Skip to comments.New Rules for Liberals
Posted on 08/07/2005 5:48:09 PM PDT by new yorker 77
1. You can't have it both ways. Stop supporting pro-war candidates, while pretending to be anti-war. That would have been like opposing the invasion of Poland, while voting for Hitler. If you continue to field pro-war candidates, you will continue to loose elections. You can't outwar the other Party, though you have made a good try at it. Pro-war voters vote the other way, and you have already lost the votes of all who are truly opposed to war.
2. The campaign for Impeachment has some merit, but it also has a down side. Working toward Impeachment not only trivializes the crimes, but it also places the judgment in the hands of Congress. Congress was complicit in the commission of some of the crimes. Article 1, Section 3 (U.S. Constitution) states, "...Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office...". The offenses were not just minor indiscretions. The slaughter of many thousands of civilians is the most serious of all crimes. Impeachment is just a slap on the wrist. Nuremberg style War Crimes trials are needed. War criminals, at the very least, should be behind bars for life. There have been several unofficial trials. Every town, school, web site, and activist group should be holding war crimes trials. Yard signs and T-shirts should call for War Crimes Trials, not Impeachment.
3. Where are the discussions about citizen arrests of the war criminals? To actually pull off a citizen arrest of a high-ranking official would be difficult, if not impossible, but that is not the point. There would be some value in having public discussions on the topic. It would help to open the eyes of the sleeping citizens.
4. Stop the partisan political bashing of individuals...Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rice, Bolton, et al. Even if you got rid of the whole cabal, would it really make a difference? No. The problem is inherent within the system. It is the system that needs to be replaced. When you focus in on the flaws of corrupted individuals, you exonerate the "system". The focus should be on creating fundamental change. Here is just one example... changing how the flow of public information is controlled would have a much greater impact than replacing everyone in Washington. Efforts would be better spent on working toward stopping the flow of mis-information to the populace. Remember the planted story about the babies being thrown from the incubators? Remember the April Glaspie affair? It led to the "bait-and-switch war" against Iraq. A Truth-in-War-Mongering Law is needed.
5. Stop feeling so good about the vigils, marches, protests, etc. They accomplish less than zero because they give the false impression of achieving change. Those feel-good activities must be replaced with real action. If marching and protesting accomplished anything, they would not permit it.
6. The efforts of counter-recruiting are doomed. The U.S. is now getting disadvantaged recruits from non-industrialized nations. There will always be those who are desperate enough to fall for the recruiters false promises. Cannon fodder is easy to come by, these days. The U.S. Foreign Legion is already here. The truth-in-recruiting effort will have to go global, if it is to be effective.
7. If you are expecting change to come about through the voting booth, forget it. As stated before, if voting would really bring about change, they wouldn't let you do it. Put your efforts where they will have a greater chance of success. Decide whether you want real change, or just want to have friends in high places. If you want real change, forget partisan politics. It wastes precious time that should be used in a more effective way. Face it, we have two war parties and a gaggle of other parties that will not get off the ground until something big happens. In the meantime, people are dying.
8. Be creative. Think of actions that will bring about real change. Some effective actions are even legal and non-violent.
Rosemarie Jackowski is an advocacy journalist living in Vermont. She was arrested, tried, and convicted for having participated in a peaceful protest of the war. Her conviction is under appeal in the Vermont State Supreme Court.
Even an anti-war convict liberal is cracking.
I like the Bush=Hitler part in the beginning.
But most are illegal and violent. That's the point, isn't it?
I just wish when the last intelligent life form had left the state, that they had remembered to turn out the lights.
It sounds to me like she is advocating insurrection. Like a good Leninist.
If you can't get your way through democratic means, try overthrowing the government. Yep. That's being creative.
When someone uses another person's brain as a toilet, the least he could do is have the decency to flush.
Is the author talking about the WWW, which they have no control over...YET!
The War is a stupid mistake....we're starting to see that now...it is NOT conservative.....the lady has some good points...Since when did "limited government conservatives" start to cheerlead warmongering?
Wow. In other words, she's so far left she thinks that hating Bush is a "distraction" from the real focus of hating America.
What, oh what, could that entail?
Of course you agree with her, right?
And you have no hope of tightening up those loose elections.
I think we should encourage this journalist to spread his vision as far and wide as possible.
(btw, before you think that I'm crazy for stating this, just think of the reaction from the average, normal, middle-of-the-road majority who have been lulled to sleep by the MSM...the pushback from the majority could actually cause them to wake up and look at reality rather than merely the ABCNBCCBSNYTWPLATCNN depiction)
No peaceful protests..
She is advocating domestic terrorism.
"There have been several unofficial trials. Every town, school, web site, and activist group should be holding war crimes trials."
Sure. That'd be just as effective as anything else the moonbats have tried.
'Since when did "limited government conservatives" start to cheerlead warmongering?"
Sometime the morning of 11 September. You do remember that day don't you?
She is in need of either psychiatric care or a job in the DNC. Her Vermont connections ought to help there.
If marching and protesting accomplished anything, they would not permit it.
As stated before, if voting would really bring about change, they wouldn't let you do it.
Notice the use of the words "system" and "them".
She is a nut job, a little to into her conspiracy driven world with delusions of paranoia.
Ask her who "them" is and she'll probably say "the establishment".
Just another kook who never got out of the 60s.
They should have put that at the beginning. It would have saved us the time to read this tripe.
About the time that you were dropped on your head and woke up thinking that you were a consevative.
Behind every Leftist's granola-wholesome smiley-face is a small Josef Stalin waiting to be loosed.
Man, what a total disconnect from reality.
They are out there like Pluto!
If you are expecting change to come about through the voting booth, forget it. As stated before, if voting would really bring about change, they wouldn't let you do it. Put your efforts where they will have a greater chance of success.
Well, well. The true colors fly.
We wouldn't want to let a little thing like voting, voters, and the right to vote stop us and our "agenda for change," right?
You and Stalin.
Spot on about incipient Stalinists! Is it possible that human nature really includes only a limited selection of personality types? What was Hitler until a set of utterly improbable circumstances dropped total state power into his lap? Or Lenin? Or Stalin? Without those fortuitous conditions, they each would have been nothing more than some annoying petty bureaucrat.
This woman is likewise. From granola to genocide, there's no moral barrier whatsoever.
Stalin is who they would be if they had the guts. Every single one of their heroes is a murderous thug.
She was arrested because that protest took place in the middle of the street, blocking traffic.
"The establishment of an American Soviet government will involve the confiscation of large landed estates in town and country, and also, the whole body to forests, mineral deposits, lakes, rivers and so on." - William Z. Foster, ACLU co-founder and former chairman, Communist Party USA.
How would they achieve any of that if people actually "shudder" vote?
Oh and the spelling of "lose". Priceless.
Or is that losed?
unlike the author, I *do* possess a reasonable command of the English language
so... the one on the left recommends sex, and the one on the right is a lesbian? ok.
The King's English, so to speak?
The fantasy dream of all third party whackos. They pray for the day that some cataclysmic event (a nuclesr attack in the case of some FReepers) will result in people turning their backs on the two parties and come crawling to them begging forgiveness for dissing them all theses years.
9/11 happened and not a single third party president has been elected since.
yes: it is MINE
Exactly so, and well said!
Hmmm, reading this is practically giving me a flashback. Where's my free love?
BTW, are you an old retread from the 60s, or just channeling the spirit of one of my college classmates?
Look, you need to face up to a couple of life's [unpleasant] realities. The war in Iraq is mean, ugly, and not to be over in 120 minutes or less, as everything is in Hollywood. It is hard and drawn out. There is no guarantee of success in our acting, but most certainly a guarantee of failure if we do not.
My guess is that I've been around a lot longer than you have. FYI, we did not start terrorism, we are not responsible for the terrorists and their actions. They will not go away if we desist in pursuing them, or try to "make nice". This is kill or be killed, and you are deluding yourself if you think otherwise. Likewise, this is not a conflict that will end in a clear cut manner, with the defeated signing a document of surrender. It will go on and on, waxing and waning depending on our willingness to do the difficult and sometimes brutal things necessary.
Be a serious student of history. The world didn't start 30 years ago and neither did terrorism. History, past and present, is brutal. And peace signs, candles, protests and socialist ideals haven't and won't change that.
We may be a long way from perfect, but we are most certainly the good guys. And I, for one, have no shame in believing that my life is more important than the lives of those who wish to kill me and my family and my contrymen. And if they must die in order to prevent them from killing me (or you), so bit. It is their choice.
More impeachment bla bla from the ivory tower.
I'm sure she' a liberal fanatic after being teased those many years about her name.
There, that is more accurate.
No it was not a mistake. It is obvious your analysis is devoid of consideration of how the real world works.
Saddam was supporting the terrorists. It was a havid for those who do harm to the USA.
It is no longer a 2 dimensional war world, we have to deal with a war field that goes beyond borders and governments.
Basically you are repeating the same mistake that makes nevil chamberlin have the unique place in history as history's greatest sucker.
CNN insider's quote of the month: "If it's news, it's news to us."
OK, OK, so I'm a little slow on the uptake.