A Progressive Declaration

Written on February 20th, 2004, just after Howard Dean dropped out of the Democratic Primary race.

When in the course of political events, it becomes necessary to rise up against agendas that will cause more long-term harm than good, and to assume among the powers granted to us by our Constitution, a deeper understanding of the needs of humankind requires that we should declare the causes which impel us to the uprising.

We still hold these truths to be self-evident, that all people are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. We additionally recognize that the rights defined by the original Declaration of Independence of the Thirteen Colonies have been reinterpreted as time has passed, and that rights that were not obvious in 1776 exist and need to be addressed. These rights include the right to educational opportunities, the right to health care, and the right to be treated the same regardless of economic standing. We additionally recognize that the United States of America is only one country in a large world, and that the citizens of the rest of the world have the right to demand these as human rights. The responsibility to secure these rights for us belongs to our government, and we have the right to make demands that our needs be addressed. As it was the right of our Founding Fathers to abolish the Form of Government that became destructive to their rights and their needs, so it is still the right of the people to choose new leadership that will listen to our needs and protect our rights.

We have stood by and watched with shock and awe as the Current Administration has attempted to spread the freedoms that we enjoy to other countries. We have also been appalled by the lack of competence that has been shown by our Government to protect us from external harm, and when the light of truth has shined upon the source of the ill-feeling that predominates much of the world outside of our borders, the source of the troubles turns out to be our own Administration's History and Current Efforts. The history of the present President of the United States [George W. Bush] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of a virtual Tyranny over these States and the rest of the world. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid voting public.

He has refused his Assent to International Law, while the lawyers may argue about that until the cows come home. The spirit of International Law is to reduce the use of arms in the world, and he has increased their use. The spirit of International Cooperation is to make the world a better place for all of our children, and he has refused to follow the lead of the Administration that he replaced.

He has misused and manipulated facts and guesswork to support his own agenda, causing the loss of thousands of lives and livelihoods on all sides of the various conflicts that he has involved us in.

His Party leadership in the House of Representatives (Tom DeLay) has purposefully guided a redistricting of his own home state (Texas) for the sole and stated purpose of maintaining his grip of power in that government body, regardless of the true wishes of the voting public. This is nothing but tyranny.

He has denied the Free Press and the US Congress access to information that should be in the Public Record, including information about the greatest tragedy ever to occur on US soil (911).

He has (twice now) made recess appointments to Federal Judicial offices that would have no chance of passing the normal procedures in the US Senate, thereby pushing his own agenda above and beyond the set limitations in the Constitution that he swore to defend.

He has stated support for an Amendment to that document that would increase the discrimination felt by the citizens of this country, in direct violation of his oath.

He has pushed bad policies and poorly designed measures for economic growth in our country, causing the loss of 2.6 million jobs, and has specifically stated through his henchmen that this loss of jobs is good for the long term well being of our nation.

Let others fill in additional charges, for there are many others.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A President whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the leader of a free people, nor are his followers in their Party.

We, therefore, the citizens of the United States of America inspired by Governor Howard Dean, Congressman Dennis Kucinich and Senator Paul Wellstone, in General agreement, Assembled in many places, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the good People of this Party, solemnly publish and declare, That the Democratic Party is, and of Right ought to be, Free and Independent of Special Interests beyond those of the citizens themselves; that we are Absolved from all Allegiance to the Corporations, and that all financial connections between us and the lobbyists in the District of Columbia and beyond, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as a Free and Democratic Party, we have full Power to voice our opinions, plan strategy, contract Alliances with like minded groups, and to do all other Acts and Things which Political Parties may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence and the people we represent, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

We are from the Progressive wing of the Democratic Party. We've gotten a taste of making a difference in our Party and our Country. We're not going to quit, and we're not going to give up or get scared off. We're here to stay.

the tide

“I come to you now, at the turning of the tide.” – Gandalf the White

Like a tide, darkness has swept across our land. Our economy struggles, our security is in question, our children are not reaching their potential, and the health and well being of our people are in jeopardy.

Think about the American Dream. Can it still catch the attention of people in far off lands, and draw them to our land of opportunity? Does the United States still hold up the beacon of hope to the world in a dark age, or are we drawing closed the lantern? Think about our planet, the glorious blue marble that shines in the sky. How long can this world support her people if the people do not work tirelessly to support the world and everything on it?

The tide must turn. A tide of thought, care and humanity must sweep the darkness back again. This is a tide of people who want their voices heard, their children protected, and their world saved. You are one of those people.

On February 7th, the Washington State Democratic Party will be holding their Precinct Caucuses to determine who the chosen candidate of the Democratic Party will be in the 2004 election. This is our first chance to bring our voices into a choir heard across the nation. We can turn this country around. We can light the beacon of hope.

Look, learn, listen, read, think, act, vote. This is the legacy that we have been given by the founders of our country. This is the duty that we accept as citizens of the greatest nation on Earth. This is the responsibility of everyone who wishes the tide to turn. Please, find out where your precinct caucus will be held, and attend.

We come to you now, because only you can turn the tide.

Howard Dean & Chris Matthews on Media

>>MATTHEWS: Travel, the Democrats? Ted Kennedy was part of that deregulation, the deregulation of radio. There are so many things that have been deregulated. Is that wrong trend and would you reverse it?<<
>>DEAN: I would reverse in some areas.<<
>>First of all, 11 companies in this country control 90 percent of what ordinary people are able to read and watch on their television. That?s wrong. We need to have a wide variety of opinions in every community. We don?t have that because of Michael Powell and what George Bush has tried to do to the FCC.<<
>>MATTHEWS: Would you break up Fox?<<
(LAUGHTER)
>>MATTHEWS: I?m serious.<<
>>DEAN: I?m keeping a...<<
>>MATTHEWS: Would you break it up? Rupert Murdoch has ?The Weekly Standard.? It has got a lot of other interests. It has got ?The New York Post.? Would you break it up?<<
>>DEAN: On ideological grounds, absolutely yes, but...<<
(LAUGHTER)
>>MATTHEWS: No, seriously. As a public policy, would you bring industrial policy to bear and break up these conglomerations of power?<<
>>DEAN: I don?t want to answer whether I would break up Fox or not,
because, obviously<<
(CROSSTALK)
>>MATTHEWS: Well, how about large media enterprises?<<
>>DEAN: Let me-yes, let me get...<<
(LAUGHTER)
>>DEAN: The answer to that is yes.
>>I would say that there is too much penetration by single corporations in media markets all over this country. We need locally-owned radio stations. There are only two or three radio stations left in the state of Vermont where you can get local news anymore. The rest of it is read and ripped from the AP.<<
>>MATTHEWS: So what are you going to do about it? You?re going to be president of the United States, what are you going to do?<<
>>DEAN: What I?m going to do is appoint people to the FCC that believe democracy depends on getting information from all portions of the political spectrum, not just one.<<
>>MATTHEWS: Well, would you break up GE?<<
(APPLAUSE)
>>DEAN: I can?t-you...<<
<>>DEAN: You can?t say-you can?t ask me right now and get an answer, would I break up X corp...<<
>>MATTHEWS: We?ve got to do it now, because now is the only chance we can ask you, because, once you are in, we have got to live with you.<<
(LAUGHTER)
DEAN: No.
>>MATTHEWS: So, if you are going to do it, you have got to tell us now.<<
(CROSSTALK)
>>MATTHEWS: Are you going to break up the giant media enterprises in this country?<<
>>DEAN: Yes, we?re going to break up giant media enterprises. That doesn?t mean we?re going to break up all of GE.<<
>>What we?re going to do is say that media enterprises can?t be as big as they are today. I don?t think we actually have to break them up, which Teddy Roosevelt had to do with the leftovers from the McKinley administration.<<
(CROSSTALK)
>>MATTHEWS: ... regulate them.<<
>>DEAN: You have got to say that there has to be a limit as to how-if the state has an interest, which it does, in preserving democracy, then there has to be a limitation on how deeply the media companies can penetrate every single community. To the extent of even having two or three or four outlets in a single community, that kind of information control is not compatible with democracy.<<
>>MATTHEWS: How-how far would you go in terms of public policy?<<
(APPLAUSE)
>>MATTHEWS: This is not-what you describe is not laissez-faire.
It?s not capitalism.<<
>>DEAN: It is capitalism.<<
>>MATTHEWS: How would you-what would you call it?<<
>>DEAN: I am absolutely a capitalist. Capitalism is the greatest system that people have ever invented, because it takes advantage of bad traits, as well as our good traits, and turns them into productivity.<<
>>But the essence of capitalism, which the right-wing never understands
? it always baffles me-is, you got to have some rules. Imagine a hockey game with no rules.<<

(LAUGHTER)
>>MATTHEWS: Would you-would you<<
(CROSSTALK)
>>DEAN: Nobody benefits. Nobody benefits. So you have got to have reasonable rules. And the rules have to protect everybody in the game.<<
(CROSSTALK)
>>MATTHEWS: Do you protect-do you protect the right of the person to go work somewhere and not have to join a union? Do you accept the right of right-to-work states to say you don?t have to join a union.<<
>>Dick Gephardt sat here and came out and said he was going to say no more right to work and we get rid of 14B, get rid of Taft-Hartley, repeal that, and force people to have to join unions, where they?re organized.<<
(CROSSTALK)
>>MATTHEWS: Would you go along with that? Would you buckle to the unions u>>
DEAN: Would I buckle to the unions?<<
>>MATTHEWS: Yes, because the unions want you to do it.<<
>>DEAN: This isn?t a values-loaded question, by any chance, is it?<<
(LAUGHTER)
(APPLAUSE)
>>MATTHEWS: Well, let me ask it-let me ask it totally open. Do you think a person has a right to work somewhere if they don?t want to join a union?<<
>>DEAN: I do.<<
>>No, wait a minute. I don?t.<<
(LAUGHTER)
>>MATTHEWS: Why not? What?s wrong with an open shop where you can...<<
>>DEAN: I?ll tell you what?s the matter with it. Here is the problem with open-and, look, there?s obviously arguments to be made on...<<
>>MATTHEWS: A lot of states have right-to-work laws. You would get rid of them?<<
>>DEAN: I don?t like-well, I very much believe that states ought to have the right to recognize-to organize their own laws. So I?m not likely as president to-even though I don?t like right-to-work laws, I?m unlikely to order states to change them.<<
>>MATTHEWS: So you wouldn?t repeal 14B?<<
>>DEAN: No, I would not, but...<<
>>MATTHEWS: So you are different than Gephardt. He is with the unions.
You are not.<<
(LAUGHTER)
>>MATTHEWS: I?m serious.<<
>>DEAN: All right...<<
>>MATTHEWS: I hate it. It?s called HARDBALL. This isn?t ?Success? magazine, OK?<<
>>(APPLAUSE)<<
>>DEAN: Let me tell you what-I actually believe in card check. I believe you shouldn?t have to have an election, that people who want to join a union should just be able to sign a card and join it. Let me tell you where I am on...<<
(CROSSTALK)
>>MATTHEWS: You are against-you do not believe in repealing 14B?<<
>>You?re not going to accept the challenge from Gephardt to do that?<<
>>DEAN: If I got a bill on my desk that repealed 14B, I?d sign it in an instant. I?m just not going to push it hard...<<
>>MATTHEWS: OK.<<
>>DEAN: Because I do believe states have to have make their own judgments of that.<<
>>MATTHEWS: OK.<<
>>DEAN: I hate right-to-work laws.<<
>>And let me tell you why it?s OK to be forced to join a union. The union is out there negotiating for your wage increases. Why should you get a free ride? Why should you should be able to go to work for that company, get the same benefits as everybody else who paid their union dues and you paid nothing? That?s why I?m against right-to-work laws.<<
>>MATTHEWS: OK.<<
>>DEAN: But I do believe it?s important for states to be able to make their own laws.
>>MATTHEWS: You understand why a libertarian would disagree with you, right? A libertarian would think they had a right, he or she, to work where they can do the job.<<
>>DEAN: Yes, but why should they-but why should they get the benefits of everybody else who is paying dues and get a free ride?<<
>>MATTHEWS: Because it?s a free country.<<
(LAUGHTER)
(APPLAUSE)

A phone call at work

C: This is Chad

Dr: Hi Chad, this is Doctor Garnett at Swedish Ballard.

C: Oh, hi.

Dr: I wanted to let you know that I just now received the Pathology Report, and it's confirmed to be Hodgkins.

C: It is?... Ok, well, thanks for telling me. I guess I'll find out more information from Dr. Lane when I see him this afternoon.

Dr: Yes, I'm sure you will. Be sure to give me a call if your treatment will involve putting in an implant to make the treatment easier. I guess I'll see you Friday when I take a look at how you are healing from the biopsy.

C: Thanks, Dr. I'll see you Friday.

12 Step Program to Regime Change

By Don Hazen, AlterNet

June 2, 2003

Each day, millions of frustrated Americans engage in discussions about how
our country has gone off course and how ultraconservatives have taken over our
government. As we put our hearts and souls into figuring out how to achieve
regime change at home in November 2004, these conversations are growing in
volume.

How we engage this election will speak volumes about the future of our
country. Our passion in this political moment feels unprecedented. Yet, because
we feel a lot of anxiety about all that's happened to our country since 9/11, we
don't yet know our strength. We forget, for example, that the things we believe
in – equality, fairness, justice, dignity, and ultimately kindness and love
– inspired the greatest moral and political achievements of the 20th century:
civil rights, women's equality, the right to organize, and the growth of the
environmental movement. These values make our society strong and appealing to
the rest of the world. We must protect and promote them in the 21st century as
well.

Some of us have been discouraged by the increasingly conservative corporate
media, which try to marginalize us. We become alarmed as our government ratchets
up the fear quotient and we watch the irrational effect the scare tactics have.
At these moments, we can forget to turn to each other for support.

But we must claim our power and overcome our doubts and fears – as well as
our bad habits. We need to feel proud and joyful, not just angry and defensive.
We must work together, as one huge family, knowing that if we don't, we cannot
win.

We must be united to fight for regime change at home, not just to prevent
more bloodshed, empire building and cruel policies, but to protect virtually all
the progress we've made over the past 40 years. Environmentalists alone cannot
ensure clean air and water; union members alone cannot protect the right to
organize; civil libertarians alone cannot defend the Constitution and the Bill
of Rights; seniors on their own cannot protect Social Security; feminists alone
cannot defend Roe v. Wade; and African-Americans and Latinos alone are not going
to ensure fairness and equality and stop a wide range of cruel budget cuts.

But, by focusing on what we have in common – the clear-cut goal of
defeating Bush in 2004 – we can all succeed. How important is this? It feels
more important than anything we will do for a very long time.

To help us chart our course, what follows is a 12-step program to achieve
regime change. As in all such efforts for change, we need to take an inventory
of our strengths and our weaknesses, confront our bad habits and addictions,
reach out to others, and recover our power.

Step #1: Recognize Our Strengths

Let's start with traditions that serve as our foundation. Social critic Colin
Greer reminds us that Martin Luther King Jr.'s work evolved from his initial
civil rights struggles into protecting poor people of all colors and then to
insisting on peace in Vietnam. An overriding framework of concern linked all of
these causes into one "Beloved Community." Greer notes how the values
of progressive America inspire millions of people every day: health care
advocates; members of environmental, civil rights and civil liberties groups;
volunteers at food banks and women's shelters; people working for their
children's education, and many more. As he says, "We have to communicate
our history and our strength."

Progressives are potentially stronger now than at any time in the past 30
years. Breakthrough efforts like the fast-growing True
Majority, and Move On, with its 1.3 million
members, have significant capacity to reach and motivate new people. Move On's
PAC can also raise large amounts of money. Millions of unaffiliated middle-class
progressives are ripe for organizing. The Win Without War coalition, made up of
40 national membership groups, has committed itself to regime change with a
major investment in media. Many increasingly sophisticated national
organizations are already gathering and dedicating themselves to the work ahead,
focusing on voter registration and education and Get Out the Vote (GOTV)
strategies in key states.

In the battle ahead, we are unified. From progressive to moderate, virtually
all of us agree that regime change is our common goal. Support for third party
politics is invisible, even among those who voted for Nader in 2000.

We were part of a tremendous effort to halt the invasion of Iraq, supported
by many tens of millions of people across the globe. Most of the world is with
us, and for much more than a peace movement; for a movement for sanity, human
values and the future.

We also need to tap into our deepest, most magnanimous courage to help us
give up old habits and narrow agendas, and sacrifice more for the whole. One
woman with a lot of courage is Doris "Granny D" Haddock, who at age 95
is still raising hell; just a few years ago she walked across the country to
promote campaign finance reform. She recently reminded us of something profound.
During the recent peace marches, despite the angry speeches and the losses to be
suffered by so many, she said: "The people in the marches were joyful. Did
you notice that? Did you feel it yourself? The best smiles I've seen in
years." She went on to state that this time can also be "about
something far deeper than the Bush attack du jour... Did you not hope, as a
child, that one day it would be in your hands to save the world? Is it not
indeed joyful to embark on a life of great meaning? Aren't we joyful for this
moment, when all is at stake? We are, we are. And do not stand in the way of our
joy."

Step #2: Acknowledge What We Are Powerless to Change

We can't change the fact that September 11 happened and fundamentally
transformed the nature of American politics. We need to face the reality of our
defeat in trying to stop the attack on Iraq. We never stood a chance. The rules
have changed. We were playing by the old rules, advocating for inspections and
multilateralism, thinking that politics is about negotiation and listening to
constituencies. Now it's about raw power, and we need to exercise our own power
in the campaign to defeat Bush. The conservatives effectively established new
rules of engagement: Anything goes; be as radical and as unreasonable as you can
get away with; play the fear card; and count on the corporate media to carry the
message. Conservatives got away with invading Iraq, and the only way to stop
them is to defeat them in the election of 2004.

The conservatives have invested enough money particularly by wealthy
right-wingers in think tanks and communications over the past 40 years to reach
the point where, according to the New York Times, they believe that they have
initiated "an era of dominance" – despite the fact that significant
majorities oppose their positions. We can't change the fact that the
conservatives are likely to raise half a billion dollars to support the Bush
candidacy; or that the corporate media, especially radio networks and television
networks like Fox and NBC/General Electric, will work hard to get Bush
reelected.

If we are to succeed, we must recognize some important truths. Politically,
the "facts" will not set us free, and issues alone will not win us
elections. The other side thinks very differently than we do. Forty percent of
the U.S. population will accept virtually anything that Bush and Co. say. Most
of these people get all their news from television. This 40 percent of the
population will never agree with us, and there is nothing we can do about it.
They will not change, nor will they see the light. They are the fundamentalists
of America, the religious shock troops, the millions of fearful, and the
conservative wealthy who fund and fuel the current conservative efforts at
hegemony.

It's not easy to write off 100 million people. In our own stubborn way, we
liberals and progressives think everyone can change.

If you don't accept the depth of this conservative hold on 40 percent of the
population, read "Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives
Think," by University of California linguistics professor George Lakoff.
The book explains how conservatives think profoundly differently than
progressives and why white males vote against their economic interests. It also
offers insights into how we might frame our own issues.

Still, none of the things we can't change matter as much as what we can
do, by educating, mobilizing, motivating, sacrificing, sharing and setting good
examples. We will use plain old people power to rise up and regain balance in
our country. We have the numbers, we have the truth, and we have the vision for
a better world. We need the confidence, the discipline, and the smarts to pull
it off.

Step #3: Communicate Our Vision

To be successful in American politics, we need undecided voters to come over
to our side. We must communicate a positive vision of the future. Most Americans
like to be on the winning team, so we need winning ideas and stars who can carry
the message forward. Going negative doesn't help. When we attack the
conservative frame, we actually reinforce their messages. We need our
message.

A strong vision would draw on the deep history and powerful metaphor of
people working together to make this country strong, to protect ourselves and
one another, to care about the health and safety of all our people.

Giving one example of a big picture vision is Granny D: "We are the
people who believe in a world of environmental beauty, of happiness and not
exploitation, of justice and not oppression and torture. A world safe for
children. Government budgets that invest in our smart babies, not smart bombs.
We believe in international law and cooperative action."

Step #4: Confront Our Weaknesses

To be honest with ourselves, we have to confront our seeming compulsion to
repeat the same strategies, no matter how many times they fail. We specialize in
large single-issue membership organizations. We pride ourselves on our
unswerving dedication to myriad idealistic issues. Our organizations at times
become little more than self-perpetuating efforts to secure funding dollars.

This may sound harsh. Many of these issues are important in their own way,
but now, with so much at stake, the many do not add up to the whole.

Moving forward requires acknowledging what's not serving us. Single-issue
politics is the Achilles' heel of progressive Democrats. Conservatives
understand that individual issues need to be linked to an overall moral and
ethical perspective. As George Lakoff explains, "They fit the issues
together, develop conservative value-based language, and then highjack American
virtues like freedom and compassion and give them conservative
definitions...Progressives in contrast are hampered by the plethora of issues,
rather than the overarching value perspective that rationalizes the
polices."

The longstanding approach of "letting a thousands flowers bloom"
has not added up. Battles on hundreds of fronts, competing for attention and
funding, will not bring us political power. Too many voices often cancel each
other out, and the confusing cacophony can send people away. We have to rethink
change and appreciate that by gaining political clout our issues have a better
chance of winning.

Step #5: Practice Being Realistic

A big behavioral change for many will be diving into electoral politics. Many
of us have viewed elections as tainted, trivial or hopelessly uncool. We may
have preferred the detachment of the cynical or the purity of issue advocacy.
After decades of attacking the political system as hopelessly corrupted by
campaign financing, we regard politics as dirty and impervious to change. But
alas, despite its enormous flaws, it is the only system we've got.

Author Jonathan Schell says, "Elections are a fabulous tool for bringing
about change – if you use them! You have to infuse them with your energy.
There's something tautological about rejecting elections. It's like an admission
of defeat. It's very bad to admit defeat when you're in a movement. It's a big
mistake. You should try to win. You may fail; there's no victory guaranteed in
this world, in life. But you should aim to win and really change things."

When we opt out of campaigns, the political consultants and media buyers take
over. These guys just add to the nasty image of politics, particularly with
their multi-million dollar hit ads, often designed to turn people off voting
altogether and leave them confused, discouraged and disgusted.

We'll also need to sacrifice some of our purity. As Granny D put it,
"Politics is about winning. For us, it is about winning to save lives and
raise people up from poverty and illness and loneliness and injustice."

Finally, we need to shake our frequent paralysis regarding public educational
activity of non-profits. The outrageously partisan behavior of Pat Robertson's
and other conservative groups operating as tax exempt ultimately prevailed in
the courts. Still, many liberal foundations and their grantees remain gun-shy
about aggressive public education.

Some estimate that just a top group of the largest liberal non-profit
organizations has as much as $2 billion dollars in operating budgets. Although
tax laws prohibit organizations from advocating for specific candidates, they
can still do a lot of public education offering workable models and far
different approaches to current domestic and foreign policies. And staff are
free to be partisan on their own time.

Step #6: Stop Squabbling and Make Amends

You may have heard the joke: What's a progressive firing squad? Answer: A
circle.

Enough! Or, as progressive leader and communications guy Dan Carol says:
"Kumbaya dammit. There are ways to stand for principles without fighting
over crumbs. Start with everyone sharing their vision of what they want and need
... and check your passive aggressiveness at the door. Let's not forget that the
perfect is the enemy of the good."

It is time to declare an amnesty. If South Africa can have a reconciliation,
why not progressives? Let us join our competitors and our former enemies in new
collaborations toward victory.

Step #7: Think Strategically

If you have read this far, you are probably part of the core Democratic vote.
Not enough of us have been active in Democratic Party politics or elections.
Let's make that history.

Make no mistake; we are not a majority. Clinton won the '92 presidential race
with 39 percent of the vote (with Perot in the race against Bob Dole). We hover
around 40 percent of the electorate. The conservatives and Republicans are also
close to 40 percent. To become a majority, we need to reach swing voters.
Electoral College rules mean that the Democratic candidate could win the popular
vote by a million votes in 2004 and still lose the election. We need to win a
couple of red states while hanging on to the blue states Gore won in 2000.

Do you know which states are red? Which are swing states? Which voters are
swing voters? It's time to get strategic! Below is a list. If you live in a
swing state, get to work; if you don't live in a swing state, start visiting and
finding all your friends and relatives who are in one.

Swing State Line Up:

The Blues: In 2000, Al Gore really won 10 states by less than 6%: Florida
(which was given to the Republicans by the Supreme Court); New Mexico,
Wisconsin, Iowa and Oregon (by less than 1%); Minnesota (by 2.5%); and
Pennsylvania, Michigan, Maine and Washington (by about 5%).

The Reds: George W. Bush won nine states by less than 6.5% (not counting
Florida), five of those by less than 5%: New Hampshire (which he won by only
7,200 votes, or 1.3%); Ohio, Nevada and Missouri (by about 3.5%); Tennessee
(4%); Arkansas (5.5%); Arizona and West Virginia (about 6.5%).

Step #8: Deal With the Politics of Fear

Fear is the subtext of American politics. The Republicans know that fearful
people tend to vote conservative, so generating and exploiting fear will be high
on their agenda. Expect every kind of Republican surprise: Code Reds, new acts
of terrorism, invasions of other countries, the sudden capture of Osama bin
Laden or Saddam Hussein. There may be dirty tricks in this election.

Even though some of us don't feel it acutely, fear is a fundamental issue in
America. It's no accident that we have more than 11,000 gun deaths a year while
neighboring Canada has far fewer with as many guns per capita. America just
passed the 2 million mark in the number of people incarcerated in prisons. While
violent crime goes down, the presentation of violent crime in the media
escalates.

Generating fear of "the other" is a staple of Republican politics.
Only united can we can fight it. But this isn't simple and requires a lot of
discussion, thought and creative ideas. The main point is to acknowledge that
fear is on people's minds and not trivialize or deny it. The antidote to fear is
joy and courage. It is mutual support and protection and a clear, forthright
policy on national security. Progressive values are about protecting our
families, our communities, making our lives safe and fulfilling. But we're not
interested, as the Bush administration insists is necessary, in trading freedom
for security. As Move On's Wes Boyd notes: "Luckily, Americans are made of
sterner stuff and we'll continue to protect freedom and it will make us
strong."

Step #9: Examine Our Privilege and Embrace Diversity

This step is particularly aimed at those of us in the social change business.
Are we too aloof from the grittiness of electoral politics and face-to-face
organizing and talking with people who don't agree with us? Most of the millions
of people who make up the leadership and rank and file of non-profits and
foundations are highly educated, have health insurance and many have family
support. Even when we have risen from the working class, we have the privilege
of networks and access to mentors and support.

When the economy gets worse, when Medicare and Medicaid are cut, when the
minimum wage is stuck way below the living wage, when tax breaks go to the rich,
most of us remain untouched. In some cases, we actually benefit from political
crises; our organizations can raise more money. But poor people and many people
of color have no such luxuries. They can't criticize elections as a distraction
on the road to political change, as a prominent peace leader did recently. They
have to deal with the political reality.

Diversity is a fundamental progressive value, just like fairness and
protection of families. Our hybridness is a strength. The mix of our skills,
talents, experiences, histories and colors makes us much more than the sum of
our parts and imbues us with the power to defeat the more homogeneous and rigid
conservatives.

We also need to keep in mind that many of our brilliant and exciting current
efforts are white and middle class. We learned from the 2002 primary elections
that ignoring the base and running to the middle will lose elections, as
minority voters stayed home in droves and resources didn't make it into their
communities. Hopefully 2002 was the aberration, and the powerful voter
registering and organizing work that was done in Florida (e.g., that won that
state for Gore, until the Supreme Court decided otherwise) will be the model
across the country. African Americans were far ahead of other groups in opposing
the invasion of Iraq, and the rapidly growing Latino population is very
concerned about the impact of war budgets and tax cuts on services their
communities desperately need. Minority communities represent the strongest
element in the quest for regime change. It is crucial that diversity issues be
addressed at the beginning of any broad-based planning for 2004, and not as an
afterthought.

Step #10: Create an Independent Power, Not Reliant on Parties or
Candidates

To help us win in 2004, how about organizing a progressive electoral movement
that becomes a force in the election by not picking one of the candidates
in the primaries? Instead we'll raise money, develop an active base nationwide
and effectively target key swing states. We earn our credibility by working
while the primaries are underway, building an infrastructure that is ready to
roll the last four months of the campaign on behalf of whomever the Democrats
nominate.

All the Democratic candidates are superior to George W. Bush; even Joe
Lieberman, the guy progressives love to hate. Domestically, all these candidates
believe in fundamental values and issues that if framed effectively can appeal
to a wide cross-section of Democrats and swing voters. These are themes, values
and positions that Bush clearly does not support. In addition, a forceful
progressive presence will help keep candidates on message, give them backbone on
issues, and balance the inevitable challenges from the media and the
conservative Democrats when candidates take strong populist positions. Of course
many progressives will support candidates closest to them on key issues. But no
matter who gets nominated, we need to get the nominee elected.

It would be a bold move to quickly organize and grow a large-scale
independent campaign for regime change at home. Let's call it the
"Independent Force." It would counter the stereotypes that
progressives can't work together and that partnerships don't travel well across
race, class and issue lines. If key leadership groups bought in, such a
formation could, by effectively using the Internet, number five million and be
well funded with $10 million by next summer. No, that wouldn't be enough. Yet,
big organizations and coalitions of insiders wielding large amounts of money may
not be the best way to engage the rank and file.

A regime change movement would: a) ensure an organizational infrastructure,
especially in swing states, to help elect the Democratic nominee; b) coordinate
and articulate a clear vision of the values and principles generally shared by
all the Democratic candidates and strongly desired by millions of independent
and progressive Democrats; and c) create a way for the progressive and activist
universe to exercise political influence after the election. It would hold the
Democratic nominee accountable during the election (and hopefully afterward). It
would create effective new ways to work together in the event of Bush's
reelection.

Progressives need to be a vigilant counterweight to the bad habits of Beltway
thinking, potential big organization in-fighting, and the influence of some of
the Democratic Party's wealthy donors. Ingrained attitudes that take the base of
voters for granted, depend on negative campaigning, run to the middle, instead
of standing for issues clearly and firmly, have led to failure in the past, but
not this time if we succeed.

Step #11: Use and Trust Independent Media

The Republican-controlled FCC has decided to make media more conservative,
more corporate and more concentrated. Given the media system we have already,
that's hard to swallow. Now we'll have more nightmares like Clear Channel, which
owns more than 1,200 stations and is infamous for dumbing down radio and
organizing pro-war rallies.

But even before this latest stage, the "Fox effect" pushed news
coverage to the right. Rupert Murdoch's pending purchase of Direct TV
exponentially increases the power of conservative TV. This is all wrong and
unacceptable, but by everyone's estimation, changing the media system is a
long-term struggle. The corporate media system is likely to get worse as far as
the eye can see.

We don't have time to wait. Yes, we should work the contradictions in
corporate media as best we can, since the media system needs a semblance of
objectivity to be credible enough to make their profits. But also we need to use
our own independent media system, which, with the help of the Internet, has
grown tremendously, risen in quality and reaches many more people than ever
before. AlterNet.org, where I work, Common Dreams, Tom Paine.com, the Nation,
Salon, Pacific News Service and many more (including WireTapmag.org, the feisty
youth site), are powerful daily information sources. When added up, the
independent media often do much more than the corporate media in presenting
details and diversity of voices.

It is important to have alternative perspectives and viable options in play.
Michael Moore, progressive media's superstar, has shown that it's possible to
reach millions with a very strong populist message. (Moore's next film is in the
works and will calculate the tremendous loss of political freedom since 9/11
while tracing the relationship of the bin Laden and Bush families, all in time
for the 2004 election.) But there are dozens of other voices also reaching
millions, because the Internet makes it possible to amplify radio shows,
columns, speeches and great journalism every day.

Many of us have become "connectors," zipping the best ideas,
analysis and personal voices around the web so we all know what Robert Scheer,
Arianna Huffington, Molly Ivins, Arundhati Roy, Amy Goodman and numerous others
are writing, thinking and saying. Worldlink TV and FreeSpeech TV, our only
progressive TV networks, are improving everyday. (Sure, you have to get a
satellite dish to watch them, but you'll also get "The Sopranos," so
why not?)

When Greg Palast was asked how his current "alternative ' book became a
bestseller, he told the interviewer the alternative press needs to change its
name: "It reaches more people than the mainstream."

Step #12: Make a Commitment

Activist Harriet Barlow has started talking to friends about the "5
percent" plan. If you are really serious about defeating Bush, she says,
commit 5 percent of your income and 5 percent of your time to the cause; more if
you can afford it. And start now. Many others are in tune with Barlow. If you
can, why not vacation or even temporarily relocate to key swing states like
Ohio, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Florida and Nevada, especially if you are from
there or have family or friends there? Dedicate a portion of your time to what
will be the most important election of our lives. If idealistic young people can
travel to Iraq and Palestine, why not to Kansas City, Cleveland, Pittsburg or
Jacksonville?

Dropping everything and moving to a swing state may seem extreme, but there
are many steps along the way. One thing we need to do is get together and talk
about what's at stake and give each other encouragement. Regime Change house
parties, salons and picnics can become the rage. Progressive leaders travel all
the time and are aching for invitations – give them a call, especially if you
are in a swing state. Plan on facilitating an exchange of ideas and information,
not just hosting a speech. We need more interaction and voices, fewer speeches.

Many organizations with people on the ground, such as ACORN,
NAACP, Greenpeace,
League of Conservation
Voters, Rock
The Vote and Win Without War
and their affiliates will have local efforts going across the country. Check out
their websites, volunteer, send them money if you can.

Tom Paine.com, True Majority and Peace Action have organized a register
voters for peace campaign, and the Swing
State Project is recruiting volunteers nationwide now. Working
For Change is one of the best places on the web to read about and take part
in political actions. Get on their list.

Parting Thoughts

It is good to remember that change often isn't linear. Dramatic events can
short-circuit everything we think we know. Unexpected combinations of
circumstances and planning have erupted in major historic events – 9/11 of
course, but also the fall of the Berlin Wall, the ending of apartheid, the
feminist and environmentalist revolutions – that all shocked the political
world when they emerged.

But nothing takes the place of organizing. Progressives, as Robert Borosage
underscores in a recent The Nation, have just begun to build the independent
capacity to drive energy into the political debate. Our think tanks will provide
ammunition for our efforts. As we join our web-based communicators like Move on,
Working Assets and True Majority, we help build their strength to broaden the
base. Now is the time to draw the line. We need to dedicate ourselves to the
task ahead fully, without ambivalence, minimizing squabbling, knowing we are
right. The future of our families and our globe is in our hands.

Don Hazen is the executive director of the Independent Media Institute (IMI).
This article was written independently of AlterNet. The opinions expressed in
this article in no way reflect the positions of IMI or AlterNet.

Dear Mr. LaRouche supporters

I have been reading the speeches and positions of Lyndon LaRouche for a long time, and I like some of his ideas and appreciate his steadfastness.

However, from what I saw last night, your candidate will never gain the support of the Democratic Party. I attended my first political meeting at the Washington 46th District Democratic meeting on Thursday, May 15, 2003. There were about 15 Larouche Youth Movement volunteers that everyone welcomed at the beginning of the meeting. They handed out the literature, talked to people, and right off the bat started insulting people. One older lady was told “we’re going to get rid of all you old fogeys” when she politely declined to receive a copy of the New Federalist. Then, in the middle of a very full agenda, while an office worker from Senator Patty Murray’s office was talking about the current legislation in the US House, they stood up and started talking about how LaRouche was “the only issue in the Democratic Party”, and that anything else was ignoring the issues. Their next step was to start singing protest songs and the entire meeting was interrupted for about a half hour until the police arrived to finally escort them out of the room.

This display of unruliness made me ashamed to be even a partial supporter of Lyndon LaRouche, and a repeat of the performance will make these youth unwelcome at any of the Democratic party meetings. In addition, Lyndon LaRouche will not make it onto the ballot in the Democratic Party, and none of his daring plans to rescue the US and world economies will even be considered.

I implore your campaign leadership to conduct better training for your youth, specifically to teach them Robert's Rules of Order and the importance of following them. If they are unable to do this, another election will go by and will be yet another failure for the causes you fight for.

Letter to my Senators on Senator Santorum's comments

Dear Senator Murray and Senator Cantwell,

I recently read an article in the Washington Post about Senator Santorum’s remarks regarding the Supreme Court case involving the Texas sodomy law and the right to privacy guaranteed by the Constitution’s Bill of Rights.

I was very offended by his remarks. The Post quotes him as follows:

"If the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual (gay) sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything," the Pennsylvania lawmaker said in a recent interview, fuming over a landmark gay rights case before the high court that pits a Texas sodomy law against equality and privacy rights.

"All of those things are antithetical to a healthy, stable, traditional family," Santorum said. "And that's sort of where we are in today's world, unfortunately. It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn't exist, in my opinion, in the United States Constitution."

I know that the two of you are more aware of the fight that the Human Rights Campaign, PFLAG and many other Gay and Lesbian groups around the nation are waging to protect the civil rights of people who identify with alternative sexuality. Can you please pass on to Senator Santorum and Sen. Frist that to say that the right to privacy doesn’t exist is not the kind of statement I would expect to hear from someone on either side of the isle.

Chad Lupkes

Another step in the wrong direction

Sorry it's been awhile. I went down to California for Christmas, and saw something on the plane ride that caught my attention. Visa is now offering Visa Payroll, where an employer deposits a person's paycheck, and they have that much credit until they run out of money. No checking account required. Now this sounds neat until you realize that this completely eliminates savings. So, this is the latest way for our government to ensure that we are completely beholden to their Social Security Program, because there will be no other way to have money for retirement. There is one way to fix this. If Visa (or the issuing bank) would pay interest on the amount of money on the card just before the new paycheck came in, it might discourage people from spending every penny.

Ya think?!

Oh give me a break. Of course Bush is going to declare Iraq in material breach of the UN resolution. I could have told you that before the resolution passed. Bush doesn't care if Iraq is innocent or not, he just wants his oil.

Boy, isn't that a surprise?

The White House doesn't think that Iraq is being honest. Why do people develop weapons? For two reasons; Offense and Defense. If Iraq has weapons, that means they are preparing to either attack another country or to defend their own. Nations attack other countries for one reason; to expand their resources. There is NO other reason for sending troops across a border. Oh, sorry. There is one other reason. "The voice(s) of God told me that they were bad people."

The Bush administration wants to do one thing. It wants to make sure that whatever WMD Iraq have does not enter the US or are used against US interests and people outside the US. Oh, and there's oil in them thar hills, but that shouldn't really mean much, should it?

Teaser is sick...

Teaser is really sick. I've never dealt with a sick cat before. He is getting thinner and has lost both sight and sense of smell. So, not only can he not see that his food bowl is full, he can't smell the food either. Cancer? Looking at all the possibilities, that's actually something we're hoping for. It would be an easier end.

Bush, if you want the world to end in Nuclear War, why don't you just say so instead of calling on Rice and Ridge to write your plans up as a 'response to aggression'. I just hope we survive long enough to get you out of office.

A Railroad executive?

Railroads? Isn't the railroad industry one of the worst performing industries right now? Well, on the other hand, maybe this is a step in the right direction. There are two ways to efficiently move people and merchandise; water and rail. These two industries are also foundation industries for the US Economy. That's why the original Dow 30 included a lot of Railroad stocks. Maybe Snow can do something to boost the railroad industry and actually get something good going. A nation-wide high speed rail system like the one California is building would be a good thing.

In other news, Bethany, OK has a new gimmick to encourage business within it's city border. An 18 inch wide bright blue stripe painted on the streets marking the town's borders. Wild.

WMD Report is out

Ok, so now the US has a complete copy of the report. Good. Let's hope the report disproves all of the US claims. I don't want Iraq to have WMD, and I don't think they do. Let them prove it so we can go in there and bomb the real problems of poverty, poor heath care and poor education. That will do more for the people of Iraq than anything else.

Media Violence vs Children

Saw something about Media Violence vs. Children today. It seems like people are so convinced that media violence is the core problem that they're ignoring anything else. Michael Moore's brilliant documentary "Bowling for Columbine" asked these questions, and found that Canadian kids watch just as much violence in Movies and on TV as US kids, and are something like 1/100th as likely to take those violent tendencies into the real world. So something is teaching US kids by example that using violence to solve problems is ok. Gee, Mr. Bush, what do you think that could possibly be?

Splitting our forces

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/07/opinion/07RICH.html?todaysheadlines

Frank Rich asks: "If it was a huge risk to split our focus between Saddam and Al Qaeda then, why isn't it now? "

Good question. I also find it interesting that the choice made by the Bush administration on this subject is that pursuing Al Qaeda is mostly a legal matter, consisting of keeping pressure on foreign banks to reveal the total activity of money even remotely related to any Al Qaeda operative. But the war against Iraq (and it is a war) seems totally focused on Bush being willing to flounce the law and go it alone rather than establish a standard law enforcement plan through the United Nations and then sticking to it. Bush has decided not to release any of the secret information that he is using to 'prove' that Iraq has WMD until after the UN Weapons Inspectors have gone through and pulled out the items that would give other countries ideas on how to start their own programs. Don't these two things have enough in common that it should raise red flags? Seems to me that Bush will throw out onto the poker table exactly that proof that the Inspectors have taken out of Iraq's report, canceling out their judgment call on what to release, and then Bush will probably be chomping at the bit to hit Iraq with our military might based on what his security people have made up from nothing in the first place.

If Iraq wanted to really foil the US, they would post their 13,000 page report on the Internet so everyone on the planet can see it. No more questions, no more confusion, and if the US wants to throw something on the table, they would have to post what they have as well.

New Taxes, and other news

A new tax cut package? I'd love to know exactly how that's going to boost the economy. As proven by the greatest economic president of all time, the best way to stimulate the economy is spending. The only way to pay for spending is taxes. That's why the income taxes were invented in the 1930's to begin with! The government is by definition BROKE! No money, unless it is provided by the citizens. Thus, the income tax. Now Bush wants to nearly do away with the Income Tax, and Increase Spending to boost the economy? !

Someone send this guy to Logic 101.

Iraq hands over their WMD records tomorrow. 13,000 pages worth. And they keep claiming that the programs no longer exist. I think (and hope) that they are telling the truth. Getting the economic sanctions lifted is so far and away more important than developing weapons that would do their country no good.

But all I can do is wait, watch and hope. The alternative is unthinkable.

Dear Israel,

Stop it. Every person you kill causes someone else to want to kill one of yours. Break the cycle on your end, and they will stop it on theirs.

Dear Winona Rider (and I can't believe I'm seeing this in the news again),

Get over yourself. You have no excuse. You could BUY one of the Saks stores outright, and you choose to steal from them? ! I hope you come up with a really good excuse, but it won't fly with me.

Behind the Smile - NYTimes

Behind the Smile

By BOB HERBERT
New York Times Editorial
November 11, 2002

One of the definitions of slick is "deftly executed; adroit." Synonyms include "sly, shrewd, slippery, wily." These words came to mind as I watched the Republican Party's remarkable off-year election triumph last week. Give credit where it's due. Bill Clinton at his most devious was never as sly or as cunning (or as politically effective) as the Republican Party has become.

I think of the G.O.P. as the costume party. It wears a sunny mask, which conceals a reality that is far more ideological, far more extreme, than most Americans realize.

Among the less meaningful questions being asked in Washington is whether the Republicans, having won control of the Senate and strengthened their hold on the House, will now go too far and outpace their mandate. My question is: Where have you been? In a nation that is divided almost 50-50 politically, the Republicans flew past their mandate a long time ago.

Driven by its right wing and aided immeasurably by George W. Bush's genial smile, the G.O.P. is putting in place profoundly conservative policies that will hamper progressive efforts for decades to come, no matter what happens in upcoming elections.

With the help of Democrats who should have known better, the Republicans have already enacted a huge and potentially hazardous round of tax cuts. In an environment in which budget deficits have returned and war appears to be imminent, common sense would seem to suggest that the government tread softly on tax cuts for the time being. But a key element of the G.O.P. agenda in the immediate aftermath of last week's stunning victories was a plan to make the current tax cuts permanent and enact a new package of cuts.

There is a method to the G.O.P.'s tax cut madness, beyond the obvious benefits to the very rich. Conservatives have long reasoned that the only way to destroy popular programs that actually help ordinary Americans (Social Security, Medicare and so on) is to starve the government of the money needed to pay for them.

The intensity of the conservative opposition to such programs can be startling. To Ronald Reagan, for example, Medicare was an affront to the very idea of America. The historian Robert Dallek noted that Mr. Reagan "saw Medicare as the advance wave of socialism, which would `invade every area of freedom in this country.' "

During a budget fight in the mid-90's, Newt Gingrich, apparently referring to the original fee-for-service version of Medicare, which had become cherished by the elderly, wisecracked: "We don't get rid of it in Round One because we don't think it's politically smart."

The way to cripple such programs without openly opposing them is to bleed the government of the money to pay for them. With the prospect of budget deficits stretching far into the future, and with the first wave of baby boomers already well into their 50's, the day of reckoning for Social Security and Medicare is not far off.

The right wing of the G.O.P. has also proved itself hostile to environmental protection, and to the myriad health and safety regulations that protect Americans against poisonous foods and other dangerous products and practices. One of its most important leaders in those fights, Representative Tom DeLay, will now ascend to the post of House majority leader.

How extreme is Mr. DeLay? When the Nobel Prize in Chemistry was awarded to the discoverers of the link between chlorofluorocarbons and ozone depletion, Mr. DeLay mocked the award as the "Nobel Appeasement Prize."

And then there are the federal courts, which are being packed by conservatives from coast to coast, with the big prize � appointments to the Supreme Court � still to come.

Over the next couple of years as many as three (or more) Supreme Court vacancies could open, which could determine the direction of the court for the next 30 years. President Bush has made it clear that he favors justices in the mode of Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia. With two more justices like that, progressive government would be caught in the devastating trap of a right-wing assault from all sides � the White House, the Congress and the courts � with the Treasury drained of all money for new initiatives.

Slick? Adroit? Any number of adjectives will do. How about dangerous?

Why am I posting this editorial on my website? Because it's not enough to throw up my hands and say "It's not my fault, I didn't vote for them." The Republican party is going to do so much damage to the United States over the next few years, it will take decades to recover.

My take on the 2000 Election

November 7th, 2000. A day that will live in infamy.

Oh, sorry, I might have the month wrong there.

We have a choice coming. A choice between the right direction, and the ... other ... direction. I won’t say wrong, because only history will decide what direction is ‘right’. And history is of course written by the winners.

Resumes

I find it interesting that the statement presented by Vice President Al Gore and Senator Joseph Lieberman reads like a resume. Gore has stated that he has spent the last 26 years in service to the people. But he only lists the US Army and his time as a Reporter as ‘occupations’. I’m assuming that he does not think that his time in the House, Senate and Vice-presidency a walk in the park. We all know it’s hard work to represent people who can’t see the ‘bigger picture’. That’s probably why he chose to vote in line with Republican thinking on some of his issues. Because he understands that the truth is not on one side or the other, but somewhere in-between. I like that kind of thinking.

Of the four pictures on this page in the Voters Pamphlet, only Al Gore is looking away from the camera. Who knows why? I don’t. He might be planning his next speech, which he probably writes by himself. He might be too busy on the campaign trail to have a specific picture taken. Heck, on those lines even the picture of Joseph Lieberman looks like it was taken by a newspaper.

George W. Bush said a mouthful at the last debate. He said "I trust the people". That was enough for me, even if I had not made up my mind yet. I don’t know everything. I don’t have time to deal with the bigger picture of the way a country should go. Abraham Lincoln didn’t "trust the people". That’s why we have one country instead of two. Military Leaders don’t "trust the people". That’s why the military is not a democracy. I do know where I want my life to go; I do know what I want teachers to say in classes; I do know where I want my bank to invest my money. That’s why I make the decisions on where I work, where my children go to school, and where my investments are focused. I don’t need someone in an office somewhere to tell me I have that power. Those are the powers that define our country, and make us who we are. The bigger picture is someone else’s job, and I don’t want someone in that office that will try to foster that responsibility down on my shoulders. I already have enough.

We don’t need someone in the office of the President to make sweeping changes. Every time people start talking about big changes on a government level, I get nervous. We need someone to pick and choose our battles, who is willing to take things one step at a time. We need someone who knows that the far future is not something to pass on to our children with a pat on the back and a “good luck”, but something to plan for and invest in with sound economic decisions that will last not one generation, not two, but two hundred. Thinking anything else is like saying that someone is going to come out of the sky and rescue us from our own folly.

George Bush wants to give a tax break to everyone. In a perfect world, that would be great. But in a perfect world, we wouldn’t have 20% of our people getting government help because they don’t have the training and education to get a job that would pay their bills. People make millions and billions of dollars because they have made some very good choices. Congratulations, and can I have a piece of the pie too? Anyone who thinks they just can’t live if they have to pay 30 million dollars more in personal income taxes with this guy in the office than the other guy is someone who I don’t want to hear from. If I had won the Washington State Lottery tonight (30 Million Dollars worth), I would gladly pay whatever amount of taxes the government wanted to take. Because those taxes are what keep the roads drivable and the schools open.

Governor Bush keeps harping on the fact that the current administration made promises that it didn’t keep. But Dave Ross (KIRO 710 Seattle) mentioned something interesting about that. The only power that the president has is Executive. In that he is supreme, the chief, the boss, the end of the line. Anything else he wants to do he has to ask permission for. Supreme Court Justices, Tax Cuts, his budget, etc. Anything. And what did the current administration have to go up against to try and keep those promises? A Republican controlled Congress. Gee, I guess Bush may be able to get the ball moving after all if he gets elected. At least the Congress will vote for HIS ideas. They’re on the same team. Oh, and by the way. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think the person running for office in 1992 and 1996 was William Clinton. Not Al Gore. So Al Gore did not break his promises. And I don’t think he would. At least not those promises that he has control over.

Everyone reading this raise your hand if you think the schools are good enough and don’t need more money. I don’t see very many hands. Both sides think that the schools need improvement. Both sides think they need testing from the 3rd grade all the way up to the 8th grade. Makes you wonder how the school administration knows which students to pass on to the next grade. I mean if they don’t have testing now to see how the kids are doing in class, how do they know who passed? The point is that tests happen every day all over the country. I don’t think we need another test. I think we need to go somewhere with the knowledge we have. There should be a standard test required for everyone to get a high school diploma. The subjects should be reading, writing, math, science, sociology, economics, world history, US history, social skills, job skills, resume writing, physical readiness, health, nutrition, sexuality, philosophy, logic, music, art, speech, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Japanese, Chinese, ... Get the point yet? Where exactly do we think our children will get taught all the skills that they will need to be in the work force? At home? How many parents out there would be comfortable teaching their children how to solve a geometry problem? Or how to solve that logic equation? Or how to protect themselves from AIDS? When someone reaches the age of 18, we expect them to be ready to fight and defend our country in the armed forces if they get called. How much more important is that than being able to support themselves if they don’t get called? Not very.

George Bush has mentioned that he would have no personal objection to seeing the ‘standard version’ of the 10 commandments posted in school. I think anyone with any knowledge of history and religion would agree that the ‘standard version’ of the 10 commandments comes from the Talmud. So in that, I agree with him. I have no personal objection to having the 10 commandments posted in schools either. As long as they are printed in Hebrew. And if the kids can read them, then we know we have improved the schools. In fact, can anyone think of a religion in the world where the laws and original text was written in the English Language? I can. So if we want to put a good moral system up where everyone can read it, let’s post the Wiccan Rede.

But who am I to say all this? I’m just one man. On November 7th, I’ll have the opportunity to be equal to George Bush, Al Gore and William Clinton. They only get one vote, and so do I. And so do you. If you had the opportunity just one time in your life to feel real power, this is it. You don’t have to agree with what I say. You don’t have to agree with what anyone says. There was a program on a few weeks ago that really touched me. Governor Ventura of Minnesota told a TV program on independent candidates that it’s not about choosing the lesser of two evils. Election day is about voting with your mind, heart and soul to get the people in the offices in our government that will follow your ideals and represent your interests in the forming of the ‘big picture’. And unless you want to put yourself up for election and take on that level of responsibility, November 7th is the only chance you will have to make your ideas and dreams known. So if the only thing you ever tell anyone who is wondering what to do on November 7th, be sure to tell them to vote. It’s our greatest connection to the ones who started it all in the West. Athens, Greece. You remember, the people who worshiped the Goddess.

Blessed Be!

Chad Lupkes
chadlupkes@yahoo.com
Touch Magic, Pass It On!

Dream 02/20/00

I was part of a hunting party. Not hunting for meat, but for a man. He was a criminal who had escaped his emprisonment, and we were trying to track him down and return him. We had tracked him to an ancient church ground, one still enthused with the energy of the distant past. The building was made of stone, with no gargoyles, and few windows. I had never seen the building before, but it was in an isolated valley, so I must have just missed it. We stopped the group outside, and prepared to enter and search. We didn't see any horses outside, so we figured the place was empty except for our quarry.

We were wrong.

The front doors swung open and a procession of Warriors filed out. Our man was in the middle, marching with head high, no fear on his face at all. I remember that being significantly different from his expression as we had seen it on the spyscopes from a distance the other day. He had been running for his life, and the evidence of fear had been paplable even from the distance we were watching him at. Not so any more. He was in a state of peace as the procession marched up to the leader of our hunting party, and he presented himself. The lead hunter was surprised, but accepted his surrender with honor, and made preparations to return him home. The captive was given bread and meat, and wine. He had not eaten for 3 days while he was running.

Then the leader of the procession stepped out of the church. He was a tall man, at least 7' tall. The only thing clear about him was his eyes. He turned his head to view the entire scene, and his gaze seemed to have a message for everyone it touched. When he turned to me, the effect was profound. This was Thor, in the flesh or nearly. He was presenting a side that we had not seen before, one of peace and love. There was almost a female aspect to him, and I wondered what had caused the difference. Then the memories hit me. Memories of my own loves of the past, some who had passed on to Asgard, some that I just hadn't seen in a long time. I felt the sorrow of loss like it had never hit me before. I didn't collapse, but I did lean up against the ancient stone to use it's support.

When his eyes turned to mine, his presence seemed to multiply until he was covering my entire field of vision. But not just vision. Every sense was being in his company. I could feel the power of the storm behind his breath, and I could see the lightning flashing in his eyes. But what I most felt was love. And then it occured to me what had happened. The procession of Warriors was a funeral march, and the hunting party that I was with was a troop of Valkyrie, sent to receive a Warrior from Earth who had finished his cycle. The love in the eyes of Thor/Odin/Frigga was the love of the Gods toward all mankind.

They feel our pain, and wish to make their love known to us.

Can you feel it?

Opposing Discrimination in Washington way back in 1995.

Date: Sat, 22 Jul 1995 21:32:30 -0400 From: ChadL39788@aol.com Did you get my article? Here's another one that might interest you. It's from the Gay Pride issue of my store newsletter. Discrimination is defined as "the act, practice, or an instance of discriminating categorically rather than individually." This definition is from the online dictionary from America Online. It means using stereotypes to define a person instead of true knowledge of them as an individual. Two initiatives are currently going around Washington State that directly affect anyone who has dealt with legal discrimination based on sexual orientation. These initiatives are 166 and 167. Hands Off Washington, Citizens for Fairness is an anti-discrimination political force that sprang into being when 608 and 610 came up a few years ago, and is now working to fight these new initiatives to ensure they do not get a chance. Initiative 166 is a retry of Initaitive 608. This initiative would void the few legal protections that already exist against discrimination based on sexual orientation on local levels like Seattle's city ordinance. It would ban the future enactment or enforcement of such protections. Further, it would censor employees, students, and guests in public schools of any grade level from any discussion of sexuality issues except in negative terms or condemnation. There remain serious questions about its impact on parenting by gays and lesbians, contractual relationships (i.e. co-ownership of your home with a same-gender partner), and wills and other legal arrangements regarding decisions in the event you become incapacitiated or die. Initiative 167 is even more misunderstood and dangerous. This initiative is being discussed in the press and elsewhere as a "ban on lesbian and gay adoption". That description is incomplete and inaccurate--this initative is an attack on the entire adoption and foster care system. While it does contain a ban on gay &amp; lesbian adoption and foster parenting, it also bans such parenting by any unmarried couples, gay or not. It also sets a preference for placing children with married male-female couples over single people. (Forget the fact that currently, the vast majority of foster care is provided by single women!) To quote the text of the initiative, "The people further find that there is a compelling state interest in the adoptive and foster care placement of minor children, if at all possible, in sound, married, male-female households." This means that, even if you make custodial arrangements for your child, the state can override those arrangements if your chosen godparent is not married to someone of the opposite gender. In other words, the state would rather put your child in a home with married strangers rather than allow a widowed grandmother, a heterosexual uncle who lives with his girlfriend, or a lesbian aunt to raise them per your own wishes. Amazing but true! I have the entire text of the bill if you would like to see it. Basically, anything less than the Brady Bunch is just not acceptable. Initiative 167 also says this: "A person residing in the state of Washington or a nonprofit entity doing business in this state has standing to enforce the provisions of this act." This means that individuals or non-profit entities (i.e. Churches) who disagree with where a child is living can call the state and request to have the child removed from where he/she is living. I really need to talk about this, but I'm wondering how to put it in words. I hope this works: Some people are under the impression that discrimination against Gays and Lesbians is not the same as discrimination against Women, Blacks, Jews or Native Americans. But being a woman is not defined by how a female dresses, or thinks, it's who that person is. Being Black is part of someone; it doesn't wash away. Being Jewish or Native American is not primarily defined by genetics, but by culture; the way a person is raised to follow a certain set of values. The way I understand being Gay or Lesbian is the same way. It's not important what a person does or does not do, or how that person thinks or works or lives. Being Gay or Lesbian is not "just a phase." Nor is it an act. It just is. Being Gay is not what I do, it is WHO I AM, and there is a definite difference between the two phrases. Being Gay defines me as a person, just like being American defines me as person. I was raised to find my own way to my own brand of happiness. And I have found it. No one has the right to try and take it away from me because they don't agree with it. Anyone who tries is wrong. These two initiatives and many others nationwide affect me directly. My husband Kyros and I have been together for 6 years as of May 6th, and we are damn proud of that fact. So I am spending some of my energy to fight these initiatives, and stop them or anything like them from ever bothering me or mine again. As far as I am concerned, anything that advocates discrimination is a direct violation of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. I was born here, so I have my rights. No one is going to take them away. Chad A. Lupkes Orion at Twilight 2934B Colby Ave Everett, WA 98201 (206) 303-8624 OrionatTwi@aol.com - Information is free. It's the paper and binding that costs money. That makes the Internet totally free. -