LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.Best Political Blog Winner, 2007 Webby Awards, People's Voice and Jury.   Exclusive Truthdig Merchandise - Gore Vidal signed first editions - Signed Mr. Fish prints
 
July 24, 2008
Log in / Register

 Choose a size
Text Size

Reports
Obama on the Brink
No Easy Out for Obama
 * NEW! * Refighting the Vietnam War

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture

Digs
Inside the Data Mine

Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Reports

A Bridge to the 19th Century

Email this item Email    Print this item Print   
Posted on May 8, 2007

By Marie Cocco

WASHINGTON—You have to hand it to the Republican Party. It’s made history again.

When its field of presidential candidates strode onto the stage at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library for their first debate, the Republicans became the first contemporary political party to feature only candidates who represent a minority of America.

Who knew?

The dark business suits, the preponderance of made-for-TV red ties and the surfeit of balding pates shimmering under the lights spoke louder than the candidates themselves. The all-white, all-male lineup was a perfect picture of patriarchy for Republicans, who often take pride in calling themselves “the Daddy party”—the better to cast Democrats as that soft-and-girlie “Mommy party.”

What can you say about a party that thinks these years of locker-room machismo in the White House should be followed by four more? You can say that its presidential candidates represent a distinct and diminishing minority. According to the 2000 Census, white men made up 37 percent of the population. Heck, men aren’t even a majority among white people—women are.

For all the attention paid to the groundbreaking Democratic presidential field that includes a woman, a black and a Hispanic, isn’t the retro look of the Republican candidates as significant a statement?

The Republican Party just can’t get over it. The 20th century, that is.

It can’t seem to grasp the civil rights movement, the women’s movement, the gay rights movement, the global wave of immigration that has brought millions of Hispanics, Asians and other people of color to the United States. They’re all chasing the American dream that the Republicans embrace, at least when it is dreamed by people who look like them.

Remember macaca? The young, Indian-American volunteer for the Jim Webb campaign who was famously ridiculed by George Allen at a campaign event during the U.S. Senate race in Virginia last fall was singled out not just for his dark skin color but for his supposed newcomer status. “Welcome to America and the real world of Virginia,” taunted Allen, an incumbent who was supposed to breeze to re-election—and contend for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination.

The Webb aide, S.R. Sidarth, was in fact born and raised in northern Virginia and was an honor student at the University of Virginia. Voters didn’t see him as an unwanted interloper; they saw him as a neighbor. And they elected Democrat Webb to the Senate, in one of the pivotal races that led to the turnover of power on Capitol Hill.

Virginia is one of seven states in which increased turnout among black voters played a role in Democratic victories last fall, according to an election analysis by David Bositis of the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, which studies trends in black voting and political attitudes. The list reads like a road map through potential presidential-election swing states: Florida, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Tennessee are among them.

Coupled with the influx of Hispanics and other nonwhites, demographic changes already have put big states such as California and New York effectively out of reach for Republican presidential candidates. With Hispanics alone projected to comprise almost a quarter of the population by 2030, how does the hostility toward immigrants among many core Republican supporters—the very base voters its candidates must woo to win the nomination—lead to victory?

“We’re coming to a tipping point and it’s a tipping point that’s unfavorable to Republicans,” Bositis says.

Demographics aside, how about their debating points?

The Republicans competed for the distinction of being toughest against abortion, thus telling American women that politicians are entitled to make their most intimate decisions for them. Former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson said businesses should be allowed to fire gay employees, though he backtracked in subsequent interviews, perhaps because impressing the Republican base seemed less urgent than repairing the damage. And, of course, there was the visual highlight of the night when three candidates—Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee—raised their hands to assert that they do not believe in evolution. It’s just a thought, but how can a party whose would-be leaders reject the foundation of modern biology be trusted with the challenge of global warming?

Bill Clinton pledged to build a “bridge to the 21st century,” a slogan so trite as to invite ridicule. Now Republicans offer a scarier path. Theirs is a road back to the 19th. 

Marie Cocco’s e-mail address is mariecocco(at symbol)washpost.com.

© 2007, Washington Post Writers Group

Email Newsletter

Get truth delivered to your inbox every week.

Previous item: Ten Bodies, but Not Much of a Pulse

Next item: A Shining Light Goes Out in Africa

Jump to Comments

Advertisement


Elsewhere: .

Comments

Are you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig.

By Fadel Abdallah, May 19, 2007 at 9:41 pm #

#71050 by nahida on 5/19 at 9:33 am
(Unregistered commenter)

Excellent comment, Nahida, and a sweet powerful poem; certaily more powerful than their weapons of mass destruction and their hate, fanaticism and racism.

However, your comment fits better under another thread of Truthdig, under the title, “Palestinians’ Hard Choice: An Interview with Sari Nuseibah,” in the Interviews section.

I am taking the freedom to re-post your comment and poem there. Keep up the good work, you the dignified daughter of Beloved Palestine!

Report this

By nahida, May 19, 2007 at 9:33 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

Lefty said
“If the Arabs calling themselves Palestinians can do anything better than the Israelis, that would be propaganda aka lying.”

You know what we could do better than the israelis???
Unlike the Israelis; we haven’t lost our souls, or our humanity despite the massacres, the crimes, and the theft, the barbarity that was used against us to annihilate us and to ethnically cleanse us from our land.
******************

I Am So blessed

I am so blessed
Being a Palestinian
Being a refugee
For over fifty years
I am so blessed
I wasn’t in the tank
With an army uniform
Killing and destroying
To frighten people away
“It was a barren land”
Later on to say!
I am so blessed

Being under curfew
For most of my life
I am so blessed
I wasn’t with the army
Erecting high walls
Shooting at civilians
At every check-point
I am so blessed

Losing my father
In one of their raids
I am so blessed
That it was not I
Flying planes of terror
Firing that missile
Then Laughing and rejoicing
The mission was a success
I am so blessed

Watching my brother
Being taken away
I am so blessed
I wasn’t one of those
Kicking till he bled
From his nose and head
I am so blessed

Burying my baby
With a bullet in her heart
I am so blessed
I wasn’t that soldier
Who took a baby’s life
Nor was I his mother
Who welcomed him a hero
When coming back home
I am so blessed

Sleeping in a UN tent
Shivering in the freezing cold
I am so blessed
I wasn’t that settler
Who occupied my home
Justifying massacres
With a “PROMISE SO DIVINE”
Then, tossing and turning
All night long
Wondering what’s wrong
Haunted by his deeds
Searching like mad
For a long lost peace
Which he can’t find
I am so blessed

Holding David’s stone
In my little hand
I am so blessed
I wasn’t giant Goliath
With mass-destruction might
Seeing himself invincible
With no hope in sight
I am so blessed

Report this

By Lefty, May 14, 2007 at 6:22 am #

Re: #69416 by Douglas Chalmers on 5/11 at 1:13 pm
(270 comments total)
* * *

“That is, of course, all total rubbish!

“Firstly, Israels’ defense capabilities include a nuclear reactor at Dimona and a nuclear weapons production facility in the Negev Desert.

You can see the rest for yourself here http://poetryforpalestine.spaces.live.com/”
--------------------------------------------------
Which part is rubbish?  The part about Israel being in the forefront of science, technology, medicine and art, or the part about the Arabs being in the forefront of brainwashing children to be suicide bombers?  Both are patently, demonstrably true to any reasonable, rational observer, Doug!

Yes, Israel has nuclear weapons. So what?  If Israel were any less responsible, less humanitarian nation with such defense capabilities, under the circumstances, they would have certainly used them by now.  No reasonable observer can say that Israel’s defense against the 60 years of purpetual military and terrorist attacks by nations and brainwashed, psychopathic terrorists, has been anything other than measured and restrained. 

I wouldn’t be so measured.  I would send them a message that they would remember for 25,000 years.  [The half life of plutonium-239].  If the U.S. were similarly attacked, the few attackers, and residents of the nations who supported them, remaining, would most certainly be suffering from radiation poisoning. 

And “poetry for palestine” is supposed to be what, an objective source of information!  If the Arabs calling themselves palestinians can do anything better than the Israelis, that would be propaganda aka lying.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, May 11, 2007 at 1:13 pm #

#69340 by Lefty on 5/11 at 6:38 am: “...That’s because the Israelis, whose militaristic existence is necessitated by the purpetual military and terrorist attacks by the barbaric, Arab hordes surrounding them on all sides, are the good guys, and the Palestinian terrorist and suicide bombers, who are supported financially and militarily by the barbarian, Arab hordes, are the bad guys.

Further, despite the fact that Israel continues to be forced to dedicate a tremendous amount of it’s limited resources to it’s defense capabilities........”

That is, of course, all total rubbish!

Firstly, Israels’ defense capabilities include a nuclear reactor at Dimona and a nuclear weapons production facility in the Negev Desert.

You can see the rest for yourself here http://poetryforpalestine.spaces.live.com/

Report this

By Lefty, May 11, 2007 at 6:38 am #

Re: #69100 by Fadel Abdallah on 5/09 at 10:13 pm
(36 comments total)

“Though I agree with the essence of Marie Cocco’s pessimist evaluation of the Republican all-white candidates, I want to add that I am equally disturbed by the Democratic candidates as well. All of them seem to be pandering to and appeasing the Israeli lobby. That’s why all of them traveled to Israel and were hosted by the Israeli militaristic government, and must have been subjected to the Israeli propaganda machine through the long arm of AIPAC.
----------------------------------------------------
Fidel,

That’s because the Israelis, whose militaristic existence is necessitated by the purpetual military and terrorist attacks by the barbaric, Arab hordes surrounding them on all sides, are the good guys, and the Palestinian terrorist and suicide bombers, who are supported financially and militarily by the barbarian, Arab hordes, are the bad guys.

Further, despite the fact that Israel continues to be forced to dedicate a tremendous amount of it’s limited resources to it’s defense capabilities, Israel, nevertheless, finds itself as a world leader and innovator in science, medicine, technology, arts and culture. 

Similarly, the barbarian Arab hordes have shown themselves to be world leaders and innovators in the art and technology of suicide bombing and propaganda of the most laughable kind.

Report this

By Louise, May 10, 2007 at 5:35 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

Reagan was a performer first and a politician never.

A performer may get a role that’s opposite their actual character, but a good performer welcomes the challenge. For Reagan, the chance to play president was probably that challenge. I’m sure he was sincere when he first stepped onto the political stage. I believe he really wanted to serve the people. But as often happens, the party hype and a compliant media ultimately convinced him he was answering a call.

Somewhere along the way his high ideals got morphed into the actions and opinions molded by his political handlers. All of whom had an agenda far removed from serving the people.

I don’t think he ever lost his sincerity. I think he simply withdrew into his memoirs and notes and tried to ignore the rest. Following instructions when necessary, and looking forward to the one-on-ones he was so good at.

Reagan often made comments that seemed strange, or just plain wrong in light of the known facts. Happens when you play a role but don’t bother with the script, or the script’s wrong.

I suspect a shield was placed around Reagan to filter out the negative. I suspect he chose to ignore what he probably recognized wasn’t what he really was.

The neo-cons had their way. They may not have been called neo-cons at that point in time, but they were there and they were in control. Reagan never forced them out.

Read history. Read the names.

When Bush One inherited the White House, the neo-cons assumed one of their own would continue republican control of the White House for another eight years. Bush knew the script, but he wasn’t a performer.

He couldn’t convince the people that in spite of obvious problems everything was wonderful. He lacked Reagans gift of being able to cut people low, but leave them laughing. Even worse, he failed to convince Congress the first version of The Plan For A New American Century was a good idea. That’s when it became obvious to the neo-cons they had to control Congress and that became the goal.

Imagine the neo-cons searching for another Reagan. A performer with Reagans wit and humor who could make decisions contrary to the peoples best interests, but still win their affection. A performer that could be molded and handled as easily as Reagan had been. Not an easy assignment.

Bush Jr. was selected, but only after the House was firmly in neo-con control. Bush had the wit and humor his father lacked. He would be trained to be the performer Reagan was. Already governed by a personality easily detached from what was going on around him, he would be easily controlled. Whether or not he would follow the scriptwas never an issue because he was from the inner circle. Plans were put in motion to control the election in case he was defeated. Which of course, he was.

Bush has followed the script, but the neo-cons never planned for a president who once convinced of the “rightness” of the cause would not bend and make adjustments. Could not tweak the plan if the survival of the goal was at risk. Such is the danger of selecting someone who is easily detached.

So here we are. Having suffered all these years from being led by the son of a neo-con pretending to be a performer who’s pretending to perform as a leader. What a mess!

The top rung of republican neo-cons, [every one] who covet the White House are trapped in that reality. Too far removed from the memory of good and honest republican leadership, they can only look to the model created by the controlling neo-cons when they first groomed the performer Reagan for the White House.

Well, we saw them try to perform.

That’s what happens when people who don’t have talent try to be actors.
Dressed like clones, looking and sounding like they were trying out for the same minor role in a third rate movie, they were stiff, awkward and unconvincing. Moving beyond politico to a Reagan type performer is way out of their league.

Report this

By Fadel Abdallah, May 9, 2007 at 10:13 pm #

Though I agree with the essence of Marie Cocco’s pessimist evaluation of the Republican all-white candidates, I want to add that I am equally disturbed by the Democratic candidates as well. All of them seem to be pandering to and appeasing the Israeli lobby. That’s why all of them traveled to Israel and were hosted by the Israeli militaristic government, and must have been subjected to the Israeli propaganda machine through the long arm of AIPAC.

In fact, I strongly believe that the American two-party system is a form of “democratic dictatorship,” to coin a new description. If the policies and politics of the Republican party prompted Cocco to describe it as a “road back to the 19th century,” then it would be justifiable to describe the two-party American system as a legacy of the 18th century and before. Even in third world countries, with more homogenous population than the U.S., there are always multiple parties competing for political offices.

Report this

By L.Gordon, May 9, 2007 at 12:59 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

Let us not forget all that have benifited from the Bush Administration and act accordingly to keep them from public office. And that includes Arnold Swartzenegger.

Report this

By Valley, May 9, 2007 at 10:19 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

All of the candidates seemed really out of touch. The new ways of waging war on the U.S. are incombatible. They can only be fought through means of bringing the rest of the world out of disease and poverty. These two factors create the catalysts and anger that drive terrorist organizations. We need to take off the war paint and put on our gloves.

Report this

By PaulMagillSmith, May 9, 2007 at 7:26 am #

One of the most telling signs that the GOP doesn’t represent mainstream Americans is the way the audience looked. Glassy-eyed robots, all neat & shiny in their lock-step look-alike hair & suits, they looked like one of Bush’s contrived town hall get togethers. It’s certainly like they have completely bought into the failed Japanese mantra of, “The nail that stands out gets pounded down”.

Nowhere visible was the American spirit that celebrates individuality, diversity in dress, thinking, or uniqueness. Also missing at the ‘debate’ (gag) was truthfulness and empathy with the plight of the American middle-class.

Since people are supposed to ‘argue’ their point in a debate, and these ten wealthy out-of-touch puppets didn’t seem to be capable of anything other than kissing the ring of their senile saint, Ronald Reagan, this farcical ‘show’ was little more than a photo-op. Too bad someone didn’t have the forethought to fire up the jet and blow these blow-hards off the stage. If these clowns are the best that approximately half the American voting public can come up with then I’m reminded of an Elton John lyric, “It’s a sad/it’s a sad/it’s a sad sad situation”.

Report this

By PatrickHenry, May 8, 2007 at 5:41 pm #

About Ron
Brief Overview of Congressman Paul’s Record

He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.

He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.

Report this

By SamSnedegar, May 8, 2007 at 4:41 pm #

Only one of the candidates can hold a candle to Dubya, and that is Sam Brownback, but even he has a vestigal brain, as poorly as he uses it, and as seldom.

George W is a real moron, not a fake one, so don’t think it will be easy to replace him, where he managed somehow to replace Reagan, who was ravaged by Alzheimers and was virtually brain dead in his last years, after being merely a fool and a dimwit in earlier days of his Presidency. I lived in California for 8 years whilst Ronnie was Guv, and he was as dumb as a post in that job, so it was no surprise that he was a fool for a President, but not too bad an actor playing the part of President. No surprise there either, for he played at the part of Governor too . . . he never quite knew what was going on though.

Nixon was MY President, my crook, my liar, my favorite. He had a brain, but I never knew why he didn’t burn the tapes; maybe he couldn’t.

Anyone know where Dan Quayle is today? HE might be able to replace Dubya. Surely no one with a real brain could fit in.

Here’s a factoid for you, since you seem to have missed it over the past 30 years: No Republican President or Congress has ever passed one law or made one attempt to do one single thing for any person who makes less than the 50th percentile in annual wages. Another fact: no Republican candidate could be or has been elected if he or she ever told the voters the truth.

The amazing thing about these facts is that not only the media whores and pimps won’t report them, but neither will the Democratic candidates point them out to the electorate.

Report this

By James V, May 8, 2007 at 3:32 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

You know, the entire scene reminded me of those banking commercials. You know the ones, where all those stuffy old white guys were penned up behind red velvet ropes? The guys who were completely out of touch and indifferent to the average person. And now that I think of it, perhaps it was more than the simple outward appearances that seemed so similar to me…

Report this

By euni84, May 8, 2007 at 3:10 pm #

It’s great that the Democrats are drawing so much more support than the Republicans. This
really supports the notion that the Democrats are taking on issues that really matter to the
American people. From health care to education and poverty, these issues take precedence over an ever-inflating military budget that seems to bring no resolve for any country involved.

The Borgen Project states that just $19 billion annually can end starvation and $23 billon annually can reverse the spread of Malaria and AIDS. With these issues being so easily addressed, it is no wonder that a war-touting political group that doesn’t believe in humanitarianism isn’t doing well in the polls or with the American people.

Report this

By Lefty, May 8, 2007 at 3:10 pm #

19th Century???  Yeah . . . ahhh . . . NOOOO!!! 

The 19th Century was after the renaissance!  More like the 13th Century!

Report this

By Hammo, May 8, 2007 at 11:36 am #

Though the Republican presidential candidates were trying to associate themselves in the debate with Ronald Reagan, not George W. Bush ... the current president remains in the spotlight.

Actions and activities of the Bush-Cheney administration are on the minds of all Americans. And now, in former CIA Director George Tenet’s new book, insight into pre-9/11 activity and inactivity are revealed.

Take a look at the article by Robert Parry:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/050807E.shtml

Report this

By TAO Walker, May 8, 2007 at 10:23 am #

The media moguls mean to manage the ‘08 presidential derby (on behalf of the plutoligarchy) for maximum distractive effect....no doubt raking-in record profits along the way.  The field of entries certainly makes-up in quantity what it lacks in quality....with the token exceptions of such as Paul, Gravel, and Kucinich, who are allowed to enter the early time-trials as “teasers.” That way the superficially pampered but cynically pissed-on americanpeople can’t claim they never had a “choice.”

Anybody who still believes there is any business besides “show-business” has to be ignoring the up-coming Republican re-re-re-make of Ronald Reagan’s presidential play-acting (to so many rear-view-mirrored rave reviews these days, at least from “the right").  The Democrats’ Clinton redux epic will certainly be in the same vein....and certainly in-vain, win-or-lose.

Here in Indian Country, seeking “authority” is an automatic disqualification from having any.  “Power” corrupts because it is an illusion....a most seductive one, to-be-sure, but never other than more-or-less lethal (leaving its victim/perpetrators always more-AND-less dead).

Is there some connection, this old savage wonders, between america being a dreamland where “any boy (or, here in these latter days, girl) can grow-up to be president,” and the fact few if any americans ever really grow-up at all?  It looks like they’re coming to some firm and well-founded conclusions about that, finally, in Europe and Asia.

We’ve been four or five hundred years ahead of that curve, here in Turtle and Hummingbird Islands.  Our free wild sisters and brothers in Africa’ve been in-the-know at least as long.  So welcome to our (soon-to-be sixth?) world, all you civilized peoples.

HokaHey!

Report this

By Dale Headley, May 8, 2007 at 9:16 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

The surprising thing to me is that only three of the candidates raised their hands to admit they were ignorant (didn’t believe in evolution).  I guarantee that if you’d given them a little more time to ponder what their evangelical base would think, more of them would have joined in. In 1998, the National Academy of Sciences conducted a comprehensive world wide survey of attitudes about religion and science.  It found, among other shocking discoveries, that approximately 70% of Republicans did NOT believe in evolution.  It explains why science has received so little support from them, whereas they fall all over themselves to please the supremely ignorant Pat Robertson.  Most of them are scheduled to speak at Regent University, Robertson’s faux college; but does a single one of them address any scientific organization, such as the aforementioned academy or, say, the Center for Science in the Public Interest?  Of course not; Republicans on the whole, despise science, as shown by their antipathy to the scientific consensus regarding global warming.  If it isn’t in Revelations, it isn’t happening!
The notion that we’ll have another president who is ignorant is (and proud of it) is frightening.  Just look how much damage the present one has caused.

Report this

By rowdy, May 8, 2007 at 8:26 am #

it is tragic,when people choose to bury their head in the sand and ignore the reality of the world. the democrats are no better. they want power to serve their own personal agenda and the rest of us can go to hell. the demos suck up to right wing groups and i can’t help but wonder how many of them would disavow evolution if they thought it would garner votes.

Report this

By dp, May 8, 2007 at 7:19 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

Hitting the proverbial nail on the head.  That is the goal of the Republican party, to revert back to the 19th century, when women (and other minorities) knew their places and stayed in them, when the good ol’ boys ran things (well and to their advantage).  One would think there is no way there could be a GOP win, but don’t rule out another voting fiasco, a grand scale disenfranchisement, that’s what the firing of the Attorney Generals may prove to be about.

Report this

By LANCE, May 8, 2007 at 6:48 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

All they need is a big corporation with big dollars to throw around and a State full of dumb clucks like Floriduh or Ohio and they can buy another election.

Report this

By Verne Arnold, May 8, 2007 at 5:17 am #

It’s like watching...what?  A group of sad old men who don’t quite get it.  They woke up one day and the future has left them behind...I would pity them if they weren’t capable of such profound damage to our country and the world.

Buyer Beware!!!!

Report this

By THOMAS BILLIS, May 8, 2007 at 3:29 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

The republicans are in a box they must pander to their right to get nominated and then swing to the center to get elected.Well people have seen up close and personal what conservative government is and have swung left ward leaving Pat Dobson and et al as the arbiter of the primary system.To get their approval and then swing to the middle is a leap that that Evel Knevel would not attempt in his prime.
You and I are some of the few who realized one of the biggest signs that the republicans are not in this century is that show hands against evolution and not a remark from the other seven candidates on their beleifs like they were ashamed that they believed in evolution.These people are not descended from gorillas they are gorillas.
The only thing that could stop a huge democratic victory in 08 are the democrats.Once the vaunted democratic consultants get hold of these candidates they can rip defeat from the jaws of victory.They managed to lose to an autistic moron from Texas who could hardly speak english.Not once but twice.

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, May 8, 2007 at 3:21 am #

Obviously, the American dream doesn’t include “...the civil rights movement, the women’s movement, the gay rights movement, the global wave of immigration that has brought millions of Hispanics, Asians and other people of color to the United States...”, etc etc, as far as the Republicans are concerned.

I always did feel that, instead of turning the clock forward at 2YK - 1.01.2000 - many in power simply turned it back to 1.01.1900! No wonder they are trapped in their grandpa suits (especially the men!) and committed to sadly repeating all of history’s past mistakes.

Their howling response to 9/11 seems to have proved it and to continue to blindly follow those fools will only lead to total disaster. Even Arni Swarzenegger has seen that. There is a new world of essential co-operation necessary to survive climate change and grabbing what is left instead of sharing the benefits of industrialisation around the planet would be a serious mistake.

We all live in this world together and we all must share in the work and responsibility to make it a liveable place. The USA no longer has planet Earth to itself for exploitation and plunder. The “playing field” has to be levelled out or no-one else will want to take responsibility - or, more likely, no-one will continue to tolerate the USA’s failure to take responsibility for its own actions.

Report this

Add Your Comment

Posts by unregistered readers are moderated. Posts by members
are published immediately. Why wait? Register today!






Notify you when others comment on this article?


Are you a human?
Retype the word you see here.


Please read and abide by our comment policy.
By submitting this comment, you agree to this site's terms and conditions.

Newsletter

Get Truthdig in your inbox

Privacy Policy

 
Click here to advertise with Truthdig
 

 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2008 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.