Home     Writers     Op/Ed     Book Reviews     News     Bookstore     Photoshops     Submit     Search     Contact Us     Advertise  
  You are here: 

Sat

17

Nov

2007

Chivalry is Alive and Well and Living in Las Vegas
Saturday, 17 November 2007 21:15
by Jayne Lyn Stahl

Both Democratic presidential contenders Barack Obama and John Edwards were treated to boos and jeers, last night, when attempting to corner the first woman candidate for president, Hillary Clinton, on the issue of health care, and special interests, but it was Clinton herself who said "if you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen." Too bad someone didn't tell that to the president before his now infamous meeting with then Prime Minister Tony Blair, on Downing Street, where the two commanders-in-chef cooked the books with respect to fraudulent evidence that took us to war in Iraq. Hillary Clinton also added that she's comfortable in the kitchen;that's what concerns me; that's what John Edwards and Dennis Kucinich worry about, too.

While I'm being facetious when I say that the audience was being chivalrous in its defense of Hillary, make no mistake — the omnipotent, and egregious disapproval of the audience for Clinton's challengers' attempts at hardball effectively muted the substance of their charges. Ironically, too, those who watched last night's debate, whether they were in Vegas or in New Orleans, and those who will choose the next Democratic Party nominee, are the ones who needed most to hear what John Edwards had to say about the politics of privilege, big business, and obdurate devotion to corporate profit.

Those who most need to hear what both Edwards and Kucinich had to say about class struggle in America, about unions, about NAFTA, about economic disenfranchisement were coming to the defense of the one candidate who has yet to take a decisive stand against outsourcing jobs, and who has conspicuously aligned herself with the other boys when it comes to defending Roe v. Wade on the basis of a "right to privacy," rather than on the basis of a woman's right to choose. Oh, yes, and man or woman, choice is the issue now as it will be for generations.

While Barack Obama has routinely paid lip service to poverty, and hunger in America, only John Edwards has taken on that subject squarely, and only Edwards and Kucinich dare to expose America's dirty little secret of poverty, privilege, and those who gain most by preserving the status quo. There's talk of changes to tax laws, but the underlying issue, that it is those who are most disadvantaged among us who will be first on the front lines of war, is swept under the rug by both frontrunners of this campaign.

Edwards and Kucinich are the only candidates taking strident aim at extraordinary rendition, torture, electronic surveillance, and the USA Patriot Act; this is flat out unacceptable. What does Edwards get for his persistent attack on the lords of the manor, and his dogged insistence upon openness in government? He gets accused of being a pit bull. Why? Can it be because Edwards is the only one with the courage to come out and say what we all dread to hear, that the process is corrupt, and rigged.

The days of the iron hand in the velvet glove are over. The gloves are off, and whether they're ready or not, all candidates for elected office must be prepared to get down and dirty, as well as come clean about where their allegiances lie. We can no more afford eight more years of sacrificing our sons and daughters on the altars of oil profits than we can eight more years of attempts to cover up who gets sacrificed, and why.

Moreover, when the subject of "illegal immigration" comes up, no candidate, not even Governor Bill Richardson, mentions the existence of sweatshops where undocumented immigrants work for well below minimum wage, and live in crowded, rat infested housing in states where migrant farm workers continue to suffer.

That we are this close to Iowa, and less than a year away from one of the most important presidential elections this country has ever faced, and not one clear, unambiguous, endorseable Democratic candidate has emerged is almost as scary as the all but inevitable air strikes against Iran, and behind the scenes efforts to displace another American-backed dictator, this time in Pakistan rather than Iraq.

And, while she talks of bringing Ahmadinejad "to the table" to talk, front runner Hillary Clinton voted in favor of the Senate resolution that named the Iranian Revolutionary National Guard a "terrorist" group. Likewise, while she insists that "national security" ought to be any president's primary concern, the leading Democratic contender fails to publicly connect the dots, and show how violation of the Consitution, and the First and Fourth Amendments, poses a graver risk to our national security than bin Laden, or Al Qaeda ever could.

Like it or not, the process of voting, in America, has become a lot like ordering from a Chinese restaurant: one from Column A, one from Column B. If things keep going at this rate, instead of using ballots, in 2050, people will be voting with take-out menus.

Whether it be a Republican, or Democratic Party debate, one thing is clear: the days of chivalry and civility are over. A political party must not only come up with a candidate, but a platform, and whether the nominee is a smooth talker, or is custom made for a photo-op, those who go to the polls must wipe the soap out of their eyes, and vote with their heads not their prayer beads.

Any platform that tips backwards in an effort to remain centrist is one that is doomed to fail. Any candidate who is unwilling to risk it all, and put everything on the line to be a vehicle for the delivery of truth, not illusions, is one who ought to be running for ringmaster not president of the United States.
More from this author:
Following in the Footsteps... (6430 Hits)
by Jayne Lyn Stahl The manic warriors, in Washington, are at it again, only now they've found someone who can manage more than one syllable at...
Worldwide Open Season on the Press (9585 Hits)
by Jayne Lyn Stahl On an otherwise quiet street in Istanbul, this morning, a 53 year old Turkish citizen of Armenian descent was gunned down...
On Hillary's announcement... (5597 Hits)
by Jayne Lyn Stahl You may have read the transcript of a speech given by George McGovern in The Nation last week in which he rightly...
An Open Letter to "The Decider" (5946 Hits)
by Jayne Lyn Stahl While the odds are probably better of getting a response from Santa, there are a few things I'd like to say if you can...
"Notes from the Undergrown: State of the Oilman Address" (5925 Hits)
by Jayne Lyn Stahl The president's speech last night was more important for what it didn't say than for what it did. In an address that could...
Related Articles:
A Well Deserved Honor for Joe and Valerie Wilson (4412 Hits)
by Linda Milazzo In a display of gratitude for taking the high road for their nation, Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame Wilson were honored tonight...
Monsters Among Us: Living in a Torture State (5789 Hits)
by Chris Floyd Well, John the Baptist after torturing a thief Looks up at his hero the Commander-in-Chief Saying, "Tell me great hero,...
Arguments over Night of the Living Dead in Iraq (3947 Hits)
by Juan Cole A Government Accounting Office report has found that the Iraqi government has not met 13 of 18 benchmarks set by the US Congress....
With Donkeys for Transport, All Is Well (4582 Hits)
by Dahr Jamail & Ali al-Fadhily FALLUJAH, Sep 5 (IPS) - A brave new attempt is under way to project that all is well now with Fallujah....
Unhappy Birthday: The Democrats' Year of Living Disastrously (4844 Hits)
by Chris Floyd My first piece of guest-blogging for Glenn Greenwald is up at Salon.com: The Democrats' year of living disastrously. Here's a...


Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Trackback(0)
Comments (1)add comment

Dale Mastarone said:

0
...
Thank you, Jayne, for your enlightenment! I am concerned no longer that H. Clinton will be on the Democrat portion of the 2008 general election ballot, say Column A (or B) on the Chinese restaurant menu. When ordering at Chinese restaurants many people are concerned whether there is MSG in the dish served to make it tastier. Sometimes the menu actually states "No MSG". It is very probable that John Edwards will be on the 2008 general election menu. What John Edwards, however, cannot state on his own menu is the guarantee there is no MSG (flavor enhancer) in his "devotion" to reducing poverty in America. Mainstream media news reports that John Edwards has a $6 million, 28,000 sq. ft. mansion in North Carolina. It appears to me that there is a genuine lack of sincerity in John Edwards' words regarding the plight of the poor. Unless he takes in a couple of hundred homeless people every night and feeds them -- which I sincerely doubt he does. Not too many homeless people will go to the polls in November 2008 -- so they really don't count much in terms of voter turnout. However, John Edwards can really turn the mansion into votes. What Senator Edwards must do is reach out to middle-class America which pays the bulk of income taxes and put his money where his mouth is. He must set an example to defeat any idea that he puts himself above the poor folks among us. Will Edwards turn title of the $6 million property to a charity (that he has no control over) and the charity will be able to house a whole bunch of homeless every night? Wouldn't that be a perfect example of unselfishness? If John Edwards fails to make that personal sacrifice, then how can he ever expect to win against the presidential candidate that is finally getting name-recognition, the Congressman that is called "the taxpayers' best friend", the US Representative in his 10th term in office who has NEVER voted for a spending measure that was unconstitutional? Who was it in the US Senate that voted for the Patriot Act and voted for the war in Iraq? Wasn't that John Edwards? How is it that Americans who are totally fed up with Patriot Act/Iraq "war" (invasive police action, really, just like Korea and Nam) will not look at voting records in the Congress and otherwise to arrive at their pre-election day decision that the Congressman who voted against those unlawful activities is the only real hope America has at this time to preserve freedom in America. Who is this un-named Congressman? Hint, same name as the Apostle in the Holy Scriptures writing Acts and other Missives, and with much the same message of personal responsibility, obedience to our Creator -- and live explicitly by the Rule of Law -- and that is the nut of what this Statesman has stood ever-so-strongly for in over two decades in public office. Hint: This Congressman does not sit in the Congress representing Ohio. Another hint: This candidate for President of the United States of America, what is supposed to be a constitutional republic, is the only presidential candidate for 2008 that has never violated his or her oath of office sworn. Not one of the other candidates can have anyone say that about them, not Clinton, not Edwards, not Obama, not Rommney,not McCain, not Richardson et al from both "parties" -- not one of them on either "side" has NOT violated oath of public office sworn when one compares their legislative votes or executive acts to both federal and state constitutions. The next to last hint to who this mysterious candidate for president is, he is the leading presidential candidate getting campaign contributions from active-duty American military personnel. I humbly suggest that we as Americans should dutifully support our troops by supporting the presidential candidate our troops support. After all, our troops swore a military oath to uphold and defend the Constitution and protect America from all enemies, both foreign and domestic -- and it appears that those on the front lines of combat against enemies of the United States have recognized that the domestic enemy is the foremost enemy to defend our liberty against -- and their is only one presidential candidate upholding without question his sworn oath. The final hint to who this candidate is: the all-time record for presidential candidate contributions for one day was broken when over 36,000 individual American citizens (not corporate-controlled PACs, etc. -- individual citizens) sent in over #4.2 million to the Hope for America campaign, and that in a 24 hour period. So who is it that will most likely be our next president? Probably not John Edwards -- it might not be foreseeable that he turns title of his mansion over to a charity, and probably not any other of the candidates that all completely proven to be self-serving -- the next president will most likely be the Congressman who is not self serving -- having, by example, rejected participating in the Congressional pension plan because he is opposed to unjustly enriching himself by taking from the American people their rightful fruits of their labor through taxation. In my humble non-professional opinion, the revolution sweeping America today in amply-proven grassroots support for this presidential candidate will not be fully realized until several years after he is sworn in as president, the realization until after 2010 mid-term elections when the American people, with their president on the bully pulpit, finally decide to clean House, and the Senate, too, by electing a whole new Congress, a Congress finally in line with American principals as set forth in the United States Constitution. If true patriots, as they claim, not one of those running against the statesman Congressman should continue running -- for they truly know that they have numerous times violated their oath of public office they have "self-served" themselves in -- and they are actually disqualified from running for further public office, no question about it.
 
November 19, 2007
Votes: +0

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
 

adsense

Top