[Peace-discuss] Is Iowa important?

[Laurie at advancenet.net]

This is assessment by Mike Flugennock  is the first realistic assessment
that I have seen on this list or anywhere else that does not buy into the
overly optimistic premises that in the long run Democracy is good and things
will work out for the better in the future because the possibility that
there can be candidates for public office can be trusted, that there are
progressive and radical candidates who are not caught up in the
establishment game supporting basic establishment premises and looking out
for their own self-interests, and that the electoral process is not merely a
circulation of establishment elites or their representatives who are only
willing to make symbolic gestures or minor reforms in unimportant ways to
the peripheral values and assumptions that govern this society.

The only thing to add is that what was said for the Democrats and Democratic
Party is equally true of the Republicans and the Republican Party and
probably most third party candidates who have enough strength and resources
to become a candidate for any office at any level.  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net [mailto:peace-discuss-
> bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of C. G. Estabrook
> Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2007 12:10 AM
> To: Peace Discuss
> Subject: [Peace-discuss] Is Iowa important?
> 
> ["Don't play it again, Sam," by Mike Flugennock in the blog
> <http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org/>. --CGE]
> 
>      SAM SMITH wrote:
> 
>      http://prorev.com/2007/12/most-important-primary-decision-in-
> 40.html
> 
>      >
>      > ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
>      > THE MOST IMPORTANT PRIMARY DECISION IN FORTY YEARS
>      > ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
>      >
>      > If Edwards wins the Iowa caucuses, it will be the most
> significant
>      > progressive primary win since Eugene McCarthy got 41% of the
> vote
>      > in New Hampshire in 1968.
> 
>      Sam, dude. I love ya, bro', but I'm begging you. Knock it off with
> the Senator Goodhair hype. The guy makes a big deal out of being some
> kind of progressive populist, but ... How long was he a nobody in the
> Senate before he got picked to co-pilot the 2004 Swift Boat To Hell?
> Senator Breck Boy was a runner-up in the same Political American Idol
> contest that plucked Senator Magic Negro from out of nowhere.
> 
>      ... with all due respect, man, for the love of all that's good and
> decent, why are you so nuts about John Edwards? He was gung-ho for the
> war when he thought that knowingly believing the lies would keep his
> ass
> in power, and when he got caught out believing the lies, he spewed the
> same old "oh, I was so terribly deceived" line of crap that all the
> other Democrats were spewing when public opinion shifted against the
> war
> -- and then, went right back to believing the lies being told about
> Iran, for _another_ big Bush war drive.
> 
> 
>      > While those who prefer the personal, albeit single digit, purity
>      > of supporting a Kucinich may scoff...
> 
>      While I think Kucinich is a totally useless energy- and
> resource-sucking vortex designed by the Democrats to waste the US
> Left's
> time, still -- I think whatever movement you're in is fucked without
> "purity" of thought and vision. No revolution was won without it. We're
> in the trouble we're in now because the US Left insists on shackling
> itself to a dead institution that's made a business out of compromising
> principles for political expediency until it's got no principles left
> to
> compromise. Don't forget the Pogo quote that you, yourself, proudly
> brandish on the PR blog site.
> 
>      > ...even Ralph Nader agrees that an Edwards
>      > nomination would be a historic shift in the political
> landscape...
> 
>      And that, friends, is pretty goddamn' sad. Sad that the Democratic
> Party nomination of a rich, white, gated-suburb-dwelling,
> ambulance-chaser whose idea of universal health care is to force
> everybody to become customers of for-profit health-insurance
> corporations -- the "Nixon Plan" for corporate-dominated healthcare --
> would be considered a "historic shift in the political landscape". I
> knew things were sucking in this country lately, but I never realized
> that they were sucking so deeply and profoundly that the DP running
> Senator Goodhair for El Presidente would be a "historic shift".
> 
>      Now, on the other hand, a rock-bottom turnout next year -- a
> turnout so small that no party or pundit could claim a "mandate" or to
> claim that "the People have spoken" or that "non-voters are apathetic"
> -- followed by a widespread general strike, followed by a very large,
> spontaneous, belligerent, possibly a bit violent, mass mobilization to
> Capitol Hill (a la the 1970 post-Kent State convergence on DC) to
> demand
> the immediate resignation and exile of _all_ incumbent political
> leadership and a brand-new election -- now, _that'd_ be a historic
> shift
> in the goddamn' political landscape.
> 
>      > Edwards' election would signal the end of another era, namely
> that
>      > of Reagan, the Bushes and Clinton - one that has wrecked social
> democracy,
>      > returned the economy to robber baron standards and caused us to
> be hated
>      > around the world...
> 
>      Oh f'cripesake, Sam. The guy's a goddamn' _Democrat_... you know,
> the party which has been aiding and abetting this misery as far back as
> I can remember. "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss..." --the Who.
> 
>      > Finally we can begin again. This would not be a reflection of
> Edwards'
>      > virtues so much as of the strength of a constituency for change
> that
>      > this country has not seen for a long time. And it would be a
> victory for
>      > all of us.
> 
>      No, it'd be a victory for the Democratic party and
> corporate-cash-strung-out politics.
> 
>      If you ask me, electing a Democratic Administration would just put
> off the inevitable. I'd just as soon see the final collapse of the DP
> and the immediate prospect of four years of "Giuliani Time" shocking
> people off of their couches and into the streets. Look how well
> President Chimp did at unifying the US Left -- until, of course, the
> 2004 "election", in which sizeable numbers of them suddenly fell into a
> deep psychosis in which they believed that electing a party that was
> enabling the current Iraq horror would end it. Many of them continue to
> shuffle around in this debilitated state to this day.
> 
>      I still remember how hard it was trying to organize the US Left
> against the _last_ Democratic Administration...basically, like trying
> to
> push a truck uphill with a rope.
> 
>      All I can say is that I'm glad I've finally realized what a
> useless
> freak show this all is, and that I've quit caring. I can't begin to
> tell
> you how liberating it is to not give a rat's ass who "wins" the
> "election" -- and how especially liberating it is not to care about the
> goddamn' _Democrats_ -- because I know none of that class of people
> will
> bring us any change, nor will trudging off and validating a corrupt,
> collapsing institution with my "vote".
> 
> 	###
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss