when part of a
rocket-propelled grenade exploded on a vacant lot where he was playing
soccer with three other children, according to police reports. Muhammad
was killed instantly in the blast. His friend, Ahmed Hamid Jelu, 9,
lost both his legs and died at a hospital shortly afterward. Two other children -- Hassan Dhaya, 7, and Muhammad's sister, Ahlan Khudaer Muhammad -- were seriously wounded.
The above is from Katherine Zoepf and Sam Dagher's "A Decline in Deaths in Iraq Is Not Enough for a Family" (New York Times)
underscoring the realities of "decreased" violence in a country torn by
violence. The provincial elections are hoped to take place in Iraq at
some point near the end of January. Whether the much delayed elections
take place or not, Article 50 has been addressed. Hurriyet reports:
"Iraq's parliament voted on Monday to guarantee religious minorities
seats on provincial councils to be selected next year, but drew ire
from Iraqi Christians by setting aside fewer spots than a U.N. proposal
had urged." China's Xinhau provides
the breakdown the vote (106 out of 150 MPs voted for it) and notes that
it's six seats: "A seat will give to each Christians and Sabeans in
Baghdad, and a seat for each Christians, Yazidies and Shabak in
Nineveh, and a single seat for Christians in Basra." On the topic of
Iraq's Christians, CNN reports
Iraqi President Jalal Talabani has promised $900,000 (US
equivalent)will be spent in some manner on protecting Iraqi Christians:
A
committee of Christian leaders and representatives from Talabani's
office will supervise the distribution of the money, the statement said. More
than half of Mosul's Christian population -- an estimated 13,000
people, or 2,300 families -- fled the city last month, though the
departures tapered toward the month's end, Nineveh province's Deputy
Gov. Khasro Goran told CNN on Tuesday.
Independent Catholic News reports
that London saw a demonstration in the form of a Saturday march to No
10 Downing St on behalf of Iraqi Christians. A petition was presented
and citizens and residents of Great Britain who wish to sign the
petition can click here.
Bonnie notes Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Ms. Troll" went up Sunday. And we'll note Investing For The Soul which is investment news with an emphasis on green.
Turning
to the US presidential race. Cynthia McKinney is the Green Party
presidential candidate and Rosa Clemente is her running mate. (No link
to their website because it has been down since Wednesday. It may up
come up before tomorrow but I doubt it.) The Green Party notes:
Greens appeal to progressive, independent, antiwar voters: invest your vote in McKinney & Clemente on Election Day
Contacts: Scott McLarty, Media Coordinator, 202-518-5624, cell 202-904-7614, mclarty@greens.org Starlene Rankin, Media Coordinator, 916-995-3805, starlene@gp.org
Greens
promote ten videos of McKinney speaking on major issues; Green leaders
stress 'Green Imperative' of building a progressive US party
Obama
doesn't represent the views of millions of his own supporters who want
real change in US politics; voters who seek a permanent alternative to
two-party politics should vote for Green McKinney instead of
independent Nader
WASHINGTON, DC -- Green Party leaders are urging progressive,
independent, and antiwar voters to invest their votes in a growing
progressive, antiwar party on Election Day 2008 by voting for the Green
Party presidential ticket: Cynthia McKinney for President, Rosa
Clemente for Vice President.
Greens are making a special appeal to Obama and Nader supporters to
vote for the 'Green Imperative' on November 4. Ms. McKinney is
currently featured in ten online videos in which she details her
positions on major issues, including corporate bailouts, foreign
policy, health care, the rights of Katrina survivors, and the Green
challenge to two-party dominance. Links to the clips are listed below.
"Millions of Americans who favor the Green Party's positions on the
wars, health care, global warming, and other important issues plan to
vote for Barack Obama, who doesn't share their views. It's not enough
just to defeat John McCain and the GOP agenda," said Green vice
presidential candidate Rosa Clemente.
"Democrats have retreated over and over and voted for Bush-Cheney
policies -- war funding, the unconstitutional US Patriotic Act,
telecomm immunity, corporate handouts and taxbreaks, the death penalty,
record incarceration rates, and a $700 billion Wall Street bailout that
doesn't help working Americans. The only way to reverse the dangerous
direction of US politics is to build a real opposition party. Voting
for Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente will strengthen a party that's
dedicated to ecological, antiwar, and truly democratic values and
doesn't take money and orders from corporations," Ms. Clemente added.
Greens stressed that votes for the Green presidential candidates, as
well as for Green candidates for state and local office, will also help
some state Green Parties achieve or keep official party status in their
states. For example, Iowa requires 2% in a presidential race to
maintain a party's ballot line, Arkansas requires 3%, and Minnesota and
Rhode Island each require 5%.
Green Party leaders praised Ralph Nader for his strong political
positions and have argued for his inclusion in the presidential debates
(along with Ms. McKinney and other excluded candidates). But they said
that votes for Mr. Nader would have no effect after Election Day, since
he's running as an independent. Mr. Nader's Green run in 2000 helped
put the Green Party on the political map, but his independent campaigns
in 2004 and 2008 leave no lasting legacy.
"A vote for the McKinney-Clemente ticket is an investment that will
continue to pay off as the Green Party grows and challenges bipartisan
corporate-money politics in the years to come. A vote for an
independent like Ralph Nader is a valid protest vote, but does nothing
to establish a permanent political alternative. The Nader campaign will
be over after Election Day, while the Green Party is a permanent
political fixture with the hope of achieving major party status in the
coming years," said Sanda Everette, co-chair of the Green Party of the
United States.
Now
that the election is approaching, everybody is coming down from the
hype to ask: what will happen after? They are referring, of course, to
how we will pressure whoever becomes president. But the question
becomes relevant in a more disconcerting way when we look at the
advisers backing both candidates, who are—from the looks of
things—going to take us down the same paths as before. If Colin
Powell’s recent endorsement of Obama isn’t enough to convince you of
executive continuity, these articles should shed some light on the
issue. Both are from several months ago, but what they lack in currency
they make up for in clairvoyance: their warnings about the connections
between advisers and abdicating on the issues has proved prescient.
Both invite us to remember that whatever organizing we do after the
elections can be outdone by a few people who have the president’s ear.
Press Release FORIMMEDIATERELEASE Contact: Marc Abizeid, 202-471-5833, marcabizeid@votenader.org
TUESDAY, NOV. 4 - Nader to Hold One-Word Response Press Conference
*NOTECHANGEOFDATE
Special questioning/interview opportunities for members of the foreign media
In
deference to the sound bite journalism that dominates presidential
political media coverage, independent presidential candidate Ralph
Nader will host a press conference at which he will only issue one-word
responses to questions for the first 30 minutes.
Who: Ralph Nader
What:
Special One-hour Press Conference. For the first half of the Press
Conference, Mr. Nader will answer all questions with just a one-word
response. For the second half of the press conference, foreign press
credentialed media will be given priority.
Where: National Press Club, Murrow Room, 13th Floor - National Press Building, 529 14th Street NW, Washington, DC
The
Nader campaign has a new video. I'm not linking to it (or posting it
here) and the only one bringing it up is a visitor e-mailing the public
account. If it gets the campaign votes or attention, good for them;
however, we have no interest in it and never would. Guts and strength
are not gender based and we've called out that thinking before. In
fact, the only version of that term used here was done byIsaiah in a comic that made fun of the notion and, even then, he used the Spanish term.
"America
is worth fighting for" is my favorite line of my father's speech. I
think it is so poignant, and essentially, it captures the reason why I
have always loved, supported and believed in my father. It is why I
believe he would be the best President for our country now, at a point
where we face many challenges abroad and also at home, where so many of
our fellow Americans are going through difficult times. The fact that
our country is and always will be worth for fighting for is the essence
of why I have been so inspired to participate in this campaign, and
throughout this process I have been even more inspired by the people
and the places I have encountered along the way, around our great
country.
We
are truly the luckiest people in the world, and I have been very
fortunate to be a part of this experience on the campaign, and to be
able to share it with so many of you. The next three days will fly by
and no doubt be pretty crazy, so let me just say thanks right now for
getting involved too. This is what was at the heart of what I hoped to
achieve with my blog, and it has gone beyond my expectations. Stay
tuned for more from the trail tomorrow!
I noted that. I have not endorsed and am not endorsing. (I have stated I'm not voting for McCain or Obama.) The Albuquerque Journal has endorsed and Sofia notes this from McCain - Palin '08:
Weekly
town hall meeting-style debates for the last two months, as proposed by
Sen. John McCain, would have done much to inform the public about the
issues -- and about McCain's long, clear record as a moderate who works
across party lines. Sen. Barack Obama, whose record is very thin,
shrewdly rejected the joint tour that could have given swing voters a
more substantial comparison of the candidates.
The
Republican hasn't fared well in the traditional campaign that ensued,
though voters caught a glimpse of the real McCain when he firmly told a
supporter there was no reason to "fear" his rival, publicly squelching
the notion that Obama is anything other than a patriotic American who
has run a masterful campaign.
We
encourage those who are still uncommitted and those who vote on the
basis of a candidate's qualifications instead of party label to give
McCain's experience a closer look and to consider the consequences of
concentrating too much political and economic power in the hands of one
party.
11/3/2008 10:45:00 AM - Moon Township , PA Road to Victory Rally in Moon Township, PA Please join Senator John McCain for a Road to Victory Rally in Moon Township, PA on Monday November 3rd. Doors open at 10:45 a.m.
11/3/2008 12:00:00 PM - Dubuque , IA Road to Victory Rally in Dubuque, IA Please join Governor Sarah Palin for a Road to Victory Rally in Dubuque, IA on Monday November 3rd.
11/3/2008 1:00:00 PM - Indianapolis , IN Road to Victory Rally in Indianapolis, IN Please join Senator John McCain for a Road to Victory Rally in Indianapolis, IN on Monday November 3rd. Doors open at 1:00 p.m.
11/3/2008 3:00:00 PM - Roswell , NM Road to Victory Rally in Roswell, NM Please join Senator John McCain for a Road to Victory Rally in Roswell, NM on Monday November 3rd. Doors open at 3:00 p.m.
11/3/2008 3:30:00 PM - Colorado Springs , CO Road to Victory Rally in Colorado Springs, CO Please
join Governor Sarah Palin for a Road to Victory Rally in Colorado
Springs, CO on Monday November 3rd. Doors open at 3:30 p.m.
11/3/2008 4:00:00 PM - Henderson , NV Road to Victory Rally in Henderson, NV Please join Senator John McCain for a Road to Victory Rally in Henderson, NV on Monday November 3rd. Doors open at 4:00 p.m.
11/3/2008 5:30:00 PM - Reno , NV Road to Victory Rally in Reno, NV Please join Governor Sarah Palin for a Road to Victory Rally in Reno, NV on Monday November 3rd.
11/3/2008 8:30:00 PM - Elko, NV Road to Victory Rally in Elko, NV Please join Govenor Sarah Palin for a Road to Victory Rally on Monday November 3rd in Elko, NV.
11/3/2008 9:00:00 PM - Prescott , AZ Midnight Road to Victory Rally in Prescott, AZ Please
join Senator John McCain & Cindy McCain for a Midnight Road to
Victory Rally in Prescott, AZ on Monday November 3rd. Doors open at
9:00 p.m.
11/4/2008 8:30:00 AM - Grand Junction , CO Election Day Road to Victory Rally in Grand Junction, CO Please
join Senator John McCain for an Election Day Road to Victory Rally in
Grand Junction, CO on Tuesday November 4th. Doors open at 8:30 a.m.
A visitor wanted a highlight. We'll gladly note it and thank you to ____ for sending it. This is from William H. Willimon's "Electing Not to Vote: Christian Reflections on Reasons for Not Voting" (The Christian Century): If
there is one idea that unites Jim Wallis and Pat Robertson, it is the
idea that voting is a good idea. American Christians of both the right
and the left have been so thoroughly indoctrinated into thinking that
democracy is an unarguable good and that voting is the price we pay for
the privilege of life in a constitutional democracy that there's nobody
left among us to question the practice. Voting has been inflated from a
democratic right to a Christian responsibility, and we have been so
accustomed to thinking positively about voting that it's difficult for
us to think like Christians. Here is a wonderful little book that
answers a big question that most of us American Christians have lost
the theological resources even to ask: Why vote? Each of these nine
essays defends Christian refusal to vote—"conscientious
abstention"—with a variety of reasons, all of which (with the possible
exception of those offered by a Catholic author) seem indebted to the
ecclesiology of John Howard Yoder. American Christians have succumbed
to a state-as-savior mentality in which voting has assumed
religious-like trappings. Registering, showing up on the appointed day,
entering the curtained booth and secretly voting has become an
unquestioned, sacred "confession of faith," says Andy Alexis-Baker;
it's the little pinch of incense we offer to Caesar. All of the essays
argue that though voting doesn't make much difference one way or the
other, Christians ought to take care in their worship because the pinch
of incense may not be inconsequential.
I haven't read the
book but it's a point worth noting: You have the right not to vote.
We've noted that many times but we'll note it again. This is a
democracy and your vote is your business and no one else's. That
includes who you vote for, who you don't vote for or whether you vote
at all. You should vote (or not vote) as is comfortable and feels right
to you. Non-voters are stereotyped as lazy, ignorant and apathetic.
Some may be. Some are making a decision and doing so for various
reasons. They owe no explanations. Your vote is your vote. Use it as
wisely -- by your definition of wisely.
And we'll go out with
this from independent journalist John Pilger -- one of the few who can
make that claim and one of the few who can hold their head high. For
those who've forgotten how embarrassing Panhandle Media has been in
2008, flash back on Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Wheel of Greed"
Pilger never sold out and this is from his "The Diplomacy Of Lying" (Information Clearing House):
The
beatification of President Barack Obama is already under way; for it is
he who "challenges America to rise up [and] summon 'the better angels
of our nature'", says Rolling Stone magazine, reminiscent of the mating
calls of Guardian writers to the "mystical" Blair. As ever, the Orwell
Inversion Test is necessary. Obama claims that his vast campaign wealth
comes from small individual donors, yet he has also received funds from
some of the most notorious looters on Wall Street. Moreover, the "dove"
and "candidate of change" has voted repeatedly to fund George W Bush's
rapacious wars, and now demands more war in Afghanistan while he
threatens to bomb Pakistan. Dismissing
the popular democracies in Latin America as a "vacuum" to be filled by
the United States, he has endorsed Colombia's "right to strike
terrorists who seek safe havens across its borders". Translated, this
means the "right" of the criminal regime in that country to invade its
neighbours, notably uppity Venezuela, on Washington's behalf. The
British human rights group Justice for Colombia has just published a
study concerning Anglo-American backing for the Colombian regime of
Álvaro Uribe, which is responsible for more than 90 per cent of all
cases of torture. The principal torturers, the "security forces", are
trained by the Americans and the British. The Foreign Office replies
that it is "improving the human rights record of the military and
combating drug trafficking". The study finds not a shred of evidence to
support this. Colombian officers with barbaric records, such as those
implicated in the murder of a trade union leader, are welcomed to
Britain for "seminars". As
in many parts of the world, the British role is that of subcontractor
to Washington. The bloody "Plan Colombia" was the design of Bill
Clinton, the last Democratic president and inspiration for Blair's and
Brown's new Labour. Clinton's administration was at least as violent as
Bush's – see Unicef's report that 500,000 Iraqi children died as a
result of the Anglo-American blockade in the 1990s. The
lesson learned is that no presidential candidate, least of all a
Democrat awash with money from America's "banksters", as Franklin
Roosevelt called them, can or will challenge a militarised system that
controls and rewards him. Obama's job is to present a benign, even
progressive face that will revive America's democratic pretensions,
internationally and domestically, while ensuring nothing of substance
changes. Among ordinary
Americans desperate for a secure life, his skin colour may help him
regain this unjustified "trust", even though it is of a similar hue to
that of Colin Powell, who lied to the United Nations for Bush and now
endorses Obama. As for the rest of us, is it not time we opened our
eyes and exercised our right not to be lied to, yet again?
"Our
coverage of the U.S. election is not heavy because we believe that the
result of the elections will not have a direct impact on the future of
Iraq," said Ahmed Abdul-Majid, chief editor of Azzaman, a major Baghdad
newspaper. "There is no difference between McCain and, Obama because
both of them will follow the strategic policies drawn up by
decision-making circles," he said. Abdul-Halim Saleh, senior editor
at the government-owned newspaper Al-Sabah, offered a similar view: "In
the end, strategic policies made in the United States will not be
affected by the changing of the administrations." The idea that
institutions and not presidents determine U.S. policy helps explain why
the security agreement commands so much attention. The agreement, under
negotiation for months, would keep American troops in Iraq for three
more years but give Iraqis a greater role in deciding U.S. military
operations.
The above is from Sameer N. Yacoub's "Iraqis keep an eye on US vote, but security pact has full attention" (AP) and on the treaty masquerading as a Status Of Forces Agreement, China's Xinhau notes
al-Sabah (Baghdad newspaper) is reporting three of the five amendments
have been agreed to by DC. Among the rejected are supposedly the issue
of immunity for US troops and among the agreed to changes is that US
forces would leave in 36 months and that the treaty will be called
"agreement on withdrawal of US forces."
Moving from the treaty to the continuing crisis created by the White House when it decided to attack Syria two Sundays ago, AP reports
that Walid al-Moualem, Syria's Foreign Minister, has used the word
"painful" to describe the responses from Syria to the US should the
White House and its agencies continue to stonewall regarding the
attack. Meanwhile AKI reports
that the US Embassy in Syria reopened yesterday (it was closed Thursday
due to protests and closed Friday as well although the State Dept
maintained that was due to a holiday). The US school has been closed
and Sami Moubayed's "American dream expelled from Syria" (Asia Times) addresses that:
A
belated victim of the United States raid into Syria on October 27 was
the American school in Damascus. The institution has been a
controversial satellite of US interests in Syria since its founding
more than a half-century ago, and it has often been featured as
political football during the two nations' turbulent, often bitter
relationship. The American school in Damascus, known as the Damascus
Community School (DCS), was one among many US academic institutes that
started appearing in the Middle East in the mid-20th century. Unlike
the American University of Beirut (AUB), a missionary school, or the
American College in Aleppo, northern Syria, DCS was part of American
initiative fostered by then-US secretary of state John Foster Dulles
during the Cold War in 1956. There was no US ambassador in Syria at
the time of its founding - as is the case today - and relations were
tense. The White House, under president Dwight D Eisenhower, had
accused the Syrian government of transforming Syria into a Soviet
satellite. Yet a key architect of the school's opening was Syria's
ex-foreign minister Salah al-Din al-Bitar, ironically also one of the
two founders of the Baath Party.
Bonnie notes that Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Ms. Troll"
went up last night. Turning to the US presidential election, Ralph
Nader is in the independent presidential candidate and Matt Gonzalez is
his running mate. Sarita notes this from Team Nader:
Breaking Point: The Real McCoy
Posted by Loralynne Krobetzky on Sunday, November 2, 2008 at 08:51:00 PM
I’m
39 years old; I have never voted in my life. There are many reasons as
to why, none of which I will bore you with. I saw Mr. Nader on C-Span
the other day, he will get my first vote as an American citizen. That
is all.
—Todd
Mr. Nader, Congratulations
for standing up and supporting the American Taxpayer for all these
years. As a registered(conservative)Democrat for 38 years, I have
decided to change my party affiliation to Independent. I certainly
admire your tenacity and want thank you on behalf of all Americans that
have come to understand often, as a result of your irrepressible
energies that the current two party system has become untenable and
that it is crucial for our country to have a viable third party choice. Stay well. Sincerely,
—Jonathan Galin Anchorage, Alaska
I just saw you (Ralph Nader) on CNN
which prompted me to visit your website. As I read through your stance
on the issues I realized you stand for everything I do. Prior to today
I was going to vote for Obama. Not anymore.
Ralph Nader has my vote now.
Thank you for explaining your agenda in a clear, concise manner. This is the kind of straight talk and ACTION that will make America great once again, and restore our good reputation in the world.
Thank you!
—Joel Nethery Redding, CA
Dear Mr. Nader, On
October 21st, I attended your Seattle rally along with my husband and
brother. Two days have passed since then and I just wanted to say that
your words are still buzzing in our house! My husband, who was until
then an Obama supporter, has been watching your videos on youtube
non-stop, and has also starting reading your books that I’ve had on my
shelf for years! I am proud to say that you have our whole family
hooked now! My husband and I have been very moved by your message and
will pledge our support to you as long as you are running. Never again
will we vote for the "least worst". Our first child is due in the next
three weeks, and we hope that someday he will get to see a president
like you or Mr. Gonzalez in office. Please know that our hearts are
with you, our votes have been cast to you, and our lives have been so
inspired by your cause. Much luck to you and your running mate! Be well,
—Jamie Kostek
Photo above provided by a supporter.
If you haven’t reached your breaking point, visit www.breakingpoint08.com. Send me your Breaking Point story to share at loralynne@votenader.org, so the growing numbers of independent voters can join our voices, and together, we can change the system.
Loralynne Krobetzky Communications Director Nader for President 2008
John
McCain is the Republican presidential nominee and Sarah Palin is his
running mate. The campaign picked up another endorsement and Robertnoted this:
This
presidential election comes down, as they often do, to trust. We must
trust the person's competence, courage and ability to defend us from
our enemies and to fight for the best economic conditions possible.
In
both areas, John McCain stands head and shoulders above his rival.
McCain has been tested as few men ever have, and he has never been
found wanting. Barack Obama has no experience -- none. He may be the
most unprepared major-party candidate ever. His own vice presidential
pick says our enemies will test him quickly and severely. There is no
good reason to take that chance.
Cynthia McKinney is the
Green Party presidential candidate and Rosa Clemente is her running
mate. We'll again note Kimberly and Ian Wilder's "Vote Green Party On Tuesday!" (On The Wilder Side):
November 1, 2008 This is an exciting time for us! The Green Party has never been as relevant as it is today. As Congress offers trillion-dollar bailouts to Wall Street, people living on Main Street struggle to stay in their homes and pay for basic needs. Why is Congress bailing out corporations while the public slides into economic insecurity? Because the industries that will benefit from the bailout are some of the largest campaign contributors to political campaigns. But never fear because you can VOTE GREEN on Tuesday and choose People Power over corporate power. Support Cynthia McKinney for President and Rosa Clemente for Vice President; and, support other Green candidates running in your community. Greens are running for office across the country for 60 types of office. Check them out! To find out who’s running in your community, click here. Once elected, Greens will not betray the public interest for corporate cash. We accept no corporate money because we believe corporate influence is what’s wrong with politics. If you believe healthcare is a right for all, not to be governed by the profit motive of insurance companies, support the Green Party and our campaign for Single Payer Healthcare. If you believe offshore drilling furthers our national addiction to fossil fuels;
and want to see positive solutions like renewable energy, local food
production, local businesses and better public transportation- Help elect Greens who will make it a reality. If you believe every vote must be counted, that higher education should be available to everyone, that climate change is real, that the war on drugs is racist, and that the privatization of public goods and services is wrong and that we need to BRING OUR TROOPS HOME NOW stand up and support the party that will stand up for you The Green Party. If you want to see a clean, healthy future for our children, make sure we have a strong Green Party today
larry pinkney
leila fadel
hussein kadhim
corinne reilly
damien mcelroy
cindy 
gina chon
the wall street journal
the new york times
stephen farrell
abeer mohammed
katharine q. seelye
michael birnbaum
the washington post
the los angeles times
ned parker
scott conroy
cbs news
victoria kim
mcclatchy newspapers
sameer n. yacoub
sami moubayed
cnn
brian montopoli
john pilger
sam dagher
independent catholic reporter
william h. willimon
