Showing posts with label Ralph Nader. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ralph Nader. Show all posts

February 03, 2009

The "I couldn't agree more" department

It’s Not Going to Be OK, By Chris Hedges

Dandelion Salad

By Chris Hedges
ICH
February 02, 2009 “TruthDig“

see

The daily bleeding of thousands of jobs will soon turn our economic crisis into a political crisis. The street protests, strikes and riots that have rattled France, Turkey, Greece, Ukraine, Russia, Latvia, Lithuania, Bulgaria and Iceland will descend on us. It is only a matter of time. And not much time. When things start to go sour, when Barack Obama is exposed as a mortal waving a sword at a tidal wave, the United States could plunge into a long period of precarious social instability.

At no period in American history has our democracy been in such peril or has the possibility of totalitarianism been as real. Our way of life is over. Our profligate consumption is finished. Our children will never have the standard of living we had. And poverty and despair will sweep across the landscape like a plague. This is the bleak future. There is nothing President Obama can do to stop it. It has been decades in the making. It cannot be undone with a trillion or two trillion dollars in bailout money. Our empire is dying. Our economy has collapsed.

How will we cope with our decline? Will we cling to the absurd dreams of a superpower and a glorious tomorrow or will we responsibly face our stark new limitations? Will we heed those who are sober and rational, those who speak of a new simplicity and humility, or will we follow the demagogues and charlatans who rise up out of the slime in moments of crisis to offer fantastic visions? Will we radically transform our system to one that protects the ordinary citizen and fosters the common good, that defies the corporate state, or will we employ the brutality and technology of our internal security and surveillance apparatus to crush all dissent? We won’t have to wait long to find out.

There are a few isolated individuals who saw it coming. The political philosophers Sheldon S. Wolin, John Ralston Saul and Andrew Bacevich, as well as writers such as Noam Chomsky, Chalmers Johnson, David Korten and Naomi Klein, along with activists such as Bill McKibben and Ralph Nader, rang the alarm bells. They were largely ignored or ridiculed. Our corporate media and corporate universities proved, when we needed them most, intellectually and morally useless.

Wolin, who taught political philosophy at the University of California in Berkeley and at Princeton, in his book “Democracy Incorporated” uses the phrase inverted totalitarianism to describe our system of power. Inverted totalitarianism, unlike classical totalitarianism, does not revolve around a demagogue or charismatic leader. It finds its expression in the anonymity of the corporate state. It purports to cherish democracy, patriotism and the Constitution while cynically manipulating internal levers to subvert and thwart democratic institutions. Political candidates are elected in popular votes by citizens, but they must raise staggering amounts of corporate funds to compete. They are beholden to armies of corporate lobbyists in Washington or state capitals who write the legislation. A corporate media controls nearly everything we read, watch or hear and imposes a bland uniformity of opinion or diverts us with trivia and celebrity gossip. In classical totalitarian regimes, such as Nazi fascism or Soviet communism, economics was subordinate to politics. “Under inverted totalitarianism the reverse is true,” Wolin writes. “Economics dominates politics-and with that domination comes different forms of ruthlessness.”

I reached Wolin, 86, by phone at his home about 25 miles north of San Francisco. He was a bombardier in the South Pacific during World War II and went to Harvard after the war to get his doctorate. Wolin has written classics such as “Politics and Vision” and “Tocqueville Between Two Worlds.” His newest book is one of the most important and prescient critiques to date of the American political system. He is also the author of a series of remarkable essays on Augustine of Hippo, Richard Hooker, David Hume, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Max Weber, Friedrich Nietzsche, Karl Marx and John Dewey. His voice, however, has faded from public awareness because, as he told me, “it is harder and harder for people like me to get a public hearing.” He said that publications, such as The New York Review of Books, which often published his work a couple of decades ago, lost interest in his critiques of American capitalism, his warnings about the subversion of democratic institutions and the emergence of the corporate state. He does not hold out much hope for Obama.

“The basic systems are going to stay in place; they are too powerful to be challenged,” Wolin told me when I asked him about the new Obama administration. “This is shown by the financial bailout. It does not bother with the structure at all. I don’t think Obama can take on the kind of military establishment we have developed. This is not to say that I do not admire him. He is probably the most intelligent president we have had in decades. I think he is well meaning, but he inherits a system of constraints that make it very difficult to take on these major power configurations. I do not think he has the appetite for it in any ideological sense. The corporate structure is not going to be challenged. There has not been a word from him that would suggest an attempt to rethink the American imperium.”

Wolin argues that a failure to dismantle our vast and overextended imperial projects, coupled with the economic collapse, is likely to result in inverted totalitarianism. He said that without “radical and drastic remedies” the response to mounting discontent and social unrest will probably lead to greater state control and repression. There will be, he warned, a huge “expansion of government power.”

“Our political culture has remained unhelpful in fostering a democratic consciousness,” he said. “The political system and its operatives will not be constrained by popular discontent or uprisings.”

Wolin writes that in inverted totalitarianism consumer goods and a comfortable standard of living, along with a vast entertainment industry that provides spectacles and diversions, keep the citizenry politically passive. I asked if the economic collapse and the steady decline in our standard of living might not, in fact, trigger classical totalitarianism. Could widespread frustration and poverty lead the working and middle classes to place their faith in demagogues, especially those from the Christian right?

“I think that’s perfectly possible,” he answered. “That was the experience of the 1930s. There wasn’t just FDR. There was Huey Long and Father Coughlin. There were even more extreme movements including the Klan. The extent to which those forces can be fed by the downturn and bleakness is a very real danger. It could become classical totalitarianism.”

He said the widespread political passivity is dangerous. It is often exploited by demagogues who pose as saviors and offer dreams of glory and salvation. He warned that “the apoliticalness, even anti-politicalness, will be very powerful elements in taking us towards a radically dictatorial direction. It testifies to how thin the commitment to democracy is in the present circumstances. Democracy is not ascendant. It is not dominant. It is beleaguered. The extent to which young people have been drawn away from public concerns and given this extraordinary range of diversions makes it very likely they could then rally to a demagogue.”

Wolin lamented that the corporate state has successfully blocked any real debate about alternative forms of power. Corporations determine who gets heard and who does not, he said. And those who critique corporate power are given no place in the national dialogue.

“In the 1930s there were all kinds of alternative understandings, from socialism to more extensive governmental involvement,” he said. “There was a range of different approaches. But what I am struck by now is the narrow range within which palliatives are being modeled. We are supposed to work with the financial system. So the people who helped create this system are put in charge of the solution. There has to be some major effort to think outside the box.”

“The puzzle to me is the lack of social unrest,” Wolin said when I asked why we have not yet seen rioting or protests. He said he worried that popular protests will be dismissed and ignored by the corporate media. This, he said, is what happened when tens of thousands protested the war in Iraq. This will permit the state to ruthlessly suppress local protests, as happened during the Democratic and Republic conventions. Anti-war protests in the 1960s gained momentum from their ability to spread across the country, he noted. This, he said, may not happen this time. “The ways they can isolate protests and prevent it from [becoming] a contagion are formidable,” he said.

“My greatest fear is that the Obama administration will achieve relatively little in terms of structural change,” he added. “They may at best keep the system going. But there is a growing pessimism. Every day we hear how much longer the recession will continue. They are already talking about beyond next year. The economic difficulties are more profound than we had guessed and because of globalization more difficult to deal with. I wish the political establishment, the parties and leadership, would become more aware of the depths of the problem. They can’t keep throwing money at this. They have to begin structural changes that involve a very different approach from a market economy. I don’t think this will happen.”

“I keep asking why and how and when this country became so conservative,” he went on. “This country once prided itself on its experimentation and flexibility. It has become rigid. It is probably the most conservative of all the advanced countries.”

The American left, he said, has crumbled. It sold out to a bankrupt Democratic Party, abandoned the working class and has no ability to organize. Unions are a spent force. The universities are mills for corporate employees. The press churns out info-entertainment or fatuous pundits. The left, he said, no longer has the capacity to be a counterweight to the corporate state. He said that if an extreme right gains momentum there will probably be very little organized resistance.

“The left is amorphous,” he said. “I despair over the left. Left parties may be small in number in Europe but they are a coherent organization that keeps going. Here, except for Nader’s efforts, we don’t have that. We have a few voices here, a magazine there, and that’s about it. It goes nowhere.”

© 2009 TruthDig.com

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Obama’s New Bank Giveaway, by Michael Hudson

Nests In Hell, by Rand Clifford

The Age Of Liberal Fascism, by Rocket Kirchner

Ralph Nader Posts & Videos

The Economy Sucks and or Collapse 2

July 15, 2008

Activism: Hey, give Ralph some money !!


July 15, 2008
www.votenader.org
www.officialnaderstore.com


Donate $100 now.

And we'll send you an autographed copy of the DVD - An Unreasonable Man.

Autographed by Ralph Nader - the subject of this historic documentary.

All around us are people who don't want Ralph to run this year.

This movie is the perfect remedy. (Watch trailer here.)

Buy this DVD.

Show it to them, loan it to them, or just give it to them - but just make sure they see it.

Young people will learn and older people will remember what it means to stand for something, to fight for something, and to believe that your efforts will make a difference.

An Unreasonable Man is the movie that turns heads.

Show it to people who like Ralph.

Show it to people who don't like Ralph.

Show it people who think Ralph should run.

Show it to people who think Ralph should not run.

But get your own autographed copy now.

So you can show it to them all.

(Or if you already have a copy, get one as a gift.)

This limited offer is part of our ten day fundraiser.

Our goal - raise $60,000 by July 20.

To put Ralph on the ballot on 15 states by July 20.

Over the last five days, we've raised over $30,000.

So, we're halfway there.

Now, let's push it past the finish line.

Donate $100 or more by 12 midnight Sunday July 20, and we'll send you an autographed copy of this explosive documentary of Ralph's public life of citizen activism.

(Only one DVD per donation of $100 or more. If you would like two copies, please donate twice. Three copies, donate three times. Remember - only one DVD per donation of $100 or more.)

Don't miss out.

Hit the button now.

Thank you.

Together, we will make a difference.

Onward

The Nader Team

PS: We invite your comments to the blog.

Your contribution could be doubled. Public campaign financing may match your contribution total up to $250.

July 12, 2008

CYNTHIA McKINNEY is our candidate !!


HISTORY MADE TODAY IN CHICAGO

The Greens chose Cynthia McKinney on the first ballot today in Chicago to be the party presidential nominee. Cynthia then nominated Rosa Clemente to be her running mate who was quickly approved by near unanimous acclaim.

Born and raised in the South Bronx she is a graduate of the University of Albany and Cornell University. Clemente is a highly regarded commentator, political activist, community organizer, Hip-Hop activist, and independent reporter.

Chuck D of Public Enemy says that Clemente "is one of this generations' most important political voices and community organizers."

In her acceptance speech McKinney defined winning as setting a goal to garner 5% of the national vote which would give the Green Party major party status on the national level. McKinney made it clear that her run for president is all about building an alternative to the two war parties. The corporate parties have to flip-flop on the issues she said "because they have to appear" to agree with our progressive values while they then do the bidding of the corporations who pay their freight.

Maine delegates gave McKinney the 5th most votes of any state during the first round of balloting. Only New York, Illinois, California, and Wisconsin gave her more presidential delegate votes.

Ralph Nader came in a distant second in the presidential balloting which indicated that while people still respect him, his day of gaining the ballot lines via the Green Party across the nation are over. At this point McKinney will be on the ballot in at least 25 states across the nation next November . Greens in other states are still attempting to cross the enormously difficult ballot status barriers that keep the Republicans and Democrats from being challenged.

Just after the nomination process concluded 2004 Green Party presidential candidate David Cobb made a rousing introduction speech of McKinney. It was Cobb, and the Green Party, that challenged the well-documented vote fraud in Ohio in 2004 that put Bush in the White House again. While John Kerry, and the Democratic Party, violated their promise to "fight for every vote" it fell to the Greens to file the legal challenge to protect disenfranchised voters in Ohio.

Before McKinney's acceptance speech, a video was played on the huge screen above the stage in the Chicago Symphony Center with John Lennon singing his song "Power to the People." McKinney has adopted that slogan as her campaign theme and it brought tears to me eyes to see her dancing on the stage during the Lennon song.

I felt that it was a moment of liberation for McKinney and the Green Party. McKinney was free of the restraints that come from being a "good" Democratic Party elected official where you are expected to toe the party line and not challenge the party orthodoxy. Now McKinney is free to be herself - to speak truth to power as she so effectively does. In fact on the podium, as McKinney spoke, was a sign that read TRUTH.

With the nomination of McKinney and Clemente the Green Party is now free to become the real radical alternative party that it should be - radical in the sense of "getting to the roots" of the issues at hand and building the political base to make the needed changes. The Green Party took a huge step today in the creation of a multi-ethnic party with leadership from black and Latino communities. This is a must as we look at the coming demographic changes in America. There will be no progressive movement in America without active leadership from people of color working alongside of progressive white activists.

To say the least it was refreshing.

I've been a McKinney watcher for years as she was one of the key voices in the Congress who time and again spoke on behalf of "the people". McKinney has been run out of office twice by the power structure and vilified by the corporate media for having the audacity to speak against war and corporate domination. I am sure her nomination will be greeted with scorn by the corporate masters.

For me today was a revolutionary moment. Since working on the Jesse Jackson presidential campaign in 1984, and seeing the hope of a "Rainbow coalition" whither away, I've thirsted for the coming together of the movements. Today's event clearly indicated the enormous possibilities that exist for revolutionary peace, social justice, and ecological organizing in the U.S. if people are willing to step into this historic moment.

The change we all long for will not come from the Democratic Party. A new positive and earth shaking train has just left the station. The question remains will people who see themselves as progressive have the wisdom to get on-board and not be left behind sorting through the crumbs left behind by the corporate parties.

posted by Bruce Gagnon

July 04, 2008

Green Party (Obama exposed!) update


href="http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=68">http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=vi...
1&Itemid=1

Cynthia McKinney Deserves Your Support, Obama Does Not Wednesday,
02 July 2008 A Campaign Foreign Policy Focus by BAR executive editor
Glen Ford

Former Georgia congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, who seems poised to
capture the Green Party presidential nomination, in Chicago, this
month, "is at this juncture in history the only vehicle through
which progressives can both register their outrage at Barack Obama
and begin the process of rebuilding a mass, Black-led movement for
real social change." Meanwhile, the frequency of Obama's Right turns
seem to increase in direct proportion to the nearness of the general
election. "Surely no one with a brain any longer believes that Obama
is a closet progressive, or even a genuine liberal." The question
is, How many progressives will put their votes and resources to
honorable use?

Cynthia McKinney Deserves Your Support, Obama Does Not A Campaign
Foreign Policy Focus by BAR executive editor Glen Ford

"Cynthia McKinney's campaign is the last opportunity to threaten
Obama with a backlash against his betrayals of progressive principles.

"We have to bring the war in Iraq to a respectable, responsible and
honorable end," said Barack Obama, sharing a platform with Hillary
Clinton in Unity, New Hampshire, last week. The list of qualifiers
and impediments to a quick exit from Iraq lengthens with each Obama
lurch to the Right. The closer the Illinois senator gets to the
White House, the farther he projects the Iraq occupation into a
future just as murky as that envisioned by George Bush and John
McCain. In Obama's endlessly conditional world, withdrawal from
Iraq must be done "responsibly" - meaning, in actuality, that the
U.S. must retain the power to keep the Iraqis "responsive" to
American military, economic and political demands. A U.S. military
pullout (of who knows how many troops, since Obama has always been
elusive on the question) must be "honorable" - meaning, it should
not give the appearance of weakness or admission of criminality.
Most important, the U.S. must emerge from the withdrawal (or
reduction, or draw-down, or other conjure-word) in a position of
"respect" - a total impossibility, unless respect actually means
evoking terror throughout the neighborhood at the very thought of
ever again provoking the Americans into violating the laws of modern
civilization.

Such is the endless elasticity of terms like "peace" and "withdrawal"

when mouthed by Barack Obama, a master of bait-and-switch, a game
he apparently believes he can play indefinitely on the people of
the United States and the planet. The general debasement of language
in the U.S.

political culture - a degeneration that devalues meaning and facts,
cause and effect, in favor of bells, whistles, hype and prettily-packaged
but hollow "hope" - provides a perfect soundstage for Obama's
politics of vapidity, in which no term has reliable, lasting
definition. Only in a flim-flam market culture, in which old products
are packaged as "new and improved" and senile reactionary farts
like Ronald Reagan are deemed "revolutionaries," could Barack Obama,
Hillary Clinton and Democratic congressional leadership masquerade
as proponents of peace - even as virtually the entire senatorial
Party endorses another $162.5 billion for Iraq-Afghanistan war
funding.

"Barack Obama is a master of bait-and-switch."

Obama is confident he can retain the "peace candidate" label while
erecting successive obstacles to actual, physical withdrawal from
Iraq, and while simultaneously pledging to add 92,000 troops to the
U.S. Armed Forces in order "to fight two wars and defend our
homeland." His confidence is well-placed, not just because he is
the Big Money Candidate in the current historical shift of corporate
dollars from Republicans to Democrats - money that buys a mass
version of reality - but because generations of two-party homogenized
gibberish has rendered millions of Americans incapable of distinguishing
between fact and fantasy, between waging war and pursuing peace.

The true voices of peace speak clearly, in simple language. "The
U.S.

should withdraw all troops and mercenaries from Iraq in as orderly
a fashion as possible," says former Georgia congresswoman Cynthia
McKinney, candidate for the Green Party's presidential nomination.
"This withdrawal should be quickly accomplished, since the troops
and the equipment were all pre-positioned in the area to start with,
at the start of the invasion."

No flim-flam, no equivocations, no inventing of excuses to prolong
the crime against peace (a Nuremburg capital offense). McKinney
speaks as both a former U.S. Representative and a movement activist,
one of the architects of the Reconstruction Party's Power to the
People Platform, which declares:

"We need an end to all wars and occupations by U.S. forces, including
in Iraq and Afghanistan. We need an immediate cessation of funding
for war. We need prosecution for all individuals guilty of violating
the law, including having committed or authorized crimes against
humanity, crimes against the peace, torture, or war crimes. We need
a complete renunciation of the pre-emptive war doctrine. We need
an end to all wars and war's utility. We need to dismantle the
apparatus that implements schemes of regime change around the world,
and that instead assists in self-determination of all peoples."

The platform on which McKinney runs is straightforward, eminently
understandable, and in conformance with the substance and spirit
of international law. It is what Barack Obama used to pretend to
say, in front of progressive audiences, only without his mitigating
language designed for ease of reversal - commonly called flip-flop,
but more accurately, betrayal - terms that ultimately smother peace
in a pillow of words like "respectable, responsible and honorable."

This is how Obama uses his impressive language skills: to lure
constituencies that seek peace into the maelstroms of war; to assault
the integrity of language itself with his relentless tinkering with
meanings, until finally, his original peaceful promises turn into
their warlike opposites.

Obama's modus operandi is consistent and, especially after his
recent flurry of policy reversals, transparent to all who care to
observe him dispassionately. He is a word-hustler, a slickster, a
politician/actor who has always been eager to serve the global aims
of the very rich. That's why, back in the summer of 2003, while a
candidate for the Illinois Democratic U.S.

senatorial nomination, he had to be pressured (by Bruce Dixon and
me) to have his name removed from the corporatist Democratic
Leadership Council membership list. And that's why, five years
later, he stripped off his anti-NAFTA clothing to announce on CNBC,
the businessman's cable source: "Look. I am a pro-growth, free-market
guy. I love the market."

"The U.S. should withdraw all troops and mercenaries from Iraq in
as orderly a fashion as possible,' says former Georgia congresswoman
Cynthia McKinney."

As Naomi Klein wrote in "Obama's Chicago Boys" (June 14, The Nation),
Obama "is thoroughly embedded in the mind-set known as the Chicago
School,"

established by Ronald Reagan's favorite economist, Milton Friedman,
at the University of Chicago, where Obama taught constitutional law
for ten years.

Obama's chief economic adviser, Austan Goolsbee, is on the faculty.
It was Goolsbee who, back in February, urged the rightwing Canadian
government not to pay too much attention to Obama's campaign critiques
of NAFTA, explaining that the candidate's rhetoric was "more
reflective of political maneuvering than policy."

Goolsby spoke the truth. Obama has maneuvered himself out of the
anti-NAFTA camp, entirely. As he told Nina Easton of Fortune, the
quintessential ruling class magazine:

"Sometimes during campaigns the rhetoric gets overheated and
amplified,"

he conceded, after I reminded him that he had called NAFTA
"devastating" and "a big mistake," despite nonpartisan studies
concluding that the trade zone has had a mild, positive effect on
the U.S. economy.

Does that mean his rhetoric was overheated and amplified? "Politicians
are always guilty of that, and I don't exempt myself," he answered.

Obama used to say he would reexamine NAFTA in its totality. Now he
says, "I'm not a big believer in doing things unilaterally." He has
capitulated.

But there is an unwavering progressive in the race. "The practical
effect of NAFTA is that it is an anti-union policy," says Green
candidate Cynthia McKinney. "Why US unions would support a political
party [the Democrats] that has decisively contributed to their own
demise, is beyond me.

I support the international right to unionize. My legislation, the
Corporate Responsibility Act and the TRUTH Act sought to compel US
corporations operating abroad to abide by U.S. labor, environmental
standards, thereby lifting up workers in other parts of the world,
not exploiting them. The Reconstruction Movement Draft Manifesto
also calls for repeal of Taft Hartley, to strengthen workers' rights
in this country."

McKinney cites the Power to the People Platform: "We need to promote
and enact laws for U.S. corporations that keep labor standards high
at home and raise them abroad. Toward that end, it is clear that
we need a repeal of NAFTA, CAFTA, the Caribbean FTA, and the U.S.-Peru
FTA and justice for immigrant workers, including an end to the
guest-worker program riddled with abuses."

"No one with a brain any longer believes that Obama is a closet
progressive, or even a genuine liberal."

Both Black and white progressives deliberately made themselves
irrelevant to the Democratic campaign by failing to challenge Obama
before and during the primary season. Now there is one remaining
chance to put a healthy fear into Obama and to help build a Black-led
movement that will fight for progressive values after the election
is over: solidarity with Cynthia McKinney.

Surely no one with a brain any longer believes that Obama is a
closet progressive, or even a genuine liberal. Last month he finally
confessed that Black Agenda Report has been right about him all the
time: he's Hillary Clinton's political clone "If you look at my
positions and Senator Clinton's, there's not a lot of difference,
which is why it's so easy for advisers, senior advisers of Senator
Clinton, to support my candidacy," said Obama, unveiling his roster
of national security advisors.

And what a "Back to the Future" crew of Bill Clinton and Bush #1
retrograde hacks he has chosen! Obama's core group of foreign policy
gurus is non-change personified - U.S. imperialism from the pre-Bush
#2 era in the flesh. (See "Background of Obama's Foreign Policy
Group," Institute for Public Accuracy.) Endless war is written on
their faces. Progressives should have taken Obama seriously when
he announced to everyone who would listen, back in March, "The truth
is that my foreign policy is actually a return to the traditional,
bipartisan, realistic foreign policy of George Bush's father, John
F. Kennedy, of in some ways Ronald Reagan."

Obama had the gall to praise Reagan and the elder Bush while on a
"Stand for Change" bus tour.

Cynthia McKinney offers real change - peace for a change.

"The United States should and must engage the world, but not in
empire, not in military," said McKinney, who was first elected to
the U.S. Congress from a suburban Atlanta district in 1992. "Ninety
percent of the US security budget is dedicated to some military
engagement with the world. The United States should stop arming
factions, supporting factions, new elections should be held [in
Iraq] with international advisors, and the "coalition of the willing"
should work with the United Nations to disarm and restore to the
extent possible the Iraqi civil sector. The Reconstruction Draft
Manifesto calls for an end to US militarism and the establishment
of a Department of Peace by restructuring the US State Department."

So it does. The manifesto is a comprehensive movement document, a
basis for political action beyond the narrow confines of electoral
contests.

"Sadly," says the manifesto, "the Bush - Pelosi war policy is a
formula for endless global conflict, deterioration of the rule of
law among nations, and growing impoverishment, indebtedness and
evisceration of civil liberties at home."

More and more each day, "the Bush-Pelosi war policy" is also Barack
Obama's policy, as further evidenced by his about-face on Bush
spying on U.S.

citizens with the aid of U.S. telecom companies.

In going the extra, unrequested mile for AIPAC, the Israel lobby,
Obama moved to the Right of every U.S. president in history. Obama's
blustering vow that Jerusalem will remain forever an "undivided"
"Jewish" city would lock the U.S. into a position unacceptable to
every Arab or Muslim government on Earth.

His bellicosity regarding Iran differs from John McCain's, only in
that Obama would theoretically deign to hold talks with Iranians
"at a time and place of my choosing," while refusing to rule out a
preemptive strike.

"The Bush-Pelosi war policy" is also Barack Obama's policy."

Every Obama foreign policy instinct seems to support the "special"
and unlimited "relationship" with Israel, robust defense of American
Manifest Destiny, ever-increasing war expenditures, and inherent
supra-national, extra-legal U.S. rights - formulas for planetary
doom. On not one major foreign policy front does Obama any longer
advocate positions consistent with peaceful planetary development.
Not one!

It's time for people claiming to be progressives who supported
Obama, to accept that they were bamboozled by a champion slickster.
Actually, that's putting the best face on the situation, since most
of Obama's progressive credentials were simply wished into existence
by folks who were tired of even pretending to fight. Obama now dares
to drop all pretense of progressivism, trusting that there will be
no ramifications on the Left, especially among the otherwise most
dependable progressive constituency, African Americans.

Will the next few weeks and months prove Obama right? Cynthia
McKinney deserves Black and Left support, while Obama manifestly
does not.

McKinney, whose last act in Congress was to submit articles of
impeachment against George Bush in 2006; who courageously questioned
the White House version of events before and after September 11,
2001; who acted as a one-person conscience of the House Armed
Services Committee, speaking out against corporate and military
mega-theft under both Clinton and Bush; who has with amazing
consistency always placed principle above her own personal and
electoral fortunes, is at this juncture in history the only vehicle
through which progressives can both register their outrage at Obama
and begin the process of rebuilding a mass, Black-led movement for
real social change.

(Ralph Nader cannot, for reasons of temperament and race, achieve
such dual purposes.)

On Venezuela, the difference between Obama and McCain is narrow,
indeed:

Obama has reflexively included popularly (and repeatedly) elected
President Hugo Chavez among the world's "rogue" leaders, deriding
his "predictable yet perilous mix of anti-American rhetoric,
authoritarian government, and checkbook diplomacy," while McCain's
pitiful verbal skills at first allowed him only to sputter that
Chavez is "wacko." More recently, McCain vowed to "work to impede
Venezuela and Bolivia from following the same path of failure that
Castro followed in Cuba." McCain criticized Obama for, again, being
theoretically prepared to meet with Chavez. Not to be outdone, Obama
held a match to the region, condoning the Colombian narco-state's
armed intrusion into the territory of Ecuador, a nation friendly
to Venezuela.

McKinney's position on the region is as follows:

"It is totally irresponsible to call Hugo Chavez an 'oil tyrant'
as published some time ago. Totally irresponsible to support the
violation of the territorial integrity of Ecuador, a country that
has signaled its desire to join the framework for peace and against
destabilization by pulling out of the school of the Americas....
I pledge untiring support for self-determination in Bolivia, wracked
now by a secessionist-type 'autonomy' movement, probably fomented
outside Bolivia's borders."

Obama wholeheartedly backs the militarization of Africa through the
new U.S. Africa Command, AFRICOM. "There will be situations that
require the United States to work with its partners in Africa to
fight terrorism with lethal force. Having a unified command operating
in Africa will facilitate this action," said Obama.

"The McKinney campaign is the only vehicle through which progressives
can both register their outrage at Obama and begin the process of
rebuilding a mass Black-led movement for real social change."

McKinney has acted as a sentinel for Africa, on guard against U.S.

recolonization of the continent. She correctly regards AFRICOM as
a threat to the region. "More than likely, this force will be used
in just the same way as Plan Colombia is used -- to police dissent
and punish the innocent solely for pecuniary reasons. The last
thing Africa needs is AFRICOM, U.S. soldiers, or a School of the
Americas-type relationship with Africa."

When Obama is not carrying imperial water in the bullying of weaker
nations, he is silent on burning global issues - especially those
of keen interest to African Americans.

The December 2006 U.S.-instigated Ethiopian invasion of Somalia,
which according to the United Nations created "the worst [and still
ongoing] humanitarian crisis in Africa," elicits not a peep from
Obama. In fact, the only comments from Obama on Somalia that we
have found are his complaints about pictures taken during a trip
to his father's homeland, Kenya, depicting Obama in the ceremonial
tribal garb of the overwhelming Muslim Somalis.

McKinney has repeatedly denounced the U.S. overthrow of Haiti's
elected government in 2004, the kidnapping and exile of President
Jean Bertrand Aristide, and Brazil's and the United Nation's role
in occupying the country on behalf of the Americans.

Obama's last recorded comments on Haiti, from 2005, were summarized
on his Senate web site:

"Obama said he favors a congressional fact-finding mission to Haiti.
He said additional aid is needed there, but it must come with strings
attached to ensure it is used properly and not to line the pockets
of politicians, as happened in his father's native Kenya."

This is apparently all that Obama has to say about the bloody
suppression of the Haitian nation by the U.S. and its allies.

"The last thing Africa needs is AFRICOM."

There can be no effective reasoning with those African Americans
who want only that a member of The Race occupy the Oval Office -
no matter the character and politics of that Black individual. But
self-described progressives of all races cannot excuse their own
docility in the face of Obama's rightward lunge - especially when
there exists one last opportunity to threaten the Democratic
nominee-to-be with a backlash against his betrayals of progressive
principles - one last chance to affect Obama's behavior before
Election Day, November 4, and beyond. Cynthia McKinney has made
herself available to the Green Party's convention in Chicago, July
10-12, and will almost surely be their nominee.

If progressives cannot bring themselves to vote honorably, they can
at the very least go to McKinney's campaign site and send money.
Even a little principled behavior is better than none at all.

BAR executive editor Glen Ford can be contacted at
Glen.F...@BlackAgendaReport.com


June 30, 2008

Ralph Nader is now being attacked as a racist for pointing out the obvious - that Obamarama is NOT a populist at all. He is getting some lamestream media attention for stating the TRUTH.

Meanwhile, although Ralph, who has done enormous good for all people, is being called racist. They forget about his support of Winona LaDuke!

Many progressives in America who support the Bill of Rights, are now sending their dollars to Ralph! Go, Ralph, Go! (And Cynthia M., too !)

Hard to tell what will happen before the US elections, but you can be sure it will prove "interesting" !!

Veeger

June 30, 2008
www.votenader.org
www.officialnaderstore.com

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Chris Driscoll, 202-360-3273, chris@votenader.org
IL Contact: Christina Tobin: 312-320-4101

THE NADER/GONZALEZ CAMPAIGN DECLARES BALLOT VICTORY IN ILLINOIS

The Nader/Gonzalez independent presidential campaign will be on the Illinois ballot in the November election. The campaign submitted more than 50,000 signatures to the Illinois Board of Elections on Monday June 23, far surpassing the required 25,000. Under Illinois law, upon submitting signatures for ballot access, other parties have 1 week to challenge those signatures. That 1-week period has now passed and no party has challenged the Nader/Gonzalez signatures.

This is good news for voters who want more choice and the opportunity to vote for an anti-war candidate in November.

Illinois marks the third state where Nader/Gonzalez will be on the ballot in 2008, but did not qualify in 2004. Arizona and Hawaii are the other two. Presently, the Nader/Gonzalez Campaign has seven teams in seven states collecting signatures for ballot access. Sunday, on ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos," Mr. Nader announced his campaign will be on the ballot in 45 states.

In 2004 the Democratic Party and their allies initiated frivolous lawsuits aimed at keeping the Nader/Camejo ticket off the ballots in 18 states, denying voters the choice of an Independent candidacy for President and Vice President. In 2008 the Nader/Gonzalez Campaign is cautioning the Democratic Party not to misuse the court system with baseless political challenges and to honor the will of the people for more choices on the ballot.

- End -

June 06, 2008

Vorting rights for 16 year olds: Ralph Nader proposal (rah!)

RALPH NADER SPEAKS OUT FOR THE RIGHTS OF 16 YEAR OLDS TO VOTE

Washington D.C. ---- Ralph Nader made a compelling argument, on June 3, for lowering the voting age nationwide to 16. For full text, see votenader.org


Austria, for example, lowered their voting age last year. Also, legislators in several states are considering lowering the voting age for local elections. As Nader states, 16 year olds work, are able to drive motor vehicles, and pay taxes, but are not allowed to vote.

With 16 year old voting, Nader argues that high school social studies teachers would be more likely to present voting in a non-partisan environment in the classroom. This would stimulate their students to become an informed electorate.

Nader concludes that the only way this change will be made is by 16 year olds themselves holding rallies, marches, and in general, organizing to force members of Congress and state legislatures to change the laws.

-End-

May 14, 2008

Fundraising pitch for Ralph Nader

Ralph Nader for President 2008

May 14, 2008
www.votenader.org
www.officialnaderstore.com


While most of us sit in front of screens typing and searching, Ralph Nader still types out his prose on a manual Underwood typewriter.

On Monday, Mr. Underwood traveled to Google headquarters in Mountain View, California.

Nader is not easily dazzled by technological wonders.

Throughout his career, Nader has confronted head-on the downside of nuclear, automobile, genetic engineering and other industrial advances.

And now he's questioning the enormous amount of time we spend in front of our computers.

Has Google and the information revolution that it leads made our society better?

Or is it just another mass diversion from the reality of the corporate takeover of our democracy?

At Googleland, Nader took questions for an hour.

And then sat down for an eight-minute interview with Youtube.

Nader/Gonzalez is confronting head-on the reality of the corporate takeover of our democracy.

As you know this week, we are raising money to get Nader/Gonzalez on the ballot in the Land of Lincoln - Illinois.

In just five short days, 462 of you - on-line and face-to-face at Nader/Gonzalez rallies on the West Coast - have donated $43,718.

Thank you.

We need just another 70 of you - our loyal supporters - to donate $100 each - to reach our Illinois goal of $50,000.

Let's get her done today.

Do it for Mr. Underwood.

Onward.

The Nader Team

PS: We invite your comments to the blog.

Your contribution could be doubled. Public campaign financing may match your contribution total up to $250.


ShareThis