Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

silencing the minority

Just one more instance of evil on the part of our government.  Using the list of who donated to Kerry's campaign to exclude certain delegates from the Inter-American Telecommunications Commission meeting...  so fucking blatant.  Is this what McCain-Feingold has wrought?  Even if the Dems take back the government, is this particular abuse of power irreversible?  The men in power now are acting as if they will have power no matter what they do; they know that they control the voting machines, and that they have a lock on a large portion of this country. 

Their push to silence the minority (this is but a small piece of it, compared to the effort to eliminate the filibuster) belies a belief that they will be in power forever.  They believe their lock is complete, and it's hard to see how we can break it.  They control the voting machines in the middle ground, they have maneuvered the unreasoning half of the country to simply vote for them blindly, and they control the media to the extent that this story will only ever be heard of in Time's "Notebook" section.

I wonder what the numbers are on oustanding federal judge positions since 1992.  I would say that since 1994 the ability of the government to fill those positions has been severely limited, just as a gut feeling; I'd like to know what the numbers actually look like.


( 1 comment — Leave a comment )
Apr. 26th, 2005 05:23 pm (UTC)
Addressing a change of power
So I had this thought when I was in Israel, where the Progessive/Religious movement has a similar challenge (there, the Ultra-Orthodox control the swing vote, so the UO gets a lot of power in the government). It seems that there is a fundamental failure on the part of the non-incumbent movements, which asserts something like this:

"The guy in power is bad"

"You don't like the guy in power"

"I'm not the guy in power"

"Vote for me"

This argument does ignore the fact that swing voters are generally not single issue voters, but rather have a complex approach, and on a given Tuesday, might feel more strongly about the best defense than they do about faster progress on marriage reform, even assuming that an alternate candidate would make sweeping changes faster than the courts are doing so.

So there is a big question that has to be answered - how are those who advocate reform going to reach out to the middle ground voters, who aren't quite so dogmatic? Especially to those with a knee jerk reaction to sounds of "Vote for anyone except ...." which reminds us to much of 1930's Germany for comfort.
( 1 comment — Leave a comment )