portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reposts united states

imperialism & war

Democrat puppet organizations misdirecting anti-war movement

Perhaps no organization is more illustrative of this kind of sell-out, and none more powerful, than MoveOn.org.
March 18, 2005

Scarcely a day goes by that I do not receive an email from a self-proclaimed "progressive" organization soliciting contributions and asking for support and participation. Unfortunately most of these groups are tightly allied with, if not completely controlled by, the Democratic Party leadership and they toe the party line with a fidelity that would make an old Stalinist blush. The groups are legion: MoveOn, ACT, American Family Values, True Majority, etc. They raise many issues, the favorites being Social Security and (surprise!) electing Democrats in 2006. But one issue that is rarely mentioned is the war on Iraq. And although these groups will tell you that the war was a mistake, they are careful to state that now the U.S. cannot withdraw at least not anytime soon. They are for "staying the course," although they do not like to use those words. The giant fissure now separating these groups and their hawkish masters like Howard Dean, H. Clinton and John Kerry from genuine progressives and from a near majority of the American people is the issue of total withdrawal from Iraq, commencing at once.

Perhaps no organization is more illustrative of this kind of sell-out, and none more powerful, than MoveOn.org. Take a look at their web-site today (03/16/2005). You will find nothing about the upcoming actions on the weekend of March 19th, the second anniversary of the War, calling for withdrawal now. (There is an advertisment for an old documentary on Iraq done in 2003, but that is it. That is a long period of silence.) But the site is awash with items on the approved Democratic Party agenda. (It is pretty pathetic when the only possible victory these "progressives" can hope to claim is preservation of a program from the 1930's. Hardly progress.)

But MoveOn is apparently feeling some heat. After an incisive piece by Norman Solomon exposing the pro-war stance of MoveOn, I received an unexpected email today. In it MoveOn calls on its contributors to participate in peace "vigils" sponsored by Sojournors. But Sojournors on its web-site does not call for total and prompt withdrawal from Iraq, only for "lasting peace and security in the region," whatever that means. Sojournors is apparently intent on proving that you don't have to be anti-war to be pro-peace. But that is not the worst of it. MoveOn wants to make sure its stance is not misinterpreted, saying: "The fundamental error of the invasion has left us, as a nation, with no opportunity for a quick fix." "Quick fix" is MoveOn speak for prompt withdrawal.

Even more pathetic were the house parties organized by MoveOn nationwide last March 10. There were many younger people at the one I attended who were brought there by anger over the war in Iraq. And what did they confront an organizing meeting where the word Iraq was mentioned only once over the webcast and that as something MoveOn would eventually address. To kick the meeting off, the webcast was addressed by Senate minority leader, Harry Reid, who is pro-war, anti-choice, anti-environment (siding with the mining interests in his state of Nevada) and the author of a constitutional amendment prohibiting flag burning. Some progressive! And then we were "organized" to call Senators to urge them to oppose Bush's judicial nominations a bit of political tone deafness in light of the fact that the second anniversary of the war comes in the same week when this action is being urged.

MoveOn's fundamental problem is that it is not democratic. There is no effective way for members to communicate with the leadership. The leadership polls its members but only within certain guidelines. When they did their on-line primary which launched the candidacy of pro-war Howard Dean, they did not include Nader or any non-Democrats. In the on-line discussions one's comments get lost in a fog of blog. And I have personally had my comments critical of the Democratic Party pulled from such a Discussion. MoveOn will either democratize or die as progressives understand that it is strictly a partisan organization.

But I fear that other "progressive" organizations are sliding into the same pro-war pit inhabited by MoveOn. For example, The Nation's call for immediate withdrawal, at least in the last half year, has been minimal. It is noteworthy that both the Nation and the paleo-conservative magazine, The American Conservative, have opposed the war. But whereasThe Nation endorsed the pro-war John Kerry, the American Conservative refused to endorse the pro-war George Bush. So which magazine is principled and which merely partisan? (The American Conservative even did an extensive interview with the anti-war Ralph Nader leading up to the election whereas The Nation excoriated him and banished him from its pages.) And now leading up to the March 20th anniversary of the war, there is no clear call in The Nation this week to join the Out Now demonstrations. Hopefully, The Nation will change course, invite Nader's contributions on the war and vigorously promote actions calling for U.S. withdrawal.

And sadly this slide to the Right includes the Greens (my party). At least The Greens are calling for immediate withdrawal and sponsoring the Out Now demonstrations this coming weekend. But they are hardly leveling a blistering critique at the Democratic Party for its pro-war stance which is precisely what a political party like the Greens exists to do. Instead the Greens seem to be stalled in some kind of time warp where all that matters is the vote count in Ohio. Or take Air America Radio. Its anchor program, the Al Franken show, has not called for withdrawal or pointed even once to the complicity of the Democrats in the war. Franken, author of "Lies and the Lying Liars That Tell Them," should know that a very powerful way of lying is by omission. Fortunately some other voices on Air America are not following the party line, calling instead for immediate withdrawal and promoting the Out Now demonstrations. And it is evident from the calls that many are fed up with the Democrats.

Beneath all this an anti-war movement is stirring. One can see it in organizations and coalitions like the one organizing the March in Fayettteville, NC, calling for the troops to be brought home now, in the town meetings in Vermont where 49 of 52 towns voted for withdrawal, in the anti-war movement in Washington, DC, which has been sparked into a fury of progressive activity following its work together with A.N.S.W.E.R on the anti-war demonstration at the Inaugural, and in the demonstrations at military recruitment centers. (To its credit, MichaelMoore.com tirelessly tracks these genuine anti-war efforts.)

So it is on to Fayetteville this weekend. Or if you cannot make Fayatteville then demonstrate locally not at a phony vigil but at a genuine "Out Now" anti-war event. (See www.unitedforpeace.org/) Soon the misleadership must either change or lose its following.

John Walsh can be reached at  bioscimd@yahoo.com

homepage: homepage: http://www.counterpunch.org/

Howard Dean, H. Clinton and John Kerry 20.Mar.2005 02:23


"H." stands for "Hilary".

Why did he single her out for special treatment different from him and him?

Not that I'm excusing 'Move On' or the 'Green Party'.
Or any other organization which ignores it "members".

Disobedient governments.

three questions & a comment 20.Mar.2005 04:55


1) is it possible to be anti-war & support, directly or indirectly, a pro war candidate?

2) did any prominent indys/progressive organizations,publications, individuals completely reject the ABB strategy, other than Nader, Counterpunch?

"(To its credit, MichaelMoore.com tirelessly tracks these genuine anti-war efforts.)"

3) what about michael moore himself? He may be anti-war, but he campaigned many hours in 04 for johnnie "i'm talking about winning in iraq" kerry.

very few emerged from the anti-war movement & the 04 campaign with their credibility intact

Oh That Dean! 20.Mar.2005 11:00


It was pretty sickening watching Howard Dean grovel before AIPAC last week. In his shameless quest for dollars, he publicly refuted his earlier statements about 'evenhandedness for Palestinians', much to the delight of the all-powerful Israeli Lobby. Do you really think the Democrats are going to take a position on Iraq that is at fundamental odds with the goals and ideals of it's biggest financial contributor? It's rapidly becoming the U.S. of Israel around here. We are their pawns in many ways. Killing their enemies for them and helping them make new ones. Democrats have a LOT of bloodstained laundry to wash.

I'm sorry, but I'm UNIMPRESSED 20.Mar.2005 12:00

Progressive Democrat

So I read this story and I go to the Move On site and scroll down to something about Iraq. Here's what I find --

<<As American opponents of the war and occupation in Iraq, we are cognizant that some 5,500 US soldiers, according to Pentagon figures, have decided to refuse combat for reasons of conscience, and are in grave danger of persecution by the Bush Administration for their bravery. Although they are part of the U.S. "voluntary army", their choices were determined in large part by economic forces and the aggressive and misleading recruiting drives of the Pentagon which even penetrate our high schools. Since signing up, however, they have realized the true nature of the war, and refuse to kill or die for a mistake. We are committed to defending of their choice to follow their consciences instead of the dictates of the State.

<<These young men and women will live in peril - unless a sanctuary is established in Canada or other countries known for their anti-war sentiment and independence. We respectfully appeal to the people of Canada and their elected officials to fashion a policy of refugee sanctuary for these Americans facing threats and prosecution. We hope that the Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board grants protection to Jeremy Hinzman in the case currently before its panel, but also hope to engage our Canadian friends in a collaboration that leads to sanctuary.>>

So then I turn to Counter Punch, I scroll down and find "March 19" BUT you can't click on it, although you CAN click on the next item, which is the GREAT Alexander Cockburn turning the Democrats' successful defeat of the Republican attempt to deconstruct Social Security into another rant against the Democrats. That's the ONLY story he can find in the Social Security recent battle over Social Security. (Oh, except that he concludes that Social Security is now going to remain "unfixed" due to Democrats' posturing "around the old New Deal" -- EXACTLY how Republican pundits talk!) And that's Cockburn's BIG STORY on March 20 (today), the day after M19! Where's the campaign from Counter Punch in support of M19?

What IS Counter Punch anyway? Check it out -- it's Alexander Cockkburn and Jeffrey St. Clair -- two effete intellectuals, if there ever was such a thing. (And, I'm sorry, but there was and there is!)

Yes, most (but not all) Democrats are of the opinion that it isn't feasible to withdraw from Iraq immediately, but that doesn't EVEN warrant this accusation that the Democratic Party has somehow infiltrated Move On and is controlling Move On or any other organization. That idea is ridiculous. The Democrats are too divided, and the Democratic National Committee is too exhausted from battling the Republican behemoth, to manage anything like that. If anything, Move On might be infiltrating and trying to control the Democratic Party. Who really cares?

Jesse Jackson, Jr., a Democratic member of congress, and a member of the House Progressive Caucus, spent his 21st birthday in jail for protesting in Washington, D.C. Where did Alexander Cockburn spend his 21st birthday?

So, FINE, I'm a Kucinich supporter, so I check out the Kucinich web-site. I scroll down to Dennis' first main issue, ("Universal Health Care") to the second main issue --

<<2. International Cooperation: US out of Iraq, UN in>>

Then I click on "Iraq" and I scroll through that to the bottom where I click on "TEN POINT PLAN TO BRING OUR TROOPS HOME NOW"

Dennis Kucinich: "Other Democrats join the Bush Administration in explaining that 'We can't cut and run.' I say we can't continue the damage we are causing and cannot begin repairing it until we withdraw our occupying army."

I also find a link there (Kucinich on withdrawal from Iraq) to the "Bring Them Home Now" organization supported by Veterans for Peace --


Why no link at Counter Punch? Who does Counter Punch support, other than Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair? Why did Counter Punch take a valid story-line about how Move On wasn't supporting M19 demonstrations and turn it into an unsupported op-ed thing about the entire Democratic Party -- cynically undermining opposition to the attempt to deconstruct Social Security? Was that to drain your energy against the war by turning it into rage against "the Democrats" -- so that you could justify staying home on M19? That way, you could sit at home on M19 and still feel superior to the Democrats who were there, marching with everybody else, even with people who hate the Democratic Party! How has Counter Punch supported the M19 demonstrations?

Oh, I remember now, all you get from Counter Punch is that the Democrats are very bad people. That's what ALL of Counter Punch EVER has to say! Gee, I really never imagined that there might be some bad people in the Democratic Party -- I thought that all the bad people were Republicans. So, now, thanks to the brilliant mind of Alexander Cockburn, I now understand that ALL the people that jump on the poor old Democratic Party -- they must be really good people?

I'm sorry, but I have to wonder why or how Counter Punch finds their party line (the "anti-Democrat Party") so profitable? Maybe the enemy of their enemy is their friend?

As A Fierce Supporter of Kucinich... 20.Mar.2005 13:52

E. Combatant

...my single most lasting memory of him will be his endorsement of Fascist Loving Fucktard, John Kerry. Had he simply remained silent regarding Kerry, I could have overlooked it. His open endorsement of a man who stands clearly against every aspect of Kucinich's 'vision' (Kerry), was devistating and painfull to me. I could not imagine offering further support to Dennis, without an open admission by him that his endorsement of Kerry was a horrible mistake.


Progressive Democrat

Look, I'm not saying to "FIERCE SUPPORTER" to ante up again for Kucinich for President. That's obviously up to the person. If I were "FIERCE SUPPORTER," I'd send Dennis a e-mail and express myself.

Right now, today, after the so-called election last year, at the Kucinich web site you'll see MAJOR ATTENTION ON THE FACT THAT THE VOTE WAS RIGGED IN A BIG WAY BY DIEBOLD VOTING MACHINES! And in many other criminal ways, as well. Do you, "FIERCE SUPPORTER", believe that the Diebold machines are just business as usual? -- well, that's what CounterPunch will tell you!


On November 11, 2004, Cockburn wrote an article called "NOW FOR THE REALLY BAD NEWS" Here's what the BRILLIANT INTELLECTUAL ALEXANDER COCKBURN SAYS --

<<Dreadful news -- the worst. All the 9/11 nuts have relocated to Stolen Election. My inbox is awash. People who have spent the last three years sending me screeds establishing to their own satisfaction that George Bush personally ordered the attacks on the Trade Towers and that Dick Cheney vectored the planes in are now pummeling me with data on the time people spent online waiting to vote in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, and how the Diebold machines are all jimmied.

<<As usual, the nuts think that conspiracies of inconceivable complexity worked at 100 percent efficiency, that Murphy's Law was once again in suspense, and that 10,000 co-conspirators are all going to keep their mouths shut.

<<Do I think the election was stolen? No more than usual.>>

Above taken from --
 link to www.freepress.org]

So, CounterPunch is supposed to be the cutting edge of the battle against fascism. And then they undercut our efforts to stop the Diebold no-paper-trail hi-jacking of whatever democracy we have ever had in this country?


On January 19 of this year, Cockburn wrote "Bush was reelected with a solid majority."

 link to www.freepress.org]

HORSE SHIT! Bush was reelected by criminal fraud.

And CounterPunch is full of crap!

(I can show you more from CounterPunch if you don't believe me.)

The trouble with CounterPunch is they are a bunch of intellectuals who really do not like and do not even understand the American people.

OBVIOUSLY, no political party is going to do anything for us that we can't do it on our own.

So, let's do it! But CounterPoint and their pitiful mantra of "Fuckin' Democrats -- it's all THEIR fault" -- that ain't gonna do a damn thing! It's just a waste of good cyberspace here at Portland IndyMedia.

Cockburn's official bio says: "Educated in Ireland, England and Scotland, Cockburn graduated with honors from Oxford University in 1963. He now lives in Northern California and travels extensively."

The Free Press, which carries all his columns, says about him: "Alexander Cockburn is coeditor with Jeffrey St. Clair of the muckraking newsletter CounterPunch."

What I say is that CounterPunch isn't much of a NEWS letter at all, unless you think that it is news that Democrats are neither saints nor saviors.

I hesitate to allege conspiracy, but I still have to wonder about CounterPunch: is the enemy of their enemy their friend?


Thank you very much, mister brilliant radical intellectual Cockburn -- yes, thank you very much, Alexander Cockburn and FUCK YOU ! !

O.K., CounterPunch is Full of Crap, and the Democrats will Save Us...Got It 20.Mar.2005 21:42

E. Combatant

Let's see. People right here on Portland IMC have been pointing out the e-vote problems, as well as other forms of election fraud for years. It was right here in Portland where I witnessed a local resident ask Kucinich about his opinion of the e-voting issue. He seemed unfamiliar with the issue at the time.

Other 'Progressive Democrats' were bombarded with information which questioned the credibility of e-voting, and of rampant abuses within our voting system, but they couldn't be bothered. They were busy hijacking the pro-human anti-empire movement, so that they could have their own corporate cock-sucking multi-war criminal asswipe LOOSE the sElection to his Skull 'n Bones buddy, known as the demented Chimp.

Now you come here ready to swallow your tounge, screeching that SOMETHING MUST BE DONE! THE DEMOCRATS ARE OUR ONLY HOPE!! Look here, gullible Democrat apologist. Your party is the other festering abomination within our now completely illegitimate psycopathic criminal empire. Until you have the wherewithall to come to terms with that undeniable fact, I can't imagine why anyone would take you seriously.

BTW- Here's a hint, Einstein: The first line is the title of the comment. The author's name is underneath. (Goddamn! We have to explain EVERYTHING to you guys.)

Question for "Progressive Democrat" 20.Mar.2005 22:15


if everything you say is true, and actionable, regarding fraudulent election [verbatim quote from 'Progressive Democrat': "reelected by criminal fraud"] of Bu$h -

why haven't the opponents - Kerry/Edwards ticket - done anything about it?

CRAM IT UP YOURS, E. Combatant ! ! 21.Mar.2005 00:32

Progressive Democrat


Not EVEN, you lying Cockburn sucker!

Look here, you gullible CounterPunch apologist, your yay-hoo bud Cockburn is trying to destroy the credibility of the movement to stop vote fraud! Until you come to terms with that undeniable fact (which I have documented!) I can't imagine why anyone would take you seriously.

You want to know the truth? There is no party that can do for us that we can't do it on our own. And we don't need a stuck-up Oxford-educated asshole liar like Cockburn to tell us what we can and can't do!

And why do you defend him? What he represents is the biggest obstacle to doing something about the vote fraud -- public indifference!

ANSWER TO QUESTION 21.Mar.2005 00:41

Progressive Democrat

What has Kerry-Edwards 2004 done about the criminal fraud? Answer:

(1) the judiciary has been appointed for years now by mostly Republican presidents -- and even when Clinton was president, the Republican congresses were able to block most of his appointments -- therefore, Kerry-Edwards had not ability to bring criminal charges anymore than you or myself could. Now, if Kerry had become president, we could have a different U.S. Attorney General than Ashcroft or (torture advocate) Salazar.

(2) That leaves open the possibility of hoping that there is still enough life left in the federal judiciary to bring a civil suit against Ohio's secretary of state, the Republican piece-of-shit Kenneth Blackwell AND the elections commission. Guess what? That's what is happening! Kerry-Edwards 2004 IS a co-plaintiff with Cobb (Green Party) and with Badnarik (Libertarian).

There's nothing more important going on in this country than the movement to expose and stop vote fraud.

Why does Cockburn discount the compelling evidence that the Ohio vote was hi-jacked? AND Florida AND New Mexico. Why doesn't he talk about that evidence? Instead, he says, and I quote --

"All the 9/11 nuts have relocated to Stolen Election. . . . People who have spent the last three years sending me screeds establishing to their own satisfaction that George Bush personally ordered the attacks on the Trade Towers and that Dick Cheney vectored the planes in are now pummeling me with data on the time people spent online waiting to vote in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, and how the Diebold machines are all jimmied."

So what is he saying -- that Cheney did not order Flight 93 shot down by the USAF? That the Diebold machines are not rigged? What CRAP! Please, people, give it up! I'm sorry for you if I'm destroying some hero of yours, but Cockburn is a piece-of-shit snotty-nosed working part of the corporate mind-control mechanism! You have doubts about Dennis Kucinich -- but not about Cockburn???

poverty of this dialogue 21.Mar.2005 10:36

protest society

"For the agora, the general community, has gone, along with communities restricted to intermediary bodies or to independent institutions, to salons or cafes, or to workers in a single company. There is no place left where people can discuss the realities which concern them, because they can never lastingly free themselves from the crushing presence of media discourse and of the various forces organized to relay it. "

and politics also speak the dominant dialogue,with arguing points layed out before you for your distraction. Informational poverty (and the desire to accept the dispensers of half-truths) is a symptom of the poverty of any idea for reform in a government based on the APPEARANCE of a liberty based constitution. Fact is you will be sold out by all leaders intellectual and otherwise, precisely because you are following them and expect anything from them. Isn't it obvious?

Counterpunch doesn't publish new material on Sundays 21.Mar.2005 14:47

CP Reader

so there wouldn't have been articles about Saturday's events there for that reason alone. Today, Monday, the first day back publishing after the weekend off, CP features at least 3 articles about the M19 events, including a really good one about the Fayetteville protests, which were important, historical, and definitely ignored in the mainstream media.

this is not addressing the frequent anti-Democratic Party slant of many of CP's writers. But let's keep our facts straight about why they didn't publish anything about M19 on Sunday.


Progressive Democrat 21.Mar.2005 20:01

George Bender

I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish.

It's not likely that you'll find much support for the Democrats among the few radicals here who still care about electoral politics. But why bother? According to the vote totals from the last election, the radical left now numbers a fraction of one percent of the voters. Even if we all agreed to support Democrat candidates, which we won't, they wouldn't win.

The majority of the American left has already come over to your side, I'm sorry to say, because they're so afraid of the Republicans. So you already have those votes, even though you don't deserve them. And it still wasn't enough. (I don't believe fraud tipped the balance. That's just an excuse for bad politics. It's denial.)

To win, you're going to have to persuade a lot of nonvoters to start voting again, and vote for your candidate. Which probably in turn means persuading your party to nominate a candidate who would actually excite people and give them a reason to vote. That is your task. I don't believe it can be done, but if you do, then tell us what the plan is. One thing I can tell you is that it would take massive organization on a national scale. You've got to find a way to do it better than the Dean campaign. If I were you I would start now.

Wake up dude! 21.Mar.2005 22:29


Cockburn is really disappointing in his statements, but he is only one voice on Counterpunch. There are many independent writers and quite a few good articles.

As for your defense of Kerry and saying it is the fault of republican judges, that is complete bullshit and shows that your in a state of denial. Kerry did everything he could to help Bush. I am not sure if they were working together, or just are controled by the same interests so it appears they were working together. Kerry could not have done a better job of helping Bush than he did. Kerry is one of the bad guys and he still has you hanging on a hook cause you are so desparate to believe.

NO "answer", "Progressive Democrat" 21.Mar.2005 22:30


the question was not:

"What has Kerry-Edwards 2004 done about the criminal fraud?"

(and in any case you answered your own fabricated straw-question, with non-answers such as "if Kerry had become president, we could have a different U.S. Attorney General than Ashcroft" Kerry is NOT the president, and HAS NOT done anything about mass vote fraud surrounding the Nov. 2004 election. John Kerry also approved HAVA (Help America Vote Act) in Congress which has implemented Diebold electronic machines on a wide scale.)

the question - which you did not answer - was:

what has Kerry/Edwards done about what YOU, "Progressive Democrat" describe as an election "RIGGED IN A BIG WAY BY DIEBOLD VOTING MACHINES! And in many other criminal ways, as well" . . .

Boy, it sure sounds like Kerry/Edwards '04 jumped RIGHT ONTO THAT on November 3rd (and boy, were they ever eager to do so) -


"bring a civil suit against Ohio's secretary of state" -

they 'co-signed' onto an initiative _____begun_____ by non-corporate Green Party candidate Cobb, which does not address electronic and other forms of vote fraud in Florida and other key states (QUOTE FROM "Progressive Democrat": "AND Florida AND New Mexico . . . ").

when Cobb began the initiative (his own entire Green Party presidential campaign was primarily being run on the premise of pointing out fraud and inconsistency in the US electoral process, not on any farfetched prospect of his own eventual "win") RIGHT AFTER Nov. 2nd 2004, the Democrats REFUSED TO EVEN ACKNOWLEDGE him, his campaign, or ANY TYPE of nationwide electoral anomalies. Kerry/Edwards simply conceded defeat within 72 hours and told All Their Supporters To Accept It.

In any case, it's being actioned well after GWB's inauguration, and if any of these schemes were to achieve results should have been implemented on November 3rd (Before Which The Democratic Party Had Plenty of Pre-Election Information From Activist Groups Working On Electronic Vote Fraud, And Supposedly Had Their Own MultiMillion Dollar Teams of Lawyers Ready To "Pounce" And Challenge Nationwide Electoral Discrepancies, WHICH THEY WAITED FOR INDEPENDENT NON-DEMOCRAT/CORPORATE CANDIDATE DAVID COBB to Initiate And Then "Sign Themselves Onto" _____AFTER_____ Bush's Inauguration).

Okay, I'll say it one more time 22.Mar.2005 16:15

Progressive Democrat

Alright, CounterPunch isn't Cockburn ONLY -- although his name is prominently displayed at the web site so that anyone would tend to think that!

I have investigated Cockburn at some length -- and, as the famous French phrase goes -- "J'accuse!" I accuse him of being a stuck-up snobbish elitist working with the corporatist mind-control machine to deter the American people from uniting against fascism. I have documented my case. If you people don't like that -- why haven't you set forth any evidence to the contrary?

You're not sure what I'm trying to accomplish? Here it is -- I am trying to wake up the sleeping sheeple and Democrats, in Congress and on the streets and at work, as to the crisis in this country. The war with fascism. The necessity of a united front to fight fascism!

As for your analysis about what if these people over here had voted for that, while those people over there had voted for this -- I am not sure what you are trying to accomplish! As for being afraid of the Republicans -- I want the people to fear fascism and to fight it, under whatever name it appears. (Including if it appears under the name of "anti-Democrat"!)

I realize that you don't believe that my task can be accomplished. Okay, tell me again about your task and how that will be accomplished.

Please check out my comments at


TO JASON -- There are two reasons why Kerry lost -- (1) the election was rigged, particularly in Florida and Ohio. (2) The SwiftBoat campaign of lies about Kerry's military service record and the inability/refusal of corporate media to report on Bush's disgraceful service record. I do not understand your accusation that "Kerry still has you hanging on a hook cause you are so desparate to believe." Where do you get that? I think you just like to throw shit! Goodbye, shit-thrower. I'll just walk away now and let you try to clean up.

TO the "quizmaster" -- Yes, of course, Kerry fucked up on November 3! And Cobb rose to the occasion, as did Badnarik for the Libertarians! Everybody knows that! But take a second look at this thing: should the challenge to established vote tampering by Diebold and others be something of, or primarily by, the Democratic Party. Isn't it potentially a much stronger movement as a partnership of Democrats, Greens, Libertarians -- and, dare I suggest? even QUIZMASTERS ?? GET WITH IT, QUIZMASTER! SUPPORT THE CAMPAIGN TO STOP VOTE FRAUD IN AMERICA! WHO IS JOHN KERRY ANYWAY? HE'S A SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS? DO YOU LIVE IN MASSACHUSETTS? JOIN THE WAR AGAINST FASCISM! FORGET PETTY PARTISAN WRANGLING!

Response to "Progressive Democrat" 22.Mar.2005 18:49

E. Combatant

I accuse (you) of being a stuck-up snobbish elitist working with the corporatist mind-control machine to deter the American people from uniting against fascism. (You)have documented my case.

re: reasons why Kerry lost 22.Mar.2005 19:21

E. Combatant

You forgot to mention that Kerry is a festering maggot, deeply embedded in the anus of the sinking corporate empire. How about the fact that he is a grievous disgrace and a complete cowardly failure to the basic principles that this country claims to stand for? Weren't those factors in his defeat?

"Progressive Democrat" Misses Boat, Again. 22.Mar.2005 19:49


"Yes, of course, Kerry fucked up on November 3!"

--uuuhhh, what does this mean? are you implying that he actually LOST the election? but of course you don't honestly CONCEDE that, do you "Progressive Democrat"? yet more obfuscation and inconsistency . . .

"And Cobb rose to the occasion, as did Badnarik for the Libertarians! Everybody knows that!"

--what "occasion" are you referring to? the very act of Third-NonCorporate-Party candidates having the unmitigated gall to actually RUN for the office of President of the United States? After DNC spent *hundreds of thousands* of dollars on corporate lawyers and legal obstructions/impediments to Nader/Camejo's very *access* onto nationwide state ballots? meh . . .

Already mentioned in my previous comment, above: Cobb's own entire Green Party presidential campaign was - as explicity stated from the outset - being run on the main premise of pointing out fraud and inconsistency in the US electoral (and corporate media campaign coverage) process, not on any farfetched prospect of his own eventual "win" / "victory" / entry into the White House.

"But take a second look at this thing: should the challenge to established vote tampering by Diebold and others be something of, or primarily by, the Democratic Party. Isn't it potentially a much stronger movement as a partnership of Democrats, Greens, Libertarians -- and, dare I suggest? even QUIZMASTERS ?? GET WITH IT, QUIZMASTER! SUPPORT THE CAMPAIGN TO STOP VOTE FRAUD IN AMERICA! WHO IS JOHN KERRY ANYWAY? HE'S A SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS? DO YOU LIVE IN MASSACHUSETTS? JOIN THE WAR AGAINST FASCISM! FORGET PETTY PARTISAN WRANGLING!"

--ok, now you're foaming incoherently at the mouth. The time to "join the war against fascism" was sometime back in Fall 2003, when Bev Harris' investigative research on Diebold electronic voting (search this web site for a complete chronological documentation) - and the Walden O'Dell/Ohio Republican connection - had already broken wide open. I have - personally - been active on this and related voting issues since mid-2003 via Bev's own blackboxvoting and other nonpartisan associations. She, and many others, TRIED VALIANTLY to get the Democrats to pay attention and become proactive on the issue, esp. regarding elite Republican ownership of Diebold, ES & S, etc. But after the Democratic Party had all-but-nominated Yale Skull & Bones/pro-Help-America-Vote-Act Kerry by Feb. 2004, who would bother to listen?

"Partnership" of "Democrats, Greens, Libertarians" ???!?? When the Democrats actively and openly quash, intimidate, marginalize and threaten Third-Party candidates during the actual campaign, and then turn around after their "opponent" has been successfully inaugurated, and farcically "team up" with the Rabble-Rousers-Who-Formerly-Needed-To-Be-Gagged-At-All-(Legal)-Costs?

--if you truly, honestly believe in a 'coalition' of "Democrats, Greens, Libertarians [fill in blank _____________]", mr. "Progressive Democrat", then let it begin with you and your active persuasion, knob-polishing and cajoling of your very own DNC to at least give a political convention party platform to the likes of Dennis Kucinich - even if it's obvious from presidential campaign outset that they'll never actually nominate him. (and of course, getting the Corporate Media to "allow" Third Party viewpoints onto the televised debates . . . good luck there)


--Skull & Bones, just like his "opponent".

(whatever happened to Howard Dean after Feb. 2004, anyway . . . ?)

Progressive Democrat 22.Mar.2005 21:59

George Bender

I'm sorry you didn't understand what I wrote. I don't know how to make it any clearer. If you want radicals to support a Democratic candidate in the next presidential election you're going to have to get your party to nominate a progressive. Is that clear enough?

Fighting fascism is too nebulous a goal for me to get behind, and it's not my main concern. My goal is to do something to help poor people in their political battle against the middle and upper classes. In this country, if you have no money you have no rights. My main political concerns are economic: jobs, a living wage, universal health care, the right to form a union (no, we don't have it), etc.

I would also like to set up a mass progressive electoral force outside the Democratic party. I have no plan to do this because the last election convinced me it can't be done, at least not now. I've pretty much abandoned state and federal politics as hopeless. I'll see how things look in 2008.

Your charge against Cockburn is absurd. I can't take it seriously enough to respond. You're swinging wild. With their scorched earth assault on the Nader campaign, the Democrats gave radicals plenty of reason to hate them forever. United front? I don't think so. What did you expect?

Kerry lost because he gave people no good reason to vote for him except fear of Bush. That's not good enough.

TO George Bender 22.Mar.2005 23:03


I would like to see radicals voting for progressive Democrats running for Congress, or any other office, in 2006. The next presidential election is 2008.

IMHO, there is no difference between fighting fascism and helping poor people in their political battle against the middle and upper classes. What do you think fascism is all about? Maybe I should have used Mussolini's definition of fascism -- "corporatism".

I too would like to see a mass progressive electoral force -- for me, it could be outside OR inside the Democratic Party. If that thing could appear tomorrow, or anytime soon, I couldn't care less if it was called "Democrat" or "Communist" ! !

Fuck Cockburn. I just hate to see the ass-hole get credit for being such a great intellect -- even making a living at it -- when I know AND YOU KNOW that he's no more brilliant or a better writer than you are, George Bender!

What is this fixation on Kerry? He's the junior Senator from Massachusetts, right? Do you live in Massachusetts? Do you have any idea of how things might look to you if you did live in Massachusetts? That whole Kerry mind-set of yours shows me that you are still controlled by mainstream media. Think for yourself!

This is as far as I go ... 22.Mar.2005 23:12


... with you, Quizmaster. No more of your 20 question bullshit.

You quote me like this: "Yes, of course, Kerry fucked up on November 3!" Then you ask " --uuuhhh, what does this mean? are you implying that he actually LOST the election?"

Well, duuuuhh, since I said that he "fucked up" that might mean to a person whose brain is still alive that Kerry should NOT have conceded on Nov. 3, because he DID get more votes in Ohio than Bush!

Sorry that thinking is such a challenge to you, but I'm going to have to let you go now without further tutoring. Recommend a remedial program to you at your local community college.

Not even far enough 22.Mar.2005 23:59


"Well, duuuuhh, since I said that he "fucked up" that might mean to a person whose brain is still alive that Kerry should NOT have conceded on Nov. 3, because he DID get more votes in Ohio than Bush!"

--so why DID Kerry/Edwards concede? Because it was "the right thing to do"? Because they "just didn't care" about disenfranchised lower-income and African-American voters in Florida and Ohio? Because the DLC "knows nothing whatsoever" about Republican ownership of voting machine manufacturing companies Diebold and ES & S? Because they "couldn't remember" what Al Gore did about Florida Nov. 2000? Duuhhhhh . . . does it ever cross your mind that if KERRY/EDWARDS HAD INTENDED TO WIN, THEY WOULD AND COULD HAVE?? or is it all just a big "Republican conspiracy"?

Cockburn 23.Mar.2005 00:44

George Bender

Yes, he is more brilliant and a better writer than I am. Also he has a better memory, perhaps in part because he has spent his life following politics, whereas I dropped out for long periods of time, intent on survival. I've had to read books on the Clinton era to relearn some of what happened during those eight depressing years. Cockburn is better than you too, mainly because he's more coherent.

Also I like Cockburn because he says what I feel. You don't like him because he constantly criticizes Democrats. But you should have the same beef with me and with the rest of the radical left. We're going to keep doing it. I would think by now you would know why.

I write about Kerry because he's the most recent failure of the Democratic party, and because he is typical of the candidates Democrats choose for president. How could you pick a warmonger? Kerry is the leading symptom of the Democratic disease. But your party has the same problem at the congressional and state levels. I used to vote for Democrats but over the last few years I quit. You're not offering people like me anything. In many ways, especially at the state level, you have been making war on us.

Last words 23.Mar.2005 23:39


You guys are determined, I'll give you that.

I don't suppose anyone will ever read this final (?) comment of mine, because --


DAMN ! !