US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC : http://boston.indymedia.org/
Boston.Indymedia
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Testimonies
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | View comments | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
Commentary ::
The Democratic Party-Party Is Over
02 Aug 2004
The Democratic Party-Party Convention is over, and its singular memory will be its predictable banality and the commercialism that mostly financed it.

Historically, conventions were newsworthy because there was a struggle over who would receive the nomination and what the Parties would stand for in their platforms.

Today, there is a coronation for the nominee and inquiries about what would be on the menus of the 250 parties that corporations and their smooth-tongued lobbyists were throwing for their favorably-positioned congressional bigwigs.
nader.jpg
Inside the festooned Convention Center there were dozens of speeches - all pre-viewed, sanitized and edited down to the last minute on teleprompters by the standby Kerry censors. When Al Sharpton departed from the script for a couple of minutes, you would have thought their wedding cake was burning.

Fifteen thousand reporters spent five days looking for stories - any stories - that qualified as news or soft features from the Party, its 4,000-plus delegates, and the swarm of corporate backslappers. It was not difficult to describe the wine, whiskey, music, and obvious temptations - in return for the implicit political favors - that the drug, insurance, banking, chemical, oil, media, and computer companies presented to the attending politicians.

For this business bacchanalia the taxpayers were required to pay the Democratic party thirteen million dollars (and later the same amount for the Republican Party Convention). A few years ago, Congress - namely the two Parties - decided that these political Conventions were "educational" in nature and worthy of your tax dollars.

Around, over, and under the Convention premises hovered a security army of police, detectives, troops, and armed, airborne, and land-based technology worthy of a Marine division. Thwarting a possible terrorist attack was one reason for over tens of millions of dollars spent - the other objective was to keep the people from protesting anywhere near the Fleet Center Convention.

The people - voters, taxpayers, workers - were detained in a "free speech zone" (catch the irony) that looked like an ad hoc concentration camp encirclement. The intimidating zone was distant enough not to be convenient to the electronic media placements. In a phrase, the Democratic Party did what it does so regularly in Washington - it shut out the people, who resigned themselves to social justice gatherings elsewhere in Boston.

But the "people" should have been smarter. They should have had contrasting parties held by dispossessed workers, defrauded consumers, medical malpractice victims, fleeced taxpayers, small farmers, and polluted communities with open invitations for the politicians to attend. The media likes contrasts, especially when very few of these Congressional delegates would have left their lavish business bashes to greet the Americans they court and flatter only at election time - from distant stages and 30 second television ads.

The Democratic Convention did have its amusing moments. Bill Clinton didn’t charge his $200,000 per-speech fee for his speech to the convention and the viewing public. The National Association of Broadcasters - representing those television stations who use your public airwaves free and decide 24 hours a day what is allowed to air on our property - held a huge party for Congressman Ed Markey. Mr. Markey started his Congressional career as a major outspoken critic of the broadcasting industry. He has been much quieter in recent years.

This work is in the public domain
Add a quick comment
Title
Your name Your email

Comment

Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.

Comments

and.....
01 Aug 2004
no one at the DNC accepted campaign contributions from neo-con fascists....unlike you, Ralph.
Re: Anti-War Candidate Nader's Critique of DNC
01 Aug 2004
You don't call the automotive industry neo facists, maybe it's cause there just racists who continue to push black workers to assembly line possitions for 20 and 30 years while white, underqualified workers move straight up in 6 months. And I mind you that tax money is distrubuted to all candidates from all kinda people, including, racists, sexists, facists, homophobes, capatalists, communists, socialists(like me), anarchists, terrorists and everything beyond, before, and inbetween. It's the fascists who are fools, giving money to a progressive voice. But none of that money is soft nor used for control of the elections and the debate commision. If things were more even, perhaps then your point would be well taken, until then, you should know the dirtiest players in the game still hold the dirtiest money in the game, and they do own the game which is dirtier then Paris Hilton's cunt(sorry i'm not pc, if u have a prob with that, join up with Tipper Gore). Much peace and love my friends and don't waste a vote on John F. Bush!!!
Re: Anti-War Candidate Nader's Critique of DNC
01 Aug 2004
RALPH IS RIGHT, AS USUAL. THE DNC WAS NOTHING MORE THAN A CHEER LEADING SESSION, A BIG, EXPENSIVE PEP RALLY. NADER IS THE ONLY ANTI-WAR CANDIDATE. I HAVE 13,000 REASONS FOR VOTING FOR HIM. THEY ARE ALL BURIED IN IRAQ.
Re: Anti-War Candidate Nader's Critique of DNC
02 Aug 2004
lets not forget kerry's approx $1 million stock shares in Wall-Mart. I also have approx 13,000 reasons for voting for David Cobb, the other anti-war candidate. gosh, and I am in a "contested state." So why is it our fault that you lot have sold out? You all voted to endorse the warmonger.

Did I mention that David Cobb has taken no right wing money?
Re: Anti-War Candidate Nader's Critique of DNC
02 Aug 2004
“no one at the DNC accepted campaign contributions from neo-con fascists....unlike you, Ralph.”
Huh??? You mean The DNC has taken money from anybody with a buck. Steven Bing,Democrat’s biggest money man has mob connections. ABC broke the story then pulled it, typical Democratic party stuff...
I haven’t seen any million dollar parties for Nader, that was all the rage in Boston a few days ago.
Nader, yeah right...
02 Aug 2004
did any of you hear Kucinich or Sharpton speak? seems like the Democratic Party, which embraces both of them and wants to get Bush fascists out of office is on the right track. Or are you too busy spouting your own ideology to see that this is the REAL chance to indict the rotten Cheney - Rumsfeld murderers?

Nader? Sure, all you young "radical" intellectuals, when you are finished wiping the whip cream from your Starbucks latte off your peach fuzz, get a life, will you?
Nader, yeah right...
02 Aug 2004
did any of you hear Kucinich or Sharpton speak? seems like the Democratic Party, which embraces both of them and wants to get Bush fascists out of office is on the right track. Or are you too busy spouting your own ideology to see that this is the REAL chance to indict the rotten Cheney - Rumsfeld murderers?

Nader? Sure, all you young "radical" intellectuals, when you are finished wiping the whip cream from your Starbucks latte off your peach fuzz, get a life, will you?
Re: Anti-War Candidate Nader's Critique of DNC
02 Aug 2004
it's not just the money he took from the neo-cons, its the signatures he's using to get on the ballot that undermine the powerful work he's done to protect the citizens of this country. He's getting a leg up from the very thugs who he's battled throughout his career and has been all too dismissive of that fact. He's always been good at telling the truth, but he's evading that one.