It takes a Party, it takes a Movement

Watching Leadership take a Leadership Role; House Sit ins and William J Barber

Bernie Sanders obliquely called us Democrats "political cowards" in his latest broadside at the party. He wrote this even as he ran from the Senate End of the capital to the House End to try to steal some thunder from John Lewis and his Civil Disobedience on the House Floor. John Lewis, one of the courageous democrats that he and his surrogates were accusing of "political cowardice" only hours before, had the moral courage to actually work with others and stage a sit in. What Lewis is doing is a little more consequential than a filibuster. The term for it is Civil Disobedience. There are consequences for Civil Disobedience beyond the need to eat or use the Potty. As my hero Doctor William J. Barber explains, talking about the Moral Monday's Movement:

[Rule #3] "A moral movement draws power not from its ability to overwhelm opposition but from its willingness to suffer. The Second Reconstruction brought large-scale nonviolent direct action to America through the Montgomery bus boycott. A Third Reconstruction depends upon escalating noncooperation in order to demonstrate our capacity to sacrifice for a better future." [Third Reconstruction]

The Trouble with Bernie Sanders -- Final

Bernie Sanders writes an "apologia" for his campaign in today's Washington Post. It opens with this statement:

"As we head toward the Democratic National Convention, I often hear the question, “What does Bernie want?” Wrong question. The right question is what the 12 million Americans who voted for a political revolution want."

That has been the problem. Bernie still has not one idea of the impact of his own personality, foibles, paranoia and unwillingness to work with others. It is not what the 12 million people who voted for him want. He didn't lead a "political revolution." That is a grandiose statement. He led a political campaign. And his efforts to cast his quest for the Presidency as a "revolution" are part of the problem. He told people what he wanted. They liked what he said. They followed him. He didn't follow them. This is hubris, plain and simple. There is a sense of "we" versus "you" not "we" are part of a greater "us." He acts like he only represents the 12 million people who voted for him and not the needs and aspirations of the whole party and country. And it's a minority not democracy the way he formulates it.

He still puts the campaign in terms that absolve himself of responsibility for a firm stand or mistakes and cast the fight as "me"/"us" versus them. With the "them" including most of us Democrats.

Respecting the power of people to help themselves

Chelsea's Heroic Efforts in Haiti

Sadly when I hear "journalist" my mind often thinks "hack" nowadays. There are a few Journalists who still have my respect. But not as many as too many of the ones I once relied on for good reporting have proven recently to be either sloppy, naive, dense or to have editors determined to use headlines to say the opposite of what the material they are reporting says. It's amazing. A good example of this sloppy click bait journalism was a politico article from September last year, titled: "The Clintons’ Haiti Screw-Up, As Told By Hillary’s Emails, The family still doesn't know how to wield its own power." I read this story and the text within it had almost no relationship to the headline! The Author, Jonathan Katz, is trying to make Chelsea Clinton's memo into part of a narrative about corruption and power that was just not there. If you ask me those efforts were heroic.

The Heart

When the heart is broken once,

it skips a beat.

When the heart is broken twice,

it thumps and thumps and murmurs in disgust.

But it continues doing what it must.

 

It takes a lot of abuse to break that heart on down.

Mostly it continues ticking til they put us in the ground.

Good friends and lovers die.

Or, worse, leave us, seemingly alone and in tears.

But the heart is still there, that constant old friend.

Telling us "I'm alive" and I'll beat my way again.

 

Those who have a lot of heart.

Have a lot of heart to give.

And the more our heart works for us;

the more it bleeds like a sieve

The more we can give joy to others,

even when we grieve.

 

Chris Holte 6/19/2016

A Reckless and stupid Trumpster and a Feckless media

The Trumpster accused Obama of not being willing to talk about "Islamic Extremism" in language that made Darth Cheney and Padowan George W. Bush's tirades seem almost intelligent and gentle. Almost accusing Obama of Treason for not using the term! The Moron said it in multiple speeches and even a tweet!

"Is President Obama going to finally mention the words radical Islamic terrorism? If he doesn't he should immediately resign in disgrace! Tweet: 1:58 PM - 12 Jun 2016" see [http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/06/trump-obama-immediately-resign-disgrace-not-mentioning-radical-islam-pulse-attack/]

Obama explains why The Trumpster is reckless and the Feckless media calls his comments a Tirade!

Greg Palast and the Busters kick the facts in the teeth

I'm writing this because whenever two groups have such diametrically opposed views of what actually happened in a situation, I worry that my view might be the deluded one. Well deluded or not, my Buster friends are going to argue I'm the deluded one. So I'm following up my article on Bernie's 'Bernie corollary to Hanlon's Razor' with more evidence that that is what is going on. I was expecting things to calm down, that Bernie would admit defeat and support the common candidate. But instead I'm seeing more evidence that folks see "fraud" and "rigging" in the election rather than the reality. Some folks like "The Justice Gazette" are so Nutzoid it's obvious. [Just read this [Justice Gazette] carefully and look up who NGP Van is and remember that what they are saying is based on anecdotes contradicted by other witnesses]. Sometimes you can sense the unhinged schizophrenia simply in the font someone uses. But people I otherwise trust are playing the same game!

But normally Greg Palast is my main man! Not this time!

Principles of Federalism

Federated principles are concerned with uniting people and getting them to work together in solidarity. Federal Government is general government that spans multiple centers of population and subdivisions and links people who might otherwise be at war with one another. Thus all the principles of Federal Government derive from two basic concepts: "E Pluribus Unum" -- out of many one and the notion that we are stronger when we work together; "United We Stand, Divided We Fall." The notion of "Union" as better than disunion is central to all of them. For a Federation to work it has to recognize the rights and responsibilities of both central authorities and local authorities, subsidiarity and replication of republican forms to the local level.