Another Reason to Love Patrick Stewart

I'm out apartment searching all day, so instead of a essay-lette posting I leave you this, even further proof that Patrick Stewart is a Boss. Not only are his words extremely moving, he's also absolutely right about what he's saying. Read it. Pay attention. And, when we're talking about government programs, or increased government curtailing people's freedoms think about this: do we want our government to be dedicated to protecting the rights of opportunity for the Gladys and Patrick Stewarts of the world or, rather, dedicated to protecting the power that the Alfred Stewarts of the world use to control others. We can't do both. And we can't do the former without a powerful government.



"Our house was small, and when you grow up with domestic violence in a confined space you learn to gauge, very precisely, the temperature of situations. I knew exactly when the shouting was done and a hand was about to be raised – I also knew exactly when to insert a small body between the fist and her face, a skill no child should ever have to learn. Curiously, I never felt fear for myself and he never struck me, an odd moral imposition that would not allow him to strike a child. The situation was barely tolerable: I witnessed terrible things, which I knew were wrong, but there was nowhere to go for help. Worse, there were those who condoned the abuse. I heard police or ambulance men, standing in our house, say, “She must have provoked him,” or, “Mrs Stewart, it takes two to make a fight.” They had no idea. The truth is my mother did nothing to deserve the violence she endured. She did not provoke my father, and even if she had, violence is an unacceptable way of dealing with conflict. Violence is a choice a man makes and he alone is responsible for it.”

Thoughts on the Upcoming Election(s)

Though I have not given up my hope that we will someday have a true multiparty Democracy in America it's also important to have a plan on how to go about pursuing electoral politics in the next few years that fits within some designated framework that already exists. It it may be easier to hijack the Democrat Party back into the hands of the true left than to start from scratch. But... here's my take on what Progressives should do if we stay within the Democrat Party.

In 2012, though its fine to criticize him, but don't mess around with not voting for Obama. No I do not think that Obama is a shining light for Progressives. But he's the best option we have. I fear how his 2nd term would go with a Republican controlled House and Senate, but with at least a truly left-leaning House and Senate along with a vocal populace, I believe he could do great work. So this is my bit of advice for Progressives for the upcoming election. First, vote for Obama. Second, unless you're in a swing state or the Republican candidate turns out to be Superman, don't do more for Obama than that. Our time and money must go into promoting progressive candidates, like Massachusetts' Elizabeth Warren. If we manage to accomplish these things: re-electing Obama with at least a Progressive-slanted mandate then I believe that there is a great possibility that Obama will govern as more of a Progressive in his second term.

One idea I have been thinking abut a lot lately is how Progressives can try to influence Obama's appointees in his second term. Clearly he will be carrying many of the first-termers into the second term (Even Joe Biden… who had better not run for President). However, think of what it might mean to the Progressive movement to have a real Leftist as Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of Labor. Any of the Cabinet level positions. It is hard to find a single Progressive among Obama's closest advisors. We must find a way to change that in his second term. Perhaps this is the way to find Dennis Kucinich a way back into government. Or, if their elections go badly, Warren, Norman Solomon, Donna Edwards, or any of the few progressive candidates that are running now (check some of them out here). Or maybe this is the way to try and welcome sexual deviants Eliot Spitzer or John Edwards back into the fold. Or any of the Progressive leaning leaders in business, energy, law, education, the arts. Any of these would be an improvement on the 1990s-style 'centrists' that currently fill up Obama's cabinet.

Lastly, we have three years before the 2016 elections. There is no excuse to not have Progressives running in, and in many places winning, Democratic primaries. Just because the Tea Party is an organization of regressive cretins doesn't mean that their tactics aren't useful. The general idea for Progressives must be to have a progressive leaning Congress by 2014 and the more Progressive President, or at least a President who will pay more deference to us elected in 2016, regardless of how this election goes.

Romney Etch-a-Sketch

Another week without an original posting, sorry everyone. But my 10 day stretch of madness is nearly over and I should have two new postings next week.

I did want to pass along one link from last night's Rachel Maddow Show. I usually find the first segment of her show the hardest to get through. For the past months it seems she's always leading with 'here's what's dumb about the Republican Presidential Nomination' today. Though there's certainly plenty of stupid to go around, its hardly necessary that someone with such fantastic ideas on social spending, infrastructure, civil rights... basically everything (let's face is, she's a genius) spend so much time paying attention to the Republican clown car. I'll more into this in a post at some point.


However, last night's Rachel Maddow show ran a story on the newest 'gaffe' (which, in this nominating cycle, really do seem more like Freudian slips) from the Romney campaign. She is absolutely right to point out that this one is different. The idea that the Romney campaign would be so brazen as to admit that their entire plan is to try and forget about everything R-Money has said in the past 6 months to 6 years shows the candidate's base immorality and utter disdain for the American people. And I believe it is this particular character trait that the Obama campaign must attack in the general election. If George W. Bush could paint a decorated war veteran and public servant as a coward, surely Obama can paint the (true to life) picture of the Recreant Romney.

Check it out: Etch-a-Sketch

A few recommendations

I'm sorry I haven't had a chance to post for the past week or so. My theatrical-life has switched into high gear, but I should ideally have enough time to get out at least one posting next week. I've got a few things swimming up in my head.

But, I wanted to share two interviews I've heard on two of my favorite blogs / programs over the course of the past week.

The first is an interview on the Majority Report with Richard Kahlenberg on why he believes that the right to Unionize should be a civil right. If you're like me and have always wanted someone to really the philosophical rational behind Unions... this is perfect. If you're more informed than me, as some of you no doubt are, I'm sure it will provide new context for some of your believes. And if you know nothing about Unions... really listen to it. Kahlenberg also presents a fantastic example of how to push progressive causes working within the confines of the structures of the American government. Its a fantastic interview and one of the best I've heard on the Majority Report for a while (which is high praise, not a backhanded complement). You can find it here

The second is from The David Pakman Show (which has just gone from 2 shows a week to 4, including an international thursday show, which I'm very excited about). On Tuesday, David aired an interview that he did with Neil deGrasse Tyson on the future of space exploration. Not only does Tyson provide a more plausible, palatable, and Progressive path into space than Newt Gingrich's Moon Base / 51st State, but he also provides a compelling argument as to why science (and by extension of that, space exploration) has been under attack and what we can do about it. You can find it here

So really, watch / listen to these clips. They're both from great shows (which everyone should try and catch every so often... and donate to if you can).

Against Centrism

The idea of centrism has been under attack for the better part of the Obama presidency. From the Right this has manifested through electoral politics. The attacks on women, unions, minorities, elderly, students, the poor, etc. have predominantly come from newly elected more hard-core conservatives. These are not your father's Republicans, they're your great-grandfather's. On the left we are not seeing the same type of electoral shift. Instead, the changes have come on a more sociological level with the ongoing Occupy protests as well as the growth of groups like Anonymous and Wikileaks. The country is becoming more polarized. People who believed they had no interest in politics are starting to pay attention and realize that not only do they have opinions, they usually tend to have strong opinions. The idea that a knowledgeable electorate living in such turbulent period would favor centrist policies is absurd.

After all what are centrist policies? There is a different centrism and bipartisanship. Issues like having a police force, a national highway system, schools: these are not centrist issues, they are bipartisan issues. There may be a multiplicity of opinions on how such edifices of society should be run, but, by and large, their existence is supported across the board. Even if the centrist becomes a champion of, say, public works, and does not prove that politician to be a centrist, simply a pragmatist.

What defines a centrist is having an opinion on hot button issues that is moderately palatable to everybody. Centrists, by and large, do not believe in gay marriage, but they're willing to give some rights to homosexuals. They tend to support the idea of having access to healthcare, but see far too many problems to truly implementing a universal system in our country. They tend to speak against the horrors of war, but usually vote to pass every new military funding bill. Mistakenly labeled as flip floppers, all they really are are pen pushers. They're in the business of maintaining the status quo. Period. 

Last week famed centrist Olympia Snowe threw up her hands and declared that there was too much partisanship in Washington for her to run for reelection. And certainly the partisanship particular from the Republican side certainly has attributed the deadlock in our nations capital. But I would argue that it is simply weak leadership, from both sides of the aisle, that is causing this debacle. After all, perhaps the 2 most successful and celebrated presence of the last century, FDR on the Left and Ronald Reagan on the Right had a vision not of managing our country but re-imagining it. In our electoral politics there is now a clear right-wing. There is quite a clear center (center right). We must elect Progressives who present not simply a buffer to the onslaught from the right but true alternatives.