Politics: The Internet Revolution
I find it fascinating how the internet is considered an "alternate world". On this blog, for instance, you may see things that would possibly seem "out of place" on the mainstream media. Ask yourselves why. I'm not a gossip-mongerer. I write about reality...often taken directly off the mainstream...injecting my opinion, of course. The Internet is confounding the "real" world with all these voices who have been silent for so long. What to do?
Internet muse.
Daring, bold, never sold.
My daily weblog of politics, humor, philosophy...and a constant and nagging reminder of the existence of universal love....
Sunday, February 22, 2004
He's baaaaaack
What will Progressives do? (WWPD?)
The Democrats have themselves toblame thank
On 'Face the Nation', I saw DNC chairman Terry McAuliffe blaming Ralph Nader for former VP Al Gore's loss in 2000.
I wondered: "When will he start taking responsibility for his own party's decisions and policies?"
As much as I was displeased (and appalled) at the barely-democratic process which handed us George W. Bush as our President in 2000, I do not begrudge Ralph Nader a run as an Independent candidate in 2004. I will not sit here and ignore him...nor will I mock his candidacy.
I used to think differently
I've been guilty in the recent past of cynicism and frustration about Nader, but I am realizing, after giving him a fair listen this morning, that vanity is likely not his reason for running. I will no longer attack his motives as "vanity-seeking-power". I hear the vanity-spin beginning already this morning in the mainstream media. I recall the media's "crazy-Howard" and "weirdo-Dennis" spin, too. I refuse to let my displeasure with Bush cause a "DISCONNECT" with my views on democracy in this nation. I love American democracy more than I politically disagree with the Bush administration. My view on this matter is evolving before you. If there's one thing you can say about politics, it's that it is NOT enhanced by adynamic thought. If that were so, I'd be holding fast to ideas long-obsolete. Why, then I'd be like a far-right Republican, for Pete's sake. Let me explain myself.
I'm sure Nader has watched the Democratic race closely. Why do you suppose he waited until now to enter as a Presidential candidate?
In many ways, the Democratic party has handed Mr. Nader the invitation to run in the way I've observed Democratic leadership running their primary contest. I'm tired of the carpenter blaming his tools for a shoddy end-product. Had American voters been given equally serious, educated, and clear media-disseminated choices (which we all know could have occurred with Democratic party leadership influence), there might not be such disgust with those whom many voters consider to be establishment-Democrats (aka "Republican-lite"). Serious DNC promotion of lesser-known candidates like Carol Moseley-Braun and Dennis Kucinich would have meant more than giving them token spots and occasional questions in the debates while sitting back silently as the mainstream media (for all intents and purposes) ignored and often MOCKED them. They have NOT taken the views of their left-leaning base seriously..and the 'left-base' knows this all too well. If anyone has to pay the piper for the Ralph Nader run, it would have to be the DNC chairperson....where the buck stops. Of course, Mr. McAuliffe will have the ever-influential DLC leaders Bruce Reed and Al From with whom to share the credit for Ralph accepting their cordial invitation to run.
They "brought him on".
Let's think about this carefully as we move forward
I'll end this with my own quote from last September. I hope you can sort through my words and understand that I am looking at my own gut-feelings through the shady glass of realism (based upon the jaded two-party political system in America today...and the media who loves them).
It's fairly clear that, had Mr. Nader never run for President as a Green in 2000, the voting results in Florida between Bush and Gore would possibly not have been so close. Then again..if Nader had not run in 2000, perhaps the small percentage of Greens that did vote for him would have stayed home on election day. Bottom line, we'll never know.
What we do know is that what happened in Florida, 2000 was and is still a shaded mystery...resulting in shaded history.
While I applaud Mr. Nader's right and respect his decision to run, I do hope we all have learned something from the shaded history that was "Florida 2000". I have not decided upon any other candidate for President since Howard Dean has suspended his run. I will still vote for Howard Dean in my NY State primary. Personally, I will probably use my November vote for pragmatic reasons. I want, in the end, what is best for this world. Sometimes we have to choke back our idealistic pride in order to move to the next level.
Ask yourselves...do you want four more years of the Bush administraton? Would it be easier for you to work as a Progressive in a more welcoming (albeit barely more comforting) political atmosphere with a Democratic president who failed to espouse your every ideal? I'm not telling you what to do...only to consider.
NZ Bear at The Truth Laid Bear blog has a very interesting analysis at his website.
What will Progressives do? (WWPD?)
The Democrats have themselves to
On 'Face the Nation', I saw DNC chairman Terry McAuliffe blaming Ralph Nader for former VP Al Gore's loss in 2000.
I wondered: "When will he start taking responsibility for his own party's decisions and policies?"
As much as I was displeased (and appalled) at the barely-democratic process which handed us George W. Bush as our President in 2000, I do not begrudge Ralph Nader a run as an Independent candidate in 2004. I will not sit here and ignore him...nor will I mock his candidacy.
I used to think differently
I've been guilty in the recent past of cynicism and frustration about Nader, but I am realizing, after giving him a fair listen this morning, that vanity is likely not his reason for running. I will no longer attack his motives as "vanity-seeking-power". I hear the vanity-spin beginning already this morning in the mainstream media. I recall the media's "crazy-Howard" and "weirdo-Dennis" spin, too. I refuse to let my displeasure with Bush cause a "DISCONNECT" with my views on democracy in this nation. I love American democracy more than I politically disagree with the Bush administration. My view on this matter is evolving before you. If there's one thing you can say about politics, it's that it is NOT enhanced by adynamic thought. If that were so, I'd be holding fast to ideas long-obsolete. Why, then I'd be like a far-right Republican, for Pete's sake. Let me explain myself.
I'm sure Nader has watched the Democratic race closely. Why do you suppose he waited until now to enter as a Presidential candidate?
In many ways, the Democratic party has handed Mr. Nader the invitation to run in the way I've observed Democratic leadership running their primary contest. I'm tired of the carpenter blaming his tools for a shoddy end-product. Had American voters been given equally serious, educated, and clear media-disseminated choices (which we all know could have occurred with Democratic party leadership influence), there might not be such disgust with those whom many voters consider to be establishment-Democrats (aka "Republican-lite"). Serious DNC promotion of lesser-known candidates like Carol Moseley-Braun and Dennis Kucinich would have meant more than giving them token spots and occasional questions in the debates while sitting back silently as the mainstream media (for all intents and purposes) ignored and often MOCKED them. They have NOT taken the views of their left-leaning base seriously..and the 'left-base' knows this all too well. If anyone has to pay the piper for the Ralph Nader run, it would have to be the DNC chairperson....where the buck stops. Of course, Mr. McAuliffe will have the ever-influential DLC leaders Bruce Reed and Al From with whom to share the credit for Ralph accepting their cordial invitation to run.
They "brought him on".
Let's think about this carefully as we move forward
I'll end this with my own quote from last September. I hope you can sort through my words and understand that I am looking at my own gut-feelings through the shady glass of realism (based upon the jaded two-party political system in America today...and the media who loves them).
"..I think we should be realistic for the health of our democracy.What's my point, you ask? Only that you consider all the factors and decide with your heart and mind toward a better day--whatever that means to you.
A second Bush term may decay democracy to a point of no return.
This may be the most important American election in history.
We really do need to find a way to unite as Democrats, Greens, Progessives, Independents...the strength of the party of Karl Rove is the way he's unifying their base.
This next election will be war...let's be prepared for battle.
The American dream of our forefathers will never continue until we awaken from our current nightmare.
..I happen to think Dennis Kucinich is one of the most truly decent souls in the entire field of democratic candidates.
I have the utmost respect for his ideas.
But I'll tell you this..and I believe it's true.
Americans will not elect Dennis Kucinich...
...I know America too, too well.
How I wish it could be different.
I saw what happened in the last election...I felt that Ralph Nader had fantastic ideas. So did many others.
Unfortunately, we saw what happened in Florida..which may well have been avoided had some of our idealistic voters chosen to consider the sheer pragmatism of the situation and the danger of the fast-encroaching radical right-wing...and voted for Gore rather than Nader.
I wonder, knowing what they know now, if many of the Nader voters would have changed their vote.
Idealism, Kate Harris, and five crooks on the US Supreme Court got us one "George W Bush" in 2000.
What a prize.
It's fairly clear that, had Mr. Nader never run for President as a Green in 2000, the voting results in Florida between Bush and Gore would possibly not have been so close. Then again..if Nader had not run in 2000, perhaps the small percentage of Greens that did vote for him would have stayed home on election day. Bottom line, we'll never know.
What we do know is that what happened in Florida, 2000 was and is still a shaded mystery...resulting in shaded history.
While I applaud Mr. Nader's right and respect his decision to run, I do hope we all have learned something from the shaded history that was "Florida 2000". I have not decided upon any other candidate for President since Howard Dean has suspended his run. I will still vote for Howard Dean in my NY State primary. Personally, I will probably use my November vote for pragmatic reasons. I want, in the end, what is best for this world. Sometimes we have to choke back our idealistic pride in order to move to the next level.
Ask yourselves...do you want four more years of the Bush administraton? Would it be easier for you to work as a Progressive in a more welcoming (albeit barely more comforting) political atmosphere with a Democratic president who failed to espouse your every ideal? I'm not telling you what to do...only to consider.
NZ Bear at The Truth Laid Bear blog has a very interesting analysis at his website.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)