Print
Email Friend
Add to Favorites
del.icio.us
Digg It!
Slashdot It!
Michael Moore, regardless of subject (but let's take managed health care and Sicko for example) pushes back on American fascist politics. Even if there were no reasons other then his current willingness to push back on main stream media and his documentary work being examples of powerful media protest, I would say he is a national treasure and we need all the examples of single individuals committed to personal political responsibility --for the good of working people-- that we can get!
One thing that Moore's work should not be used to inspire is an attempt to redirect American protest into a third political party.
At the launch of Sicko, the Green party sent Mike this letter. The letter's lead point (emphasis mine) “ ...we're not going to get a national health plan as long as the political landscape remains limited to two parties addicted to corporate contributions,” is spot on-- except for the qualifier “...limited to two parties.” Creating third-party competition as a push-back mechanism to stop corporate influence on politicians --a very compelling argument –presumes political parties and not the individual people of which parties are comprised control lawmakers in this country. That premise is wrong for a strong democracy.
Think about this: Want to stop a massive pro-business immigration bill that even the current imperial president desperately wants? You don't need a political party. ACCEPT YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTEST and just do it!
That's what right-wing radio “hawk” show hosts—all three of them and their impersonators --recently did on the issue of immigration reform. Their ten-to-one market dominance over all other voices makes them radio's “main stream” media and gives them access to millions of listeners. Providing awareness of an immigration policy (spun as it was) and which they did not like-- combined with a leadership-style call to action to destroy that policy -- led angry security-panicked listeners to flood state and federal politicians' offices with threats of future election retaliation should that representative be associated with passage of the bill. 51% of Americans polled on support for the bill said they didn't have enough information to form an opinion, yet the 16% who were against it created protest enough for a crushing defeat.
There was no time to create the mechanism of a third party challenge, nor was there a need. Instead, the irresistible force of citizen anger met the immovable object of bad legislation and like it not, The People Prevailed. On issues of health care, the imperial presidency and so much more, I believe that you can too. The question is, what are you really willing to do?
The Protest Movie Sicko and Mo(o)re!
|
Posted By: CLB Posted on: Jul. 14, 2007 at 6:21 PM  153 Comments
|
4.2 / 5
Based on 8 ratings.
|
Anonymous commenting has been disabled, you must login to comment on articles.
Signup for an accountComments:
|
Cancelled Account
Jul. 16, 2007 at 09:11:48 PM
|
| This user has cancelled their account with Voice of North America. | |
|
Jul. 16, 2007 at 09:21:46 PM
|
|
I just got back from taking the kids to the town pool. I have never seen so many fat kids, Dozens with globs of lard and giant pot bellies Some as young as 3 or 4 years. I think there were 2 not obese women and 1/2 dozen not obese men or so . . . the rest were BIG!!!!! Big rolling mounds of tattoed people! Made me not want to get in the pool! It looks like they won't be able to build enuf hospitals in the near future, for all these going to be unhealthy folks! Anyway, I have not seen "Sicko" yet. But I did see the movie "SUPERSIZE ME" and believe me, it is worth the rent! |
||
|
Jul. 16, 2007 at 10:59:02 PM
|
Rating for this article
|
| Hmmm, that picture, and the initials CLB? Who could this be? Oh, I know . . . Angelina Jolie!!! How are the kids Angie? I agree 100% that it would be a tragedy if the positive force of this movie were to be usurped and channeled into the marginal strengthening of a third party, with the consequence of becoming the spoiler and bleeding votes away from Democratic candidates who already have healthcare reform as a cornerstone issue. Not that I don't believe third party alternatives are a bad thing, because I don't. However to have any hope of prevailing against the well-money established parties, the grass-roots organization and fund-raising better be done well in advance of the elections, and it is too late for 2008. Perhaps in 2012, or in the 2010 midterms, and probably only if some rather radical instant runoff voting election reforms were instituted in the interim. Sicko should, frankly, make us sick. Sick and tired of tolerating a healthcare delivery system where medical decisions are dictated by for-profit insurers with little, if any, medical knowledge; who set net profit and not patient care / clinical outcome as the bottom line. We need to take our outrage and demand that our elected representatives articulate a comprehensive plan for providing low cost healthcare for each and every person in this country. Personally I believe that access to medical care should not cost a cent out of pocket. Yes, we will each pay higher taxes for this, because you cannot get something for nothing, but we will pay a fair and affordable amount for that cradle to grave coverage, and we will not have millions laid destitute because they did not anticipate their car crash or that cancer. BTW, and I'm sure this will not be popular with many here: that access to medical care should be available to anyone who comes through the door of a clinic or hospital and needs attention, U.S. citizen or not. It is immoral to refuse treatment to someone who is in need of it, and that is not part of some oath only taught in medical school -- it is a fundamental humanitarian principle that we all should abide by. It is part of the social contract. AZ Mod, I am less concerned about term limits and professional politicians than I am about what awaits these politicians once they leave high office. No one makes millions in office unless they are corrupt through and through like Duke Cunningham. More often, they came to office independently wealthy, because today, vast reserves of your own money is usually all that is takes to reach the House, and even more so the Senate. As for President, who was our last pauper President? Abe Lincoln? For those who paid the cost of admission and still require more, the gravy train lobbyist position awaits them once they retire from public service and enter into the service of mammon. As I previously suggested, I believe the "crust" of big influence would be most effectively broken by an outright banning of all corporate lobbying on Capitol Hill. Petitioning government is a right of people, and I simply can't accept the concept of corporate person-hood, let alone the premise that business incorporation somehow grants an equivalent right of petition. That throws the whole idea of individuals petitioning their elected representatives out the door. How could I have the same access to my congressman's ear as Exxon-Mobil? I can't even afford to fly to Washington to talk to them. I propose several sweeping legislative reforms in 2009 if all goes well (we certainly can't count on the Supreme Court to do this for us). These will probably require Constitutional Amendments, but it is high time. 1. Outlaw lobbying. To serve the function of "educating and informing" the congressmen about the complex issues of the day, and to sift through the tomes of legislation they will be voting upon, expand every congressman's office retinue to include a team of dedicated research staffers. We will pay far less for this governmental service than we would, say, for a bridge to no where, or an unnecessary war. 2. Institute complete public financing of elections. 3. Get rid of the electoral college. Move to instant runoff voting for all municipal, state, and federal elections (like this will happen anytime in our lifetimes). Still needs a paper trail, BTW. 4. Clarify the 14th Amendment with another Amendment that specifically defines "All persons" as all biological persons, not corporate entities. Maybe down the road, we will have to extend the 14th Amendment to intelligent robots and androids, or "visitors." 5. Strip away the power of the President to commute or pardon any members of his or her own Administration unless there is concurrence of the majority or minority speaker of the opposite party (assuming two parties). This also holds for any presidential appointments. I just had to through this in as another check and balance. Tom, I am surprised that you trust the US government with such responsibility to administer healthcare and become the sole payer. You do not recognize their authority to tax your income, yet they can decide if your liver transplantation is warranted. Interesting. |
||
|
|
Cancelled Account
Jul. 16, 2007 at 11:17:16 PM
|
| This user has cancelled their account with Voice of North America. | |
|
|
Jul. 17, 2007 at 12:24:56 AM
|
Rating for this article
|
| I agree with you on much. For the rest, well, we can find agreement halfway. I think government can work too. It's the people we elect that seem to be the problem. Yes, both parties are dysfunctional, but to different degrees. The Democratic Party is anemic but still has the strength to walk a constitutional path. The blood has been completely sucked out of the Republican Party (I look to Cheney as the prime suspect). The constitutional path seems to be blocked by the pasty Republican zombies at each Democratic step. Dysfunctional parties do not imply dysfunctional individuals. I think there are many good people in Congress today, people who have not egregiously compromised their principles in the pursuit of money and power, who know the Constitution and who remember the idealism of their first day serving as the people's representatives. True, in reflecting my partisan bias, I think these people are are almost all to be found within Democratic ranks, but I am the first to admit that the Democratic Party has its stinkers too. It is not that we do not have the right people in Congress today, but that we do not have enough of them. I will not throw out the Feingold's, Waxman's, and Conyers with the Hot Tub Tom's spa water. I think that a basic premise CLB makes is that real change in government is not made by shuffling parties or adding a third into the mix. It is made by using effectively our power as citizens to put the right people into those parties, and to use our voice to make sure they remember that they work for us. When this is done, a dynamic but working tension can exist between the two parties, if that is the number we our fated to have. Within this tension (an internal check and balance upon a runaway legislative process), compromise can be reached and both sides can work together for shared common interest in the country, in its people, and our nation of laws. As for the government taxing my labor, this does not make me a slave. What do you call a transaction where I give the blacksmith two gallons of my cow's milk in exchange for his shoeing my plow-horse? Barter and trade? Well, I give the U.S. Treasury roughly 30% of my income, in exchange for paved highways, a firehouse, drinkable water, clean air, safe streets, electricity; and a degree of national security that allows business to thrive, families to grow, and infrastructure to be built upon. Disregard for a minute that the services provided to me in exchange for my tax dollars have lacked in quality in recent years - that again is a flaw in whom we elect into government and not our model of government itself. And please don't give me the usual libertarian mantra that these services can be provided by our own labor or met with local taxation only. One way or another, we will pay for the societal benefits we avail ourselves of. No, I am no slave for paying my way. It is the cost of doing business as a US citizen, and by all accounts it is worth it. If you desire a tax free existence like Ed Brown, I once again suggest Antarctica. If you don't pay your taxes based on a stretched rationale that the 16th Amendment somehow contradicts the Constitution and thus is null and void, then you are just cheating the U.S. Treasury, you are cheating every one of us. |
||
|
|
Cancelled Account
Jul. 17, 2007 at 06:36:27 AM
|
| This user has cancelled their account with Voice of North America. | |
|
|
Jul. 17, 2007 at 07:50:22 AM
|
Rating for this article
|
| So this country's bills are paid solely by landowners? That currently this country's $8.9 trillion debt is the result of the private Federal Reserve Bank usury practices and was not accrued by years of federal spending in excess of revenues? We each owe approximately $30,000 because of combined obligations accumulated over the years, the same as an unpaid credit card bill in all our names. No doubt the banking practices of the Federal Reserve contributed to this debt. I am open to abolishing it down the road. But we can not walk away from our shared financial responsibility. We are holding the bag for the money borrowed from other countries in the form of promissory notes, and we cannot default or become "repossessed." I don't see how we are free to stop paying taxes to continue the day to day operations of this country, and to service our past obligations. I don't see how insolvency is good for any American. Perhaps, like an impoverished African nation, we should plead to China, Japan, and Europe for loan forgiveness and renegotiate terms on our T-bills? Tom, let's continue this tax discussion in a more appropriate place . . . like William's finger-pointing article. ;-) |
||
|
Jul. 17, 2007 at 08:50:34 AM
|
Rating for this article
|
| Tom and MC, at the core of the argument is the question of whether government-administered programs work (first) and then--who should provide the funds for those programs. That a government can administer a program is not an issue. Every modern one can and does. In fact when a government like ours can function without the political attack of fascists like Bushco, it works quite well. Were the people to really put their minds to it, more government programs could run very well, including universal single-payer health-care. And those who profit the most should pay the most in taxes. I love the idea of taxes. I would love paying mine if mine were paying for my health coverage and not the idiotic invasion and occupation of oil-rich "interests" whose installed leaders get pissed at their masters leash-jerking. That would mean corporations pay the most. People invested in corporations should be paid only if they actually work in them, not just invest. Investment is a form of usury and drives unworthy products up in value only because they provide a return, not a real (as opposed to a marketing-manufactured) good. The free-market anarchists I'm afraid really would need to move to a government-less (not free) island that pooling their resources they could own and create their own army to defend. There they could struggle against the natural animal inclination for a "Lord-of-the-Flies" style tribalism and get by as best they can...I know their laissez-faire slave labor-driven frontier-style "state" would be a lesson to those whose minds stray from the sometimes mundane order of being free from the fear of homelessness. |
||
|
|
Jul. 17, 2007 at 09:51:54 AM
|
Rating for this article
|
| Amen CLB (forgive me for getting all religious here). I've been asked a number of times on this site, "If you're so convinced that government should be your nanny, why don't you overpay your taxes?" Well, believing in the potential of government to appropriately spend tax revenue on and for your behalf doesn't mean I believe they currently are doing so. I will not spend a penny more in taxes than I absolutely have to while this Administration uses this money in countless ways that I object to, like a trillion dollar war for the profit of few and the misery of many. But I also can't immediately and unilaterally absolve myself from my portion of the shared responsibility for my government's actions. I didn't vote for these bums - ever - but I am partly responsible for their being there. At the end of the day, it is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people; and I am one of its people. I will pay the minimum of what is owed, and nothing more. The day that our government once again lives up to its promise to "establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity" is the day that I carelessly overpay my income taxes. Until then, I will hoard my discretionary silver pieces to spent upon myself or on my private philanthropic interests, and not render them unto Caesar. As for that government-less island paradise where we can realize Tom's vision of tyranny-free uninhibited freedom, I have already alluded to it: Antarctica. No flies too!!! |
||
If these dudes were limited to a single term, and then obliged to refrain from lobbying for at least one term, the churning of the people's representatives would break the crust of BIG INFLUENCE's hold, a crust that takes time to build. If there was a new cadre' of fresh Senators and Representatives each cycle, the playing field would be leveled for the people vs the BIGBOYS.
Report Abuse