Articles in this series

Michael Beauregard is President of the Young Democrats of Rhode Island and a Providence resident.

3 responses to “The Democratic Party and the country need Keith Ellison”

  1. Johnnie

    Listen to what Glen Ford, at Black Agenda Report, has to say about Keith Ellison:

    “But don’t expect it to get effective support [Tulsi Gabbard’s bill] from the Progressive Caucus in the U.S. Congress. Minnesota Black congressman Keith Ellison is Caucus co-chair – and absolutely worthless to the cause of peace. He supported the war against Libya and the proxy war in Syria, which is why he stands a good chance of becoming head of the Democratic National Committee, where it’s all war, and anti-Russia, all the time.”

    VN:R_U [1.9.20_1166]
    Rating: +1 (from 3 votes)
  2. Johnnie

    I noticed a couple of people voted thumbs down on the quote from the Black Agenda Report. They either believe that Glen Ford is lying about Keith Ellison, or the Democrats are not the party of all war all the time. It is the Republicans that made Ellison vote for war in Iraq and Syria — and forced the Democrats to continue to fund these wars.

    Under Obama’s watch, the US has invaded, unleashed drone warfare, bombed, occupied or provided material, tactical and logistical support to counter-insurgencies in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Libya, Iraq, Syria and Yemen — and these are the countries we know of. The US Special Forces and the CIA run black-ops all over the world. The US was also behind coups in the democratically elected governments of Honduras and Ukraine. Honduras has the highest per-capita murder rate in the world, and the US has 7 military bases in the country. Do you think there may be some correlation? Why the need for 7 military bases in a small and impoverished country in Central America?

    In the last 8 years of Obomber, have any Democrats used their platform here or nationally to even suggest that it might be time to evaluate the morality and sanity of killing people who have done nothing to us, destroying nations and shredding their social fabric and patrimony?

    According to Aljazeera, Afghan civilian casualties hit a record high 11,000 last year, eclipsing the 2014 record. And the Taliban control more territory now than they did when we invaded. According to an Afghan researcher from Amnesty International: “Afghan women were the ones who lost most from the war and militarization.” In a 2011 poll of gender researchers, Afghanistan was voted the most dangerous place in the world to be a woman.

    Those who disagree with Glen Ford and BAR, please ask our anti-war Democratic congressmen — or the Democratic Obama administration— to explain the purpose behind the US occupation of Afghanistan, and why it is that Afghanistan has become the source of about 90% of the world’s opium?

    We have destabilized the world, with more refugees than at any time since WW ll, and have left a trail of failed states, and most Americans still see the US as a force for good in the world….. and strongly object to the Democrats being characterized as war mongers.

    In this last electoral sideshow, did any of the show-biz-types — those who ask the “tough questions” — ask any of the candidates their position on the wars and savagery the US is prosecuting around the world? Did the Socialists, Greens or Libertarians speak seriously to any of this?

    As I am writing this, a breaking news story just came across my screen from the NY Times: Clinton calls Russian hacking ‘an attack against our country’

    Some of us who read RIFuture like to vote up or down, just as the Romans being entertained at the Coliseum. The irony is not lost on me.

    In the words of Bob Dylan in Masters of War: “even Jesus would never forgive what you do”

    VN:R_U [1.9.20_1166]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
    1. cailin rua

      The trouble with BAR is they’re not innovative enough. I don’t think they have a sustainable brand strategy, “brand strategy is how, what, where, when and to whom you plan on communicating and delivering on your brand messages.”

      They’ve overlooked truths such as the following: “The most obvious example of this is Coke vs. a generic soda. Because Coca-Cola has built a powerful brand equity, it can charge more for its product–and customers will pay that higher price.”

      The problem for BAR is that Dixon and Ford fail to realize the “added value intrinsic to brand equity frequently comes in the form of perceived quality or emotional attachment.”

      In this day and age government is about running a business. No one will succeed in the politics of running the business of goverment who fails to grasp these simple facts. How do they think they could ever get people on board with all consuming P3 strategies and outright asset giveaways with a strategy like the one the Black Agenda Report has pursued?

      Thank the stars above for sensible pols like Corey Booker, and Ellison, too, I guess. It must be all about sour grapes for the folks at BAR. That’s the only available conclusion, isn’t it? It’s been said “Your identity is not your logo. It’s your DNA.” . . . and it should be your politics, too. To hell w/ class!

      VN:R_U [1.9.20_1166]
      Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.