Friday, September 23, 2016

Note to some fellow lefties...

Students from Johnson C. Smith University at a rally for Hillary Clinton in Charlotte, North Carolina. Credit Doug Mills/The New York Times        
Sorry to say, rapacious capitalism will still be here in November. Not only that, but I doubt it will ever be simply voted out. Even if a "socialist" like Bernie were to someday be elected (I wish). But maybe that's just old-school me.

Whatever the case, come the first of the year, either Hillary Clinton, or Donald Trump, will be our next president and Jill Stein and Gary Johnson will have taken their campaign funds and gone home, a la Ralph Nader and the rest of those perennial presidential spoiler candidates.

That's when the real movement for social justice, peace and racial equality needs to kick into gear again -- after the election, no matter who is elected.

NYT columnist Charles Blow, speaking to Morgan State Univ. students, tries to break through the reported millennial political malaise and encourage a large youth turnout for Clinton.
First — and this cannot be said enough — Clinton and Trump are not equally bad candidates. One is a conventional politician who has a long record of public service full of pros and cons. The other is a demagogic bigot with a puddle-deep understanding of national and international issues, who openly courts white nationalism, is hostile to women, Mexicans and Muslims, and is callously using black people as pawns in a Donnie-come-lately kinder-gentler campaign.
As an educator, I would also include Trump's pledge to do away with public education or what he calls, the "government monopoly" of public schools. And here I thought Trump loved to play Monopoly.

Blow continues...
That person will appoint someone to fill the current vacancy on the Supreme Court (assuming that the Senate doesn’t find religion and move on Merrick Garland before the new president takes office) and that person will also appoint federal judges to fill the 88 district court and court of appeals vacancies that now exist (there are 51 nominees pending for these seats).
And more...
You can’t have taken part in a march for Eric Garner, chanting “I can’t breathe,” and risk the ascendance of a man who has as one of his chief advisers Rudy Giuliani, the grandfather of the very “broken windows” policing strategy that sent officers after low-level offenders like Garner.
You can’t detest racial-dragnet-policy stop-and-frisk policing as not only morally abhorrent but thoroughly unconstitutional and risk the ascendance of a man who on Wednesday reportedly suggested that he would consider using stop-and-frisk more across the nation.
Makes sense. As Bernie Sanders himself said last week: “This is not the time for a protest vote.”

As one of the leaders of the "vote in the streets" 60's youth revolt and someone who has often cast protest votes or gone fishing on meaningless election days, I couldn't agree more.


  1. Secondary_Math_TeacherSeptember 24, 2016 at 8:38 AM

    Charles Blow's comments on Mrs. Clinton vs. Mr. Trump are right on point.

    I am still shocked and dismayed by anyone who didn't see the Gore/W dichotomy in a similar light. The difference between W and Gore was so obvious to me, and I argued the same... that the Gore/W election was NOT a time to put in a protest vote. To this day I believe that if Albert Gore had been voted in as president in 2000, our nation would be so much better off now.

  2. Well done sir. I sure hope we don't end up with the situation like Richard Nixon being voted in because some people did not see Hubert Humphrey as different. Humphrey (like all of us had flaws. But he would have been a far better President than Nixon.

  3. "[Humphrey]like all of us had flaws..."
    Sorry Joe, but the war in Vietnam and Dixiecrat Jim Crow weren't what I would call "flaws" and "all of us" weren't guilty of it. By '68, the Dems were clearly seen as the war party and the party of southern segregation. Too late to reverse the verdict on Humphrey. Supporting him would have been an absolute betrayal. Did you? The young anti-war and civil rights movements, voted in the streets that year and then ran Dick ("I am not a crook") Nixon out of office in '74). Sometimes that is necessary. But not this year. Keep eyes on the prize.

  4. We ran him out of office? We were one force among many. A major factor was the Tet offensive and the realization that we could not defeat the enemy. Another was the growing rebellion in the military; the "fragging", rebellion on board ships. etc. etc.

  5. My interpretation has been that the removal of Nixon was a symbolic farse--the quasi- bringing down the head of a government that ended up holding the bag for a lost a war.


Agree? Disagree? Let me hear from you.