The Danger in Underestimating the Right Wing

I found this on a website called The Progressive Puppy this morning.  I'm still shaking and bordering on the incoherent, because I honestly don't know what to DO about this. 

The JFK poster appeared all over Dallas just days before he was assassinated.  I don't know how widespread the Obama poster has been, but the three of these pictures together tell a story that just cannot be denied.  (Thank you, Max Pearson.)

There is something going on in this country that is insidious and destructive and dangerous.  We just can't go on pretending that it comes from fringe groups in small numbers.  Not when we have the Glenn Becks and Rush Limbaughs and Michelle Malkins and even so-called Christian ministers advocating taking Obama down.  They may not be selling violence outright, but they're adding flames to the fire, and they know it.  It draws audiences and constituencies, and they know their people well.

These are the same flame-throwers who, if something does happen to President Obama, will be the first to say, "Don't look at me.  I didn't do it."

At the same time, I don't want to be one who says, "I didn't do enough".  I could cite dozens of websites here that advocate violence against our president, but I won't.  A Google search with the right words is enough to give me nightmares again.  It's out there, and it's growing, and it's becoming mainstream.

It's only one step from becoming normal behavior.  One of our Four Freedoms.  But speech can inflame.  Speech can incite.  Speech can be accessory to violence.

We've already seen the next step past freedom of speech.  We've seen assault weapons being carried into political rallies, where the president is scheduled to speak.  Gunslingers coming to shut the president up.  Now it's at the threat stage--next will be the actual shooting.

When do we finally get it that this is no longer a Free Speech issue?  This is anarchy, and we're standing around making jokes about it, pointing fingers, shaking our heads, and then turning away, as if ignoring the so-called crazies will dilute their messages of pure hatred.

They're just getting started.  When the first "citizen" walked into a public auditorium with a gun slung over his shoulder and nobody stopped him, it gave permission to dozens, then hundreds, then thousands, to follow.

Nancy Pelosi teared up the other day when she talked about the very real dangers in the advocating of violence.  What was the reaction?  A campaign of hatred and ridicule against Nancy Pelosi.

I'm not about to carry a gun to get my message across.  All I have are words, and in this present atmosphere, they're pretty puny.  But I see what's happening--this all-out hatred, this increasing call to violence--as wholly un-American.  This is NOT who we are.  This is NOT who we were meant to be.  Generations of Americans didn't work their asses off to bring us to this.  This is not a vast Right Wing conspiracy, it's Right Wingers out in the open, advocating anarchy, threatening to "take back" a country they've never understood, never nurtured, never respected.

They don't deserve it and they're not going to get it without a fight.

Or are they?

(Addendum:  read Bob Herbert's column here.)

[It's] time for other Americans, of whatever persuasion, to take a stand, to say we're better than this. They should do it because it's right. But also because we've seen so many times what can happen when this garbage gets out of control. Think about the Oklahoma City bombing, and the assassinations of King and the Kennedys. On Nov. 22, 1963, as they were preparing to fly to Dallas, a hotbed of political insanity, President Kennedy said to Mrs. Kennedy: "We're heading into nut country today."

Ramona

(Cross-posted at Talking Points Memo here.)

Who Loves Ya, Labor?

On Tuesday two emails appeared in my box,  both asking me for help in doing something about the sorry state of labor in this country.  One was from John Sweeney, the outgoing AFL-CIO president.  This is his message in its entirety:

Dear Ramona,

Yesterday at the opening session of the 2009 AFL-CIO Convention in Pittsburgh, I had the opportunity to thank my family, staff and labor leaders from across the country and around the world for their commitment, personal sacrifice and hard work during the past 14 years. Today, I want to thank you.

I've loved our labor movement all my life. There is no greater honor than the opportunity to serve working people. It has been an amazing 14 years, and together we transformed the debate over globalization and helped redefine the global labor movement as a champion of workers' rights. We called the hand of the greedy corporations that sent our jobs overseas, scammed our mortgage markets and nearly destroyed our economy.

We brought health care and labor law reform to the top of our national agenda. We seated a pro-working-family majority in the United States Congress. We elected a champion of working families as the first African American president in the history of our country.

We changed the direction of our country, and we should be just as proud of how we changed our movement. We built the strongest grassroots political operation in our country and brought hundreds of thousands of union volunteers into the fight to protect the dreams we share. We knew we were faced with building a movement on changing ground, and we reached out to organizations and workers outside our walls.

At the opening of our 2009 convention, I'm filled with optimism. We've helped create one of those rare moments when history invites dramatic improvement in the human condition.

But the excitement over our possibilities is tempered by the realities of our times. We're seeing glimmers of an economic recovery, yet nearly 20 million of our brothers and sisters are still without work. The poor and the out-of-work are no longer invisible or abstract figures—they're our friends and neighbors, our mothers and fathers, our sons and daughters.

We're on the cusp of the greatest advance in labor law reform in 70 years, but we're taking heavy fire from the corporate captains of deceit. We're closer than ever to winning our long struggle for universal health care, but our success has kindled a firestorm of meanness stoked by politicians playing on fear, racism, nativism and greed.

Every one of our achievements represents unfinished business—and the tasks we're challenged with are daunting. But if there is one thing we've learned over the past 14 years, it is this: Miracles present themselves on the shoulders of commitment, unity and action.

At the center of these is unity—the solidarity that flows through the marrow of our movement. For us, solidarity is more than just a strategy, it's a way of life. We believe in helping each other. We care about our brothers and sisters.

Solidarity is what gives workers the collective courage to form a union, to fight back against a greedy employer.

Solidarity is what compelled thousands of first responders and construction workers to risk their lives at Ground Zero eight years ago last Friday.

Solidarity is what saved 155 airline passengers who could have drowned in the icy waters of the Hudson River.

Solidarity is what compels a firefighter to dive into an inferno to save a stranger, a teacher to refuse to give up on a child or back off from a battle with a school board.
Now it is up to you to bring even more solidarity, revive our economy and make it work for everyone.

We will pass the Employee Free Choice Act and help millions of America's workers lift their lives and realize their aspirations. We will guarantee every family in America health care when they need it. And we will be true to our enduring mission of improving the lives of working families, bringing fairness and dignity to our workplaces and securing economic and social equity in our nation.

That's our mission, that's our job—let's get at it.

John J. Sweeney
AFL-CIO President
Labor Warrior At-Large

The other email came from National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.  I won't print the entire thing, but if you want to read it, the link is here.


It started, "Dear Ramona", and was signed by Mark Mix, head of NRW.  (Somewhere down the road, I either accidentally wandered onto their website or they got my email address from somewhere and added me to their list. However it happened, I've been getting regular emailings from them.  At first, I couldn't believe what I was reading and I almost took my name off of their list.  But then the "know your enemy" strategy kicked in and so, when I can stomach it, I venture into enemy territory and open one of their links.)
But what struck me about those two emails was the stark contrasts of opinion about the same issue.  Who is right?  (The question is rhetorical.  I know the answer.)

Mark Mix (no relation to Tom Mix, he says. That should make Tom very happy.) and his crowd want me to believe that:

The Right to Work principle--the guiding concept of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation--affirms the right of every American to work for a living without being compelled to belong to a union. Compulsory unionism in any form--"union," "closed," or "agency" shop--is a contradiction of the Right to Work principle and the fundamental human right that the principle represents. The National Right to Work Committee advocates that every individual must have the right, but must not be compelled, to join a labor union. The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation assists employees who are victimized because of their assertion of that principle.

Meanwhile, the AFL-CIO wants me to believe they're wrong:

To set the record (and the name) straight, right to work for less doesn’t guarantee any rights. In fact, by weakening unions and collective bargaining, it destroys the best job security protection that exists: the union contract. Meanwhile, it allows workers to pay nothing and get all the benefits of union membership. Right to work laws say unions must represent all eligible employees, whether they pay dues or not. This forces unions to use their time and members’ dues money to provide union benefits to free riders who are not willing to pay their fair share.

Mark Mix and pals ask, What effect does a Right to Work law have on a state's standard of living?

The National Right to Work Committee has called attention to the fact that Right to Work states enjoy a higher standard of living than do non-Right to Work states. Families in Right to Work states, on average, have greater after-tax income and purchasing power than do those families living in non-Right to Work states, independent studies reveal. What's more, Right to Work states have greater economic vitality, official Department of Labor statistics show, with faster growth in manufacturing and nonagricultural jobs, lower unemployment rates and fewer work stoppages.

The AFL-CIO says the opposite:

Right to work laws lower wages for everyone. The average worker in a right to work state makes about $5,333 a year less than workers in other states ($35,500 compared with $30,167).[1] Weekly wages are $72 greater in free-bargaining states than in right to work states ($621 versus $549).[2] Working families in states without right to work laws have higher wages and benefit from healthier tax bases that improve their quality of life.

While Mark Mix and posse see smoke signals on the horizon:

How does compulsory unionism affect government policy?

Compulsory unionism is primarily responsible for the Tax-and-Spend policies of the U.S. Congress. Under their federally-granted coercive powers, union officials collect some $4.5 billion annually in compulsory dues and funnel much of it into unreported campaign operations to elect and control congressional majorities dedicated to higher taxes and increased government spending.

The AFL-CIO sees a safe haven:

Right to work endangers safety and health standards that protect workers on the job by weakening unions that help to ensure worker safety by fighting for tougher safety rules. According to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics, the rate of workplace deaths is 51 percent higher in states with right to work, where unions can’t speak up on behalf of workers.[3]

Mark Mix sees coercion everywhere but in the boss's office:

What is "exclusive representation"?

"Exclusive representation" is the special coercive privilege, given by federal law, that empowers union officials to represent all employees in a company's bargaining unit. This "compulsory union representation" deprives employees, even in Right to Work states, of their right to bargain for themselves. Union officials demand this power, then use it as their excuse to force employees to pay dues for representation they do not want. The unions see it as protection:
Federal law already protects workers who don’t want to join a union to get or keep their jobs. Supporters claim right to work laws protect employees from being forced to join unions. Don’t be fooled—federal law already does this, as well as protecting nonmembers from paying for union activities that violate their religious or political beliefs. This individual freedom argument is a sham.

The email from Mark Mix might have scared the beejesus out of me if I hadn't already seen his kind in action before.  He said:

During the last elections, Big Labor spent more than a BILLION dollars in forced-dues cash to create a national tidal wave of victories for its handpicked candidates. Now they’re demanding PAYBACK!The union bosses are moving at lightning speed to ram through the most extreme socialistic items on their agenda --they’ve been waiting decades for exactly this moment!But at the very top of their agenda are moves to seize more special privileges for coercive unionism. In fact, forced unionism power grabs are at the very heart of the bailout bills, health care overhaul bills, and numerous other laws being pushed by Congress right now.

Man!  Where do I sign up?   But. . .what's this?

 Now I’m writing to all of the Foundation’s best supporters because, according to my calculations, if you and our other most generous supporters gave a gift of $250 to the Foundation today, it would be enough to fully fund the rest of our 2009 program.

I realize that $250 is a lot to ask, but so much is at stake.

You see, I know a few people won’t give at all right now. They will count on others to carry their load.

That's why, if at all possible, I ask you for a very generous contribution of $500.

That may be more than you’ve given in a single gift before, but I hope you will seriously consider digging this deep.

More than anything, such a request is a testament to just how critical the Foundation’s ongoing projects and financial needs are.

But, if I can count on generous donors like you to give such a contribution now, I could put aside any thoughts of scaling back our program and focus on the business of challenging Big Labor’s abuses.

I hope you understand how much is at stake.

With the resources provided by your contribution, the Foundation can maintain and perhaps even increase its aggressive attack on Big Labor’s compulsory unionism schemes. Your support could not come at a better time than now, given the challenges we face.

We’ve been able to rely on you before, and I’m hoping that you’ll come through for the Foundation now. If, for some reason, you just can’t send $500 today, please give at least the full $250 or whatever you can afford right away.

Whether you give $500 or $250 -- or if a lesser amount is the most you can afford right now -- please submit your Supporter's Directive giving me your advice and be as generous as you are able.

Please, help today. Your contribution will make a difference.

Sincerely,

Mark Mix

P.S. The union bosses are moving at lightning speed to crush all opposition to expansion of their government-granted special privileges. This is their best shot in decades to move Card Check Forced Unionism and other radical measures into reality.

The National Right to Work Foundation has its back against the wall as we fight Big Labor’s assault. Yet at this crucial moment, I fear the Foundation will not have the resources to fight against all the threats you and I face.

Please let me have your advice by filling out your Supporter’s Directive today. And I really hope you will make a tax-deductible contribution of $500 or at least $250 or whatever you can afford today.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. . . .(catches breath). . .ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. . . . .(rolls off couch). . . .ha     ha     ha.

I had such a headache.  You wouldn't believe. . .

So I went back and read John Sweeney's letter.  Poof!  Headache gone.  All it took was a breath of fresh air.

Ramona

For Labor: A Pat on the Back, a Hail and Farewell

"Less than a century ago the laborer had no rights, little or no respect, and led a life which was socially submerged and barren….American industry organized misery into sweatshops and proclaimed the right of capital to act without restraints and without conscience. The inspiring answer to this intolerable and dehumanizing existence was economic organization through trade unions. The worker became determined not to wait for charitable impulses to grow in his employer. He constructed the means by which fairer sharing of the fruits of his toil had to be given to him or the wheels of industry, which he alone turned, would halt and wealth for no one would be available…
"History is a great teacher. Now everyone knows that the labor movement did not diminish the strength of the nation but enlarged it. By raising the living standards of millions, labor miraculously created a market for industry and lifted the whole nation to undreamed of levels of production. Those who attack labor forget these simple truths, but history remembers them.

-  Martin Luther King, AFL-CIO address, December 11, 1961

______________________________________________________________________

The story of the labor movement in America is a sweeping epic, a saga of betrayal and redemption, a tender love story, a tragedy worthy of the Greeks.  As in any good story, there is hope, there is conflict; there are victims and villains, there are cowards and there are heroes. For some who have followed the story, the end has already come.  For others, the hope lives on.  But, as in any great movement, in any great story, the paradigm changes, the characters along with it.  For labor, the days of glory, of prosperity,  have dwindled.  There are many who see this as a sign of progress.  They've already picked out the casket.

So it is fitting, as we come together to mourn the loss of the strength of America, to  remember and celebrate its existence, and the people who worked to keep it strong.  From Samuel Gompers to Eugene V. Debs to Mother Jones to John L. Lewis to Frances Perkins and the Roosevelt Administration to Walter Reuther to Cesar Chavez  to Martin Luther King to the Willmar Eight to "Norma Rae" , there have been those who stood tall and gave their all to preserve and protect the working class in this country.

Most of those named here are gone now.  If they could come back today, would they lament the present conditions?  No question.
Would they see their own hard work as wasted?  Not likely.  For how much worse would it  have been without them.
Would they put their heads together and come up with a solution?  Oh, yes--yes they would.
Would the solution be revolution?  We could only hope.
Would they lead us again?  Right down the path to victory.

But they are not here, and time and events have passed them by.   There are still some who fight the battles of the workplace with a fervor we could only hope would make a difference, but shouting the truth in the wilderness is, in the end, about as effective as whispering in a crowd.

Labor Day, the celebration of our laborers, began as a union event in 1882 and eventually became a nationwide holiday.  I can remember my dad taking me to a huge Labor Day parade in downtown Detroit when I was a child.  The crowds lined Woodward Avenue by the thousands, but they were almost dwarfed by the rows of marchers holding banners and singing the songs of labor. The people lining the avenue cheered them on mightily, raucously, my dad along with them, and I cheered, too.  The outpouring of emotion was frightening, yet thrilling.  And even at that young age (I couldn't have been more than eight or nine) I sensed that we were a part of something important.

Are there still Labor Day parades today?  Are they in celebration of labor and not just the holiday?

According to the DOL:  The character of the Labor Day celebration has undergone a change in recent years, especially in large industrial centers where mass displays and huge parades have proved a problem. This change, however, is more a shift in emphasis and medium of expression. Labor Day addresses by leading union officials, industrialists, educators, clerics and government officials are given wide coverage in newspapers, radio, and television.
 

 Our new labor secretary, Hilda Solis, said this at the Union League Club of Chicago on September 2:

From the Great Depression to 9/11, Americans have faced tough times and we beat them. Together. This time will be no different. The fact that the daughter of immigrants is the nation's 25th Secretary of Labor is testament that anything is possible in our country. My mother was a minimum wage worker at a toy assembly plant and was a member of the United Rubber Workers Union, now the Steelworkers. My father worked in a battery recycling plant and was a Teamsters shop steward.
Many people have influenced me, mentored me, and inspired me:

• Martin Luther King Jr. who sparked my passion for civil and human rights;
• Dolores Huerta who had her ribs broken in the struggle but never her spirit; and
• Cesar Chavez, who inspired me and the world by simply saying: "Si Se Puede!" --Yes, We Can!

I am a product of:

• The women's movement.
• The labor movement.
• The environmental movement.
• The social justice movement.
• And I'm married to a small business owner.

I'm proud of all that. It is what defines me and shapes my goal as Labor Secretary: Good Jobs For Everyone.
And here's what I mean by "good jobs":

• Jobs that can support a family by increasing incomes and narrowing the wage gap;
• Jobs that are safe and secure, and give people a voice in the workplace;
• Jobs that are sustainable and innovative — like green jobs — that export products not paychecks.
• And jobs that rebuild a strong middle class.

I want to believe, even in the face of all evidence to the contrary, that the people who labor in and for this country will take back their rightful positions as the vanguards for prosperity, and that those in power will be there to move them forward.  To all who labor in the factories, in the warehouses, in the fields, in the offices, in the schools, and behind the counters, may this day be the turning point.  May tomorrow bring the changes that have so long been promised.  


Our force is in our numbers.  Our weapons are pride and determination.  Our hope is in ourselves.


Ramona


(Cross-posted at Talking Points Memo here)

Health Care - A Condition, not a Commodity

Let's get on with it, Mr. President. We're up the proverbial creek with spaghetti as our paddle. This health care thing could have been the crossing of the Delaware, the turning point in the next American Revolution — the moment we put the mercenaries to rout, as General Washington did the Hessians at Trenton. We could have stamped our victory "Made in the USA." We could have said to the world, "Look what we did!" And we could have turned to each other and said, "Thank you."
As it is, we're about to get health care reform that measures human beings only in corporate terms of a cost-benefit analysis. I mean this is topsy-turvy — we should be treating health as a condition, not a commodity.
 Bill Moyers, September 5, 2009

This is Saturday night on the Labor Day weekend, and I have no illusions about anybody stopping whatever they're doing to read this, so I won't take long.

Bill Moyers has been tireless in his efforts to get through to the President the importance of universal, equitable health care.  This isn't something he--or we--can afford to put off.  Millions are without health care, millions are without jobs, millions are without homes, millions are without money.  If this isn't the time to push for health care as an inalienable right for all Americans, I don't know when that will be.

I wrote a letter to President Obama asking him to read the transcript and/or watch Bill Moyers' clip:

I have talked about labor issues and health care on my own blog, as have thousands of others, but I'm writing this today to beg you to watch and read what Bill Moyers said on his program last night.


http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/blog/2009/09/bill_moyers_on_obamas_moment.html#c259311

President Obama, we need at LEAST a public option. Please stop letting the insurance providers set our health care policy. They've bamboozled and defrauded us long enough. Why on earth would you even think of rewarding them yet again?


You made promises about health care that encouraged millions of us to trust you, to vote for you, to work for you. With so many millions underpaid or out of work, we cannot afford to make weak compromises on the health issue. You need to be strong now, and you need to know that we're with you. People are suffering and you can make it right. Remember that when you give your speech on Wednesday night.

Not exactly Moyers quality, but I figure if each of us lets him know in our own words how we feel about the coming health care compromises he'll know it's not all teabaggers and townhallers out there letting their voices be heard.

Write him here and do it before Wednesday:  (I know it's a holiday, but it's a holiday commemorating and celebrating the American work force, past and present.  Do this for them  Please)

http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

Ramona

(Cross-posted at Talking Points Memo here.)

Can we please, finally, forgive Ted Kennedy?

May it be said of our Party in 1980 that we found our faith again.

And may it be said of us, both in dark passages and in bright days, in the words of Tennyson that my brothers quoted and loved, and that have special meaning for me now:

"I am a part of all that I have met
To [Tho] much is taken, much abides
That which we are, we are --
One equal temper of heroic hearts
Strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."

For me, a few hours ago, this campaign came to an end.

For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die.

Senator Edward Kennedy, Concession speech, August 12, 1980

I woke up this morning to the news I've been dreading for weeks now. Ted Kennedy, the Good Man of the Senate, has died. He has been on my mind a lot lately, as we wage this battle for the common good, because what I fear most now is that our progress will suffer badly without his counsel, without his presence.

For more than 40 years he has consistently been on the side of the people without power. As former senator Bob Kerrey said on "Morning Joe" today, "If you're getting the shaft, you ought to be weeping today because Ted Kennedy was your best friend."

The list of his accomplishments, the bills he worked so tirelessly to get passed, the people whose personal stories tell the tale of a man of high privilege coming to understand his role in the negation of human misery--are a part of our history we will never forget.

But no matter how much we would prefer to concentrate on the triumphs of his life, on the undeniable good he has done for his country, the specter of Chappaquiddick will never stop casting a long shadow over it all.

Already, this early in the morning, it comes up in the remembrances of those who knew him and are now before the cameras talking about his life.  It happened--we know it happened.  The facts are that Mary Jo Kopechne's life ended on July 18, 1969, after  drowning in a river on Chappaquiddick Island.  It was late at night and she was a passenger in a car driven by Sen. Edward Kennedy. They were heading toward the ferry to the mainland after a victory party when the car skidded off a bridge and crashed into the water. Kennedy survived, but Mary Jo didn't. She was just days away from her 29th birthday.

There is no question that Ted Kennedy panicked and swam across to the mainland, leaving Mary Jo in that car in that river.  Did he try to save her?  He says he did. He says he was going for help, but it was hours before anyone found the car with Mary Jo's body inside.

Leaving the scene of an accident is a crime, and there were a lot of us--maybe most of us--who wanted to see him, at the very least, serve time in jail.  His sentence was eventually suspended, a seemingly contemptuous judicial act that stunned us all. No punishment for running like a coward, allowing a young woman to die? Why? Because the rich and famous are exempt from having to pay for their sins?

For years I didn't want to ever hear the name Ted Kennedy again. For years I heard the stories of his drinking, his carousing, and I wondered how the good people of Massachusetts could go on electing him.

He ran for president against Jimmy Carter and campaigned badly. Again, we counted him out.  Then he gave his concession speech, his "the dream shall never die" speech, on the night of Jimmy Carter's primary victory. There were a number of us in the room that night watching the returns, but I can still remember how quiet it was as we listened to the final moments of his speech. I remember that none of us expected much from him by that time so when he started we were barely listening. When it ended, we all looked at one another and someone said, "Why in God's name did he have to wait until now to give that speech?"

I've heard people say that he campaigned badly because, after Chappaquiddick, he felt deep down that he didn't deserve the presidency. I can't begin to look into Ted Kennedy's soul at the time, but after that defeat he was a different man. He went to work to fight for the causes his liberal heart told him were the most important, and he never looked back.
 
Already I'm seeing the hatred toward the Liberal Lion, the greatest senator of our times, bombarding the boards.  I won't repeat them here because I choose to celebrate Ted Kennedy's life.  It's a life that is ultimately deserving of praise.  Many of the people who are without a doubt going to go on the Hate Kennedy rampage today will laugh at the idea of a plea for forgiveness, but to forgive is not to forget. I'm not alone in wondering where Mary Jo's life would have taken her.  From all accounts, she was good, decent, smart, loving.  She was on Robert Kennedy's staff, even helping to write a speech he gave against the Vietnam War. Who knows what kind of career she would have chosen?  Where she would be today?

I've always wondered if it's possible that Ted Kennedy chose to give his life over to helping people who couldn't help themselves because the one time he might have actually saved a life, he failed.

It was the greatest act of repentance I think I've ever seen, and if I weep for Ted Kennedy today it is not for all the things that might have been, it is for all the things that were and now will be no more.

Calling All Dems: Time for an Intervention

Here's the least surprising news of the week: Americans are souring on the Democratic Party. The wonder is that it's taken so long for public opinion to curdle. There's nothing agreeable about watching a determined attempt to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Eugene Robinson, Washington Post

It is an axiom of American politics that the Democratic Party will negotiate from a position of weakness and the Republican Party will proceed from strength. The number of seats they hold in Congress is irrelevant to this paradigm. The Republicans could be down to five senators and they would still charge into battle. And the Democrats would, from the outset, assume that the Republicans are right (and mainstream) and that since their own position is too extreme they must concede as soon as possible to remain politically viable. There is no Republican talking point that won't scare the bejesus out of the Democratic Party. - Cenk Uygur, Huffington Post

_________________________________________________________

The above-quoted pieces aren't necessarily eye-openers. They're not saying anything we haven't all been talking about for months now. They're just saying it better. In fact, dazzlingly better. In fact, they're making so much sense I'm getting ready for the final smackdown. I've been patient long enough.

This year marks my 50th Anniversary as a card carrying Democrat. Long enough so that they're almost like family to me, and as families go, we've had our ups and downs. But it's clear to me, finally, that I've been far more loyal to them than they've been to me.

All I've ever asked of them is that they do the right thing. It doesn't take a decade's worth of committee meetings and forests full of red-taped paper to come up with a way to do the right thing. We need living-wage jobs. We need affordable health care. We need clean air, clean water and a leaning toward green. We need protection from the callous, the cruel, and the crazies. It's not too much to ask of the Party of the People. (Think Ted Kennedy, Paul Wellstone, Dennis Kucinich, John Conyers, Anthony Weiner, Russ Feingold. . .)

Still, I'm a charitable person. I'm willing to give them another chance. But I'm gonna need some help. So all of those interested in going the intervention route to save the Democratic Party leaders from themselves, holler "Aye"!

AYE!

Aye?

Waiting. . . .

Counting the minutes. . .

Gettin' hungry here. And lonely. . .

C'mon people. Remember how they used to be? Remember this?

"Liberals got women the right to vote. Liberals got African-Americans the right to vote. Liberals created Social Security and lifted millions of elderly people out of poverty. Liberals ended segregation. Liberals passed the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act. Liberals created Medicare. Liberals passed the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act. What did Conservatives do? They opposed them on every one of those things...every one!
- Matt Santos, The West Wing

And this?

Democrats have changed America in simple basic ways in the past fifty years that have benefited everyone. Race has become less and less an issue in people's lives and racism has ceased to be socially acceptable anywhere.

Women have moved into every realm of society and this is everywhere accepted without much comment, Equal opportunity in education, employment, housing. There is general agreement on the right to a dignified old age, guaranteed by the state. Democrats led the way in bringing these things about. It's one thing to get into power and do favors for your friends; it's quite another to touch the conscience of a nation. The last Republican to do that was Teddy Roosevelt.

and:
The fear of catastrophe could chill the soul but the social compact assures you that if the wasps come after you, if gruesome disease strikes down your child, if you find yourself hopelessly lost, incapable, drowning in despair, running through the rye toward the cliff, then the rest of us will catch you and tend to you and not only your friends but We the People in the form of public servants.
- Garrison Keillor, "Homegrown Democrat" 2004

And especially this:

The economic plank of this platform on its face concerns only material things, but it is also a moral issue that I raise tonight. It has taken many forms over many years. In this campaign and in this country that we seek to lead, the challenge in 1980 is to give our voice and our vote for these fundamental democratic principles.

Let us pledge that we will never misuse unemployment, high interest rates, and human misery as false weapons against inflation.

Let us pledge that employment will be the first priority of our economic policy.

Let us pledge that there will be security for all those who are now at work, and let us pledge that there will be jobs for all who are out of work; and we will not compromise on the issues of jobs.

These are not simplistic pledges. Simply put, they are the heart of our tradition, and they have been the soul of our Party across the generations. It is the glory and the greatness of our tradition to speak for those who have no voice, to remember those who are forgotten, to respond to the frustrations and fulfill the aspirations of all Americans seeking a better life in a better land.

We dare not forsake that tradition. We cannot let the great purposes of the Democratic Party become the bygone passages of history.

- Ted Kennedy, 1980 Democratic Convention,

We don't need a new party. We already have one of the historically great ones. This may cause some heads to snap, but we were the greatest when we were the most liberal. We lost whatever moral standing we had when we shut the door on being our brother's keeper and got in bed instead with the powermongers who would just as soon screw us as look at us.

That is not who we are. I remember a certain charismatic but maddeningly flawed presidential candidate saying over and over, "We're better than that". And for a while it looked like he was right. After eight years of cowardice that smelled a lot like treachery, we were on the way to Doing the Right Thing.

The candidate who became president sounded like an old Democrat, too, and we screamed with joy when the votes were in and our man won. Politics As Usual went out the window, and--surprise!--flew right back in again.

After more than eight years of cowardice/treachery, they owe us. Millions of us are hurting because of their actions, or inaction. They have a lot of making up to do, a lot of promises to keep, yet to watch them these days you would think that winning elections was all there was to it.

Wrong.

You have a job to do, you masters of the universe, you servants of the people. We made you--we can break you. So listen up:

We need cheap equitable health care without the usual looting by the insurance pirates. Take care of it.

We need a jobs program like the WPA/CCC. Take care of it.

We need to send a Dear John letter to Republican Fat-Cat-enabling naysayers. Take care of it.

We need to get back to making products instead of creating serfs. Take care of it.

And you need to stop pretending that Business As Usual is going to save us. It's not.

And another thing: The majority of us don't run with the Blue Dogs. The Blue Dogs are dogs. Let them eat scraps.

Time's up. You're dismissed. Now get to work.

Ramona

(Cross-posted at Talking Points Memo here)

The Morality and the Reality of Public Health Care - Ed Schultz Hits it Out of the Park

Historically, all the great social movements that have been successful have had the faith community at the heart of it.

Right now fear is controlling this debate, and we have to start talking about truth-telling and what is the moral core? We can't lose the moral core, which is people. Our friends, our neighbors, our loved ones are hurting. The broken system has to be fixed. And the faith community is not going to settle for anything less than full accessible health care coverage for all of God's children

The Rev. Jim Wallis, Sojourners
____________________________

Tonight on "The Ed Show", Ed Schultz talked with the Rev. Jim Wallis about the President's unprecedented conference call to thousands of religious leaders asking for their input on the government's role in health care. Rev. Wallis, president of Sojourners, Christians for Justice and Peace, talked passionately about the role the church must play in this all-important debate. (Their website was down soon after the Ed Show. I got on once and then didn't hang onto the link so I've been trying again for over an hour and can't get on.)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

What struck me about this entire event--these thousands of religious leaders conferring with the president about how best to use their community to do good works--is how little we've heard from these people, as opposed to those leaders on the Religious Right who use their names and their clout to fight any attempt to reign in insurance company profits and use taxpayer funds to give aid to the many millions of Americans who suffer because of non-existent or inadequate health, or worse--because the Insurers have had the freedom to play God with their lives.

How is it that we've rewarded those hateful charlatans with fame and fortune while effectively shunning those who actually minister to real people with real problems? Maybe now that change is in the air, now that unprecedented numbers of our citizens need an unprecedented amount of help, we'll look to the real churches for real help.

But from the sublime to the ridiculous:

Later Ed talked to former Republican congressman Ernest Istook, now with the Heritage Foundation and tried to get him to describe the Republican plan for Health Care. The upshot, after many uncomfortable moments, is that either there isn't a plan or Istook has taken an oath of silence. Whichever, the spokesman wasn't talking.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Later still, Ed talked to Dr. Howard Dean--good stuff, and I might have opted to concentrate on that part here, but Ed saved the best for last. His "discussion" with Jonathan "Liberals are driving themselves over the cliff" Alter looked a whole lot like a barroom brawl. Now THAT was fun! Watch Dean first, and then the Alter altercation:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

That was one heck of an hour. Ed Schultz, my new hero of the week.

Ramona

(Cross-posted at Talking Points Memo here)

Cal Thomas, Humanitarian: An Oxymoron if Ever There Was One

The secular left claims we are evolutionary accidents who managed to crawl out of the slime and by “natural selection” stand erect and over millions of years outsmart our ancestors, the apes. If that is your belief, then you probably think health care should be rationed. Why spend lots of money to improve — or save — the life of someone who evolved from slime and has no special significance other than the “accident” of becoming human? Policies flow from such a philosophy, though the average secularist probably wouldn’t put it in such stark terms. Stark, or not, isn’t this the inevitable progression of seeing humanity as maybe complex, but nothing special?
- Cal Thomas, "What Lies Beneath the Health Care Debate"

___________________________________

If there is a line to be drawn between religion and government, you can count on Cal Thomas, believe-you-me-in-residence, to be there providing the crayon. Sometimes he has to reach far distances in order to make the connection, but by diatribe's end he's thumping his chest, feeling mighty satisfied as he puts down the crayon and harumphs his final harumph.

For that reason, I usually bypass his 800 words, ubiquitous as they are in every big and little newspaper across our fair land. But last Tuesday I was up in the northernmost north woods of Michigan's Upper Peninsula without a computer or a cell phone signal, and the Great Northern mid-day sun was busy melting everything in sight. In the shaded, slightly-cooler cabin, the Daily Mining Gazette happened to be open to the Op-Ed page, and there he was--that evil, mustachioed grin; that high and mighty forehead; those lidded, serpentine eyes; the buttoned-up collar. He was claiming to know what lies beneath the health care debate.

Oh, my God. I couldn't resist.

To say that I don't always understand Cal Thomas is to say a mouthful, so when I read the paragraphs below I actually thought we were on the same wavelength:

The debate — OK, the shouting match — we are having over “health care reform” is about many things, including cost, who gets help and who does not and who, or what, gets to make that determination. Underlying it all is a larger question: Is human life something special? Is it to be valued more highly than, say, plants and pets? When someone is in a “persistent vegetative state” do we mean to say that person is equal in value to a carrot?

Are we now assigning worth to human life, or does it arrive with its own pre-determined value, irrespective of race, class, IQ, or disability?

The bottom line is not the bottom line. It is something far more profound. Our decisions regarding who will get help and who won’t are more than about bean-counting bureaucrats deciding if your drugs or operation will cost more than you are contributing to the U.S. Treasury.

I saw those words, "bean-counting bureaucrats" and I thought he was talking about those people we don't like--the rascals from the last administration who started this whole fiasco. Turns out he was talking about my government--and, lawsy. . .about ME! (Ed. Note: See highlighted quote under title)

I've been called the "Secular Left" before, though I've never really taken it as an insult. On the same morning that I happened to read Cal Thomas's column I also read another chapter of Carl Sagan's "The Demon-Haunted World". I'm reasonably sure that Cal Thomas was not a fan of Carl Sagan, so the contrast between the two points of view on the same day was more than just interesting--it was downright compelling. (Secular Left might have been Sagan's strong point.)

This connection Cal makes between the belief in so-called "evolutionary accidents" and a total disregard for human life is--can I say?--nutty. Where is the evidence that those who don't believe as Thomas does can't possibly understand that humans are special?

Of course we're special. We're so special, in fact, that a whole lot of us lefty heathens work doubly hard to ensure a quality of life for all. A far cry from what Thomas and his kind have been advocating. They're in the business of picking and choosing--who lives and who dies?--and a cynical business it is. They've chosen--proudly chosen--obscene, royal profits over needless suffering of the masses.

There is no anger in their hearts for the providers who spend millions of dollars and man-hours trying to figure out ways of maximizing profits at the expense of their clients.

They hold no grudges towards the Medicare and Medicaid cheaters who operate on such a large scale their profits are in the Billions and Billions. (Oops--another Carl Sagan title. A good read, too, by the way.)

Where was Cal Thomas and his bunch when the Bushies were giving health care providers free reign to charge whatever they wanted and to consistently deny humane aid to their paying, special, human customers?

Where is Thomas, even now, when millions of those special humans are jobless and homeless and without health care or even decent meals for themselves and their families?

Have you heard any shouting from Cal Thomas now that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is waging an all-out battle against the government (that's us) to maintain their rapacious strongholds? Those same destructive strongholds that have brought us to our very knees?

Much to ponder in his ponderous piece, what with references to people evolving from slime, and 100-year-olds with inoperable brain tumors, and "Bruce Almighty", but can you scratch your head and laugh out loud at the same time? Okay. How about this?

We are now witnessing some of the consequences of attempting to ban people with a God perspective from the public square. If there are no rules and no one to whom one might appeal when those rules are violated, we are on our own to set whatever rules we wish and to change them in a moment in response to opinion polls. Any appeals to a higher authority stop at the Supreme Court.

The GOD PERSPECTIVE?? The public square? And this has WHAT to do with What Lies Beneath the Health Care debate??

So, I know I'm dense when it comes to Cal and his super-Califragilisms, but is he saying we have no business fighting health care Big Business because we're not religious enough?

And is he saying that if we were religious enough, we would STOP fighting them?

I don't know. I'm so confused. But it seems to me if you were Cal Thomas and you saw humanity as something special, brought to you by the God of your choice, you would be working overtime to keep them well and away from the clutches of the so-called health care providers who have proven to be anything but special. And you might even want to cut yourself off, mid-harumph, to put that word "slime" in its proper place.

Ramona

(Cross-posted at Talking Points Memo here)

Happy Birthday, Helen Thomas. Oh, and You, Too, MR. Prez

We in the press have a special role since there is no other institution in our society that can hold the President accountable. I do believe that our democracy can endure and prevail only if the American people are informed. - Helen Thomas
________________________________________________

I'm a day late with this, I know, but the well-wishing is just as genuine as it would have been yesterday. I caught the clip of President Obama presenting Helen Thomas with a plate full of cupcakes on their mutual birthday. Helen was 89 years old yesterday; Barack Obama turned 48. I thought it was a lovely gesture--so completely unlike anything the previous president would have done, but true to what every president before the last might have done if he had thought of it.




Except for a dry spell during the Bush years, when she was unceremoniously expelled from the front row of the White House press room in a not-so-subtle attempt to shut up the pushy broad when GWB was in the room, Helen has had the ear of every president since John F. Kennedy in 1961. (She claims that she was forced to give up the front row because she no longer worked for the wire services, but what law says the President or his press secretary couldn't have asked her to stay right there, where she had been for over four decades?)

During Kennedy's presidency she had the honor of starting each press conference with the first question and then ending the questioning with, "Thank you, Mr. President". I've watched a lot of press conferences since JFK was president and Helen, except for those three years, presided over every one. She became a fixture in that room, and while I don't doubt for a minute that she also seemed the interminable crotchety old woman to many of the young, wet-behind-the-ears reporters there, we, the public, were comforted by that continuity. (Or at least I, the public.) Her bulldog tenacity, her refusal to stop asking tough follow-up questions, were exactly what was needed during the Bush years.

Helen grew up in Detroit and attended Wayne State University, so, even though I grew up in and around Detroit but didn't attend WSU and didn't become a journalist and didn't quite grow up in her generation, I've always felt a kinship with her.

There's something about her that says "Tough REAL reporter who just happens to be a woman". I loved watching her rise up from her signature slouch, take a deep breath, and hammer away with a question that absolutely required an answer.

I loved watching, one by one, all of those powerful Leaders of the Western World trying to suppress a sigh, wishing they could make light of this little woman's questions, but having the decency to honor the long-held Helen Thomas protocol by answering thoughtfully-- like grown-ups.

Then George W. Bush took over the White House. Helen was moved to the rear of the bus, and my heart sank. To humiliate a venerable old reporter known for decades for her ethics and her integrity was bad enough, but after it happened, the entire White House Press Corps pretended it was business as usual. Not a single voice was raised in protest. No stampedes out the doors until Helen was plopped back into her proper place. Not a peep from the mainstream media about the indignity of it all.

The first sign of trouble in a democratic land--the press becomes willing sheep. The White House had the power and the audacity to silence Helen Thomas, and the press, her colleagues, not willing to give up the best seats in the house, went along. I've never trusted any of them since.

In March of 2006, after a long three-year silence, Helen finally got to ask George W. Bush a question.




This is a portion of the White House transcript as provided by Media Matters, along with a video of Bill O'Reilly, Tucker Carlson and assorted Right Wingers commenting back then on yesterday's lovable Birthday Gal.

O'Reilly: "I would have laid into that woman, and I don't care how old she is. I would have laid her out, saying, 'How dare you?'"

Tucker Carlson called her the "reporter turned propagandist Helen Thomas", saying "Whatever you think of her questionable skills as a journalist, she isn't shy."

On that same program, Carlson introduced the "Five Best Helen Thomas Bloviating in the Briefing Room moments",

Imus's take: "The old bag should shut up and get out. I'm sick of her."

This is Helen Thomas in 2006 grilling Scott McClellan on illegal wiretapping.

This is Helen being mean to Dana Perino over citizen casualties in Iraq

This is Helen being Helen on Jon Stewart's "The Daily Show" in 2006, before she was banished.

And this is Christiane Amanpour, the journalist's journalist, explaining to the veteran news reader why there's no need to worry about Helen going all goofy over Obama bringing her cupcakes. (Listen carefully to the way each of these women reacts to this story. Which of them do you trust to get the news right? If you answered "Christiane", I don't need to go on telling you why the Helen Thomases of the world are so vital and so cherished. If you didn't--well, okay. Goodbye.)



Happy Birthday, Helen.

Happy Birthday, President Obama.

May your lights always shine upon us.

Ramona

(Cross-posted at Talking Points Memo here)

My Words on Bill Moyers' Lips - I'm Speechless

I missed Bill Moyers Journal on Friday night, and I was away from home all day yesterday until about 8 PM, so I had no idea that the end paragraph of my lowly blog about Moyers' interview with Wendell Potter made it onto the top of his show. (The clip shows my blog at Talking Points Memo but the content is the same as the original post here.)



Rowan Wolf over at Talking Points Memo Cafe saw it, blogged about it and put it on YouTube. To say I'm pretty stunned by this is a total understatement, and normally I don't like to toot my own horn, but this may be my 15 seconds of fame, so you'll have to forgive me for this, please.

I really want to talk about how blogs and bloggers have come out of the shadows and onto the battlefield. It's becoming a powerful vehicle for change, but with that comes the same kind of responsibility that journalists advocate but don't always follow. There are thousands of political bloggers out there now, and picking and choosing is a daunting, time-consuming occupation. Our political views are often going to be different, but the one thing we should be able to agree on is that we've come to this new vehicle for change with the understanding that we have an obligation to tell the truth as we see it and understand it. We'll make mistakes--plenty of them. Most of us are not professionals, after all, and our passion is bound to get in the way of clear thinking and good judgment some of the time. But our voices are out there; we're growing stronger, and I believe this country will be the better for it.

I came late to blogging. I just didn't get it. So much of what I saw was superficial, shallow navel-gazing--a kind of helter-skelter motor-mouth. Every thought, worthy or not, was transported onto a personal page for everyone to read--even those just merely, superficially interested.

I think it was the blogs on The Daily Kos that first convinced me it could be used to pull whole communities of people with common interests together so that one voice became many, and many voices could ultimately gain the power to change things.

I started my own blog here on January 20, the day of Barack Obama's inauguration. I remember hesitating for a long time before I hit the "Publish Post" button. It seemed like such a conceited, ego-driven kind of thing to do, but after the past eight years, and after the heady jubilance of the Obama victory, the passion to do something was overwhelming.

All I can do, really, is write. I'm not good at organizing or speechifying or getting on the telephone to try and convince anybody of anything. Writing is re-writing, and since I never get my thoughts straight the first time, it's the perfect vehicle for me. But I wanted my blog to include more than just my voice. I wanted it to be an open outlet for the blogs, articles, columns and videos so many of us were sending to one another by email almost every day. I've created links to many of them, but there are so many good writers out there who have a voice and are working hard to get themselves heard. It's becoming a real movement now, and outlets like Talking Points Memo are right at the forefront.

Somewhere along the way, Iwas lucky enough to find Talking Points Memo and the TPM Cafe. A whole new world! Intimidating at first because, man, are they smart! But I started a blog there and they welcomed me with a generosity that actually kind of floored me. My comment section here on this blog remains forelorn and lonely, but at TPM the comments sections are lively and boisterous -- full of good talk and good information. You can always count on the commenters to make you get it right. That's the terrifying beauty of political blogging--we're all opinionators and we make our opinions known!

But this one blog about Moyers and Potter must have struck a tiny nerve. My Blogspot blog had 162 hits that day and the next, and it received 656 Diggs--all because it was posted on TPM.

We have the power to make change. On my last post, I was wallowing in Faithlessness, but today I'm energized. And all because Bill Moyers spoke my words for a few seconds on his show. Okay, I'm ready to get back to work. Health care, labor, education, voter fraud, congressional shenanigans, shameless fat cats--bring 'em on.

What can I say? I'm easy.

Ramona