It is instructive to consider that Sandra Day O'Connor is considered by many in the religious right a traitor to the conservative cause. Allegedly, she had the 'right' perspective when she was first appointed to the court 25 years ago, but has since moved toward the middle.
My sense is that the middle has moved (or been dragged, kicking and screaming), not Ms. Day-O'Connor.
If the Conservative movement in American politics is most accurately represented by those with a far right ideology, is it accurate to call it 'conservative'? I think they should own up to their ideology - and adopt a term that the public understands: fundamentalist.
Saturday, July 02, 2005
Wednesday, June 01, 2005
Sore Throat
The scrupulously objective national press are going to great lengths to present both sides of the story of, what I will call, the 'Felt Tipper' (otherwise known as Deep Throat).
You are forgiven if you have difficulty in perceiving another side to this story: afterall, time has given us more than ample evidence of the psychological flaws, and criminal intent, of former President Richard M. Nixon.
But in this era journalistic objectivity often has little to do with the facts, and everything to do with presenting two political perspectives.
So most of the news programs covered the revelation that former FBI assistant director Mark Felt was the famous anonymous source Deep Throat by asking for a discussion of whether Felt was a hero, or something else.
On one side are -for the most part, those who saw Watergate unfold from outside the White House, and who believe that without sources like Felt and others, no real investigation would have taken place. The President was at the heart of the conspiracy to cover-up and obstruct investigations, and at his command were the Attorney General, the White House Chief of Staff, the head of the FBI and many other people in power who were willing and able to lie to the American people. Felt had no choice but to go outside the normal chain of command.
One the other other side are the White House insiders - many of whom are now convicted felons, who are calling Felt everything from a traitor to a snake, and suggesting that he should have either resigned, 'gone through channels', or just kept his mouth shut.
Former Congressman Robert Dorn (one of the few condemning Felt who was not a former Nixon staffer) went so far as to blame Felt for the loss of the Vietnam War.
There is no arguing that the fall of Nixon was a momentous event in the history of the United States. There are those who would argue, however, that America would have been better off had the conspiracy never been revealed. Somehow loyalty, even loyalty to corrupt individuals or destructive ideology, is the virtue of virtues.
I simply believe that nothing founded on lies will stand the test of time.
You are forgiven if you have difficulty in perceiving another side to this story: afterall, time has given us more than ample evidence of the psychological flaws, and criminal intent, of former President Richard M. Nixon.
But in this era journalistic objectivity often has little to do with the facts, and everything to do with presenting two political perspectives.
So most of the news programs covered the revelation that former FBI assistant director Mark Felt was the famous anonymous source Deep Throat by asking for a discussion of whether Felt was a hero, or something else.
On one side are -for the most part, those who saw Watergate unfold from outside the White House, and who believe that without sources like Felt and others, no real investigation would have taken place. The President was at the heart of the conspiracy to cover-up and obstruct investigations, and at his command were the Attorney General, the White House Chief of Staff, the head of the FBI and many other people in power who were willing and able to lie to the American people. Felt had no choice but to go outside the normal chain of command.
One the other other side are the White House insiders - many of whom are now convicted felons, who are calling Felt everything from a traitor to a snake, and suggesting that he should have either resigned, 'gone through channels', or just kept his mouth shut.
Former Congressman Robert Dorn (one of the few condemning Felt who was not a former Nixon staffer) went so far as to blame Felt for the loss of the Vietnam War.
There is no arguing that the fall of Nixon was a momentous event in the history of the United States. There are those who would argue, however, that America would have been better off had the conspiracy never been revealed. Somehow loyalty, even loyalty to corrupt individuals or destructive ideology, is the virtue of virtues.
I simply believe that nothing founded on lies will stand the test of time.
Tuesday, May 24, 2005
A little respect?
The Great Compromise of '05 has been reached, but there are many questions, and many concerns remaining, at least on my part.
What exactly is the wording of the compromise, and what does it guarantee? It seems that the only guarantees are those that have been given to the Republicans: namely that they will have 'up or down' votes on five of their more controversial nominees, including Owens, Brown, and Pryor.
As I understand this compromise, the Democrats were not promised that the 'Nuclear Option' was off the table. The Republicans were not promised that the minority party would not invoke the filibuster at a future date, though I have heard it said that the filibuster will now only be used in extreme cases.
But if Owens, Brown, and Pryor are not extreme cases, I am at a loss to understand just who might be.
Underlying everything was a continued lack of respect -on the part of the Democratic leadership, for the important role that progressive activists have played in this and other debates. Democratic leaders have yet to understand that we do not represent a far-left, radical perspective. We represent a wide spectrum of political beliefs, but we are united against the far right, the religious right, and the corporate right.
I truly believe that without our efforts this so-called compromise would have never taken place. But to be honest, I feel that this compromise represents a defeat for progressives.
The real question is, who is responsible for this defeat: the right-wing, or the so-called moderates?
What exactly is the wording of the compromise, and what does it guarantee? It seems that the only guarantees are those that have been given to the Republicans: namely that they will have 'up or down' votes on five of their more controversial nominees, including Owens, Brown, and Pryor.
As I understand this compromise, the Democrats were not promised that the 'Nuclear Option' was off the table. The Republicans were not promised that the minority party would not invoke the filibuster at a future date, though I have heard it said that the filibuster will now only be used in extreme cases.
But if Owens, Brown, and Pryor are not extreme cases, I am at a loss to understand just who might be.
Underlying everything was a continued lack of respect -on the part of the Democratic leadership, for the important role that progressive activists have played in this and other debates. Democratic leaders have yet to understand that we do not represent a far-left, radical perspective. We represent a wide spectrum of political beliefs, but we are united against the far right, the religious right, and the corporate right.
I truly believe that without our efforts this so-called compromise would have never taken place. But to be honest, I feel that this compromise represents a defeat for progressives.
The real question is, who is responsible for this defeat: the right-wing, or the so-called moderates?
Saturday, May 14, 2005
Note from the Democratic State Convention
-I have just returned from the Democratic State Convention in Lowell, and so offer the following observations.
First, it seemed Deval Patrick's day. Patrick is a candidate for Governor - a relative newcomer to politics, but someone who it seems has hit the ground running. He was one of three declared candidates who was given five minutes to address the delegates, and he made the most of his opportunity, delivering an exciting, well paced stump speech using the catch-phrase 'Yes We Can!'.
Patrick was sandwiched between the other two gubernatorial candidate: Secretary of State Bill Galvin spoke first, and finally, Attorney General Tom Reilly delivered his address. Neither aroused much of an audience response and Reilly - who though he only officially declared on Friday (May 13) was very disappointing.
Reilly clearly has money, and organization, and strong backing from the party regulars but... Patrick seems to excite the average delegate (at least those at this convention) and, perhaps, offers an alternative to democrats and progressives who don't seemed to have been willing to back the nominee over the last 15 years.
The convention was also notable for a few other passionate speeches, most notably that of Senator Ted Kennedy - who ended his rousing speech with an impromptu dance to the classic rock song, 'Still the One', and a long speech by new Democratic National Committee chair Howard Dean.
First, it seemed Deval Patrick's day. Patrick is a candidate for Governor - a relative newcomer to politics, but someone who it seems has hit the ground running. He was one of three declared candidates who was given five minutes to address the delegates, and he made the most of his opportunity, delivering an exciting, well paced stump speech using the catch-phrase 'Yes We Can!'.
Patrick was sandwiched between the other two gubernatorial candidate: Secretary of State Bill Galvin spoke first, and finally, Attorney General Tom Reilly delivered his address. Neither aroused much of an audience response and Reilly - who though he only officially declared on Friday (May 13) was very disappointing.
Reilly clearly has money, and organization, and strong backing from the party regulars but... Patrick seems to excite the average delegate (at least those at this convention) and, perhaps, offers an alternative to democrats and progressives who don't seemed to have been willing to back the nominee over the last 15 years.
The convention was also notable for a few other passionate speeches, most notably that of Senator Ted Kennedy - who ended his rousing speech with an impromptu dance to the classic rock song, 'Still the One', and a long speech by new Democratic National Committee chair Howard Dean.
Wednesday, May 04, 2005
The 2005 Mass Democratic Platform
PREAMBLE
WE the Democrats of Massachusetts, in order to best assure our state success in this new century, hereby pledge to work for and support an agenda that creates opportunity, recognizes responsibility, and builds community.
WE embrace the Democratic traditions of our forebears, reaffirming our commitments to the tenets of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.
WE recognize that a life which “insures domestic Tranquility” must provide good jobs, a good education, and quality health care.
WE recognize that to “secure the blessings of Liberty” we must honor families, invest in our communities, and safeguard the political rights of all our citizens.
WE recognize that to “promote the general Welfare” we must honor families, invest in our communities, and safeguard the political rights of all our citizens.
We believe in democratic government and in the power of good governance. As we begin this new century, we acknowledge the wisdom of our Founders, who crafted a Democracy that endures. Looking ahead, we dedicate ourselves to the proposition that the ideals of our past must become a workable force for the future. Cognizant of the challenges of our diversity, we guarantee a place at the table for every citizen and reaffirm our dedication to an all-inclusive Democratic Party. From Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal, through John F. Kennedy’s New Frontier, and Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society, the Democratic Party has always stood strong in support of pro-active solutions. We respect the individual positions members of our Party may take, and welcome all people to participate at every level of our Party. Steadfast in our resolve, we pledge ourselves to making this great experiment called democracy viable for generations to come.
To that end, on behalf of the Massachusetts Democratic Party, we hereby adopt the following platform:
Click Here to Read the Entire Platform
WE the Democrats of Massachusetts, in order to best assure our state success in this new century, hereby pledge to work for and support an agenda that creates opportunity, recognizes responsibility, and builds community.
WE embrace the Democratic traditions of our forebears, reaffirming our commitments to the tenets of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.
WE recognize that a life which “insures domestic Tranquility” must provide good jobs, a good education, and quality health care.
WE recognize that to “secure the blessings of Liberty” we must honor families, invest in our communities, and safeguard the political rights of all our citizens.
WE recognize that to “promote the general Welfare” we must honor families, invest in our communities, and safeguard the political rights of all our citizens.
We believe in democratic government and in the power of good governance. As we begin this new century, we acknowledge the wisdom of our Founders, who crafted a Democracy that endures. Looking ahead, we dedicate ourselves to the proposition that the ideals of our past must become a workable force for the future. Cognizant of the challenges of our diversity, we guarantee a place at the table for every citizen and reaffirm our dedication to an all-inclusive Democratic Party. From Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s New Deal, through John F. Kennedy’s New Frontier, and Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society, the Democratic Party has always stood strong in support of pro-active solutions. We respect the individual positions members of our Party may take, and welcome all people to participate at every level of our Party. Steadfast in our resolve, we pledge ourselves to making this great experiment called democracy viable for generations to come.
To that end, on behalf of the Massachusetts Democratic Party, we hereby adopt the following platform:
Click Here to Read the Entire Platform
Thursday, April 21, 2005
24_Hour Filibuster Protesting 'Nuclear Option'
Have you got sixty seconds to spare?
Of course you do.
So do me a favor: seriously consider how you will react when the Republican-dominated Congress uses the 'Nuclear Option' to approve judges to the highest courts in this country, judges who have been nominated simply because they will advance a right-wing, conservative Christian agenda.
Think about it.
Then go to the People's Filibuster and register to be a reader (or just lend support) during our 24 hour filibuster on at the Joseph Moakley Court House in Boston.
If everyone spoke for just sixty seconds I would need 8640 voices to cover that 24 our period. If you just want to express your frustration or -in addition to signing up for the event, place your sixty second speech on the 24-hour filibuster blog at: http://www.24HourFilibuster.blogspot.com
Then ask a friend to do the same.
-Frank Mand, Plymouth, Massachusetts
Of course you do.
So do me a favor: seriously consider how you will react when the Republican-dominated Congress uses the 'Nuclear Option' to approve judges to the highest courts in this country, judges who have been nominated simply because they will advance a right-wing, conservative Christian agenda.
Think about it.
Then go to the People's Filibuster and register to be a reader (or just lend support) during our 24 hour filibuster on at the Joseph Moakley Court House in Boston.
If everyone spoke for just sixty seconds I would need 8640 voices to cover that 24 our period. If you just want to express your frustration or -in addition to signing up for the event, place your sixty second speech on the 24-hour filibuster blog at: http://www.24HourFilibuster.blogspot.com
Then ask a friend to do the same.
-Frank Mand, Plymouth, Massachusetts
Thursday, April 14, 2005
Delahunt Hosting Forum in Barnstable on Social Security
Rep. Bill Delahunt will host public forums this month for South Shore and Cape & Island residents, focusing on the future of Social Security.
The forums, which will feature Social Security Administration officials and other national experts, are scheduled for Monday, April 25 in Barnstable and Quincy:
Time: 9:30 - 11 am
Place: Cape Cod Community College
2244 Iyanough Road
West Barnstable
According to a release from Delahunt: "the April 25 forums are intended to clarify the nature and scope of the system’s problems and to outline various proposals to address them. Presentations will attempt to place the current debate in a historical context and to “connect the dots” to other developments – including the just-announced spike in Medicare premiums, which impact beneficiaries just as directly as any changes in Social Security policy."
Delahunt says he wants to hear "first-hand" the view of area residents – both current and future beneficiaries, and that, to date, the discussion has been "cheapened by demagoguery on all sides” .
I personally think it would be important for progressives from every local group to attend this meeting and to insist that any changes to the Social Security system meet three basic principles:
1. No reduction in benefits
2. National 401K Plan in addition to Social Security
3. New Revenue from combination of repeal of tax cuts for wealthiest 2% (including re-instatement of modified Estate Tax) and raising the point at which SS taxes end.
We are well into this 'fight', and although I know it is important for elected officials to listen to their constituents, members of Congress are elected as 'leaders'. I hope to hear Congressman Delahunt tell us what he thinks we should do to reform Social Security.
Email address for Delahunt: william.delahunt@mail.house.gov
The forums, which will feature Social Security Administration officials and other national experts, are scheduled for Monday, April 25 in Barnstable and Quincy:
Time: 9:30 - 11 am
Place: Cape Cod Community College
2244 Iyanough Road
West Barnstable
According to a release from Delahunt: "the April 25 forums are intended to clarify the nature and scope of the system’s problems and to outline various proposals to address them. Presentations will attempt to place the current debate in a historical context and to “connect the dots” to other developments – including the just-announced spike in Medicare premiums, which impact beneficiaries just as directly as any changes in Social Security policy."
Delahunt says he wants to hear "first-hand" the view of area residents – both current and future beneficiaries, and that, to date, the discussion has been "cheapened by demagoguery on all sides” .
I personally think it would be important for progressives from every local group to attend this meeting and to insist that any changes to the Social Security system meet three basic principles:
1. No reduction in benefits
2. National 401K Plan in addition to Social Security
3. New Revenue from combination of repeal of tax cuts for wealthiest 2% (including re-instatement of modified Estate Tax) and raising the point at which SS taxes end.
We are well into this 'fight', and although I know it is important for elected officials to listen to their constituents, members of Congress are elected as 'leaders'. I hope to hear Congressman Delahunt tell us what he thinks we should do to reform Social Security.
Email address for Delahunt: william.delahunt@mail.house.gov
Wednesday, April 13, 2005
Tell Delahunt to Vote Against the Repeal of the Estate Tax
The Bush administration's tax cuts over the last four years have led to big cuts in vital health and other services to working families, while exploding the national debt. Those tax cuts for millionaires, and the resulting budget deficits, are also a wasteful use of resources that could be used to shore up Social Security and Medicare.
This week, in what can only be described as a dramatic display of contempt for American families, Congress will try to permanently repeal the estate tax (helping the super-rich) and pass bankruptcy reform (hurting the middle class) at the same time.
This first vote will likely come today! Please call your representative right now and let them know you oppose both the repeal of the estate tax and the bankruptcy law changes.
Call:
Congressman William Delahunt
Local phone: 617-770-3700
DC Phone: 202-225-3111
(Toll Free: 800-794-9911)
Tell the staffer who answers that you are a constituent and that you would like Rep. Delahunt to vote against the repeal of the estate tax and against the bankruptcy bill because both reforms side with the super-rich and corporations over middle class families. Ask the staffer to send you a letter explaining the representative's position.
Email address for Delahunt: william.delahunt@mail.house.gov
This week, in what can only be described as a dramatic display of contempt for American families, Congress will try to permanently repeal the estate tax (helping the super-rich) and pass bankruptcy reform (hurting the middle class) at the same time.
This first vote will likely come today! Please call your representative right now and let them know you oppose both the repeal of the estate tax and the bankruptcy law changes.
Call:
Congressman William Delahunt
Local phone: 617-770-3700
DC Phone: 202-225-3111
(Toll Free: 800-794-9911)
Tell the staffer who answers that you are a constituent and that you would like Rep. Delahunt to vote against the repeal of the estate tax and against the bankruptcy bill because both reforms side with the super-rich and corporations over middle class families. Ask the staffer to send you a letter explaining the representative's position.
Email address for Delahunt: william.delahunt@mail.house.gov
Friday, April 08, 2005
Plymouth Democratic Town Committee
Plymouth Democratic Town Committee
This blog site is presently open for commenting by any and all visitors. In the future however, it will likely be modified to allow commentary by PDTC members -and Democratic officials, only.
Apart from restricting your postings and comments to issues relevant to the work of the committee, feel free to say what you want.
This blog site is presently open for commenting by any and all visitors. In the future however, it will likely be modified to allow commentary by PDTC members -and Democratic officials, only.
Apart from restricting your postings and comments to issues relevant to the work of the committee, feel free to say what you want.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)