CARTOON: Tiptoeing & Fast Dancing -- The Number One Issue Democrats Won't Address At Convention
As the bodies in Gaza and the West Bank pile up and Israel directs American mass murder, don't expect anything to be done in Chicago to address our obscene war crimes.
Cartoon by Mark Taylor / DeMOCKracy.ink
NOTICE: If you, or someone you know, is in Chicago to protest the Democratic Party and need legal help, you can access legal support by calling this hotline: 1 (872) 465 4244.
Is The Ghost Of Hubert Humphrey Stalking Kamala Harris & The Democrats?
Vice President Hubert H. Humphrey was "greeted by a not too friendly number of placards," according to the original photo caption, as he addressed students at Fairleigh Dickinson University on October 31, 1968. (Photo: Bettmann / Contributor / via Getty Images)
As a pivotal election neared, a candidate had to decide whether to keep supporting an unpopular war or speak out for a meaningful change. Humphrey faced that choice in 1968. Harris faces it now.
By Norman Soloman
Common Dreams (8/15/24)
After the Democrat in the White House decided not to run for reelection, the vice president got the party’s presidential nod—and continued to back the administration’s policies for an unpopular war. As the election neared, the candidate had to decide whether to keep supporting the war or speak out for a change.
Hubert Humphrey faced that choice in 1968. Kamala Harris faces it now.
Despite the differences in eras and circumstances, key dynamics are eerily similar. The history of how Vice President Humphrey navigated the political terrain of the war in Vietnam has ominous parallels with how Vice President Harris has been dealing with the war in Gaza.
From Landslide to Chaos
For millions of liberals, during the first half of the 1960s, Hubert Humphrey was the nation’s most heroic politician. As the Senate majority whip, he deftly championed landmark bills for civil rights and social programs. By the time President Lyndon B. Johnson put him on the Democratic ticket in 1964, progressive momentum was in high gear.
LBJ defeated ultra-conservative Barry Goldwater in a landslide. As vice president, Humphrey assisted Johnson to follow up on the 1964 Civil Rights Act with the 1965 Voting Rights Act and a huge set of antipoverty measures while enacting broad social programs in realms of education, health care, nutrition, housing and the environment. Midway through the summer of 1965, Johnson signed Medicare and Medicaid into law.
The chaos and bitterness in Chicago underscored how the vice president’s deference to the war president had weakened the party while undermining the chances for victory.
Meanwhile, escalation of the U.S. war on Vietnam was taking off. And, as Martin Luther King Jr. soon pointed out, “When a nation becomes obsessed with the guns of war, social programs must inevitably suffer. We can talk about guns and butter all we want to, but when the guns are there with all of its emphasis you don’t even get good oleo [margarine]. These are facts of life.”
At first, Vice President Humphrey wrote slightly dovish memos to Johnson, who angrily rejected the advice and retaliated by excluding him from key meetings. Banished to the doghouse, Humphrey licked his wounds and changed his approach. By early 1966, he was deferring to Johnson’s war views in private and advocating for the Vietnam War in public.
As the war escalated, so did the vice president’s zeal to extol it as a fight for freedom and democracy. “By 1967 he had become a hawk on Vietnam,” biographer Arnold Offner noted. Beneath the lofty rhetoric was cold calculation.
“Humphrey’s passage from dove to hawk on Vietnam was not the result of one-sided White House briefings or of his ability, as one journalist had noted, to see silver linings in the stormiest clouds,” Offner wrote. “His change of position derived from a case of willful mind over matter, from his strong anti-Communism combined with political expediency driven by ambition, namely desire to remain in Johnson’s good graces and perhaps succeed him whenever his presidency ended.”
That desire to be in the president’s good graces did not dissipate after Johnson suddenly announced in a televised address on March 31, 1968 that he would not seek reelection. Four weeks later, Humphrey launched a presidential campaign that pitted him against two antiwar candidates, Senators Eugene McCarthy and Robert Kennedy.
From the outset, Humphrey was plagued by his fear of antagonizing Johnson if he were to depart from a pro-war script. The United States had “nothing to apologize for,” Humphrey said. He didn’t run in any primaries and was not willing to debate McCarthy or Kennedy.
Humphrey mouthed the same old rhetoric to rationalize the administration’s policies for the war in Vietnam. Several high-level supporters—including Iowa’s Governor Harold Hughes, Vermont’s Governor Philip Hoff, and the venerable former New York governor and ambassador Averell Harriman—advised him to resign the vice presidency and thus free himself from entanglement with Johnson. But to Humphrey, such a step was unthinkable.
And so, Hubert Humphrey rode in the caboose of the war train all summer. In late August, the day before the Democratic National Convention got underway in Chicago, he told viewers of the CBS program Face the Nation that the administration’s policies in Vietnam were “basically sound.”
The convention nominated him while, outside, tear gas filled the air during what a report from a special federal commission later called a police riot that meted out violence to antiwar demonstrators as well as some journalists. Inside the turbulent convention, dissenting delegates were outshouted, outvoted and suppressed by the pro-Humphrey forces.
Deference to the war
The chaos and bitterness in Chicago underscored how the vice president’s deference to the war president had weakened the party while undermining the chances for victory. In polls, Humphrey trailed the Republican candidate Richard Nixon by double digits.
And yet, like a true warhorse, the VP could not bring himself to break from the president’s steely insistence on maintaining the U.S. government’s horrific violence in Vietnam. The Democratic ticket of Humphrey and Maine’s senator Edmund Muskie was in a tailspin, propelled downward by Humphrey’s refusal to break ranks with Johnson.
It wasn’t until Sept. 30 that Humphrey took a meaningful step. His campaign bought 30 minutes of national TV air time on NBC, and he used it to deliver a speech that finally created a bit of daylight between him and Johnson’s war. Humphrey said that as president he’d be willing to halt the bombing of North Vietnam. The speech revived his campaign, which nearly closed the gap with Nixon in October. But it was too little, too late.
Trying to Square a Circle of Mass Murder With the 'Politics of Joy'?
Like Hubert Humphrey six decades ago, Kamala Harris has remained in step with the man responsible for changing her title from senator to vice president. She has toed President Biden’s war line, while at times voicing sympathy for the victims of the Gaza war that’s made possible by policies that she supports. Her words of compassion have yet to translate into opposing the pipeline of weapons and ammunition to the Israeli military as it keeps slaughtering Palestinian civilians.
As the Democratic standard-bearer during carnage in Gaza, Harris has been trying to square a circle of mass murder, expressing empathy for victims while staying within bounds of U.S. government policies. Last week, Harris had her national security adviser declare that “she does not support an arms embargo on Israel.”
Like Hubert Humphrey six decades ago, Kamala Harris has remained in step with the man responsible for changing her title from senator to vice president
If maintained, that stance will continue to be a moral catastrophe—while increasing the chances that Harris will lose to Donald Trump. In effect, so far, Harris has opted to stay aligned with power brokers, big donors and conventional political wisdom instead of aligning with most voters. A CBS News/YouGov poll in June found that Americans opposed sending “weapons and supplies to Israel” by 61 to 39 percent.
Last week, Harris described herself and running-mate Tim Walz as “joyful warriors.” Many outlets have heralded their joyride along the campaign trail. The Associated Pressreported that “Harris is pushing joy.” A New York Times headline proclaimed that “joy is fueling her campaign.” The brand of the Harris campaign is fast becoming “the politics of joy.”
Such branding will be a sharp contrast to the outcries from thousands of protesters in Chicago outside the Democratic National Convention next week, as they denounce U.S. complicity with the methodical killing of so many children, women and other civilians in Gaza.
Campaigning for joy while supporting horrendous warfare is nothing new. Fifty-six years before Vice President Harris called herself a “joyful warrior,” Vice President Humphrey declared that he stood for the “politics of joy” when announcing his run for the 1968 Democratic presidential nomination.
At that point, the Pentagon was several years into its massive killing spree in Vietnam, as Humphrey kicked off his campaign by saying: “here we are the spirit of dedication, here we are the way politics ought to be in America, the politics of happiness, politics of purpose, politics of joy; and that’s the way it’s going to be, all the way, too, from here on out.”
If Kamala Harris loses to Trump after sticking with her support for arming the slaughter in Gaza, historians will likely echo words from biographer Offner, who wrote that after the 1968 election Humphrey “asked himself repeatedly whether he should have distanced himself sooner from President Johnson on the war. The answer was all too obvious.”
FORGET THE VIRTUE SIGNALING: Kamala Harris FULLY Supports Arming Israeli Genocide, No Different Than Biden
Electronic Intifada (8/16/24)
Since President Joe Biden pulled out of the race and Kamala Harris became the presumptive nominee, there's been a softening towards the Democratic Party among some on the progressive left. Ali Abunimah and Nora Barrows-Friedman discuss debunk claims that Harris is somehow a "lesser evil" when it comes to Israel's genocide in Gaza.
15-minute video
DEMOCRACY? IN AMERICA? OH, PLEASE! Mass Protests Planned For DNC Spotlight Chicago’s Legacy Of Brutal Police Repression
Legal advocates say Chicago cops have long targeted protesters as they prepare for a crackdown ahead of the convention.
By Mike Ludwig
Truthout (8/15/24)
The upcoming Democratic National Convention (DNC) in Chicago has been drawing parallels to its 1968 predecessor for months now. Back then, members of the Chicago Police Department infamously attacked protesters and innocent bystanders on live television during a calamitous crackdown on crowds of anti-war protesters gathered outside.
While the violence of 1968 sticks out in the national memory, it’s only one piece of Chicago law enforcement’s long history of repressing social liberation movements that stretches back to the labor revolts of the 19th century.
Now, as tens of thousands of demonstrators prepare to descend on downtown Chicago to march on the 2024 DNC in protest of the Biden administration’s support of Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, the decades-long effort to protect freedom of assembly and hold police accountable on the streets of Chicago is once again gaining national attention.
“There’s been an animus against leftist and progressive organizing throughout the history of Chicago … we’ve just perpetually seen the targeting and the retribution and violence against individuals who are progressive, leftist and in some cases liberal, protesting for different demands,” said Joey Mogul, director of partnerships at Movement Law Lab and a veteran attorney at the Chicago-based People’s Law Office, in an interview.
From the unlawful mass arrest of veterans and other demonstrators protesting the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, to the police officers caught on camera beating protesters during the scandal-plagued response to the uprisings for racial justice in 2020, Chicago police are notorious for brutal crackdowns on activists. Their hostility has kept the department embroiled in controversy and expensive lawsuits for years after the crowds disperse.
Most recently, Chicago police have come under fire for their responses to various demonstrations and direct actions demanding a ceasefire in Gaza. Arielle Rebekah, a spokesperson for the anti-war group Jewish Voice for Peace, said activists have observed a clear pattern of police targeting specific Black and Palestinian activists for harassment and arrest.
“It is very obviously targeted, because the people they are picking out are the people who are known protest organizers in Chicago. It is consistent, and too consistent to be accidental,” Rebekah said.
Mogul pointed out that Chicago has a long and “ugly history” of violent police crackdowns on large demonstrations that end in mass arrests in violation of the First Amendment.
“That includes in 2003 with the anti-Iraq war protests, the demonstrations in response to the NATO summit in 2012, the egregious violence and ‘kettling’ that we saw at some of the protests in support of Black lives in the summer of 2020,” Mogul said. “And most recently, we are seeing violence at protests gathering in response to the war on Gaza or the demands for a ceasefire, and in response to outrage over the police killing of Dexter Reed.”
Dexter Reed, a 26-year-old Black man, was shot 13 times and killed by police during a traffic stop on Chicago’s West Side in March. Medical examiners ruled the case a homicide. Police say Reed shot first, but protests broke out in recent weeks following the release of body camera footage showing officers firing almost 100 rounds. Reed’s family has filed a wrongful death lawsuit accusing the police of using violent and militarized tactics.
The protests over Reed’s death follow multiple cycles of outrage over racist and deadly police violence in Chicago, where the city council recently agreed to pay $57 million to settle three lawsuits over a range of police misconduct, including an unauthorized car chase that left a 15-year-old with a traumatic brain injury and unable to walk. Efforts by the community to reform the Chicago Police Department were so contentious and unsuccessful that the Justice Department stepped in and announced a consent decree back in 2018. That decree mandates the police department must improve training and policies around “impartial policing,” “use of force,” “crisis intervention,” and other areas under federal oversight.
Anger boiled over again during the summer of 2020 after the police murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis sparked a nationwide uprising for racial justice.
On May 30, 2020, groups of Black and Brown youth who showed up to protest were trapped in downtown Chicago after former Mayor Lori Lightfoot ordered bridges to be lifted and public transportation shut down. The Chicago Freedom School, which teaches community organizing primarily to Black and Brown youth, opened its doors so the protesters could gather in safety and coordinate rides home as a 9 p.m. emergency curfew approached.
Chicago Freedom School organizers also provided bottles of water, pizza and granola bars to the stranded youth, which prompted a raid by Chicago police along with city inspectors who penalized the school for running a commercialized kitchen without a business license. The school was temporarily shut down under a “cease and desist” order that was described as a deliberate attack on Black and Brown youth exercising their First Amendment rights.
As counsel for the People’s Law Office, Mogul and other attorneys filed suit against the city and the police department and the “cease and desist” order was rescinded as part of a settlement with the Chicago Freedom School. While the city reprimanded the officials who handed out the unlawful order, they were later promoted within the Chicago bureaucracy, according to local reports.
“They weren’t selling this food for money, so it was clearly pretextual and outrageous, a way to prevent and chill the Chicago Freedom School from supporting these young Black and Brown people protesting police violence,” Mogul said.
The Chicago Freedom School was far from the only controversy arising from the Chicago Police Department’s response to the 2020 protests. The use of pepper spray and indiscriminate mass arrests during the uprisings came under intense public scrutiny. A report by the Inspector General for Chicago found that the department’s crowd management policies increased the likelihood that cops would violate the constitutional rights of demonstrators.
New protocols
Under fire for these alleged First Amendment violations, the Chicago Police Department is rolling out new protocols for policing mass events and protests ahead of the DNC, including a new standard for ordering crowds to disperse only if three or more individuals are involved in “disorderly conduct” that could lead to “substantial harm.”
Top Chicago police officials have said “rioting” will not be tolerated during the DNC next week, and the city reopened a defunct courtroom to handle an anticipated multitude of cases in the event of mass arrests during the convention.
Considering the track record of the Chicago police, it’s no surprise racial justice and police accountability are a major focus of the city’s vast activist scene. Mogul said people coming to Chicago to protest the DNC should know that movement lawyers are coordinating across multiple organizations — including the Movement Law Lab, Palestine Legal, the National Lawyers Guild, and others — to provide legal support for activists.
“I think people have a right to protest and should feel comfortable doing so,” Mogul said. “But they should be smart, be wise, go with other people, and make sure that people who are not at the protest know they are there.”
Chicago protesters can access legal support by calling this hotline: 1 (872) 465 4244.
KEEP THE PEOPLE AWAY! Chicago Clampdown Shows Democrats Fear The People
5-minute video
1968 REPEAT? Massive Gaza Protests Heading To CRASH Kamala DNC Party
Breaking Points (8/15/24)
15-minute video
George Carlin’s Words Of Truth Are Even More Relevant Now…
Why Don't I Vote? I'll Let George Carlin Explain It To You
8-minute video
“We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office.” — Aesop
‘It’s a big club and you ain’t in it.’ Mark, what fascinates me is that GC left the land of comedy for almost a decade. His stand up routines were social commentary and people continued to attend but did they comprehend? At times it seems he is throwing awareness bombs at the audience and they don’t get it … they laugh … but he was on a quest in his closing years. He was a heyoka truth teller but there is one caveat when dealing with heyoka… you have to be self aware enough and wise enough the heyoka is talking to ‘you.’ I learn something every time I listen to his later performances … and I try to remember what I thought of Carlin in 1996 and 2006 … I think a lot of me in 96 thought he was just a bitter pissed off man shirking his duties as a citizen. By 2006 I was wise-ER but you can’t know what you don’t know. It wasn’t until October 8th that I woke up to the world from 72 years of Rip Van Winkle sleep. My education WAS worthless EXCEPT for preparing me for my profession. It taught me the value of life long learning … but WHAT I was taught was not objective fact nor factual history nor even the depth of truth about psychology. I wish I could do it over… knowing what I know … I waste too much time on that one. Now the DNC 2024 version. Same problems different location. ‘Steal This Book’ Remember that by AH? Steal this book. I rambling. As always I enjoy your posts and love your drawings… and the message. Just today Blinken did a ‘what blood’ Soulless deviants
GREAT post! Arguably our greatest philosopher and social critic and analyst George Carlin spread the word for decades - and NOTHING HAS CHANGED! Certainly not this imaginary 'american dream,' which is called a dream because you have to be ASLEEP to believe it........!