RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
Now You See Me - A Glimpse Into the Zapatista Movement, Two Decades Later Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=26945"><span class="small">Laura Gottesdiener, TomDispatch</span></a>   
Friday, 24 January 2014 08:58

Gottesdiener writes: "Growing up in a well-heeled suburban community, I absorbed our society's distaste for dissent long before I was old enough to grasp just what was being dismissed. ... this is why, until recently, I knew almost nothing about the Mexican Zapatista movement except that the excessive number of 'a's looked vaguely suspicious to me."

Zapatista girl. (artwork: Matt Verges)
Zapatista girl. (artwork: Matt Verges)


Now You See Me - A Glimpse Into the Zapatista Movement, Two Decades Later

By Laura Gottesdiener, TomDispatch

24 January 14

 

rowing up in a well-heeled suburban community, I absorbed our society's distaste for dissent long before I was old enough to grasp just what was being dismissed. My understanding of so many people and concepts was tainted by this environment and the education that went with it: Che Guevara and the Black Panthers and Oscar Wilde and Noam Chomsky and Venezuela and Malcolm X and the Service Employees International Union and so, so many more. All of this is why, until recently, I knew almost nothing about the Mexican Zapatista movement except that the excessive number of "a"s looked vaguely suspicious to me. It's also why I felt compelled to travel thousands of miles to a Zapatista "organizing school" in the heart of the Lacandon jungle in southeastern Mexico to try to sort out just what I'd been missing all these years.

Hurtling South

The fog is so thick that the revelers arrive like ghosts. Out of the mist they appear: men sporting wide-brimmed Zapata hats, women encased in the shaggy sheepskin skirts that are still common in the remote villages of Mexico. And then there are the outsiders like myself with our North Face jackets and camera bags, eyes wide with adventure. ("It's like the Mexican Woodstock!" exclaims a student from the northern city of Tijuana.) The hill is lined with little restaurants selling tamales and arroz con leche and pozol, a ground-corn drink that can rip a foreigner's stomach to shreds. There is no alcohol in sight. Sipping coffee as sugary as Alabama sweet tea, I realize that tonight will be my first sober New Year's Eve since December 31, 1999, when I climbed into bed with my parents to await the Y2K Millennium bug and mourned that the whole world was going to end before I had even kissed a boy.

Thousands are clustered in this muddy field to mark the 20-year anniversary of January 1, 1994, when an army of impoverished farmers surged out of the jungle and launched the first post-modern revolution. Those forces, known as the Zapatista Army of National Liberation, were the armed wing of a much larger movement of indigenous peoples in the southeastern Mexican state of Chiapas, who were demanding full autonomy from their government and global liberation for all people.

As the news swept across that emerging communication system known as the Internet, the world momentarily held its breath. A popular uprising against government-backed globalization led by an all but forgotten people: it was an event that seemed unthinkable. The Berlin Wall had fallen. The market had triumphed. The treaties had been signed. And yet surging out of the jungles came a movement of people with no market value and the audacity to refuse to disappear.

Now, 20 years later, villagers and sympathetic outsiders are pouring into one of the Zapatistas' political centers, known as Oventic, to celebrate the fact that their rebellion has not been wiped out by the wind and exiled from the memory of men.

The plane tickets from New York City to southern Mexico were so expensive that we traveled by land. We E-ZPassed down the eastern seaboard, ate catfish sandwiches in Louisiana, barreled past the refineries of Texas, and then crossed the border. We pulled into Mexico City during the pre-Christmas festivities. The streets were clogged with parents eating tamales and children swinging at piñatas. By daybreak the next morning, we were heading south again. Speed bumps scraped the bottom of our Volvo the entire way from Mexico City to Chiapas, where the Zapatistas control wide swathes of territory. The road skinned the car alive. Later I realized that those speed bumps were, in a way, the consequences of dissent -- tiny traffic-controlling monuments to a culture far less resigned to following the rules.

"Up north," I'd later tell Mexican friends, "we don't have as many speed bumps, but neither do we have as much social resistance."

After five days of driving, we reached La Universidad de la Tierra, a free Zapatista-run school in the touristy town of San Cristóbal de Las Casas in Chiapas. Most of the year, people from surrounding rural communities arrive here to learn trades like electrical wiring, artisanal crafts, and farming practices. This week, thousands of foreigners had traveled to the town to learn about something much more basic: autonomy.

Our first "class" was in the back of a covered pickup truck careening through the Lacandon jungle with orange trees in full bloom. As we passed, men and women raised peace signs in salute. Spray-painted road signs read (in translation):

"You are now entering Zapatista territory. Here the people order and the government obeys."

I grew nauseous from the exhaust and the dizzying mountain views, and after six hours in that pickup on this, my sixth day of travel, two things occurred to me: first, I realized that I had traveled "across" Chiapas in what was actually a giant circle; second, I began to suspect that there was no Zapatista organizing school at all, that the lesson I was supposed to absorb was simply that life is a matter of perpetual, cyclical motion. The movement's main symbol, after all, is a snail's shell.

Finally, though, we arrived in a village where the houses had thatched roofs and the children spoke only the pre-Hispanic language Ch'ol.

¡Ya Basta!

Over the centuries, the indigenous communities of Chiapas survived Spanish conquistadors, slavery, and plantation-style sugar cane fields; Mexican independence and mestizo landowners; racism, railroads, and neoliberal economic reforms. Each passing year seemed to bring more threats to its way of life. As the father of my host family explained to me, the community began to organize itself in the early 1990s because people felt that the government was slowly but surely exterminating them.

The government was chingando, he said, which translates roughly as deceiving, cheating, and otherwise screwing someone over. It was, he said, stealing their lands. It was extracting the region's natural resources, forcing people from the countryside into the cities. It was disappearing the indigenous languages through its version of public education. It was signing free trade agreements that threatened to devastate the region's corn market and the community's main subsistence crop.

So on January 1, 1994, the day the North America Free Trade Agreement went into effect, some residents of this village -- along with those from hundreds of other villages -- seized control of major cities across the state and declared war on the Mexican government. Under the name of the Zapatista Army for National Liberation, they burned the army's barracks and liberated the inmates in the prison at San Cristóbal de Las Casas.

In response, the Mexican army descended on Chiapas with such violence that the students of Mexico City rioted in the streets. In the end, the two sides sat down for peace talks that, to this day, have never been resolved.

The uprising itself lasted only 12 days; the response was a punishing decade of repression. First came the great betrayal. Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo, who, in the wake of the uprising, had promised to enact greater protections for indigenous peoples, instead sent thousands of troops into the Zapatistas' territory in search of Subcomandante Marcos, the world-renowned spokesperson for the movement. They didn't find him. But the operation marked the beginning of a hush-hush war against the communities that supported the Zapatistas. The army, police, and hired thugs burned homes and fields and wrecked small, communally owned businesses. Some local leaders disappeared. Others were imprisoned. In one region of Chiapas, the entire population was displaced for so long that the Red Cross set up a refugee camp for them. (In the end, the community rejected the Red Cross aid, in the same way that it also rejects all government aid.)

Since 1994, the movement has largely worked without arms. Villagers resisted government attacks and encroachments with road blockades, silent marches, and even, in one famous case, an aerial attack comprised entirely of paper airplanes.

The Boy Who Is Free

Fifteen years after the uprising, a child named Diego was born in Zapatista territory. He was the youngest member of the household where I was staying, and during my week with the family, he was always up to something. He agitated the chickens, peeked his head through the window to surprise his father at the breakfast table, and amused the family by telling me long stories in Ch'ol that I couldn't possibly understand.

He also, unknowingly, defied the government's claim that he does not exist.

Diego is part of the first generation of Zapatista children whose births are registered by one of the organization's own civil judges. In the eyes of his father, he is one of the first fully independent human beings. He was born in Zapatista territory, attends a Zapatista school, lives on unregistered land, and his body is free of pesticides and genetically modified organisms. Adding to his autonomy is the fact that nothing about him -- not his name, weight, eye color, or birth date -- is officially registered with the Mexican government. His family does not receive a peso of government aid, nor does it pay a peso worth of taxes. Not even the name of Diego's town appears on any official map.

By first-world standards, this autonomy comes at a steep price: some serious poverty. Diego's home has electricity but no running water or indoor plumbing. The outhouse is a hole in the ground concealed by waist-high tarp walls. The bathtub is the small stream in the backyard. Their chickens often free-range it right through their one-room, dirt-floor house. Eating them is considered a luxury.

The population of the town is split between Zapatistas and government loyalists, whom the Zapatistas call "priistas" in reference to Mexico's ruling political party, the PRI. To discern who is who, all you have to do is check whether or not a family's roof sports a satellite dish.

Then again, the Zapatistas aren't focused on accumulating wealth, but on living with dignity. Most of the movement's work over the last two decades has involved patiently building autonomous structures for Diego and his generation. Today, children like him grow up in a community with its own Zapatista schools; communal businesses; banks; hospitals; clinics; judicial processes; birth, death, and marriage certificates; annual censuses; transportation systems; sports teams; musical bands; art collectives; and a three-tiered system of government. There are no prisons. Students learn both Spanish and their own indigenous language in school. An operation in the autonomous hospital can cost one-tenth that in an official hospital. Members of the Zapatista government, elected through town assemblies, serve without receiving any monetary compensation.

Economic independence is considered the cornerstone of autonomy -- especially for a movement that opposes the dominant global model of neoliberal capitalism. In Diego's town, the Zapatista families have organized a handful of small collectives: a pig-raising operation, a bakery, a shared field for farming, and a chicken coop. The 20-odd chickens had all been sold just before Christmas, so the coop was empty when we visited. The three women who ran the collective explained, somewhat bashfully, that they would soon purchase more chicks to raise.

As they spoke in the outdoor chicken coop, there were squealing noises beneath a nearby table. A tangled cluster of four newly born puppies, eyes still crusted shut against the light, were squirming to stay warm. Their mother was nowhere in sight, and the whole world was new and cold, and everything was unknown. I watched them for a moment and thought about how, although it seemed impossible, they would undoubtedly survive and grow.

Unlike Diego, the majority of young children on the planet today are born into densely packed cities without access to land, animals, crops, or almost any of the natural resources that are required to sustain human life. Instead, we city dwellers often need a ridiculous amount of money simply to meet our basic needs. My first apartment in New York City, a studio smaller than my host family's thatched-roof house, cost more per month than the family has likely spent in Diego's entire lifetime.

As a result, many wonder if the example of the Zapatistas has anything to offer an urbanized planet in search of change. Then again, this movement resisted defeat by the military of a modern state and built its own school, medical, and governmental systems for the next generation without even having the convenience of running water. So perhaps a more appropriate question is: What's the rest of the world waiting for?

Celebrating Dissent

Around six o'clock, when night falls in Oventic, the music for the celebration begins. On stage, a band of guitar-strumming men wear hats that look like lampshades with brightly colored tassels. Younger boys perform Spanish rap. Women, probably from the nearby state of Veracruz, play son jarocho, a type of folk music featuring miniature guitar-like instruments.

It's raining gently in the open field. The mist clings to shawls and skirts and pasamontañas, the face-covering ski masks that have become iconic imagery for the Zapatistas. "We cover our faces so that you can see us" is a famous Zapatista saying. And it's true: For a group of people often erased by politicians and exploited by global economies, the ski-masks have the curious effect of making previously invisible faces visible.

Still, there are many strategies to make dissent disappear, of which the least effective may be violence. The most ingenious is undoubtedly to make the rest of the world -- and even the dissenter herself -- dismissive of what's being accomplished. Since curtailing its military offensive, the government has waged a propaganda war focused on convincing the rest of Mexico, the world, and even Zapatista communities themselves that the movement and its vision no longer exists.

But there are just as many strategies for keeping dissent and dissenters going. One way is certainly to invite thousands of outsiders to visit your communities and see firsthand that they are real, that in every way that matters they are thriving, and that they have something to teach the rest of us. As Diego's father said in an uncharacteristic moment of boastfulness, "I think by now that the whole world has heard of our organization."

Writing is another way to prevent an idea and a movement from disappearing, especially when one is hurtling down the highway in Texas headed back to New York City, already surrounded by a reality so different as to instantly make the Zapatistas hard to remember.

The most joyous way to assert one's existence, however, is through celebration.

The New Year arrived early in Oventic. One of the subcomandantes had just read a communique issued by the organization's leadership, first in Spanish, then in the indigenous languages Tzotzil and Tzeltal. The latter translations took her nearly twice as long to deliver, as if to remind us of all the knowledge that was lost with the imposition of a colonial language centuries ago. Then, a low hiss like a cracked soda can, and two fireworks exploded into the air.

"Long live the insurgents!" a masked man on stage cried.

"Viva!" we shouted. The band burst into song, and two more fireworks shot into the sky, their explosions well timed drumbeats of color and sound. The coordination was impeccable. As the chants continued, the air grew so smoky that we could barely see the fireworks exploding, but in that moment, I could still feel their brilliance and the illumination, 20 years old, of the movement releasing them.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
The Infrastructure of American Democracy Is Dysfunctional Print
Thursday, 23 January 2014 14:56

Nichols writes: "President Obama's second inaugural address touched on the reality that the United States has a dysfunctional election system."

Florida voters waited in long lines to vote in the 2012 election, after the state reduced early voting and polling places. (photo: Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
Florida voters waited in long lines to vote in the 2012 election, after the state reduced early voting and polling places. (photo: Joe Raedle/Getty Images)


The Infrastructure of American Democracy Is Dysfunctional

By John Nichols, The Nation

23 January 14

 

resident Obama's second inaugural address touched on the reality that the United States has a dysfunctional election system. Describing the nation's progress, as well as the ways in which the nation needs to progress, the president declared, "Our journey is not complete until no citizen is forced to wait for hours to exercise the right to vote."

Obama drew knowing applause when he spoke that truth in January 2013, as he did in November 2012, when just hours after his re-election the president noted that millions of Americans had "waited in line for a very long time" to vote. Then, in an ad lib that got more attention than his prepared remark, the president added: "By the way we have to fix that."

On Wednesday, the process of fixing the problem - and of moving America a few more steps toward democracy - accelerated. A little.

Continue Reading: The Infrastructure of American Democracy Is Dysfunctional

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Get Ready for Rand Paul Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=6853"><span class="small">Frank Rich, New York Magazine</span></a>   
Thursday, 23 January 2014 09:12

Rich writes: "The one-two punch out of McDonnell and Christie has pretty much leveled the media and GOP Establishment fantasy that the Republicans might nominate a 'centrist' conservative for president in 2016. As I've said before - and before Christie's fall - the front-runner for that nomination, at this early date at least, is Rand Paul."

Rand Paul. (photo: Jeff Malet/maletphoto.com)
Rand Paul. (photo: Jeff Malet/maletphoto.com)


Get Ready for Rand Paul

By Frank Rich, New York Magazine

23 January 14

 

Every week, New York Magazine writer-at-large Frank Rich talks with contributor Eric Benson about the biggest stories in politics and culture. This week: What the twin scandals of Bob McDonnell and Chris Christie mean for the GOP, and a look at the Oscar nominees.

ormer Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, were indicted yesterday for accepting and attempting to conceal $140,000 in loans and gifts (among them private-jet trips and wedding catering) in exchange for helping a shady Richmond-based businessman curry political favor and push a non-FDA-approved "dietary supplement." McDonnell's scandal helped Democrats sweep Virginia's 2013 elections. What is the political fallout of the former First Couple's indictment and will it lead to more?

It was just a little over four years ago that the simultaneous election of McDonnell and Chris Christie to the governorship in two states along the northeastern corridor - the purple Virginia and blue New Jersey - heralded the arrival of a pair of dream presidential contenders for the GOP: relatively moderate, bipartisan-minded exemplars of good governance rather than ideological warfare. In McDonnell's case, the moderation was a bit of a stretch: He's the governor schooled at Pat Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network University (since rebranded as Regent), whose tenure became synonymous with "transvaginal ultrasound wands" after he endorsed the idea of inflicting them on women seeking abortions. He's also the governor who left any mention of slavery out of his declaration of Confederate History Month because he wanted to focus only on issues that he "thought were most significant for Virginia." Now he will also be known for his close association with Rolex, Ferrari, Oscar de la Renta, Armani, Louis Vuitton, Bergdorf, and all the other aspirational brands that he and his wife were able to harvest with the aid of a sugar daddy seeking a gubernatorial blessing for a pseudo-pharmaceutical product that sounds suspiciously like snake oil.

McDonnell has a better chance of landing in prison than the White House. His household scandals paved the way for a most unlikely figure, the freewheeling Clinton crony Terry McAuliffe, to succeed him as Virginia's governor. That's the local political fallout. As for the future national fallout: The one-two punch out of McDonnell and Christie has pretty much leveled the media and GOP Establishment fantasy that the Republicans might nominate a "centrist" conservative for president in 2016. As I've said before - and before Christie's fall - the front-runner for that nomination, at this early date at least, is Rand Paul. Unless, of course, Mitt Romney is inspired to run again by the runaway success of the humanizing documentary Mitt at Sundance. It goes up on Netflix on Friday, and may prove a winning political antidote to the repellent fictional Democratic politician Frank Underwood, soon to return in season two of House of Cards.

Christie was inaugurated yesterday amid scandals over the George Washington Bridge lane closures, Sandy relief money, and a growing sense that his office routinely punished his political adversaries. You dismissed Christie's presidential chances before these scandals. What happens to him now? Can he still be a viable governor? And are there any conclusions we can draw between McDonnell's abuses of power and Christie's office's misdeeds?

Before the scandal, Christie had about as much a chance of winning his party's hearts and minds on the primary circuit as his fellow bully Rudy Giuliani did in 2008. In their own party, they are considered quasi-leftists by the grassroots. Now fellow Republicans have another reason to beat up on Christie, and so they are, with even (relative) moderates like Lindsey Graham joining long-time Christie bashers like Rand Paul in piling on. When Christie went down to Florida over the weekend to fund-raise for the reelection campaign of the incumbent Republican governor, Rick Scott, the two men had no joint public appearances or press conferences. Ken Cuccinelli, the right-wing former Virginia attorney general who lost the Virginia governorship to McAuliffe in part because of the McDonnell scandal, has just become the first to call for Christie to resign as chairman of the Republican Governors Association.

Christie cannot be a viable governor if he is spending all his time trying to defend himself. And he will keep having to defend himself until we get the answer, for starters, to the basic question that every voter is still asking: How does an underling send the order "Time for some traffic problems at Fort Lee" and get it executed on the busiest bridge in the world for four disruptive days without someone above her knowing about it or acting to end it? We also don't know what other scandals will emerge, including the dirt that turned up in the Romney campaign's vetting of him for the vice-presidency, or to what extent Christie and his circle will stonewall investigators and subpoenas. It tells you a lot about what's to come that Christie has now hired a Giuliani crony, the criminal lawyer Randy Mastro, to help him circle the wagons as investigators flood into Trenton. Meanwhile, Christie's public persona shows no signs of real contrition. He remains a world-class narcissist who regards himself, not his constituents, as the truly "sad" and "heartbroken" victim of the scandal. By the count of James Warren of the Daily News, Christie still managed to use the pronoun "I" nearly twenty times in his downsized eighteen-minute inaugural address yesterday. This is going to be a long second term.

If there's a unifying lesson to be learned from the double-header of the McDonnell-Christie scandals, it's only that dubious character is hardly a bar to running for governor. Yesterday, the Republican senator David Vitter, best known for turning up in the phone book of the "D.C. Madam" in 2007, announced he would seek Louisiana's state house in 2015. Somewhere, perhaps, Rod Blagojevich is laughing.

Last week, the Oscar nominations were announced, with American Hustle, Gravity, and 12 Year a Slave getting the most nods. Did the Academy do last year's films justice? And what or who were you most sorry didn't make the cut?

This was such a great year for movies that there was no way even the Oscars could screw it up. I am a fan of Inside Llewyn Davis - a taste not universally shared - so I was sorry to see it snubbed. I remain baffled by the popularity of Gravity, a bravura slab of cinema smothered by a syrupy script that is as mawkish as it is unbelievable. (But if grosses count at the Oscars - and they do - it must be considered the front-runner.) I look forward to watching the ceremony, and hope that Mitt Romney, who spurned a Tony Awards invitation to present a trophy to The Book of Mormon a few years back, will serve as a presenter this time, now that he's got skin in the Hollywood game.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
On and Off the Road With Barack Obama Print
Wednesday, 22 January 2014 14:35

Remnick writes: "I was along for the ride, sitting in a guest cabin with a couple of aides and a staffer who was tasked with keeping watch over a dark suit bag with a tag reading 'The President.'"

President Obama delivers a campaign speech. (photo: Scott Olson/Getty Images)
President Obama delivers a campaign speech. (photo: Scott Olson/Getty Images)


On and Off the Road With Barack Obama

By David Remnick, The New Yorker

22 January 14

 

n the Sunday afternoon before Thanksgiving, Barack Obama sat in the office cabin of Air Force One wearing a look of heavy-lidded annoyance. The Affordable Care Act, his signature domestic achievement and, for all its limitations, the most ambitious social legislation since the Great Society, half a century ago, was in jeopardy. His approval rating was down to forty per cent - lower than George W. Bush's in December of 2005, when Bush admitted that the decision to invade Iraq had been based on intelligence that "turned out to be wrong." Also, Obama said thickly, "I've got a fat lip."

That morning, while playing basketball at F.B.I. headquarters, Obama went up for a rebound and came down empty-handed; he got, instead, the sort of humbling reserved for middle-aged men who stubbornly refuse the transition to the elliptical machine and Gentle Healing Yoga. This had happened before. In 2010, after taking a self-described "shellacking" in the midterm elections, Obama caught an elbow in the mouth while playing ball at Fort McNair. He wound up with a dozen stitches. The culprit then was one Reynaldo Decerega, a member of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute. Decerega wasn't invited to play again, though Obama sent him a photograph inscribed "For Rey, the only guy that ever hit the President and didn't get arrested. Barack."

This time, the injury was slighter and no assailant was named - "I think it was the ball," Obama said - but the President needed little assistance in divining the metaphor in this latest insult to his person. The pundits were declaring 2013 the worst year of his Presidency. The Republicans had been sniping at Obamacare since its passage, nearly four years earlier, and HealthCare.gov, a Web site that was undertested and overmatched, was a gift to them. There were other beribboned boxes under the tree: Edward Snowden's revelations about the National Security Agency; the failure to get anything passed on gun control or immigration reform; the unseemly waffling over whether the Egyptian coup was a coup; the solidifying wisdom in Washington that the President was "disengaged," allergic to the forensic and seductive arts of political persuasion. The congressional Republicans quashed nearly all legislation as a matter of principle and shut down the government for sixteen days, before relenting out of sheer tactical confusion and embarrassment - and yet it was the President's miseries that dominated the year-end summations.

Obama worried his lip with his tongue and the tip of his index finger. He sighed, slumping in his chair. The night before, Iran had agreed to freeze its nuclear program for six months. A final pact, if one could be arrived at, would end the prospect of a military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities and the hell that could follow: terror attacks, proxy battles, regional war - take your pick. An agreement could even help normalize relations between the United States and Iran for the first time since the Islamic Revolution, in 1979. Obama put the odds of a final accord at less than even, but, still, how was this not good news?

The answer had arrived with breakfast. The Saudis, the Israelis, and the Republican leadership made their opposition known on the Sunday-morning shows and through diplomatic channels. Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, called the agreement a "historic mistake." Even a putative ally like New York Senator Chuck Schumer could go on "Meet the Press" and, fearing no retribution from the White House, hint that he might help bollix up the deal. Obama hadn't tuned in. "I don't watch Sunday-morning shows," he said. "That's been a well-established rule." Instead, he went out to play ball.

Usually, Obama spends Sundays with his family. Now he was headed for a three-day fund-raising trip to Seattle, San Francisco, and Los Angeles, rattling the cup in one preposterous mansion after another. The prospect was dispiriting. Obama had already run his last race, and the chances that the Democratic Party will win back the House of Representatives in the 2014 midterm elections are slight. The Democrats could, in fact, lose the Senate.

For an important trip abroad, Air Force One is crowded with advisers, military aides, Secret Service people, support staff, the press pool. This trip was smaller, and I was along for the ride, sitting in a guest cabin with a couple of aides and a staffer who was tasked with keeping watch over a dark suit bag with a tag reading "The President."

Obama spent his flight time in the private quarters in the nose of the plane, in his office compartment, or in a conference room. At one point on the trip from Andrews Air Force Base to Seattle, I was invited up front for a conversation. Obama was sitting at his desk watching the Miami Dolphins-Carolina Panthers game. Slender as a switch, he wore a white shirt and dark slacks; a flight jacket was slung over his high-backed leather chair. As we talked, mainly about the Middle East, his eyes wandered to the game. Reports of multiple concussions and retired players with early-onset dementia had been in the news all year, and so, before I left, I asked if he didn't feel at all ambivalent about following the sport. He didn't.

"I would not let my son play pro football," he conceded. "But, I mean, you wrote a lot about boxing, right? We're sort of in the same realm."

The Miami defense was taking on a Keystone Kops quality, and Obama, who had lost hope on a Bears contest, was starting to lose interest in the Dolphins. "At this point, there's a little bit of caveat emptor," he went on. "These guys, they know what they're doing. They know what they're buying into. It is no longer a secret. It's sort of the feeling I have about smokers, you know?"

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Four Years After 'Citizens United': Real Movement Print
Wednesday, 22 January 2014 14:20

Nichols writes: "This is a coalition...boldly demanding that the US Constitution be amended - a reform sufficient to prevent the High Court from transforming American democracy into a dollarocracy."

According to Nichols, the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling struck down barriers for multinational corporations to buy elections. (photo: Getty Images)
According to Nichols, the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling struck down barriers for multinational corporations to buy elections. (photo: Getty Images)


Four Years After 'Citizens United': Real Movement

By John Nichols, The Nation

22 January 14

 

our years after an activist majority on the United States Supreme Court struck down barriers to the buying of elections by multinational corporations - with the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling that signaled an intention to dismantle remaining restraints on money in politics - a broad-based movement has emerged to undo the damage done by the Court.

This is a coalition that refuses to tinker around the edges of the crisis.

It is boldly demanding that the US Constitution be amended - a reform sufficient to prevent the High Court from transforming American democracy into a dollarocracy.

Continue Reading: Four Years After 'Citizens United': Real Movement

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 2981 2982 2983 2984 2985 2986 2987 2988 2989 2990 Next > End >>

Page 2983 of 3432

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN