patrickmurfin

MoveOn dropped me an e-mail asking me to post this on my blog.  Fair enough.  A complete re-prioritization of American energy policy is key to our economic recovery in the short run and our survival on this planet in the long.

It's 2009. Democrats have ample majorities in both houses of Congress. President Obama campaigned on the promise to tackle climate change and boost our economy by investing in clean energy.

So why on earth is Congress considering an energy bill that:

• Would weaken current law, repealing President Obama's authority to crack down on dirty power plants, and
• Doesn't actually require the creation of new solar or wind power? (The Union of Concerned Scientists has concluded that the clean energy standards won't make power companies produce more clean energy than is already in the works.)

Why? Because Big Oil and Coal have teamed up with conservatives in both parties, and they've been successful in weakening the bill.

These are major flaws, but the bill has a lot of really good provisions, too. The key thing is that Congress can still strengthen it—if there's a public outcry. But we don't have much time: Congress is expected to vote on this bill in less than three weeks.

Can you sign this petition to Representative Donald Manzullo today? Eighty thousand MoveOn members have already signed. We need to double the number of signatures by Wednesday—that means we need 10 more signatures in Crystal Lake. MoveOn members will personally deliver this petition to many congressional offices the next day. Click here to add your name:

http://pol.moveon.org/cleanenergy/o.pl?id=16315-3430421-yY2.Vnx&t=4

The petition says: "We need a stronger energy bill to fulfill Obama's vision of a clean energy economy. Congress should strengthen the clean energy standards and restore Obama's authority to crack down on dirty coal plants." 

Congress must change the energy bill to require power companies to produce more clean energy for America. Wind and solar create more than twice as many jobs as coal and oil. And Congress needs to hold polluters accountable by restoring President Obama's current authority through the EPA to crack down on global warming pollution from power plants.

The Union of Concerned Scientists analysis finds that the current version of the clean energy standard "won't require utilities to use any more renewable electricity than...would be generated as a result of state renewable electricity standards already in place and the recently enacted stimulus package."
 

If we just sit back, we'll miss our chance to go big with wind and solar—and we'll lose the jobs those industries would create. Big Oil and Coal will keep getting billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies. And President Obama will be powerless to stop more than 100 new dirty coal plants, which will crowd out the clean energy growth we need to boost our economy.

There are some good parts of the bill, but these are significant problems. As the Sierra Club's Carl Pope writes, the bill establishes strong long-term goals for cutting carbon pollution and very strong energy-efficiency investments, "but in its present form, it won't do all that's needed. The oil, coal, and dirty-utility interests...were able to prevent enactment of President Obama's much bolder vision...Yes, they will try to kill the green-jobs recovery in its cradle, and yes, they will try to block our clean-energy future."

Please urge Rep. Manzullo to fight for a stronger energy bill. Clicking here will add your name to the petition:

http://pol.moveon.org/cleanenergy/o.pl?id=16315-3430421-yY2.Vnx&t=5

Thanks for all you do.

–Anna, Michael, Joan, Noah and the rest of the team

Sources:

1. Bill Needs Strengthening to Guarantee Necessary Carbon Reductions, New Green Jobs and Consumer Benefits, Science Group Says, Union of Concerned Scientists, May 14, 2009 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51475&id=16315-3430421-yY2.Vnx&t=6

2. EPA urged to act on climate, not wait for Congress, Associated Press, May 18, 2009 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51479&id=16315-3430421-yY2.Vnx&t=7

3. American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, Library of Congress, May 15, 2009 http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51482&id=16315-3430421-yY2.Vnx&t=8

4. Green Recovery: A Program to Create Good Jobs and Start Building a Low-Carbon Economy, Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst, September 2008 http://www.peri.umass.edu/green_recovery/

5. Stopping the Coal Rush, Sierra Club

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51483&id=16315-3430421-yY2.Vnx&t=10

6. So How Good Is This Climate Bill, Anyhow? Sierra Club, May 22, 2009
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51478&id=16315-3430421-yY2.Vnx&t=11

MoveOn.Org has unveiled this new TV spot contrasting the desire of the American—and Iraqi people—for a clear timeline to withdraw U.S. Forces with John McCain’s open ended commitment. 

Left unsaid is the bright contrast between McCain’s stubborn commitment to the quagmire and Barack Obama steady and unwavering support of a carefully planned withdrawal which he reasserted  Monday in a celebrated New York Times op-ed piece.

Under Federal rules MoveOn can only ask viewers to raise the issue with McCain.  But an independent blog like this—your reliable, if quirky, source of information—can certainly report the news about the new ad and specifically tell you that Barack Obama has a different position.

Oops!  I already have.

 
The Rev. William Sinkford, President of the Unitarian Universalsit Association 

This past week has been rife with the petitions for action that often clog my e-mail.  The Senate has repeatedly gone to the well to vote on various schemes to reign in the imperial ambitions of the Mal-Administration on Habeas corpus and on the war itself.  Each time I have been urged to communicate my support, and each time the tenacious rear-guard action of dutiful Republican minions has blocked any effective action.  Meanwhile the same body that could not curb the war found tome, with the assistance of some particularly craven Democrats, to condemn MoveOn for daring to exercise free speech.  It is all unimaginably discouraging.

Yet hope, faint hope, remains.  The House of Representatives is unconstrained by the Senate’s minority empowering cloture rules.  A simple majority is all that is required to act.  With a clear majority Democrats, joined by un-brainwashed Republicans in the House have the power to remove funding for continuing operations in Iraq, except as they involve safely extricating our forces.  In the face of a unified House majority, no bellicose Senate minority can compel funding.  An impasse on Defense appropriations may occur, but no money to fund the war would be forthcoming. It is not a perfect solution—it is messy and fraught with the well advertised dangers of a “Constitutional crisis.”  But we already have a Constitutional crisis with the attempted neo-con consolidation of total power in the White House.

Seventy members of the House have already pledged not to vote for any more war funding.  It is a good staret.  But more need to sign on to achieve the majority that can end the war.

When I received the following e-mail from Rev. William Sinkford of the Unitarian Universalist Association, I was stirred by the commitment of my faith community to bear witness for peace in a meaningful manner.  I urge my fellow UUs to read Rev. Sinkford’s appeal below and to sign the petition.

Friends: 

On September 6, I faxed a message to every member of Congress telling them, “Not another dollar.  Not another life.”  To make sure they heard me, I am headed to Capitol Hill with my colleague Rev. John H. Thomas, the United Church of Christ’s General Minister and President.  On October 10 we will be walking into your representatives’ offices to tell them to end the war and I want to bring you with me.

I Invite you to sign the petition linked below, calling for an end to our reliance on violence as the first, rather than the last resort and an end to the arrogant unilateralism of preemptive war.  Join me in speaking truth to those who have run from it.  Please sign this petition and add your voice to 25,000 other Unitarian Universalists who say that security is found in building beloved community, not by dominating others. 

Sincerely,

Rev. William G. Sinkford,

President, Unitarian Universalist Association

Read Rev. Sinkford’s September 6 letter to Congress:

http://www.uua.org/news/newssubmissions/44811.shtml

Sign the following petition to be among the 25,000 Unitarian Universalists joining Rev. William Sinkford as he speaks truth to power at the following link:  http://tinyurl.com/29ttcd

Along with thousands of Unitarian Universalists, I call for an end to the war in Iraq, an end to our reliance on violence as the first, rather than the last resort, an end to the arrogant unilateralism of preemptive war.

I call for the humility and courage to acknowledge failure and error, to accept the futility of our current path, and I cry out for the creativity to seek new paths of peacemaking in the Middle East, through regional engagement and true multinational policing.

I call for acknowledgment of our responsibility for the destruction caused by sanctions and war and a beginning to rebuild trust in the Middle East and around the world.

I call for truth-telling in our nation and for the recognition in our congregations that security is found in building beloved community, not by dominating others.

 
I will join protest to prayer, support ministries of compassion for victims here and in the Middle East and cast off the fear that has made many of us accept the way of violence and return again to the way of love. Thus may bloodshed end and cries be transformed to the harmonies of justice and the melodies of peace. For this I yearn, for this I petition, and toward this end I rededicate myself as a member of our human family.

            None of us who were alive and conscious at the time will ever be able to let a September 11 pass un-noticed.  The odd fact is that September 11 no longer exists.  It has been replaced by 9/11, an event both terrible and awesome—in the Biblical sense of those words—that it changed us all utterly.  It also united an often fractured nation in grief, fear, and outrage.  Everyone felt it, commented on it.  For a while there were no conservatives and liberals, no atheists and religious, no gays straights, not even any New Yorkers and heartlanders.

            It didn’t last long.  The toxic cloud still hung over the site of the Twin towers as that unity was being brazenly exploited to set the stage for an endless round of wars designed to create a new American Imperium.  TV preachers and reactionary fundraisers with enormous mailing lists were soon busy blaming the tragedy on moral weakness  laid at the feet of liberals, atheists, Gays, pro-choice women, and advocates of tolerance.  Then came the radio ranters and the rent-me-cheep cable talking heads—all busy taking that brief unity and smashing it to advance their own agendas.

            And it hasn’t ended.  The Resident, the Dark Sith Lord Cheney and their minions continue to use 9/11 as a bludgeon to demonize their opponents and rally their faithful.

            But I remember how it was.  I remember who we could be.

*************

            On the one year anniversary, I wrote and read the following poem at a commemoration vigil on the Square in WOODSTOCK, sponsored by the McHENRY COUNTY PEACE GROUP.  We were trying to honor the dead, the injured and the wounded nation.  We were also trying to find ways to avert the war that we already knew was being plotted in our name.

THE DEAD OF 9/11 LEAVE A MESSAGE ON GEORGE W’S ANSWERING MACHINE

The Dead cry out--       

It is not lonely here.

     They come by the scores     

          and by the thousands

          everyday,                       

          as they have always come,          

          each soul here

          a tragedy for someone down there.

     They come as they have always come,

          each death a completion of journey,         

          the closing of a hoop of life.

     And we welcome each of them.

But we are not lonely here.

     We do not wander silent corridors,

          our footsteps echoing,

          yearning for a voice.

     We are not lonely

          for we are the Dead

          and we are everywhere, 

          united in that last breath

          and in eternity.

But you make haste to fill the unfillable, 

     to send us more,

     many more,

     out of their own time

     as we were out of ours,

     yanked here in violence and hatred.

Let them be.
    They will come in their own time.

                       
SPORTING ONLY THREE STARS, GENERAL PETRAEUS STILL HAD PLENTY OF MILITARY GLORY PINNED TO HIS CHEST WHEN HE TESTIFIED TO THE SENATE EARLIER ON HIS PLANS FOR THE GREAT "TROOP SURGE."

           It came as no surprise, really, when GENERAL DAVID PETRAEUS trotted up to Capital Hill the day before 9/11. 

Memo to Democratic Congressional Leaders:  Hey, I know we have been promised this report from Petraeus since the abortive attempt to tie war funding to a withdrawal schedule earlier this summer, but how on earth did you allow this report to be made the very week of the annual 9/11 exploitation orgy?  You allowed the General’s predictably Pollyanna report to be showered in the Resident’s patented exploitation festival.  Don’t any of you pay any attention to this stuff?

Anyway, the General showed up in all of his dazzling military glory with so many ribbons stretching from pocket flap to shoulder that I suspected he had to stretched out on the Rack just to accommodate them all.  The General, erect and impressive and even in full possession of a genuine DOUGLAS MacARTHUR memorial hair cut, launched into his long awaited testimony without being encumbered by being placed under oath.

A good thing for him, because he was soon off and running with a bunch of whoppers in fact and fanciful exaggerations of expectations.  House Democrats, predictably, were skeptical and question the General closely.  But they were to some degree hamstrung by their own leadership, which had earlier pronounced Petraeus an “honorable man” who could be relied upon for a truly independent judgement.  The General proclaimed his independence and claimed that his testimony had been in no way vetted, guided or reviewed by the White House.

He did not need such guidance.  He knew exactly what he was supposed to report and he did so, regardless that portions contradicted published statements by some of his own subordinate commanders, the overwhelming opinion of many senior officers, both active duty and retired, the Iraqi government’s own assessments, and god-only-knows how many “independent” inquiries and assessments.  Only the easily hypnotized media (think KATIE COURIC) and nervous Democratic centrists (read HILLARY CLINTON) seem to have been taken in by a summer long public relations campaign touting military “progress” in BAGHDAD.

Never the less, Democratic leaders fear the Resident’s magic spell.  Despite overwhelming polling numbers indicating that Americans want action winding down the war NOW, they fear to be tarred as surrender monkeys and be blamed for a military disaster when a “retreat under fire” is conducted by the same inept leadership that got us into the war in the first place.  So some Democratic leaders are already thrashing about for some kind of “bi-partisan” compromise that will give the administration the green light to continue the war in exchange for un-enforceable promises of future troop reductions.  SENATOR DICK DURBIN and other war critics have vowed not to let that happen.

Meanwhile MOVEON.ORG and other grass roots organizations are planning to hold timid Democratic leadership’s feet to the fire. MoveOn has done a good job of exposing Petreaus’s con job.  For your information, I am copying their critique below.

·                                 Petraeus is using "funny math." According to the Washington Post, Petraeus and the Pentagon are using a bizarre formula for measuring violence in the country. For example, deaths by car bombs don't count.³ And assassinations count only if you're shot in the back of the head—not in the front.⁴

·                                 Iraqis believe the surge has failed. According to a massive new ABC/BBC poll, every single Iraqi polled in Baghdad, the primary target of the "surge," said it had made security worse. Iraqis themselves overwhelmingly think the situation in Iraq is deteriorating, in terms of security, political cooperation, the economy, and other measures. Overall, 70% think the escalation worsened rather than improved security conditions. ⁵

·                                 The independent GAO report found that violence is up. A comprehensive Government Accountability Office report ordered by Congress found that "average number of daily attacks against civilians have remained unchanged from February to July 2007."⁶  In August, things got worse, with civilian casualties rising according to the Associated Press⁷ and the Los Angeles Times.⁸ 

·                                 For our troops, it's the bloodiest summer yet. More U.S. troops died every month this year compared to the same month last year.⁹

Petraeus claimed that he compiled his report without conferring with the White House. But the Washington Post recently reported that Petraeus or his staff joined daily conference calls with the White House and former RNC chairman Ed Gillespie this summer to "map out ways of selling the surge." The Post reported that Gillespie's White House political unit was "hard-wired" to Petraeus' military unit.¹⁰

We would all like to see life improving in Iraq. But it's not—it's getting worse. And if US forces stay in Iraq both Americans and Iraqis will pay a terrible price.

Today is the anniversary of the worst terrorist attack in American history. The wounds of 9/11 are still fresh for many of us. After 9/11, President Bush used fear, lies and trumped-up intelligence to stampede us into Iraq. Now, America is bogged down in an unwinnable civil war, and Al Qaeda has regained enough strength to once again menace the United States.¹¹

It would be a tragic irony if, six years later, the administration used skewed intelligence to head off the growing momentum for an exit strategy from Iraq.

 SOURCES
1.  Washington Post, "Petraeus Backs Initial Pullout," 9/11/07
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=2958&id=11221-3430421-BAOq9I&t=5 2. Ibid.
3. New York Times, "Time to Take a Stand," 9/7/07
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=2941&id=11221-3430421-BAOq9I&t=6
4. Washington Post, "Experts Doubt Drop in Violence in Iraq," 9/6/07
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=2938&id=11221-3430421-BAOq9I&t=7
5. ABC News, "Iraqis' Own Surge Assessment," 9/10/07
http://abcnews.go.com/US/Story?id=3571504
6. Washington Post, "Experts Doubt Drop in Violence in Iraq," 9/6/07
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=2938&id=11221-3430421-BAOq9I&t=8
7. Associated Press, "1,809 Iraqi civilians killed in August," 9/1/07
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20543737/
8. Los Angeles Times, "Iraqi civilian deaths climb again," 9/1/07
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=2956&id=11221-3430421-BAOq9I&t=9
9. http://www.iCasualties.org
10. Washington Post, "Among Top Officials, 'Surge' Has Sparked Dissent, Infighting," 9/9/07
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=2957&id=11221-3430421-BAOq9I&t=10
11. Washington Post, "Scarier than Bin Laden," 9/9/07
http://www.moveon.org/r?r=2959&id=11221-3430421-BAOq9I&t=11

            Now is the time to flood the in boxes of your Congressperson and Senators with demands that they not be mesmerized.  Now is the time we expect action to finally end this dreadful war.

            Let’s honor the Dead of 9/11 by not continuing to “fill the unfillable” with those “yanked here in violence and hatred.”

One of scores of MOVEON anti-filibuster rallies around the country.

Well, it’s over now.  A bleary-eyed SENATE has voted not to end the filibuster against the LEVIN-REED AMENDMENT to the DEFENSE DEPARTMENT budget allocation.  The final vote was 52-47.  Four REPUBLICANS—GORDON SMITH (Oregon,) CHUCK HAGEL (Nebraska,) OLYMPIA SNOW (Maine,) and SUSAN COLLINS (ditto) voted to end the debate and proceed to a majority vote on the amendment. JOE LIEBERMAN (Turd, Connecticut) of course voted with the Repugnitans.  But so did HARRY REID himself—a parliamentary maneuver that allows him to resurrect the amendment for yet another vote.  TIM JOHNSON, still recovering from a stroke, was absent for the vote.

            The DEMOCRATS thus picked up one GOP vote.  But Collins, in a tough re-election race, said that she only voted to allow an up or down vote on the amendment but would have voted against the amendment itself. This is desperate, meaningless hair splitting since the amendment was doomed any way.  And if it had come to a vote, it would have passed, even with her opposition.

            Republicans whined that it was all just theater.  That it was.  But it is important theater.  It required the parade of Bush loyalists to stand up and defend the indefensible.  It also showed them up as obstructionists at a time when the overwhelming majority of American voters want Congress to take action to end this unpopular war. 

            Reid knows from bitter experience that the public does not appreciate the nuances of Senate tradition and have little patience for the hallowed tradition of the FILIBUSTER as a means of thwarting the majority of the body.  The GOP was able to use that repugnance to wipe up the floor with Democrats in the hotly contested judicial confirmations of the last Congress.  Even though most voters disapproved of the kind of reactionary judges Shrub had sent to the Senate, they hated the obstruction more.  Now it was Reid’s turn to rub the new minority’s nose in its own shit.

            In recent years the filibuster has not much resembled JEFFERSON SMITH’S lonely crusade—or even the epic rear-guard actions of the segregationist Democrats against the Civil Rights acts of the 1960’s.  Instead it has been a carefully orchestrated dance in which the mere threat of a filibuster, when the votes are sure to sustain it, is enough to kill legislation or an appointment.  That way no one actually has to put any effort into one.

            But Reid has told the Minority that they must actually hold their “extended debate.”  What is more he has threatened to bring the issue of ending the War back again and again with this amendment or with others—perhaps with ROBERT BYRD’S and HILLARY CLINTON’S amendment to withdraw the Resident’s authority to wage the war under the original 2002 measure obtained under false pretences.  There is also a pile-up of progressive legislation already passed by the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES that could be subject to the same strategy.  How bad with the GOP look filibustering, say, children’s health insurance?

            As for the Levin-Reed Amendment itself, it is far from the “bring-‘em-home-now” demands of much of the anti-war movement.  It is centrist in every respect echoing many of the recommendations of the IRAQ STUDY GROUP.  It calls for a draw down of American troops beginning 120 days after passage, limiting remaining troops to missions against AL-QAEDA—a provision repeatedly mocked by JOHN McCAIN as requiring that they “wear t-shirts” identifying themselves—and training Iraqi forces.  It also call for a diplomatic initiative with Iraq’s neighbors and mediation effort led by the UNITED NATIONS.

            Yet even action this limited represents a strong rebuke to the CHENEY/BUSH/NEO-CON war machine.  It would not stop the war, but it would put the breaks on and undoubtedly be followed by stronger measures.  Reid’s aggressive tactics represent a break with Democratic timidity that can not be underestimated.

            Like it or not, this war will not be ended in one fell swoop.  Some sort of steady, controlled departure is the best that we can expect from Congress.

            MOVEON recognized this, which is why it mobilized anti-filibuster actions around the country. They undoubtedly will be ripped as Democratic Party lackeys again.  Ignore the criticism.  Congretional Democrats are finally getting it right. 

            Certified liberals everywhere are wringing their hands over yesterday’s SUPREME COURT OPINION overturning a key provision of the McCAIN-FEINGOLD ACT. 

            Forgive me if I do not share their angst. 

            It’s not that I am any less worried than they are by the corrupting power of money in American Politics.  Or that I am sanguine about the probability that unlimited bushels of cash will now be funneled through various interest groups broadcasting “issue information” aimed at sinking opponents without the contribution restraints on direct donations.  I have no doubt that the rich and powerful will do what they do best with the blessing of the Bush Court—bamboozle the American public in anticipation of being able to pick their pockets.

            So what else is new?  If the court had upheld the ban on such ads in the run-up to elections, those same clever fat cats would have found some other way to corrupt the system.

            In the past DEMOCRATS, progressives of all stripes, and left leaning advocacy groups were virtually helpless against the avalanche of money.  Dedicated volunteers and over heated mimeograph machines were no match for the corporate dollars that gave us the REPUBLICAN oligarchy.

            But things have changed.  We’ve changed.  Beginning with the DEAN campaign on one hand and the emergence on truly grass roots, web based organizations like MOVEON, we have learned to play the game our own way.  We are now raising millions of dollars, not just for candidates but for causes.  Just look at the reporting.  Our small donors are beginning to match their deep pockets dollar for dollar.

            And our issue oriented organizations—Pro-choice, anti-gun, health care reform, civil liberties, drug reform, gay rights, anti-war, you name it—are now eager to use some of those donations to go after the bad guys in congress with the same kind of ads that twisted RUSS FEINGOLD’S shorts.

            I have the distinct impression that if the Court had upheld the restrictions in this case, the [IN]JUSTICE DEPARTMENT would spend a great deal more time chasing after our folks than they would bite the hand that feeds its master.  Just a guess.

            So forgive me if I sit out the current liberal pity party.

            LET’S GET READY TO RUMBLE!

All week the in-box of my e-mail has been stuffed with screaming outrage.  Thurdsay the Democratic led congress handed Resident GEORGE W.  BUSH  the fabulous gift of almost complete surrender on funding the WAR IN IRAQ.   After a “compromise” deal was worked out with the White House the measure cleared both houses on Thursday.  MAJORITY LEADER HARRY REID voted for the measure.  In an act of slight of hand SPEAKER NANCY PELOSI voted against it while letting her leadership team advance the bill.  The lip-stick-on-the-pig, meant to mollify a public demanding an end to the war, is that for the first time Bush will have to accept “benchmarks” for progress from the Iraqi government in getting control of the country.  Make that optional earmarks.  Shrub can wave them if he sees fit.

            As part of the deal, the Democrats got to bundle some spending initiatives unrelated to the bill—most of them worthwhile.  And they finally got the long treasured MINIMUM WAGE increase, albeit with tax-cut bribes for business.  Great. Just great.  By tying those measures to the bill they invite the Republicans to mock them and unprincipled pork-barrel traders and the corrupt recipients of public bribes.  It will make no difference that the corrupters and bribers are the Maladministration and the GOP (stands for Got Ours, Patsy) Congressional minorities.

            With in moments of the announcement of the “deal” by Democratic leaders earlier in the week, jubilant Republicans were claiming a total Democratic capitulation to the President’s insistence on “no surrender dates.”  They also knew that the Democrats were now full partners in the war.  By playing Tweedle Dee to Tweedle Dum Democrats were neutralizing the war as an election issue.

            There can be no question that this is both a policy and a political disaster for Congressional Democrats.  No one now believes them when they claim that they will stand fast when they tackle the subject again when the regular Defense Department funding bill comes up for consideration in July.

            So what will the vote achieve?  Can any silk purse be knit from this sows ear?  One good thing is that the vast network of anti-war organizations, websites, blogs and publications have become instantly re-unified.  Just months ago stand-fasters like DEMOCRATS.COM, CODE PINK,  and others were at the throats of  “pragmatists” at MOVEON and moderates like the COUNCIL FOR A LIVABLE WORLD when the latter went along with Nancy Pelosi’s incremental approach to a funding bill.  This week there wasn’t a dimes worth of difference in the outrage all expressed or in the intensity in mobilizing their supporters to swamp Congress with protest.

            Dozens of  Democratic incumbent Congress people and Senators who have signed on to the capitulation will now be the targets of well financed and organized primary challengers as the grass roots rises up to seize the party and not only make it a true peace party, but drive it significantly to the left.  Things look bleak indeed for “triangulators” and DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP COUNCIL types.

            This also will have a major impact on the Presidential race.  Marginal dark horses who have been consistently and vocally anti-war may be the beneficiaries of those now taking pledges never to vote for anyone who approves of this measure.  Score points for DENNIS KUCINICH, MIKE GRAVEL,  and CHRISTOPHER DODD.  If one of them could establish himself as a clear alternative he could suddenly find himself both funded and a real player in some of the primary states.

            Established anti-war candidates BARACK OBAMA and JOHN EDWARDS will do alright as well.  Edwards came out strongly against the temporary funding measure a few days ago in a policy speech to the COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, where he outlined a detailed proposal for ending the war.  Out now hardliners might not, however like the details of his plan which calls for removing the bulk of U.S. troops by the end of the year but maintaining a strong presence in Kuwait and the Gulf and even a sizable garrison in Baghdad to “protect the embassy.”  Like it or not this is version of JOHN MURTHA’S earlier proposal of maintaining a regional presence “over the horizon.”  Obama, who got to cast a vote against the measure in the Senate, has been less detailed but tends in the same direction.   And in point of fact this is how America will get out of the war, no matter how unsatisfactory to the bring-‘em-all-home-now crowd. 

            HILLARY CLINTON also voted against the funding.  Will that be enough to placate the rabidly anti-Hillary peace left?  Or will she be seen as bending to the whims of polls and thus sully the image as a “strong” leader she has carefully built.  The right already hates her.  They will take special delight in smearing her now as a “flip-lopper” and a “surrender monkey.”  She calculates that the public’s absolute rejection of the war and its sycophantic boosters that she can weather that storm.  A new CBS NEWS/NEW YORK TIMES presidential preference poll showed her picking up seven points over the past two weeks and now enjoying a wide lead over Obama.  Maybe the move can actually woo the anti-war public as opposed to the anti-war movement, which will never embrace her.

JOHN KERRY who, despite dropping out of the race following an embarrassing case of foot-in-the-mouth disease, has scrupulously maintained his campaign e-mail list and today made a point of touting his vote against the bill.  He may still harbor fantasies of the Party turning to him after the main contenders cannibalize each other.  Fat chance.

By coincidence  AL GORE launched his new book ASSAULT ON REASON, stinging rebuke to the post “reality based” trips of the Bush administration, this week.  That gave him the opportunity to pummel “failed leadership” not just in the White House, but in Congress and the Courts as well. He was everywhere from the Sunday morning talking head shows to DAVID LETTERMAN.  And while maintaining constantly (and most of his friends believe it) that he does not intend to run for President, he has lately made a point of saying “never say never.”  A hugely laudatory profile in the NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE by JAMES TRAUB has been circulated throughout the net by several blogs and websites and hints that Gore might be mulling a “late entry” into the race if the front runner falter and there is a “grassroots” demand.  A number of high powered political pros have refrained from signing on with other campaigns and are setting up an un-official shadow operation.  Gore growing iconic status and the yearning of many Democrats may overwhelm his desire not to run.  Were he to announce there would be a stampede of supporters deserting other campaigns for Gore.  It might not be enough to put the former vice-president over the top, but it could sink campaigns with shallow support—Hillary being the most vulnerable.

What ever happens, the anti-war movement will be tempted to jettison its attachment to the Democratic Party—a move longed for by the left militants of such demonstrations machines as THE WORLD CAN’T WAIT.  We could see an up-turn in street demonstrations, direct action, and civil disobedience and the development of a movement reminiscent of the Vietnam War resistance.  That could drain maybe tens of thousands of dedicated, motivated boots-on-the-ground troops that Democrats were counting on next year not only for the Presidential campaign, but to build solid majorities in both houses of  Congress.

            To end the war and to build a Democratic Party strong enough to advance a positive progressive agenda, Congressional Democrats must find a way to say no to the least popular President in history.  And they have to find that way fast.

            Now is the moment to raise Hell, or Hell will surely find us.

On Tuesday, April 10th MOVEON.ORG will offer an extraordinary opportunity to hear first hand from the top Democratic candidates for president their views on the WAR IN IRAQ.  The leading organization for integrating local activists into a national movement via the web is sponsoring house parties across the country.  Participants (in alphabetic order for fairness) will be SENATOR JOSEPH BIDEN, SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON, JOHN EDWARDS, REPRESENTATIVE DENNIS KUCINICH, SENATOR BARAK OBAMA, and GOVERNOR BILL RICHARDSON.

MoveOn members, gathering in living rooms from coast to coast will ask candidates the tough questions about their Iraq plans and will hear the answers directly. There will be time for group discussion at each meeting and on line across the country. The next day, all MoveOn members will vote on who we think will do the best job in Iraq.

Unfortunately, I have to work that night (Rats!) But most of you have a chance to attend.  The parties are scheduled to start at 6:30 Central Time, but I imagine that it will be 7 before the candidates log in.  The discussion is bound to be lively—and pointed.  This is you chance to separate the sheep from the goats.

To find a house party near you, or to host one (it’s not too late) follow this link:  http://pol.moveon.org/event/events/index.html?action_id=80      

The movement that started with StopAOL has broadened into an urgent wider campaign to resist the many potential assaults on the current free and equal access to the internet.  Most importantly it is urging Congress to support Network Neutrality to preserve that freedom before corporate interests attempt to seize control abetted by those who most fear the people power of unfettered free speech. 

Read more details of the campaign from MoveOn.  Sign the petition, describe your position in your own words, and fill out the internet use survey.

This was my message to Congress.  What will be yours?

Forces are at work that would stifle the most vibrant contemporary manifestation of democracy.  Forces that fear the free exchange of ideas here as much as the Chinese fear it in their country. Forces willing to sacrifice the interests of ordinary citizens for the private benefit of a handful of powerful corporations.  Forces most delighted to be able to do both in one vote.  Do you want to be one of them?  Remember the very power of internet democracy will rise up and sweep you away before you can muzzle, tax or tame it.

Not a LiveJournal member? Comment by e-mail to pmurfin@sbcglobal.net .