Jeanene Louden is the first elected Secretary of the Coffee Party Board of Directors. Her new Coffee Party Radioshow will now run weekly on Thursdays at 2:30 ET (11:30 AM PT). The purpose of the show will be to update Coffee Party members and supporters on what's going on with the newly elected Board of Directors, and to get a sense of how our community feels about current events, activities, and initiatives. So please call in and tell Jeanene what's on your mind. She'll be very pleased to share what she hears with her fellow Coffee Party Directors.
PS: Jeanene is still taking suggestions for a name for the show Jeanene already has a bunch of ideas like "Louden Clear," "Make Mine an Expresso," and "Waaaassaaaaap!"
Previous Shows:
Jeanene Louden's first Coffee Party Radio Show!
Thursday Jan. 26, 2012
Topics:
Coffee Party Board of Directors — How it is going with the new crew
The Republican Primary Race
The SOPA/PIPA Uproar, and its implications
The State of the Union Address
Guests:
Joe Lorenz — Occupy Wall Street organizer and senior at Washington State University, Vancouver
Eric Byler — Coffee Party Board of Directors President
It is official. The People's backlash against the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision is on!
From Los Angeles to New York City, from Montana to Vermont, from city councils to state supreme courts, from state legislatures to occupations, people are standing up and saying, "No! Corporations are not people. No! Unlimited, anonymous money to purchase our elections is not the same as free speech."
The grassroots coalition Move to Amend is at the forefront of this nationally coordinated campaign to help local groups advance ballot initiatives and resolutions rejecting the 2010 Supreme Court decision that opened the floodgates to unlimited special interest money manipulating elections and dictating policy.
To mark the second anniversary of the Citizens United decision, we are calling on citizens, activists, organizations and lawmakers to Occupy the Courts on Friday, January 20, 2012. Americans are gathering at over 80 federal courts, including the Supreme Court, to proclaim these truths: 1) Rights recognized under the Constitution belong to human beings only, and not to artificial legal entities such as corporations, Super PACs, or labor unions; and 2) Political campaign spending is not a form of speech protected under the First Amendment.
These nationwide protests in front of U.S. federal courts will kick off petition drives in local communities to put resolutions on the ballot calling for a constitutional amendment to abolish corporate personhood.
Organize locally! Check out the toolkit and sign up here for an organizing webinar. The next webinar is on Tuesday, January 10th.
Learn more about this initiative by listening to our Town Hall with Move to Amend on December 28th hosted by Egberto Willies on Coffee Party Radio.
Listen or call in to today's Coffee Party Radio show, also hosted by Egberto at 1 PM ET Saturday, Jan 7th. Click here to listen on-line. Or call: (646) 929-2495
Speakers at the action at the Supreme Court in Washington, DC on January 20th will include: progressive radio talk show host Thom Hartmann; founder of the Coffee Party, Annabel Park; and Move To Amend national spokesman (and 2004 Green Party Presidential Candidate) David Cobb. Dr. Cornel West will be speaking at the action in Gainesville, FL.
To support on Twitter, follow @movetoamend and use #occupythecourts.
To support on Facebook, like Move to Amend's page and download the Occupy the Courts poster and use as your profile picture.
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor set out to "humanize" his image by doing a 60 Minutes interview with Leslie Stahl that aired on New Year's Day. This is how Stahl explains the context of the interview: "President Obama has made Eric Cantor the face of Republican inflexibility."
Although it did not go entirely as planned, it's clear what Cantor and his press team wanted: Cantor presented as a nice guy, a family man, a reasonable politician who is trying to do what he thinks is best for his country.
The interview contains the usual elements of a Washington PR makeover: Cantor the "cool" dad who listens to rap, Cantor the devoted husband, Cantor the cyclist, Cantor as a boy who wanted to fit in at school, Cantor the statesman who stands for his principles, Cantor the straight-shooting populist who rails against those who game the system and include "provisions in the tax code that favor their industry," etc.
But, something goes awry: the Ghost of Ronald Reagan makes an appearance and, like x-ray vision, reveals the cracks in Cantor's story.
STAHL: What’s the difference between compromise and cooperate?
CANTOR: Well, I would say cooperate is let’s look to where we can move things forward where we agree. Comprising principles, you don’t want to ask anybody to do that. That’s who they are as their core being.
STAHL: But you know, your idol, as I’ve read anyway, was Ronald Reagan. And he compromised.
CANTOR: He never compromised his principles.
STAHL: Well, he raised taxes and it was one of his principles not to raise taxes.
CANTOR: Well, he– he also cut taxes.
STAHL: But he did compromise–
CANTOR: Well I –
OFF-SCREEN ANGRY VOICE: That just isn’t true! And I don’t want to let that stand!
The voice that breaks the fourth wall belongs to Cantor's press secretary, Brad Dayspring. After the interruption, 60 Minutes immediately cuts to Reagan in 1982 announcing a tax raise and the need for compromise. To millions of viewers, it felt like Reagan had cooperated with CBS News to give Cantor and the House Republicans a good bonk on the head.
Despite the best laid plans of the Cantor media team, the Ghost of Reagan stole the show and revealed the chasm that separates Reagan from Cantor, and the ideological conservatives of today from the principled conservatives of yesteryear. The biggest difference between Reagan and Cantor is that Reagan, in his approach to tax policy and the economy, had the strength of character to do what was right for the country, even if powerful special interests disagreed. Where is that strength of character now?
Reagan said of his '82 tax increase, "I support it because it is right for America. I support it because it is fair."
Fairness. What's right for America. Those are the kind of principles that ought not to be compromised. A pledge to powerful bankers and corporate lobbyists is not a principle; it's a backroom deal.
Our country needs more revenue to heal an economy in cardiac arrest. We can address the deficit as the economy heals from emergency surgery and is up and walking again. We need to put job creation and economic growth before backroom pledges and ideological rigidity. That's what Reagan would do if he were president today, and that is what Cantor should do if he really, truly wants an image makeover.
It seems like we should be celebrating the end of the war, but I don't see many people celebrating except for the White House.
I'm certainly relieved that we are leaving Iraq and I am grateful to all those who served in the war and all those who protested peacefully to end the war. I am also grateful to President Obama that he delivered on one of his campaign promises that was really important to me.
Despite the relief and gratitude, I fear that we haven't really learned any lessons from the war. Why did we really go to war? When is war justified or not justified? Was this war justified? What is the best way to decide when and how we go to war? How did we fund or not fund this war? What was the real damage? How do we begin to repair the damage at home and abroad? Does this mean that the War of Terror is also ending? Where is the accountability?
There's a lot to think and talk about. In fact, we need to do some soul-searching. As a nation, we've been strangely silent on the subject for the last several years. And with the announcement that this war is finally ending, it's hardly registering in the news.
First of all, I am inspired by your courage and conviction and I thank you for the leadership that you are showing the nation.
I just read the Declaration of the Occupation of New York City passed by the NYC General Assembly. I agree with many of the critical statements made about our current financial and political system and I admire the comprehensive nature of the approach.
As we further develop our collective vision and political strategy, I submit for consideration, Franklin D. Roosevelt's Economic Bill of Rights proposed in his State of a Union speech in 1944, a year before his death.
Although never adopted as an official amendment to the US Constitution, the Economic Bill of Rights became the basis of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, authored in part by his wife, Eleanor Roosevelt, and adopted by the UN General Assembly December 10, 1948. The United States voted in favor of the adoption.
Martin Luther King, Jr. attempted to advance a version of this in 1968 through the Poor People's Campaign before he was assassinated.
While we may need to revise it, it seems to me that the Economic Bill of Rights offers an orientation -- an intellectual, social and moral one -- that addresses many concerns that we all have as citizens and frames our rights as rights; not as "entitlements" for the elderly, the undeserving, or the underperforming.
The values and ideas expressed in the Economic Bill of Rights were embodied in the New Deal programs — Roosevelt administration's response to the Great Depression — one of which is our current Social Security program.
Insofar as the Economic Bill of Rights may appear to be unrealizable, this so-called conventional wisdom attests to just how far our current consciousness has departed from the lessons in humanity painfully learned during the Great Depression and World War II.
This departure is no accident; it is by design. In the last 30 years, we've moved away from Roosevelt's vision, and have been lured or bullied into accepting an entirely different social contract. Roosevelt wanted the Economic Bill of Rights to be the law of the land because he knew the "economic royalists" were nipping at the heels of social justice. He wanted to give us constitutional protection from their abuse of power. He spelled it out in 1936 in his speech "Rendezvous with History."
The hours men and women worked, the wages they received, the conditions of their labor - these had passed beyond the control of the people, and were imposed by this new industrial dictatorship. The savings of the average family, the capital of the small-businessmen, the investments set aside for old age — other people's money — these were tools which the new economic royalty used to dig itself in.
Without our consent, we have become enablers or cogs of a financial system that requires us to pay off the gambling debts of the "money guys" at the casino we call Wall St and maintain the system that benefits the 1%, the "economic royalists." Our political system is now fully co-dependent on this financial system, just too addicted to the enormous amounts of cash that flow into campaign coffers, and into bank accounts once our elected leaders leave office to join the private sector.
Because of these problems, and, our incomprehensible and unfair tax code, our country has an upward income redistribution system. In a sense, we have socialism, but only for the 1%. It bestows privileges to the wealthy for being wealthy and punishes the poor for being poor.
The current social contract tramples on our right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We need to thoroughly revisit and renegotiate this social contract. It is not too late to make a u-turn on the terrible policies of the last 30 years that led to the current recession, extreme economic inequality, and the corruption of our democracy, and return to a politics that recognizes our humanity.
Let's discuss the merits of the vision advanced by Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt who praised compassion, and compare it to the vision advanced by Ayn Rand who praised selfishness instead. Let us decide as a nation which we prefer. We do need to make a choice here.
This brings me to my second request. Let's take the occupation to the voting booth. Let's take it to town halls, city halls, state capitols and the US Capitol. Let's Occupy the Voting Booth in 2012.
The truth is, too many of us have been absent from the political process. Widespread public disengagement hurts our democracy as much if not more than greed and corruption. We cannot achieve changes in this country until We the People occupy the People's House and stay there.
In Egypt, the people demanded that a dictator step down. In a dictatorship, that can work: Hosni Mubarak stepped down and the people of Egypt embarked on a journey to constitute a new democratic society. But the United States is a representative democracy with a complex system of laws that must change. There is no one person who could step down, or step up, and solve our problems. The closest thing that we have to Mubarak is money. And the only ones who can step up are We the People. Perhaps the rally cry for the American people should be: Money out. People in. And: we want our democracy back.
Whichever solution or slogan we decide to advance as a people coming together in an unstoppable wave of energy to change our society, we cannot achieve our goals without the commitment to ongoing and fiercely persistent engagement from all of us. We need to take our jobs as citizens seriously and understand that our civic duty is really a civic gift from those who fought for and are still fighting for real democracy.
Finally, to my new friends at OccupyDC and to OccupyTogether, I invite you to join us on October 29th for a Citizens Intervention at the US Capitol. Let's speak for the 99% and take our concerns, stories, ideas and grievances directly to Congress. Let's initiate a civil, national dialog with all Americans in the spirit of out of many voices, one.
We need all Americans whether they are in Congress or not, to agree to have dialog about our future. As much as we may at times feel alienated from each other, we do share a common future and a common bond, the love of our country and its ideals.
I have no idea what the outcome of our struggle will be. I can offer my hope and these stirring words from Roosevelt.
To some generations much is given. Of other generations much is expected. This generation of Americans has a rendezvous with destiny... It is not alone a war against want and destitution and economic demoralization. It is more than that; it is a war for the survival of democracy. We are fighting to save a great and precious form of government for ourselves and for the world.
Let's move to protect our democracy for our fellow Americans and the rest of the world.
Note: A shortened version of this speech for delivered at conconcon.org which took place at Harvard Law School, 9/24-25.
I'd like to raise some questions designed to make us self-conscious. In honor of one of my favorite political figures in the last century, Vice Admiral James Stockdale, who at the 1992 Vice Presidential debate asked, "Who am I and what am I doing here?" I'm going to ask: Who are we and what are we doing here?
I want to ask you all something. How many of you believe that our government is not broken? Almost all of us agree that it is. So, yes, we are here in recognition of this terrible truth and we want to do something.
I'm going to risk having Larry Lessig getting mad at me and venture to say that I think we have been enticed here under false pretenses.
In mid September, we posted the following status on our Facebook wall:
"We love our country. We need an AmericanIntervention. Problems in Washington have affected my life in the following ways: ___________ (fill in the blank)."
Hundreds of people responded, sharing their struggles and stories.
“Unemployment ran out and still no job.... you do the math.”
“My country is dying and I'm out here twisting in the wind, like so many.”
“My husband and I can’t sleep because his company lays off people every Friday. It is known as Black Friday.”
It's clear that Washington isn't working for us. It is time for a Citizens Intervention.
At the Enough Is Enough! Rally on October 29, our goal is to recruit 1,000 everyday Americans to exercise their First Amendment right to speak out and share stories about how government dysfunction and corruption have impacted their lives.
Speech before the 1936 Democratic National Convention
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
June 27, 1936
A Rendezvous With Destiny by Franklin D. Roosvelt
"Senator Robinson, Members of the Democratic Convention, My Friends: Here, and in every community throughout the land, we are met at a time of great moment to the future of the nation. It is an occasion to be dedicated to the simple and sincere expression of an attitude toward problems, the determination of which will profoundly affect America.
I come not only as a leader of a party, not only as a candidate for high office, but as one upon whom many critical hours have imposed and still impose a grave responsibility.
For the sympathy, help and confidence with which Americans have sustained me in my task I am grateful. For their loyalty I salute the members of our great party, in and out of political life in every part of the Union. I salute those of other parties, especially those in the Congress of the United States who on so many occasions have put partisanship aside. I thank the governors of the several states, their legislatures, their state and local officials who participated unselfishly and regardless of party in our efforts to achieve recovery and destroy abuses. Above all I thank the millions of Americans who have borne disaster bravely and have dared to smile through the storm.
America will not forget these recent years, will not forget that the rescue was not a mere party task. It was the concern of all of us. In our strength we rose together, rallied our energies together, applied the old rules of common sense, and together survived.
In those days we feared fear. That was why we fought fear. And today, my friends, we have won against the most dangerous of our foes. We have conquered fear.
But I cannot, with candor, tell you that all is well with the world. Clouds of suspicion, tides of ill-will and intolerance gather darkly in many places. In our own land we enjoy indeed a fullness of life greater than that of most nations. But the rush of modern civilization itself has raised for us new difficulties, new problems which must be solved if we are to preserve to the United States the political and economic freedom for which Washington and Jefferson planned and fought.
Philadelphia is a good city in which to write American history. This is fitting ground on which to reaffirm the faith of our fathers; to pledge ourselves to restore to the people a wider freedom; to give to 1936 as the founders gave to 1776 — an American way of life.
We are in the middle of a great struggle for the soul of our country.
It is easy to read the news each day and become a little more disheartened, if not downright demoralized about our future. Elected members of our government are telling us that we don't deserve disaster relief, clean air, fair wages, healthcare, jobs, or homes. We are not part of the "productive class," and thus the tax dollars we contribute should not be invested in our families or our futures.
Our struggle is often presented as an economic struggle. The top 1% vs the rest of us. In many ways, it is that. But, like many conflicts between people and power throughout history, it is also a struggle for identity, as individuals and as a nation.
The ruling class in America wants to determine what we deserve or don't deserve as human beings. They malign social programs — paid for with our taxpayer money — as "entitlements" that, for some reason, we no longer deserve. In the aftermath of the Wall Street financial crisis, somehow We the People have become less deserving of the fruits of our labor. Instead, our money goes to those who created the crisis — the "money guys" as former Senator Alan Simpson refers to them. [READ MORE]
Coffee Party USA is a people-powered, grassroots effort, and we use Google AdSense to defray our web hosting costs. The ads shown are unfiltered and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Coffee Party.
by Annabel Park 
I'd like to raise some questions designed to make us self-conscious. In honor of one of my favorite political figures in the last century, Vice Admiral James Stockdale, who at the 1992 Vice Presidential debate asked, "Who am I and what am I doing here?" I'm going to ask: Who are we and what are we doing here?
Dear America,
