« Feed The Activists! | Main | Blog Lunch To Go »
Think Small
[Editor's Note: The DCP fundraiser for the fund to feed the activists is continuing. Please check here for more details and to add your support.]
Last week in this space, Karen Bradley and Dick Bell presented a shrewd analysis of the current state of fluidity in American politics. The essay they wrote for the DCP blog included a stirring call to arms, one that was picked up and echoed elsewhere in the political blogosphere as well. (If you didn't read their 'Constitutional Crisis' essay the first time around, go read it now. And if you did read it before, go back and re-read it again. It's that good.)
As Karen and Dick wrote in that piece, "Our energy has to go into organizations, be they existing organizations, or brand-new ones that we found, to push Bush and his congressional support out of power as soon as possible. These are opportunities and they abound ... We each need to contribute, in the largest sense of that word. It could be a simple as forwarding an email that you know has truth. It could be as complicated as building an online community for a cause or a candidate. It probably needs to be 'all of the above' ... We each must build our own capacity for taking action, making sure the infrastructure is in place, contributing to the hands reaching out for us, and joining them."
And those certainly are laudable goals. But it's easy to get overwhelmed by the sheer number of options available to us these days, especially with the Internet as a medium of intellectual and emotional exchange. And it's easy to think that by being ardent online activists, we're doing everything we can to make change happen in the real world.
But the world of online political activism is still only a small corner of the real world of politics. The great majority of voters and potential voters in this country don't get their guidance from blogs or online news feeds. They don't sign online petitions or donate money to a PAC with a quick click of a mouse. They don't live in large cities like Washington or Seattle or New York where organizers can bring together huge crowds by sending out email or cell-phone text messages to the faithful.
So while we need to make full use of the tools available to us in these high-tech times, it's also important to remember that there's still no substitute for boots on the ground. All politics is local, and all politics is personal. To influence policy, you have to influence people first. Voters' minds don't get changed by communiqués from the massed media; they get changed in the course of simple, direct, one-on-one conversations with friends and neighbors.
The GOP understands this, and they made it their business to think small when they first started trying to regain their lost political ground back in the '60's and '70's. They realized that people may read about senators and representatives, but they're much more directly influenced by mayors and aldermen and local assemblymen. They knew that building a vast right-wing conspiracy could only happen one voter at a time. They got out there in the town halls and the rural co-ops and the small churches, and they pressed the flesh and argued their points until they gradually amassed a majority following that allowed them to gain control of every facet of the national government. They made it happen from the ground up, not from the top down.
To take the reins of power back from those who have them wrapped in a stranglehold around the neck of liberty, we need to take a page from their playbook first. So as we go about our own citizen-activist activities, we need to keep in mind what the other side already knows: yes, we need to see the big picture; and yes, we need to pursue the big ideas, and make the big gestures, and execute the big strategies at every opportunity. But…
Even as we go and do those big things, we also have to keep our focus on the little things. We have to keep our eyes on what's happening right in front of us, and on who's standing right next to us, and on when and where our own little actions can speak much louder than others’ large words.
Policies may get hammered out in high-level meetings. But in the real world, decisions are made by those who show up. And if we're going to influence enough of those decisions to effect the crucial changes that will put our country back on track, we have to always remember:
Think Small.
As Karen and Dick summed it up in their call to action last week: "We don't have to say yes to everything asked, but saying no brings the effort to a halt. Offer something back -- a suggestion, a small check, a networking moment, a hug of encouragement.
"Think of it as being a good citizen."
A provocative piece - interestingly, I read it right before reading the lead entry on this site, and right after reading that a fundamentalist church on the East-side where Microsoft is plans to lead a boycott against Microsoft if they don't help defeat a fair housing/employment bill.
Worth reading, at:
http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/0604/geov-parrish.html
Title: The Futility of Boycotts
Excerpt:
Political activists of all stripes are often eager to find a handle with which to influence the perceived sociopathic actions of big corporations. The problem is that when you target a company as large as Microsoft or Boeing—both of which have earnings greater than most of the world's countries—even if their retail products can be boycotted easily, it's virtually impossible to imagine a circumstance in which enough people join the boycott to cause a perceptible drop in earnings. Even then, unless participants tell the company what they're doing (which most don't), sales fluctuations can and usually are attributed to a thousand other factors first.
That global Coke boycott? A regional distributor putting six-packs on sale for a holiday weekend has a hundred times the impact.
Boycotts are almost always a waste of time. So, alas, are minority shareholder resolutions. Corporations are not democratic institutions, and by definition, they do not have a social conscience. They exist solely to make money for their owners or shareholders, and they spend far more polishing their image than any boycott campaign does tarnishing it.
It's fine and well to shun a product or company because of dislike for the company's policies. People should use moral yardsticks when deciding whom to give money to. But don't expect to influence the company's behavior.
This is why the growing economic and political power of big global corporations is so dangerous. With government, there's not much accountability, but at least there's a little. By contrast, the number of times big companies have been held accountable by ordinary consumers for social policies can be counted on two hands. And even then, after the campaign closes up shop, the behavior often resumes. Ask the United Farm Workers.
This is why, noxious as it is, for left, right, or center the only institution powerful enough to consistently influence corporate behavior is government. That's one of the reasons corporations work so hard to influence governments.
What can ordinary consumers do? Buy local. Get involved in the political process. Create alternative institutions. By all means, use your hard-earned money to patronize big companies only when you want to support them. It'll make you feel better.
But usually, they won't feel a thing.
--- On a personal level, I WILL buy my 15th tank of Citgo (from Venezuela), I do not plan to start watching television again, & I will not be buying fast food. The personal is political, and it may not make a direct difference that I can track or trace, but over time it will make a difference & it adds up, especially if there are more people making conscious choices instead of grabbing the quickest and easiest choice.
This is an old book now, from the early days of the environmental movement, but one of the most useful you will ever read. Seek it out. The person who gave it to me taught me that "Small is beautiful" and to "think globally, act locally."
He attended a dinner where people were randomly assigned to nations of the world and then fed at the banquet according to the GNP of said nation. He got a tiny bowl of rice, while he watched those at "developed countries" tables eat lavishly.
Small Is Beautiful: Economics as If People Mattered, by E. F. Schumacher
Schumacher was born in Germany, lived in English and though he was an economist, he critiqued the system from within. (Like Paul Krugman or Robert Reich?!!)
He then proposed alternatives AND he was a Buddhist and gardener and admirer of Ghandi.
He favored decentralization. Units were small. He would have been an advocate of food co-ops, city shared gardens, small publishers - local production for local use.
This is radical in a time of globalization.
He was willing to sacrifice "growth," something that is unthinkable today! He valued quality of life and work as fulfillment.
Sources and Resources:
Schumacher, E. F. Small Is Beautiful: Economics As If People Mattered. New York: Harper and Row, 1973.
E. F. Schumacher Society http://www.smallisbeautiful.org
http://schumachersociety.org
Intermediate Technology Development Group http://www.itdg.org/
For those who like to do online polls, here's one from aol.
http://articles.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20060123102809990002&ncid=NWS00010000000001
President Bush and other officials Monday intensified their defense of a domestic surveillance program that supporters say protects against terrorism and critics say threatens civil liberties. "These are not phone calls within the United States," Bush said. "This is a phone call of an al Qaeda, known al Qaeda suspect, making a phone call into the United States." And a former intelligence chief said had the program been in place before September 11, 2001, he believed it would have identified some of the 9/11 hijackers.
www.cnn.com
... and if we had a competent POTUS in place who knew how to respond to a PDB...
Oh, never mind.
I commend Rick for the level-headedness and common sense of this post, and agree. We need to work with our family and friends, our neighborhors, neighborhoods, school districts.
Imagine your energy as a ripple in a pool that sends out waves.
Thank you Rick, for keeping it in perspective.
How is this for irony? Al Jazeera reports this while no American media does. I bet ya that Karen doesn't even know yet...
http://tinyurl.com/752n6
Bush Administration Seeks to Squelch State of the Union Protest at Capitol on January 31
January 22, 2006
World Can't Wait
Capitol Hill Office: 511 ‘C’ St. NE Washington DC 20002, Stanton Square
DC PRESS CONTACT: Don Spark, 202-536-4310, donspark@worldcantwait.org
Press Conference:
Monday, January 23, 9:30 a.m.
National Press Club, Edward R. Murrow Room
529 14th Street, NW Washington DC
The Bush administration has expanded the special security zone around the Capitol, effectively denying a meaningful public space for a protest called by World Can’t Wait-Drive Out the Bush Regime during the State of the Union address on January 31, 2006. This action, one of many held simultaneously that night at 8pm EST in cities and towns across the country, calls for symbolically “drowning out Bush’s lies” and demands “BUSH STEP DOWN.”
At a meeting on January 10 with the National Park Service Police, Capitol Police, and National Parks Department, the World Can’t Wait was offered the area surrounding the Capitol Reflecting Pool for the January 31st gathering. This was accepted by World Can’t Wait. However, on January 19, the organization received word that this area had been reclassified as part of a “secure perimeter” for that day.
In addition, the grass areas of the National Mall have been closed for “turf renovation” up to 7th Street. Thus, the proposed demonstration area is restricted to the “gravel and concrete walkways of the national Mall between 3rd and 4th Streets.”
Travis Morales of World Can’t Wait—Drive Out the Bush Regime responded: “This so-called permit would have the effect of dispersing and disrupting this First Amendment protest by preventing a large, cohesive gathering anywhere near the Capitol. We’d have to go a mile away to 7th Street to even have a stage. We’re mobilizing people to challenge this outrageous prohibition, and we’re pursuing legal action.”
The right of the people peacably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances?
Oh I forgot, it's only backward countries like Iraq where we have to enforce a constitution.
http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.asp?feed=OBR&Date=20060122&ID=5435694
Rupert Murdoch on Sunday said News Corp. needed to do more to take advantage of strong growth in global broadband and Internet use and defended the media conglomerate's controversial anti-takeover provision.
Read this article: it explains how the free flow of information on the Internet could be squelched out by the end of the decade. This is serious. Take a few minutes and give this a read. Then think about how to make your voice heard.
-- Josh Marshall http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007503.php
Posted by: Veritas at January 23, 2006 07:58 PM
They're making their own constitution.
That's like how they made their own voting machines too.
On a day Bush speaks of a "Noble Cause," we also learn that Halliburton poisoned troops and that legislation is pending to test pesicides on humans. In what way is this the "Culture of Life" we were told about during his campaign?
Democrats Denounce Bush's Human Pesticide Testing Plan
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/012306Q.shtml
Today Senator Barbara Boxer, Rep. Henry A. Waxman, and Rep. Hilda L. Solis criticized a Bush Administration plan to promote pesticide experimentation upon humans. The plan, contained in a final draft rule, was leaked to the legislators by a concerned Administration official who requested that the original copy of the plan not be duplicated in its entirety and widely distributed out of concern for anonymity.
The yella belly chickenhawk cowards.
Posted by: sparrow at January 23, 2006 07:48 PM
And, not only are they cowards, they must really be afraid of the effect of the publicity of this demonstration. Oh, Goody!!!
And, of course, Yahoo already caved to the Feds demands for data on web searches.
Democrats Denounce Bush's Human Pesticide Testing Plan
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/012306Q.shtml
Today Senator Barbara Boxer, Rep. Henry A. Waxman, and Rep. Hilda L. Solis criticized a Bush Administration plan to promote pesticide experimentation upon humans. The plan, contained in a final draft rule, was leaked to the legislators by a concerned Administration official who requested that the original copy of the plan not be duplicated in its entirety and widely distributed out of concern for anonymity.
I wish I could post this whole article. Please, please read it - take a blood pressure pill or a tranquilizer first - it's awful!!!!!
Not since I used to read about Nazi concentration camps in WWII have I heard of anything so utterly and completely inhumane and despicable!!!!! This just PROVES that The Cretin and his Criminal Cabal do not care one whit about vulnerable people, children in particular, poor people, and others who would be directly affected by something that is evil beyond my comprehension!!! Someone sent me info on this stuff quite some time ago where a pesticide/chemical company promised poor parents a movie camera and something like $900 to obtain permission to let chemical companies test chemicals on their children. A few weeks later I saw some blurb that Congress voted against it... and now it's back!!! I can barely believe what I'm reading! If Congress does not give The Cretin what he wants (for his corporate cronies in the chemical business), I'm sure he would do a secret executive order or sign one of those exemptions (like he did about the torture when he "approved" the McCain ban on torture written into law).
If the Bu$hCo administration stoops this low, no one (without exception!) can say we can't compare Bu$h to Hitler or to Saddam Hussein when he was testing chemicals on his own people for sheer evilness....!!!!! How could this kind of bill even get to the point of being voted on in Congress?!?!?!?!? Who has a mind this evil it could even be written as a legal permission?!?!?!? In the US of A, no less, whose pResident hypocritically touts a "moral high ground" when it comes to this kind of horror and to and the horror of torture...!!! Anyone who does pesticide and/or chemical experiments on children, pregnant women, vulnerable adults, anyone else, or on animals, deserves to be thrown in prison!!!!!!!!!
Doesn't ANYONE in The Cretin's administration have a conscience?!?!?!?!? Is there no set of ethical or moral rules or laws that they will not break in their mad pursuit of money and power?!?!?
Levee problems predicted, documents show
Homeland Security was warned New Orleans could be flooded for months
WASHINGTON - The Homeland Security Department was warned a day before Hurricane Katrina hit that the storm’s surge could breach levees and leave New Orleans flooded for weeks or months, documents released Monday show.
An Aug. 28 report by the department’s National Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center concluded that a Category 4 or 5 hurricane would cause severe damage in the city, including power outages and a direct economic hit of up to $10 billion for the first week.
“Overall, the impacts described herein are conservative,” stated the report, which was sent to Homeland Security’s office for infrastructure protection.
“Any storm rated Category 4 or greater ... will likely lead to severe flooding and/or levee breaching, leaving the New Orleans metro area submerged for weeks or months,” said the report, which was released by a Senate panel examining the government’s breakdown in responding to Katrina.
The documents are the latest indication that the federal government knew beforehand of the catastrophic damage that a storm of Katrina’s magnitude could cause.
-snip-
Shortly after the disaster, President Bush said, “I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees.” He later clarified his remarks, saying his comment was meant to suggest that there had been a false sense of relief that the levees had held when the storm passed, only to break a few hours later.
more... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10995817/
Bush tells abortion foes, 'We will prevail'
33 years after Roe v. Wade ruling, abortion debate continues
Monday, January 23, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) -- President Bush told abortion opponents Monday that they are pursuing "a noble cause" and making a real difference in the campaign to recruit more Americans to stand on their side.
"We're working to persuade more of our fellow Americans of the rightness of our cause," the president told abortion foes gathered at the foot of Capitol Hill on a chilly, rainy day. He spoke by telephone from Manhattan, Kansas, where he was to give a speech.
"This is a cause that appeals to the conscience of our citizens and is rooted in America's deepest principle," the president said. "And history tells us that with such a cause we will prevail."
-snip-
"You believe, as I do, that every human life has value, that the strong have a duty to protect the weak, and that the self-evident truths of the Declaration of Independence apply to everyone, not just to those considered healthy or wanted or convenient," Bush told the abortion foes.
"These principles call us to defend the sick and the dying, persons with disabilities and birth defects, all who are weak and vulnerable, especially unborn children," the president said
more... http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/01/23/abortion.anniversary.ap/index.html?section=cnn_us
Photograph shows Bush meeting now-Governor of Marianas Islands, who helped Abramoff get millions
John Byrne and Ron Brynaert
Published: January 23, 2006
On the heels of a Time Magazine article revealing the existence of photographs of President George W. Bush with fallen conservative superlobbyist Jack Abramoff, RAW STORY has found another photograph of Bush with a leading Abramoff client.
The President appears in a snapshot with Beningo Repeki Fitial, then-Speaker of the House for the Northern Marianas Islands. Fitial is vice president of Tan Holdings – the family conglomerate which owns numerous clothing factories on the islands that were a routine stop for Abramoff-flown lawmakers. Tan Holdings was one of the firms which made up the Saipan Garment Manufacturers’ Association, an Abramoff client.
He was also, incidentally, chairman of the Bush for President Committee for the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
The photograph appears to have been taken the same day Bush met Raul Garza Sr., the former chairman of the Texas Kickapoo tribe who Time says was photographed with Bush. Abramoff, once the largest lobbyist in Washington, pled guilty to bribery charges earlier this month and his work has drawn new scrutiny to D.C.'s $4 billion lobbying business.
The White House could not be immediately reached for comment. When speaking to Time, a spokesman said, “The President stopped by a meeting with 21 state legislators and two tribal leaders. Available records show that Mr. Abramoff was not in attendance."
The White House omitted Fitial’s attendance.
Fitial was photographed at a May 9, 2001 event hosted by Americans for Tax Reform, a conservative anti-tax group led by longtime Abramoff friend and conservative heavyweight Grover Norquist, and the photograph appeared in a circular produced by the group. Norquist led Abramoff’s successful campaign to become chairman of the national College Republicans in the 1980s.
more... http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Photograph_shows_Bush_meeting_nowGovernor_of_0123.html
Posted by: monkey at January 23, 2006 09:48 PM
Proof of why he appointed Roberts and Scalito!
AND more proof of why those silly fear tactics are used.
Impeachment hearings: The White House prepares for the worst
The Bush administration is bracing for impeachment hearings in Congress.
"A coalition in Congress is being formed to support impeachment," an administration source said.
Sources said a prelude to the impeachment process could begin with hearings by the Senate Judiciary Committee in February. They said the hearings would focus on the secret electronic surveillance program and whether Mr. Bush violated the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
Administration sources said the charges are expected to include false reports to Congress as well as Mr. Bush's authorization of the National Security Agency to engage in electronic surveillance inside the United States without a court warrant. This included the monitoring of overseas telephone calls and e-mail traffic to and from people living in the United States without requisite permission from a secret court.
Sources said the probe to determine whether the president violated the law will include Republicans, but that they may not be aware they could be helping to lay the groundwork for a Democratic impeachment campaign against Mr. Bush
http://www.insightmag.com/Media/MediaManager/impeachment.htm
Too funny! And this is a REAL article!
CARACAS, Venezuela - Venezuela's vice president derided Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record) for suggesting that "wackos" run the South American country, saying Monday that the United States should focus on its own problems
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060124/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/venezuela_mccain
I had heard of Joni Mitchell, but not Sonia Kitchell. Someone took me to see this singer not even old enough to drink, but tomorrow night she will be at Carnegie Hall.
Anyway, I was seated at a table with mostly people I had never met in my life and by the end of the night we were all politically sympatico, united to impeach!!! We must keep up steady, unrelenting pressure until the deed is done!
& I don't like to hear about Bush saying he cares about the disabled. My sister is a schizophrenic and I can tell you alot about his real policies.
Suffice to say that Grover Norquist type economics result in more meth addicts, which leads to more prisoners, which means crowded prisons, which overflow to encroach on the mental hospital. Under Reagan's "deinstitutional" programs, we ended up with more schizophrenic homeless. I do not trust one thing Bush says about the vulnerable.
Posted by: monkey at January 23, 2006 09:48 PM
Really scarey isn't it, that everything he says he means just the opposite? Except, maybe regarding abortion.
Black is white, up is down, Orwelian speak is the direct opposite of what they say.
Sources said the probe to determine whether the president violated the law will include Republicans, but that they may not be aware they could be helping to lay the groundwork for a Democratic impeachment campaign against Mr. Bush
http://www.insightmag.com/Media/MediaManager/impeachment.htm
Posted by: sparrow at January 23, 2006 11:10 PM
Do we dare hope?
In his remarks, Bush said that allowing the NSA to monitor the international phone calls and e-mails of Americans with suspected ties to terrorists can hardly be considered "domestic spying."
"It's what I would call a terrorist surveillance program," Bush said at Kansas State. "If they're making a phone call in the United States, it seems like to me we want to know why."
He said he "had all kinds of lawyers review the process" to ensure it didn't violate civil liberties or the law.
And he insisted that a recent Supreme Court decision backs his contention that he had the authority to order the program through a resolution Congress passed after the 2001 terrorist attacks that lets him use force in the anti-terror fight.
"I'm not a lawyer, but I can tell you what it means: It means Congress gave me the authority to use necessary force to protect the American people, but it didn't prescribe the tactics," Bush said.
Bush and Hayden sought to paint the program as vital to national security. "Had this program been in effect prior to 9/11, it is my professional judgment that we would have detected some of the al-Qaida operatives in the United States," Hayden said.
http://tinyurl.com/8c74c
Supreme Ethics Problem
Jan. 23, 2006 — At the historic swearing-in of John Roberts as the 17th chief justice of the United States last September, every member of the Supreme Court, except Antonin Scalia, was in attendance. ABC News has learned that Scalia had instead was on the tennis court at one of the country's top resorts, the Ritz-Carlton hotel in Bachelor Gulch, Colo., during a trip to a legal seminar sponsored by the Federalist Society.
Not only did Scalia's absence appear to be a snub of the new chief justice, but according to some legal ethics experts, it also raised questions about the propriety of what critics call judicial junkets.
"It's unfortunate of course that what kept him from the swearing in was an activity that is itself of dubious ethical propriety," said Stephen Gillers, a New York University law professor, who is a recognized scholar on legal ethics.
Scalia Mum
Justice Scalia spent two nights at the luxury resort lecturing at the legal seminar where ABC News also found him on the tennis court, heading out for a fly-fishing expedition, and socializing with members of the Federalist Society, the conservative activist group that paid for the expenses of his trip.
At a press conference, almost two weeks later, Scalia was not inclined to tell reporters his whereabouts during Roberts' swearing in.
"I was out of town with a commitment that I could not break, and that's what the Public Information Office told you," he said.
"[It] doesn't matter what it was. It was a commitment that I couldn't break," Scalia continued when questioned further.
According to the event's invitation, obtained by ABC News, the Federalist Society promised members who attended the seminar an exclusive and "rare opportunity to spend time, both socially and intellectually" with Scalia.
"I think Justice Scalia should not have gone on that trip for several reasons," Gillers commented. "They are a group with a decided political-slash-judicial profile."
One night at the resort, Justice Scalia attended a cocktail reception, sponsored in part by the same lobbying and law firm where convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff once worked.
"You know a lot of people would be embarrassed at that. I don't think Antonin Scalia will be embarrassed," Gillers continued.
more... http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/Investigation/story?id=1534260
College Sophomore Stumps President Bush
Bush was stumped during the Q&A session of his speech today by a sophomore at Kansas State:
Q: My name is Tiffany Cooper. I’m a sophomore here at Kansas State and I was just wanting to get your comments about education. Recently 12.7 billion dollars was cut from education. I was just wondering how is that supposed to help our futures?
[snip]
Bush: Actually, I think what we did was reform the student loan program. We are not cutting money out of it.
Tiffany clearly confused Bush. Not only did he have to turn to his aide for advice, but he confused truthiness with the truth. The facts:
Student Loans: On Dec. 21, 2005, the Senate passed $12.7 billion in cuts to education programs — “the largest cut in student college loan programs in history.” Vice President Cheney cast the deciding vote in favor of the cuts. The bill also fixed the interest rate on student loans at 6.8 percent, “even if commercial rates are lower.” Despite Bush’s claims, students will be left off the program.
Pell Grants: Pell Grants have been frozen or cut since 2002; they are now stuck at a maximum of $4,050. In his 2000 election campaign, President Bush promised to increase the maximum Pell Grant amount to $5,100. “From 2004 to 2005, 24,000 students lost their Pell grants, according to a report pre-pared by the Congressional Research Service. This was the first drop in the number of students receiving the grants in several years; the number had been growing steadily since 1999.”
Full transcript below:
Q: My name is Tiffany Cooper. I’m a sophomore here at Kansas State and I was just wanting to get your comments about education. Recently 12.7 billion dollars was cut from education. I was just wondering how is that supposed to help our futures?
Bush: Education budget was cut — say it again. What was cut?
Q: 12.7 billion dollars was cut from education. I’m wanting to know how is that supposed to help our futures?
Bush: At the federal level?
Q: Yes.
Bush: I don’t think we’ve actually — for higher education? Student loans?
Q: Yes, student loans.
Bush: Actually, I think what we did was reform the student loan program. We are not cutting money out of it. In other words, people aren’t going to be cut off the program. We’re just making sure it works better as part of the reconciliation package I think she’s talking about? Yeah — It is a form of the program to make sure it functions better. In other words, we’re not taking people off student loans. We’re saving money in the student loan program because it’s inefficient. So I think the thing to look at is whether or not there will be fewer people getting student loans. I don’t think so.
Secondly, on Pell Grants, we are actually expanding the number of Pell grants through our budget. Great question. The key on education is to make sure that we stay focused on how do we stay competitive into the 21st century, and I plan on doing some talking about math and science and engineering programs so that people who graduate out of college will have the skills necessary to compete in this competitive world. But I think i’m right on this. I will check when I get back to Washington, but thank you for your question.
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/23/sophomore-stumps-bush/
(idiot)
Oh boy, what a dilemma for American Conservatives... ya know, since they hate everything French.
Canadians choose conservative
(CNN) -- Canadians elected Conservative Party leader Stephen Harper as their next prime minister Monday, but denied him the outright majority he would need to take any strong change in direction.
Buoyed by a political resurrection in French-speaking Quebec, the Conservatives won the most seats in the 308-seat House of Commons.
However, as the votes were being counted the Conservatives were hovering at around 125 seats, well short of the 155 they needed for a majority, while the scandal-plagued Liberals were winning around 100 seats, down from the 133 they held going into the vote.
The Conservatives were taking about 36 percent of the vote nationwide, compared to 30 percent for the Liberals, 17 percent for the left-wing New Democrats and 10 percent for the Quebec-separatist Bloc Quebecois, which only runs candidates in the province.
more... http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/01/24/canada.election/index.html
There's an excellent review of the coverage of the NSA press conference with Gen. Hayden, specifically focusing on omissions and differences in the coverage and then highlighting specific exchanges from the transcript and earlier statements by Gen. Hayden from 2000 and 2002.
The diarist does mention that Travis Morales of WCW, a peace activist, got to ask a question that Gen Hayden pointedly refused to answer.
from the diary:
Travis Morales, a peace activist, then asks a question:
QUESTION: No, I asked, are you targeting us and people who politically oppose the Bush government, the Bush administration? Not a fishing net, but are you targeting specifically political opponents of the Bush administration? Because as Vice President Gore recently said, "It is much worse than people realize."
Hayden refuses to answer that. Morales is talking about whether the NSA is targeting World Can't Wait, a very vocal anti-Bush peace group. I'll have to take Hayden's silence (and numerous media reports) to mean that indeed the NSA and gov't is spying on peace groups.
----
Read the entire thing here... it's liberally sprinkled with embedded links back to prior sources...
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/1/24/43623/1366
"NSA cannot, under the FISA statute, put someone on coverage and go ahead and play for 72 hours while it gets a note saying it's OK," he said. "The attorney general approves the emergency FISA coverage, and the attorney general's standard is a body of evidence equal to that which we would present to the court."
- Air Force Gen. Michael Hayden, 01/23/06
Does this douchebag not know that they can get approval from FISA afterwards?
The President has justified these warrantless wiretaps by suggesting that--for reasons of expediency--they were absolutely necessary to track imminent threats. Unfortunately, that logic is not sufficiently specific enough to justify such a major expansion of executive power. Indeed, the principle purpose behind the establishment of a special FISA court in 1978 was to remedy the stunning abuse of intelligence agencies by the office of the President. The secret court was conceived in order to help better negotiate that very same "tricky balance" -- ensuring that both national security and individual rights were being protected.
To secure a FISA-approved wiretap, the government must only show "probable cause" exists that the sought-after target is working on behalf of a foreign power and has engaged in activities that "may" abrogate U.S. law. Over the space of 26 years, the FISA court has approved close to 20,000 government applications and has rejected or deferred a mere six. FISA applications can be submitted and approved in a matter of only hours (or minutes) so that foreign agents and terrorists are prevented from slipping through gaping legal loopholes. In extraordinary circumstances, court approval can be obtained even days after the wiretap has already been put in place.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10284912/
(so bite me, Gen. Hayden)
NYT editorial RE: Iran and how this regime has blown any good relations that had been established with them... Is there a country on this planet that we haven't p*ssed off?
The Gulf Between Us
AS the United States and its European partners consider their next steps to contain the Iranian nuclear threat, let's recall how poorly the Bush administration has handled this issue. During its five years in office, the administration has turned away from every opportunity to put relations with Iran on a more positive trajectory. Three examples stand out.
Read the rest here ==>
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/24/opinion/24leverett.html?_r=1&th&emc=th
Posted by: monkey at January 24, 2006 03:41 AM
We're a family suffering this college stress and I sent it to all the fundies in my family who will in one year be facing the same problems. Will they learn then what they vote for and support?
(Or will they actually lose their job and home and get to qualify for those nice little 'reforms'.)
New Five Minutes actions on front page today--please help!
On Travis and the press conference--he is leaving here now to go to the meeting with the Park Police about the permit for Jan. 31, which they are f***ing with. They are also filing a lawsuit this morning over it.
The entire notion of first amendment vs. fourth amendment rights needs exploration, if anyone wants to take a crack at it. It seems to me the administration is conflating ideas and intents in order to obfuscate. Free speech and search and seizure issues are part of a Bill of Rights that has clear overall intention. This is supposed to be the government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Hayden et al are using smoke and mirrors to confuse the people.
As for the thread header--go Rick! EF Schumacher was an early inspiration to both Dick and me. We have been to Schumacher College in Devon, ENgland, surely one of the loveliest spots, where the conversation about how to preserve the planet itself and its inhabitants continues.
Schumacher courses listed here:
http://www.schumachercollege.org.uk/ShortCourses/Diary.html
Obfuscate - that's what they do - that's the right word! They do it all the time!!
In Seattle, since WTO '99, they've started to relegate us to a pier where no one can see us & press less likely to cover.
When activists were at the Federal Building right before the war, someone painted a sign that said, "Tieneman Square .. Are We Next?"
Posted on Tue, Jan. 24, 2006
Bush may ask Congress to OK domestic spyingBy Stewart M. PowellHEARST NEWSPAPERSWASHINGTON - President Bush and the nation's No. 2 intelligence official on Monday defended "targeted" post-9/11 domestic spying without court approval, amid hints that the White House may ask Congress for a green light to continue the wiretaps.
Bush said he had constitutional and congressional authority to order the National Security Agency to carry out secret surveillance on two-way international communications between individuals in the U.S., including American citizens, and suspected al-Qaida operatives overseas.
http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/local/states/california/13698129.htm
According to the BBC, EU knew about torture flights.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/1/24/91638/4287
This frontpage post at dailykos by georgia10 has come to mind a couple of times since I read it yesterday and I think it has some very important information for us on just how badly the Bush administration has screwed up in managing Iraq, Iran, Syria...
In essence, Iraq and Iran are in the middle of forging much closer ties and Syria may be in there too and the middle east is going to look far different than the cradle of American-style democracy that W has been promising us.
She's included lots of embedded links and citations to support and inform us.
Please bookmark this if you don't have time to read it now...
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/1/23/104640/751
Does this douchebag not know that they can get approval from FISA afterwards?
Posted by: monkey at January 24, 2006 08:23 AM
Yes, they do know; but what they're after is blanket approval of anything they want to do, regardless of the legalities involved (like the Nazis did; there's precedent) - under the excuse that they're trying to save us from ourselves, it seems. It only takes minutes to get approval, too (on the phone, no less, with the proper signatures to be obtained within a day or two on the appropriate papers), not hours or days of waiting for approval (and only four or five have ever been turned down, while thousands have been approved). Truly, it's not a big deal; the neoCons are just making a huge production out of it (it makes the Dems look like they don't want to protect people from themselves, and it makes Dems look unpatriotic, like Dems don't want to protect people from porn or terrorists that they've now created) - it's a distraction from the other stuff with Abramoff, Fitzgerald's grand jury, the Senate debate about Alito, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera....
They're less than douche bags. At least douche bags are useful....
Posted by: sparrow at January 24, 2006 09:49 AM
I was watching BBC (interpreter's voice) when they had to cut off for time constraints. I was hoping to hear the complete translation.... Sounded interesting, and the person speaking (?French, I think; his voice was sort of muted) sounded pissed about it all.
I empathized. I'm pissed, too, about this torture stuff. The Cretin once again (sound byte on some morning show today) told that college audience 'we don't torture.' What a mountain of crap!!!!! I bet he repeats that LIE in the SOTU speech...! Ugh! LIES, LIES, LIES.....
Totally OT, but historically relevant to the past five years in particular. On a genealogy web site with a long list of old news blurbs from different people I found this (no one named is related to me):
http://www.rootsweb.com/~nyschoha/newsgleanings.html
Gettysburg Compiler (Gettysburg, PA) – December 18, 1854
Political Preaching
The Albany Atlas bitterly attacks the Rev. Washington Van Zandt, “who preached Clark and Raymond instead of Christ crucified, in the pulpit, the day before the election.”
But, adds the editor, he is not so bad “as the preacher who traversed Schoharie county, proclaiming that Gov. Seymour was a papist, and had one of his daughters in a nunnery.” The story told from the pulpits of Madison county that Gov. S. kept a grocery up stairs in his mansion, required the capacious maws of three of the cloth to give utterance to.
Whereupon says the editor:
“Our advice is, that when such men rise in the pulpit, and so far destroy its sacredness as to denounce by name such men as Gov. Seymour and other leading democrats in the congregation should rise in their seats, and, with all the respect due to the place, contradict the falsehood.
“There is no other way than this: If the church is to be turned into a political meeting room, either let the congregation have notice, so as to stay away, or let them have their full right of debate and discussion, as well as the stipendiaries of party, who throw out these political challenges from the pulpit.”
The NYTimes OpEd that madame defarge referred to has some excellent analysis and suggestions further in. The author points out some statements and suggestions made by the Saudis this last week which could be used to diplomatically move us away from saber-rattling.
----
Last week, the Saudi foreign minister, Saud al-Faisal, suggested a way out of this impasse - one that might also help address other pressing challenges in the Persian Gulf. The Saudi prince noted that if Iranian nuclear weapons were deployed against Israel, they would kill Palestinians, and if they missed Israel, they would hit Arab countries. And so he urged Iran "to accept the position that we have taken to make the Gulf, as part of the Middle East, nuclear free and free of weapons of mass destruction."
While Prince Saud blamed Israel for starting a nuclear arms race in the Middle East, his implication that a nuclear-weapons-free Gulf might precede a regionwide nuclear-weapons-free zone is a nuanced departure from longstanding Arab insistence that regional arms control cannot begin without Israel's denuclearization. The United States and its partners should build on this idea and support the creation of a Gulf Security Council that would include Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and the other Arab states in the Gulf, as well as the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council.
The Gulf Security Council would not replace American alliances with traditional security partners, but it would operate alongside them, much as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe has operated alongside NATO. The council would provide a framework under which the United States could guarantee that it would not use force to change Iran's borders or form of government, provided that Iran committed itself to regionally defined and monitored norms for nonproliferation (including a nuclear weapons ban), counterterrorism and human rights. States concerned about Iran's nuclear activities would then have new leverage to ensure Iranian compliance with these commitments. Additionally, pressing Iran to abide by standards defined and administered multilaterally might be more acceptable to China and Russia than pushing Iran to accept an American reinterpretation of its nonproliferation obligations.
Such a framework would leapfrog over proposals for establishing a "contact group" of Iraq's neighbors and offer all parts of the Iranian political spectrum - even the hard-liners around Mr. Ahmadinejad - something they want: recognition of Iran's leading regional role. Besides rejuvenating efforts to contain the Iranian nuclear threat, it could provide essential support for stabilization in Iraq, as the inclusion of Iran and Saudi Arabia would bring together the two states that could be most useful in brokering compromises between Shiite and Sunni communities there.
A diplomatic resolution of the Iranian nuclear problem is still within reach. But successful diplomacy will require a bold new vision. The next time the five permanent members of the Security Council convene to discuss Iran, perhaps they should meet in Riyadh rather than London.
----
The author is Flynt Leverett, who was a senior director for Mid East relations at the National Security Council (NSC) which he left in 2003 and now works for the Brookings Institute.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/24/opinion/24leverett.html?_r=2
-------
Jerome a Paris has an excellent diary on this same topic today with excerpts from several UK and French sources that make some excellent points....
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/1/24/83619/2896#34
Today is the 365th day / 1 year anniversary of a diary that has appeared daily at dailykos called:
Iraq War Grief Daily Witness (photos) Day 365
by dailykos poster RubDMC
It is what you think. A daily posting of photos from Iraq and sometimes poems and other thoughts. Please go thank him/her for the faithful posting and know that you can check RubDMC's diary every day for the latest posting.
http://rubdmc.dailykos.com/
Kinda hard to believe that the rebuilding effort is not going well-isn't it?
Iraq Rebuilding Badly Hobbled, U.S. Report Finds
The first official history of the $25 billion American reconstruction effort in Iraq depicts a program hobbled from the outset by gross understaffing, a lack of technical expertise, bureaucratic infighting, secrecy and constantly increasing security costs, according to a preliminary draft.
SNIP
(and now for my favorite quote):
"It's incomplete," said a spokesman for the inspector general's office, Jim Mitchell. "It could change significantly before it is finally published."
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/24/international/middleeast/24reconstruct.html?_r=1&th&emc=th
Marjorie Cohn | Bush on Trial for Crimes against Humanity
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/012406Z.shtml
The International Commission of Inquiry on Crimes against Humanity Committed by the Bush Administration (http://www.bushcommission.org) convened last weekend in New York City's Riverside Church. In the tradition of the Russell tribunal, the panel of judges at the commission of inquiry heard evidence of George W. Bush's war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantánamo Bay, and elsewhere.
Posted by: NonnyO at January 24, 2006 10:22 AM
Actually Nonny, I know they know it too... and I know that what they are doing is just creating soundbytes for the millions of mindless drones to walk around and repeat.
Because to an idiot, what he's saying makes sense.
Sparrow,
Yes we know.
Torture flights in headlines all over Europe.
One example with translation, on bottom left.
http://permanent.nouvelobs.com/etranger/20060124.REU12164.html?1504
Hey All:
Just wanted to pass on to NonnyO that the link she posted yesterday:
"Robert Freeman | Should the President be King? Reflections from the Deep Origins of America
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0121-22.htm
"GREAT historical perspective.... (IMHO - but then historical perspective is something I like....)
"Posted by: NonnyO at January 23, 2006 02:22 PM"
does indeed give a great historical perspective on what this is all about, to my mind. Me, I'm used to it. I've lived under all kinds of regimes. But all that time, I thought to myself, but, America is different. It was a great dream. I hope it will be a great dream for my daughter.
Chuck in Doha
Senator Reid is currently giving a speech at the Center for American Progress that comes out swinging. The site says to check back later for video here...
http://www.americanprogressaction.org/site/pp.asp?c=klLWJcP7H&b=1370075
In the meantime, Raw Story has the text of the speech here...
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Reid_fires_back_at_Bush_The_0124.html
You'll be cheering out loud by the time you get done reading it!
oppps Bushes friends arent going to like this much so sorry, it in no way compares to 30,000 workers but its about time that a company takes away the overhead instead of the workforce!! Thank goodness my Hubby has always insisted on owning MOPAR!!
DaimlerChrysler to cut 6,000 white-collar jobs
Automaker aims to save $1.2 billion a year
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11004269/
Posted by: sparrow at January 24, 2006 09:33 AM
If he believed he had the right why ask now at this late date? Oh thats right cause he didnt. Duhhhhhhh
Oh and on the Google-Government issue, when I first started researching I rarely used Google then people convinced me it was great, and it wasnt Yahoo I was using either it was Dogpile.com they are going to love this that wonderful little efficiant search engine, because I believe I will go back to using that, not that I have anything to hide just that I am not open to anyone snooping into my business no matter how tame and housewify the business is! www.dogpile.com wonderful little place to visit and still small enough to be way under big government radar.
Another Culture of Corruption eruption in the Supreme Court --- 1-23-2006 from ABC Nightline
EXCLUSIVE: Supreme Ethics Problem?
What Was Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia Doing on Day of Supreme Court Swearing-In?
By BRIAN ROSS
Jan. 23, 2006 — - At the historic swearing-in of John Roberts as the 17th chief justice of the United States last September, every member of the Supreme Court, except Antonin Scalia, was in attendance. ABC News has learned that Scalia instead was on the tennis court at one of the country's top resorts, the Ritz-Carlton hotel in Bachelor Gulch, Colo., during a trip to a legal seminar sponsored by the Federalist Society.
Not only did Scalia's absence appear to be a snub of the new chief justice, but according to some legal ethics experts, it also raised questions about the propriety of what critics call judicial junkets.
read the rest here...
http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/print?id=1534260
and what is the Federalist Society, you ask?
Check out the details here...
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=3149
Posted by: DiAnne at January 23, 2006 06:56 PM
--------
Boycotts aren't a statement of the values of the places I boycott. They are a statement of my values. They may succeed, but I don't have to help them.
----------
Also, NEW THREAD!!
I feel the same.
I posted Geov Parrish' perspective as an alternative to mine.
I understand what he's saying but I feel that if I make long and medium-term lifestyle changes based on my values it DOES have an impact over time.
I use alot of food, gas, etc. in a year & it adds up to more than I pay in taxes and may have as much impact as my vote.
It also may directly help local merchants or small producers or distributors even on line. It's not just about punishing the corporations, it's about helping the deserving.
I often disagree with Geov but also respect him.
His interview with Chomsky was interesting.
Posted by: monkey at January 24, 2006 11:20 AM
True. But let us always remember that all those people out there who believe the lies aren't idiots, just ignorant because of a lack of education about what is really going on out there.
Someone here gave statistics on an earlier thread, I believe it was DiAnne, that stated that most Americans STILL get their news coverage from television nooze, and are operating under the assumption that America still broadcasts facts and not propaganda. A small percentile of our population actually knows about and utilizes internet news and blogs.
And therein lies the problem......
Hey, a thought just came to me......what if we educate people toward using the internet for news??? (That's exactly what we are doing here, I understand,.....but, I mean, on a larger scale????)