Should I run against Doggett?

Written by: Scott Trimble on Sep 23, 2007 3:52 AM EDT

Linked to groups: Democracy for Texas - Austin

Many of us in Austin groups working for peace and/or impeachment of Bush and/or Cheney have made numerous attempts to set up a meeting between our groups and our representative, Lloyd Doggett, to discuss these issues, and have been repeatedly rebuffed.  This experience has led me to decide to seriously explore the possibility of running against Mr. Doggett in 2008, not specifically because of these issues (impeachment will be moot after the 2008 elections, and hopefully, so will the the conflagration in Iraq), but because it is my belief that our supposedly representative democracy has become not so representative.

Read more

Impeachment is not enough

Written by: Scott Trimble on Jul 11, 2007 11:49 PM EDT

George W Bush has maintained an approval rating below 30% for how long now?  46% of Americans currently believe he should be removed from office, while 54% believe Cheney should.  Articles of Impeachment for Cheney have already been introduced in Congress, and while they have not been brought to the floor, the topic has been "out there" at least since the November elections.

Along with the "war" in Iraq, the other big reason for the change of majorities in both houses of Congress in the November 2006 election was the perception of corruption and dishonesty, especially among Republicans.  In 1994, the Republicans gained control of Congress by promising to bring the issues that were important to the people to the fore, based on a general understanding that the Democratic Congress had become unresponsive to the issues that mattered to the people.

Not long after that Bill Clinton became only the second President ever impeached....

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/11/212653/438

Between the Neo-cons and their "unitary executive"

Written by: Scott Trimble on Jun 15, 2007 11:40 AM EDT

Linked to groups: Democracy For TX-25

(which might also be called the new path to autocracy) and the Democrats failure to stand firm on getting us out of Iraq, taking impeachment off the table, and still no serious talk of single-payer universal health care (not just "coverage"), it becomes more obvious to me evry day that we must move America closer to democracy. We must put more power in the hands of the people, spread out enough to prevent tyranny, and deliberative enough to prevent rash decisions.  To this end...

Read more

Impeach, Convict & Prosecute

Written by: Scott Trimble on Jun 1, 2007 3:21 PM EDT

I don't know how many of you have the time or inclination (or a flat-rate long distance plan), but if you would like to join me, this is the action I am taking today:

I am calling the Democratic members (and Ron Paul) of two subcommittees (which appear from their names at least to be a bit redundant):

The House Committee on Foreign Affairs' Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights and Oversight

and

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform's Subcommittee on National Security & Foreign Affairs

Anyway, I'm calling them to insist that their duty of oversight with regard to foreign affairs includes a responsibility to censure or otherwise punish the President for violation of Public Law 107-243 (which was popularly known as The Authorization to Use Military Force in Iraq), which authorized the President to use military force in Iraq pursuant to two specific provisions:

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq ; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq .

Undoubtedly, any threat to the US which was ever purported to exist from Iraq was removed when Saddam Hussein and his government were removed from power, and it has now become a matter of public record (and some of us knew long before the invasion ) that Iraq never posed a military threat to the United States. Furthermore, the UN Security Council resolutions of which the previous government of Iraq was held to be in violation all pertained to that previous government, and not the current government, which was established by elections and assembled over a year ago. Also, even before that government was seated, the government which was held to be in violation ceased to exist four years ago.

THEREFORE: The President of the United States, having kept an offensive military force in Iraq well beyond the existence of these conditions, and indeed well beyond a reasonable amount of time after the expiration of these conditions to have removed the offensive military forces, is in violation of US law, and should be punished appropriately, through censure, impeachment, or some other legal proceeding before Congress.

Below are the names and phone numbers of the Congress members I am calling. Please join me if you can.

Peace,
Scott


House Committee on Foreign Affairs
Subcommittee on International Organizations, Human Rights and Oversight
Chair: Bill Delahunt Mass
subcommittee office 202-226-6434
all other phone numbers begin with 202-225-
Russ Carnahan Missouri x 2671
Donald Payne New Jersey x 3436
ask for Stephanie
Gregory Meeks New York x 3461
Joseph Crowley New York x 3965
Ron Paul Texas x 2831

House Committee on Oversight & Government Reform
Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs
chair: John Tierney Mass x 8020
Carolyn Maloney New York x 7944
Stephen Lynch Massachussets 8273
Brian Higgins New York 3306
John Yarmuth Kentucky 5401
Bruce Braley Iowa 2911
Betty McCollum Minnesota 6631
Jim Cooper Tennessee 4311
Chris Van Hollen Maryland 5341
Paul Hodes New Hampshire 5206
Peter Welch Vermont 4115
Tom Lantos* 3531
*also chair of House Committee on Foreign Affairs

In support of Rep. Ron Paul's legislation to sunset the AUMF-Iraq (Public Law 107-243), but also to request investigation and admonishment/punishment/censure of the President for overstepping the bounds of that law. Since both elements of that authorization have been fulfilled, or are no longer relevant, it is unauthorized, and therefore unlawful, for the President to be keeping an offensive force in Iraq.

 

Ready for Democracy?

Written by: Scott Trimble on May 31, 2007 10:30 AM EDT

Linked to groups: Democracy for Texas - Austin

The administration of George W. Bush has laid bare many of the loopholes and other flaws in our supposedly democratic form of government. Many of us knew, or at least suspected, that something was wrong with our system even before our current President-who-would-be-king took office, but it was easier to ignore many of the problems, or at least to claim that there was nothing we could do about it. Since the arrival of the little dictator, it has become imperative that we find a way to do something about the problems in our political system, for our personal, cultural, environmental and political survival.

Read more

Why support Gore?

Written by: Scott Trimble on May 31, 2007 10:00 AM EDT

When he served for so long in the Senate riding down the middle of the road, then slid to the right for eight years in the Clinton White House, then chose Lieberman as a running mate AND failed to fight for his victory (as all evidence seemed then, and since to indicate that a full recount would have shown him to be the winner), and by doing so, failed to fight for the poor blacks in Florida who were disenfranchised illegally, and failed to fight for all of us to be free of the type of President who would steal an election, and worse, as we have since found out (although I'm sure many of us suspected it already)...just because he has  now slid slightly back to the left?  Why aren't grassroots groups like this fully behind Kucinich or Gravel, or at least arguing about which of those two to support?  Are you still buying into the establishment's "unelectable" categorization?  That's what a grassroots movement is supposed to fight against, that top-down mentality, that "we'll tell you who to vote for" culture that has been gradually taking over and destroying our democracy.  Why support someone who offers only the slight reprieve of a few years without a Republican in the White House? Why not support someone with a truly progressive vision who wants to truly break new ground and take us somewhere better than we have ever been before?  Why not support someone who wants to build a peace not built on fear, but a lasting peace built on establishing a more cooperative foreign policy?  Why not support someone who wants to provide Americans with a REAL universal health care system, rather than a facade that allows the insurance companies to continue to swindle us?

Gore seems to have had a transformation on environmental issues. Great! Offer him the Secretary of Energy or Secretary of the Interior job, but I have heard nothing from him suggesting that he's got any new and progressive vision on other issues, like empowering the people of America to become part of the decision-making process.

Gravel/Kucinich '08! 

 

Read more

Who's ready for real democracy for America?

Written by: Scott Trimble on May 30, 2007 8:19 PM EDT

The administration of George W. Bush has laid bare many of the loopholes and other flaws in our supposedly democratic form of government. Many of us knew, or at least suspected, that something was wrong with our system even before our current President-who-would-be-king took office, but it was easier to ignore many of the problems, or at least to claim that there was nothing we could do about it. Since the arrival of the little dictator, it has become imperative that we find a way to do something about the problems in our political system, for our personal, cultural, environmental and political survival.

Read more

A new Plan for Iran

Written by: Scott Trimble on May 9, 2007 10:52 AM EDT

Linked to groups: Democracy For TX-25

So, the big "problem" with Iran is the idea that they want nuclear energy.  They say they want it for peaceful energy purposes, while many other nations (including the US) seem to fear that they want to develop nuclear weaponry.  So, my idea is to call their bluff.

If they want energy for peaceful purposes, there really is no more peaceful, ecologically-friendly, and in the long run, cheaper source than solar power.  Since solar power is relatively expensive up front, however, it can be prohibitive to get into.  So, why don't we (the US) try to estimate how much it would cost to retro-fit all of Iran's houses and other suitable buildings with solar panel roofing, then create an international fund, and ask all the other nations who are concerned about Iran's desire to acquire nuclear energy to contribute, and then offer Iran basically a free solar energy plan that will not create nuclear wastes to make their citizens sick, tied to an agreement for nuclear inspectors to be able to carry on inspections there to guarantee the rest of the world that no new nuclear weaponry is being created.  After all, expensive as it may be, it's bound to be cheaper than another war. Heck, there might even be some money after that (that we won't need for more war) that could be used to start retro-fitting houses here.

Iran would be hard pressed to turn down such an offer, as it would say to the world that in fact they would prefer nuclear power for its weapon capabilities, but it would also help their people, which would also be a show of humanitarian generosity and ecological good intentions, which would be a good first step in restoring the good reputation the US once had. Furthermore, if Israel was one of the contributors to the fund, then it might be the beginnings of trying to bridge the differences between those two nations.

 I'd like to find out what others think about this idea.

Congress needs our help

Written by: Scott Trimble on Feb 9, 2007 2:58 PM EST

We need to take action to protect our troops.  Congress will not do it without us forcing them.  Not only do we need to bring them home, we need to make sure that we provide for them when they get here.  We have a terrible track record with our veterans so far.  Veterans often have to wait weeks or even months for an appointement at a VA hospital to receive the care they need. And while a small percentage of our population are veterans, 25% of our homeless population are veterans.  Also, veterans' unemployment rate is three times that of the rest of the population.  So much for the training and money for education BS the military puts in its propaganda.

We need to write letters to our Congresspersons urging, no...demanding, a bill that will:

1. take the money Bush would like to spend on continuing and escalating the war, and dividing that up into four funds:

a.  to house, feed, and otherwise protect the troops while they are in Iraq
b. to transport them back home ASAP
c. to add money to the VA budget to help provide medical and psychological care for Iraq war veterans; AND to add money to Medicare (see #2)
d.  to provide financial and resource restitution to Iraq without any military or political strings; and to remove all military bases from Iraq

2. to automatically enroll every American service veteran with combat experience into Medicare system (even Republicans would be hard pressed to argue against that)

Why is this group called "Democracy For America?"

Written by: Scott Trimble on Feb 1, 2007 7:09 PM EST

The name suggests that it wants to offer something new, something called "democracy," and that the recipient will be "America," but what does that mean?

Read more