|
Below is a letter that I just sent to Al Gore through the Dean for America web site:
Thank you, President-elect Gore, for your commitment to the people of America.
On the beautiful late summer morning of September 11, 2001, I was on my way to work in Manhattan when I saw somebody frantically point a camera to the sky. From Sixth Avenue and 23rd Street, I looked down the Avenue and saw that the World Trade Center was on fire. A crowd started gathering. Someone with a radio said that a plane had hit the tower. Even for New Yorkers, this was something unusual. Then we heard on the radio that a second plane had hit the other tower. The word terrorism spread through the crowd.
When something tragic happens in a person's life, it usually takes a little while for the import of the tragedy to be fully understood. I can't even remember what went through my mind during the few minutes it took me to walk to my office. I passed by my coworkers huddled around a radio, went inside my office, and cried uncontrollably.
But I wasn't crying for the people that were dying at the World Trade Center, as perhaps I should have been. Instead, I was crying for my two sons, then ages eleven and eight, whose childhood I knew had just in some ways come to an end. From this day, they would carry with them the fear that something horrifying could happen to them at any moment. They would know that there is anger and hatred in this world that knows no bounds, and living in this great city of ours, they were prime targets.
I raced back across town to the east side to get my children from school. The billowing black clouds of smoke looked like they were getting larger and moving toward us. But we went a few minutes out of our way so that my sons could get a good view of the towers burning. I knew that this was the most momentous event of their lives, and when they were older they would be glad they saw it firsthand.
For weeks afterwards, the smell of death hung over our city. As a family, we decided that we would not move out of the city. Both of our children said that they wanted to stay. It's not that we are tough people refusing to run. It was just that we live in a wonderful community, and we did not want to leave behind our children's home, school, and friends. I still sometimes wonder if I am doing the right thing for my kids.
I was extremely upset when George Bush was awarded the Presidency in December 2000. I had always respected you, and during the 2000 campaign, as the attack dogs of the right wing relentlessly went after you, I grew to admire you more. I thought you could be a great President. But after 9/11 I found myself in the unusual position of supporting the Bush administration as they went to war in Afghanistan. It was time for the country to unite.
But as events unfolded, all of my worst fears about the Bush administration were being realized. 9/11 has become a pretext for an extreme right wing assault against our federal government, the American people, and all people on this earth. I have even become firmly convinced that if you were President, 9/11 never would have happened. "Policy wonk Al Gore", "detail nerd Al Gore" would never have received all the warnings we did of an imminent terrorist attack and done absolutely nothing about it, as the Bush misadministration did. Whether because of enormous incompetence or something far more sinister, George Bush must be held accountable for what happened that morning.
As this administration follows the PNAC plans for a total war against all those who do not submit to its will, both domestic and foreign, my children still live with the fear of being the targets of terrorism. But thanks to George Bush, that fear has been superseded by another--fear of their own government. The greatest fear that they have to live with now is that if Bush wins in 2004, they will be drafted into the military when they become eighteen years old. Bush's war will expand to other countries and with our military already stretched to its limits, it seems inevitable that he will institute a draft to force our children to go and kill and be killed, not to defend their country, but to advance the interests of George Bush and his corporate cronies.
For a couple of years, many Americans had become filled with despair. As we watched our country turn even further to the extreme right, and with the help of a meek and compliant corporate media, Bush seemed certain to win in 2004. The Democratic party seemed resigned to defeat, afraid to make waves and be attacked by the right. I had even begun half-seriously thinking about moving my family out of the country.
But then I heard Howard Dean.
The experts have decided that Howard Dean is unelectable because he is too angry. But social progress throughout history has almost always been preceded by anger--anger at the way things are, and a desire to change them. Most of the historical figures that we are taught to admire were angry. One kind of anger is a bitter anger, resigned to the idea that things will not get better. But this is not Howard Dean. Instead, he has given me hope for this country for the first time since 9/11. His personal style --bold, blunt, smart, strong, positive, energetic, fun, feisty, and yes, angry--has electrified many people. His innovative and unique campaign has moved the Democratic Party out of the doldrums and offers us hope that the Party can still be an agent of change for the common good in this country, as it has been many times before.
A populist movement is forming around the Dean campaign. Howard Dean did not create this movement, but he has become its voice. This is a movement that has a chance to restructure our political landscape in profound ways, driven by technology, new ideas, and a newly politicized populace with immediate access to the political process. I believe that some are vastly underestimating the transformation of American politics that Howard Dean has ignited, and it may not become apparent to them until November, 2004.
I've been reading about your endorsement of Governor Dean, and some writers are bewildered that you would endorse him. To them, it seems like a mismatch--a centrist Washington insider endorsing a left wing outsider (even though Dean is pretty much a centrist, he is portrayed as being of the left). But these writers have not been paying attention. In the last couple of years you have given some of the best political speeches of our lifetime. You have grown greatly in stature, and you have moved away from the center and toward more progressive views. Governor Dean has also grown during the course of his campaign. This opens up both of you to the charge that you "flip-flop" and "don't know what you stand for." But. as usual, these are ridiculous charges. What you have done is what all thinking human beings do: your thoughts evolve as new events occur and new evidence is found. Only a simple-minded person never changes his views.
I believe that the Dean campaign is a natural outgrowth of your 2000 campaign. You started doing better in the polls when you began defining yourself as standing up for the common people against the special interests, and you were able to rally to victory. I thought at the time that it seemed a bit odd for the Vice President of the previous eight years to portray himself as an outsider. I did not realize at the time how right you truly were. It seemed to some like political posturing, but it turns out you really were the last line of defense. Bush was awarded the White House, and the corporate special interests have been feeding at the trough of our tax dollars ever since. Also, the events of Florida 2000 helped plant the seeds of the Dean campaign. Your determined fight, and gracious speech conceding Bush the White House, were the beginning of the rebirth of the Democratic Party. Sometimes we need to take one step back so that we can take two steps forward.
George Bush has been portrayed as a conservative, but I don't agree. A true conservative believes that the government should be kept small and its powers limited--that it is not the best way to solve society's problems. In trying to do so, it will cause more problems than it solves. I don't agree with this, but it is certainly a valid argument. But George Bush does not at all believe in limiting the powers of government. Under him, the size and powers of the federal government is growing enormously and it is activist in trying to reshape our country. It's goals seem to be an undoing of the twentieth century, the transference of wealth upwards, and the crushing of those who might oppose them. They have never given any indication that they believe in the principles our nation was founded on. While the federal government can't solve all of society's problems, a Howard Dean presidency would once again establish a government that tries to works for--not against--the common good.
There are a number of excellent candidates running for the Democratic nomination. While I have favored Howard Dean for many months, it was only a couple of weeks ago that I came to a final decision that he was the candidate I wanted to see win the nomination. I came to the conclusion that he has the best ability to remove George Bush from office. His campaign has a chance to evolve into a historical popular movement. But it is imperative that the battle for the nomination not be prolonged far into next year. More than ever, the Democratic Party needs to coalesce around their candidate early. The biggest question facing the Party this year is this: is the number one priority of the Party establishment to remove George Bush, or is it to maintain their own hold on power within the Party? It will take time to reshape the Party in the model of the Dean campaign, but once it does it will become much stronger than it is today. I think that your early endorsement of Howard Dean is a recognition of this.
When I was younger I frequently opposed my government's policies. I protested against Reaganomics and his brutal and unjust wars against the people of Latin America. I thought that the Democratic Party rarely offered up a real alternative to Republicans, so I registered as an Independent and voted in the 70's and 80's for Eugene McCarthy and Jesse Jackson. I did not want the Democratic Party to take my vote for granted, and I wanted to let them know if they wanted my vote, they had to respond to my concerns. I did not want to vote for "Republican Lite."
As I grew older, and especially after the birth of my first son in 1990, my views did not change but I began to appreciate the idea that progress in our society can most easily be made in small steps. After twelve years of Reagan and Bush Sr., we needed to start moving the country forward again. In 1992 I was happy to carry my son into the voting booth with me and have him pull the lever for Bill Clinton and Al Gore. I did not want my son to grow up like me, despising his own government. I wanted him to think that his federal government is a force for good in the world, one he can be proud of. Two months ago I changed my voter registration. I am now a registered Democrat. After three years of George Bush, I see the Democratic Party and Howard Dean as the best hope for those who believe that our government can once again work for ordinary people instead of against them.
Thank you again, President-elect Gore, for continuing to fight the good fight on our behalf. After the events of the 2000 election, it must have been tempting to remove yourself from public life. It is good to see that you have not. You may never have the opportunity to become a great American President, but that does not prevent you from being a great American.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
