Category: Uncategorized

David Swanson explains how we’re committing suicide by election:

There must be a Star Trek episode (if there’s not, there should be) in which all the best minds in the leftist political opposition on some planet are diverted into an obsession with a virtual reality game, leaving all the right-wingers free to drive the planet into inevitable war and destruction. A game is a harmless thing when not put to such use. Elections are a fundamental pillar of democracy when not put to such use. That makes the case I want to argue all the more difficult. My thesis is that, if we do not change our thinking, elections are going to be the death of U.S. democracy.

Read the rest.

Matt Stoller points out five giant issues that are ignored by Clinton and Obama (and for the most part by Edwards), when any genuinely progressive presidential candidate would be trying to drag them onto the national agenda.

Almost forgotten now is how Howard Dean vowed in December, 2003 “to break up giant media enterprises.” Of course, that vanished when he became party chair.

There’s something that puzzles me about some of the reactions and reactions-to-reactions that have followed the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. There seem to be these unspoken rules that it’s unseemly for presidential candidates to use this crisis to draw contrasts with each other and that the American media shouldn’t make this story “all about us” by linking it with domestic politics. The notion that discussing politics in the wake of Bhutto’s death is out of bounds is ridiculous. She was murdered by her political opponents, so unless you knew her personally (thanks for the reminders Sen. Clinton), any discussion of the assassination is inherently political.

When you’re president, you don’t get to pick and choose which crises you get to get to respond to (unless you’re George W. Bush), so at the very least, the candidates for the presidency better have something to say about Bhutto’s death. Considering that we’re only looking at 6-8 viable candidates for the next leader of our country, if any of these candidates have a reaction that highlights their differences, then it’s all the better for those of us who are trying to decide who to vote for. I’m not saying this to attack or defend any specific comments. If anything, some of the more crass reactions are as illuminating as the more substantive discussions of foreign policy. If a candidate’s reaction to this news is a tactless and substance-free attack on their opponent, then it’s good to know that about a candidate before stepping into the ballot box.

There are many reasons to bash traditional media outlets, but examining the effect that Bhutto’s assassination might have on the presidential race isn’t one of them. When the American media is reporting to the American public how the most important story in the world will effect the choice of who will be our next leader (a process that begins in less than a week), this doesn’t cheapen or trivialize the death of Bhutto, it adds context and highlights the importance of the issue. Most Americans probably didn’t know or care about Pakistani politics a week ago, but it’s an important lesson to the America people that this slain promoter of democracy was running against a military coup leader who’s considered a key ally to the United States.

Bhutto’s death will have a profound effect on international politics. There are key differences between the foreign policy positions of our current leader and those of the men and woman who are trying to replace him. Considering that presidential contests are largely decided on trivial differences, using an international crisis to highlight something more substantive than an expensive haircut or where a particular candidate went to elementary school is a good thing.

I highly recommend The Scanner, a new political blog by someone who (1) is anonymous and (2) genuinely knows what they’re talking about. (However, you might want to subscribe to the feed rather than bookmarking it, because it seems to keep to a relaxed schedule of one post per month.)

You can start here: “Why the “new progressive movement” is fucked”

I’m so tired of the commercialization of decrying the commercialization of Christmas!

When I was growing up, we didn’t need special issues of Real Simple Magazine or episodes of Oprah to decry the commercialization of Christmas. I bet my entire family could have decried the commercialization of Christmas for less money than they spend on one disapproving segment on the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric about competing neighbors in Boca Raton who each spend $1 million each year on Christmas decorations in their subdivision. In fact, one year when times were slow at dad’s law firm, we decried the commercialization of Christmas without spending any money at all!

That’s because we understood the true meaning of decrying the commercialization of Christmas. It’s about giving, and sharing, and spending time with your loved ones being angry about the CGI baby Jesus in the Wii commercial.

The worst part is that it starts earlier every year. First it was December, then Thanksgiving, then Labor Day. I wouldn’t be surprised if we wake up one year soon and we’re decrying the commercialization of Christmas on December 26th, before we’ve even returned the copy of It’s a Wonderful Life we bought to decry the commercialization of the previous Christmas!

So take my advice: this year, step back from your over-scheduled, stressful life, and decry the commercialization of Christmas the old fashioned way. You don’t need big corporations to do it for you. Just get together with the people you care about the most, and bitch about it like your parents did…and their parents before them. I bet a year from now you’ll look back on this as the best decrying the commercialization of Christmas of all.