Mel Brennan
10 Sep 2004, 08:16 PM
I guess I should say it now, even though I was going to do a whole big post on it, but I and my wife are voting for John Kerry, for a number of reasons, many, but nowhere near all of them, here:
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0730-04.htm
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/07/27/145200&mode=thread&tid=25
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/08/09/1341224
http://www.dsausa.org/LatestNews/election04c.html
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0806-13.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0817-10.htm
And that is not the issue; the issue is, by electing Kerry, what are we saving?
Again, my theory is that we can lay no claim on that which we do when it is easy to do; we cna only lay claim to something as representative of ourselves when it is not easy to do or be that thing...that is how we KNOW it is a part of us. That whole "character is what we do when we know noone is looking and we'll never be caught" axiom is a corollary.
Who are we right now? (http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/dispatch/2004-09-10/pols_feature4.html) If we are going to defecate all over what little democracy we have, what are we calling that which we are trying so hard to save, trying so hard to keep from losing? What IS it? What can we call it?
I am voting for Kerry in the main due to the "you don't remodel the house while it's burning to the ground" analogy. I accept that. What I don't accept is a fundamental effort from those who claim to be "better," however they define it, than the choice that is George Bush working just as hard to inspire fear and subvert democratic practice as Rove and his ********ing gang...
..."This is American fascism. We're going to appeal it all." That was Ralph Nader's response to two Sept. 1 decisions rejecting the Nader presidential campaign's applications for ballot access in Oregon and Texas. In Oregon, the secretary of state rejected the campaign's third submission of petitions, saying they still did not comply with state law. And in Texas, U.S. District Court Judge Lee Yeakel ruled against Nader in his lawsuit to have the Texas regulations governing independent candidates ruled unconstitutional. Yeakel ruled that although independents are required to submit more signatures gathered in a shorter time than are minor-party candidates, the differing requirements are "reasonable, nondiscriminatory, and constitutional." (Nader's campaign had submitted enough signatures by the deadline to meet minor-party requirements, but not the higher standard required of independents.)
National campaign spokesman Kevin Zeese called Yeakel's ruling "a very poor decision, and we will appeal it. ... It's patently unfair to require independent candidates to collect 20,000 more signatures in two weeks less time..."
If you don't have a problem with this, then you have the same "ends justifies the means" mentality as Bush and the terrorists around the globe do. Thrasymachus is correct; essentially, "might makes right." The Dems do this in essence because they can. We go into Iraq, because we can. UBL funds and plans murderous bombings b/c he can...violent physical force capability as power is the ultimate, fundamental lever of the universe.
I cannot, and will not either subscribe to, or endorse, that type of life and living. It is, in fact, perfectly decpetive, and perfectly wrong in its seeming totality. But it takes thinking that reflects a mid and long-term wisdom, and not a short-term process of becoming whatever to gain whatever (and thus, after enough twists and turns, being very little at all) to see that.
I want Nader in the race for as long as it takes to get Kerry to understand that just being "not Bush" will guarantee his losing one of the most important elections in my lifetime. Of course, there is another tack: he can, in election/campaign practice, become Bush/Rove Corp. He can employ the same tactics, the same gutter ads, the same base non-issues, and we'll eat it up while wondering why we're never both full and satiated, civically, and spiritually, let alone culturally or economically. I would hope that Nader, or his voters, migrate over to getting Bush's team out, and then hammering Kerry's so-called mandate into oblivion, but we don't even see those that claim to do it/say it/live it better than Bush fighting for that. And if you are not gonna fight for democracy when it's hard - the littel bit of it you have left - when ARE you gonna fight for it? When?
When?
I'm just tired. Tired of thinking that this is what we choose to distill into, everyday. I don't care what you think, of Nader, or of me, or of the issue...this is wrong. This is not the direction in which we are supposed to be going. I speak in vain, I know, but it really makes me sad, deeply, for the nation and the world. The longer-term is comprised not of small steps of "right" and "wrong," but of small steps where we do, or do not do.
When are we going to demand al lthe things this set of decision-rules not only gives us, but CAN give us?
******** it. It's late here. But this is wrong. It is wrong to work so DAMN HARD against democracy!
I guess that I'm trying to square my voting for Kerry with my own conscience, kowing what I know. But I no longer feel like the choice is between the lesser of two evils (where a vote for Kerry is still a vote for evil); I think of it two different ways, depending on the day; sometimes I thnik of it as a vote for the greater of two goods. One good is voting for Nader, or Cobb, or another party that more specifically embraces the potential of America as a people-government. The greater good, in that framework, is ousting Bush.
Then, sometimes, I think that the whole good/evil thing is stupid and useless and not descriptive of our actual world. Then I see the whole thing as simply being, and we do what we can to maximize that being; in that light, Bush's presidency is like a tumor on the body. We may also have a broken toe, but the tumor's gonna kill us unless we excise it.
But if we excise it with chemicals and such in a way that will eventually make us die a painful death anyway, what's the point?
We, right now, are throwing the baby out with the bath water. I've come to really love babies.
Don't do that to your baby. Don't do that to my baby. Let's just throw out the bath water, that scummy, dirty, filthy bath water, and towel off the sweet clean baby, and nurture it, and protect it with our lives, and help it become all it can be in realtionship with the other babies becoming al lthey can be, in relationship to her/him...
Thus a circle is created, the truth of interdependency acknowledged.
It's what we do when it's hard to do. I'm rambling. Good night.
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0730-04.htm
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/07/27/145200&mode=thread&tid=25
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/08/09/1341224
http://www.dsausa.org/LatestNews/election04c.html
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0806-13.htm
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0817-10.htm
And that is not the issue; the issue is, by electing Kerry, what are we saving?
Again, my theory is that we can lay no claim on that which we do when it is easy to do; we cna only lay claim to something as representative of ourselves when it is not easy to do or be that thing...that is how we KNOW it is a part of us. That whole "character is what we do when we know noone is looking and we'll never be caught" axiom is a corollary.
Who are we right now? (http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/dispatch/2004-09-10/pols_feature4.html) If we are going to defecate all over what little democracy we have, what are we calling that which we are trying so hard to save, trying so hard to keep from losing? What IS it? What can we call it?
I am voting for Kerry in the main due to the "you don't remodel the house while it's burning to the ground" analogy. I accept that. What I don't accept is a fundamental effort from those who claim to be "better," however they define it, than the choice that is George Bush working just as hard to inspire fear and subvert democratic practice as Rove and his ********ing gang...
..."This is American fascism. We're going to appeal it all." That was Ralph Nader's response to two Sept. 1 decisions rejecting the Nader presidential campaign's applications for ballot access in Oregon and Texas. In Oregon, the secretary of state rejected the campaign's third submission of petitions, saying they still did not comply with state law. And in Texas, U.S. District Court Judge Lee Yeakel ruled against Nader in his lawsuit to have the Texas regulations governing independent candidates ruled unconstitutional. Yeakel ruled that although independents are required to submit more signatures gathered in a shorter time than are minor-party candidates, the differing requirements are "reasonable, nondiscriminatory, and constitutional." (Nader's campaign had submitted enough signatures by the deadline to meet minor-party requirements, but not the higher standard required of independents.)
National campaign spokesman Kevin Zeese called Yeakel's ruling "a very poor decision, and we will appeal it. ... It's patently unfair to require independent candidates to collect 20,000 more signatures in two weeks less time..."
If you don't have a problem with this, then you have the same "ends justifies the means" mentality as Bush and the terrorists around the globe do. Thrasymachus is correct; essentially, "might makes right." The Dems do this in essence because they can. We go into Iraq, because we can. UBL funds and plans murderous bombings b/c he can...violent physical force capability as power is the ultimate, fundamental lever of the universe.
I cannot, and will not either subscribe to, or endorse, that type of life and living. It is, in fact, perfectly decpetive, and perfectly wrong in its seeming totality. But it takes thinking that reflects a mid and long-term wisdom, and not a short-term process of becoming whatever to gain whatever (and thus, after enough twists and turns, being very little at all) to see that.
I want Nader in the race for as long as it takes to get Kerry to understand that just being "not Bush" will guarantee his losing one of the most important elections in my lifetime. Of course, there is another tack: he can, in election/campaign practice, become Bush/Rove Corp. He can employ the same tactics, the same gutter ads, the same base non-issues, and we'll eat it up while wondering why we're never both full and satiated, civically, and spiritually, let alone culturally or economically. I would hope that Nader, or his voters, migrate over to getting Bush's team out, and then hammering Kerry's so-called mandate into oblivion, but we don't even see those that claim to do it/say it/live it better than Bush fighting for that. And if you are not gonna fight for democracy when it's hard - the littel bit of it you have left - when ARE you gonna fight for it? When?
When?
I'm just tired. Tired of thinking that this is what we choose to distill into, everyday. I don't care what you think, of Nader, or of me, or of the issue...this is wrong. This is not the direction in which we are supposed to be going. I speak in vain, I know, but it really makes me sad, deeply, for the nation and the world. The longer-term is comprised not of small steps of "right" and "wrong," but of small steps where we do, or do not do.
When are we going to demand al lthe things this set of decision-rules not only gives us, but CAN give us?
******** it. It's late here. But this is wrong. It is wrong to work so DAMN HARD against democracy!
I guess that I'm trying to square my voting for Kerry with my own conscience, kowing what I know. But I no longer feel like the choice is between the lesser of two evils (where a vote for Kerry is still a vote for evil); I think of it two different ways, depending on the day; sometimes I thnik of it as a vote for the greater of two goods. One good is voting for Nader, or Cobb, or another party that more specifically embraces the potential of America as a people-government. The greater good, in that framework, is ousting Bush.
Then, sometimes, I think that the whole good/evil thing is stupid and useless and not descriptive of our actual world. Then I see the whole thing as simply being, and we do what we can to maximize that being; in that light, Bush's presidency is like a tumor on the body. We may also have a broken toe, but the tumor's gonna kill us unless we excise it.
But if we excise it with chemicals and such in a way that will eventually make us die a painful death anyway, what's the point?
We, right now, are throwing the baby out with the bath water. I've come to really love babies.
Don't do that to your baby. Don't do that to my baby. Let's just throw out the bath water, that scummy, dirty, filthy bath water, and towel off the sweet clean baby, and nurture it, and protect it with our lives, and help it become all it can be in realtionship with the other babies becoming al lthey can be, in relationship to her/him...
Thus a circle is created, the truth of interdependency acknowledged.
It's what we do when it's hard to do. I'm rambling. Good night.