Ralph Nader Cornel West Unveil Proposal to Challenge Obama in Primaries

September 19, 2011
http://www.singlepayeraction.org/blog/?p=3032

Progressive leaders led by Ralph Nader and Cornel West unveiled a proposal today to challenge President Obama in the Democratic Party’s presidential primaries in 2012.

The proposal, which has been endorsed by over 45 distinguished leaders, seeks to have a slate of six candidates run against President Obama, each representing a field in which Obama has never clearly staked a progressive claim or where he has drifted toward the corporatist right.

“Without debates by challengers inside the Democratic Party’s presidential primaries, the liberal/majoritarian agenda will be muted and ignored,” said Ralph Nader.

“The one-man Democratic primaries will be dull, repetitive, and draining of both voter enthusiasm and real bright lines between the two parties that excite voters,” Nader said.

A letter is being sent to a list of distinguished elected officials, civic leaders, prominent members of academia and the NGO community who represent the fields of labor, poverty, military and foreign policy, health insurance and care, the environment, financial regulation, consumer protection, and civil, political and human rights/empowerment.

The list of potential candidates also includes progressive democrats who have held national and state office and have fought for progressive reforms.

“We need to put strong democratic pressure on President Obama in the name of poor and working people” said Cornel West, author and Professor at Princeton University. “His administration has tilted too much toward Wall Street, we need policies that empower Main Street.”

The letter pronounces that without primary challengers, President Obama will never have to seriously articulate and defend his beliefs to his own party. Given the dangers our nation faces, that option is unacceptable.

“It’s time for the White House to get into the trench with organized labor and lend a hand. We know what we need, and we don’t need another campaign speech,” said Chris Townsend Political Action Director, United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America. “The absence of discussion or debate about the failed strategies of this administration only emboldens the corporate onslaught.”

The letter points to numerous decisions that have drawn criticism from Obama’s own Democratic Party including his decision to bail out Wall Street’s most profitable firms while failing to push for effective prosecution of the criminal behavior that triggered the recession, escalating the wars in Afghanistan and Pakistan while simultaneously engaging in a unilateral war in Libya, his decision to extend the Bush era tax cuts, and his acquiescence to Republican extortion during the recent debt ceiling negotiations.

“Robust debate on the crucial issues facing our nation, including global environmental devastation, should characterize all races for national public office and the Democratic presidential primaries are no exception,” said Brent Blackwelder, President Emeritus of Friends of the Earth. “The public needs to hear whether a second term Obama will be like the first term Obama, or perhaps more like the 2008 presidential candidate Obama or something else altogether.”

The list of prominent leaders receiving the letter is being kept private as a courtesy.

Here’s a partial list of endorsees:

James Abourezk
Former U.S. Senator, South Dakota

Gar Alperovitz, Professor University of Maryland, Co-Founder Democracy Collaborative

Norman Birnbaum
Professor Emeritus, Georgetown University Law Center

Dr. Brent Blackwelder
President Emeritus of Friends of the Earth

Ellen H. Brown
Lawyer and Author of Web of Debt

Edgar Stuart Cahn
Professor of Law, University of the District of Columbia
Co-founder Legal Services for the Poor

Pat Choate
1996 Reform Party Vice President Candidate

Charles Cray
Director of the Center for Corporate Policy

Peter Coyote
Actor, Author and Director

Ronnie Cummins, Executive Director, Organic Consumers Association

Charles Derber, Professor, Boston College

Ronnie Dugger
Founder, Alliance for Democracy

John Fullerton
President, Capital Institute

Rebecca and James Goodman, Northwood Farm

Randy Hayes
Director, Foundation Earth
Rainforest Action Network Founder

Chris Hedges
Pulitzer Prize Winning Journalist of the New York Times and Author

Hazel Henderson,
Author of Ethical Markets: Growing the Green Economy
President, Ethical Markets Media, LLC.

Jean Houston
Psychologist, Anthropologist and Author of The Possible Human and The
Possible Society

Nicholas Johnson
Former Commissioner, Federal Communications Commission
Former Administrator, Federal Maritime Commission

Alan F. Kay
Author of Spot the Spin and Locating Consensus for Democracy

Harry Kelber
The Labor Educator

Andrew Kimbrell
Executive Director, Center for Food Safety&
International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA)

Jonathan Kozol
Educator, Author of Savage Inequalities

Lewis Lapham
Former Editor, Harper’s Magazine

Leland Lehrman, Partner, Fund Balance

Rabbi Michael Lerner
Editor, Tikkun Magazine
Chair, Network of Spiritual Progressives

Dr. Richard Lippin, MD
Physician Forecaster, Board Certified in Preventive Medicine and
Advocate for both Individual and Institutional Prevention

Robert D. Manning
Founder and CEO, Responsible Debt Relief Institute
Author of Credit Card Nation

Dr. Samuel Metz, MD
Mad As Hell Doctors, founding member
Physicians for a National Health Plan, member of Portland chapter

Carol Miller, Community Activist, New Mexico

E. Ethelbert Miller, Board Chair Institute for Policy Studies

Ralph Nader
Citizen Advocate

Michael Parenti
Author

John Passacantando
Former Executive Director, Greenpeace USA

Erich Pica
President of Friends of the Earth

Vijay Prashad
Author and Professor, Trinity College

Nomi Prins
Author and former Managing Director at Goldman Sachs

Marcus Raskin
Author of The Common Good and former White House Advisor

Andy Shallal
“Democracy’s Restauranteur” and Owner of Bus Boys& Poets

Michelle Shocked
Musician

David Swanson
Author, War is a Lie

Chris Townsend
Political Action Director, United Electrical, Radio and Machine
Workers of America (UE)

Gore Vidal
Author and Political Activist

Rabbi Arthur Waskow
Chair, The Shalom Center

Harvey Wasserman
Author of Solartopia! Our Green-Powered Earth

Cornel West
Professor and Author of Race Matters

Quentin D. Young MD
National Coordinator, Physicians for a National Health Program

Paul/Ventura 2012?

From PrisonPlanet.com:

Former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura has an important message for Libertarian Congressman Ron Paul – ditch the Republican Party and run for President as an independent.

On the day that Obama officially announced his 2012 Presidential campaign underway, the spotlight will now turn on those who are expected to set the wheels in motion to run against the president.

One name mentioned over and over again for the past few months has been Republican Congressman Ron Paul. However, Ventura, who was victorious as an Independent himself in 1998, believes that Paul can mount a more powerful challenge by distancing himself from the GOP establishment.

And Ventura even offered to throw his own name into the hat as a possible running mate.

“If Ron Paul would quit the Republican Party, and he asked me, then I would give serious consideration to running with him.” Ventura told syndicated radio host Alex Jones today.

“I will not run as a Democrat or Republican. I want nothing to do with these parties. They are the problem, they are not the solution.” the former Governor added.

“They’re the ones that have been in control of this country, as Ralph Nadar calls them, the two party dictatorship. They are the ones that have us in this mess. They are the ones who have caused all the debt problems… it’s time to throw them out. The people of this country can do a major thing and its so easy. The next election, don’t vote for ANY Republicans or Democrats. That would be the greatest thing that could happen in this country, to bring down and destroy these two political parties.” Ventura urged.

Congressman Paul has recently been victorious in several Republican straw polls of potential presidential nominees, and he has raised a staggering $3 million already this first quarter via his various grass roots organizations. That is more than any other potential Republican nominee thus far.

Ventura believes Paul should fully capitalize on his political popularity and make the break from the GOP.

“He won’t get the Republican Party nomination, he has to understand that.” Ventura said.

“The Republicans are not going to put Ron Paul up as their Presidential nominee. He is too much of a rogue, he is not bought and sold by multinational corporations. Plus the biggest thing of all, he calls for an audit of the Federal Reserve.” he added...

Ventura is currently promoting his new book, 63 documents The Government Doesn’t Want You To Read. The former Governor explained that he had dedicated the book to Congressman Paul as a thank you for his tireless efforts to bring more transparency to Washington.

“He was the only Congressman we have that had the courage to go out on the floor of the Congress and support Wikileaks,” Ventura noted, alluding to the whistle blowing website.

“Like Ron Paul said, no one has died from Wikileaks. How many people have died from the trumped up intelligence and the lying that got us into the Iraq war. And then he said something even more profound. He talked about in a free country like ours, when the truth equals treason we are in big trouble.”

While Ron Paul has yet to announce whether he will mount another presidential run, he may want to take Ventura up on his offer before the former pro-wrestler turned political powerhouse looks toward an even more ambitious role.

“I never said who would be President and who would be Vice President.” Ventura quipped.

“Ron and I may have to flip a coin.”

Ventura Urges Ron Paul To Run For President As Independent
Steve Watson
April 4, 2011
http://www.prisonplanet.com/ventura-urges-ron-paul-to-run-for-president-as-independent.html

Progressive Libertarians

Ralph Nader was once the most despised man in korporate America for his muckraking. He has since become despised by the yuppie liberal media mouthpieces who use him as a scapegoat for the 2000 election. (Antonin Scalia or Jeb Bush would be better choices.) Whatever his flaws, he is his own man and a trendsetter, and thus his recent embrace of the fusion politics of progressives and libertarians may hopefully be a sign of where things could be heading.

Think of it as the best of both Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul. As trend researcher Gerald Celente described it, movement members would be "libertarian in the sense of government staying out of people's lives" and progressive "with the government having control of issues where they can make a difference." Nader declares this to be "the most exciting new political dynamic."

Nader: Progressive-libertarian alliance ‘the most exciting new political dynamic’ in US
Stephen C. Webster
Thursday, January 13th, 2011
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/progressive-libertarianism-the-exciting-political-dynamic-ralph-nader

Ralph Nader, Fiction Writer

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1925576,00.html

Ralph Nader, Fiction Writer
By Tim Morrison
Wednesday, Sep. 23, 2009

Ralph Nader has been many things: lawyer, consumer-rights bulldog, political activist and perennial third-party presidential candidate. He has now added a new title to his business card: fiction writer. His latest book, Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us!, is a 700-page populist fantasy in which a small group of billionaires and media moguls — led by Warren Buffett and including Ted Turner, George Soros, Bill Cosby, Yoko Ono and Phil Donahue — pool their massive resources to reform the U.S. With the help of a $15 billion war chest and a p.r. campaign starring a talking parrot, the group successfully unionizes Walmart, ends corporate influence on Congress, makes Warren Beatty the governor of California and legalizes industrial hemp. TIME talked to Nader about the origins of his book, its celebrity characters and the U.S.'s real-life political battles.

You say in your author's note that this book is not a novel. And yet it's not nonfiction. So what is it?

In the literary world, it's either called a work of speculation — "What if something happened?" "What if somebody did this?" — or a practical utopia. We haven't had many practical utopias. Russell Jacoby, a professor out in California, wrote a book called The End of Utopia in 1999, which argues that the idea of imagining better futures has diminished, as we wallow more and more in our desperate state of societal and governmental decay. So I tried to revive the genre, so to speak.

Was that your goal in writing the book? To create a practical utopia?

No. As you go through year after year, as many civic advocates do, being overwhelmed by the corporate lobbies and their allies in government, you say to yourself, 'If we only had more media, if we only had more money, if we only had more field organizers, if we only had better ideas and strategies.' That's what produced the book. What if we had a collection of superrich elderly, retired people who are very dismayed at the state of their beloved country, and what if they got together and really poured money in? What would happen? And what would happen is a major power collision with corporate goliaths and their government allies.

You mention your group of the superrich. How did you come up with that idea, with those characters?

First of all, the civil rights movement, contrary to popular impression, was funded in significant part by superrich people. The right-wing movement in this country is funded by people like Richard Scaife, who's put in a quarter of a billion dollars at least. I decided to pick [my characters] because they all brought something to the table: Barry Diller, media; Ted Turner, media; George Soros, the Open Society Institute and institution-building; Peter Lewis, insurance; Joe Jamail and Bill Gates Sr. on access to justice. They all brought something to it.

How does Yoko Ono fit into the group?

I wanted to have more women than I could find who were older and quite well-known. She brings moral sentiments and aesthetics. Aesthetics is a very understressed dimension of civic action: music, song, beauty, posters, logos, all these things.

Have you met all the people you based these characters on?

Oh yes. I've talked to or met a lot of them: Barry Diller, Phil Donahue, Bernard Rapoport, Leonard Riggio ...

Did you say to any of them, "I'm writing this book about you"?

Not until I finished it.

What did they say?

Well, I got through to eight of them; they were bemused, but obviously they weren't going to say much until they saw the book. But some of them were very pleased.

Did you ever consider making yourself a character in the book?

That's what Warren Beatty wants. He wants to make this a movie, but only if I'm in it.

The jumping-off point for the story is the government's response to Hurricane Katrina. Was that the genesis of the book idea for you as well?

It was one of them, yeah. Another of them was how demoralized they were, these superrich older people that I talked to. I said to them, "How could you be demoralized? You're sitting on 5, 6, 8 billion dollars. For a billion dollars, with field organizers in every congressional district, you can get a single-payer health-care system.' What's a billion dollars to these people?

The events in the book read like an unstoppable wave of progressivism. Isn't it kind of a fantasy to expect that to actually happen?

Well, I tried to unleash almost everything short of detonations [on the main characters]. I mean, the other side really unleashed about everything they had, but you see, they weren't used to being taken on by the big guys or in ways they'd never seen before. They're used to meat-and-potatoes lobbying: put the ads on, get the think tanks going, throw more money in the PACs. Very traditional.

And you think that would be their response in real life as well?

Well, if they were caught by surprise, sure.

What do you think about the current fight over health-care reform?

Well, it's going down heavily. Obama's not going to get a public option. By the time the thousand-page monstrosity of complexity and ambiguity gets to his desk, it's going to be a shred of what the majority of doctors, nurses and the people in this country want — which is full Medicare for all.

What's your take on President Obama thus far?

Weak. Waffling, wavering, ambiguous and overwhelmingly concessionary.

Is any of that enough to get you back into the political arena?

It's too early to say. One thing is, I always want the progressive agenda represented on the ballot, even in a rigged two-party tyranny. I wish other people would do it, but as far as me, it's too early to say.

Do you think third parties have a shot in the next elections?

Sure. They'll be called the Bloomberg Party. Some billionaire will come in like Perot and turn it into a three-way race. There's so many billionaires, and a few of them are quite enlightened. You don't need a right-wing billionaire because they've already got the Republican Party.

Ralph Nader says Barack Obama is an Uncle Tom

From Conspiracy Nation ( http://www.shout.net/~bigred/cn.html ):

(Melchizedek Communique, MC032709) Ralph Nader says Barack Obama is an "Uncle Tom".

Nader said this on Fox News on election night, Nov. 4, 2008:

"To put it very simply, he [Barack Obama] is our first African American president, or he will be. And we wish him well. But his choice, basically, is whether he is going to be Uncle Sam for the people of this country or Uncle Tom for the giant corporations." [1]

People were shocked that Nader would say such a thing. "Fox anchor Shepard Smith gave Nader repeated opportunities to retract his use of the racially offensive term, 'Uncle Tom.'" [1]

But Nader simply lowered his head and plowed on. [1]

An "Uncle Tom" is "a pejorative for an African American who is perceived by others as behaving in a subservient manner to White American authority figures, or as seeking ingratiation with them by way of unnecessary accommodation." [2]

Why Bruce Tomaso, who provides the Nader quote [1], would say "Uncle Tom" is "racially offensive" remains unclear. Nader did not say anything like "All blacks are Uncle Toms." Is it "racially offensive" to say Barack Obama is tall? Is it "racially offensive" to say Barack Obama is part Irish?

It does begin to appear that Ralph Nader is correct, i.e., that President Barack Obama is indeed an Uncle Tom.

Where are billions of dollars being frantically spent? The money is being poured into giant Wall Street firms and, soon, into an escalation of war in Afghanistan. "As President Barack Obama begins winding down the Bush war in Iraq, he is building up his own war farther east," writes Jim Hightower. "We're told that it will be a new, expanded, extra-special American adventure in Afghanistan, involving a vigorous surge strategy to 'stabilize' this perpetually unstable land." [3]

The Bureau of Labor Statistics Table A-12, "Alternative measures of labor underutilization", features a "U-6" measure. This includes "marginally attached" workers, "discouraged" workers, and those working part-time who would prefer to work full-time but cannot find such employment. As of February 2009, the U-6 unemployment rate was 16 percent. [4]

Follow the money. Where is the Obama administration spending billions of dollars? Answer: On Wall Street usury enablers and to control poppy production in Afghanistan, more than on the needs of ordinary Americans.

What would the unemployment rate be if not for the millions of government employees, immune from downsizings?

The word "apparatchik" derives from the former Soviet Union. In Russian, it comes from "apparat" (the government machine or structure) plus "chik" (agent). The term apparatchik "suggests a bureaucrat who willingly follows and implements the party line, either in a spirit of blind obedience or one of cynical ambition." [5]

In a sense, an "Uncle Tom" would be an apparatchik. So would relatively privileged government employees be apparatchiks.

Scores of apparatchiks could be seen in the background at yesterday's "Uncle Tom" Obama Town Hall Meeting. They sat in chairs functioning as polite backdrop for Mighty Obama. From which government bureaucracy did the background apparatchiks possibly originate?

------- Sources -------
[1] "Ralph Nader wonders whether Obama will be an 'Uncle Tom'", by Bruce Tomaso. Nov. 6, 2008
http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/11/ralph-nader-wonders-whether-ob.html
[2] "Uncle Tom", Wikipedia, March 27, 2009
[3] "Obama's Triple Surge Into Afghanistan", by Jim Hightower. March 26, 2009
http://www.creators.com/opinion/jim-hightower/obama-s-triple-surge-into-afghanistan.html
[4] "Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey", Bureau of Labor Statistics
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t12.htm
[5] apparatchik (uh-pah-RAH-chik) noun.
http://wordsmith.org/words/apparatchik.html

Beast of the Month - December 2008

Beast of the Month - December 2008
Al From
Democratic Leadership Council Kingpin

"I yam an anti-Christ..."
John Lydon (aka Johnny Rotten) of The Sex Pistols, "Anarchy in the UK"

"His choice, basically, is whether he's going to be Uncle Sam for the people of this country, or Uncle Tom for the giant corporations."
Ralph Nader on Barack Obama, on election night

Anyone who is cynical about the whole Obamamania fad (and yes, that would include The Konformist itself) might as well suck it up and accept the truth: like it or not, Barky is the face of "liberalism" and "the left" for at least the next eight years. (And perhaps up to forty, if you believe the persuasive political theories of Webster Tarpley and Samuel Huntington.) So the question needs to be asked: what is the reality behind this face?

Despite all the korporate press propagandizing already proclaiming President Obama a perfect mixture of JFK, MLK, RFK, FDR, Abraham Lincoln and Jesus Christ even before he has taken office (an embarrassing level of delusional fawning by the establishment media not seen since... well, since George W. Bush right after 9/11) he is decidedly a transparent fraud rather than a transcendental leader in The Konformist view. This became more annoyingly obvious as the image heavy, substance non-existent campaign continued to be exposed as a front for the most noxious elements of the Democratic Party. All the repeated chantings of the mantras of "hope" and "change" couldn't hide the repellant machine behind the bizarre mixture of a New Age religious kult and a multi-level marketing scam.

Certainly Obama, a crafty politician and master manipulator, deserves much of the credit and blame for the success of his campaign, starting off with his lofty oratorical style. Indeed, his personal magnetism in speeches is so spellbinding, many suspect he intentionally uses NLP phraseology and pacing in his delivery to induce mass hypnosis on his audience. (Then again, since mass manipulation is the purpose of all political propaganda, it's hard to fault Obama on this count just because he's better at it than everyone else.)

NLP hypnosis or not, Obama didn't come up with his war plan blueprint all by his lone gunman self. His two top political advisors, chief strategist David Axelrod and campaign manager David Plouffe, certainly deserve much of the cheers and heckles as well. Axelrod and Plouffe are partners in AKP&D Message and Media, and the campaign they helped craft earned the prize from Advertising Age for 2008 Marketer of the Year, beating out Apple and Zappos.com. As the World Socialist Web Site would sarcastically observe, "Obama replaces last year's winner, the video game system Nintendo. The runner-up in 2007 was the insurance corporation GEICO, which features a talking lizard and a cave-man in its ads for discount insurance."

Still, even the twin David's are chump change in the Democratic Party machine, smooth spin doctor salesman rather than the policy genius. If Obama is the current Grand Theft Auto of politics, the Xbox 360 system running the software is clearly the Democratic Leadership Council, led by founder and CEO Al From, The Konformist Beast of the Month.

The DLC was founded in 1985, after the massacre of Walter Mondale by the Gipper in the '84 election. Its first major battle came in 1988, when it successfully fought against Jesse Jackson from winning the Democratic nomination. Ironically then, its first mission was blocking a smooth-talking Chicago black man from winning the White House.

The DLC's problem with Jesse wasn't that he was African-American, but that he was an economic populist, which the DLC terms as "out of touch" thinking. Instead, they support what they term "centrism" - i.e. right wing economic and foreign policy positions. Economic populism, as far as the DLC is concerned, is engaging in "class warfare" and a decided no-no. Talking populism may not be acceptable, but taking hefty dollars from oil companies, military contractors, korporate monoliths and right-wing foundations is okely dokely. Thanks to the DLC's refusal to battle the GOP talking points, they, as much as George W. Bush, Rush Limbaugh and FOX News, have pushed the rightward shift in American politics over the last twenty years.

In 2003, the DLC leadership strongly backed the invasion of Iraq. Indeed, Will Marshall (besides From, the only non-elected official on the DLC founding roster) co-signed a letter written by the neocon Project for the New American Century to George W. Bush in favor of the attack before it was launched. Even as the war became increasingly unpopular, Marshall and the DLC crowd continued to mock what they termed the "looney left" critics of the war. As Marshall would put it, "Democrats need to be choosier about the political company they keep, distancing themselves from the pacifist and anti-American fringe." The DLC went after prez candidate Howard Dean over his antiwar status, who replied that he came "from the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party." (It's plausible the repeated playing of the "Dean Scream" was orchestrated by DLCers who wanted to destroy his campaign.) There was one guy even more hated than Dean in 2004 among the DLC: Michael Moore, whose Fahrenheit 9/11 heated up the box-office and progressive voters with his Bush-bashing documentary. As Marshall would sneer, "You know, let's let Hollywood and the Cannes Film Festival fawn all over Michael Moore. We ought to make it pretty clear that he sure doesn't speak for us when it comes to standing up for our country." From would add: "We've got to repudiate, you know, the most strident and insulting anti-American voices out there sometimes on our party's left... We can't have our party identified by Michael Moore and Hollywood as our cultural values." Four years later, Moore has been proven to be even more vindicated over what the correct position on Iraq was than Jose Canseco has been on steroids in baseball. Despite this, Marshall continues to head the Progressive Policy Institute, the DLC's think tank (Orwellian in name due to its lack of any progressive values.)

Shilling for war in Iraq isn't the only Shrubian position taken by the DLC. When Bush's illegal warrantless surveillance program was uncovered, senior fellow Marshall Wittmann dismissed opposition to it as from the "fevered imaginations of graying baby boomers and twenty-something bloggers," and added: "The Democratic Party is increasingly under the influence of modern day McGovernites." It should be noted that Wittmann is a "former" Republican, still a social conservative and neocon, and a one-time legislative director for the Christian Coalition. This, of course, is totally acceptable to the DLC, but Michael Moore is not.

The current chairman of the DLC, Blue Dog conservative Democrat Harold Ford, shows the utter cluelessness of the organization. Like Obama, Ford is a charismatic African-American who barely conceals his right-wing agenda under vague generalities. In 2006, he lost the Tennessee Senate contest after his opponent Bob Corker unveiled race-baiting commercials, race-baiting Ford refused to denounce in his attempts to portray himself as a "post-racial" politician. So now, the irony of ironies, one of the few decided Democratic losers in the 2006 election cycle is leading an organization whose purpose is to show the Democratic Party the path to victory.

Thanks to its right-wing posturing, the DLC is viewed as a four-letter word among progressives, and Hillary Clinton's membership (along with her husband Billy's, who is also a former DLC chairman) became a rally just under her Iraq War support for Daily Kos Hill-hatred. In their distaste for Hillary, they found their supposed champion in Obama.

But The Konformist smells a ringer: though he denies any ties to the DLC (just as he's denied ties to Tony Rezko and Bill Ayers) he was featured prominently on the DLC's “100 to Watch” list for 2003. Meanwhile, early last year, From gushed about Obama as the potential Democratic choice, noting: “I mean his chief economist, Austan Goolsbee, is a fellow at the Progressive Policy Institute, which is our think tank.” (Goolsbee, for those keeping score, is from the University of Chicago and represents the "centrists" among Milton Friedman acolytes.) The timing of From's comment coincides with the sudden switching of loyalties in the Democratic Party establishment from Hillary to Obama.

Why did the DLC betray Hillary? Perhaps it was about Hillary not being particularly loved by the progressive crowd, meaning that she would be expected to deliver something to satisfy them. Meanwhile, Obama has come with little demands from his followers, as his kult of narcissism has substituted feel-good personality worship over policy and substance. Or perhaps it's about Hill and Bill, for all their "Third Way" and centrist leanings, are still Democrats who believe in the New Deal (having been behind crazy things like trying to provide Americans with universal health coverage) making them unpopular among the DLC crowd in their own right. Whatever the reason, the end result is that the Democratic Party now has as its standard bearer a guy who took less progressive stands on issues than either Hillary or John Edwards during the campaign, this at a time when another Great Depression may be starting and another New Deal the best remedy.

Of course, whatever the DLC may want may be trumped by reality. Sooner or later, if unemployment soars to the double digits and people keep losing their homes to banks, the masses may demand more from Obama than snuggly slogans, at the point of riots. When that happens, Obama can either finally deliver something to the public in a concrete plan or send in the National Guard. At the core of the best of politicians, the fundamental ideology is not wanting to lose, and if there is any true "hope" over Obama, it's that he doesn't want to be labeled a loser. But as shrewd betters in Las Vegas, The Konformist is guessing he's a compromised tool for the DLC establishment who is going to do too little too late, leaving an impotent Democratic Party discredited and holding the bag on Great Depression II. Go ahead, Obama, prove us wrong.

In any case, we salute Al From as Beast of the Month. Congratulations, and keep up the great work, Al!!!

Uncle Sam or Uncle Tom...

"His choice, basically, is whether he's going to be Uncle Sam for the people of this country, or Uncle Tom for the giant corporations."
-- Ralph Nader on Obama, on election night

"What was that?...Are you kidding me?...I just wonder if in hindsight you wish you'd used a phrase other than 'Uncle Tom'."
-- Fox News' Shepard Smith, following up the next day

"Not at all."
-- Nader

Barr launches Libertarian White House bid

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jGwp22QlX2kmePoy02e4pTBLwWwAD90KEJ980

Barr launches Libertarian White House bid
By BEN EVANS
5-12-8

WASHINGTON (AP) — Former Republican Rep. Bob Barr launched a Libertarian Party presidential bid Monday, saying voters are hungry for an alternative to the status quo who would dramatically cut the federal government.

His candidacy throws a wild card into the White House race that many believe could peel away votes from Republican Sen. John McCain given the candidates' similar positions on fiscal policy.

Barr, who has hired Ross Perot's former campaign manager, acknowledged that some Republicans have tried to discourage him from running. But he said he's getting in the race to win, not to play spoiler or to make a point.

"I've heard from Americans from all walks of life ... they want a choice," he said at a news conference in Washington. "They believe that America has more and better to offer than what the current political situation is serving up to us."

Barr first must win the Libertarian nomination at the party's national convention that begins May 22. Party officials consider him a front-runner thanks to the national profile he developed as a Georgia congressman from 1995 to 2003.

If he wins the White House, he said he would immediately freeze discretionary spending in Washington. He also would begin withdrawing troops from Iraq and consider slashing spending at federal agencies such as the departments of education and commerce — as well as at overseas military bases.

The former U.S. attorney also said he would strictly enforce immigration laws.

"This notion that government owes something to people just because they're here does not resonate with me," he said. "This is not a charity."

Barr, 59, quit the Republican Party two years ago, saying he had grown disillusioned with its failure to shrink government and its willingness to scale back civil liberties in fighting terrorism. He has been particularly critical of President Bush over the war in Iraq and says the administration is ignoring constitutional protections on due process and privacy.

While in Congress, he was a persistent critic of President Clinton and was among the first to press for impeaching the former president. He helped manage House Republicans' impeachment case before the Senate.

He lost his seat to fellow Republican Rep. John Linder in 2002 after a redistricting. He then opened a lobbying and public affairs firm with offices in Atlanta and outside Washington.

The 2004 Libertarian presidential candidate, Michael Badnarik, took less than 1 percent of the vote, placing fourth behind President Bush, Democrat John Kerry and Independent Ralph Nader.

Gore could still steal the show

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections08/story/0%2C%2C2114538%2C00.html

Poll of Democrats reveals Gore could still steal the show
· Clinton would be big loser if ex-vice president ran
· Republicans also unhappy with current candidates
Simon Tisdall in Washington
Friday June 29, 2007
The Guardian

A presidential election poll suggesting Democratic voters would prefer former vice-president Al Gore to any of the declared contenders, including frontrunner Hillary Clinton, has highlighted continuing dissatisfaction among supporters of both main parties with the choice of candidates to succeed George Bush.

The poll, conducted in New Hampshire by 7News and Suffolk University, confirmed Ms Clinton's nationwide double-digit lead over her main rival, Illinois senator Barack Obama. The former first lady and New York senator attracted 37% support, against Mr Obama's 19%. John Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, was on 9%.


But if Mr Gore were to seek the Democratic nomination, 29% of Ms Clinton's backers would switch their support to him, the poll found. When defections from other candidates are factored in, the man who controversially lost to Mr Bush in the 2000 election takes command of the field, with 32% support.

Both the Democrats and Republicans will contest primary elections in New Hampshire on January 22.

Mr Gore has repeatedly denied he is planning a White House run. But the absence so far of a strong, unifying choice for the Democratic nomination, Mr Gore's enhanced reputation as an environmental campaigner, and deep Republican divisions are encouraging speculation that he may change his mind.

"I have not ruled out the possibility of getting into politics some time in the future but I don't expect to because I don't expect things to change," Mr Gore says in an interview in the July edition of Fast Company magazine. "If they did change, then I would feel differently."

David Terr, a political analyst at USAelectionpolls.com, said the 7News poll was based on a small voter sample and had a large margin of error. But it reinforced a pattern in the polls that showed Mr Gore gaining support nationally.

"His gaining six points in six months is ... just what he needs to justify running for the presidency," Mr Terr said. "He can say that the American people wanted him to run. So the image about him being a sore loser or desperate to become president or someone that is not a man of the people can be thrown into the trash."

"If Al Gore runs, Republicans should be very afraid," said one blogger on Politico.com yesterday. "As much as they like to make fun of him, no one can deny that he is the candidate that has the most appeal and ability to energise his base."

Mr Gore's rehabilitation is accelerating as America's political agenda steadily moves towards issues such as climate change that he has long championed.

"In what may be the greatest brand makeover in history, Gore is being hailed as a visionary who was right about everything from global warming to Iraq," writes Fast Company's Ellen McGirt. "At 59, he's an Academy award winner, a bestselling author, a frontrunner for the Nobel prize, and a concert promoter."

Mr Gore is likely to make headlines again with the Live Earth concerts on July 7. He has helped to organise the eight shows, to be held simultaneously around the world, to raise awareness and funds to combat global warming.

As Democrats struggle to measure the potential impact of undeclared candidates, similar imponderables are dogging the Republicans.

Analysts say the national lead held by Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor, could quickly disappear if, as expected, Fred Thompson, an actor and former Tennessee senator, steps in next week.

Another wild card is the undeclared but widely expected independent candidacy of the current New York mayor, Michael Bloomberg. If he runs, polls suggest Mr Giuliani would be the biggest loser. To complicate matters, Ralph Nader, the consumer activist whose third-party challenge dished Mr Gore in 2000, says he may also run as an independent.