Ladies and gentlemen, there comes a time when people of conscience are compelled to dissent.In a nation that was founded in the spirit of freedom and liberty from oppression and tyranny, the brave souls who speak out are vilified and punished. This is the tragedy that America has become. I applaud McKinney's courage and her continued leadership.
Bobby Kennedy said, "The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country."
We love our country, and that is why we dissent: because we care.
2006-08-10
Leadership with Courage
Cynthia McKinney, Election Night Remarks, August 8, 2006:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
But only because she has the "courage" to speak in favor of ideas that you support. What about the few politicians who have the "courage" to oppose Bush on such issues as reducing fedl spending, switching to a flat tax, pushing the privatized option for SS, and other issues that Bush promised, but failed to deliver to his voters?
I do respect McKinney for not compromising, though this does not mean that her victorious opponent has compromised; neither you nor I know, Nadir, if his positions are genuine or not.
You don't respect the "courage" of politicians on the right who oppose Bush's positions from the other direction. But I do share your taste for politicians who speak frankly, take clear positions, and favor one side of the pole. The problem with this kind of candidate is that they expose themselves to opposition. McKinney's opponent may really believe his positions, or he might have selected some number of his positions based on what he percieves a bigger fraction of people to either support, or to not oppose. In some way I respect such maneuvering as it accounts for democracy in that the candidates "gives the people what they want", even if it's not what he wants.
I subscribe to the interpretation of Lincoln's career as having done this boldly, courageously (as evidenced by the death threats and that bullet), and effectively in the successful advance of a true novel revolution on our dear earth: abolition of slavery and racial equality. So I think that it is possible for political maneuvering to result in bold moves. But 99% of the time it merely leads to one guy winning an election.
I do admire the politicians who clearly state that they would respond to 911 by pulling all US troops out of non-democratic nations, and cut support for Isreal. These are clear policies, and I am unclear about the possibility of their success. I am willing to give them a try, though on balance I oppose this. I would vote for a democrat who said: Let's try isolationism as a foriegn policy, and a flat tax on demostic policy and see what happens.
"What about the few politicians who have the "courage" to oppose Bush on such issues as reducing fedl spending, switching to a flat tax, pushing the privatized option for SS, and other issues that Bush promised, but failed to deliver to his voters?"
I applaud those who speak out frankly, as you do, but not those who bow to corporate interests frankly and openly. Many are just doing it for the paycheck.
It is boldness that is missing from politics. It is the courage to step out on principled convitions, not because someone has donated to your campaign coffers, but because you believe it is the right thing to do.
Hank Johnson's platform is that he will be a "pothole politician" and he has stated that he will not rock the boat. That would be fine for a state rep in Michigan, where we have a lot of potholes, but we need people in Washington with strong convictions who will work to change the direction in which this country is headed.
Post a Comment