Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.
Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.
So, You Want to Be My President, Huh?
Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
Poverty, Income, and Health Insurance: What to Expect and Why It Really Matters
Jared Bernstein
Democracy and Elections:
Troops Abroad Donate 6:1 to Obama Over McCain
Luke Rosiak
DrugReporter:
Unlocking the Power of Art to Counter Injustice
Anthony Papa
Election 2008:
With Obama Faltering, Do We Need Al Gore?
Stewart Lawrence
Environment:
Why T. Boone Pickens' 'Clean Energy' Plan Is a Ponzi Scheme
Scott Thill
ForeignPolicy:
Russia and Georgia: All About Oil
Michael T. Klare
Health and Wellness:
Medical Tourism Is Great -- for Those Who Can Afford It
Niko Karvounis
Hurricane Katrina:
From the Bayou to Baghdad: Mission Not Accomplished
Amy Goodman
Immigration:
American Legion Immigration Report Replete With Falsehoods
Sonia Scherr
Media and Technology:
Communication Breakdown: How Cell Phones Hurt Communities
Benjamin Dangl
Movie Mix:
Protest over Use of the Word 'Retard' in Stiller's 'Tropic Thunder' Misses the Target
Annabelle Gurwitch
Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Why Obama Should Pick Hillary
Lanny Davis
Rights and Liberties:
Who Will Crash the Democratic and Republican Conventions?
Michael Gould-Wartofsky
Sex and Relationships:
The Things Women Go Through to Attract Men ...
Cheryl Saban
War on Iraq:
Robin Long, War Resister Deported from Canada, Faces Trial This Week
Sarah Lazare
Water:
Water for All: The Leaders of a New Revolution
Jay Walljasper
One of the greatest deficiencies of American democracy - such as it is nowadays - is the near complete lack of accountability to which elected and selected officials are subjected.
There are other problems, to be sure, but the degree to which these folks can insulate themselves from the concerns and demands of their constituents is among the truly worst aspects of the way we now practice governance in this country.
The Bush administration has - surprise! - refined this insularity to - shock! - a fine art, with its secrecy, arrogance and defiance of Congressional oversight. There are endless examples of their use of raw power and pure cheekiness to avoid the people whom they're supposed to be serving. Of all their tricks, though, my very favorite was how they campaigned in 2004. You remember, don't you, back before the empire, when campaigns were about winning over undecided voters? Not with these guys. Rove made damn sure that Bush never encountered such a creature throughout the entire campaign. You literally had to be a Bush/Cheney campaign volunteer to get into events. And if you somehow got a ticket but showed up wearing the wrong t-shirt or having the wrong bumper-sticker on your car, the Secret Service literally arrested you. Some democracy, eh? Heck, even the last remaining samples of smallpox virus aren't that insulated from contact with the world.
But please don't get me started on diseases and Republicans and other kinds of regressive beasts…
I have several times now had the pleasure of observing retail politics in action in New Hampshire, as presidential candidates have to go before real voters and sway them sufficiently to win their votes. The process is imperfect, to be sure, although mainly because there isn't enough of it. I was also rather disappointed with the lack of toughness in the questions asked at the many events I observed (and Barack Obama didn't take questions at all in the session I attended). That said, I suspect the quality of the process is better there and in Iowa than anywhere in the United States, and I do think that many of the citizens of those states take their role quite seriously, and that they actually make better choices more often than does the rest of the country.
I hope we're not past the point in the process now where these candidates are being subjected to some real questioning by real people with real (non-corporate) concerns. And I hope those real people will take advantage of the minuscule opportunities remaining to pose some tough questions to these candidates. Below is my own list of favorites. Anyone reading this in Nevada or South Carolina or anywhere beyond may feel free to use any of these questions as appropriate. Go get 'em!
HILLARY CLINTON: Your vote on both the Iraq and Iran resolutions are inexcusable. You claim to be tested, experienced and ready to go, but your rationalization for the Iraq vote is that you were essentially duped by the president, and that you were not voting to authorize war, just the threat of war. If you have such wisdom and experience, why were you fooled when so many other people throughout the world - including half the Democrats in Congress - were not? Why were you voting to give license to attack a country which had neither threatened nor attacked the United States? Why was Iraq an urgent threat that required military action when the Soviet Union was not throughout the entire Cold War?
JOHN McCAIN: Of all the candidates running, you are the greatest enthusiast for the Iraq war. You also claim to be riding the Straight-Talk Express. So, how about a little straight talk on Iraq? If Saddam Hussein was such a menace to his neighborhood, why did the United States, under Ronald Reagan, encourage him to attack Iran, and supply him with weapons and intelligence and satellite reconnaissance when he was doing so? If he was such a monster when he was using chemical weapons against both Iranians and Iraqis, why did Republican administrations in the US turn a blind eye to that and even protect the Iraqis from condemnation at the UN?
See more stories tagged with: election08
David Michael Green is a professor of political science at Hofstra University. He is delighted to receive readers' reactions to his articles (dmg@regressiveantidote.net), but regrets that time constraints do not always allow him to respond. More of his work can be found at www.regressiveantidote.net.
Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »