David Sirota and Paul Waldman to Speak at Progressive Conference

If you're like me, Music Row Democrats and their progressive allies here in the mid-state area have greatly missed the many inspirational and informative speaking events held at the Belcourt Theatre back during the heat of the 2004 campaign. Those events allowed Democrats and progressives from both inside and outside the music industry the opportunity to see and hear national personalities not ordinarily available to Nashville audiences.

Well, here is another opportunity. David Sirota and Paul Waldman, both noted progressive activists and best-selling authors will speak Saturday, April 14th at the Tennessee Alliance for Progress Compass IV Conference being held at the Cohn Adult Learning Center in West Nashville, April 13-14, 2007.

David Sirota, a fierce critic of neo-liberal economics, full-time political journalist and best-selling author, has been a guest on, among others, CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, NPR and the Cobert Report. Sirota, whose book Hostile Takeover: How Big Money & Corruption Conquered Our Government - and How We Take It Back is posted on the MRD and TAP websites, is at the vanguard of progressives who fearlessly speak out regarding our broken government and the failure of both parties to fairly and justly represent the people. Read his recent Alternet article People Party vs. Money Party: Who's Who Among the Democrats as evidence.

Paul Waldman, author of Being Right Is Not Enough: What Progressives Must Learn From Conservative Success and Fraud: The Strategy Behind the Bush Lies and Why The Media Didn't Tell You, is a Senior Fellow at Media Matters for America and previous associate director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center. Waldman will speak on Saturday and will also join TAP's progressive leaders in a statewide network strategy session on Friday, April 13th.

For registration and details on the conference go to the website. Tennesse Alliance for Progress. Pre-registration has been extended to April 6th however early registration is advised.

This is a wonderful chance for local progressives to join with those from across the state to network with each other and to meet and hear these two popular and distinguished progressive leaders speak.

Power to the people!  

Pointing To The Wolf

We have procedures in this country for dealing with unsatisfactory political leaders, for removing the incompetent from office. It's called impeachment. Last November, the American public brought the opposition party into power in Congress, and immediately the leaders of the opposition party said impeachment is off the table. Well, if impeachment is off the table, then it may well be that Constitutional democracy is off the table, too. -- Chalmers Johnson, author of Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic

My God! How much does it take to wake Americans up – and as I’ve said before, just how stupid is the majority? And what has happened to the Democratic Party? Why has the leadership of the party caved and rolled over to Bush-Cheney and the enemy within - the run-amok, criminally insane, imperialistic corporate aristocracy that has taken over the Republican Party? Could it be these Democrats are also card carrying members of the same run-amok aristocracy?

Chalmers Johnson has written two previous books that warned of the dangers our country now faces by continuing to embrace imperialistic ideals and dreams of world empire. His latest book, Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic, is the most frightening and alarming. Alternet has posted an interview with Johnson which I urge everyone who considers themselves an American to read.

Chalmers points out that we have been warned over and over of the dangers to our nation but as a people we have not only not been vigilant enough, we have ignored those warnings and have allowed our nation to reach a state where we are teetering on the edge of collapse. He suggests we did not win the cold war as we think we did. He claims that we and Russia both lost only Russia fell first and that we are falling now, ending up like Russia did, deeply in debt, on the brink of bankruptcy, over extended militarily and facing defeat in attempts to colonize sovereign nations.

Chalmers is one of a growing number of progressive voices that have not just suddenly popped awake and become aware of some danger that appeared overnight. This is no knee-jerk reaction to a recent turn of events. There are many American patriots who have been trying to get the attention of the masses for years and even decades. The progressives who have severely criticized the Bush regime and elected representatives of both the Democratic and Republican parties are not irrational alarmists, not delusional bleeding heart liberals warning of imaginary dangers. They are clear-headed, intelligent, and prescient visionaries who are solidly in touch with reality. They have carefully studied history and see clearly what is about to happen if we don’t come together as a nation and demand a change of leadership and direction.

Progressives aren’t just crying wolf. They are pointing to a real wolf that is about to pounce and are crying out for their fellow countrymen to turn and defend our country and our way of life before it’s too late.

It's Amazing How Stupid Americans Are

I don’t buy the idea that George W Bush and the rest are good people with good intentions but are simply incompetent leaders with faulty judgment. They know exactly what they are doing and it’s the most serious crime ever perpetrated against this nation.

In your face you stupid Americans, say George W Bush, Dick Cheney and the rest.

After four years of this brutal war most Americans still accept the explanation that we went to war to protect the US from terrorists. For the first time in our history the US invaded a sovereign nation that did not first attack us and one that was no threat to our nation.

And despite the glaring evidence most Americans still can’t see that it was big corporations and their representatives, both big oil and those that profit from war, the military-industrial complex, that were the one’s who planned and orchestrated this atrocity against the Iraqis and against Americans and the rest of the world. They are the REAL terrorists.

The rest of the world sees this – they know this – but the majority of Americans are as stupid as rocks – blinded by fear and ignorance.

Those radical Muslim terrorists who attacked on 9/11 didn’t go after the American people; they went after big business and oil interests by attacking the World Trade Center. They also went after corporate America’s private army, the US Military, by striking the Pentagon. We are told the fourth plane had the heads of the big oil monster as a target, the corporate henchmen who occupy the White House.

Don’t forget George W Bush’s Trifecta remark, “You know, when I was running for President, in Chicago, somebody said, would you ever have deficit spending? I said, only if we were at war, or only if we had a recession, or only if we had a national emergency. Never did I dream we'd get the trifecta." Ha, ha, ha, responded his supporters. George is so funny, he’s just a good ol’ boy, and he’s one of us. Ha, ha, ha.

How could anyone but a madman joke about pain and suffering, so many people losing their lives and the horrors of man’s most atrocious act, the act of war that maims and destroys innocent civilians and innocent soldiers - a purposeful violent act that destroys thousands upon thousands of lives and destroys a nation’s land, their infrastructure and their culture, an intentional act that creates such havoc with people’s lives both physically and mentally.

And that includes American soldiers and their families. How many lives of those who serve in this conflict are being destroyed along with their families? Besides the horrific physical injuries and disabilities there will also be economic hardships and irreparable emotional and mental injuries that will plague the military survivors for the rest of their lives and for their children’s lives.

And what does George W Bush mean when he jokes about deficit spending? It means borrowing billions upon billions of dollars against the American people and distributing it indirectly to himself and his family and to his friends in the corporate world. It means robbing Americans and putting them, their children and their children’s children into massive debt and by so doing causing average working Americans needless suffering. It also means threatening our country’s economic stability and ability to defend ourselves for decades to come.

As you read Greg Palast’s following report, look closely at the name on the oil tanker, it’s the “Condoleeza Rice”. And if you doubt the Bush-Cheney-Rice connection to big oil go here to see the glaring proof.

How f---ing plain does it have to be that these people expect you to sacrifice your children’s and your grandchildren’s lives so that their family’s are guaranteed to be wealthy and powerful for decades to come. They even had the arrogance to name the invasion of Iraq "Operation Iraqi Liberation" – OIL.

How does it feel to be considered so stupid that you won’t recognize when you’re being screwed?

Wave your flag – it will only hurt for a little while.

It's STILL the oil: Secret Condi Meeting on Oil Before Invasion

by Greg Palast
Sunday, March 18, 2007

Four years ago this week, the tanks rolled for what President Bush originally called, "Operation Iraqi Liberation" -- O.I.L.
I kid you not.

And it was four years ago that, from the White House, George Bush, declaring war, said, "I want to talk to the Iraqi people." That Dick Cheney didn't tell Bush that Iraqis speak Arabic … well, never mind. I expected the President to say something like, "Our troops are coming to liberate you, so don't shoot them." Instead, Mr. Bush told, the Iraqis,

"Do not destroy oil wells."

Nevertheless, the Bush Administration said the war had nothing to do with Iraq's oil. Indeed, in 2002, the State Department stated, and its official newsletter, the Washington Post, repeated, that State's Iraq study group, "does not have oil on its list of issues."

But now, we've learned that, despite protestations to the contrary, Condoleezza Rice held a secret meeting with the former Secretary-General of OPEC, Fadhil Chalabi, an Iraqi, and offered Chalabi the job of Oil Minister for Iraq. (It is well established that the President of the United States may appoint the cabinet ministers of another nation if that appointment is confirmed by the 101st Airborne.)

In all the chest-beating about how the war did badly, no one seems to remember how the war did very, very well -- for Big Oil.

The war has kept Iraq's oil production to 2.1 million barrels a day from pre-war, pre-embargo production of over 4 million barrels. In the oil game, that's a lot to lose. In fact, the loss of Iraq's 2 million barrels a day is equal to the entire planet's reserve production capacity.

In other words, the war has caused a hell of a supply squeeze -- and Big Oil just loves it. Oil today is $57 a barrel versus the $18 a barrel price under Bill "Love-Not-War" Clinton.

Since the launch of Operation Iraqi Liberation, Halliburton stock has tripled to $64 a share -- not, as some believe, because of those Iraq reconstruction contracts -- peanuts for Halliburton. Cheney's former company's main business is "oil services." And, as one oilman complained to me, Cheney's former company has captured a big hunk of the rise in oil prices by jacking up the charges for Halliburton drilling and piping equipment.

But before we shed tears for Big Oil's having to hand Halliburton its slice, let me note that the value of the reserves of the five biggest oil companies more than doubled during the war to $2.36 trillion.

And that was the plan: putting a new floor under the price of oil. I've have that in writing. In 2005, after a two-year battle with the State and Defense Departments, they released to my team at BBC Newsnight the "Options for a Sustainable Iraqi Oil Industry." Now, you might think our government shouldn't be writing a plan for another nation's oil. Well, our government didn't write it, despite the State Department seal on the cover. In fact, we discovered that the 323-page plan was drafted in Houston by oil industry executives and consultants.

The suspicion is that Bush went to war to get Iraq's oil. That's not true. The document, and secret recordings of those in on the scheme, made it clear that the Administration wanted to make certain America did not get the oil. In other words, keep the lid on Iraq's oil production -- and thereby keep the price of oil high.

Of course, the language was far more subtle than, "Let's cut Iraq's oil production and jack up prices." Rather, the report uses industry jargon and euphemisms which require Iraq to remain an obedient member of the OPEC cartel and stick to the oil-production limits -- "quotas" -- which keep up oil prices.

The Houston plan, enforced by an army of occupation, would, "enhance [Iraq's] relationship with OPEC," the oil cartel.

And that's undoubtedly why Condoleezza Rice asked Fadhil Chalabi to take charge of Iraq's Oil Ministry. As former chief operating officer of OPEC, the oil cartel, Fadhil was a Big Oil favorite, certain to ensure that Iraq would never again allow the world to slip back to the Clinton era of low prices and low profits. (In investigating for BBC, I was told by the former chief of the CIA's oil unit that he'd met with Fadhil regarding oil at Bush's request. Fadhil recently complained to the BBC. He denied the meeting with the Bush emissary in London because, he noted, he was secretly meeting that week in Washington with Condi!)

Fadhil, by the way, turned down Condi's offer to run Iraq's Oil Ministry. Ultimately, Iraq's Oil Ministry was given to Fadhil's fellow tribesman, Ahmad Chalabi, a convicted bank swindler and neo-con idol. But whichever Chalabi is nominal head of Iraq's oil industry in Baghdad, the orders come from Houston. Indeed, the oil law adopted by Iraq's shaky government this month is virtually a photocopy of the "Options" plan first conceived in Texas long before Iraq was "liberated."

In other words, the war has gone exactly to plan -- the Houston plan. So forget the naïve cloth-rending about a conflict gone haywire. Exxon-Mobil reported a record $10 billion profit last quarter, the largest of any corporation in history. Mission Accomplished.

Republican, Democrat - or Progressive?

Here in America we essentially have a two party political system although many would like it to be otherwise. There is also the Green Party, the Libertarians, and a few others but these are unfortunately very small groups with little power and influence. The Democratic Party and the Republican Party dominate politics – for the time being.

Without going into how both these major parties have evolved and changed over the past fifty years it is apparent there is a bifurcation taking place within the Democratic Party, a splitting off of members within the party who believe differently than what most refer to as “establishment” Democrats represented by the “Clintonistas” and the Democratic Leadership Council who tend to be centrists and more corporate-serving than populist. This element of the Democratic Party was referred by the Howard Dean campaign as “Republican Lite” as opposed to the more liberal-leaning faction of the party which Howard Dean often called “the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party”, a phrase coined and popularized by the late Senator Paul Wellstone.

While the label “progressive” is not new and has been used by local Democratic factions in the past, this latest movement made up of more liberal-leaning Democrats has morphed a new faction and power block within the national party who call themselves “progressives”. This group consists of primarily young, energetic, compassionate, smart, and technologically hip Democrats, plus a good number of us old coots who have been progressive all our lives and a growing number of disillusioned Republicans.

Hell-bent on returning the Democratic Party to it’s old glory as the party of the people, a party of compassion, common sense, equality and justice for all, this factor is the bane of the DLC and the DC establishment which marches to the orders of big moneyed interests and corporations. The "progressive's" goal is nothing short of taking over the leadership of the party. If this “progressive” movement fails to take back the Democratic Party from the corporate lackeys and the power elite that now controls the Democratic Party, it has the growing potential to become a separate national party replacing the Democratic Party as the only party of power to challenge the Republican Party, a party which no longer represents this nation’s people but instead is wholly owned by corporations and their representatives which have taken over our government, our military and a big part of our courts and our judicial system.

In an effort to explain what a progressive is, Mike Lux of American Family Voices, speaks out as to why he calls himself a “progressive”. Following is the first installment of a series he hopes will define what “progressives” represent.

Gary

I believe a country should do the best that it can to be like a good family. In the family I grew up in, we were taught to look out for each other, to take care of the ones who were sick and give a helping hand to those struggling to find their way. We were told to share our toys, and be gentle and kind with each other. We were told to keep an eye on the neighbor kids and help them if they were in trouble.
We were lucky that we grew up in families like that, way too many folks don't. I was a special beneficiary of it. A little bit of family history you may not know: when I was about 2 months old, I got a toy caught in my throat when I was in the crib. Luckily for me, your grandma walked by before it was too late, but it was in there long enough to cause some brain damage. (Aha, you say, now I know why he is a liberal Democrat! And it might be part of the reason.) As a result of the accident, I developed a mild form of cerebral palsy. It took me a long time to walk and I had braces on my legs for a few years. It meant that I was a terrible athlete, always the slowest and most uncoordinated in my classes in school. But my confidence didn't suffer, and I never felt sorry for myself because of the kind of family we had. Everybody in the family treated me with great kindness and patience and gave me the support I needed to flourish.

Another step that was central to my growing up was that before I can even remember, an African family, came to Lincoln so that the husband could study at Nebraska Wesleyan. When his wife suffered a miscarriage, your grandparents heard about it and about how deeply depressed they were. They reached out to them and became their family away from home. This was in the late '50s/early '60s, and they didn't think twice about taking foreigners, Africans, into their home. A few years later, another African family came as well. I was in middle elementary school by then, and I walked their younger kids to school. More than once, we were confronted by bullies yelling "nigger" and worse. My courage sometimes failed me, but I knew my job was to hold their hands and take their part and comfort them afterwards.

When I was 11, your grandparents took another stranger into our home, a foster child with mental and physical disabilities you now know as one of your uncles. I wasn't sure at first about dealing with his disabilities, and I didn't always do as well as I should have, but I knew my job was to play ball and hang out with him just the way my older siblings did with me. And I grew to love him as my brother, and my relationship with him has been one of the most fulfilling in my life.

Like any good family, our family took care of the weak and the slow and the disabled, instead of making fun of them. We welcomed the stranger and the immigrant. We loved the kids who were "different" just as much as we loved the kids without special needs. We were taught not to make fun of people who were different, but to take special care of them. That's what I want America to be. That's why I rejected a party whose leader in the 1980s (Reagan) made fun of "welfare queens" and whose leader in the 1990s (Gingrich) described Republicans as the party for "normal Americans." Normal Americans? I guess that wouldn't have included me with my cerebral palsy, or others in the family and neighborhood with disabilities. I preferred to be part of a party and movement that embraced those who were different, not as talented or lucky or rich or normal as other people.

I want an America that welcomes and looks out for the people who are different and who are weaker and who are hungry and who are sick and who are immigrants, just like my family did. I prefer the philosophy that we are all in this together rather than one that says you are on your own. That's why I am a progressive. I know both parties and movements have their faults, but I have always preferred to err on the side of compassion and gentleness than to risk the sins of unkindness and intolerance, sins which I feel your party and the conservative movement sometimes fall victim to.

It’s Only What We Do That Has Consequence

John Ruskin (1819-1900), 17th century British art and social critic, had a lot to say about the social ills of his time. Almost all are applicable today.

One of my favorite Ruskin quotes that I often do not follow religiously enough myself is this:” What we think, or what we know, or what we believe is, in the end, of little consequence. The only consequence is what we do.” Amen! Can I get a witness?

If only we all would heed this wise counsel, but most often we stand back and remain indifferent to the problems we face as a nation and as a society. We expect others to do the heavy lifting of assuring national security, freedom, justice and social change. We expect others to stand up and call for equality and fairness while we mumble and complain in the background.

How many Americans are quick to voice their disapproval and condemnation of our nation’s policies and of our elected representatives but don’t go to the polls to cast their vote?

In the 2004 election the turnout was a dismal 64% of registered voters yet was up from 60% in the controversial 2000 election in which, although Al Gore won both the popular vote and the electoral vote, the election was awarded to Bush by the Supreme Court. How many registered Democrats did not vote in 2000? How many eligible voters who favored the election of Gore didn’t even bother to register?

In the 2006 elections the number of those under thirty who went to the polls was the most of any election in 20 years yet only 1 in 4 eligible voters under 30 years voted. Where were the other 75%? Did they not have an opinion? Did they not care?

How many Americans were against the invasion of Iraq but stood silently by and allowed the Bush administration to invade a sovereign nation that did not attack us and was no serious or immediate threat? A nation that had absolutely nothing to do with the terrorist attack of 9/11.

We instead rely on our verbal and financial support for change. Sure, there are a few of us who will sign a petition or donate to this cause or that cause; a little to this campaign or that campaign, but those actions are not nearly enough.

How many of us will get off our ass to go to meetings and rallies and how many will volunteer to knock on doors and write letters? How many will call their representatives to let them know their views on an issue? And how many will speak up when confronted by a verbally and physically threatening bullies who are have learned to use hatred, violence and fear to get their way?

How many just stand back and quietly take satisfaction in the idea that their knowledge and beliefs are on the right side of the issues? I guess they feel God knows where their heart is and that’s what counts.

Tell me this. What if the God you know, the God you worship and trust in is just like you? What if your God conveys wonderful thoughts and words of love and salvation but does not feel any responsibility to DO anything about it? Who will save your ass then?

It’s time we all take active responsibility for our nation, the plight of our fellow men and our world. I reiterate Ruskin:” What we think, or what we know, or what we believe is, in the end, of little consequence. The only consequence is what we do.”