Remember, when I felt that it seemed like the moderate Republican movement was dead and gone? Well, don't put that nail in the coffin yet. Several past moderate Republican officials including former governors and staffers in the Nixon and Ford Administrations have put together a group for moderates to come together to bring the party back to the mainstream of American politics. It's called Come Back to the Mainstream. They are urging an agenda for the GOP that is pro-environment, offers a more multilateral approach to foreign policy, and " pay-as-you-go" way of dealing with government spending.
It's nice to see the old guard moderates come to life. Join this group. I did.
Posted by Dennis at August 31, 2004 12:42 AMCongrats Dennis!!! You made the Strib.
"The faith I was brought up in is based on justice, equality and love."
http://www.startribune.com/stories/465/4960319.html
Will I see you here Dennis?
When: Friday, 09/03 NOON
Where: MN State Fair - MPR Booth
MPR's Gary Eichten will host the Side by Side Presidential Rally. Join Kerry-Edwards supporters and show our outstanding support for a Stronger America.
On stage, Gary Eichten will be joined by DFL commentator Bob Meek and Republican commentator Tom Horner. MPR has also located an undecided voter in Minnesota. The audience will share their compelling reasons and convince this voter why John Kerry will be the next President of the United States of America.
I didn't know there were any swing voters left in Minnesota!!
Posted by: dorsano at September 2, 2004 09:11 PM From: j@tabby.com
Subject: try to have a nice day - our war in Iraq
Date: September 2, 2004 12:15:46 PM PDT
To: j@tabby.com
Dear fellow Americans and friends,
I have to get this off my chest. If you don't want to read about politics and war, trash this now and have a nice day.
* * * * * * * *
As of this Republican National Convention, it has become 100% kosher for Republicans to say that it's wonderful and good for the US to invade foreign countries on the pretext of "spreading freedom and democracy." In case you haven't noticed, since 9/11, the US, has adopted a new foreign policy, exemplified by Iraq: pre-emptive invasion. This credo was voiced over and over during their convention in New York. What the Replican machine says, in a nutshell, is this: the U.S. is the greatest most wonderful country in the world, and we have not only the right, but also the obligation, to invade countries that we think are dangerous. We will do so at will, and with our massive military power, we will smash every country that we think threatens our "way of life." Iraq is the obvious manifestation of this policy.
But invasion is war. In war, we kill. We invaded a soverign nation that had not attacked us, and we KILL KILL KILL KILL KILL. This is not a clean good war. We're killing innocent people. We are killing thousands of civilians! How can that OK? Wrapping our invasion in flag-waving god-fearing patriotism does not make it all right.
We as a nation have said that our lives are worth more than anyone else's -- by an order of magnitude. We think that we can kill all the civilians we want to, as long as we stay safe.
And still we claim to be a good Christian nation!
Last I checked, Jesus didn't say it was OK to kill civilians -- ever.
Do you need evidence of our malfeasance? It's easily found -- except on the major TV news. Look into the foreign press web sites, Al Jazeera, The Nation, the New Yorker, Michael Moore, movies like "Control Room," independent video on the web, or just use Google: the truth about the brutality of this war is in abundance.
(By the way, Dick Cheney, in his speech at the convention last night, spoke of the "3,000 Americans" killed at ground zero on 9/11; in fact, there were hundreds of foreign nationals killed in the attack -- not all were Americans. Do you think Dick Cheney really wants you to know that detail?)
American soldiers, like all soldiers across all of history, become barbaric in the heat of war, and they kill everything they see. We're told of the bravery and goodness of American soldiers in Iraq. But the truth is, we are often no better than anyone else -- we can be just as evil, just as capable of murder and dehumanization and mayhem. (Abu Ghraib, anyone?)
THIS ISN'T A "JUST" WAR. IT'S FLAT OUT MURDER. What gives us the right to kill?
Iraqi civilian body count:
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
Video of Iraqis being killed by a US helicopter gunship:
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/01/284086.html
Video of US soldiers shooting apparently unarmed and injured Iraqis:
http://www.journalism.co.uk/news/story823.shtml
Collection of stories of what soldiers really experience in Iraq,-- the stuff that the major news outlets won't play because it doesn't fit with their totally scripted, nationalistic and "Hollywood-ized" potrayal of the Iraq war:
http://www.worldmessenger.20m.com/usmilitary.html
In-depth study of the 9/11 Commission report and why our policies are so misguided:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/29/books/review/29POSNERL.html
Seymour Hersh, of the New Yorker and the reporter who broke the story of the U.S. massacre of civilians at My Lai in Vietname, writes about Abu Ghraib:
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040510fa_fact
The effects of our depleted uranium munitions kill thousands -- Americans and Iraqis -- long after hostilities end:
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=19961021&s=19961021mesler&c=1
By now, we have killed far more civilians in Iraq than were killed in 9/11. As measured simply by body count alone, Bush should feel that he has more than "gotten even" for 9/11. Instead, he is carrying out a war against a country that was no threat to us. And by sticking his hand into a hornet's nest, he inspires more and more of the Islamic world to hate the US. The war we wage in Iraq can never eliminate the Islamic militants who threaten us; our war only inspires them to their cause.
The harder the US fights its wars with Islamic militants, the greater their resolve to attack us. Our current path will only lead to more misery, for everyone.
(To more fully grasp the complexity of the situation we are in, it's also necessary to understand the long history of dissonance between the Islamic world and the western Judeo-Christian world, and in particular, the recent rise of Islamic militantism. But that's a story for another day.)
peace be with you,
Matt
"I couldn't watch that whole flash Renee - maybe it gets better toward the end - what I watched seemed tasteless to me."
Yes, it's by Mark Fiore, and he's pretty "edgy" and probably best at "preaching to the choir", so to speak. I can see how it wouldn't be much help with moderates or disaffected Republicans. Possibly what it could do is connect with the Democrats who are wary of any mention of religion in this election. The Kerry campaign is signing its own death warrent if it heeds their advice.
I still recommend taking a look at the petition, though.
http://go.sojo.net/campaign/takebackourfaith
This touches on a larger, more interconnected issue that I don't have time to fully explore now, but I agree about the empathy. I balk at words like "rethugs" for that reason.
Also, listening to Randi Rhodes yesterday, interviewing Olympia Snowe...Randi commented that the Republicans shout down or silence their more moderate members, for example, those who are pro-choice.
But I can't say that the treatment of pro-life Democrats has been any better. It doesn't matter in the eyes of many Democrats, though, because, "That's different--the pro-choice Republicans are *right* on that particular issue, whereas the pro-life Democrats are *wrong".
Dennis & other liberal Republicans-
Check out this blog- www.hawken.blogspot.com
I write on it alot, along with a somewhat partisan Democrat (Chad) and somewhat partisan Republican (Nitin). They actually aren't overly partisan but strongly support the broader political agendas of their respective parties. Chad is definetly a DLC type Democrat, and Nitin more along the lines of a quasi-libertarian conservative (he's pro-choice and pro-gay marriage, but also pro-war and pro-Bush)
Posted by: Bill from UW Madison at September 2, 2004 12:24 AMHi Dennis-
I remember you from your work with "Republicans for Dean". I just thought I'd stop by and see whats up.
The Republican party, in many ways actually has a more Progressive tradition than the Democrats do. I mean, for starters, the two founding planks of the party in 1854 were Abolition of Slavery and Women's Suffrage. They started as a third party challenger to the established parties of Whigs and Democrats, who ironically represented largely the two major voting blocs for the Republicans today- the southern religious conservatives for the Democrats, and the wealthy Northeastern corporate businessmen, aka Wall Street & The Robber Barons, for the Whigs.
On the eve of the Civil War, the Whig coalition collapsed and eventually was absorbed into parts of both the new Republican party and the Democrats after the war.
The history of the civil war, and the class politics which followed, is actually a very interesting deal. The Southern Planter Aristocracy, once opposed to the Northern corporate aristocracy, decided to ally with the Northern businessmen and proceeded to take over the two parties. In the south, since the Republicans were despised among most of the white population because of the civil war, they conquered the Democrats. In the north, Wall Street took over the Republicans. Though they controlled different political parties, the policies of the two aristocracies often worked together in congress in opposition to the more radical wings of their respective parties.
It wasn't until the Populist revolt of the 1890's that the Democrats were swung left for the first time since Jefferson. Its very unfortunate that the Populists were absorbed into the Democrats during the 1896 William Bryan Jennings campaign (which lost to McKinley), because the farmer-labor coalition they forged could have well turned into the American equivilent of European Labor parties.
Do you know who Robert M LaFollete is? He's also known as "Fighting Bob". He founded *The Progressive* magazine (www.Progressive.org). It was originally called LaFollete's Review. He also made Wisconsin (my home state) the first place in the US to have a Social Security system, which later became the model for the national system. He was a Republican.
Here's were it gets interesting- During the election of 1912, Fightin' Bob wanted to run a strong Progressive challenge to the two parties, but was overshadowed by the more centrist Teddy Roosevelt. The Socialist Wing of the new Progressive Party broke off and ran their own candidate as they had the previous 3 elections (Eugene Debs), and Roosevelt narrowly lost to Wilson who represented the more conservative wing of the broader progessive movement. Many trace this election as the beginning of modern Liberalism in the Democrats.
Anyways, the Fighting Bob did eventually run his own campaign for president in 1924. After being the lone voice in the US Senate in opposition to World War I in 1917, Fighting Bob ran the most successful independent campaign for president in American history. He gathered 17% of the vote, won the electoral college votes of Wisconsin, swept working class neighborhoods throughout the urban Northeast, and came in second place in most of the Western States. In less than 10 years, his 1924 platform and coalition became the basis of the New Deal. Many of his advisors became advisors to Roosevelt.
Also interesting to note, is that much of the early 20th Century progressive movement was actually centered around the Republican party, not the Democrats. It wasn’t until the Goldwater takeover of 1964 that really turned the Republicans into the party they are today. The last remnants of the progressive wing of the Republican party still live on today in the form of people like Senator Jim Jeffords from Vermont.
Hope things are going well despite the unfortunate collapse of the Dean movement. Who do you plan on voting for on November 2nd? I’m voting for David Cobb- he’s the Green party candidate (Nader is going Indy this year)
Posted by: Bill from UW Madison at September 1, 2004 11:17 PMI couldn't watch that whole flash Renee - maybe it gets better toward the end - what I watched seemed tasteless to me.
I don't like the idea that my religious freedom is threatened by these people - but I'm not sure that the flash addresses the threat in an effective way.
It's not possible to out-hate a fundamentalist and ridicule only breeds more hate. The flash needs to be more creative.
I'd suggest exploring empathy.
Posted by: dorsano at September 1, 2004 10:34 PM"Join this group. I did."
Hey Dennis! For a second there, before I noticed the punctuation, I thought maybe you were doing a Yoda impression. ;-)
Have you seen the "Heavenly Convention" animation?
http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=action.election&item=petition_flash
Posted by: Renee in Ohio at September 1, 2004 10:09 PMLogCabin Republicans have started running ads:
http://www.logcabin.org/logcabin/hope.html
CNN is not going to run these ads because they are "too controversial", however they will continue to air the swiftboat ads!?
Posted by: Alex at September 1, 2004 12:28 AM