digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Noam Chomsky applauds Sen. Gravel's Accomplishments

gravel2008.us — Alone among members of Congress, Senator Mike Gravel had the courage to take a stand that not only helped bring the atrocious Indochina wars to an end, but also made a great contribution to breaking the wall of secrecy that governments erect to protect themselves from their own citizens.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • mempko, on 01/08/2008, -4/+20Noam failed to speak about Gravel dedication to bringing Democracy to the people via the National Initiative.
  • wellstone, on 01/08/2008, -4/+13Ya though he is speaking out... wow
  • arbulus, on 01/08/2008, -6/+49Mike Gravel is definitely the one to set this country straight. I'm 100% behind him.
    • notque, on 01/08/2008, -4/+29There isn't one to set the country straight. It takes us, the population being informed and acting. There are no saviors, and there never have been.
      • mempko, on 01/08/2008, -3/+25Hey, thats exactly what Gravel says!
      • arbulus, on 01/08/2008, -2/+12True.
        I guess what i meant by my comment is that he would be the best one in the presidential position who can help give us back the power to decide our own fate and to control our country - return the power to the people, where it should be.
  • SuperMoses, on 01/08/2008, -6/+60http://www.issues2000.org/Mike_Gravel.htm

    Him and Kucinich are the best Democratic candidates, and not surprisingly both are excluded from debates.
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=L3gQfz8GC0o
    http://youtube.com/watch?v=yLT4wa0qmzM - Clinton and Edwards conspiring.
    • Waterrat, on 01/08/2008, -1/+2 No tt's not,cause the elite do not want people like them running this country. For you see,only THEY have the right to run this country..
      In the end,the person who gets elected will ALWAYS be who the elite want...It's an illusion that we have chosen at all. ..For in the end,they choose for us and use the media to manipulate us to voting their way...See Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent on Google videos.
  • LmaoTzu, on 01/08/2008, -16/+2*golfclap*
  • fadeout, on 01/08/2008, -6/+13Staring into a camera for 5 minutes and throwing a rock into a lake takes true genius.
    • nick111, on 01/08/2008, -0/+6Maybe - but you'll still remember that one when you're 80. Bet you don't remember any of the others.
  • circleback2, on 01/08/2008, -1/+32I wish more people would realize Gravel's accomplishments. He is a consistent and unabashed warrior of American public interest. I wish there were more politicians like him that stand up to the Washington military-industrial complex as Gravel. He is a true American hero.
  • gtluke, on 01/08/2008, -20/+6noam chomsky getting behind mike gravel is like ann coulter getting behind fred thomson
    its a big DUH
    • jonmills, on 01/08/2008, -1/+6Maybe, if Noam Chomsky was a post-op tranny...
    • avasol, on 01/08/2008, -0/+9Dude you're comparing possibly the most idiotic and absurdly hateful two people in the US to the potentially smartest and the most compassionate.

      You have absolutely no mental framework with which to judge people, have you?
      Just more damaged goods from the US.
      • DRINKxREDxBULL, on 01/10/2008, -2/+1I know. How dare he even put Fred Thompson in the same sentence as scum like Noam.
  • pimpdown, on 01/08/2008, -1/+19The Pentagon papers were absolute proof the Government and the U.S. Military were lying sacks of *****.
    • Waterrat, on 01/08/2008, -0/+3 And nothing has changed since then.
  • sdlvx, on 01/08/2008, -1/+15go mike, you rule.

    After seeing Hillary tank like she has, it gives me a twinkle of hope for Mike.
  • Jack9, on 01/08/2008, -1/+13go mike!
  • schavira, on 01/08/2008, -1/+33It is sick how the media, especially GE (Saturday Night Live being the worst offender), treat an American hero like Gravel so disrespectfully, and for what, voicing his opinions that go against their corporate doctrine? I wish America would wake up.
    • Waterrat, on 01/08/2008, -0/+2 But don't forget..SNL has no choice...Big courps are controlled by the elite and EVERYTHING we see on TV (Except PBS) has to fit their agenda. The elite would not tolerate anything positive said about Gravel on SNL or anywhere else. SNL MUST play by the higher up's rules.. They only give the illusion of being rebellious, but pieces that diss people like Gravel show the audience that SNL and all the other shows are there to manipulate you..it may be done with humor,but it's still manipulation,non the less.
      The rich and powerful, who are pulling the strings behind the scenes , want those who disagree with them and their agenda to look bad,so they will be ignored...Meanwhile the person the elite really wants is pushed forward as the shining star and the best thing since sliced bread.
      If SNL said something positive about him and put down the elite's choice,do you really think it would be aired?
      Remember,the elite control ALL of the mass media and their way of looking at things must prevail.
      They have already decided who will win and people who go against the elite's master plan,such as Gravel will not be allowed a fair shake.
      Once you understand how the media manipulates reality to suite their various agendas,you will understand why dissing Gravel on SNL makes perfect sense.
      In reality,the actors may be for Gravel,but they have to play by the network rules...
      And they do...And so it goes...The very best for the people never get elected...The very best for the elite win every damn time.
    • counterspin, on 01/09/2008, -0/+2OK, the corporate controlled media is one explanation (@ Waterrat), but what about EVERYONE else?For whatever it means, just want you to know, Mr. Gravel, that both my sister - a two - time Edward R. Murrow award winning investigative new reporter/ news director - and myself, love you. We were in Charleston, S.C. covering the debates together & were so pissed @ the way you were treated. You were the ONLY candidate who didn't take a jet to get there & when Coop asked the query, the unmistakable deafening silence from the candidates on stage, followed by the ridiculous stammering from the candidates after you spoke was priceless.
      The truth being, you make people uncomfortable. You AND your wife. And you know what? Let the ignorant masses be damned! You are a true hero & I have a sneaking suspicion you don't really give a rat's arse about what anyone thinks.
      A BIG mwaaaa from NYC!
    • plookmenow, on 01/09/2008, -0/+2One of the few truly funny things SNL has aired in the last 30 years was Robert Smigel's "Conspiracy Theory Rock" cartoon about how the corporations, including GE, that control the TV networks manipulate the news that you see. And predictably enough, it was pulled from all reruns of that episode. Lorne Michaels was quoted variously as saying that it wasn't "comedically effective" and that he wanted to make room in that episode for a second performance by that night's musical guest, the Backstreet Boys. Uh-huh.

      SNL's portrayal of Sen. Gravel was unfunny and sickening. It's all too easy for hack comedy writers to get a cheap laugh by labeling as insane anyone who opposes the status quo -- it takes far more skill, on the other hand, to lampoon the ignorant attitudes behind the consensus view. Does anyone remember how SNL treated Sinead O'Connor after she had the courage to stand up against Vatican complicity in child abuse?

      The caricaturing of Gravel as "insane" also illustrates one of Chomsky's points about the agenda-setting function of the mass media. As he pointed out in the documentary "Manufacturing Consent," the demands for concision in news interviews are all but guaranteed to make any non-mainstream view look insane, whereas views that are mainstream but utterly baseless (e.g. the constant barrage of commentary saying that Iraq or Iran or the next enemy du jour is a major threat to us) get a free pass.

      End the draft in this country and people treat you like *****. Meanwhile, Bill Kristol, the ***** who brought us PNAC, gets a column in the New York Times, and the people of New Hampshire vote for two of the creeps who got a million people killed in Iraq. I'm going to go bang my head against a wall now.
  • MGSupporter, on 01/08/2008, -1/+11Glad to read that Noam applauds Mike's accomplishments!
  • senatorpjt, on 01/08/2008, -10/+2Why is this guy running? He has no chance, even compared to Kucinich. I'm hoping he's trying to pull a reverse Hillary and use a presidential run to get a NY senate seat. I'd be glad if he took Hillary's old Senate job, when she loses the presidency and the rest of New York kicks her out.
    • DontGiveADamn, on 01/08/2008, -0/+12He's running because he wants to get his message out. It must work because we are discussing him.
    • duggreen, on 01/08/2008, -0/+4'Has no chance'? sounds like you've been watching too much TV. People who believe polls are the problem in this country.
  • crackah, on 01/08/2008, -0/+20Sucks, I like him better than Paul, yet no big fan fare for gravel? why not?
    • Hippyhart, on 01/08/2008, -0/+15Mike Gravel's candor should be applauded rather than scorned by the general public -- he is a true hero. Unfortunately, his campaign is under-funded (he does not take money from lobbyists or big business) and mismanaged (he has no paid staff members), which have been a few of the reasons given by big media as a way to keep him out of the debates.
    • brad3378, on 01/08/2008, -2/+3Although I respect Gravel, I think much of what is fueling the Ron Paul phenomenon is about shrinking the size of government. Although both guys are against this very expensive war, I believe Paul has a slight edge in the realm of cutting the size of government.

      I also think Gravel needs to express his anger more.......It seems to work well for Ron Paul.
      • mempko, on 01/08/2008, -1/+4Are you kidding me, by Gravel putting the national initiative on the table he would give us (you, me and the public) a true chance to shrink the government instead of relying on some politician. With the national initiative we can keep the government small. If ron paul gets office and the person after him balloons the government...what use was paul?
    • thirdoffive, on 01/13/2008, -0/+2>>Sucks, I like him better than Paul, yet no big fan fare for gravel? why not?

      There was an already active libertarian base that Paul could build on. Couple that with the discontent and lack of other alternatives on the right, and it equaled magic for Paul. Nothing like that (an activist base and extreme discontent) existed on the left.

      Also, progressives were too enamored with the Obama/Hillary/Edwards trifecta to be desperately seeking an alternative. Having Kucinich in the race probably also split the support of alternative progressives.

      Bottom line: bad timing in a bad climate.
  • Jamihabs, on 01/08/2008, -16/+3Birds of a feather flock together. Loser supports loser.
    • SuperMoses, on 01/08/2008, -1/+11It's sad when people treat democracy like a highschool football game.
    • thirdoffive, on 01/13/2008, -0/+2An alternative view is that the scum rises to the top (tier).
  • BumRush, on 01/08/2008, -1/+7Gravel is the man..... to bad fox and cnn don't agree, so they can tell all the clowns like Jamihabs to vote for him.
    • Jamihabs, on 01/08/2008, -2/+2Here is your chance to help me. I am an American voter who is disgusted with every candidate, on both sides, who's main message is "Change", with little or no explanation of what that means.

      Chomsky's endorsement is not a plus in my book, but tell me, what would President Gravel do?
      • notque, on 01/08/2008, -0/+1Chomsky isn't endorsing anyone, but thinks Edwards is the candidate that is the best out of the likely to win. And by best, he means least bad.
  • krnldmp, on 01/08/2008, -1/+10Folks saying that Paul, Gravel and Kucinich have no chance to win don't seem to understand how much time all the "front runners" have to crash and burn. They're in HUGE hurry to do it too.
  • charlietuna, on 01/08/2008, -7/+3Kucinich - I think I get.
    Ron Paul - ditto (how could I not learn about him)
    Gravel - yeah all I know is he does Fellini type videos where he stares into the camera. wtf

    Not mocking him, but his message seems more about raw outrage than a real policy. Biden (for example) gets pissed, mouths off, but you also know he has proposals and wields some clout.
    • PeaceCzar, on 01/08/2008, -0/+6What you don't get is The National Initiative. Read that, and his other platform issues. They're both more practical and progressive than either than Kucinich or Paul. And by empowering the people to make laws, they are that much more achievable, too.
      • Waterrat, on 01/08/2008, -0/+2 And it's the very empowering the people to make laws is what scares the ***** out of the elite....They are not about to give up a kilogram of their power/control over this country and how its run...So in a word,Gravel and his ilk cannot be allowed to win...It's easy for the elite to use their power and control over the mass media to see to it that Gravel has no chance whatsoever....And they are doing that even as I type this and doing it very well...But they are masters at manipulation,smoke and mirrors....Always have been,always will be.
  • Hippyhart, on 01/08/2008, -0/+13For those who "don't get" Mike Gravel, here's a breakdown on what he stands for -- for more details, go to http://www.gravel2008.us/issues

    The War in Iraq: To commence an immediate and orderly withdrawal of all U.S. troops that will have them home within 120 days.
    The National Initiative for Democracy: The NI4D is a way to bring legislative power back to the people. In many states, citizens can put measures on the ballot and Mike believes as citizens of the United States we should all have that power.
    Global Warming/Climate Change: Mike believes that global climate change is a matter of national security and survivability of the planet.
    Progressive Taxes: A fair Tax Senator Gravel's Progressive Fair Tax proposal calls for eliminating the IRS and the income tax and replacing it with a national sales tax on new products and services.
    Healthcare: Senator Gravel advocates a universal healthcare system that provides equal medical services to all citizens, paid for by a retail sales tax.
    Reproductive Rights: Mike supports a woman's right to decide if and when to have children.
    The War on Drugs: The War on Drugs has been a failure. It is time to end prohibition and start treating addiction as a public health problem.
    Human Rights Senator Gravel is adamantly opposed to torture, indefinite detention, and the deprivation of lawyers/speedy trials.
    • charlietuna, on 01/08/2008, -3/+1Having people vote directly on laws (NI4D) often works poorly, especially in large countries like the US. People can agree on policies which are half baked. Take California with proposition 187. This bans public services to illegal immigrants. Sounds good to some people, but it puts emergency services workers in a real bind. If someone is bleeding to death, must an emergency services worker deny services? Populism is a dangerous thing. For more on this cautionary note, read some of Fareed Zakaria's essays: http://tinyurl.com/yqkb9x
      • plookmenow, on 01/09/2008, -0/+1On the other hand, I could enumerate scores of terrible laws passed by elected representatives. So what? Do you think those people are more qualified to write and pass laws than you and I?

        I've read the National Initiative laws that Gravel has proposed, and they include a variety of checks on potential public irresponsibility, including an advisory vote by the Congress, public hearings on all pending legislation, a deliberative committee selected randomly from the citizenry much like a jury, and a public information campaign disseminating the findings of the above before the actual vote.

        In Switzerland, they have a national initiative, and here's an example of one possible referendum: http://www.no-dmca.ch/index.en.html . A group of Swiss citizens are trying to get enough signatures for a public vote on the Swiss equivalent of our Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Imagine if we in the US could directly vote on the DMCA.
    • mempko, on 01/08/2008, -0/+1California is a bad model of what the National Initiative is about. What you don't understand is that direct democracy can scale well in federalist system such as ours. If we have it throughout. In any case, there would be like 2 to 4 big issues a year that we would vote on giving the public plenty of time to make heads and tiles of the issues.
  • Jamihabs, on 01/08/2008, -12/+3The big question here is: who is more irrelevant, Chomsky, or Gravel? I believe that Chomsky is more irrelevant. Digg me down if you believe it's Gravel.
    • lezlie, on 01/08/2008, -3/+6WRONG! neither one of them are... that's enough reason to Digg you down!
      • Jamihabs, on 01/08/2008, -5/+1I will count that as a vote for Gravel. Thank you for your participation.
    • bigjimslade, on 01/08/2008, -4/+2Chomsky is way more irrelevent. What's a tired old Marxist to do?
  • afruff23, on 01/08/2008, -7/+5Chomsky is an anarcho-syndicalist. Just saying that he believes voluntary transactions (AKA capitalism) is coercion.
    • notque, on 01/08/2008, -2/+4No, he's a Libertarian Socialist, and doesn't believe voluntary transactions are coercion. There isn't anything voluntary about our system of government. He's not the only one that doesn't like it, Adam Smith didn't like what he saw of it either.
      • speerross, on 01/08/2008, -1/+2Libertarian Socialist/Anarcho-Syndicalist, the difference is minor
        • EricJHerboso, on 01/08/2008, -1/+2Actually, for Chomsky, the difference is nil. His label of 'lbertarian' is in the european sense, which is completely opposite what libertarians in america believe.

          That said, anarcho-syndicalism really does make a lot of sense when you really look into it.
    • scubasteve377, on 01/08/2008, -1/+1...and yet somehow believes forced redistribution of wealth is not coercion... Huh?
  • spookycheddar, on 01/08/2008, -12/+2what was it noam chomsky said about eating pussy?
  • DestroyFascism, on 01/08/2008, -0/+5One man stands up and declares he is a true patriot. And no one else listens.....well maybe one....
  • iiPwnYoo, on 01/08/2008, -0/+6Mike Gravel, we support you.
  • faskippy, on 01/08/2008, -1/+3Thanks, hippyhart for the breakdown. I'm a Paul fan, myself, but I will go and look up his actions and compare them to what his website says. You see, it's usually pretty easy to find out if someone is stating their true actions, or just giving lip service. Education is good.
    • mempko, on 01/08/2008, -0/+2And I hope you will find what I have. Mike Gravel has great integrity
  • duggreen, on 01/08/2008, -7/+3Chomsky is an idiot. Well, not so much an idiot as a *****. I guess he at least recognizes and admires Gravels unbelievable courage, which is probably what we all respond to most.
  • designer, on 01/08/2008, -6/+1Noam Chomsky, Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich are communists.
    • PeaceCzar, on 01/08/2008, -1/+3You, yourself, and you are ignorant.
      • Ambien7, on 01/08/2008, -1/+1Can you even tell me what a communist is designer?
        • Waterrat, on 01/08/2008, -0/+1 Anyone who disagrees with him,I guess.
  • Ambien7, on 01/08/2008, -0/+5This is great news. I have run into so many people that say they like Gravel's policies but won't vote for him because they don't think he's electable. FFS if people would just vote for him instead of trying to pick the person they think is going to win maybe Gravel would actually get elected. Right now everyone is piling behind Obama because "he has the best shot out of the three". Wtf kind of reason is that. That's like saying "I'm going to pay with the $5 in my pocket because I'm too lazy to pick up the $20 on the ground."

    Oh, and if you have never read Amusing Ourselves to Death by Neil Postman I suggest you do. It will make so many things much more clearer. For example, isn't it strange that the super bowl lasts, in conjunction with the pre-game show and the post-game show, about 5 hours, but our political debates only last 1 or 2 hours at most? You want to know why? Intelligent debate takes a really long time and is not visually entertaining at all. The primary use of television is visual entertainment. I mean seriously, it's like trying to send letters over the phone. Non-visual stuff like politics and news does not belong on TV because it's in conflict with that medium which is best suited for visual entertainment. Try asking someone what they would do to end the war in Iraq, but make them give you details in under 5 minutes. I'm not talking about details like "what would your first priority be..." I mean the hard questions like "How do you plan to pay for that?" or "(Obama) You are the second largest recipient of funds from the health care industry right behind Hillary, yet you say you don't take money from special interest groups. What do you have to say about that?" That is why politicians never give any real answers, because they are never forced to do so in our debates. Any public speaker can speak for five minutes on absolutely any topic. Hard questions take time and that is not what TV as a medium is geared toward. SuperMoses said it right; American Politics is being treated like a high school football game.
    • duggreen, on 01/08/2008, -0/+3Well put. I hate the E word too. It isn't a frigging horse race!
      • Hippyhart, on 01/09/2008, -0/+0I'm so sick of the voting for the lesser of two (or at this point, three) evils mentality. If more people looked at the issues and voted for the candidate that reflects their views most, it would produce different (and hopefully better) results.
  • duggreen, on 01/08/2008, -0/+5Every male who wasn't drafted since the Nixon administration owes his vote to Mike!
    • Waterrat, on 01/08/2008, -0/+1They do indeed.
    • scubasteve377, on 01/08/2008, -0/+1Mike Gravel is a great and courageous American and a true hero. I owe him my thanks, my respect, and my sincere admiration.

      I do not, however, owe him my vote.
      • duggreen, on 01/09/2008, -0/+2Ok so maybe "owe him your vote" is a strong phrase, but I think we can agree that he changed the course of your life more than any other candidate?
  • Fallout911, on 01/09/2008, -0/+3I will stand with Gravel till the end.
  • slowthinking, on 01/09/2008, -0/+2This seems real.
  • perot9296, on 01/09/2008, -0/+3Mike Gravel 2008!
  • RepPress, on 01/13/2008, -0/+0 see video: Noam Chomsky applauds Senator Gravel's past and present accomplishments http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=di_DGXS-HM8&feature ...
    see video: Petty Clinton Omits Gravel, Hillary Shows Her True Colors http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k87hBjkM8-s&feature ...
    see video: It's Too Dangerous to Give Hillary Clinton Another Shot http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJ-lPita6SE&feature ...
  • TruthAlert, on 01/16/2008, -0/+1Kudos to Mike Gravel. It is sad and annoying that lame-stream media doesn't acknowledge the real candidates of quality in both parties -- like Mike Gravel and Ron Paul.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.