The Foggy Dew - Sinead O'Connor and the Chieftains http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13MQFCfCYdQ

As down the glen one Easter morn
To a city fair rode I,
Their armed lines of marching men
In squadrons passed me by.
No pipe did hum, no battle drum
Did sound its loud tattoo
But the Angelus' bells o'er the Liffey swells
Rang out in the foggy dew.

Right proudly high in Dublin town
Hung they out a flag of war.
'Twas better to die 'neath an Irish sky
Than at Suvla or Sud el Bar.
And from the plains of Royal Meath
Strong men came hurrying through;
While Brittania's Huns with their long-range guns
Sailed in through the foggy dew.

The bravest fell, and the requiem bell
Rang mournfully and clear
For those who died that Easter-tide
In the springing of the year.
While the world did gaze with deep amaze
At those fearless men but few
Who bore the fight that freedom's light
Might shine through the foggy dew.

And back through the glen I rode again
And my heart with grief was sore
For I parted then with valiant men
Whom I never shall see more
But to and fro
In my dreams I go
And I kneel and pray for you
For slavery fled
O glorious dead
When you fell in the foggy dew


The Fields of Athenry - Dropkick Murphys http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10agPj0Vzu4

By a lonely prison wall
I heard a young girl callin'
Michael, they have taken you away
For you stole Trevalyen's corn
So the young might see the morn
Now a prison ship lies waiting in the bay

Low lie the fields of Athenry
Where once we watched the small free birds fly
Our love was on the wing, we had dreams and songs to sing
It's so lonely 'round the fields of Athenry

By a lonely prison wall
I heard a young man callin'
Nothing matters, Mary, when you're free
Against the famine and the crown
I rebelled, they cut me down
Now you must raise our child with dignity

Low lie the fields of Athenry
Where once we watched the small free birds fly
Our love was on the wing, we had dreams and songs to sing
It's so lonely 'round the fields of Athenry

By a lonely harbor wall
She watched the last star fallin'
As the prison ship sailed out against the sky
So she'll wait, and hope and pray,
For her love in Botany Bay
It's so lonely 'round the fields of Athenry

It's so lonely 'round the fields of Athenry

Low lie the fields of Athenry
Where once we watched the small free birds fly
Our love was on the wing, we had dreams and songs to sing
It's so lonely 'round the fields of Athenry

Words cannot describe how much I LOATHE the smarmy, arrogant, smirking, self-righteous superiority conveyed in those words.

"Oh, I held my nose and voted for ____."

"If ____ is the candidate I guess I'll have to hold my nose and vote for him/her"

SHUT UP

SHUT UP

SHUT THE FUCK UP

The ONLY reason anyone has for uttering that banal and asinine phrase is to let it be known to the whole wide ever-lovin' world that YOU have super-duper-impeccable-unreachable-amazingly high standards that 99% of the Democratic party has no chance of meeting, but nevertheless, you sucked it up, toughed it out, nailed yourself to the cross like the long-suffering saint and patriot that you are and voted for that hideous, horrible, no-good worthless DINO piece of shit on the ballot because even though you KNEW they'd lose and/or be a worthless PNAC enabler, you DID IT ANYWAY for the GREATER GOOD.

Honest to God, spare us all the sanctimonious windbaggery. If you voted for a candidate in the past that you didn't care for - cry me a river. There are usually several candidates in any given primary - not everyone's favorite choice is going to be the nominee. Stop acting like you're special because the eventual nominee didn't meet your lofty standards.

And whatever you do, don't pull this shit in 2008. If you cannot vote for the eventual candidate without making some holier-than-thou pronouncement about the stench emanating from the ballot causing you to gag and retch and hold your nose - then don't vote for them! It's really that simple! If Hillary/Edwards/Obama/Kucinich/whoever disgusts you THAT thoroughly that you literally feel a wave of nausea overcome you as you step behind the curtain on election day, then don't vote for them just so you can go proclaim your eternal martyrdom on DU afterwards and crow about what a great patriot you are that you voted for this AWFUL candidate that you hated just because you hate the Republicans more.

There are a few candidates that, I will admit, I am seriously considering not voting for in the general election should they be the Democratic nominee. I will not discuss who they are, and if any of them actually becomes the nominee, I am certainly not going to spend all of 2008 wailing about how my preferred candidate should have gotten the nomination and now I'm just going to have to HOLD MY NOSE and vote for _____ even though it violates everything I believe in. Why? Because that's narcissistic in the extreme. If you can't graciously support the Democratic nominee, then please refrain from loudly telling anyone and everyone that you'll vote for them even though it sickens you to your core. Either vote for them, and advocate for them, and do it honestly and with conviction; or if you cannot bring yourself to support them, then BE HONEST ABOUT IT and don't support them and use DU to discuss other things and issues that matter to you. If for some reason I can't bring myself to support the party's nominee in 2008 wholeheartedly, I will refrain from posting anything about that candidate during the election. It's that simple.

Lukewarm "support" like loudly proclaiming that you will "hold your nose" while you vote is every bit as harmful in the general election as actively campaigning for a third party, which is not allowed at DU. I honestly don't see why the "holding my nose" bullshit is allowed either.

On CSPAN 2 now, talking about withdrawal - how his withdrawal bill last summer was mocked by MSM, Dems and Repubs and got only 13 votes because according to the naysayers "we weren't ready yet." He says 1000 soldiers have died since then and asks angrily if we're "ready" yet or if 1000 more have to die.

Good stuff, turn it on or check out the live feed.

I haven't really posted anything at DU since hearing of Jerry Falwell's death, although I have read through several of the DU threads here. There seem to be, broadly speaking, two camps:

1) the people who believe that it is wrong to say unkind things about Falwell at this time and that doing so either a) brings us down to Falwell's level; b) confirms GOPer's beliefs about "nasty lefties"; c) devalues us as progressives.

2) the people who believe that Falwell's hateful politics and bigotry earns him no respite in death and that there is no shame in expressing extreme animosity and loathing for such a wicked man because of the pain he brought to the world.

I understand the position of the first group of people, I really do, and during the other controversial celebrity deathgasms I usually found myself in that camp. I just couldn't see what good it did to say unkind things about Gerald Ford, who ceased being a relevant political figure 30 years ago, Anna Nicole Smith, who was harmless and vapid, or even to an extent Ronald Reagan, who had been a vegetable for so long that his death was almost like a formality.

But Jerry Falwell is different. He was among the elite few movers and shakers almost single-handedly responsible for the birth of the reactionary, anti-Constitution conservative Christian movement in this country without which Reagan and Bush Jr. would not have been possible. He created a political empire built on searing, vulgar, and undiluted hatred. He has enabled an entire generation of false Christians to spit in the face of Christ's teachings and worship a false religion built on blood money and political power, a modern day Caiaphas. He helped foster a political climate that rejoiced in the death of AIDS victims - would little 13 year old Ryan White have been brutally harassed without Jerry Falwell preaching that AIDS was "God's punishment" for evil homosexuals? Would the thousands of LGBT people who have been murdered in hate crimes be alive today if their murderers hadn't believed that it was not only "okay" but even "God's will" to kill homosexuals? Would America have taken AIDS seriously - and perhaps saved some lives - if people like Jerry Falwell hadn't been reaping money and political gain from homophobia?

None of us would even know who Jerry Falwell is if he hadn't chosen to become a national spokesman for hate and bigotry. He made a lot of money promoting the most hateful, divisive politico-religious movement in modern American history. His hate for LGBT people is on par with the hatred of neo-Nazis for Jews and racial minorities - and that is no exaggeration. Read his own words if you doubt me.

The fact is, a LOT of people have very good reason to celebrate the departure from earth of a man who dedicated his life to vicious hatred - hatred that likely had a direct impact on their lives. I understand the "if you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything at all" crowd, but I have to disagree with them here. I think Falwell is one of the most hateful figures of recent history and some DUers should try to understand that the disgust for Falwell is not simply because "he's on the other side," but because he did more than maybe any other American to spread homophobia, hate, and the poisonous conservative fundamentalist agenda. Those DUers who, just for virtue of being who they are, found themselves hated and maligned by Falwell owe him no courtesy. They owe him no respect.

Falwell is owed nothing from those of us on earth, and what he is owed in the world beyond will come to him regardless of what anyone says here on DU or elsewhere.

Many Americans took to the streets in the 1960s to protest an unnecessary war against a country that never attacked us. It's worth remembering which craven Democrats voted for that immoral and illegal war and helped get us stuck in the hellhole of Nam for ten years.

Among those who voted for the wasteful Vietnam War by voting YEA on the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution:

Eugene McCarthy

George McGovern

Oh sure, once it was obvious the war was unpopular, both of them conveeeeeniently became "anti-war." Well guess what? Too little too late! THEY helped get us there and therefore any backtracking against the war they did after the fact is immaterial and irrelevant. They clearly are responsible for the war. The blood of 58,000 American soldiers and countless Vietnamese civilians is on their hands. Big words after the fact don't erase the fact that they voted for the war! They gave a green light to the war and that must never be forgotten or forgiven.




(note: this post contains irony)

One word for this editorial: WOW.



Don't just read the snip I posted... read it all. It's the most powerful editorial about Iraq I've ever read. If there were more Father Greeleys and fewer Cardinal Ratzingers in the Church, I might still go to Mass.

It's just a shame that none of the Democratic presidential wannabes have condemned the immorality of this war. Oh, wait... there is that one fella, the one the media won't mention unless they can mock him like a group of cruel teenaged harpies, the tall and pensive veteran who knows all too well the tragic cost of immoral wars. He's called this war immoral, several times.

The media and the other candidates are terrified that America will find this out, because they know deep in their hearts that 2008 will be a referendum on Iraq, and there is exactly one candidate who speaks with the moral clarity this nation so desperately craves. You cannot manufacture moral clarity, and that is precisely why Hillary Clinton, John McCain, and the news media are equally threatened by John Kerry. All of the above are far too invested in either hyping, supporting, apologizing, or making excuses for this immoral lie of a war, and they are desperately hoping to convince the American people otherwise. The presence of John Kerry makes their charade impossible. For that reason alone, their entire futures depend on silencing him.

Truth, however, cannot be swept under the rug so easily. The American people have had enough of the lies, the deceptions, and the bloodshed, and they want change. That inconvenient truth does not bode well for those whose futures are deeply invested in the maintenance of the status quo. The winds of change are blowin'....

I have been very pensive this week, deliberating the fallout of this attempted character assassination against our beloved Senator. During one of my darker moods, I happened to recall a sign I had seen once, in what seems like a lifetime ago:

People are unreasonable, illogical and self-centered.
Love them anyway.

If you do good, people will accuse you of selfish, ulterior motives.
Do good anyway.

If you are successful, you will win false friends and true enemies.
Succeed anyway.

The good you do today will be forgotten tomorrow.
Do good anyway.

Honesty and frankness make you vulnerable.
Be honest and frank anyway.

The biggest person with the biggest ideas can be shot down by the smallest person with the smallest mind.
Think big anyway.

What you spend years building may be destroyed overnight.
Build anyway.

People really need help but may attack if you help them.
Help people anyway.

Give the world the best you have and you might get kicked in the teeth.
Give the world the best you've got anyway.

Then I thought it a lovely quote and admired its romantic idealism from afar. Such concepts, while soul-stirring, are very removed from the daily life of an American teenager.

But today I recalled those words and with a shudder understood them fully for the first time. In dolor veritas.

Yeah, I know, like DU needs my two cents out of the several hundreds of dollars worth of opinions that have been offered up today, but here it is anyway, if anyone cares.

I'd just like to point out that one of the achievements that we most proudly point to as a party was the signing of the Civil Rights Act in 1964. When Lyndon Johnson signed it into law, he said "Well, we've just lost the South for 30 years."

He was both right and wrong. He was right in that all the Dixiecrats - a core part of the Democratic party's majority in the mid 20th century - defected to the Republican party in protest over civil rights. He was wrong, however, about the time frame - 42 years after the Civil Rights Act, the South is still solidly Republican, for a variety of reasons - but historically, the Civil Rights Act was the trigger that forced the big switch from D to R.

While the decision to sign into law civil rights for African-Americans probably lost the Democratic party key electoral support in the ensuing 40 years, it remains one of our party's brightest shining moments because it was the right thing to do.

At no time should we be intimidated from doing the right and moral thing because of the backlash from bigots. Bigots will be bigots, and most of them already vote Republican. The decision in New Jersey today was a victory for America and for human rights, and let's be the party that stands UP for human rights - not because it's politically expedient or wins the most votes, but because it's the right thing to do.

So I went home this weekend, partly because I needed to do laundry and partly because I wanted to see my family. I am from a small (pop. 4500) town in the middle of rural corn belt Illinois where the biggest nearby city is my college town, which is an hour away. Political viewpoints are obtained from family members, TV ads, and to a smaller extent newspapers and cable news. So you could hardly accuse anyone from my hometown of being a political hardball insider - which makes their perspective particularly valuable in terms of how politics and candidates are perceived in the "real world" of the average American voting public.

My mom has always been a stalwart Democrat, but my dad remains a stubborn independent. I don't think he's actually voted for a presidential Republican candidate since the 1970s, but he's not exactly a bleeding heart liberal, either. He was for Edwards in the 2004 primary because he liked his populist message, and liked Kerry, but was hardly wild about him in 2004. He loathes Bush and the current crop of fake Christian fascist Republicans with every fiber of his being.

When I came home Dad mentioned that he had seen John Kerry's interview with Chris Wallace on Fox News. To put it mildly: he was impressed. He said Kerry "made Wallace look like an ass" and spoke plainly and forcefully.

He then said something along the lines of: "If Kerry talks like that in Iowa and just tells the average Joe what in the hell is going on, Hillary and the rest of them might as well go home. That's all the average guy wants - someone who won't pull any wishy-washy bullshit and just gets up there and tells the truth."

He said as long as Kerry pulls no punches, he's the one to beat for 2008, and he has yet to see anyone who comes close. He thinks a Kerry/Obama ticket would be unstoppable (I'm inclined to agree). He also said that the latest attacks on Kerry are coming because "people don't want him to be the candidate because he speaks too much truth."

My dad is a 60 year old union man who grew up on a farm and he has a lot more in common with the average American than "top Democratic officials" or Markos Moulitkas or Charlie Cook or whatever other talking heads are tsk-tsking at Kerry this week.

Just thought that you guys would appreciate a dose of reality after this week's blog world/beltway insider tantrum. Out here in real America, Kerry has a lot of respect and support.

The past couple of weeks have seen a desperate and frenzied effort on the part of certain elements of the liberal blogosphere who, despite their best efforts to drive a stake through the heart of John Kerry's political career, have failed to make that damned nuisance John Kerry go away. Much to their eternal disappointment, Kerry did not slink away with his tail between his legs after 2004 - he picked himself up, dusted himself off, and returned to the fray not two months later, this time wiser, tougher, and stronger than ever before. It was a battle of Thermopylaen proportions - John Kerry and a small but fiercely devoted band of supporters standing alone against the swelled ranks of both political parties, the punditocracy and the media, and a vast majority of the "netroots." Who could last long against such odds? They thought it would be easy to make John Kerry a pariah, to hammer the nail in the coffin, to scapegoat him so thoroughly for every failure of the Democratic party over the last four years that he would be a radioactive candidate.

They, not for the first time, underestimated John Kerry. They also underestimated the power of fierce loyalty and conviction.

They ultimately failed because John Kerry stands for something. He stands for a better America; a wiser America; a stronger America; a more equal America. He stands for restoration, both of our national pride and integrity and of our Constitutional foundations. He stands for courage, and perseverance. He stands for hope.

They, on the other hand, stand for fear. They stand for doom and gloom, blustering and arrogant self-righteousness, cynical and cold calculation. They stand for the status quo. They stand for despair. And they are fools if they think their agenda of hatred and anger and negativity can ever trump hope and courage.

On some level, they understand this, and they are scared. They know that the tide is turning against them, at last, and so they are doing what desperate cowards throughout time have done: they are lashing out blindly, abandoning all pretense of hiding their agenda, in one last vicious gambit to rid themselves of that meddlesome senator from Massachusetts. Of course, they are overreaching, and on some level, they know it - they know, deep down, they are ultimately doomed to fail. But that will not stop them from expending every last ounce of their malevolent energy to tear down that which they have hated and opposed for so long.

I can't believe we've reached the halfway point of this arduous marathon already. You all remember the soul-crushing despair of November 3rd - the feeling that the world was ending, the utter and complete desolation and despair. But yet... even in those blackest of days, there was a tiny seed of hope, buried beneath the ashes of our dreams. And through our blood, sweat, and tears, over these past two years we have nurtured that seed - and here we stand, against all odds, standing in support of the man that everyone said would never again have even a ghost of a chance.

We would not have been able to do it if not for the Herculean efforts of the man himself, of course. But he needs us as much as we need him. We are halfway there - but the road is only going to get harder, the hill steeper, the threats more insidious from here on.

We have made it this far, and we must not falter. We must not retreat. We must rise to meet every challenge with an equal response. And most importantly, we must never lose hope. No matter how many stand in opposition to us, no matter how hard the road may be - in the words of Winston Churchill: "Never, never, never give up."

On to victory, friends - stand fast, let's keep marching straight to the White House.

I agree with whometense, karynnj, and beachmom, especially with whometense on the idea that the media will be our biggest problem. However - this is JMHO - I think the most crucial task for JK now is to construct his own narrative. He tried to do this in 2004, but the media, by giving credence to the Swiftboat liars, derailed Kerry's chosen narrative and instead promoted the Beltway insider/aloof/effeminiate meme through participation both active - (pundit snark) - and inactive - refusal to rebut obvious Republican lies. The cumulative effect took a major toll, and IMO made the election closer than it should have been - close enough to Diebold/disenfranchise/supress voter turnout.

However, what the media did not realize is that they inadvertently handed Kerry the script for one of the greatest literary narratives of all human history - the avenged hero narrative.

Why am I obsessing about the word "narrative"? Because I think, fundamentally, the media views itself not as an impartial news outlet, but as a storyteller. Just witness media coverage of any event from a sports competition to an election. The media thrives on creating narratives and storylines for the actors in any given situation, to turn current events into an elaborate real-life stage drama. At the Olympics, more time is spent telling dramatic and touching stories of athletes who overcame obstacles to make it to the top than is spent actually showing the sports themselves. The same is, in a way, true of even elections. Assigning a particular literary stereotype to a real life person enables the media to create a narrative without having to get into the arduous and often contradictory factual details of a person's life. Thus Bush, in 2000, became the "prodigal son" - the hard partyin' rich ne'er-do-well who found God and a sense of purpose in midlife. In 2004, they employed the Wild West John Wayne narrative for Bush - he was the tough, vigilante enforcer of frontier justice not afraid to break the laws in order to do "what's right".

It is obvious to a lot of people that what happened to JK in 2004 - the Swift Boat liars, etc - was wrong and cowardly. By basing their villainy on such obviously untrue and dishonorable tactics, the GOP and the enabling media have given JK the opportunity to assume the mantle of one of the most compelling literary narratives of all - the wronged hero. It's a classic narrative that has formed the basis for some of the greatest works of literature and drama in the English language - the good and honest hero, who believes in the decency of mankind, is done a terrible injustice by an evil villain. Hero is cast out/abandoned/framed for a crime/otherwise incapacitated, and villain assumes control. However, hero is made of sterner stuff, and - after a period of soul-searching/recovery - returns to confront the villain again, this time armed with not only goodness but the righteous anger of an avenger. Villainy cannot stand in the face of the indestructable force of justice, and the hero prevails. This narrative is one of the most popular literary narratives of all time because it is also one of the most compelling. Everyone loves the story of the underdog, the avenger, the phoenix rising from the ashes. And the terrible and unprecedented Swiftboating of John Kerry - a man who all but the most incalcitrant and dishonest freepers acknowledge is a war hero and an honorable man - dropped this narrative right into JK's hands.

I'm not generally speaking a big fan of the "framing" craze that's come over the left, but in this case, I think taking control of this narrative early and using it to our advantage can be one of the biggest boon's for JK's candidacy. We should couch all our defenses and testimonials for Kerry in the context of this frame - especially when responding to the people who are disappointed/let down/angry about 2004. Kerry is certainly not the first good and honorable man to be struck down by a cowardly foe using dishonorable tactics on the field of battle, and rather than be angry with him for suffering the treachery of villainy, people should see that, rather than lay down and die, he has gotten up, dusted himself off, learned a lesson from his wounds, and returned to fight again - this time, to settle the score. This time, fully aware of the evil they are capable of. This time, to avenge himself - and the country - and assume the rightful place that was denied him by the treacherous deceit of a craven foe.

Lots of Dems have been talking the talk about supporting Lamont, but few are willing to walk the walk and hit the ground for him. Kudos to Kerry, Edwards, and every Dem who has supported Ned in real, tangible ways. October 25th... just in time for a certain important date in early November.

Ann Richards is an inspiration to fiery, contrarian women everywhere. Thanks for paving the way for us, Ann. You will not be forgotten.

It was my school's Homecoming week and I was on the homecoming parade committee, so I was manning a booth in the main hallway of the high school registering students for the car parade. One of my friends walked past and called out "hey, did you know a plane hit the World Trade Center?" He said it with kind of an incredulously amused tone of voice - he had assumed that the plane was a small single person aircraft and that the pilot was stupid or drunk or both. Kind of "Darwin Awards" scenario. This was just before 8am (I'm an hour behind the east coast). I took down the booth as class was getting ready to start and went into my biology teacher's room, which functioned as an informal gathering place for students before school started (our bio teacher was really cool). He had a TV in his room and CNN was on. It was there I learned that the plane hadn't been a small plane at all, but a big jetliner - then the second one hit and we knew something was horribly wrong.

I made my way to my first period class about 15 minutes late, but my Calculus teacher also had the TV on and we didn't bother with lessons that day. We watched as reports came in of a plane hitting the Pentagon, and a fourth crashing in Pennsylvania. So much in such a little time - I think that's when it really hit me that this would be one of the most historically significant days I'd ever live through. The first tower collapsed just as the bell rang to adjourn us for second period. No one went to class. My chemistry teacher tried to pretend nothing out of the ordinary was going on and held a quiz, but only three kids showed up. I wasn't one of them.

I remember almost every detail about that day but I don't remember who won our homecoming game that Friday.

It's been five years since 9/11, which seems unreal to me. Five years since our Criminal in Chief declared that Osama was "wanted dead or alive." Five years later, Bush has abandoned any pretense of searching for bin Laden, is busy calling anyone who dissents with his imperial war for oil in Iraq a traitor and a coward, and has repeatedly used the deaths of 3,000 people - people who died five years ago today - as an excuse to strip us of our liberties and bombard us into submission with the truncheon of fear.

I am sick and tired of these third-rate fascists trying to exploit a national tragedy to intimidate and frighten people into supporting the destruction of our freedoms. In these five years since that horrible day, the Republican party has not missed a single chance to tie 9/11 to their bloodthirsty lust for unrestrained power. The death and tragedy of 9/11 has certainly been a great boon to the Bush cabal, so much so that it really makes you wonder whether they're telling the truth about it at all. They certainly had no compunctions in lying about Saddam Hussein's nonexistent links to al-Qaeda to justify their illegal war of aggression in Iraq; how certain can we be that they're telling the truth about anything anymore?

Five years ago, a terrible tragedy took the lives of 3,000 innocent people, and in our fear and despair and rage we ceded total control of our mind, our will, our conscience to an aspiring tyrant who by his every action spits on what we cherish as Americans. Fear is a terrible thing; it corrupts our reason and common sense and causes us to do things we would never consider under normal circumstances. As Americans, we generally love to pat ourselves on the back for our strident dedication to freedom and individual liberties, yet under Bush we have ceded away more personal liberty and privacy than ever. Can you imagine how Republicans would have reacted had Clinton admitted to authorizing a comprehensive wiretap of Americans' phone lines? The outrage would have been audible from the newly demoted Pluto. And with good reason - some things are just above politics. The Bill of Rights and the freedom they give the citizens from their government is a cornerstone, a foundation of our free society. Yet these same Republicans now justify the stripping away of the liberties they claim to be waging a war to protect, all in the name of keeping us "safe" from the terror that only they can protect us from. Make us remember WHY WE NEED THEM!

So if you are tired of living in fear, tired of being told that to question is unpatriotic, tired of George Bush and Dick Cheney abusing the memories of those 3,000 to advance their repressive agenda, then take a moment today to remember the 11th of September. Remember the day five years ago when so much innocent blood was spilled by a dark and shadowy aggressor whose crimes have yet to be punished. Remember, too, the second tragedy that accompanied - the slow suffocation of our liberties, freely given away by we the people in a moment of panic and fear.

Remember these twin crimes against the American people, so that never again will we forget their lessons.