Delay and having things both ways

There is a lot of speculation now whether Democrats will see to my civil rights or put it off yet again; even though, others have the right to run already and can prepare for 2010 right now.

What’s important is not whether I run or could possibly succeed in running, but whether I have the right to run *IF* I wanted to. That’s what we call a stage of struggle in itself and there’s a reason for such stages, contrary to Trotskyism. You have to be allowed into the stadium before you can play ball.

The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt just expressed the same reasoning.

“He also announced that, ‘the Brotherhood has no reason to refrain from contesting parliamentary elections in November.’

“I will say only that Brotherhood members will run on their own ticket and not within the framework of a deal with the government, as some allege.”

When things are not done in stages with independence evident, accusations arise as to how a party got to run in the first place. The Brotherhood in Egypt does not want that problem and I don’t want that problem either. It’s bad enough that no matter what I do I have Gitmo shit in my background that I did not ask for.

At the same time, liberal Democrats can be found trying to have things both ways. Some are saying I play the Nero role, fiddling while Rome burns. Likewise, many pundits are egging me on saying pundits can run too. On the other hand, others are not averse to the usual Alinskyite psychology of blaming the victim. Senator Harry Reid is only the most obvious in Aesopian comments that could be construed as saying I’m Obama’s slaveowner or that Obama is too ambiguous on healthcare. Others at Huffington Post take less charged but more consistent positions of blaming the victim. I’ve noted those comments too and the problem is not me: it’s the Democrats needing to have things both ways.



%d bloggers like this: