Three Good Friday Questions

[H2O Man]

“For maximum effectiveness of the Counterintelligence Program, and to prevent wasted effort, long-range goals are being set.

“1. Prevent the coalition of militant black nationalist groups. In unity there is strength; a truism that is no less valid for all its triteness. An effective coalition of black nationalist groups might be the first step toward a real 'Mau' in America, the beginning of a true black revolution.

“2. Prevent the rise of a 'messiah,' who could unify, and electrify, the militant black nationalist movement. Malcolm X might have been such a 'messiah'; he is the martyr of the movement today. Martin Luther King , Stokely Carmichael, and Elijah Muhammad all aspire to this position. Elijah Muhammad is less of a threat because of his age. King could be a very real contender for this position should he abandon his supposed 'obedience' to 'white, liberal doctrines' (nonviolence) and embrace black nationalism....”
--FBI memorandum; March 4, 1968.

It's interesting to read and reflect upon this infamous memo, 42 years later. Food for thought on a Good Friday, in my humble opinion. I found myself thinking about this memorandum late last night, and wondering what two groups of forum members here would think about a few questions for today. Those two groups are: those who are old enough to remember the events of that bygone era (and who may have been active participants); and those who have come of age in the decades since.

The author of the memo, J. Edgar Hoover, was particularly concerned that the civil rights movement was going to forge in a coalition with the anti-war, Native American, and woman's liberation movements. The goal in 1968 was to “divide and conquer” – a strategy that had proven successful throughout a large period of human history. In my opinion, it is a strategy that is being employed today by those forces that seek to prevent the progressive change that would definitely result from a true coalition of progressive and liberal forces within the United States today. There is, after all, strength in unity.

My questions:

(1)What groups of progressive/liberal democrats and the progressive left could most likely unite to create the foundation of a powerful coalition?

(2)What issues present stumbling blocks to this type of coalition?

(3)Why isn't there an actual leader or group of leaders who are recognized as having “authority” within the the liberal-progressive-leftist communities today? (In my opinion, there has been a near-total lack of such a recognized national leader since people such as Malcolm, Martin, and RFK in the 1960s. I believe that Jesse Jackson approached that status with the Rainbow Coalition in the 1980s. Others who have shown promise have been knee-capped before reaching the full potential.)

Thanks for reading this. I hope that it stirs some thought, and perhaps even an interesting Democratic Underground discussion.

Peace,
H2O Man

[Octafish]

1. Labor and the Disenfranchised

Great questions, my Friend. Here're my short answers:

(1)What groups of progressive/liberal democrats and the progressive left could most likely unite to create the foundation of a powerful coalition?

Unions, Civil Rights Groups, Un-unionized labor, Peace Community, Students, Housewives, the Unemployed -- Liberals, Progressives, Activists and everyone who gives a damn.

(2)What issues present stumbling blocks to this type of coalition?

Issues of War and Peace; Social issues from religion to abortion; Taxation; Drug Policy; Prisons, Inc.; etc. etc. You name it and it can be used to divide the electorate. The new group's goal would be to unite on the big issues of progress, peace and prosperity. The others would sort themselves out through mutual respect-based negotiation.

(3)Why isn't there an actual leader or group of leaders who are recognized as having “authority” within the the liberal-progressive-leftist communities today? (In my opinion, there has been a near-total lack of such a recognized national leader since people such as Malcolm, Martin, and RFK in the 1960s. I believe that Jesse Jackson approached that status with the Rainbow Coalition in the 1980s. Others who have shown promise have been knee-capped before reaching the full potential.)

You-Know-Who is very organized. They used Ronnie Reagan to get them into the White House (and as soon as they could they did all they could to dump his ass on the curb). Remember the “landslide” of 1980? Out went the likes of Frank Church. Later, we find, the CIA and its “Agents for Bush” team actually had campaigned to oust the Liberals and “Doves.” America, when Secret Government is calling the shots instead of We the People, we have a problem.

John Stockwell, former CIA fellah, has a lot to say on the subject:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFPayzr8dSM

Thank you for another excellent post, H20 Man. For some reason, I always feel smarter after reading your work.

[H2O Man]

8. Thank you.

On Question #1, I'd add traditional Native Americans and environmentalists.

[roguevalley]

22. when you saw the marches in the civil rights era, in the front were

priests and nuns, religious and rabbis along with labor and all the rest. we have to rebuild the coalition. MLK was turning toward poverty and inequality of economics as well as the war when he died. He would have been the one. I still mourn that.

[H2O Man]

24. Absolutely correct.

I've enjoyed the opportunity to work with a number of progressive Catholics over the decades. They are always willing to put themselves on the front line. And they all point to the tactics and philosophy of Martin Luther King, Jr., as the example we should follow.

[roguevalley]

30. I will never forget it, back in the 'social justice' days.

[EFerrari]

16. I think the answer to #2 is (what passes for) our media.

Lookit how it's presently portraying the tea partiers as mainstream Americans out en force and contrast that to the much larger anti-war demonstrations (a position held by many more Americans) that go virtually unreported.

It's perception management. Even differences of race, religion and origin can be overcome as we saw in the 60s. But then, the Noise Machine was still on the drawing board.

[BeFree]

2. 1,2,3

Coffee Party coalition of environmentalists, peace, labor, and good government political junkies.

Main hurdle is the corrupted vote counting systems.

Alan Grayson may be the leader.


Really, the Coffee Party, a grass-roots org is, imo, a ray of sunshine in this otherwise dark smoke filled room of corrupt bought and paid for politicians.

Ever hear of it?

[BeFree]

3. Damn

How many people have me on ignore? Must be a bunch.

[H2O Man]

6. An old friend

contacted me late last night, to discuss forming a local branch of the Coffee Party.

[Octafish]

14. A friend in Lansing told me the Michigan Dems are ready to split.

The young ones have grown tired of the same-ol', same-ol' and have started to lay the groundwork for a New Democratic Party. I told her about the cons of breaking off, but she said her friends not going to dedicate their lives to changing something that refuses to change -- having witnessed previous attempts at reform. She said the consensus is it would be easier to build the new brand from scratch.

[BeFree]

19. New Dems? Bad idea

Methinks the Coffee Party will be real bipartisan, but vote for Dems when it comes right down to it. Pubs, or Dems.

It will be people who have been forced out who will throw righteous rocks at the rulers. It will be progressives who will work to sway the independents who will then vote out the worst of the Dems and Pubbies.

That's how I see it. YMMV. (your mileage may vary)

[H2O Man]

23. Interesting.

I'm not up to date on the Coffee business. But I'm a democrat. I tend to work with a wide range of people, at very least half of whom are to the left of the Democratic Party. I'm not splitting, nor suggesting that anyone should. But, I suspect that a lot of people like us understand that we have far more in common with many leftists than we do with moderate to conservative democrats. And it would be impossible for me, at this point in time, to ask those friends and associates to vote for democratic candidates this fall. They would laugh at me, and think that I must be joking.

[Overseas]

4. K&R.

But I am a little too depressed to answer the questions.

In spite of what I know and have read about entrenched unelected power structures, I had still hoped that with the Bush Cheney Gang having pushed our country so far off track, we would be allowed some rebalancing because that would make the existing system more sustainable.

I had hoped President Obama would be a 21st Century Green FDR. The Bush Crash and Bush Bailout presented a great opportunity to start off in a very compassionate, practical manner with a bailout to the majority in the form of Medicare for All. It didn't worry me that President Obama presented himself as more moderate because removing the burden of medical expenses from a vanquished populace would ensure that they had a little more money in their pockets to keep their local economies going. It would have been a practical move, in that way.

Furthermore, I had thought a massive, immediate green jobs program could have been instituted and promoted on very practical grounds, in view of the realities of the destabilization of our global climate systems due to carbon pollution. In spite of the nearly $50 million Koch Industries distributed to around 40 groups to create the impression that global warming was still under debate, and Exxon Mobil's large disinformation budget, millions of our fellow citizens voted for the party of FDR. The party that at one time believed in regulating high finance and putting us back to work and prioritizing the national interest above corporate interests when necessary.

I imagined my Green FDR going to Copenhagen with millions of green jobs underway, retrofitting, establishing alternative power sources, putting us back into the community of nations, taking responsibility for curbing our power usage by making it more efficient and diversified.

I did not expect the bipartisan ideal to be used to pretend that Republicans had not destroyed our country's moral and economic fabric. I didn't expect the bipartisan ideal to be used to weaken the most practical solutions to our problems. I expected more accountability to be imposed on Republicans for their mismanagement because so many millions of people had voted them out of office and their popularity stood at 29%.

I expected the bipartisan ideal to be used more as a means of explaining the practicality of progressive policies-- Medicare is far more efficient than other systems. Deregulation had led us into another massive plutocracy and weakened our economy so we needed to correct that. Letting the nation be pushed into war on false pretenses, justifying and practicing torture, and rampant war profiteering through privatizing military services had weakened our national security and surely, traditional Republicans would want to see us strengthen our national security by correcting those imbalances.

So I am still very sad and confused. I thought Democrats might seize the day to unite new green Democrats with old eco-Democrats who had been talking about sustainable development since the 70's, and with unions to bring more manufacturing back to the US and help us reinstate more economic balance and social justice.

So you see, I had hoped 1, 2 and 3 would be Democrats seizing their mandate to correct Republican mismanagement because millions of people had voted for that.

So I feel kind of stuck, looking past the major disappointments to remember the positive accomplishments because I definitely do not want more Republicans to be elected. But having a lot less money than I used to to donate to progressive candidates after the Bush Crash.

[H2O Man]

12. When we look

at the federal government, it is apparent that even a serious President could not accomplish progressive change at this time. The reason is because of the pathetic excuse for a Congress (both the House and Senate). And there are reasons that the Congress is as corrupt and dysfunctional as it is.

I think it is important for progressives and liberals to have a firm grasp of the dynamics that Schlesinger detailed in "The Imperial Presidency." Add to that the route that led to Cheney installing a "shadow government" on 9/11. This is not a "conspiracy theory" -- it is absolutely documented. President Obama is not in a position to make significant change, even if he wants to move in that direction.

It's interesting: the other day, I posted an OP about those people who are in the Tea Bag Party. One of the things that group seems totally unaware of is what Schlesinger et al have described. Were they exposed to this information, and capable of grasping the implications, they might be in a position where they could be useful in the attempt to reinstate our Constitutional democracy.

[Overseas]

15. Thank you for your reply.

I haven't read the particular book you mention, so it may be time to update my knowledge.

I wanted to wish that the massive ugliness of the imperial presidency instituted by the Bush Cheney Gang would be easier to overturn once we'd given Democrats the mandate, even though I had heard about some of the Cheney "leave-behinds."

But I have been more and more reluctant to criticize the Obama Administration because I do sense that there must be greater obstacles to change than I realize and I don't want more cruel Republicans to take power.

[Echo In Light]

5. k/r - 3rd question is particularly troubling

[H2O Man]

10. It is.

There are answers, and it isn't because of a lack of qualified individuals.

[Echo In Light]

11. Hell man, look at how renown lefties are crucified by many here @DU

[H2O Man]

13. Exactly.

Those people who can be "leaders" will not be saints. No one is. We are all sad and weakly human. But even at the level of the progressive grass roots, there are unrealistic and unhealthy expectations.

[hootinholler]

7. If the media would let him get a head of steam up

Or if we can get the message out in spite of the media I think that Gov Dean could be a good point man.

-Hoot

[H2O Man]

9. Very good point.

I still think of the '04 "yell" as an example of how the media does the bidding of the establishment, and sidetracks a serious movement with something totally unimportant, played over and over again. I continue to donate to Gov Dean.

[EFerrari]

17. Regarding #3, I realized this week that the populist left is discouraged

actively and as a matter of policy by the Democrats. I don't know when it started but maybe it goes back as far as Chicago.

I'm not sure what to do with that, my friend, other than to focus more on the social justice side of things than on the political side .

[grantcart]

18. 1) None

The fact is that liberal/progressives are self actualized independent thinking people who will continue to participate as individuals and not organized into cohesive blocs with the discipline to stay united with a single vision.

The issues that we are working on are too diverse and none of them reach the level of concern that will call the whole to sublimate their individual concerns to create the solidarity you are looking for.

The only way that we can have that level of solidarity is that we become a one issue bloc. Currently there are two effective 'one issue blocs' that have the solidarity required to leverage a small disciplined force to exploit power beyond its numbers; gun enthusiasts and pro life supporters.

In a way we are moving as a society away from the 'low hanging fruit' of development. It was easy to pass a law and establish minimum wage and eliminate child labor. The economies of the world were segregated enough that a local labor market with a shortage of labor during a time of increased labor intensive manufacturing would experience a fast increase in union jobs and bring up the whole middle class.

Now with the labor of the world being intensively fungible regulatory increases in labor costs will mean more jobs being sourced outside of the market. We are basically dealing with a whack a mole solution to a world wide problem. We deal only with the symptoms. Here is the real problem, the real problem with ecnomic distribution is that 50 years ago 90% of the worlds population was based in rural agricultural development. Now the world can be fed with about 15% of the worlds population (and in the US it is 2%). This has created a world wide pool of about 2 billion people who need to move from an agriculture to a non agricultural job and there are a limited supply of manufacturing jobs. Protectionist moves on our traditional manufacturing base would have a devestating effect on exporting our newer manufacturing base (for example cars in the former and software, movies, games and communication in the later.) No single piece of legislation is going to solve this intractable problem.

[EFerrari]

21. Self actualized, thinking people have egos that are flexible enough

to contribute to groups without injury. ;)

[Raksha]

20. K & R

[robertpaulsen]

25. I've really enjoyed your last two OPs, H2O Man.

Two different subjects, perhaps, but I noticed a similar theme: the search for strength in unity. I think it is important for The Left, whether self-identified as liberals, progressives, Greens, socialists, or some other to understand and learn that there are ways to act on that concept without violating your core principles. True, there will always be those who, for whatever reason, strike a More-Leftist-Than-Thou pose and shun any attempt at coalescence, but I do believe that represents an extreme minority best left to their hermetically sealed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PrheWm2bF4">echo chamber. I think the vast majority of activists do yearn for a Great Coalition that can truly challenge the system to honor the needs and the will of the people or be resigned to the dustbin of history.

Within The Left, I believe that it doesn't matter which specific groups are willing to align, any number could do the trick in forging a powerful bloc. What's important is that while each member individually remains true to what specific issue attracted them to that organization, collectively all minor differences between these groups must be sublimated in pursuit of The Larger Goal. From my understanding of history, this was happening during the late 60's with Vietnam. But I believe Martin Luther King took it a step further by using Vietnam as a lightning rod to illuminate the Real Larger Goal: Economic Justice. So much money and lives were being wasted in Vietnam, destroying The Dream, destroying The Great Society. I truly believe that MLK was on a path toward waking America up to an understanding of the connection between these issues and THAT is why he was assassinated.

So what is The Issue that we can rally around? Actually, I think there are two issues that are flip sides of the same Energy/Environment coin: Peak Oil and Global Warming. Both issues are actually different manifestations of the same problem: Overconsumption of Fossil Fuels. While most people on The Left understand the immediacy of Climate Change and the ramifications that a failure to mitigate will entail, fewer understand the immediacy of Peak Oil. But I believe the Obama administration is beginning to comprehend it:

Obama Administration Cops to Likelihood of Looming Global Oil Shortage: PCI Requests Transparency of Energy Policy

In an exclusive interview published March 25 in Le Monde, Glen Sweetnam, the Obama administration’s official expert on the oil market, confirmed nearly every element of the “Peak Oil” scenario that many analysts both in and outside the oil industry have warned of for years:

• A decline of world oil production could begin soon—perhaps next year, and
• Only extraordinary levels of investment by the oil industry can maintain current rates of production much longer.

After decades of ignoring the “Peak Oil” theory that predicts global oil production will peak and then rapidly decline, Sweetnam’s admission marks a profound shift in the U.S. government’s position on energy depletion.

"I understand how difficult it must be for officials of the Department of Energy to acknowledge that the lifeblood of the industrial economy--cheap oil--is disappearing faster than they had previously forecast,” says Richard Heinberg, Senior Fellow at Post Carbon Institute. “But the American People deserve the truth."

more...

http://www.postcarbon.org/press-release/85743-obama-administration-cops-to-likelihood-of

I've written before about how Global Warming and Peak Oil are such huge civilization-altering tipping points that comprehending the ramifications of it can sometimes be a process similar to Elisabeth Kubler-Ross' 5 Stages of Grief: Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression and Acceptance. We've seen the http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=&imgrefurl=http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/2009/12/23/climategates-signs-of-the-times-anti-global-warming-signs-from-around-the-world-copenhagen-summit-crumbles/&usg=__yGPtALWR0MexKGkdK9Jbx8QS90Y=&h=351&w=319&sz=20&hl=en&start=71&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=ZIfduZbdg9GtMM:&tbnh=120&tbnw=109&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dglobal%2Bwarming%2Bprotest%2Bpictures%26start%3D60%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26ndsp%3D20%26tbs%3Disch:1">picket signs at various RW protests of far too many in the first stage of grief: Denial. The second stage, Anger, is something to be concerned about. We've seen how denial of certain social issues can lead to lashing out in anger, sometimes http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=&imgrefurl=http://www.despardes.com/People/mcveigh.html&usg=__SgqTPS-v-I-jxG7UuO6RY85c52M=&h=450&w=316&sz=12&hl=en&start=1&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=jPu2g7uWLb2tUM:&tbnh=127&tbnw=89&prev=/images%3Fq%3DTim%2BMcVeigh%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG%26ndsp%3D20%26tbs%3Disch:1">violently. But sometimes hyper-awareness of the ramifications of an issue can lead to http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=&imgrefurl=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/03/earth-liberation-front-be_n_89651.html&usg=__-2PXFNQ15WQ-A98vL5auc23jQ28=&h=512&w=407&sz=60&hl=en&start=9&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=dCIPmBwnEAZ2mM:&tbnh=131&tbnw=104&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dearth%2Bliberation%2Bfront%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26tbs%3Disch:1">lashing out in anger too. I'm not indulging in false equivalency, I'm just saying this is an area of concern to watch out for; nothing undermines a coalition quicker than an act of destructive violence. If we do build a Great Coalition, one of it's primary principles must be non-violence. But I digress.

The third stage, Bargaining, seems to be where the Obama administration is starting out on Peak Oil. That's not bad, considering that even with an extraordinary peer-reviewed consensus on Global Warming, politicians are still compromising international cooperative mitigation. But we can move beyond that stage on both issues since we're not politicians, we're political activists. I believe that involves not only linking both issues together, but understanding and using this knowledge like MLK attempted with Vietnam as a lightning rod to illuminate the Real Larger Goal: Economic Justice. Unless you change the way money works, you change nothing. We must get out of denial, anger, bargaining and depression so that we reach a true acceptance of the real ramification of Global Warming and Peak Oil: we can no longer maintain an economic infrastructure based on infinite growth. The only business that should be Globalized in the future if there is any hope for humanity is Conservation, not Capital.

This is not so much a rallying cry for socialism, though I do believe we could use a little more of that in this country, as much as it is a rallying cry for Re-Localization. Cuba faced their own version of Peak Oil in the 90's when their main oil supplier, the Soviet Union, collapsed. During that time, known to Cubans as the http://globalpublicmedia.com/the_power_of_community_how_cuba_survived_peak_oil">Special Period, Castro actually turned to capitalistic practices, allowing farmers to sell their organic crops at private markets. Understanding how money works and how to benefit each locality with that understanding might even help us cross ideological lines with our Goal. That may sound a bit too optimistic for some, but reading your Tea Bag OP made me reflect on a certain clique within that movement I call 'End the Feds'. There's a lot of rhetoric they use to propagate their cause that I don't agree with, but the cause itself is something that http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8068939">many on DU would agree with. The key to a successful coalition is to keep the lines of communication open. We might surprise ourselves with how many people out there from all walks of life find out they share the same Real Larger Goal as us. Keeping the lines of communication open is the gateway to having a real revolution in our thinking. That's the only revolution worth a damn: to throw away what was formerly most sacred in your mind that in a world on the precipice no longer is applicable. http://americanjudas.blogspot.com/2009/12/devolution-reality-of-post-peak.html">"To be able to tear everything down, throw everything out and start with a completely fresh piece of paper and say, 'OK, how do we solve this problem?'"

Thanks for writing this, H2O Man. It definitely stirred some thoughts in me. :)

[puebloknot]

26. Considering the fates of Malcolm, Martin, and RFK, it seems self-evident ...

... that those who would be leaders are reluctant to offer up their very lives when doing so does not effect change.

The Wellstone Factor is also much in the consciousness of all of us.

With a massive grassroots movement that seems here to stay, we might see more erstwhile leaders step up to the plate.

[UTUSN]

27. Here we go:

1) None.

2) (Lack of) Pragmatism.

3) I was a Hillary supporter in the primaries, yet my answer is: OBAMA.

[mmonk]

28. The coalitions that made the Democratic Party a place

where progressive and liberal change could manifest itself to real change are still there. But it reminds me of the Neil Young song on "Living With War" titled "Looking For a Leader". We have been divided by conservative forces inside the party that do not want progressive change and that division has convinced many not to act and be forceful. So everyone is standing around looking for a leader. We need to get pass that and reunite.

[omega minimo]

29. ABC easy as 123

(1)
the same one as before

(2)
Ignorance, hubris, arrogance, ego, disassociation, bigotry, narcissism

(3) you know why

[scarletwoman]

31. I don't know how to answer your questions. I only have a question of my own.

It is this: How do we (leftists, progressives, liberals, whatever) construct a narrative that will spark the imaginations of our fellow citizens? A narrative, a story, a word picture that upon being heard/read strikes a chord of recognition -- an "Aha!" moment in the mind of the receiver?

We need a story in which the masses each individually feel themselves to be the protagonist. A story, a narrative that elevates and empowers, that people can relate to on a personal level, that opens them up to a new level of perception.

I believe that stories may be our most potent forms of communication of human to human. A good story penetrates into peoples' unconscious and subconscious. A good story stirs up deep recognition of ineffable truths.

I'm not saying this as well as I would like -- it's just something that's been stirring around in the corners of my consciousness. Just some half-formed thoughts in the peripheral vision of my mind's eye.

But, I may totally off the track here -- and I'm tempted to just delete this. I'll hit post instead, and see what happens...

sw

[omega minimo]

34. We need Impeachment

a national story as you suggest, like Watergate was, drawing the nation together, educating the masses on the Constitution and the process, holding criminal leaders accountable. If it were possible to do now, that would be something. It was clear at the time, it was then or never. Even CODEPINK takes grief on DU for challenging Karl Rove's lies and lack of accountability.



We need media so that stories as you suggest are not in the stranglehold of the producers and purveyors of what passes for mass media now.



We need the war full of stories as you suggest to not be censored and sanitized, as all the "operations" since Bush I Gulf War I have been.



We need storytellers. Bill Moyers is retiring. Who else tells our national tale?

[bridgit]

32. (1)

What groups of progressive/liberal democrats and the progressive left could most likely unite to create the foundation of a powerful coalition?

Well, firstly DU could; interesting distinction however "progressive/liberal democrats and the progressive left" so that with the discussion fragmenting down into splinters of shared disrespect instead of cohesion within even these groups; DU, as a sample, could have done better to bridge that span between concepts such as, and it spite or to its charter's benefit: "progressive" "liberal" "democrat" "left" the last of which bringing along its own bag of splintered verbiage in the forms of center right/center/center left/left/far left/extreme left, etc, the last of that-which providing some dog whistle-esque allure to socialists that feel they *are* the democratic left - and while I have no immediate answer, again, DU could have been facilitating that bridge instead of offering to the www a cascading divergence of opinion with little intent to come together come hell or high water. So on that one I wish you luck :) In that as can be seen in certain responses: some are only here to further divest a cohesive play-book of any plays worth their salt

(2)What issues present stumbling blocks to this type of coalition?

Maybe its a result of the life I have lived, but in my experience any issue writ with the cherry juice from a pie in the sky will become a stumbling block. But of course, no one is under any obligation to believe me

'Well, the last I heard of Arab
He was stuck on a whale
That was married to the deputy
Sheriff of the jail
But the funniest thing was
When I was leavin’ the bay
I saw three ships a-sailin’
They were all heading my way
I asked the captain what his name was
And how come he didn’t drive a truck
He said his name was Columbus
I just said, “Good luck.”'

Seen a *well do'ya!?* list the other day. And while it was less possible to argue with the list as a summary matter; certain items within were able to be recognized as little more feel-good points almost irrespective of their merits in that sometimes the grass don't grow and the wind don't blow and that's the way it is period cause I know I'd just love to see a warm steady sunshine in breezy blue skies demurely falling with just enough morning & afternoon rain water to water my garden...its more to the point that I do not *always* expect it to occur my way

(3)Why isn't there an actual leader or group of leaders who are recognized as having “authority” within the the liberal-progressive-leftist communities today?

Sadly, my sense is that that answer is ref'd somewhere in (1) & (2)

[Me.]

33. Hmmmm

# 1...Octafish answered that as completely as I think possible

# 2...A major stumbling block is that we are always tilting at windmills. There are many social issues that need addressing but it is difficult to get to the nub of these matters because smokescreens are always being set up. This is done with the help of the media, lobbyists, banksters...It's the old misdirection of the eye that's been in play ever since Nixon. Look over there, those evil liberals made up the stories of congresspeople being cursed and spit upon. Look over here...those dirty, filthy liberals want to take our freedoms and turn us onto a totalitarian state. Look, they're killing grandma.. Raygun continued the demonetization of liberals and along the way he was ably aided by the DLC who did their best to contort our party into something it was never meant to be and they blurred the lines to such an extent that there was confusion as to what the democratic party had traditionally stood for. This is why I worry about the likes of Rahm and others from the Clinton era being so close to the seat of power again. Progressive/Liberals have got to have faith in what they believe in for this country and remain steadfast. They all have to stand together, ...all the fingers enclosed into a fist (if you will pardon the aggressive metaphor).

#3... There is no one in the mists. Not Martin or John. There are good men but fear has squeezed the courage out of many. Not necessarily for themselves but for their families and others who are vulnerable. What it will take, to make truly effective change is a great rising in this nation. In a creative and hopeful way. Not the vitriolic and hateful variety we have seen from the baggers, but a true yearning for better, for all.