[Welcome David Swanson, and Host Glenn Greenwald - bev]
Over the last eight years, David Swanson has been one of the most tenacious and effective activists against the transgressions of the Bush presidency. As Press Secretary for Dennis Kucinich’s 2004 presidential campaign, Communications Coordinator for ACORN prior to that, a tireless anti-war activist for Democrats.com and, most notably of all, as the indefatigable spearhead behind the campaign to publicize the incriminating "Downing Street memos," Swanson has been a living, breathing illustration of what vibrant citizen activism and independent, adversarial investigative journalism should be.
There have now been many books written which chronicle the imperial, lawless presidency of the Bush era, but Swanson’s superb new book — Daybreak: Undoing the Imperial Presidency and Forming a More Perfect Union — is one of the very few to examine how we can recover from it and reverse its pernicious trends. Many Bush books, given the horrific subject matter, have been dark and gloomy, even somewhat depressing. To be sure, there are parts of Swanson’s book that documents in gruesome detail all of the liberties abridged and damage done during the last eight years. This book also does not shy away from highlighting those areas in which the Obama presidency has, much to the dismay of many, come to replicate some (though by no means all) of the worst Bush abuses. But Daybreak is far more uplifting and inspiring that virtually any other book in its genre, as it devotes itself to laying out a detailed plan for how American citizens — through the activism to which he has devoted himself — can bring about a rejuvenation of our political values.
One of the most notable — and most valuable — aspects of this book is that it does not relieve the reader (you) of responsibility for our decadent and freedom-infringing political culture. Most commentators will attempt to flatter or at least please their audience by casting blame for our nation’s woes on everyone except for the average citizen: evil politicians, power-hungry executive branch officials, a subservient Congress, weak and spineless Democrats, the craven media. All of those parties receive their due flogging from Swanson, but he repeatedly reminds us that the true power — and ultimate responsibility — for shaping our political system lies with us. And from an pathological dependence on television to excessive religious influences to political apathy and defeatism to allowing ourselves to be isolated from one another, many Americans are failing to fulfill the potential they have to effect the kind of change they claim they want.
That Swanson thinks this is unsurprising, given that he himself lives this creed. The premise of most of his work — at ACORN, at Democrats.com, at AfterDowningStreet.org — is that ordinary citizens can and must find the right organizing strategies to change what they dislike in politics. Had Swanson merely insisted upon this principle over and over, the book could have veered off into the realm of the annoyingly preachy. But it never does, and the reason is that he is doing much more than evangelizing about our power and obligations to act. A large bulk of the book is devoted to laying out a very thoughtful, innovative and quite plausible blueprint for how citizen passion can be converted into meaningful change.
Most impressively, in laying out this blueprint, Swanson avoids leading readers to believe that the work will be quick or easy. To the contrary, America’s political rot is so advanced and so fundamental that he emphasizes that reversing it will be hard and will take many years. Some of the steps –such as re-establishing America as a nation of laws by punishing the high-level political leaders who repeatedly violated them — will likely be uncontroversial among most strident Bush critics (you know who you are).
But other more unique proposals — such as amending the Constitution — will almost certainly provoke strong resistance among even those most receptive to his message. And so it should: everyone ought to be reflexively wary against such changes. But Swanson makes a compelling case that the diseases with which our political system is afflicted are so entrenched that only systemic change — changing our underlying political rules — will enable the needed changes. An entire chapter is devoted to a manifesto of new rights which Swanson believes must be explicitly guaranteed to Americans. Ultimately, I was unpersuaded by the wisdom of some of these specific proposals, but the case made for them by Daybreak is provocative, thought-provoking, and certain to generate valuable debates.
"We can do more than bandage the wounds" is this book’s battle-cry. Unlike most, Swanson has the courage to embrace the logical conclusions of his premise: the U.S. faces radical political problems and — therefore — only radical change can rectify it. But "radical" in this sense does not mean violent upheavals or instituting an unrecognizable form of government. To the contrary, it means revitalizing our political culture by changing the rules so as to enable the political values we were intended to have once again to flourish. Paradoxically, this book is deeply critical of the American political establishment, yet it is profoundly patriotic. Swanson passionately believes in the promise of America, is genuinely committed to its restoration, is certain that citizen activism is the answer, and is convinced that he has the plan to bring that all about. The passion of his convictions, by themselves, make Daybreak very worthwhile. And with enough attention and discussion devoted to this book, it is not hard to see how Swanson’s belief that we have the power to fix what ails our nation could be vindicated.
Related posts:
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes David Cole, Torture Memos: Rationalizing the Unthinkable
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes David Kessler, The End of Overeating: Taking Control of the Insatiable American Appetite
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes Hillary Rettig, The Lifelong Activist: How to Change the World Without Losing Your Way
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes Leigh Stringer, The Green Workplace
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes Matthew Kerbel, Netroots: Online Progressives and the Transformation of American Politics





Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

David, Welcome to the Lake.
Glenn, Thank you for Hosting today’s Book Salon.
Glenn, thanks for the kind introduction which means so much given your own efforts. I let John Nichols get away with calling me a patriot in the book’s introduction and I’m glad to let you do the same, since I know you both mean it very well and in a very different sense from how the word is usually used. I would very much appreciate knowing which proposals in the book you found unpersuasive and why. That would be very helpful and very rare. I’m touring the country talking to almost entirely (a) people who agree with every word, and (b) people who haven’t read the book yet, with the occasional addition of (c) people who believe I’m a communist traitor from Africa. So serious civil criticism is not an abundant resource. (Tour schedule for those who like real world discussions: http://davidswanson.org/book )
Same goes for anyone else who has read the book: please tell me what you DON’T agree with as well as what you do, what you’re working on, what you think I’ve left out or should have left out. If you haven’t read the book yet, you can see the table of contents and so forth at Amazon, but Glenn’s intro gives you a good idea. It’s a proposal to shift power back away from the presidency to Congress (and courts and the people) and to make Congress representative of popular opinion. It’s a guide to reforming our laws, but does propose beginning by enforcing the laws we have, along the lines of the agenda laid out at http://prosecutebushcheney.org
Thanks BevW !
I want to congratulate you, David, on successfully knocking Glenn Beck’s book down the Amazon charts :)
This is great, but I am new at this. I think we need to change our whole system and have public financing, lower the troop levels in other countries like Germany, etc, lower defense spending and actually spend money on our country and our people.
Bad News: Beck is back at the top. Think FDL can knock him back out of #1?
Welcome, everyone – and thanks, David. You wrote a great book. In general, I think the risk of convincing people we should start seriously amending the Constitution outweighs the benefits to be gained. I think we have the tools and set of rights needed to effect the kinds of changes you call for, and the ones that are lacking can be remedied in other, less tumultuous and dangerous ways.
Hi David, Hi Glenn
How long will it take till we get our country back? Watching the health care debate, I have my doubts. And mebbe Obama is playing 11 dimensional chess but I’m not so sure.
What are the first things we should do, after staying informed?
Natch!
The book proposes public financing, and free media, and thorough media reform, and steps through which we might get there. I favor bringing all 1/2 million troops and 100,000 support staff home from Germany and over 100 other countries. We spent $140 B / year on that empire of bases. Please don’t call it “defense” spending. I can think of useful things we could do with that money. But we need to find new jobs for those 600,000 people, which presents a lot of opportunities here at home.
I am tired of Obama saying we are moving forward. I want the crooks to be prosecuted so it will not happen again. Obama is adapting to Bush policies and We are getting more of the same. We cannot let the big fish go and only catch minnow.
Susan
With the Progressive Caucus becoming increasingly relevant, do you think its possible to organize progressives behind it in this country to rival the strength of what we see with the DLC and Blue Dogs (creating the sort of left-flank that you see on the right, with a GOP completely tamed by the Club for Growth)?
What do you think motivates the “national security” community in this country to be so hawkish? I work at a mainstream think tank, and it always puzzles me why the discourse is so limited between what seems to be hawks and super hawks.
There are rule changes, law changes, simple enforcement of existing laws, and other reforms possible and – yes – desirable. But envisioning a new Constitution gives us a coherent plan, or an initial attempt at one. And some things require amending the Constitution. But doing so would be dangerous if we don’t create some of the reforms we need first. We don’t want to simply ask corporations to amend the thing, which is what would happen now. We can get rid of the filibuster with a rule change. We can’t get rid of the Senate without an amendment. We can develop public financing, but we probably can’t get rid of private financing without an amendment, or a new Supreme Court. Speaking of which, we can’t limit the powers of the Supreme court without . . .
That’s a great question – I’m actually working on a long article examining exactly that question (with a heavy focus on the think tank world). David has some really good discussion of militarism and the effect it has in the book – am interested in his thoughts on what you asked and how that can be changed.
Welcome to FDL this afternoon Glenn and David
David, I have not had an opportunity to read your book, but how do you suggest we reclaim the country. I know the punditocracy has been discussing the Imperial Presidency for most of my life and I believe it was Schlesinger who used it to describe both Johnson’s and Nixon’s presidencies.
Folks know that the Presidency has been gaining power for decades, exacerbated by Bush II and how much power that was grabbed.
With all the polarization and the complicity of the TradMed, how do we regain the ability for equal parts of government? Especially since the people who would necessarily lead this type of action, show daily how they would most likely NOT be willing to re-balance things and move back towards a partnership rather than the Empire?
Is it time to give up the idea of holding Bush/Cheney accountable and focus on repair of the damage done?
1. Stop fantasizing about chess :-)
2. Recognize that it’s virtually impossible to influence a president
3. Realize it’s very difficult to impact a senator
4. Be aware that most activist groups are astroturfing and telling you to ask for what elected officials already approve
5. Join the right groups and organize independently of party lines, and fearlessly to pressure House members
6. Do not think about when or whether we will succeed unless you absolutely have to, and then ask yourself what other moral choice we have but to struggle in the most strategic and aggressive way we can until we win or die
Thanks Glenn, and welcome David.
Ditto what Glenn said about David — he walks the talk. He’s out there in the rain, doing whatever it takes as part of the fabric of his daily life to make change happen. I have incredible respect for him.
You said it, sister. Help out: http://prosecutebushcheney.org
I think it is critical that they have taken a stand, even on something weak. Just as critical is that in round 2 they not self-censor or pre-compromise and come out demanding single-payer, and that WE demand single-payer. It is not our role to be wise insiders and self-censor. We can all compromise on a halfway bill, but it can only be a compromise if we ever stood for something. But Congress primarily has to stand for the continued existence of Congress, which means no more signing statements, law-making executive orders, secret memos as laws, officials above the rule of law, and – yes – “Czars”. And it means restoring the 2 powers that give Congress any teeth: 1) impeachment of executive branch officials and allies (such as http://impeachbybee.org Jay Bybee) and 2) subpoena and contempt enforced by the Capitol Police, not the (in)Justice Dept.
I’ll buy & read the book because I badly need some optimism, but I’m doubtful. The U.S. congress can’t even act as responsibly as they did after Watergate, and they’re more bought and paid for by corps than at any time in my three score plus. Think power is a one-way (wrong-way) street.
Here’s the place to type: if voting made a difference, they wouldn’t let us do it.
David and Glenn, thanks so much for being here.
Glenn, can’t thank you enough for expressing and role-modelling for us integrity, courage and high moral and legal standards.
David, I intend to buy and study this book. I am ashamed of my own complacency.
I did manage at last minute to vote in the recent primary in NYC, Manhattan, with one hour to go. I was ONLY the 67th voter. As I walked home and glanced up at my 8 story apartment building I realized there were more people in that one building at the moment (probably watching a Seinfeld rerun) than had voted for nominating our guardians of government in a huge Manhattan district. Pete Seeger said “think globally, act locally.” We are so not.
Maher has a great essay on complacency and my favorite line is about how Americans have soft chocolate chip cookies now so they don’t have to chew so hard. Here is a link to it.
http://www.informationclearing…..e23576.htm
Cannot echo that enough.
People are always saying “when are you going to do something about the Senate and the President” and my response is “when it will do any good.”
I had a really good experience working with David on the supplemental whip count. I think we were both kind of shocked at how effective it was.
Discourse being limited is usually a function of the corporate media. That may be the central question here. But aside from the media, the military complex exists for war and its corporate allies exist to exploit, including to exploit people in places the military can threaten and control. If the military is permitted to publicly threaten the president and pressure him into sending more young men and women to kill and die in Afghanistan, we can forget civilian rule, much less the rule of Congress over its executive.
eCHANomics – I think all of us who study politics much more than the average person are prone to defeatism. The problems are not just enormous but systemic. The most powerful forces are arrayed to preserve the status quo. Seemingly massive changes in election outcomes change very little.
This book, as you suggest, bestows optimism, but not by being cheerleader-ish or spouting feel-good rhetoric. He offers really concrete proposals that one can envision working, and that makes one believe that can happen. Any system created by human beings can be torn down and replaced by other human beings. That’s just true by definition.
I think we should start calling it the “media industrial complex” like the greatly framed “medical industrial complex” and Ike’s famous “military industrial complex” prototype to consciousness-raise against its hypnotic faux-innocent friendly propagandizing.
We should begin by restoring the power to make and end wars to the Congress, including by punishing recent abuses, and by amending the War Powers Act. We should prosecute war crimes. We should make war profiteering a serious felony and enforce that law. We should get military recruiters out of our schools. We should get our military out of other people’s countries and not use it in our own against our own. I’d seriously like to see the children and grandchildren of presidents and congress members who vote for war compelled to take part — not because I want them to but because it would prevent most wars. We have two classes, those who order and those who fight, closely paralleling those who make laws and those who can be punished for breaking them.
NO, I think so many people are dissappinted that nothing of substance has happened on this front.
It’s hard to forgive Obama and the Dems for squandering 80 million people last November ready to change America for the better. But those 80 million owe it to this country to stay awake beyond the 4 or 2 year election periods.
As my screen name indicates, my field is economics. There is certainly nothing to be optimistic about there. I watched the workers successively getting more & more screwed over by one part of the system after another.
I understand systemic change, as that is the only other possibility for the economy, and I can analogize it to the political system. I just don’t see where it’s coming from. Is there another time & place where citizen activism accomplished any great change? Fall of communism and Solidaritat comes to mind, but does the system have to get that rotten (that’s my model BTW) before change happens?
The polling cited in the book suggests better public opinion than you’d think. Winning over the public is always the easiest first step. Everything else is much harder. We have a president now cementing in place the extreme consolidation of power of the past 8 years: preventive detention being openly established in a way that one administration alone could not have done, same with signing statements, same with state secrets, same with secret memos as laws, same with rendition, with the unconstitutional treaty being used as a fig leaf for the occupation of Iraq, with the banker bailouts, with the power to torture, with the abuse of executive orders, etc. And Congress is even more accepting than before. But the public is actually getting upset. And the fact that we’ve given the one party that pretended to care majorities in both houses and the White House presents a significant opportunity to begin organizing citizens independently of parties. Things won’t necessarily go the way of more independent and aggressive activism, but it could if we guide it that way.
I actually think this would probably do more to reduce militarization and wars than any other single step (although European monarchs started a lot of wars even though they and their children were often part of the fighting force – but that wouldn’t be true here).
But would you really support that? Would you support a targeted draft where only relatives of pro-war politicians are required to serve, or a general draft?
Glenn and Bev, thanks for bringing David and this book to our attention.
I, for one, have spent the past several years depressed about where the country has gone. I do my best to rally the troops (my congregation) but it’s been hard. I couldn’t get excited by the election of Obama (nor Hillary had she been the nominee) and that probably had folks in the church wondering what was wrong with me (though actually few of them knew my true feelings). So I did my part and focused on issues and hounding my congressman to do the right thing. Sometimes he does and sometimes. . . .
Anyway, I look forward to getting the book and may even have a chance to read it before you get to Philly in Nov.
So my question is have you and Sandy Levinson been in conversation about changing the Constitution. He’s a big proponent of calling for a new ConCon.
I’m one of those people in need of some real solutions because what we’re doing isn’t working.
Thanks for all you have done and I look forward to the book. Our trust for Glenn and his take on things is pretty strong here so if he recommends it I’ll get it.
Absolutely not and I hope that’s not Mike Hearington asking that unless it’s meant as a softball question. The time has just begun. The lesson of what will happen if they are not held accountable is now before us, no longer hypothetical. And the DOJ has now told the world, foreign nations, Congress, and us that it intends to grant immunity. When Patrick Leahy in April asked Bybee to come in, and Bybee told him to go cheney himself, we reached the fork in the road. Congress can find the courage to use a subpoena and enforce it, or we can have court jesters on a Hill for the first branch of our government. The restoration of representation and checks on power is tied up with the question of whether presidents have to comply with laws. It’s all about looking forward.
Speaking of optimism, let me say I am optimistic about the work of Glen and pessimisstic about changing this nation without some very serious “re do’s” such as a new constitution.
Our whole system seems to have fallen into the wrong hands and we’ve lost the mechanisms to get it right.
There are many sweeping policy changes that a strong leader might shepherd through, but the basic structure of our government needs serious work. It’s like the problem whether to renovate or tear down and start over.
I’m for start over. But I don’t know how that would happen.
Now, though things are getting worse. But we do need truth tellers to inspire whatever change must inevitably come
Thanks Jane. Likewise. And it just stopped raining!
There is such a sad win/lose scenario systemic to our overly corporate friendly government. How can we revise that?
Medical crises that hurt citizens help the medical care revenues. Wars that kill soldiers empower and reward financially those involved with the military entities, both governmental and its contractors.
So little oversight to protect the citizen. The public trust, the common good is not on the top priority list any more in the eyes of media or government, and not expected to be, sadly, in sociopathologically structured corporation perspective.
Let’s save our pessimism for better times. You don’t need optimism. Only determination. But as long as you do need optimism, you CAN find it in the book, or in what activists just did to shut down the Army Experience Center killing games in shopping malls, or what the people of the Czech Republic just did to missile offense in their country, or what we have done thus far to prevent Iraqing Iran. Smart strategic activism and sacrifice is alive and well and a great source of solidarity, which is far stronger than optimism. http://afterdowningstreet.org
“softball”
Hey libby if you like elections and New York you might want to volunteer with my buddy Jonathan Tasini
I’ll be in NYC December 1st – see you there I hope
David,
The people jammed the switchboard before the first financial bailout vote and scared the critters for a few moments, but then they got bought out, and acted like the wusses we know them to be, who are part of the legal bribery system which is Washington.
The great Dodd, among others accepted these legal bribes and doesn’t have the ethical foundation to excuse himself from decision and power brokering in the financial crisis. With leaders like that, why bother?
Where can I get details, David? Thanks. Google Jonathan Tasini?
Corked bat
David, I know logistically that should be easy to do, but do you have a plan for getting the cowardly Democrats in congress to work with us instead of against us on that? You know that they’d put their Chicken Little dance into overdrive in order to look like they’re “Supporting the Troops!” or some such claptrap. The Republicans would make a big over the top stink about it, as they do about everything that they see as ‘the evil’, but surely their dramatics and deceit is finally beginning to wear thin on most folks. I hope.
Working Families Party worked hard in Manhattan, and is affiliated with ACORN, now under attack. The Right sure is organized.
We are going to see the bomb bomb bomb Iran guys give it another go. They will not stop until the weapons bays have unloaded their bombs over Tehran.
Hey hey ho ho Iran Must Go!
Jonathan Tasini will be our guest on the Book Salon next Saturday, Oct 3rd.
This site is telling me not to post comments so fast, so I may not be able to answer even as many questions as I am able to answer.
We and YOU did amazingly well Jane and I have no doubt we can hold 39 next time, though who knows if they’ll give us another set up where that’s all we need
Thanks, Bev! Wow, October already.
well said
Antonio Gramsci recommended pessimism of the intellect but optimism of the will
Can we hold them for the Public Option? Not hearing any numbers out of the progressive whip count.
I agree with the title of a recent book by Nick Turse in which it is a complex with dozens of words in front of it
I like the old adage, about asking oneself if one is part of the solution or the problem at the moment.
Only people can squander themselves. Elected officials don’t squander us, they use us to get elected. The question is what – if anything – we use them for.
Given all your work in actively organizing peaceful protests, I would like to hear your take on the militarization of police, particularly in regards to suppressing peaceful protests. The newest example of this is the “security forces” at the G20 protests in Pittsburgh rolling out an LRAD (Long Range Acoustic Device), a weapon originally designed for military use.
No it doesn’t HAVE to get worse to get better. And it could get worse and never get better. I recommend reading “A Force More Powerful”
None of the left’s demos got the coverage that the teabaggers get especially their DC event.
We are playing against the house which uses a stacked deck.
Another bailout is coming for Wall Street.
There are lots of good thinkers and solutions but they won’t see the light of day or be taken seriousloy. When someone gets to uppity they off him. Whomever Obama is he’s pretty much in clamped down mode and they only let him do some little things.
The poeple will not come out to vote as they did in 08 when so much anger and frustration was vented. It will be another lessor of two evils and people stay away.
We can’t use our elected officials because we don’t have access to them. Lobbyists do. I have been trying to speak with my critter for 8 years to no avail.
A general draft fairly applied (which already requires radically better public control of government to envision) would be preferable to our permanent military by (largely) economic draft. And if it really were fairly applied it would go some distance toward the reform I propose, but I’d still propose it.
Thanks RevDeb — Would love to do this again after everybody’s read it.
Thanks to Glenn too — I would take his advice as well and often do.
http://standupuga.org/PDFs/Issue5.pdf
I wrote about how the anti-war movement — even being joined by my current employer CAP — stopped a pretty fiercely worded resolution about Iran against all odds last year. It might be a good read if you need some optimism.
Look at the court cases with activists illegally rounded up in NYC after the Repub. convention. Not big media attention, even in NYC.
The politicization of terrorism alerts with the Ridge disclosure really highlights the temptation of this as justification for over-reaction and stifling of free speech.
See that is a good solution but the wrong one. We need to down size the military and change our big stick foreign policy. Why do we allow the DOD to suck so much or our resources?
welcome to 2 such serious, great voices and perspectives.
I read GG frequently, and often cite him here in discussions at FDL.
Mr. Swanson, your book is new to me, but Glenn’s intro is compelling.
My question concerns
my emphasis.
One political rule that I would nominate as one requiring some serious re-evaluation is one that maintains that the best route to progressive change is through ‘reforming the Democratic Party from within’ via primary challenges and other means. Corollaries from this hold that 3rd Party and (I) advocacy are a waste of time and effort, and can result in the election of Republicans.
Do you think this is off limits for discussion, or are there valid grounds to consider working outside of the 2 entrenched Parties?
one such ground, of course, is that it provides leverage when calling faxing writing and otherwise pleading with Democratic politicians – “heed our demands or else we are willing and able to bolt.”
right now, the ‘or else’ clause is missing.
thanks very much.
Media is central to all of this. And systemic reforms are needed and proposed in the book. But we can start by realizing the reach and strength of good websites and radio and good satelite and cable TV and building on that. Buying a $100,000 ad in the new york times to complain that the president isn’t a superhero is an encouraging if belated sign of awakening, but gets our system of government dangerously wrong and — worse — funds the enemy. Fund media outlets that do good, not those that create wars and injustices. If the good ones are small, well that’s why we’re funding them – to enlarge them.
Have you had any conversations with Sandy Levinson about changing the Constitution? He’s been writing about that for a while now.
chilling term. the two Americas. members of one America join up out of economic desperation and may die or at the very least physically and psychologically be traumatized in the battles members of the other America wage from “important offices and conference rooms” for profit.
I’ve gotten that “posting too fast” thing a couple of times lately. Don’t know what’s up, we’ll check it out.
I imagine the GOP will keep voting in a block on most key pieces of legislation, which makes 39 (40 once Garamendi is in I think) the magic number for a while.
But beyond that — leadership has real problems if they let conservative members join with the GOP to pass stuff. If something doesn’t enjoy majority Democratic support, they lose control of the caucus if they keep doing it. That’s why the Afghanistan buildup is making Pelosi wince. Sure there are enough votes to get it through — but if there are 258 Democrats, that means 130 need to support something for a majority. If 83 progressives can hang together, it makes that number tough to reach.
Yeah, I know. Sometimes I feel like the Rainman of vote counting.
I just don’t see accountability in the near term in the country. Where will it come from?
The only thing stopping the bombing of Iran is that a few twits in the military with two brain cells to rub together know the consequences for U.S. troops in Iraq. Once they’re out, all bets are off.
Because if we don’t bother we’ll get nowhere or worse — because the Glen Becks of the world will twist anger at banker bailouts into anger at safety nets, healthcare, blacks, gays, immigrants. That we haven’t succeeded does not mean we haven’t prevented worse defeat. Doing nothing guarantees disaster. Jamming phone lines is an inconvenience, but does not make life miserable for representatives who do not represent us. That is what is needed. Call, fax, Email, go, sit in, picket, go to their offices, to the local media, to their homes. Launch primary challenges. Build good media. But above all disrupt their lives.
No, I’d be glad to.
Were you here for the Ridge book salon? He typed thru the entire thing without answering a real Q.
Keep up your opposition – Pelosi said the war supplemental was the toughest vote she’s had.
Yes , google knows everything.
knows all… tells all…. seek and ye shall find. :)
Step 1, the next time we threaten and promise in a public whipping, as we did on the supplemental, we have to MEAN IT. When they stand strong or betray us on the public option we have to reward and punish, otherwise even if the so-called progressives in congress finally become a force that has to be noticed, we still won’t.
We’re as organized and far smarter, but under-funded and we don’t own the media.
http://dontattackiran.org
My brother is in the military and I told him we should have the troops over here to keep the terrorists out. He said the same old talking point “we have to fight them over there or they will be over here”. I told him they were already over here and we were stirring them up over there. He said I was naive.
you two should probably connect. He’s been writing for Balkinization for a long time now. It’s one of the sites that those of us who have been drawn into paying attention to the illegal doings of our govt. will occasionally visit. That’s where I first discovered Scott Horton writing about holding Yoo et al accountable for war crimes 3 years ago. Good stuff.
At least now we have both Olbermann and Maddow not to mention Stewart and Colbert. Yes the media is stacked against us but it’s not as bleak as it used to be.
It’s a step toward fascism and needs to be confronted, just as does all use of the actual military domestically, as do all restrictions on our First Amendment rights, as does presidentialism, as does announcing hype about Iranian WMDs at an event intended to focus on labor and work.
I read it later and I noticed that. But we GOT THE TRUTH, in spite of the horse’s mouth.
What got to me last week was the disclosure that the military industrial complex and its minions way back when including Gates, Cheney and Rumsfeld were pumping up, lying, about the dangers of Russia. And on through the decades they went as that monster M-I-C kept on growing thanks to politicization (spelling?) of National Intelligence Estimates.
Fool me once, blame you. Fool me how many times, blame the rest of us … that “terrorism” war-fear-nuclear spectre” mongering seems to be working for them … FOR THE VERY SAME DEVILS.
A bill to audit the Fed just got a hearing and already has majority support in cosponsors. A useful first babystep. Now all we need is leadership from “leadership.”
We do it, We do it every week with the lead of Mother Hamsher.
Their schedule is easy to find, as is their office, as is their home. Can’t get a meeting? Go with 5 friends, sit in, and do not leave until you get a meeting or go to jail. Post video immediately. Have the corporate media there. And post your grievances.
IIRC Ron Paul started that ball rolling. Who would have thought?
I love the work you are doing, Glenn, Jane and others. We’re doing our best but it needs to be multiplied by 10,000 or 100,000.
See Capitalism a Love Story.
Great idea. I don’t have 5 friends. I am too radical!
Excellent question. Money cannot be discussed in Washington with military and wars. But on healthcare, money is the only concern. We did what we could in June and came up with 30 congress members. How about joining us in a massive protest at the White House on October 5th? http://nogoodwar.org You can safely demonstrate or join us in risking arrest with nonviolent resistance.
I thank you and have to go get provisions. I’ll return and read the rest.
Direct action is what it takes.
Rainman reformed a fascist dictator, his brother
I/m there. Been going for 40 yrs
I made at least 5 new friends from here just on a thread about visiting my senator’s office 3+ years ago. Once upon a time we had google groups in 44 states and found one another so we could be boots on the ground. There’s got to be a way. Lots and lots of lurkers here.
Thanks for new website
David, I’m just reading the book now and hope to have it finished before my October 3-6 trip to DC. Hope to see you then. Peace!
Every recent poll finds that a majority of Americans oppose the war in Afghanistan. We need to motivate our friends, family, and neighbors to get off their asses and help end this war on October 5th!
Let’s find you 5 friends right now – where are you?
Something that gets me about all our foreign policy debates is that they usually seem to be strategic, not based on principle. With Afghanistan, we are all debating strategy, yet our very right to be there, or what Afghans want, seems to be completely left out from the discussion. Considering we’re talking about the future of their country, leaving them out is incredibly perverse.
This was the Horton post that got my attention.
Use this site and others like it to connect in the real world. That’s the purpose of the internet. Otherwise we think we’ve done more than we have and we lose insights and we lose the ability to work with others and to empathize, which then costs us our whole agenda. At http://democrats.com you can connect with every one of our members in your congressional district. Every site and list should organize by congressional district.
SanderO, Who is your congresscritter? We’ll ask around on different threads and find some co-conspirators for you.
As the debates over health care reform and which countries to attack next amply demonstrate, the American People have very little or often no representation in our bought and paid for congress. It’s a congress that serves its owners — and that ain’t us, We, the People.
We’ve been down this path before, especially after the Civil War up to the advent of the Progressive Era. It took a good deal of public tumult to convince the congress to actually get with the program; they did not take on the task voluntarily.
Part of the problem is built in to the nature and the structure of the systems we have. Tendency toward empire is built-in. Some critical changes in the Constitution might help reduce those tendencies. For example, abolishing the Senate (or making it vestigial like the House of Lords) would end the ability of a tiny minority to stall important legislation. Doubling or tripling the size of the House of Representatives might start the process of actually representing public constituencies again, which could have the positive effect of re-engaging the People in the political process. Expanding the Supreme Court could have a beneficial effect (depending of course on how it is engineered). Limiting Executive authority — and strictly enforcing those limits — would reduce the tendency toward aggrandizing power.
Relatioships between states and regions and the federal government need some critical overhauls as well, with an emphasis on autonomy within certain well-defined limits.
Yes, it is risky to take on these and other constitutional challenges, but the longer they are put off, the more institutionalized and consolidated the Imperial State becomes.
Let me know what you think, Mike. And please, everybody, let me know what you think by sending to david@davidswanson dot org. Also please post your comments or reviews at Amazon, B & Noble, Borders, Powells.
Whoever’s in DC in early October, please come to a conference on war powers
http://www.whodecidesaboutwar.org
And a protest of aggressive wars
http://www.nogoodwar.org
I learned from Jane and others here how to be assertive with my elected rep. Since I moved to PA I’ve gotten my rep’s attention! We have interesting chats. I never would have done such a thing before FDL.
Zaid, you got it. We’re not just drunkenly crashing drones into people or failing to deploy enough troops. We’re engaged in unwinnable nonsensical illegal and immoral crusades. We’re imposing democracy against the will of the democratized. We’re fighting terrorism through aggressive wars, illegal terrorizing operations.
Horton has been excellent on this topic.
The more I read about the history I lived through, the more I realize that I hadn’t a clue about what was really going on. No more.
You are right that the debate over war tends to be only about strategic concerns. Not only are the needs and concerns of the Afghans left out, so are those of Americans. We begin with assumptions about safe havens and the utility of force, without mention of what we want to be as a people or what the U.S. is supposed to be about. There is a reason our elites speak of “vital interests” instead of spelling them out – they are indefensible.
What I find strange is that its not just the corporate media where that happens, but in the blogosphere are well. So much of the anti-Iraq war discourse was about failure or the lack of WMD’s, as opposed to the utter foolishness and wrongness of the entire enterprise, or the hypocrisy of the proponents of war.
Can you give us some of your ideas on what can be done to achieve genuine media reform? Where do you think it is best to begin?
He certainly has. That post was written 3 years ago and he’s been unrelenting ever since. We need lots more like him.
U.S. has been an empire since day 1: Louisiana Purchase, Monroe Doctrine, Manifest Destiny, the list goes on.
David: Do you think the recent email that MoveOn sent out opposing further troop increases in Afghanistan is a sign that the ‘Fired up, ready to go’ types are ready to actively oppose Obama on Afghanistan?
Yes, I linked to my own site :)
Sounds kind of like the complaints that the colonies had against King George. The more things change . . . .
Horton is naive. He actually thinks there’s something called the Rule of Law. Law is only for losers. Winners create their own reality. (Has the winner of any war ever been tried for war crimes?)
Sounds like you haven’t read the book but are headed in a similar direction. I agree with the general thrust.
But what do we do on the way to there?
Before we get rid of the Senate, we could much more easily get rid of the filibuster. That could be done tomorrow with 51 votes. We could have the Employee Free Choice Act the next day. We could have single-payer healthcare this year.
Why won’t the Democrats do it? (1) They love to be able to pretend that their refusal to answer the public’s demands is the fault of Republicans. (2) They want to have the most anti-democratic tool outside of the Supreme Court available should the Republicans gain a majority.
That they are thereby helping the Republicans gain a majority is a price they are happy to pay.
Healthcare, not Warfare is a nice slogan
so would be: Healthcare, not the Filibuster
Peace, not the Filibuster
Workers’ Rights, not the Filibuster
How much are we willing to lose before we insist that the filibuster rule be ended?
Great news!
It’s fairly easy to literally get in their face.
Much harder with senators.
Extremely difficult with people who have Secret Service.
am I to assume that the subject I raised at post #68 is indeed taboo?
how can
have any meaning if Democratic pols know that their passionate, if exasperating base will never leave them, no matter what?
@118
Don’t we deserve better than the worst that we can stand?
David,
Thank you for your work and for joining us today.
Once again, the notion of the imperial presidency, in its most recent former – the unitary executive theory -, has been proved bankrupt and rejected.
Of course, the struggle continues. And the election of Barack Obama, as you correctly point out, isn’t the change we need. The work for change begins NOW that he has been elected and will continue after Jan 2017, when his presidency will be over.
Honestly, I noticed that you worked with ACORN and wonder what you think about the recent manufactured phony controversy in which the huge errors in judgement of a couple of employees have been used to paint the entire organization as “corrupt” and “advocating illegal practices.”
Thanks. Brc
what, exactly, have we actually won lately?
Exactly.
We decide that highlighting wastefulness or poor strategy or financial costs or even the suffering of veterans and military families will win the day, but we end up thinking in only those terms in our own heads.
Whereas most of us oppose wars because they kill people.
Then what do we do when the US soldiers are safe in the control rooms of drones, when the financial cost is hidden in wall street wizardry, when the weapons that don’t work are replaced with weapons that kill more effectively?
not news to Jane. She’s been training us. And he’s running for Senate—a primary challenge against Arlen Specter. It will be interesting.
eCAHN .. how true is that.
When I had more faith in BO I was still sorry he was not old enough to have been part of the Viet Nam generation, to have learned those lessons not through historical analyses but to have learned things seat of the pants with incremental but horrifying wake-up revelations. And there is still denial from that period from some who did live through it and that denial is sedimentation that new Iraq and Afghan War denial can settle and harden upon.
I am glad that history is being studied objectively and we need to listen hard. Edmund Burke says something about not knowing history, we are destined to repeat it.
Indeed, that’s why I say empire “built in”.
If we really want to “undo the Imperial Presidency and form a more perfect union,” then we have to start from square one, and I don’t think many Americans are keen to do that.
The steps that I understand David wants to take (not having read the book yet) would have the effect of mitigating some of the Imperial aspects of the nation, but they would not “undo” the nation’s innate imperialism.
That would take something much more radical.
In terms of major changes in Washington, we could begin by busting monopolies.
In terms of immediate action by each of us, stop watching and subscribing to media that destroys our country. Don’t buy ads in it. Don’t appear on it. Don’t promote it in any way.
Instead work to create good local media, and fund good local and national media.
And think carefully about giving money to election campaigns or to organizations that fund election campaigns. Every cycle good campaigns give enough money to bad media outlets that we could have created brand new television networks and newspapers that actually give us the news.
I think it’s encouraging that MoveOn finally noticed there are wars. I don’t know how it happened, and I think that’s an important question. Did their members demand it, or did important Dems in Washington OK it, or both? MoveOn’s members have usually been out ahead of MoveOn, so I don’t think its actions are a good guage of where its members are, but they may be a good guage of where Democrats in Washington and astroturfing activist groups are.
The Declaration of Indictment
http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/44094
We’re trying low-ranking scape-goats for war crimes. Horton knows that and knows that things have to change if we’re going to try those principally responsible.
I don’t know about
I gave money to ActBlue for the ad to tell Arkansas Dem Senator Lincoln and Representative Ross to ACT LIKE DEMOCRATS. That ad is running in Arkansas NOW.
I also sent the following letter to Rep Mike Ross via fax and postal service:
And I sent a similar letter to Sen Blanche Lincoln via email.
Why don’t you send letters like this one?
Also, aren’t we now speaking loudly to Rep. Cooper of Tennessee’s 5th district to tell him to start representing Democrats in his district and Democratic positions generally?
Didn’t he also say that “Evil flourishes when good people do absolutely nothing”?
yeah, seems that the ‘radicalism’ stops at the edge of the Democratic Party.
Amazing that one can advocate for ‘creating new television networks’ and amending the Constitution yet 3rd Party and (I) activism is not ‘Serious’ enough to merit acknowledgement.
Well, this is exciting, sorry to be late.
I am amazed at the optimism on display, especially by someone who has studied and participated in the system as deeply and as long as you have, sir. It surprises me that anyone can think it’s possible to save America from ourselves.
Huge swaths of our population are so ignorant and tuned-out, immense generations of Americans simply don’t know what our country stands for or how it works — how can we possibly hope to mobilize anything but a collection of elites to undermine or cure the elites who now run things? It really seems like a clash between insider haves and outsider haves, with a huge nation of have-nots affected a little by the changes, becoming serfs regardless of what happens.
I’m excited about your book, I’d like to read it, and I’ll check the schedule for SF visits. But I do not share your pragmatic optimism, although I’m all in for any activities anyone devises, as others here can tell you.
(And thanks, Glenn, for a swell intro)
well said
i agree
i posted the phrase you quoted and riffed on
is there something else you want me to say about it?
yep. Plus ça change. . . Thanks for the link.
If citizens’ loyalty remains to parties rather than to peace, justice, domestic tranquility, national defense, and the pursuit of happiness, we’re all done for.
that is a good letter. but if Mike Ross prevails against a primary opponent, exactly how will you “work hard to replace you as a member of the House of Representatives and to end your career as a Democrat.”?
especially if, as I keep querying, 3rd Party and (I) activism is “off the table” (just like Single Payer)?
No, I haven’t had the pleasure of reading your book yet, but it is definitely on my list.
From what you’re saying here, though, it seems you’re more interested in making the Imperial State more responsive to the People and less beholden to its corporate owners. This is a good thing, but it doesn’t undo the Empire and the Imperial Presidency.
That will take somewhat more than ending the filibuster.
With a powerless — or abolished — Senate, the filibuster wouldn’t matter.
But yes, politically, it would be easier to find 51 Senators in favor of abolishing the filibuster than it would be to find 2/3rds in congress and 3/4s of the states to abolish the Senate.
Oh my yes!
Hi David, I think you are probably right about MoveOn. They are beginning to represent their members on the war, but remember well when all of my local folks were calling for impeachment and MoveOn said that is not what their polls indicated was a concern. And I live in the former capitol of the Confederacy!
ACORN does as good work as any organization in existence. I’ve been blogging about it every day at http://davidswanson.org
ACORN sacrifices its causes for the benefit of Democratic campaigns and officials. And the vest majority of Democrats in the House turn around and kick ACORN when the rightwingers have knocked it down. What sort of work does that encourage others to do?
Paul Minor raises as much money for Democrats as almost anyone, is consequently imprisoned on bogus charges by the Karl Rove gang. Democrats won’t lift a finger. What sort of future campaign bribery does that encourage?
The labor movement … same deal
David–I just saw you had a book last night and GG I read you all the time. One review said David addresses a problem I worry about myself. That of the younger crowd thinking they can accomplish these difficult changes without actually hitting the ground in protest. In other words, doing it all from the keyboard. A few are really game to protest old school, but more, I think, are not. Any suggestions?
What have we won?
http://afterdowningstreet.org/node/46021
Just out of curiosity, what would be the basis for opposing President Obama if he should decide that it’s necessary to send more troops less than a year into his presidency?
Not that long ago, he campaigned forcefully on the need to win the fight in Afghanistan, and we all knew what he thought about it when we voted last Nov.
I’m not disagreeing with you as much as asking you what the counterargument to such an argument would be.
Let me take this chance to thank both you and Glenn for the superlative jobs you both do. I especially liked, David, your point that we fight because morally we have no other choice.
The power of the military-intelligence and allied corporate establishment to set the agenda of dialogue in this country is almost untouchable. Both you and Glenn (and FDL) are examples of relative independence from that agenda.
I think, David, your comment — “If the military is permitted to publicly threaten the president and pressure him into sending more young men and women to kill and die in Afghanistan, we can forget civilian rule, much less the rule of Congress over its executive.” — is perhaps more dramatic than you meant to make. The fight would not be over. In fact, this kind of military threat and action has happened before in this nation’s history (I’m of course thinking Vietnam/So. East Asia).
On the other hand, given the huge structural changes needed in this country, and given the massive resistance to progressive change in the U.S., based upon the millions of people who now rely upon the MIC for their livelihood — representing nearly a bureaucratic class, or certainly interest group, who will fight for their privilege and their ideology, which is extremely reactionary) — I don’t see how the necessary changes will take place without some kind of upheaval or struggle, which I expect will look quite ugly (a la the Sixties, or worse). We need to prepare for that, not be afraid of that.
With the teabaggers and the hired thugs at the health care open meetings, we can see the other side is not afraid of that, and in fact is taking the initiative.
In any case, all I really wanted to do here is let you know I plan to get your book, and look at it with a serious, and open mind. And thank again you and Glenn for all the work you do on behalf of positive change in this country.
thank you. withdrawal of allegiance and money from deceptive mass media outlets is an interesting direction.
maybe the time is getting ripe to see what a thoroughly viral, grass roots, internet enabled political movement can do, one that bypasses the old gatekeepers of Party and MSM.
thanks, David. No. I was just venting. Appreciate your bringing it up.
Unless you can address the torture issue. I am so dumbfounded that only 1 out of 4 citizens is against torture of any form. That disheartens me but it seems to echo the Milgram experiments at Yale, too. Those that took authoritarian orders in spite of pain inflicted on fellow humans.
Any specifics on fighting for a bigger scope of accountability on that? Instead of those at bottom of the food chain once again falling on the swords of those who abused their power and made sociopathological orders and tortured and defied the law to do so. Immunity for the elites. Glenn’s important focus so often.
What more radical do you propose (than the proposals you haven’t read yet :-)? I’m seriously interested. If I’m missing something, I want to correct that, and I’m completely indifferent to whether or not it’s radical. I just want to know what it is and if it’s needed. And please let me know after you’ve read the book too. Thanks.
Same thing last year with MoveOn and the Betrayus ad.
The dems in congress are wusses—they are indebted to the masters of the universe and not to all of the people who got out the vote to get them elected. That bus has run over and backed up over lots of us—those who work for repro. choice, gay rights, etc. Primaries seem to be the best solution we have at least for the short term. Longer term, . . . . ?
Yes, Gitch. Another great one! We as Americans will have to eventually acknowledge we are like the “Good Germans” who did not take responsibility for the atrocities of their government. I want to exit that category by getting more active and taking responsibility, the “ability to respond.”
There’s still many more of us than there are of them.
Am I the one not willing to acknowledge 3rd party and independent activism? Did I miss some comment on that above?
You know, much as I promote being aggressive, that doesn’t have to require paranoia or false charges :-)
The book argues at length for independent activism. I don’t think multiplying a bad thing (like parties) will help us, but all of the reforms that would make 3rd parties viable I favor because they would also make independent campaigns viable.
Don’t know if this is the most pc answer, sporkovat, but if Ross beats a primary challenger despite the fact that he faced challengers and despite the ads that are being run to inform his constituents about him, then maybe – just maybe – his constituents think that he’s representing their views and interests well.
Our entire rationale for calling for a primary challenge against him and others like Jim Cooper in TN-5 is that, based on polling and the votes in the last election, we think that the people of their districts are not being represented well by them.
Sorry, but I’m not ready to chuck representative democracy out the window.
Let’s talk about it in San Francisco
The health care debate exemplifies why money and politics don’t mix, with a Democratic majority and administration designing “reforms” with a primary goal of not angering interests who’d fund their defeat in the next election.
I’ve advocated for a constitutional amendment banning private funding of elections since the nineties, when a series of books by Bartlett & Steele convinced me our government was hopelessly owned by the 1% Michael Moore so frequently references.
I detected less and less interest from the left as Democrats became more effective fund raisers, culminating in the Obama juggernaut.
Do you think interest in a constitutional amendment overturning Buckley will rebound when a 5-4 Supreme Court unleashes corporate cash on our Democracy that will make Obama look like a piker in comparison?
ACORN, Van Jones, that NEA fellow: stellar examples of why people wonder why they should go all-in when asked by the Obama team to back their play. Whatever play, whatever issue, whenever it happens — won’t every single person ask themselves, “Can I make enough difference until I am targetted by the right and set adrift by my leader?”
Not that I’ll ever be asked, but I certainly would never answer any call should it come. (ha!)
Sorry, David. Sporkovat was talking to me about 3rd party and independent activism.
Certainly didn’t mean to imply that the entire book was about the filibuster (or the Senate) or that the sections on shutting down the empire were about the filibuster at all.
So I shall now call myself an Independent that likes the platform of the Green Party. Good point about multiplying a bad idea.
Without a paper ballot to validate votes,nor the abilty to wrest back the PUBLIC airwaves from the corporate propogandists,the fundamentals of change are gravely imperiled .
Funny how imperiled and imperium sound a lot alike.
There’s a lot more real world action than we always know about. I see a lot of young people in Pittsburgh right now. More is needed. But look at all the cries for grounds for optimism in this thread. That’s what I hear all over the country too. (and why the Downing Street Memo is known, unlike stronger evidence that came later when people no longer thought Congress would take action) “Give us reason to hope!” Well, if we could better inform each other of all that is going on and all that is being won, we would be stronger and more enrgized moving forward into bigger challenges. In the meantime, the president is undecided whether he favors obeying the majority of Americans or the military. Let’s help him decide on October 5th http://nogoodwar.org
We the people oppose sending the troops. Our representatives in the House have to pay or refuse to pay for those troops.
Thanks Jeff yes well said
Let’s knock Beck of #1 on Amazon!
If the Dems give us junk health care FAUX-reform I would definitely consider withdrawing from the Dem party AS LOUDLY AS POSSIBLE and rallying to another. Glad there is Working Families Dem Party, though. Would like to look into that.
I think people should pull out of Obama’s email loop as a protest, too. But I was never in it, so I guess I have to take care of my own side of street.
Libby I’m running out of time but go to http://prosecutebushcheney.org or Email me at david@davidswanson.org
The police state deploys sonic cannons at peaceful demonstrations at the G20 and at town hall meetings in San Diego County. The more (young) people there are in the streets, the better it will be for the LRAD industry. Rubber bullet and tear gas futures will go up.
I don’t have any faith in the capability of the police state to police its own response to active democracy.
As we come to the end of this lively Book Salon,
David, Thank you for stopping by the Lake and spending the afternoon with us discussing your new book and undoing the Imperial Presidency.
Glenn, Thank you very much for Hosting is great Book Salon.
Everyone, this is a great book, if you haven’t bought one yet, here is a link.
Thanks all.
The alternative would be to silence yourself when it comes to opposing the war in an effort to support the lesser of two evils. That is essentially what MoveOn’s leadership has done up to this point.
Obama has doubled the amount of troops in Afghanistan since Bush left office, so an Obama decision to not increase troop levels even further would still leave us with a situation that is unacceptable to someone with an anti-war perspective.
Seems likely.
David,
Despite the lopsided coverage in all media, that’s been my impression too.
It’s infuriating, and it should be called out more forcefully.
What do you think of getting people to go to http://www.speaker.gov to let Speaker Pelosi know that we believe an important organization and an important principle have been thrown under the bus in the name of politics? It’s wrong.
thanks
gotcha
me too
Thanks David, (and Glenn)
I like your attitude.
and as always, thanks Bev.
THANK YOU Bev
Thanks, David! This is an awesome Salon. Look forward to reading your book and your website and others you cite and attending NY Dec. appearance!
Let’s not forget the GOOD rhetoric and bad follow through on Iraq thus far
Which is no more closed than Guantanamo
In fact there are MORE troops there, more of them mercenaries
Thanks David and Glenn.
Hope to meet you in Philly in Nov.
can’t hurt but go to YOUR rep too
well said, just caught this.
hear hear
Thanks to Jane and Bev and Glenn and everyone who’s part of this wonderful website that is doing just the sort of work that needs to be done!
Not having read your book yet, it wouldn’t be prudent to comment on what’s in it — or not. I can only go with what I see here.
Reanimating — or rewriting — the Constitution is a big deal, one that I would call radical. Ending the filibuster is a big deal, too, in the context of the Senate at any rate, but it’s not radical in the sense that it would involve the People taking matters into their own hands.
The People don’t actually have to wait, for example, for the Congress to call a Constitutional Convention, and they don’t have to put up with the supermajority requirements for amendments to make changes in the Constitution we have. I’m sure you get in to all of that in your book.
But following through on it — rewriting the Constitution — is a radical act.
Rewriting the Constitution to unwind the Empire and prohibit its return would be supre-radical.
I think you catch my drift…
2 posts, #68 and another one went past and left me feeling ignored. sorry about any tone that I let slip.
The authors of the Constitution expected it to be amended frquently and would consider how outdated we’ve allowed it to become a radically dangerous act — and gave us 2 different ways to get to a Con Con. Let’s do it.
Sorry. Tried to catch all the comments but obviously didn’t manage it. In my defense, there are 185 comments :-) Whatever the other one was, you can send me at david@davidswanson.org
spork, that #65 comment you made was very provocative and inspired me to think in terms of dealing with dysfunctional party or going elsewhere to support a new one. :) good for you for speaking up!
Done! However, they’re all Republicans (both US Senators and the Representative from TN-2), will not vote under any circumstances the way I think they should, and will easily keep their offices come 2010. Rep John Duncan won’t even have a Democratic challenger in the midterm election.
Everything else I’m doing goes above and beyond as I try to stand with so many others in this country who share my values and think as I do!
[Sorry. Thought you were referring to Health Care Reform. I’ll send all three here in TN a letter re ACORN too.]
yes i missed #65, but i didn’t miss that topic in the book and don’t get the impression from this thread that anybody thinks it’s verbotten. I just missed it. Sorry.
Just ordered a copy of David’s Daybreak: Undoing the Imperial Presidency and Forming a More Perfect Union at Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/Daybreak…..1583228888
Thanks, David!
Maybe you are thinking of, or remembering this, from a young man’s pen almost 200 years ago:
from The Mask of Anarchy, by Percy B. Shelley
http://www.english.upenn.edu/~…..archy.html
thanks for sharing that awesome passage!
Thanks David, for coming by!
And ditto to those you have mentioned.
General McChrystal on 60 Minutes (live now), “We could do good things in Afghanistan for 100 years and still lose.”
Most powerful unintentional call for an end to the war in Afghanistan that I have heard in a while. A nugget of truth in a propaganda piece.