Duty to Warn

I spent the past couple of days hanging out with Vincent Bugliosi who wants Bush killed for his crimes, following a fair trial of course, and who openly pushes the supposed need for retribution while disclaiming much interest in deterrence or restoration. Then I watched Oliver Stone's new movie, "W," which depicts Bush as a poor, sad fool who's just been trying his hardest to please his daddy all these years. If I have to choose, I'm on Stone's side.

Soon we will have a new president.  It is imperative that we, the members of the peace, anti-war and anti-imperialist movements, scrutinize his actions, starting with his acceptance speech, to determine whether he is taking actions that we believe will lead to real peace and justice in the world. 

Although we may not agree on some of the specifics, I have made a list of possible points below that can used as a starting point to monitor how well he is doing over the course of his term in office.  Even if he initially takes some actions that we agree with we should not let ourselves be misled into thinking that positive changes will continue to occur without continuous pressure from us. Your thoughts are welcomed.  For one thing I may have missed important points.

Has the new President:

1.   Withdrawn U.S. troops from Iraq?

2.   Ordered that the U.S. pay restitution to Iraq?

3.   Withdrawn U.S. troops from Afghanistan?

4.   Pledged to refrain from carrying out illegal cross border attacks into Pakistan?      

Here’s the difference between vote fraud, which is real, and voter fraud, which, though almost nonexistent, has instantly gripped the popular imagination:

The former is a complex, internal problem of democracy, the acknowledgment of which requires us to face our national contradictions and inner demons, and, applying informed intelligence, demand changes in our system so it restrains our worst impulses and truly serves our ideals; the latter is a simple, mythical problem, a variation of the familiar “us vs. them” scenario that allows “us” to feel righteously threatened and strike at “them” (and their allies) with passion and force.

The two issues — one real and deeply troubling, the other false yet familiar and compelling — define, with what I would call barbed irony, our national juncture, which is headed toward a profound resolution on Election Day, less than three weeks hence.

The Wall Street bailout that was supposed to save the economy from collapse is a flop.

Only weeks ago, the media hype behind the $700 billion bailout was so intense that it sometimes verged on hysteria. More recent events should not be allowed to obscure the reality that the news media played a pivotal role in stampeding the country into a bailout that was unwise and unjust.

Exceptions in the news coverage underscore the fact that other perspectives were readily available when the Bush administration began pushing its bailout proposal in late September. "Many of the nation's brightest economic minds are warning that if the Wall Street bailout passes, it would be a dangerous rush job," McClatchy Newspapers reported on Sept. 26. For instance, economist James K. Galbraith called the warnings of economic disaster in the absence of a swift bailout "more hype than real risk." He added: "A nasty recession is possible, but the bailout will not cure that."

For almost a decade, ACORN, a community organization of 400,000 families in neighborhoods across the country, has been fighting against the predatory lending practices that have robbed our members of their homes, destabilized neighborhoods, and roiled the global economy.

In his newest ad, John McCain's campaign bizarrely claims, "ACORN forced banks to issue risky home loans, the same types of loans that caused the financial crisis we're in today."  Nothing could be further from the truth.  In fact, ACORN has worked successfully to help working class families get good home loans on fair terms from legitimate banks and has fought vigorously against predatory lenders who have ripped off families in our communities.  These predatory loans caused the crisis.

I get the impression that a great many people are upset by all the news about McCain-Palin supporters who believe Obama is an Arab, a Muslim, a terrorist, and a baby killer. I find it the most encouraging thing that's happened in eight years.

Why? Because these sorts of lies and fear-mongering are nothing new. What's new is that the U.S. corporate media is covering them. The most unaccountable, antidemocratic communications cartel outside of China has decided to cover in a major way a story it has brushed aside since September 12, 2001.

Of course, we understand why. The victim of these particular lies is a corporate-friendly senator who appears likely to be elected president of the United States. On top of that he isn't actually a Muslim or a foreigner, so you can still be bigoted and defend him on the basis of those boring old leftwing things: facts. But the media's willingness to cover the hate speech and to point out the connections between hateful speech and hateful actions makes Obama more likely to win the election and makes us all safer, wiser, and better informed.

As Goes Ohio...Election Protection Conference
Bob Fitrakis and Steve Rosenfeld on pre-Election Day Board of Elections Monitoring Project

Link: Fitrakis & Board of Election Monitoring

Keynote Address - Mark Crispin Miller delivers the keynote speech at the As Goes Ohio...Election Protection Conference, held Sept. 24 and 25 in Columbus.

Miller is a professor of media studies at New York University and author of the books: "Loser Take All," "Fooled Again, How the Right Stole the 2004 Elections" and "The Bush Dyslexicon." He is known for his writing on American media and for his activism on behalf of democratic media reform.

YouTube Link: Mark Crispin Miller Keynote (second one from left)

Mark Crispin Miller Interview:

The 'Trinity' of Reform