Tag Archives: elections

Purism deconstructed.

There seems to be considerable interest in third party candidates this year, even though neither of the major/minor candidates is anything to write home about. Jill Stein is a smart person with whom I agree across a broad range of policies, but her notion of how presidential elections work is severely stunted and bizarre. Moreover, the party she represents is almost a total waste of space – an environmental activist party that only appears once every four years to compete in the presidential race. When it comes to organizing, they’re not exactly Saul Alinsky.

Just do it, then move on.Gary Johnson, on the other hand, is clearly not the brightest ex-governor on the porch and hasn’t made much of a case for why young people should give their vote to a ticket that’s floated in part with Koch money, most likely. Perhaps his supporters are not aware that he would slash spending on just about any program that ever benefited them in any way. If American style libertarianism is about anything, it’s about that. Not that it’s likely to be much of a problem – he, like Stein, have no conceivable path to victory in this election. All they have is an extraordinary opportunity to hand Donald Trump and the hyper-reactionary Republican party an electoral victory this November that they don’t deserve and that will have repercussions for many years to come.

That is not an exaggeration. Elections have consequences, and I am saying this as someone who voted for Nader in 2000 (in New York state, of course). We are still living with the consequences of the election of Ronald Reagan, from the fallout from his Afghan “freedom fighters” (now called Al Qaeda and the Taliban), to his reactionary Supreme Court picks, to his war on labor. We also feel the effects of Dubya’s clueless reign, with troops deployed in all of the countries he invaded, a massively outsourced national security state, and our national budget buckling under the strain of his tax cuts for the richest Americans. If Trump wins, it will be because Democrats and progressives sat on their hands or actively voted for someone other than Clinton. That would be a disaster for poor and working people here and around the world.

No, Clinton isn’t a great candidate. But voting is a shitty way to protest. Voting should be strategic, and there is no coherent rationale for withdrawing support from the Democratic ticket that will lead to better policy.

The student prince.

I missed NBC’s “Commander in Chief Forum” thus week, but caught the aftermath, and it wasn’t pretty. For one thing, never have a discussion about war and peace on any deck of a warship. It’s like, I don’t know, riding an H-bomb Slim Pickens-style, like it’s a bucking bronco. Second, don’t hire Matt Lauer unless you plan on making it some kind of variety show with a quirky meteorologist and people standing outside the window holding signs. Then, of course, there’s the problem named Donald.

The Student PrinceTruth be told, I have seldom been so gob-smacked by the stupidity of a presidential candidate. Sure, Dubya was a tremendous dumb-ass. Sure, Dan Quayle couldn’t spell and thought Mexicans spoke Latin. Sure, Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson apparently thinks “Aleppo” is the name of a new recreational drug. Donald Trump is in a whole other category. Basic concepts about the nature of the world appear to be beyond his grasp. At the forum, he repeated his opinion that we should have “taken the oil” when we invaded Iraq. Asked to elaborate, he poked around the notion of leaving a few people there to stand guard over it, as if it was a small, contiguous, manageable object and not a massive natural resource that’s part of the geology of that unfortunate country.

Pulitzer Prizewinning journalist David Kay Johnston says that Trump knows nothing, and the first time I heard that I thought it was hyperbole. But it really is true: the guy simply has no knowledge outside of what he absolutely needs to know to hold himself upright. His comments at the forum were evasive, full of blather, devoid of meaningful content, and remarkably incoherent. And yet people still support him for the presidency. Some of those attending that event later commented that they were still “undecided”. I can understand the reluctance regarding Clinton. But this is no longer a policy argument. This is different. Trump would be a learn-on-the-job president with very few constraints.

The salient issue in this campaign is now how to keep a rich-ass crackpot away from the most powerful office on earth. That is a simple binary choice, whatever ideology you subscribe to.

luv u,

jp

How crazy is too crazy?

By most accounts, it hasn’t been a good week for candidate Trump. I say “most” because The Donald has die-hard ditto-heads, like the ones attached to Limbaugh’s ample ass (and there’s probably substantial overlap between those groups). His problem has been his mouth, as usual, though that’s just the thing that makes noise. It’s the policy implications of a Trump presidency that scares the hell out of me, not the fact that he has terminal foot-in-mouth disease. In with Trump would come all of the worst players in the Republican establishment – the war starters, the torturers, and so on – plus a substantial cadre of tea party freaks to fill in all of the gaping holes in his action plan as president. He took zero interest in the drafting of the GOP platform, tossing it off to these rancid constituencies. The result has been a remarkably reactionary document, far to the right of any the party has drafted before.

More likely? Well ... maybe.Does this bother the Republican establishment? Not at all. They get a little bothered by his off-hand comments and rejoinders to everyone who looks askance at him. Overt racist policies, ethnic cleansing, etc., inspires mild concern. I think the turning point was Trump’s reluctance to endorse Paul Ryan and other prominent Republicans – that’s getting their attention, and now the party is openly looking for ways to rein him in or read him out. I don’t think either will happen, frankly. His fellow Republicans worry about their seats, not about the planet – they don’t care that this hyper narcissistic man-baby who seems to have a fascination with nuclear weapons might become president.

Maybe it’s because we’ve had potential world-destroyers in the highest office before, right? Like Truman, who contemplated bombing the border between North and South Korea. Or Kennedy, who nearly blew us up over the right to keep some obsolete missiles in Turkey – missiles we had already secretly planned to remove. Or the unabashed racist Nixon who wanted to use nukes on Vietnam. Or Reagan who almost touched off a nuclear exchange with Russia by repeatedly probing their perimeter defenses until a miscalculation on the Soviet side nearly sent the missiles flying.

Or maybe it’s because they’re too craven to care about anybody other than themselves. My money’s on that one.

luv u,

jp

Rights and wrongs.

Remarkable week in so many ways. Where to begin? At the beginning.

Attack at Attaturk Airport. The horrendous bombing in Turkey was reportedly the work of three Central Asian extremists, presumably with ISIS though the group has not as of this writing taken responsibility for the attack. Two things come to mind in the wake of this atrocity. The first is that the Syrian conflict is this decade’s gathering place for psycho-fanatical killers from every corner of the region, just as Iraq was in the 2000s, Bosnia in the 1990s, and Afghanistan in the 1980s; hence, jihadists from Uzbekistan as well as the gulf. Second, ISIS is in a love-hate relationship with the Turkish government like the one between the Taliban and Pakistan. This is a monster Turkey (with our support) helped to create, and tragically it’s preying on their good people. Sickening.

Tenney: NY-22's own little Trump cloneRestored Right to Choose. The Whole Women’s Health decision by the Supreme Court has moved the needle in a positive direction on the abortion issue for the first time in many years. I’m hoping that this is the death knell for this generation of TRAP (targeted restrictions on abortion providers) laws taking hold across the country over the past few years. What the anti-choice crowd will try next is anyone’s guess. Another example of why, on the basis of the Supreme Court alone, it is well worth bothering to get out and vote the right way this fall. Just saying.

Primary Colors. Speaking of voting, New York had its federal office primary … another in a series of primary days in the Empire State. What a stupid system! In any case, my home congressional district (NY 22) only had a contest on the Republican side. Our incumbent is the centrist Republican Richard Hanna; those vying to replace him in his party are all significantly to his right: Claudia Tenney, who once referred to Oneida Indian leader Ray Halbritter as “spray-tan Ray” on Twitter; businessman Steven Wells, whose ridiculous commercials appeared to suggest that he would keep ISIS out with a chain link fence at the border; and some other conservative asshole. Tenney won, so now our district stands a fair chance of lurching significantly to the right of where it’s been pretty much my entire life. Tenney will run against Kim Myers, a mainstream Democrat from the Binghamton area.

Suggest people get their asses out and vote for this Myers person, even if she’s not a white-hot progressive. The last thing we need is to be represented in Washington by an anti-choice bigot like Tenney.

luv u,

jp

Inside the May podcast.

Jesus, that was slow. You know what we need? One of those vacuum tube systems with a branch that runs straight up to the freaking internet. You just stuff the podcast into a plastic capsule, cram that sucker in the tube, and up it goes to the “cloud”. Then when it rains, everybody gets your podcast. Modern technology – what a freaking miracle.

Now that the long-awaited May episode of our podcast THIS IS BIG GREEN has finally been posted, this seems like a good time to offer a quick rundown of its questionable contents:

Ned Trek 28 – Disheveled in the Dark. This longish, musical episode of our Star Trek parody is based on the classic Star Trek episode entitled “Devil in the Dark”, a standard morality play (of course – it was the 1960s) about a mining planet being terrorized by a mysterious cave dwelling creature. Look it up … got it? Okay. The creature, called the “Horta”, is represented in our version as the “Hairta”, literally the animated hair of Donald Trump, rampaging its way through Republican candidates on a hyper-polluted, free market, toxic waste dump and fracking planet run by Mitch McConnell and Reince Priebus. There’s a lot of running, coughing, and (of course) a performance of the palamino mind meld.

There are also eight new Big Green songs, which include:

Say Can You Fear (timecode: 16:14). A Nixon song. Basically another plea from the Nixon android for consulting work and a path back to respectability. Dude’s got issues.

Romney and You Know It (timecode: 22:04). Captain Willard Romney muses on the now dim possibility of a brokered GOP convention. Arrangement offers a minor nod to the late great George Martin. (You can also hear the song on Soundcloud.)

Down in the Polls (timecode: 39:12). Mr. Welsh wields his folk guitar into action and renders an Irish-tinged ballad of the killer Hairta. References to some of your favorite GOP contenders in 2016.

post-itHerr Mr. Hair (timecode: 49:14). Perle’s song. Predictably, he’s trying to curry favor with the Hairta. Always another ego to be stroked (or combed in this case).

You Made That Bed (timecode: 1:05:25). Sulu, the moral center of the Ned Trek universe (aside from Ned himself), characterizes the episode as one of chickens seriously coming home to roost. Cowbell played by Marvin (my personal robot assistant).

Demigod (timecode: 1:15:16). Ned’s song. A moody Melvin slow rocker about the phenomenon of Trump and Trumpism. Listen closely for ironic callback to the Youngbloods’ “Everybody Get Together”.

Hey GOP (timecode: 1:21:49). Shuffle swing number about the predicament of the Republican party, faced with the rampaging Hairta.

Cry for the Children (timecode: 1:26:36). Another over-the-top Doc Coburn number, filled with religious imagery and agonized wailing.

Put the Phone Down. Matt and I talk about how freaking exhausted we are having just completed eight songs for a freaking podcast. We also discuss the Utica Peregrine Falcon project, as well as some archival audio and video from Big Green’s live performance period back in the early 1990s.

Unite or bust.

I don’t think it would be a surprise to anyone who reads this blog that I am substantially to the left of Bernie Sanders on a whole range of issues. That said, I am overjoyed that he has done as well as he has in the contest for the Democratic nomination. It is unprecedented in my lifetime that such a progressive voice could win a string of primaries and caucuses, and that bodes well for the next generation of voters (if they make it a habit to get to the polls).

One "luxury" we can't afford.What I have to say about the “Bernie or bust” tendency, however, differs from what a lot of people on the hard left are saying these days. Working to defeat Trump by, among other things, supporting Clinton if she’s nominated is simply not that hard a pill to swallow for me – a person for whom a vote for Bernie was a kind of compromise. I want to take a moment to look at some of the main contentions I have heard from Bernie or Busters, none of which (spoiler alert!) I feel has any real merit.

Contention #1: There’s no difference between the two establishment parties. Not true. There may not be a big enough difference, but there is a difference. Anyone who lived through eight years of W. Bush, six of which saw a GOP congress as well, would know that. That small margin is enough to justify the minuscule act of voting.

Contention #2: After Trump comes the revolution. Bullshit. This sounds like it was cooked up by the radical in Zola’s Germinal. It’s a millennial hope with no chance of being realized. Trump in the White House will just mean years of rearguard actions against reactionary policies.

Contention #3: We leftists need to stand up to the Democratic establishment. This argument goes something like this: The Democrats need the left, so we need to demand that they put forward a candidate of the left or withdraw our support from their nominee; otherwise they’ll assume we will just go along to get along. The trouble with this is that (a) it puts too much of a premium on elections  – important as they are, they should only be the smallest part of what we do to move our issues forward, and (b) it’s the kind of thinking that’s done by comfortable white progressives who have less to lose from a Republican presidency than people of color, the poor, LGBT folks, etc.

Face it: these people cannot afford four to eight years of Trump. Neither can the planet – we simply do not have the luxury to allow such a disaster to happen. Standing fast to some purist ideological notion with regard to national elections is like sitting back on the deck of a sinking ship, right next to the life boats. All the more vulnerable people are five decks down, far below the waterline already. We have to make choices with them in mind, not just our own privileged asses.

luv u,

jp

And the winner is …

It seems like just yesterday we were staring at a line of 20 or more lunatics vying for the Republican nomination. And now, a few short months later, it’s all over bar the shouting. And there will be shouting, make no mistake. Donald Trump is now the presumptive nominee of the Republican party, as per Reince Priebus, and his two last competitors, “lyin'” Ted Cruz and “non-descript” John Kasich have dropped out of the race. Poor Kasich … he never did well enough even to get a decent Trump nickname. That’s got to hurt.

Trump's secret plan to stop ISIS.Kidding aside, we have a major problem – namely that one of the two people that can possibly become president of the United States is now Donald Trump. With regard to governing policy, foreign or domestic, this man is a monumental ignoramus and a congenital liar. Worse, he engages in these incendiary rants that stoke the flames of hatred and bigotry, recalling a violent past that he often invokes when urging his flock towards toughness. Perhaps most infuriating is the story about General Pershing and the execution bullets dipped in pig’s blood. Trump’s recounting goes something like this: We need to be tough, like in the good old days. Pershing was tough – he both desecrated and executed captured Muslims during the conflict in the Philippines at the turn of the last century. Ergo, we must follow the same standard as Pershing and abandon our squeamish “political correctness”.

Interestingly, none of the news networks appeared to look much closer at his story, nor the context within which it would have occurred. The American takeover of the Philippines was one of the bloodiest colonial conflicts we have ever engaged in. No one seems all that bothered by this. What I hear more about from the mainstream media is how Trump is likely to be “on the left” of Hillary Clinton on trade and on foreign policy. That is a hard circle to square. Yes, Clinton is a virtual neocon on a lot of this stuff and has an enthusiasm for intervention that outstrips that of her husband. But Trump is no pacifist. When he talks about destroying ISIS, it’s pretty clear what he means, and his hostility towards trade deals is conditional and not very principled. The left will have no influence on him whatsoever. But Hillary? That depends on us.

We will be working against the election of Trump this fall – that much is for sure. It’s likely to be a tough slog, but it’s one that must be won. We cannot afford a Trump presidency, and that particularly applies to the more economically insecure among us.

luv u,

jp

Voices not heard.

The New York primary is history, and I am not alone, I’m sure, in feeling somewhat disappointed, if not surprised. Sure, we all knew that the Empire State would be an uphill battle for Bernie Sanders, but when you get all these texts and phone calls from volunteers, and you are visited at home not once but TWICE by canvassers, one group of whom told me (accurately) where my polling place was, you start to imagine a better outcome. Those kids did pretty good upstate, actually – Sanders won my home county along with almost every other county north of Westchester. I hope they draw some encouragement from that.

Prpblematic in New York, too.What is kind of discouraging, however, is the mess that New York State elections often turn out to be. We actually have fairly restrictive voter laws. No early voting, no same day registration, excuse-only absentee balloting, and a lot of weird business, like all of those voters shut out in Brooklyn this time around. I’m not claiming any conspiracy. It’s just a kind of studied incompetence that I see in my own district. (For instance, my first presidential election as a voter was 1980 – I was away from home, at SUNY New Paltz, had applied for an absentee ballot, and they sent it to my parents’ house up in the Utica area. Stuff like that.)

Another issue is independent voters. I don’t know about you, but it seems to me that any taxpayer supported election should be open to whoever wants to participate. Even if you want to maintain some party integrity (i.e. not letting Republicans decide who the Democratic candidate will be), you can still let independents vote – just let them choose which ballot they want. And the requirement that you register with a party by sometime in October for a primary the following April is plainly absurd. New York’s system just seems like it’s the product of an ossified political culture full of time-serving hacks who seek only to protect their patch and who are careful not to smash the other guy’s rice bowl, as Alan Chartock used to say. (Perhaps he still does!)

So, we move on. Bernie Sanders still has some work to do, plainly. He may never be president, but he’s a great organizer, and we need that skill to push forward an agenda for change that even the Clintons can’t ignore.

luv u,

jp

No dogma.

All right. I am as cynical as just about any political observer on the left. And when it comes to centrist Clintonism, I find I have less and less tolerance as I get older. (Hearing Hillary talk about NATO, for example, is enough to send me through the roof.)

That said, I want to make a principled argument against the notion of clinging to the “Bernie or Bust” sentiment beyond the primary contests. I know that most politically active people focus heavily on candidates, sometimes at the cost of policy positions, and that Democrats in particular are accused of “falling in love” with their choices, as opposed to “falling in line” like the Republicans usually do (and they will … mark my words). My advice is not to redeem that particular piece of pundit fodder. As much as I love Bernie Sanders, I know that he would be the first to tell you to focus on the movement, not the man.

Either way you look at it, you lose.The most important component in the argument against “Bernie or Bust” is simply that we cannot afford eight years of one-party rule under the Republicans. This would have a hugely negative impact on the most vulnerable in our society, on the environment, on our brothers and sisters in other countries around the world, and more. The fate of the Supreme Court alone is enough reason to vote for the Democratic nominee, no matter who it is. Scalia’s replacement is only just the first slice; three or four more justices could step down in the coming years. If Donald Trump or Ted Cruz ends up being the person replacing them, say goodbye to any hope of social justice for decades to come. A Cruz court would make Roberts seem like Earl Warren.

There are plenty of reasons why voting for a Democrat in the presidential race makes a difference. But I think it is well to remember that voting is just one act; the Sanders campaign is showing us just how much we can accomplish when we stand up and make our voices heard. Like Occupy Wall Street, this movement seemingly came out of nowhere. We need to continue being not only its arms and legs, but its mind and heart as well, regardless of whether Bernie Sanders is the nominee or not. We need to push our political leaders forward, even when they are constitutionally reluctant to move in that direction, like the Clintons.

So, support Bernie, vote in your primaries, but in the midst of your hell-raising, mark your calendar for election day and vote as if your life depended on it. Because it kind of does. Then get back to the movement.

luv u,

jp

Least we can do.

Matt wrote a song back in the, I don’t know, nineties called “Good Intentions” – I’m hoping to re-record it some day. Anyway, one of the lines went like this:

That son of a bitch with the backdrop and the gun
That son of a bitch with the gun
Well, I voted against, yes I voted against, yes I
voted against for all the poor
creatures of the world

Part of the reason why I’m thinking of this is the current Republican standoff over the Supreme Court vacancy … you know, their war against the U.S. Constitution which they claim so vehemently to revere. It is depressingly predictable that they would pull something like this, of course. Why not? We gave them power, after all; not by voting for them, perhaps, but by failing to vote against them. Matt was being sarcastic, of course, writing about people who think doing very little is doing enough. It certainly isn’t, but things like voting are the very least we can do, and they can make a difference. This is how.

Gotta vote, people. Just sayin.If back in 2014 more of us had said “Damn the torpedoes, I am going to vote against those fuckers if it takes me all day,” Obama would have been able to send a nominee through a normal Senate review process. If we had kept the Senate out of the hands of the wrecking crew known as the GOP, we would likely have pulled the Supreme Court back from the extreme right for the first time in more than thirty years. Now that opportunity is completely up in the air. We don’t know what’s going to happen in November, but I can tell you what isn’t going to happen before then: a Supreme Court confirmation vote, that’s what.

Elections have consequences, it bears remembering. Reagan’s victory in 1980 certainly did, as did Nixon’s in 1968 and 1972. We are living with the fallout from those electoral failures, just as we now live with that of our most recent mid-term rout. Turnout in 2014 was remarkably low – that’s the essential ingredient in any Republican victory on a national basis. When we stay home and sit on our hands, government at every level becomes more tightly controlled by the wrecking crew. Regardless of how little faith you may have in the institutions of government, that prospect simply cannot seem to you like a good thing.

No matter who wins the Democratic nomination, nor who is running for office in your state or your congressional district. No matter how long the lines or how many hoops you have to jump through. No matter what, vote against the mothers.

Next week: Ted and Donny’s super excellent war on terror.