Tuesday, January 20, 2004

The ‘Anybody-But-Bush’ Movement

By Mark Hand

Read full article...

Posted 01/20 | Add a Comment

    Comments:

    You must register to comment.

    Login | Register

  1. Great article Mark!  Why, oh why is Michael Moore endorsing Clark, given what you’ve just reported about Yugoslavia?  And today, it is reported that George McGovern too, is endorsing Clark. 

    In his book “To Kill a Nation” Michael Parenti said the reason NATO destroyed Yugoslavia was to impose the neoliberal economic model onto that area, including expropriating its resources and using it as a source for cheap labor.  He says, equal atrocities were being committed on all sides, and it was only politically expedient to demonize Milosevic and the Serbs.

    Kucinich is my candidate.  I can’t see voting for any of the other Democrats, with the possible exception of Dean, if he showed me something in the primaries.  I thought Dean embarrassed himself in Iowa yesterday; ranting and raving, with no diminution of enthusiasm after his loss, like a snake oil salesman, about going “on to New Hampshire, and South Carolina, and Delaware,...” and on and on, a Whitmanesque list of practically every state in the union.

    So, it looks like I’ll probably be casting a protest vote again.  For Kucinich in the Illinois primary, and then Naderin the general election, if he runs as an Independent, or the Socialist candidate.  I can’t endure voting for tweedledee.

    Posted by Tracy McLellan from  on  01/20  at  05:19 PM

  2. Tracy,

    Be careful what you say around the “Anybody-But-Bush” crowd. They’re liable to commit violence this time around if they hear anybody refer to the Democratic candidate as Tweedledee. I’m not a Democrat—more of an anarcho-libertarian—but I may check out the Democratic primary scene here in Virginia this year and cast my vote for Kucinich if he’s still hanging around by then.

    I haven’t made up my mind on what I’ll do in November come general election time. It was Nader in 2000 but I may decide to vote for the Democrat this time, as long as it’s not Clark or Lieberman. With a Democrat in the White House, there may be a better chance for gridlock, given that the Republicans controll Congress. Gridlock is a good thing. The fewer laws the federal government passes and the less money it spends, the less havoc it wreaks.

    If a Democrat does win the White House, though, I surely hope all of the activists who’ve been so vocal against Bush will keep the heat on the Democratic president when he starts screwing around overseas and here at home. But if I were a betting man, I’d place a lot of money on a scenario in which 90% of the energy and activism that’s been generated in response to the Bush White House evaporates once the neoliberal takes office.

    Posted by Mark Hand from  on  01/20  at  07:59 PM

  3. Mark, you make some very good p’ints here; ones I may adopt as my own at the ballot box.  I too, will definitely vote for Kucinich if he’s still around in the Illinois primary, although I also like what Sharpton stands for.  Several years ago at the University of Louisville I heard Mr. Sharpton speak in person, and several times since then on TV, and he was very reasonable and really progressive in the positions he was taking, with not a trace of demagoguery.  I know only the very general contours of the so-called Tawanda Bradley affair, although I am astonished how the media, when they bother to mention him at all, Jimmy Kimmel comes to mind, mention only th s about Sharpton, and absolutely nothing about his very progressive, very reasonable views.

    The rest of the goddam Democrats are Tweedledees, there’s no way around it, although again, your p’int about gridlock is well taken.  Jeffrey St. Clair has a great piece on Counterpunch.org today about Dean which I would heartily recommend to anyone not already filled to the brim with nauseous disappointment.

    This is a great site, with great writing, which I have only recently been turned on to by Counterpunch, but which I now check out everyday.  Please know there’s at least one of me out here currently reading everything you post, even if you are getting 0 comments on many of the articles.

    Posted by Tracy McLellan from  on  02/02  at  07:37 PM

  4. I want to amend my above comments, because I read a story today posted on commondreams from Village Voice, which educated me to some pretty ugly things about Sharpton; including among other things that he has a top Republican acting as his campaign manager - a symbiotic relationship for surreptitous ends - and that he once wore a mic and informed undercover for the FBI.  The very good article can be read at: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0204-09.htm

    Posted by Tracy McLellan from  on  02/04  at  11:04 PM

  5. When I turned 18 I registered to vote as the first Republican in my family. Through 1998 I always voted the GOP ticket. However, following Clinton’s acquittal with 10 Republican votes I changed my voter status to “no party”. I voted for George W. Bush in 2000, but don’t plan to vote for him again.

    In 2002 I offered my support to a Republican woman who was planning to challenge incumbent Corrine Brown in Florida’s 3rd CD. However, the GOP establishment in Florida did not want anyone to challenge Brown- fearing that a high black turnout for Brown would hurt Republicans in other races, namely Jeb Bush. The Republican Party harassed my candidate to the point that she withdrew from the race. I immediately began looking for an alternative candidate, but could not find one. Then within a week of J. C. Watts announcing his retirement from Congress, Jennifer Carroll, the GOP’s failed 2000 candidate, announced she would resign from her state job- effective on the last day of the qualifying period.

    To insure that Brown did have a challenger I became a write-in candidate. My purpose was to harass the GOP since I knew I would not be able to campaign and had no chance of winning. Still I received about 100 votes without spending a dime.

    I have always known that the Democrats are the party for the welfare state. I have since realized that the Republicans are the party for millionaires. We need a party for everyone else.

    I find it alarming that some conservatives that don’t like Bush will vote for him anyway out of fear of a Democrat victory.  I find it equally alarming that Democrats will vote for whomever their party nominates out of fear that Bush will be re-elected.  As long as Americans vote for one of the major parties out of fear of the other I don’t see how they won’t be wasting their votes.  If you are going to vote for the Democrats or Republicans no matter what, these parties will take your vote for granted.  These parties will assume that they can do whatever they want because you are going to vote for one of them regardless of what they do or don’t do.

    Americans must realize that the Democrats and the Republicans have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.  Neither party will acknowledge, let alone deal with, the nation’s most pressing issues.  Do the Republicans really want to end abortion, reform the tax code or reduce the size of government? No, they don’t want to give up their campaign issues.  Do the Democrats really want to protect the environment, make public schools effective or stand up for American workers? No, they don’t want to give up their campaign issues.  Will either party confront the growing power of corporations? No, both parties are allied with and controlled by corporations.

    No one who wants to make fundamental changes in American politics will vote for the Democrats or Republicans.  No…

    Posted by Jon Arnett from  on  03/01  at  08:50 PM

  6. Bush is a minless idiot who needs to be taken out and lost.

    Posted by Steve from  on  04/03  at  08:24 PM

  7. Okay, so Democrats lie, too.  So what?  At least the Dem lies don’t cost us 87Billion dollars, a pre-emptive war and lost lives.

    We can’t afford 4 more years of Bush!  Vote Anybody But Bush, Y’all!

    Posted by Abby from  on  04/03  at  09:02 PM

  8. Abby,

    Who here is suggesting voting for Bush?

    Posted by micah holmquist from  on  04/05  at  01:12 PM
    9. Commenting is not available in this weblog entry. {/if}

    Next entry: Hyperbole and Anti-Bush Activism

    Previous entry: Call a Spade a Spade: Israel and Terrorism

    [ads]

    Support Press Action