Guest Post: Cindy Sheehan on "The War Party and its Faux-gressive Minions"

[Cindy Sheehan is a well-know peace activist and mother who lost her son in the U.S. attack and occupation of Iraq. Her commentary below is from her essay published yesterday on Facebook. The photo shows Cindy and Lansing activist Chris Singer at the Cranbrook 2007 Peace Lecture in Detroit, Nov. 18, 2007.-- RTR]

By Cindy Sheehan

For years now, I have been writing about the duplicity of the Democrats and the shocking similarity between the two parties when it comes to the use of state-sanctioned terrorism against innocent populations.

This past week, after the betrayal of every American who elected Democrats to end the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, I am wondering if there is anyone still in this nation who thinks that there’s any significant difference between the war ideologies of Democrats and Republicans.

I know many faux-gressive entities on the “left” whose silence on this matter is so loud it’s hurting my eardrums. Where was MoveOn.org over these past few weeks when the Dems were bludgeoning their caucus to vote “Aye” to extend the war crimes in the Middle East? Where were Markos Moulitsas (Daily Kos) and his bloggers that day? The day the funding bill passed, I wandered over to The Daily Kos and saw that it was all a-twitter about Senator Ensign (R) having an extra-marital affair. Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer and Harry Reid may, or may not, be loyal spouses, but their calumny will kill, maim, torture or displace thousands of people over the next 4-8 years. I am not so interested in what happens in bedrooms as what happens in Democratic war zones.

Faux-gressives MoveOn.org and The Daily Kos supported me, and my work, as long as it solely focused on the Bush regime and the Republicans. However, when I had a late in life epiphany and figured out that the Democrats were abusing the energy of the anti-war movement to regain power, and I started to speak out against the entire War Party, not just one-half of it, I was kicked off blogging for The Daily Kos and ostracized by the fully co-opted MoveOn.org. Nathan Diebenow of the Lonestar Iconoclast then accused me of “alienating” my friends, to add insult to injury.

I think that I have unfortunately been vindicated by almost every single action that the Democratic Party has taken since 2006 when impeachment was taken “off the table,” but “blank-check” war funding was served up to the Military Industrial Complex on a bloody platter dripping with the flesh and blood of real human beings.

Our politicians have no integrity partly because the organizations in the movements that have the largest emailing lists have no integrity. Wars that were wrong under Bush become acceptable under Obama and the stain of torture fades into the woodwork or is hidden from sight like a demented relation because a Senator has an affair. As I understand it, MoveOn.org was founded to oppose the impeachment of Bill Clinton for the same thing Ensign did…now the gatekeepers of the War Party are going to crucify Ensign to distract their subscribers from real issues?

MoveOn.org sent this out in April 2008 in a fundraising email to its 5 million person list: No matter what happens in Iraq, the Bush Administration and John McCain always have the same answer: 6 more months. They're at it again this week, asking for six more months. But six months won't change anything—except the body count and the price tag.

They were not talking about the Democratic war funding this week. Apparently it’s fine to fund wars if we have a Democratic Despotism, but dangerous for our troops if we have a Republican Regime.

Hey MoveOn.org: ComeBack.org. Come back from the dark side of partisan politics. You look like Move America Forward, now:( a reich-wing organization that irrationally and blindly supports Republicans and unquestioningly supported BushCo). CODEPINK supported Barack Obama, but at least CODEPINK is over in Gaza trying to call attention to that crime, while MoveOn.org ignores the situation and most of the bloggers at The Daily Kos just like to sit behind their computer screens and snarkily criticize anyone who is actually on the streets doing the work.

What Pelosi and her Wrecking Crew did last week was disgraceful, but it’s shameful that people who opposed the exact same policies under BushCo support the same crimes of ObamaCo.

-- by Cindy Sheehan

Makin' a Killing on the Cost of a New Vehicle

"What kinda liberal progressives are these?" I thought when I realized there were no veggie burgers or soy dogs being served at the Ingham County Young Dems picnic on Friday. I didn't really mind. This vegetarian wasn't there for the food. And, after all, my real beef is with a different set of Democrats, the Democrats serving in the U.S. Congress.

The week wrapped up with news that the Democratic controlled Congress passed another massive war spending bill in support of the U.S. occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan. Apparently, the anti-war Democrats elected to the House last fall -- with very few exceptions -- have no problem continuing to fund the war and the American War Machine. All that's needed now is action by the anti-war Democrats in the Senate and a signature by the anti-war President Barack Obama.

But what the hey-hey? I will be saving $4,500 on my next vehicle purchase.

Yes, the "Clunkers for Cash" program was generously embedded inside the large war spending bill. So my tax money, in part, will continue to bomb civilians in Afghanistan -- thus generating even more hatred directed at America -- and I get a discounted new car to make me feel better. The absurdity of it all will be hard to ignore the minute I turn on the news on the new radio in my new vehicle.

Being Frank with Barney

In his Thursday blog posting on the war spending vote, recommended reading here, journalist Jeremy Scahill quoted Representative Barney Frank (D-MA) as saying that members of the anti-war left have "no sense of reality." If it wasn't such an obvious pun, I'd say Frank is full of baloney.

The reality is that the American political system is unravelling and its core is being fully exposed (for those who want to look at it). The Democrats in Congress, combined with strongly pro-military spending Republicans, leave us with essentially a one-party, pro-military government -- the protectorates of the insatiable and dangerous military-industrial complex. To be polite, you can call it a duopoly -- the Coke vs. Pepsi syndrome. Regardless, it still leaves a bad after-taste. The question has been asked, who is left to represent a vast majority of the American people who support peace and have different spending priorities than endless funding for war?

After Cindy Sheehan published her scathing indictment of the "anti-war" Democrats, one of her readers on Facebook reacted and called it out: "We don't have a democratic republic, we have an oligarchy." I put Barney Frank's "reality" in what author David Korten calls the "Myth of Empire," the grand stories of a virtuous America that we all want to believe and know -- with or without the release of the graphic torture photos -- are not true.

What's Up with Health Care?

Now, as we move on to the big debate over health care insurance coverage, I won't blame true progressives on being very nervous. If the Democrats buckle to pressure from corporate and special interests, ignoring substandard and, for many, non-existent health insurance coverage for millions of Americans, more people are going to ask: With Democrats like this, who needs Republicans?

-- Rico Thomas Rico

Arlen Specter Resurrected

The political reaction was immediate as the news flashed over Twitter on Tuesday: “Dems have 60…Dems have 60!”

Pennsylvania’s U.S. Senator Arlen Specter switched political parties, from Republican to Democrat. The storyline focused on the filibuster-proof 60-vote majority now held by Senate Democrats. Some claim it is a seismic change for the American political landscape. Is it, really?

Most of the political chatter I saw and heard on TV and radio focused on the impact Specter’s switch will have on the Republican Party. The storyline was the Republican Party needs to regroup and reinvent itself to stay relevant on the national political stage. Ok, but in my book the real story was about the Democratic Party. Specifically, the Democratic Party’s strong push to the right which was made more pronounced during Bill Clinton’s presidency.

I was thinking about Arlen Specter lately, believe it or not. As I followed political news along the way, I was variously bemused and concerned that the corporate media, mostly, was consistently describing Specter as a “moderate” Republican. Arlen Specter, a moderate? The hard-core law-and-order Republican Arlen Specter who was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1980 at the beginning of the Reagan conservative “revolution”? No thanks.

Has anyone noticed how Democrats and Republicans are so easily interchangeable? Republican Specter becomes a Democrat in a blink. Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman campaigned last fall for the Republican presidential ticket (and could switch parties tomorrow). Along that same vein, Hillary Clinton supporters, upon their candidate finishing second for the party nomination, very publicly announced their defection to the John McCain presidential campaign. How can politicos support Hillary Clinton one day, then John McCain the next, with no qualms?

Now with the current Congress, you hear about “Blue Dog Democrats” acting as the voice and protectorate of the conservative viewpoint from within the majority Democratic Party. Dems control Congress, yes, but the Blue Dogs are there to make sure the “liberal” agenda doesn’t get out of control. Who invited them to the party?

The political flip-flop changes above are just a few examples. Look about our fine peninsula here in Michigan and you can find a similar interchange. For Earth Day this year, three former Michigan Governors came out in favor of an expanded nuclear power infrastructure for Michigan. The former Governors supporting this concept were William Milliken, James Blanchard, and John Engler. What’s wrong with this picture? I’m just surprised that Blanchard had a mind-meld with Engler, on nuclear power of all things. And Milliken’s pro-environment reputation took a negative hit on this one, too. Only the nuclear power industry scored a victory with the help of 2 Republicans and 1 Democrat, or 2 Democrats and 1 Republican, depending on how you categorize Milliken.

Our political discourse in this country needs to include, up front, the topic of America’s political duopoly and its impact on public policy. This blog will most likely return to this topic throughout 2009. Certainly, there won't be any shortage of material.

-- Rico Thomas Rico

Heard Here First: Jindal - Palin 2012

My Mardi Gras evening was spent discussing Leonard Peltier at Gone Wired Cafe.  Must say, Colleen's got the cafe nice and comfy with the new seating configuration.  It's gotten even better to relax, drink your choice of brown water (coffee or tea, that is), and have a good chat about current issues, if not surfing or tweeting on The Internets.

I scampered home just in time to catch President Obama's address to Congress.  It was easy to tell that partisanship is still hanging thickly over the institution.  Numerous times the Republicans were real slow -- almost grudgingly slow -- at rising from their seats to applaud specific points from the president. There were outright catcalls in when the elimination of earmarks was mentioned.  Overall, the speech did not break new ground in the President's plan for the country.  Incredibly, the television showed some members of Congress jockeying to get the autograph from the President as he exited the Chamber.

I thought the night was over until - gaak! - Bobby Jindal came on the tube to give a rebuttal.  Contrary to the positive-spin build-up for Jindal on NPR today, his presentation and appearance was, well, less than positive.  While he basically espoused the tired Republican mantra "tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts," all I heard was "deficits, deficits, deficits." (Spend-and-borrow Republicans don't change, do they?)

I got the impression that Jindal is truly the standard-bearer of the Republican opposition.  My immediate tweet reaction was three side fist pumps and shouts of "Yesh! Yesh! Yesh!"  I immediately imagined a Jindal - Palin ticket in 2012.  They'd deserve each other and represent the Republicans well.  Do the Republicans have a political training academy 

to churn out these types of hapless "leaders"?  If so, I'd like to donate to it.

I was so inspired, I created what I hope is the first rendition of a Jindal - Palin '12 bumper sticker.  Feel free to print it and paste it on the bumper of your car.  It may not stimulate the economy, but it might stimulate some knowing smiles.

-- Rico Thomas Rico

Jindal - Palin '12 Bumper Sticker

            

Check in Hand, Nowhere to Go

Just this one time I wish I had answered the phone.

A phone solicitor was asking for monetary contributions to the presidential campaign of a prominent U.S. Senator from a large Midwestern state. They needed money, I’m sure, for expensive TV ads to be broadcast over the public airwaves. These are the same ads that should, in actuality, cost little or nothing. (What part of “public” airwaves don’t we understand?)

Luckily, they got my wife on the phone.

It seems this particular U.S. Senator – who shall remain nameless for the sake of fairness – had the audacity of hope that we would donate to his campaign after he so rudely pulled out of the Michigan primary. He and a few other Dem candidates pulled out and promised not to campaign here. Of course, Mrs. Slick kept her name on the ballot. And Dennis Kucinich, like any good peacenik liberal with proper street cred, was running late and missed the deadline to pull out of the primary.

So now, the legislature must quickly peel out of their hunting clothes and pass some legislation to add all the names back on the ballot. Pass legislation? Yeah, right.

While we sit around waiting to see how it shakes out, please don’t send me any e-mail messages about how the Democratic Party is disenfranchising people by moving the primary up. For those who make this complaint, I need to remind them that they are already disenfranchised. Each and every time Iowa and New Hampshire leads the presidential election season – with their nonsensical claim to electoral superiority – you are disenfranchised. Usually by the time the primary reaches Michigan, the nominee is nearly locked up and the next thing you know a Michael Dukakis bumper sticker is on your vehicle.

I agree with Carl Levin, my former boss, the nomination choke-hold by Iowa and New Hampshire needs to end. The lead-off states should be rotated every four years to better reflect the make-up of the general population. Both parties would benefit by enabling us to make better decisions about the candidates. It’s all about democracy. Yeah, right.

I’ve got my checkbook out and an easy four-figure donation ready to go to a good candidate. But the candidate will be required to come to Michigan in person to get it. All I can do now is sit by the phone, turn on the TV, and watch “An Inconvenient Truth” while waiting for that good candidate to show up.

-- Rico Thomas Rico