The Emerging Majority

This Progressive Moment

Today we complete a transformation in American Government that began two years ago. With the inauguration of Barack Obama as our 44th President we stand at a moment in history that we have not seen since January 1965. We have a progressive President and significant progressive majorities in Congress. I have waited my entire adult life to see a day like this having come through the dark days and lost opportunities since 1980.

 

That President and Congress 44 years ago changed America by confirming civil rights, expanding health care coverage and waging a war on poverty. That moment was lost through war and assassinations and generational conflict. The cost has been incredible. The Bush Presidency has been the dying gasp of a slide into reaction that undid so much of what was achieved to make the American dream accessible to a broad working and middle class. The militarization of our foreign policy has brought our nation into conflict with much of the world.

The challenge for this progressive moment is greater than just reversing a recession or ending a war (or two). While these issues are front and center in the agenda for the new leadership and their positive resolution will hailed as improvements on the status quo, the opportunity is greater than that. This moment will be marked by the chance to change the balance of power in this country. To move power and influence back to the working and middle class. To push public policy in directions that makes change as broad in scope and with the same effectiveness as the best of the New Deal and the Great Society.

Our nation is wounded but hopeful about what will come from President Obama and the Democratic Congress. The promise is great, and deservedly so, because in recent generations we have seen nothing like the rise of the eloquence and commitment of our new President. I remember being in Ohio before the election and seeing the joy and pride in the faces of the folks in line with me waiting to see Barack Obama speak in Cincinnati. In this community (virtual or not) and cities and towns and churches and organizations across the country we need to raise our voices and support and cajole and push for what we believe.

Thank you kind reader for all you have done these past years to make this moment possible.

Let’s not lose this moment. Let’s not waste a moment. Let’s make change.

 

Field Dress My A$%

I'm voting for Obama/Biden

Broadway Night(s)

We had the chance on Saturday night to catch a performance of the Broadway revival of Boeing Boeing, the French (who knew?) farce about an architect who juggles three fiance who are flight attendants flying in and out of Paris. Based on a 1960's play (and film) the play is headlined by West Wing alum Bradley Whitford, but the night belongs to London stage maven Mark Rylance.

Rylance is hysterical as Robert Lambert, the best friend who arrives in Paris just as the architest's carefully planned liaison are falling apart because of the advent of a new Boeing superliner that makes the turnaround shorter and Bernard's life more com;icated. Completing the cast are four wonderful women including familiar faces Mary McCormack, Gina Gershon, Kathryn Hahn and Christine Baranski. The play consists of scene after scene dealing with the national stereotypes of the women and the sexual mores of the "swinging 60's." The cast does it with such energy and good humor that there is little concern for the potential to offend. Just good clean fun. With the performances of Rylance and McCormack they are nominees for tonight's Tony awards, as well as a slew of other nominees for direction and design and costuming.

One of my favorite theatre experiences of recent years, Tom Stoppard's "Rock N Roll" is also nominated for a number of Tony awards. I saw the London production from the summer of 2007 that was moved en masse to Broadway with Rufus Sewell, Brian Cox and Sinead Cusack. As the central character Jan, Sewell does a strong job following the story of Stoppard's central character from the Soviet invasion of 1968 through the Velvet Revolution and aftermath. The central question in the play revolves around whether politics (Vaclav Havel and Company) or culture (The Plastic People of the Universe) are more important forces struggling against the opression of the post-1968 stalinist state. (Please note...no where is there a discussion of Ronald Reagan or the US military build up of the 1980's.)

For those who aren't aware, Stoppard, the British playwright is actually Czech, whose family left after the communist coup of 1948. This is one of his most personal work. It is a thoroughly enjoyable play which also follows themes of friendship and betrayal, love and loss, and freedom and expression. He cleverly weaves in the music of the era including lots of selections from Pink Floyd. The unfortunate aspect of the play was the short run on Broadway, but the book is available through your favorite bookstore.

40 Years Ago

We are looking back on 40 years of missed opportunities as we reflect on the assassination of Bobby Kennedy. My friend Harold Meyerson has a poignant piece in The Washington Post. Harold reflects from the perspective of a Gene McCarthy backer talking about the opportunity they never had to bring the progressive forces together after the primaries. On the NPR program Fresh Air, Terry Gross has an amazing discussion with Pete Hamill regarding the events at The Ambassador Hotel. Hamill was working on the Kennnedy campaign and reminds us that it was the late director John Frankenheimer who hosted Bobby Kennedy at his home the night before the primary.

If we do the work between now and November then in Senator Obama's stirring words ....we will look back another 40 years from now and say this was the moment. We ended a war, we brought universal health care, we brought dignity back to work...and we brought to life the dream of Bobby Kennedy, the dream that Teddy promised us would not die...has life and breath and depth.

For me, I will give another $50 to Senator Obama and reflect once again on Senator Kennedy's life and work and words.

From a speech at the University of Kansas March, 1968

I think there's more that we can do internally here, I think there's more that we can do in South Vietnam.  I don't think we have to accept the situation, as we have it at the moment.  I think that we can do better, and I think the American people think that we can do better.
     George Bernard Shaw once wrote, "Some people see things as they are and say why?  I dream things that never were and say, why not?"
     So I come here to Kansas to ask for your help.  In the difficult five months ahead, before the convention in Chicago, I ask for your help and for your assistance.  If you believe that the United States can do better.  If you believe that we should change our course of action.  If you believe that the United States stands for something here internally as well as elsewhere around the globe, I ask for your help and your assistance and your hand over the period of the next five months.
     And when we win in November, and when we win in November, and we begin a new period of time for the United States of America - I want the next generation of Americans to look back upon this period and say as they said of Plato: "Joy was in those days, but to live."  Thank you very much.

McCain and the Pastor ... More

John McCain has repudiated the endorsements of John Hagee and Rod Parsley, but should that be the end of the issue? MCain and his campaign went to pained lengths to differentiate themselves from the relationship between Barack Obama and Jeremiah Wright.

But let me also be clear, Rev. Hagee was not and is not my pastor or spiritual advisor, and I did not attend his church for 20 years. I have denounced statements he made immediately upon learning of them, as I do again today.

Is it possible that no one on the McCain campaign staff bothered to do a web search of Hagee's comments before they solicited his endorsement? And what of his comments when he accepted the endorsement of Rod Parsley? John Ross of ABC News showed the video of Mccain saying...

At a campaign appearance in Cincinnati, McCain introduced Parsley as "one of the truly great leaders in America, a moral compass, a spiritual guide."

Again, it makes one wonder if all this wasn't just some cynical ploy by the McCain campaign to try to use these pastors for political cover in an attempt to cozy up to the right wing and then jettison them when they got called on their strategy. Perhaps McCain was injecting religion into the campaign in a totoally inappropriate way or they naively got rolled by pastors who were looking to play the role of king maker. Either way, it does not bode well for McCain's capability to lead.

McCain and the Pastors (With Updates)

John McCain has proven himself the master of pandering. I wonder sometimes if he even knows he is doing it. We saw as recently as 2006 the "statesman" John McCain in Davos Switzerland speaking on video tape about the need for dealing with Hamas now that they were in power in the Palestinian Territories. Of course he would take that position, he was surrounded by the movers and shakers of the world financial, diplomatic and intellectual communities. He wouldn't want to seem "provincial" would he?

Of course given a chance to score some cheap political points he would turn 180 degrees and attack Obama for taking a similar position regarding exercising diplomacy instead of bluster. But that helps him shore up some of the base he needs for the general election.

A few weeks back there was his comments on the Rev. Wright controversy. The reporting showed Mccain's capability of trying to have it both ways. One the hand, it didn't matter, on the other, it matters a great deal.

But soon we found out about McCain's first pastor problem, the Rev. John Hagee. Hagee was recently forced to apologize for his disparaging comments about Catholics. And we read and heard on Huffington Post the reporting by Sam Stein on Hagees bizaare contentions from sermons past about Hitler doing god's will driving the Jews to Israel. This certainly is as wacky a statement as anything Rev. Wright came up with in one of his sermons. Yet here is John McCain on the same Rev. Hagee...

"I'm very honored by Pastor John Hagee's endorsement today," McCain said at a news conference. "He has been the staunchest leader of our Christian evangelical movement in many areas, but especially, most especially, his close ties and advocacy for the freedom and independence of the state of Israel."

Then today John Ross of ABC News broke this story on another minister that McCain sought out for support when the Republican race was competitive...

Despite his call for the U.S. to win the "hearts and minds of the Islamic world," Sen. John McCain recruited the support of an evangelical minister who describes Islam as "anti-Christ" and Mohammed as "the mouthpiece of a conspiracy of spiritual evil."

McCain sought the support of Pastor Rod Parsley of the World Harvest Church of Columbus, Ohio at a critical time in his campaign in February, when former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee was continuing to draw substantial support from the Christian right.

At a campaign appearance in Cincinnati, McCain introduced Parsley as "one of the truly great leaders in America, a moral compass, a spiritual guide."

So there he is promoting his endorsement by someone advocating holy war against all muslims, a man who does not believe there are any differences among the Muslim faithful. These actions just solidiy the idea that McCain will say anything and do anything to win votes and campaign contributions including harming the chances for diplomacy to solve problems or turning his back on campaign finance reforms that he supported years ago. These stories must be seen and heard by the American People now, early in this election cycle so the true image of this man is known. Given these alliances what would his friends at <a href="http://www.weforum.org/en/index.htm">Davos</a> think?

Update...from LA Times, McCain dissing Hagee...

“Obviously, I find these remarks and others deeply offensive and indefensible, and I repudiate them. I did not know of them before Rev. Hagee's endorsement, and I feel I must reject his endorsement as well. I have said I do not believe Sen. Obama shares Rev. Wright's extreme views. But let me also be clear, Rev. Hagee was not and is not my pastor or spiritual advisor, and I did not attend his church for 20 years. I have denounced statements he made immediately upon learning of them, as I do again today."

Update 2....from TPM and Josh Marshall a McCain statement on Pasley

"I believe there is no place for that kind of dialogue in America, and I believe that even though he endorsed me, and I didn't endorse him, the fact is that I repudiate such talk, and I reject his endorsement."

But is it true? Calling someone a "moral compass" isn't an endorsement?

First Hand Views

In Sunday's New York Times Week in Review section there was a remarkable piece by seven US soldiers completing fifteen month tours of Iraq. Entitled, The War as We Saw It, the soldiers write that they are amazed by the surrealistic nature of the current discussion of the US occupation of Iraq. Their bottomline is that wishing will not make it so, the US military is not going to "win" a counter-insurgency in Iraq. Their words...

Given the situation, it is important not to assess security from an American-centered perspective. The ability of, say, American observers to safely walk down the streets of formerly violent towns is not a resounding indicator of security. What matters is the experience of the local citizenry and the future of our counterinsurgency. When we take this view, we see that a vast majority of Iraqis feel increasingly insecure and view us as an occupation force that has failed to produce normalcy after four years and is increasingly unlikely to do so as we continue to arm each warring side.

Coupling our military strategy to an insistence that the Iraqis meet political benchmarks for reconciliation is also unhelpful. The morass in the government has fueled impatience and confusion while providing no semblance of security to average Iraqis. Leaders are far from arriving at a lasting political settlement. This should not be surprising, since a lasting political solution will not be possible while the military situation remains in constant flux.

It is hard to ignore the continued tinkering with Iraq by the US. One can hear the fingernails going down the Iraqi chalkboard as politicians, I am sure with the best of intentions, talk about carving up Iraq and soft partitions. While these and other proposals may solve the US's problem in Iraq, without some form of consensus from the Iraqis it is hard to see how our proposals could possible solve their problem. As of today, the Iraqi government of Maliki is teetering on the edge of collapse. They have alot of work to do on their part.

From invading with the former colonial occupier (UK) to proving you can only walk down streets with heavy armor (John McCain), the War in Iraq has just created another way from the US to be alienated from the world. And from the hopeful nature of what America should mean to the world.

Democratic Debate on This Week ... Iraq

There was actually a good discussion this morning of the various positions the Democratic candidates for President have on the Iraq war. It is clear that among the major candidates there is a difference of opinion. Clinton and Biden believe that we should be in Iraq (in some kind of non-combat role) for a significant period of time. Obama and Edwards have plans to end military involvement quickly and maintain a diplomatic presence in the country. Richardson and Kucinich believe in out now. The point made by John Edwards and Barack Obama that is very important is that the candidates on the Democratic side all recognize a failed policy when they see one. The Republicans continue to insist (with the exception of Ron Paul) that this policy can work with a tweak here and there.

It was a great discussion that could have used a few more minutes. Unfortunately Stephanopolous interrupted to ask a dopey question about a serious subject. God. I wish they had just told him it was inappropriate and moved on.

The ADL and Truth

There is a disheartening controversy this week in Massachusetts concerning the Anti-Defamation League and its position on the genocide of Armenians at the hand of the faltering Ottoman empire. The ADL is a sponsor, with other organizations, of the "No Place to Hate" program which tries to assist communities with outreach and education against bigotry in all its forms. The program has dozens of communities participating and more will join once the controversy is resolved.

The Armenian community has called out the ADL on its position that the slaughter of Armenians in 1915-1918 does not constitute a genocide. The ADL has gone so far as to oppose HR 106 which gives Congressional support to the characterization of genocide as genocide. The result has been one community, Watertown, MA, which has a large Armenian community, has pulled its support for the "No Place to Hate" program. In a response the New England ADL and its Director have rejected the national ADL position on Armenia. As a consequence the Director has been fired and local Board threatened with further consequence.

In a letter to the New England community the ADL states it curious position on the issue. While refusing to recognize the genocide the ADL does not dispute the historic record...in fact the ADL acknowledges, in its words, "ADL has acknowledged and never denied the massacres of hundreds of thousands of Armenians — and by some accounts more than one million — at the hands of the Ottoman Empire in 1915-1918." Yet it will not join many in clarifying the historic record for fear that the staunch ally of Israel and the US will be harmed by the recognition of the accepted term for the behavior of Turkey's predecessor country.

Ironically, the ADL is concerned with the potential mistreatment of Turkey's Jewish population by the official recognition of Turkey's mistreatment of its Armenian population. What does the ADL expect to gain from its denial of truth? It lessons the moral force of its work on behalf of the victims of racial and religious intolerance and only proves that the truth can be bullied if you hold enough hostages. The point of having organizations like the ADL is the acceptance of truth as truth. Certainly there are enough politicians and lobbyists willing to sell the truth for their silver. Let the ADL face facts and let's join together to fight ignorance and bigotry in all its forms.

Giuliana and Truth

There appears in today's New York Times a well researched article about the flap caused by Rudy Giuliana when

he declared that he had been in the ruins “as often, if not more” than the cleanup workers who logged hundreds of hours in the smoldering pile. Another time he brushed aside safety claims by asserting that his long hours at the site had left him susceptible to “every health consequence that people have suffered.”

I have also seen the story picked up by MSN, but I wonder how many other outlets will run the Times story and/or do their own research? Russ Buettner, in his Times piece, goes back through Rudy's records as mayor. After leaving aside the chaotic first week he decides that Rudy spent 29 hours over a three month period. Many first responders were working 12 hour shifts per day, for weeks at the site. There is no comparison.

I remember the whipping Al Gore took from the media during his campaign for minor misstatements. Giuliana's quotes are anything but minor, and he continues to repeat them. No wonder the Firefighters and others are so critical of his behavior. They are also willing to look at his time as Mayor for what it was...divisive, uneven and coming to a less than mediocre close prior to the events of September 11th.

It is no big surprise that the city did fine after he was term limited out of office. (Despite the ego play to stay around against the law.) How will truth fare as he tries for higher office?