I am a Virginian.  My mother was a Virginian, and so was her father. His family came to the colonies out of necessity and choice. During the English Civil War in the 1640s, my ever-so-many-great grandfather backed the losing horse (thus, establishing a long tradition in my family): King Charles I.

Years before this little altercation started, the King had given my ancestor a rather large tract of land in the new colony – not that my ancestor ever bothered to go check it out, you understand. He was pretty cosy with the life he had in Halifax, in the North of England. But then the Civil War started, and the King lost his head – literally – and my ancestor was faced with a choice: stick around and lose his head (and land and everything else) or get ye the hell out to the colonies.

(Even though my family aren’t the greatest gamblers in the world, we do have a reasonable modicum of common sense and a desire for survival).

So, that’s how Virginian I am. I couldn’t be more Virginian if I were Poca-bloody-hontas (and one of her granddaughters married into my ancestor’s family), so I’m entitled to a reasonable amount of snobbism … or rather, that pejorative synonym for it: elitism.

It is as a bona fide elitist from that most elite of the original 13 colonies, I would like to address the matter of why the Democratic candidate for governor from the Commonwealth of Virginia lost in November 2009, because a lot of netroots know-it-all HuffPo dittoes, in their infinite misinformed and discombabulated thinking, have ascertained the reason of Creagh Deeds’ s defeat incorrectly.

Put simply: Y’all are WRONG!

First of all, Bob McDonnell was not ”widely popular” as some people regularly claim in HuffPo land. If anything, most logical voters viewed him suspiciously, as someone who ran as a moderate appeaser, but who had the shifty eyes of an arch-conservative in waiting to dismantle every Progressive piece of legislation enacted by the outgoing Governor, Tim Kaine.

When he appeared on the campaign trail at various times under the Confederate flag, hackles were raised along Democratic spines in alarm. The publication of ueber-regressive philosophies written in his doctoral thesis from a glorified Bible-school sent everyone’s mindset into overdrive at the regressive and repressive attitude he exhibited toward women and women’s rights. That McDonnell slickly - he exudes an image of slime trailing in his wake – excused these sentiments as a folly of youth wasn’t lost amongst the more discerning voter. 

When, exactly, does “youth” end? McDonnell was expressing these beliefs as a man of 35, when the thesis was written!!!

Nope. McDonnell appealed to Sarah Palin’s ”real Virginians,” the rural residents along the south-central corridor, extending into the mountainous westside of the state – people like the Wise County constituents, dependent on travelling medical charities for their healthcare. Sarah offered him her expert campaigning skills, and he turned her down. That, it seems, was a political stroke of sheer genius.

These were the people who couldn’t reconcile themselves to the specter of a black man in the White House.

He then turned his attention to the Socialist Communist People’s Democratic Republic of Northern Virginia (so dubbed by Joe McCain, foul-mouthed brother of Senator John), subtly reminding all and sundry that he, Bob McDonnell, came from the Northern Virginia area.

As if that mattered. 

It didn’t because – and here’s the rub – the election was won by McDonnell as much as because of who didn’t vote as who did. And it was also lost, I’m sorry to say, because the Democratic Party endorsed the wrong man as candidate.

Creagh Deeds is a lovely man, but he was little known throughout the state as a whole. He was chosen by the Democratic voters from a field that included Terry McAuliffe (the high-profile Clinton operative) and Brian Moran, the brother of the popular and Progressive 8th District Congressman. McAuliffe came with the tag “Carpetbagger” (a term that still carries images of Yankees marching through the Shenandoah), and Moran, like his brother, was viewed as too far to the Left. That left Deeds a nice compromise candidate – nice, being the operative word.

Mr Nice proceeded to run one of the most negative campaigns in recent history.

That was a big mistake.

The other big mistake was simply that Virginia voters traditionally don’t turn out in droves to elect a governor. The winner of the prize can only serve one four-year term, and then he goes. The voters are savvy enough to realise that the fella in the Big Chair will only work for the first two years and then phone in for the final two, because he’ll be busy raising campaign funds for his US Senate candidacy that will take place immediately he leaves office (Chuck Robb, Macaca Allen, Mark Warner et al). Most people don’t bother voting, considering that they’ll probably be voting for whomever in four years’ time in a senatorial campaign, so McDonnell appealed to the people he knew had a vested interest in voting.

To the goobers in the rural Southern part of the state, he was the white man who’d stand up to the one who had no right to sit in the Oval Office; and to the independents, he could put hand on heart and claim to be a fiscal conservative. He rightly calculated that most of the people who didn’t vote, would be Democrats anyway, lazily complacent, and he wasn’t wrong.

First, that particular demographic which carried Obama in the state did a no-show: the college kids. Why should they? They’d participated in the ‘big one’, the Party party. They’d canvassed and registered voters and campaigned door-o-door. They’d participated in history. Now they were having a voter hangover, or they were studying for mid-terms, or both.

Either way, they didn’t show; or they couldn’t be bothered to do so. They simply couldn’t be bothered to vote for a greying, middle-aged man with a stutter, where they’d turned out in droves for a greying, middle-aged celebrity with a teleprompter.

The other demographic that won the state for Obama failed to show as well – the African American community. In fact, they were divided, with some high profiled African American Virginians, actually, endorseing McDonnell (e.g., the divine Doug Wilder, first African American governor of any state.)

So most of the African American community stayed home too.

Statistics show that in any given election, the lower the voter turnout, the more chance a Republican or an incumbent will prevail. This is exactly what happened.

And as for this being an indictment of Obama’s shortcomings as a President, after less than one year, that’s a fallacy too. In almost every voting precinct in the state, exit polls amongst independents, who voted for McDonnell, showed that the reason they voted Republican had nothing to do with President Obama’s freshman year performance and everything to do with what they perceived to be a shoddily-run campaign on the part of the Democratic candidate. In fact, almost to a person, these voters said that they wouldn’t hesitate to vote for Obama again, as President.

As Walter Cronkite and – even better – that real Virginian Bruce Hornsby would say, “That’s just the way it is” – unfortunate, coincidental, but true.

I am just pissed off and sick and tired of self-appointed pundits in the blogosphere attempting to use this election as a rod with which to beat the President; and if that conjures up images of Simon Legree or Ole Massa beatin’ the field hands, good. I want it to show that.

Because the people making the loudest wailings about the Virginia result (and, to a degree, the New Jersey one and the Massachusetts one) are the same adolescently-inclined people who are threatening to sulk out the vote in 2010 or 2012 or who are whining for some whiter than white (literally) Progressive saviour to descend from secular heaven in the form of Howard Dean or Denis Kucinich and mount a primary challenge against the President. They’re the same people demanding that the President fire his team of advisors, including his Chief of Staff and the Secretary of the Treasury and hire a whole new entourage of their own choosing – said entourage to include, again, Howard Dean and Denis Kucinich, as well as Eliot Spitzer and Elizabeth Warren.

They’re are the political innocents, mischief makers and miscreants who proclaim themselves Progressives, far superior in intellect, tolerance, open-mindedness and understanding than the Bible-bashing, gun-totin’ Republican Right, yet they want various Rightwing commentators/politicians ’silenced’; they ban any adverse comment on certain Progressive aggregates, whilst preaching the First Amendment. When they’re told the truth by anyone in a position to know better, they either effect selective deafness or they’re arrogant enough to deem the truth a lie.

So the salutory lesson in all of this is simply this: look at what happens when you decide, for whatever reason, not to vote in an election. The fox gets in the henhouse and all hell breaks loose. McDonnell and his merry men have unleased a war against their LGBT constituents, after Tim Kaine signed executive order legislation banning any discrimination against anyone based on sexual orientation … and that’s just the start of things to come.

A helluva lot of fuck-ups can happen in four short years. Just look at the damage Bush wreaked!

This morning the office of Senator Evan Bayh, D-IN, announced that he will not run for re-election this November. There’s more than one way to react to this news. Since Bayh is a Democrat, the gut reaction might be to fear that we’re going to lose another seat — like we did in Massachusetts. Bayh is, after all, a conservative Dem in a conservative state.

But what about looking at this resignation as an opportunity? Bayh’s father, Birch Bayh, was a true Liberal Dem, a champion of Liberal causes, and a hero. He proved that a strong Liberal can win in Indiana.

Birch Bayh was defeated in 1980 by Dan Quayle during the successful demonization of the term “liberal” by the GOP. It was just another war of words — a PR campaign that had nothing to do with governance or responding to what the people need. It was the empty and shallow game that the GOP plays so well and that Democrats play so badly.

As a result, when Evan Bayh decided to follow in his father’s footsteps, he did so as a conservative. But who can say whether Evan’s politics could ever have gotten him into the governor’s mansion or to the senate without his father’s Liberal legacy.

Now that Bayh is resigning, will Democrats have the organization and skill to put forth a Liberal Dem as a candidate and defend the Liberal label? This is a true opportunity to talk about serving the people — bringing jobs back home, getting health care coverage to people who need it, starting a green energy economy, making peace.

These are the Liberal ideals that most Americans support. But they have poor advocates in the democratic pundits and spokespeople. Liberal ideals have no advocacy at all in the media.

Progressives should decide right now — not waste a moment in this critical election year — how they feel about this open seat, and what we’re going to do about it.

UPDATE (15 Feb, 8:45 pm)

Candidates — Republicans and Democrats — only have until Tuesday, February 16, 2010, to gather 4,500 signatures and file for inclusion on the Democratic primary ballot. The Democratic Party, however, has plenty of time to nominate its own candidate — until June. The timing of this decision couldn’t have been worse for independent- and progressive-minded candidates who want to push back against the status quo of the Democratic Party.

Bayh cites the partisanship in congress as reason for his departure. But how will walking away — or potentially reducing the number of Democrats in the Senate — improve that situation?

UPDATE (16 Feb, 12:10 pm)

Evan Bayh made a phone call last night to the Indiana Democratic Committee to say it’s good that Indiana won’t have a primary.

Bayh Calls Lack Of Primary To Replace Him A Good Thing On Call With Dems

Because, you know, you can’t trust those damn voters anyway (my words, not his).

And another interesting wrinkle: FEC Rules Give Bayh Room To Decide What To Do With His $13 Million War Chest

A New York Times reporter asked a man the following question, What is a fascist?  How many fascists have we?  How dangerous are they?  The man answered,

The really dangerous American fascist….is the man who wants to do in the United States in an American way what Hitler did in Germany in a Prussian way.  The American fascist would prefer not to use violence.  His method is to poison the channels of public information.  With a fascist the problem is never how best to present the truth to the public but how best to use the news to deceive the public into giving the fascist and his group more money or more power.  They claim to be superpatriots, but they would destroy every liberty guaranteed by the Constitution.  They demand free enterprise but are the spokesman for monolopy and vested interest.  Their final objective toward which all their deceit is directed is to capture political power so that using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjucation.

The man who answered that question?  Vice President Henry Wallace in 1944.   Dr. James Luther Adams, an ethics professor at Harvard Divinity School who passed on in July 1994, had known this for a long time.  During 1935 and 1936 Dr Adams was working in Germany with the underground anti-Nazi church, also known as the Confessing Church.  Because of his work with the dissidents of that group, he was interrograted by the Gestapo who suggested he return to America, which he did, along with rolls of home movie film he took of the German Christian Church.  He saw in our christian right and our corporate dominance exactly what he saw during those early dark days in Nazi Germany.  He was advising his students as early as 1982 that when they were close to 80 they would all be fighting the Christian fascists.  He also warned his students at that time that intellectual snobbery would blind them to the signs when they came.  At that time, the religious right and their demogagues were in the infancy of their eventual corporate reign.  Today, it is not so far-fetched that they are poised, with the SCOTUS ruling, to set their course for complete dominance in the political arena.

The corporations and the right have been setting the stage for several years for dominance over the middle class.   We have stood by and watched as our manufacturing base has been decimated by jobs sent overseas to places where they can pay pennies on the dollar for labor.  We have watched the Wall Street institutions and the Mortgage industry take this country to the brink.  We watch a Federal Reserve, which is not a government entity, work in secret with trillions of our dollars.  And all the time, the right screams “Less regulation, let free market capitalism work, free market capitalism will right itself”  In other words, do nothing, we like what is happening right now and want to see it to its proper conclusion.  What could that conclusion be?

Is there another ”situation” out there that is going to take the American public to the brink, then over?  Many of our fellow countrymen right now are in despair because they cannot find a decent job with fair wages and benefits.  Abandoned by the economy, beleagured by their dissappearing middle class status, their loss of community when forced to leave a foreclosed home, all of these could be the kindling for a mass movement.  In fact these very people are the people who need a friend most and who the religious right is waiting in the wings to lead them to Jesus who may solve all their problems.   Or not, but where will that movement go, will they turn to the people who will say they will make their lives better with Jesus, or will they turn to people who will help them fight their way out of the mess we are in?  We all know that bigotry and resentment are lurking just below the surface, under the right conditions can that be roused to promote a creed that calls for the destruction of democracy?  There are forces out there who are waiting for just the right time and SCOTUS gave them a big shot in the arm with their decision that corporations are people too.

I believe with the right organizational cooperation, this can be flushed and dealt a death blow.

Never doubt that a small group of committed citizens can change the world:  Indeed it’s the only thing that ever has.  Margaret Mead

Watching the Teabaggers ponce, preen and pontificate for the better part of last year, and ending with their recent convention, I’m always struck by the fact that they and their ilk have channeled Thomas Jefferson as their Founding Father icon. Jefferson has become their idol – from the armed idiot who carried the ‘Tree of Liberty’ banner, to those souls who like to parrot Jefferson’s other paradigm of ‘he who governs best, governs least.’

So you can imagine my surprise when I heard President Obama’s Snowmageddon speech earlier this month to the Democratic Party, when he reminded the audience that we were not only the party of FDR and the Kennedy brothers, but also the party of Jefferson.

That confused me.

Many years ago, I graduated from Mr Jefferson’s university – a member of the Bicentennial class, no less, and only the third graduating class to number women amongst its members. As one  is wont to do, when one is young and foolish, being young and foolish, I became associated, in an amorous sort of way with a young Alabaman law student, of the conservative ilk. (Picture Lindsey Graham with balls and you have an accurate picture of my beau.) I was a very Left-leaning Democrat and he was, what would be today, a dying breed of intelligent, intellectual Republican. Political arguments were common, but the make-up sex was good. (I can understand the ethos behind James Carville’s and Mary Matalin’s marriage, believe me).

After all these years, my own marriage and his subsequent marriage, divorce and military career, we’re still in touch; so when Obama uttered those words about the Democratic Party being the party of Jefferson, I consulted the oracle that is my friend Allen. I was under the impression that Jefferson was a Teabagger’s wet dream, I told him: Fond of minimalist government, writing the Kentucky Resolution, which framed States’ Rights and formed the basis of Secession that caused that minor conflagration of the mid-19th Century. Even that little snippet of ‘The Tree of Liberty, from time to time, needs watering with the blood of tyrants.’

All true, my friend assured me, but Jefferson, as well as being a bit of a political intriguer, himself, was also a political chameleon; and many of his later ideals closely resemble Democratic principles. In other words, Jefferson was a straddler, like our own state, Virginia, was described, during the early days of the country: neither Northern nor Southern (but eventually opting for the South).

I’ve recently begun reading Doris Kearns Goodwin’s Lincoln biography, “Team of Rivals.” Lincoln is one President, who was swiftly glossed over in my earliest elementary school history lessons, and – to a great degree – during high school as well. One of my earliest memories is the Centennial celebration of the beginning of the Civil War in 1961. (Notice that we celebrated the ‘beginning’ of the War, not the centennial of its end; by 1965, sociological changes were afoot in Virginia, in the form of civil rights and de-segregation, and besides, we lost the war – and that was glossed over too).

The sum total of my knowledge of Lincoln was:

- Abraham Lincoln was President at the time of Fort Sumter.

- Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves.

- Abraham Lincoln was the first President to be assassinated.

- Oh, and … Abraham Lincoln was a Republican.

When I was in the Fifth Grade, my class made a field trip to Harper’s Ferry, West Virginia. I remember poking my head inside an old bookshop there and wrinkling my nose at the musty odor. I was only nine years old, but – so steeped in Civil War was the place, I reckoned that’s what the Civil War smelled like. To this day, if I smell damp mildew, I describe it as ’smelling like the Civil War’ (which confuses my British husband, as his idea of the Civil War occurred two hundred years before mine).

I was raised in Mosby’s country. My great-great-grandfather’s youngest brother rode with him, was captured and executed by General Custer. When the East got word that Custer was killed at the Little Big Horn, my great-great-grandfather toasted Sitting Bull. Even if my Virginia-born-and-bred mother and my second generation immigrant father were Roosevelt-cum-Kennedy Democrats, the War Between the States was ingrained in my blood.

In order to avoid any discussion, in depth, of Abraham Lincoln’s philosophy and Presidential achievements, later on, my high school US history teacher sought to teach the class about the battles fought and the military history, good and bad.

So I never knew that much about Lincoln the man, much less, Lincoln the politician.

Oh, I knew about him being born in a log cabin, and doing his homework at a rough-hewn table by candlelight. I knew his mother died when he was nine and that her name was Nancy Hanks. I knew he split rails, read the law, and married a crazy woman (something he has in common with Todd Palin, Mr Bachmann and Dick Cheney’s son-in-law).

I’m not even a quarter of the way through the book (which is massive), and I’m learning something new every day. Like Lincoln was an arch pragmatist. I’d heard this before – how he really didn’t want to end slavery per se, just not see it extended into the newer territories of the United States, hoping it would die a natural death eventually in the South (much like Ron Paul still reckons), or that, in an effort to deflect the oncoming war and to keep the Union intact, he sought financial reimbursement to Southern slave-owners, in exchange for passing an amendment to ensure freedom for slaves. This proposal was overturned by the more radical part of his party in … guess what? … Congress.

This is not only a biography of Lincoln, it’s a biography, as well, of his team of rivals: Salmon P Chase, William Henry Seward and Edward Bates – all of whom, challenged Lincoln in the 1860 Presidential convention, and all of whom served in his Cabinet. But, more than all of those four men, combined, this book is actually a history of how the Republican Party was formed from the old Whig Party.

And this is the interesting part!

The end of the first quarter of the 19th Century saw universal suffrage – well, universal, as in all white males over the age of 21, as opposed to white males over the age of 21, educated to a certain standard and owning a certain amount of land and/or a certain amount of property to a certain value.

That’s right, Teabaggers … The Founding Fathers, whom you clasp to your bosom and profess to love second only to God, Himself, didn’t want your grubby, little Cracker hands anyplace near the helm of government. They were elitists, you see – educated at Harvard and William and Mary and founding universities like the University of Virginia. In fact, to paraphrase James Madison (my personal favourite of the bunch), he wrote the Constitution specifically to ensure that the riffraff of the country was kept well away from anything to do with governing. For all the wonderfully poetic justice of the First Amendment, the real message behind that to the hoi polloi was this: Sit down, shut up, and your betters will decide what’s best for you … So punk ONE for the notion that the United States was founded as a purely classless society. It wasn’t. It was framed and founded around the notion that the natural aristocracy would govern the lesser mortals, and these natural aristocrats were, to a man, secularists. And those lesser mortals only concerned the type of the white variety with a dangly bit hanging down between their legs. If you were a black person or a Native American or a white woman, forget it.

Real social mobility opened up in the 1820s, when any white male over the age of 21 was allowed suffrage. That opened up the power of the Democratic Party, with Andy Jackson the first ‘people’s President.’ General Jackson of the Battle of New Orleans fame, just an ordinary guy, self-educated, a man’s man, plain spoken, a guy just like any guy, someone you could have a beer or a fistfight with … kinda like …you know who …

For two decades after Jackson, with the occasional Whig, there followed a period of Democratic political domination. The Democrats were the party of the working, rural people … no different from today, on first glance. But then, a bit different. Their supporters were found in the mostly agrarian South, and they were either slave-holders or sympathetic to the system. The Whigs, on the other hand, who got weaker and weaker, were the traditional party of business interests and intellectual conservatives. In the 1850s, however, their Leftwing, Progressive branch broke off from the dying party, itself, and remolded themselves into the Republican Party, fiscally conservative, but socially liberal, advocating an abolition of slavery, amongst other things, and a very liberal social agenda.

It’s significant to note that in the decade preceding the Civil War, the Whigs produced the Republican Party, while the Democrats produced the mercifully short-lived Know-Nothings, who derided intellectual pursuit and virulently hated foreign immigration.

What stands out about Kearns Goodwin’s book is the significance of its title – that the three men listed above, were all ambitious, socially progressive experienced politicians, all educated and refined, who looked down on Lincoln, the President, as a man of little experience, but who were chosen by him, after he defeated them in the Republican convention, to serve in various capacities in his Cabinet, where they all excelled. Well, I hold Seward responsible for a pretty reprehensible act – he bought Alaska at a bargain basement price from Russia, and we all know what came from that moment of madness …

Seward’s Folly, yes?

And so thing toddled along, after Lincoln’s assassination, with the Republican Party’s identification with big business and corporate development, spawning social philanthropists and cultural liberals from Teddy Roosevelt to Nelson Rockefeller and George Romney. Theh Democrats, always a big tent, produced the Northeastern quasi-socialist rich-men-for-a-poor-man’s-fight bruisers like Franklin Roosevelt and the Kennedys, the Southern populist Huey Long and people of the ilk of George Wallace. That part of the party of FDR were segregationists was an anomaly, and when a Southern Democratic President signed the Civil Rights bill, by 1972, the Dixiecrats embraced Richard Nixon’s Republican party.

After Johnson, the Democratic Party moved steadily to the Left, unelectable until people voted in the Carter Administration, as a demonstration of discontent with the Watergate Republicans. And then we had the seesaw of Ronald Reagan campaign for and win the hearts and minds of middle-class Democrats, by means of faux promises of economic wealth (delivered up in the form of a plastic card) and ‘Morning in America.’ When the Democrats came back again, for an 8-year stint, it was in the shape of a former Leftwing populist governor, who took a leaf out of the book of Henri IV of France, who sold his religious Protestant soul to become the Catholic King of France. Bill Clinton pulled the protest party of civil unrest, of hippy students waving banners in the face of National Guardsmen, of black radical civil rights’ protesters, into the late 20th Century with the compromising pragmatism of the Third Way. He governed from the centre, and he got two terms and left the US with a balanced budget.

During this time, the Republicans got dirtier through an astute dirty trickster with an appropriately reptilian name and embraced the Religious Right, not through devotion to the Christian theology, but to achieve power through the galvanisation of their base. If forcibly ramming God and the Christian way into every aspect of American life was the price to pay for a Republican hegemony, so be it. And whilst all this was going on, this courtship of the rural, agrarian South and Midwest, the Democrats, embracing socially progressive ideals of same-sex marriage and equal rights for LGBTs, as well as pro-Choice, gun control and an anti-War agenda, creeped closer to court big business and the corporations.

So what have I learned from one quarter of this book? Only that we now occupy the place and the same basic set of core values (that aren’t written on the palms of our hands) that the fledgling Republicans held at the beginning of the Civil War; and that the Republicans are now the intransigent, unbending, socially and intellectually backward agrarian Democrats of that same period, complete with the call for states’ rights to be dominant to the point of secession.

In learning that, I think I’ve sussed how the Democratic Party can wrest control of the situation at hand and squelch the GOP in its current form: We should declare ourselves the natural successors of Lincoln, proclaim ourselves the real Republicans, and brand Boehner, McConnell and co, secessionist Democrats.

Not only would that confuse them to no end, Sarah Palin would be struck dumb in consternation, Rush Limbaugh’s head would explode and Glenn Beck would decompensate.

Happy birthday, President Lincoln … from your natural children, the Democratic Party.

XX

We need to start a movement, a splinter group from the Democratic Party.

I am not talking about “media” or “profits” but am talking about starting a movement that somehow forms and takes off.

Heck, I think we’ll even get folks that consider themselves Teabaggers, because not all Teabaggers are the racist bigots from the Palin Convention in Nashville.

Even folks who consider themselves Teabaggers were turned off by that convention and are turned off by the racism.

We have to make the time.
We have to learn to take it step by step.
But we have to figure out what the steps are.

There would be plenty of drawbacks, because we would favor labor, meaning unions, and working class Americans.

Why couldn’t we at PPOV figure it out?

Why couldn’t we be the leader in figuring it out?

There has to be a way.

There are so many disillusioned, angry, fearful and disenfranchised Americans, and shouldn’t there be a way to get the message out and bring us all together and then work for change?

Real change, without corporate influence?

Just regular Americans that UNITE and . . . what?
How?
There has to be a way.

Back in the 60’s there were causes that united people enough to protest so many things and change did happen.

I just hate feeling as though there’s nothing we can do.

I can’t think of anything to do – a solution other than organizing a movement, similar to the Teabaggers, but for the Democratic Party.

We’re more open, tolerant, and no offense to the Teabaggers, well – but we could formulate a course of action and outline actual paradigms for change rather than rhetoric.

Oh, maybe I am far too naive and maybe it is impossible, but geeze-o-peete’s, it’s got to start somewhere.

I’m tired of our voices not being heard or taken seriously.

But this site is a GROUP THINK TANK.

It would take time, and we’d have to outline exactly what it is we want.

We know the broad basics, but we would need to work on laying it all out in specifics and then laying out how we get there.

We would have to be rational, because we can’t get everything we want, or our desires for the greater good, but – well, it would be a very complicated thing to do, but would it be impossible?

And once a movement took off, and it would, we would be so powerful of a voice of “Americans United” – maybe that could be our splinter group name instead of Teabaggers, and the MSM, and better yet, the politicians could not ignore us any longer.

We should talk about it at the very least because that would be the start.

The MSM only covers the RWs, including the Teabaggers, and ignores the Democrats and Progressives.

We need a movement similar to the Teabaggers, but on the left, and on the side of the working middle class and poor Americans.

A group that would work to elect representatives that would work for the middle class and not the corporations.

Reps that would fight for health care reform, true reform, and would fight for wages – you know, we’re tired of taking pay-cuts and having to work longer hours with less benefits so the CEOs can make bigger profits and be rewarded bigger bonuses.

We need Reps to STOP corporate welfare and obnoxious bonuses while Americans are losing their homes and health insurance.

The left needs a splinter group that would work to cleanse the Democratic Party of the corporate-bought-and-paid-for Dems and blue-dog Dems, and bring in Reps that actually represent middle America.

I’m so damn tired of working to elect Democrats, only to have them work for the corporations.

I can’t think of any other solution than to form a splinter group and search for candidates and support candidates that will work for “We The People.”

I wonder how a person or group goes about starting a movement.

The teabaggers had FOX and the health insurance companies, but I wonder how regular people can start a movement, a genuine grassroots movement made up of working class and middle class and poor Americans.

I’m so discouraged by everything that’s happening in our country, and PPOV is a think tank, so maybe we could think about actually forming a splinter group of the Democratic Party.

Or is that too naive and impossible?

It has to start somewhere, and I wonder how we could get it started or if it’s even possible.

Corporations should share their profits with their employees.

That’s my first suggestion on a mission statement for starting a movement, a splinter movement of the Democratic Party, which would include everyone – mainly middle class Americans.

I’m suggesting we work on starting a movement to combat the corruption of our elected officials – we have the best bought and paid for Reps and we’ve got them on both sides of aisle.

I’m writing about real change without corporate influence.

We Planeteers, every single one of us, can work on a movement.

But before we even attempt a movement, we have to work out the mission statement and then figure out the way to achieve it.

With the growing abuse of the filibuster and Democrats unwilling to take the strong action necessary to fix the economy and regain the public trust, with the airwaves and cable increasingly dominated by the demagogic likes of Fox News and Rush Limbaugh, and with the ever-growing influence of corporate money on Congress and public opinion, what hope do we have? This country, with all of its great power and potential, is becoming increasingly ungovernable, increasingly in the hands of the myopic and greedy and the voices of ignorance. We are on the brink of disaster.

The argument that free speech won is a false one. The only voices that will be heard are the ones with the most money. Your voices/letters/emails to representatives will fall on deaf ears more so than ever. But we have a tiny window of opportunity to still be heard NOW.

Here’s the background from the New York Times:

Justices, 5-4, Reject Corporate Spending Limit

By ADAM LIPTAK

Published: January 21, 2010

WASHINGTON — Overruling two important precedents about the First Amendment rights of corporations, a bitterly divided Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the government may not ban political spending by corporations in candidate elections.

The 5-to-4 decision was a vindication, the majority said, of the First Amendment’s most basic free speech principle — that the government has no business regulating political speech. The dissenters said that allowing corporate money to flood the political marketplace would corrupt democracy.

The ruling represented a sharp doctrinal shift, and it will have major political and practical consequences. Specialists in campaign finance law said they expected the decision to reshape the way elections were conducted. Though the decision does not directly address them, its logic also applies to the labor unions that are often at political odds with big business.

Read the entire article here.

Here’s what lawmakers may do in response to this terrible decision:

Campaign finance ruling: Can Congress do anything?

While many Republicans on Capitol Hill hailed the Supreme Court decision striking down restrictions on corporate spending on political campaigns, Democrats are ramping up measures to curb its impact. This is what lawmakers are thinking about to ameliorate the decision:

For majority Democrats, it’s yet another urgent agenda item heading into a charged election season.

“This disastrous decision paves the way for free and unlimited special-interest spending in our elections,” said Sen. Charles Schumer (D) of New York at a briefing with Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D) of Maryland on Thursday. “We will not let this decision go unchallenged.”

Read the entire article here.

I think we need to immediately contact our representatives and demand legislation—or better still, a Constitutional amendment to reverse this terrible decision!

Here’s where you can contact senators:

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

Here’s where to contact the House of Representatives:

http://clerk.house.gov/member_info/index.html

If you want to contact a member of Congress other than your own, they will ask for your area code and zip code to make sure you are in their state/district. Here’s where to get area codes/zip codes:

http://www.prodial.com/areacodes-Alpha.html

http://www.zip-area.com/search.html?type=coord&string=?57,156

These are the addresses of the major television news outlets:

FAIR’s Media Contact List

Let your voice be heard! Talk back to the media.

ABC News
77 W. 66 St., New York, NY 10023
Phone: 212-456-7777 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting              212-456-7777      end_of_the_skype_highlighting

General e-mail: netaudr@abc.com
Nightline: nightline@abcnews.com
20/20: 2020@abc.com

CBS News
524 W. 57 St., New York, NY 10019
Phone: 212-975-4321
Fax: 212-975-1893

Email forms for all CBS news programs
CBS Evening News: evening@cbsnews.com
The Early Show: earlyshow@cbs.com
60 Minutes II: 60m@cbsnews.com
48 Hours: 48hours@cbsnews.com
Face The Nation: ftn@cbsnews.com

CNBC
900 Sylvan Avenue, Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632
Phone: (201) 735-2622
Fax: (201) 583-5453
Email: info@cnbc.com

CNN
One CNN Center, Box 105366, Atlanta, GA 30303-5366
Phone: 404-827-1500
Fax: 404-827-1784
Email forms for all CNN news programs

Fox News Channel
1211 Ave. of the Americas, New York, NY 10036
Phone: (212) 301-3000
Fax: (212) 301-4229
comments@foxnews.com

List of Email addresses for all Fox News Channel programs
Special Report with Bret Baier: Special@foxnews.com
FOX Report with Shepard Smith: Foxreport@foxnews.com
The O’Reilly Factor: Oreilly@foxnews.com
Hannity: Hannity@foxnews.com,
On the Record with Greta: Ontherecord@foxnews.com
Glenn Beck: GlennBeck@foxnews.com

MSNBC/NBC
30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York, NY 10112
Phone: (212) 664-4444
Fax: (212) 664-4426

List of Email addresses for all MSNBC/NBC news programs
Dateline NBC: dateline@nbcuni.com
Hardball with Chris Matthews: hardball@msnbc.com
MSNBC Reports with Joe Scarborough: joe@msnbc.com
NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams: nightly@nbc.com
NBC News Today: today@nbc.com

PBS
2100 Crystal Drive, Arlington VA 22202
Phone: 703-739-5000
Fax: 703-739-8458

The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer: newshour@pbs.org

National Public Radio
635 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20001-3753
Phone: 202-513-3232
Fax: 202-513-3329

E-mail: Alicia Shephard, Ombudsman ombudsman@npr.org
List of Email addresses for all NPR news programs
The Rush Limbaugh Show
1270 Avenue of the Americas, NY 10020
Phone (on air): 800-282-2882
Fax: 212-445-3963
E-mail: ElRushbo@eibnet.com
Sean Hannity Show
Phone (on air): 800-941-7326
Sean Hannity: 212-613-3800
James Grisham, Producer: 212-613-3807

E-mail: Phil Boyce, Program Director phil.boyce@citcomm.com

The Los Angeles Times
202 West First Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
Phone: 800-528-4637 or 213-237-5000
Fax: 213-237-4712

L.A. Times Contact Information by Department
Letters to the Editor: letters@latimes.com
Readers’ Representative: readers.rep@latimes.com
The New York Times
620 8th Ave., New York, NY 10018
Phone: 212-556-1234
D.C. Bureau phone: 202-862-0300
Fax: 212-556-3690

Letters to the Editor (for publication): letters@nytimes.com
Write to the news editors: news-tips@nytimes.com
Corrections: senioreditor@nytimes.com
New York Times Contact Information by Department
How to Contact New York Times Reporters and Editors

USA Today
7950 Jones Branch Dr., McLean, VA 22108
Phone: 703-854-3400
Fax: 703-854-2078

Letters to the Editor: editor@usatoday.com
Give feedback to USA Today
The Wall Street Journal
200 Liberty St., New York, NY 10281
Phone: 212-416-2000
Fax: 212-416-2658

Letters to the Editor: wsj.ltrs@wsj.com
Comment on News Articles: wsjcontact@dowjones.com
The Washington Post
1150 15th St., NW, Washington, DC 20071
Phone: 202-334-6000
Fax: 202-334-5269

Letters to the Editor: letters@washpost.com
Ombudsman: ombudsman@washpost.com
Contact Washington Post Writers and Editors

Newsweek
251 W 57th Street, New York, NY 10019
Phone: 212-445-4000
Fax: 212-445-5068

Letters to the Editor: letters@newsweek.com
Time
Time & Life Bldg., Rockefeller Center, 1271 6th Ave., New York, NY 10020
Phone: 212-522-1212
Fax: 212-522-0003

Letters to the Editor letters@time.com
U.S. News & World Report
1050 Thomas Jefferson St., Washington, DC 20007
Phone: 202-955-2000
Fax: 202-955-2049

Letters to the Editor letters@usnews.com

Associated Press
450 West 33rd St., New York, NY 10001
Phone: 212-621-1500
Fax: 212-621-7523

General Questions and Comments: info@ap.org
Partial Contact Information for the Associated Press by Department and Bureau

Reuters
Three Times Square, New York, NY 10036
Telephone: 646-223-4000

Reuters Editorial Feedback

United Press International
1133 19th Street, NW, Suite 800, Washington, DC 20036
Telephone: 202-898-8000
FAX: 202-898-8048

Comments and Tips: tips@upi.com

FAIR
104 W. 27th St. 10th Floor
New York, NY 10001
fair@fair.org

If anyone has any other addresses, including your local newspapers, please add them to this post. PLEASE– LET’S AT LEAST TRY TO KEEP DEMOCRACY ALIVE. THANK YOU!

As everyone probably knows by now, the great Tea Party Convention is in full swing this weekend in Nashville.

A whopping 600 teabaggers are gathered to hear their leaders, and are especially excited to hear Sarah Palin.

The convention kicked off to a great start with notable speaker Tom Tancredo –

Tancredo told the audience that the country had elected “a committed socialist ideologue in the White House” because “we do not have a civics, literary test before people can vote in this country“:

The opening-night speaker at the first National Tea Party Convention ripped into President Obama, Sen. John McCain and “the cult of multiculturalism,” asserting that Obama was elected because “we do not have a civics, literacy test before people can vote in this country.”

The speaker, former Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., told about 600 delegates in a Nashville, Tenn., ballroom that in the 2008 election, America “put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House … Barack Hussein Obama.”

Tancredo says Obama won because we lack a ‘literacy test before people can vote in this country.’

Another speaker was Steven Millroy who claimed –

President Obama is not a U.S. socialist. He’s an international socialist. He envisions one world government. That’s what his whole plan is.

How Dare You Say We Believe This Stuff!

And there were these words of wisdom from Joseph Farah –

My dream is that IF Barack Obama even seeks re-election as president in 2012, he won’t be able to go to any city, any town, any hamlet in America without seeing signs that ask, “Where’s the birth certificate?”

What I’ll say today at 1st Tea Party Convention

The Tea Party Movement is claiming victory for Scott Brown winning Senator Kennedy’s seat in Massachusetts and Brown’s win has bolstered the movement.

The Tea Party Express PAC spent $285,000 for Brown’s campaign, and there are reportedly several other smaller Tea Party PACs from Tennessee to California, which are working on campaigns for Tea Party candidates.

The Tea Party is looking to corporations, since the SCOTUS ruling –

Tea party looking for corporate donations

The US Supreme Court’s recent decision to scale back part of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reforms could also come to play a role. Tea party organizers gathered in Nashville, Tenn., say corporations are welcome to donate.

The establishment of various tea-party-related campaign funds is part of a rush by genuine organizers, K Street lobbyists, established party operatives, and even hucksters to cash in on the tea party moniker – a criticism that has been leveled from both outside and inside the movement against Tea Party Nation, the for-profit group that’s bringing former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin to Nashville for a speech Saturday night.

New Tea Party PAC: Can it raise $10 million for midterm revolt?

But there are problems within the Tea Party Movement itself, with protests from within.
A splinter group has emerged due to the price of the convention and the feeling of being scammed by the Tea Party leaders.

Meanwhile, a splinter group plans to stage a guerilla press conference on the grounds of the Opryland Resort to denounce the convention for its cost and failure to represent the tea party spirit.

Harnessing ‘tea party’ spirit won’t be easy. Convention is proof.

Can Sarah Palin unite her loyal teabaggers or will her appearance divide the movement further?

Stay tuned.

Tonight, Bill Moyers had a marvelous episode which I can’t recommend enough.

The first segment was about the SCOTUS decision and the impact on our democracy.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/02052010/watch.html

With pro and con voices.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/02052010/watch2.html

The second segment I found the most intriguing, with a doctor who had been working for single payer with Congress…and was ultimately shut down and out by the White House.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/02052010/watch3.html

And a final piece on which corporations finance these Republican and Democrat retreats.

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/02052010/watch4.html

I highly recommend watching these segments and the rest of this remarkable episode.

This morning I happened upon an article dated January 21st, 2010 from the East Valley Tribune about a meeting of religious leaders regarding immigration.

The Arizona Interfaith Network is hosting the event, which will begin with a prayer service, followed by a press conference and panel discussion. The intent is to “urge Congress to enact legislation which will protect workers and help with economic recovery, create millions of new taxpayers, keep families together, and protect the due process rights of all.”

http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/149784

The comments following the article drew my attention and ire.

Those commenting were spouting “Separation of Church and State!” since the religious leaders were sympathetic in regards to illegal immigration, which is an exceptionally hot topic in Arizona.

These are most likely the same people who scream that America was founded on Christian beliefs and that homosexuality is a threat to Christianity and a sin against God.

Odds are, these are the same people who shout about Liberals, Progressives and Democrats being anti-God!
Christians who demand the right to hang the Ten Commandments on state buildings, have prayer in public schools, and are anti-choice because of religious beliefs.

Christians have no problem when religious institutions step in to ban gay marriage and using religion to defend those who murder doctors, but when religion steps into the immigration debate, they scream for Separation of Church and State!

Arizona, as most states, is struggling financially and cutting services that help the poor. They’ve cut the funds that help poor families with health care, they are closing state run mental institutions casting severely mental patients into the streets, and closing state funded hospices that care for the sick and dying.

Residents support the cuts for the poor by rationalizing that most of the funds help illegal immigrants.

Christians, fueled by the likes of Bill O’Reilly, scream about the discrimination in this country against Christians, spurring the annual ‘War on Christmas’.

Christians and their Christian pundits use religion rather conveniently for their agendas, but when a group of Christian leaders hold meetings about the plight of immigrants, the same Christians shouting about discrimination because of religion, demand that their Christian leaders and churches stay out of politics.
Separation of Church and State?

Only when convenient.

Taking Action Against The SCOTUS Decision!

A couple of weeks ago I posted in the Time Out..O/T post an alert from CREDO Action Alert and asked everyone to sign the petition.  The petition was on for a FCC hearing.
The hearing was on internet freedom.  According to CREDO and another outside source the response was overwhelming.  The petition for internet freedom out numbered what the corporations could produce!  Thank You. I hope we just saved “The Planet” and our POV will remain intact.

Today I received another alert concerning the recent SCOTUS decision that fell on us like standing under a tree with a flock of birds roosting in it. It was messy and  didn’t smell too good either.  I am asking every one to please read and sign the petition supporting legislative action to curtail this as soon as possible.  Our very Democracy may depend on it.

Do you remember what Mr. Fluffywuvers faced?  Then sign the petition!

Attention Planet People,

We deserve a country where our elected officials are not bought and paid for by Big Business. But last week’s Supreme Court decision in the case Citizens United vs. FEC overturned over a century of precedent and opened the floodgates for unlimited amounts of corporate money to flow into our political system. Shockingly, the court’s decision may even allow foreign corporations and large multinationals to manipulate our elections.

If we do nothing, this ruling has the potential to undermine the very foundation of our democracy.

Representative Alan Grayson has been one the most forceful voices in responding to this crisis. He has introduced a number of bills as part of a “Save Our Democracy” initiative to blunt some of the worst implications of the Supreme Court’s decision.

I signed a petition to President Obama and the Congressional leadership telling them they must enact Grayson’s strong laws to save our democracy from the pernicious influence of corporate money. Please join me by clicking below.

http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/grayson_democracy/?r_by=7507-2307056-iH.6BVx&rc=confemail1

Corporations Are People Too!

or

How to Explain The Supreme Court’s Derangement to Your Child

by Dr. Suits

On a winter’s day in two thousand ten
A decision was made by five crazy men
Their words were all heard by the little boy, Trent
Who then asked his mother what all of this meant.

“Corporations are people? That seems very odd.
I haven’t met one in my class or schoolyard.”

“Do they have arms and legs? Do they like to kick balls?
Do they lick ice cream cones? Do they yell in the halls?”
His mother replied with a shake of her head,
“No they don’t but they’re people, the Justices said.”

“Do they like to climb trees? Do they walk? Do they run?
Do they like to breathe air? Do they sing just for fun?”
His mother replied with a face that was red,
“No they don’t but they’re people, the Justices said.”

“Do they vote in elections? Or drive a fast car?
Do they give birth to babies? Or wish on a star?”
His mother looked weary and ready for bed,
“No they don’t but they’re people, the Justices said.”

“Do they live? Do they die? Or even have souls?
Do they pour lots of milk in their cereal bowls?”
His mother’s heart fell as if  weighted by lead,
“No they don’t but they’re people, the Justices said.”

The little boy Trent had had quite enough,
He started to frown, he started to huff,
“What kind of people don’t breathe or have souls?
Don’t live and don’t die or have cereal bowls?”

“Those five men are dumber than all in my class,
My decision for them? They can all  kiss my ass!”

                                                      “Politics As Unusual”

 We have been privileged to become witness to two political events in 14 months that most of us never imagined would happen in our lifetime. The elections of Barack Obama and Scott Brown. Two men who each in their own way took on established and entrenched Democratic Machines and each in their own right were swept into office by a voting populous demanding change.

“ The reason he’s pullin’ our pants down. ” ” Gonna paddle a little behind.” “Ain’t gonna paddle it -- gonna kick it, real hard.” ” No, I believe he’s gonna paddle it.”  “I don’t believe that’s a proper characterization.” “Well, that’s how I’d characterize it.” ”I believe it’s more of a kickin’ sitcheyation”

 As different and diverse as their political ideals may be there are some striking similarities in the response to these gentleman’s elections from the opposing Party:

1. OMG!!! It’s the coming  Apocalypse for America.

2. The downplaying of the significance of their “Historical” win’s by some of the opposing party’s Leadership.  

Before the confetti could be swept up from the floor of Scott Brown’s victory party the Liberal and Democratic Talking Heads were spewing forth their repetitive Talking points:

1. This was a referendum backlash vote against President Obama’s love affair with Wall Street Bankers.

2. Democrats stayed home to protest  the perceived lack of support for the Public Option from the White House.

3. The Democratic Party Candidate Martha Coakly ran a lousy campaign.

4. Most people decide whom they vote for based on the Economy and Unemployment #’s (jobs).

  The day after the election there was Howard Dean on MSNBC spouting off poll numbers of Democrats who didn’t vote in the election. He claimed that 80% didn’t vote because the Public Option had been removed from the Senate Bill. It would seem that the poll number’s justify the new round of fear mongering agenda we are experiencing designed to stir up anger to be manipulated into disapointment in the President.

                       ” I never vote for anyone, I always vote against.” -  W. C. Fields

After spending the last few days exploring the citizen blogs connected to Massachusetts I have come to the belief that this election was much more than just than the simplistic analogies given to explain the defeat of Martha Coakly.

                                                      “Welcome To The Machine”

I love the idea of the Elder Statesmen, don’t you?  The silver- haired well dressed articulate millionaire limo riding solicitorof business for his constituents bringing home the pork keeper of the parliamentary proclivities of the sacred halls of the Senate body who speaks for the “little man” . 

“Furthermore, in the second Pappy O’Daniel administration, these boys is gonna be my *brain* trust.” 

 The Commonwealth of Massachusetts  is controlled by an Old Fashioned Democratic Machine connected to every level of politics from the local School Board to the two Houses of Representation in Washington D.C. with an ear to the White House.  It has everything you could ask for in a well oiled Political Machine, a nationally recognizable Family name, a lovable Patriarch , Union Bosses, Newspaper Editors,  Media Moguls, The local religious Hierarchy, Influential Businessmen, Powerful Lawyers and Judges, Two long standing influential millionaire professional politician United States Senators  (who until ones recent demise)  had a combined 71 years in the Senate, a content constituency grateful for all the Machine has done for them and their communities and of course a “scandel” or two. 

The last three Speakers of the Massachusetts House of Representatives a legislative body the Democratic Party has controlled for the last 55 years have had to resign due to scandals that resulted in their indictments.

In the last 2 years, 3 Democrats in the State Senate have been removed because of scandalous behavior. Including one caught on an FBI surveillance tape stuffing a Thousand Dollar Bribe down her bra.

Martha Coakley is a cog in the Machine.

                                                       ”So What The Truck Happened”

                                         This is the now famous “Old Pick-up” Commercial 

To coincide with this pleasant no negative attack campaign commercial Scott Brown with knowledge gained from the Obama campaign utilized youth and the Internet.

                    (quite possibly the least expensive and most efficient campaign method)

                                            “Is you is, or is you ain’t, my constituency?”

Was Martha Coakley complacent in her bid for the Senate?  If your the chosen one from the Machine with a 30 point lead in the Polls against your closest opponent in a Special Election, how much campaigning do you actually need to do?  Besides, just how does one aggressively respond to the type of Campaign Ads shown above ?

  You don’t tell your pappy how to court the electorate. We ain’t one-at-a-timin’ here. We’re MASS communicating!”

  No need to dwell on Martha’s Radio Airwave Mass Communicating gaffe’s, but even a Corn Bread Eatin Gravey Lickin Okie like myself knows you just don’t call a “Red Sox” World Series Hero  a “Yankee” fan.

                                               (besides she managed to carry Boston)

“This band of miscreants, this very evening, interfered with a lynch mob in the performance of its duty.”

On January 12th 2010  Martha Coakley attended a “Fundraiser”  at  Sonoma in Washington D.C.  She referred to it as a “Unity Party” that was planned after she had won the primary. In attendance were numerous Lobbyist’s representing “Big Pharma” and “Big Insurance”. When questioned about the Lobbyist’s from a “Weekly Standard” reporter, the reporter was subsequently attacked, thrown to the ground and bullied by Coakley Staffer Michael Meehan, a recent Obama appointee nominated to serve on the Broadcasting Board of Governors.

Michael P. Meehan currently serves as President of Blue Line Strategic Communications, Inc. and as Senior Vice President at Virilion, a digital media company. For over two decades, Meehan served in senior roles for U.S. Senators John Kerry, Barbara Boxer, Maria Cantwell and former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, two presidential campaigns, two U.S. House offices and congressional campaigns in 25 states. Mr. Meehan earned a B.A. in political science from Bates College.

From the White House- http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/president-obama-announces-more-key-administration-posts-111809

http://www.politico.com/arena/bio/michael_meehan.html

The Broadcasting Board of Governors is responsible for all non-military, international broadcasting sponsored by the U.S government.  

                                         “It’s A Bird - It’s a Plane - It’s”  

The 2008  Massachusetts Democratic Primary was won overwhelmingly by Hilliary Clinton by a margin of 56.o1% to 4o.64%. Before the Super Tuesday Primary was held the upper echalons of the Machine had already thrown their support and Super Delagate status to Barack Obama. After the primary Massachusetts was one of  the states where the peoples voice was ignorned by the elites of the Machine creating a controversy the DNC is still trying to address. 

( Ironicly Martha Coakley was a Super Delagate who pledged to Hillary Clinton. She went against the Machine and it may be noted that in a race that was deemed vital to the DNC she recieved very little national support until it was too late)

                               “ Oh son, for that you sold your everlasting soul?” 
                                                          ”Well, I wasn’t usin’ it.” 

In two high profile Child Abuse cases in which Martha Coakley was the Prosecutor the parents of the abused children were forced to hire their own Attorneys to represent them in forcing the criminal charges into court. In both cases the abuser was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison. One was a high profile case involving a Catholic Priest, another was the son of an influential Union Boss who was connected to Coakley’s campaign for Attorney General.(this was the curling iron case) 

 Coakley also failed to disclose $200,ooo in financial assets and a $12,ooo retirement account in her financial disclosure forms submitted to the US Senate in relation to her candidacy. 

                                                       “The Peoples Seat”

 In the Jan. 19th Special Election Debate moderator David Gergen confronted Scott Brown with these words

“Are you willing, under those circumstances, to say I’m gonna be the person, I’m gonna sit in Teddy Kennedy’s seat, and I’m gonna be the person that’s gonna block it for another 15 years”

Scott Brown responded with what will soon become a mispelled slogan on handmade signs whenever a political rally is held the next few years.

“Well, with all due respect, it’s not the Kennedys’ seat, and it’s not the Democrats’ seat, it’s the people’s seat “

This connected with quite a few people not only in Massachusetts, but the country as a whole.

“We could hire our own midget, even shorter than his” “ Wouldn’t we look like a bunch of Johnny-come-latelies, bragging on our own midget, doesn’t matter how stumpy”

1,216,865  people voted in the  2008  Massachusetts Democratic Primary.

1,o58,682 people  voted for Coakley in 2010.

1,168,107  people voted for Scott Brown in 2010.

1,108,854  people voted for John McCain in 2oo8.

1,904,097 people voted for President Obama in 2008.

 If you crunch the numbers there were  786,166  less votes cast in the 2010 Special election than in the 2008 Presidential Election.  John McCain  recived 50,172 more votes in 2008 than Coakley in 2010. Scott Brown recived 59,253 more votes in 2010 than McCain in 2008.

 When I look at these numbers it tell me there is more to the 2010 election than just Dem’s staying home in protest of the “Public Option” .

           Perhaps it was “Rage Agaist The Machine”  or just “None of The Above”

                             #

“Any change is resisted because bureaucrats have a vested interest in the chaos in which they exist.”    Richard M. Nixon

[additional quotes taken from O' Brother Where Art Thou]

addendum:  I think it is important to note that while I was learning more about the political make up of Massachusetts  I learned that as much as it is a “Blue“  State Massachusetts  has the same number of people registered Independent/3rd party as are registered  Republican and Democrat.

Democrats-1.6 million, Republican-490,000, Independent/3rd Party -2.1 million   

Only about 50% of registered voters turned out for the Special Election.

We just had a 1-2-3-4 combination of punches and we’re reeling.

1. The election of Brown and the loss of a Dem 60 vote majority in The Senate.

2. The concession that HCR will not be passed.

3. Pres. Obama’s choosing “bipartisanship” over fighting for Progressive values.

4. The Supreme Court nakedly handing our political system to corporations.

It’s overwhelming, a bit much to deal with in the span of a couple of days. But as usual, once I have the chance to fully process everything, I want to turn my outrage into action.

From the beginning, PlanetPOV was intended to become a citizen’s think tank, a blog for substantive discussions  and a place to organize initiatives.

That is, a place for talk and action.

We have begun our first comprehensive project, ProjectPOV, under Nellie’s fine leadership. If you haven’t already, may I suggest clicking over to it to check it out. Also, I’d suggest that all members wishing to participate leave a brief comment and check the box to receive email notifications on new comments so you can stay updated.

With the events that have recently unfolded, I would like to propose adding one more activist project to our plate (which will dovetail with ProjectPOV).

Consider the four setbacks listed above and let’s discuss here what action, if any, a majority here would be interested in pursuing.

Some suggestions to start the ball rolling:

1. Should PlanetPOV join petition drives with other, bigger organizations for Congressional action on reversing the SC decision?

2. Should we draft a letter that can be co-signed by members and sent to The White House and Dem Congresspeople demanding bold action, commitment and/or exercising the Nuclear Option to accomplish true HCR and other items on the Progressive Agenda or else be seen as failures and unworthy of enthusiastic support?

3. Should we draft a petition calling on Pres. Obama to abandon this quest for bipartisanship in favor of being a bold, tough leader fighting for Progressive values with no holds barred?

4.  Should we research the logistics of getting Propositions on state ballots that could reign in corporations, later seeking collaborations with other entities on moving such propositions forward if viable?

5. Should we draft Letters to Editors for members to send to their local papers, co-signed by all members in agreement?

What else could or should we do to step up to these challenges to our nation’s future?

Please add your suggestions and do mention which others you may support. I will then create a poll that lists them for members to vote on and thus chart our course of action.

I can’t stand sitting around and feeling screwed, it’s time for action.

It was one year ago Barack Obama was inaugurated as President of the United States…or wasn’t according to teabaggers who protested the mucking up of the oath by Roberts. Remember? The de-legitimizing of Obama’s presidency literally began on the day he became president.

What also ended that day was the era of bipartisanship, which  is clearly over for at least a generation, possibly forever.

The end of bipartisanship was observed by the GOP at the beginning of the year during the Stimulus conferences, discussions and votes.

Unfortunately, President Obama, with the best of intentions, mistook the end of bipartisanship for an initial setback. He deserves to take the heat for this mistake in perception, this misplaced optimistic altruism.

But forgiveness should not come with much resistance, Presidents have been guilty of far worse deeds far more frequently in recent history.

Wrapping up the finger pointing, Rahm Emmanuel’s political malpractice, his total failure to guide Obama and his agenda successfully and intact through Congress should not be permitted to be swept under the rug. He should resign or be fired, he and his pro-corporate DLC ways have undermined and sabotaged this president.

One more note about this bipartisanship thing. As brilliant as Pres. Obama unquestionably is, the dynamics of productive bipartisanship is far different than de facto bipartisanship and it is the latter which he pursued.

Negotiating away things that would greatly benefit Americans just to coax one or more Republicans to sign on may technically be bipartisanship but goes against serving the American people. It is not what the American people meant by bipartisanship, what they wanted was for both parties to come together and work together to do what’s best for them.

Once the GOP made clear that they did not want what’s best for The People but for Obama (and the country) to fail, Obama’s continuing a pursuit of a technical bipartisanship was neither supported by the American people nor to their benefit to support. And that has been a huge factor for the political blowback from HCR, the economy (because of the compromises on the Stimulus), the MA election and Obama’s approval ratings at record lows.

We can’t and shouldn’t dwell on what can’t be changed. We have 3 more years in this term to change this nation for the better and regain positive momentum for Progressive issues. And those so-called Progressives who want only to condemn Obama can kiss Rush Limbaugh’s ass.

I think Pres. Obama has to turn his back on the 2009 Obama and truly “start” his presidency in 2010 as he should have in 2009. Fighting for the people, not accepting the concessions to corporate interests, not readily negotiating away valuable benefits for Americans to pursue  some disconnected concept of technical “bipartisanship”.

It is this kind of bold leadership that he represented he would bring to the country and which was expected. It is this kind of bold leadership he must embark on now as he begins again.

I suggest that Pres. Obama meet with Harry Reid and splash a bucket of reality in his face (though a real bucket of water would please me too). “Face facts, you’re going to lose your seat in the Senate, the Dems look incapable of leading and accomplishing things in Congress and will lose control. The only hope any of us have to turn this around is to get rid of that damn filibuster. If what gets accomplished after that doesn’t get you reelected, you can at least leave the Senate proudly as  having helped make the most fundamental and meaningful changes to this nation since FDR instead of as the ineffective leader that doomed Democratic control of Congress and the Obama Presidency.”

Short of nuking the filibuster, the Dems in the Senate need to use all the levers that Repubs used when they had 51 votes under Bush to get huge changes through. And yes, despite all the whining, that means using Reconciliation.

In either one of these scenarios, only 50 senators plus the VP are needed to pass legislation and no compromises with Blue Dogs or Repubs need to be made.

This is it for the Dems and the Progressive agenda. With the huge majorities they still have and a brilliant, fair minded president, if there is a possibility of the Democratic Party delivering for the American People in a big and sustained way, it will begin now. If not, the Dems will lose the enthusiasm and faith of their members for a long time to come. It will be hard to believe again in change being possible with the Dems if they can’t manage it now.

Word is that Obama’s SOTU Address will reflect more of a pivot towards being a bold leader. I’m pleased to hear that.

Hope and Change 2010. Be it and be it strongly, Mr. President and hold The Senate’s feet to the fire, I think the tables will quickly turn if you do.