The Hollywood Liberal

OBAMA AND HUCKABEE

Populist Leaders of Change or Patented American Hucksters?
Or
Which looks more like Elmer Gantry?

Listening to the semi-folksy – ministerial delivery of Huckabee’s acceptance of his Iowa win wasn’t rousing as the network clucks declared. It was scary.

Listening to Obama wasn’t rousing, it was far too similar to the rhythm and rhyme of the old Civil Rights moderates, somewhat mimicking of Martin Luther King, Jr., but the King of 1970, not 2008, nor the King who declared war on poverty and imperialism.

What we are hearing is that this duopoly party dominated country needs is a good ole candidate up from the common Joe and Joan – on the Right they pray for one embedded by Christian fundamentalism, war imperialism and reactionary faux capitalist politics. On the Left, with some racial integration tossed in, a fellow of color who speaks in the coded language of the African American pulpit.

The question is whether Huckabee is that Elmer Gantry of the political Right? Not if you read through his tax and pardon history. What Huckabee may be is a Republican insurgent that can pull enough of the practical evangelical vote and mix it with independents and moderately racist Democrats to become the next white, male President and all that means.

Do not be fooled by his pardons and his outreach to the poor. Down here the southern country Christian hallmark charity and forgiveness as part of their mission. At the other end is an expected level of servile gratitude: “Yes, boss – thank you preacher – bless your Governor,” is the grateful’s patent mantra.

With a Huckabee President what we can expect is a reversal of all the moderate gains made by women in their choice of contraception, a regressive social policy regarding constitutional rights, continued fear mongering that will drive the agenda of “Homeland Security” that will piggy back on a foreign policy that will continue the White Christian crusade against the world of color within and without our borders.

“Governor Huckabee has pledged to support every item on the Radical Right’s wish list: a constitutional ban on abortion, a veto of legislation to protect gay and lesbian Americans from discrimination, support for a bill to keep federal courts from intervening when local officials violate the separation of church and state, and most importantly, a far-right Supreme Court.

When asked about what kind of justices Huckabee would appoint to the Supreme Court — something CNN predicts the next president could get to do three or more times — his answer was:

“I would want people who are in the spirit of Scalia. He’s probably my hero in the Court.”
Which is simply more of the same Nixon – Reagan – Bush – Bush and then worse.

Obama on the other hand, looking like a nice guy, is wedded to the American political system that has delivered the Hubert Humphreys, Bill Clintons and Joe Liebermans to us. The former two were not good enough in solving the crucial class, race and gender issues of this nation during their time, and Lieberman … (are you kidding, Lieberman a “liberal?”) … nor is Obama now expected to face-off against the corporate monster their parties are heir to.

But worse: his main campaign advisor, and who may well become part of his cabinet, is a man named Zbigniew Brzezinski, who worked in Carter’s administration, (whose administration’s claim to fame is the Yankee corporatization of The South.)

In Brzezinski’s book, “The Grand Chessboard,” we see a corporate ideologue like Kissinger and like Dick Cheney–highly intelligent, but without an ounce of compassion in his body. In his book he describes U.S. strategy: American Imperialism and furthering and maintaining our Empire against the emerging hordes.

Obama’s bankroll has the stamp of corporate America, (the same stamp on Hillary’s millions.) You have to be idiotic not to understand the meaning of what millionaire attorney John Edwards means when he diagnoses that “corporate greed has an iron clad hold on our government.” Just in case you’re having a dumber or dumber moment: That means who gets paid does what the payer pays for. Obama will deliver whatever his corporate owners pay him to do. Period!

So we come to that expected, very loudly shouted question: “What, another George Bush because the “left” is to pure to compromise?”

Aside from the fact that Ralph Nader DID NOT COST GORE THE ELECTION, there is no point in being a political progressive if in the end you enable the Corporate State Democrats to take “their turn at bat,” as Jerry Brown once called the game played every two – to – four years by the operatives of the American two-party, ruling class system.

Ah, yes, the electoral two-party ruling class hegemony. It’s as if we’ve all been struck dumb and dumber thinking that electoral politics is real “the agent of change” in this country. As if in any country dominated by the Corporate State. But apparently the Bill Clinton version of “Camelot” came not only to mean the explosive burst of “globalization” it also brought about the death of radical politics in the US,

That then left us with the one Progressive agent of change in 2008, Dennis Kucinich. After the Des Moines Iowa Register blackballed him from the debate I emailed one of the chief campaign personnel,

“Pretend I am a complete idiot and have someone tell me why Dennis Kucinich and every one of his supporters are not taking to the streets after what occurred in Iowa (or did not occur)…If this is the campaign plan for Kucinich…then we are all missing the point…or the campaign manager needs to be fired. Or K needs to quit.”

His reply: “You want Dennis running around Des Moines ranting and raving like the dis-inherited bastard child? Or picket lines in front of the Des Moines Register? Or what?”

I don’t know about the “what?” part — but he was fucking correct: I wanted to see this valiant “American Hero” (*) in the streets in front of the Register – in front of the Democratic National Party Headquarters, in front of AARP which barred him from their debate, challenging the other candidates on this basic abrogation of the First Amendment. And now I want them in front of ABC headquarters in LA and NY.

But that sadly is not going to happen. It is not the practice of the “Kucinich” progressives, perhaps not of the progressive body politic in toto. And in all kindness to Kucinich, who I have listened to throughout this campaign, his explanation on Moyers the other night was a stammering refusal to face the truth: It was at he could not explain that what at best a blunder – at worst, an indication that on some basic level Kucinich does not believe his own message. Perhaps he has spent far too many years in the Compromise … uh, Congress.

As for the two Democratic Party “voices of change” now being showcased by the same media, the Wunderkind Obama and the anti-corporate rebel Edwards, if you believe they will change the government of the United States, I have some sub-prime mortgage offers for you.

If you disagree at least strip yourself of your childish illusions about Obama and your gamble on Edwards and go out and work for Dame Hillary. You may at least get to meet the first “Black President” who duped “hopeful” African Americans and their white allies who prayed for “anybody but another Reagan or Bush,” and along with Fleetwood Mac, sang the anthem of the time: “Dot.com greed and tooting cocaine is good. Let use Depleted Uranium Bombs and make movies in Hollywood.”

(*as Jennifer Lynne Ziemann and I dubbed him as a result of our feature length interview that appeared on this blog, The LA Free Press and Greenville, and South Carolina’s The BEAT.)

Dennis Kucinich appeared on the Bill Moyers program last night on PBS. Dennis explains why he told the voters of Iowa to cast a second choice ballot for Barack Obama. Kucinich also talks about the real reason why he was not allowed in the debate sponsored by the Des Moines Register, and why ABC has excluded him from the New Hampshire debate. Dennis has been virtually ignored by the mainstream media (unless they have something negative to say about him) despite the fact that he as WON several straw polls and internet polls. In one of the debates ABC put a poll on it’s website asking who won. They were shocked when Dennis beat out Obama, Clinton, and Edwards, they later removed the information from the website and now if you go to that page all you get is a blank white background. Check out the interview with Dennis here.

Michael O’McCarthy

There is no pleasure in this. It is a troubling thing I must do, but I must do it.

I have met and interviewed Kucinich and liked and admired him, for surviving the hell of his childhood and persevering through a sea of ridicule heaped upon him for both his politics and his seemingly eccentric personality. I have read and participated in the review of his biography. I have utilized my columns and blogs to support him; to defend him because he represented the very best progressive politics of a lifetime stretching back to the 1940’s.

I have made attempt after attempt to volunteer for the campaign at the lowest possible fee that would allow me to pay my bills. Within the last two weeks I called upon the Kucinich campaign to demand of us progressives that we stand united, on principle and on progressive politics. I am sad to say that night before last Kucinich did just the opposite. In going to the American people and giving away his principled position opposing Obama and what the Democratic Party hierarchy represents, he gave away his right to champion progressive politics.

I have been briefed on the reason, aside from his apparently losing status in Iowa. His attempt to use his support for Obama on the second Iowa call so that he might win Obama and Michigan Congressperson John Conyers’ support in Michigan is on its face pathetic; worse, it is an endorsement of the corporate state’s party politics as usual.

No person of conscience can stand for progressive politics in this imperial beast of a nation and capitulate to a candidate who is now and will be in the future enwrapped in the arms of the corporate state as is Obama, nice guy or not.

As Michael Moore said:

“Personally, Congressman Kucinich, more than any other candidate, shares the
same positions that I have on the issues (although the UFO that picked ME up
would only take me as far as Kalamazoo). But let’s not waste time talking
about Dennis. Even he is resigned to losing, with statements like the one he
made yesterday to his supporters in Iowa to throw their support to Senator
Obama as their “second choice.”’ …

But who is he? I mean, other than a guy who gives a great speech? How much do any of us really know about him? I know he was against the war. How do I know that? He gave a speech before the war started. But since he joined the senate, he has voted for the funds for the war, while at the same time saying we should get out. He says he’s for the little guy, but then he votes for a corporate-backed bill to make it harder for the little guy to file a class action suit when his kid swallows lead paint from a Chinese-made toy. In fact, Obama doesn’t think Wall Street is a bad place. He wants the insurance companies to help us develop a new health care plan — the same companies who have created the mess in the first place.” MMFlint@aol.com - www.MichaelMoore.com

In a letter sent me via Progressive Democrats of America on January 3, 2008 entitled, “Edwards Reconsidered,” Norman Solomon capsulated it:

Quoting Kucinich’s final statement, “Sen. Obama and I have one thing in common: Change.” ‘

Solomon went on to say:

This statement doesn’t seem to respect the intelligence of those of us who have planned to vote for Dennis Kucinich.

It’s hard to think of a single major issue — including “the war,” “health care” and “trade” — for which Obama has a more progressive position than Edwards. But there are many issues, including those three, for which Edwards has a decidedly more progressive position than Obama.

But the most disturbing part of Dennis’ statement was this: “Sen. Obama and I have one thing in common: Change.” This doesn’t seem like a reasoned argument for Obama. It seems like an exercise in smoke-blowing.

I write these words unhappily. I was a strong advocate for Kucinich during the race for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination. In late December, I spoke at an event for his campaign in Northern California. I believe there is no one in Congress today with a more brilliant analysis of key problems facing humankind or a more solid progressive political program for how to overcome them.

As of the first of this year, Dennis has urged Iowa caucusers to do exactly what he spent the last year telling us not to do — skip over a candidate with more progressive politics in order to support a candidate with less progressive politics.

The best argument for voting for Dennis Kucinich in caucuses and primaries has been what he aptly describes as his “singular positions on the war, on health care, and trade.” But his support for Obama over Edwards indicates that he’s willing to allow some opaque and illogical priorities to trump maximizing the momentum of our common progressive agendas.

Presidential candidates have to be considered in the context of the current historical crossroads. No matter how much we admire or revere an individual, there’s too much at stake to pursue faith-based politics at the expense of reality-based politics. There’s no reason to support Obama over Edwards on Kucinich’s say-so. And now, I can’t think of reasons good enough to support Kucinich rather than Edwards in the weeks ahead.”

http://pdamerica.org

As for Edwards: As I have said, the bottom line is twofold. It’s difficult to trust a millionaire and a lawyer. My experience is that they hang with their class every time. That Edwards hasn’t the courage of his rhetoric in cleanly breaking from the health insurance industry, (thus, miming Obama and Clinton,) is evidence enough of just how hard he “will fight those greedy corporate interests.”

Very, very few patricians have been known to bring about economic justice for the producer’s of their wealth. And economic justice that defines social justice requires a just share of the profits from what a human produces.

FDR, the most memorable Democratic Party patrician of all time, broke the back of the progressive movement for social and economic justice when his “New Deal” failed. Aside from the controversy concerning his foreknowledge of the attack on Pearl Harbor or not, his foreign trade policy was that was that that took America to war. He followed the allied victory then by building the largest war machine in the history of mankind and while fighting fascism, set the stage for what would become the greatest imperialist crusade in America’s history.

Aside from the ethical issues involved, the wealth produced by his war industry simply made his class all the more powerful, and all the more wealthy. The booty from this imperial machine trickled down to the working class and for a time grew a new white middle class of managers who were then trained and slotted for the corporate world his class was creating.

The next “liberal” to play the “reformist game” was his heir apparent, Lyndon Baines Johnson. His price for signing a “Civil Rights” bill was the endorsement of McNamara’s One Hundred Thousand of the poor and ethnic disenfranchised that was skiploaded into the death and torture trap of America’s war on South East Asia

Edward’s apology for his war vote is not reassuring. When asked about withdrawal from Iraq he is equivocal about when and how many. But that is not the question!

The real question is: if President will you get American forces out of countries where they do not belong and are not wanted? Only Kucinich stated that his foreign policy would not be imperialist.

The rest, Obama, Clinton, Edwards, et al are wedded to the machine. Anyone who trusts that the agents of terror working for this corporate state will not drive these “liberals” to military use are just fools.

Nor has any of them said the magic phrase: “redistribution of wealth.” Or that those that produce the wealth deserve a just share of the profits from the GNP. Only Kucinich’s progressive platform addressed those two absolutely essential challenges to the death machine of the new CSA: the Corporate State of America.

Kucinich may come out of this being a nice guy in congress. But he has just shafted the people he represented. That is an old political act. Way too old. Shame on him. But “don’t mourn organize!”

Michael O’McCarthy

Activist Tells Congress About Suicide Epidemic Among Vets
By Penny Coleman, AlterNet - January 2, 2008

This is one of today’s Alternet headlines. The one that grabbed me. Another recent headline was about the failure of the VA to accurately diagnose and treat the growing victims of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD,) among the returning Iraq - Afghanastan vets. Another chronicled the extraordinary percentage of vets who compose the nation’s homeless. Again and again these headlines are Vietnam Deja Vu All Over Again. And again, the Congress and the Bush-Cheney war maching do nothing. As if!

Here’s the truth: NOTHING - NOTHING will be done as long as the vets themselves don’t rise up, rally the American people and force this war mongering goverment to change policy.

We set the precedent, albeit very late, in 1981 when Vietnam vets, era and combat veterans began a sit-in strike at the Brentwood VA hospital after the death of Jim Hopkins, a suicide by all reliable accounts. Failing an honorable response by the Reagan administration that called them “rabble,” Vietnam combat veterans began a hunger strike that finally reached the halls of congress: the vets marched everyday into the offices of the all too silent Congresspeople; finally striking a nerve with then Congresspeople like Daschle and Bonoir who were vets themselves.

Threatening to die in front of the White House raised the ante. The American people were not prepared to accept their guilt at letting their government continue Washington’s malfeasance and negligence. The vets won, keeping the threatened Vet Centers open and forcing the further studies into Agent Orange (the poisonous, dioxin-based herbicide sprayed over “enemy” and friendly alike in the “bush” of Southeast Asia,) and into the reality and effects of PTSD.

As for any victimized populace, rarely do the “do gooders” come to the rescue. Complaining, lobbying, getting Alternet headlines will not work: The people, drugged with the messianic BS of Bush, reality run way model and dysfunctional nut case family TV shows, terrified of confronting the Homeland Security apparatus that can dub them suspect at any moment without rhyme nor reason, will not respond until forced to. Forced to by either having the veil of denial ripped from their eyes by direct action, or confronted by their own vulnerability as their brothers, sisters, fathers and mothers, kin and neighbors continue to be victimized.

But somebody must lead. If not the Vets themselves, who? - If not now, when?

Michael O’McCarthy

I was just reading that Mitt Romney has started a law in Massachusetts that says that if you don’t have health insurance you will be fined. Apparently Hillary has the same idea. Bankrupt people who can’t afford insurance with fines. While the insurance companies make even more money on the people who can barely afford it but don’t want to be fined. All of the political candidates are on the side of the corporations and against you, except one. If you don’t vote for Dennis in the primary you are voting for Bush style corporatism, (not to mention more war) Here’s Dennis