"Do Something," You Say? Let's Have the Specifics

Today on Huffington Post, commentator Susan Madrak spoke eloquently of how our forefathers stood up for liberty even at great personal risk, and then she exhorted the masses thus:

"You have to give up something substantial to fix [the current mess]. You have to risk something: Your job, your neighbors' scorn, someone else's feelings. There's too much on the line for any of us to sit on our fat behinds."

I have seen quite a few people in the blogosphere admonishing others to get up and do something. As I noted in a comment to her blog [which has not yet been posted as of this writing], I have to ask: what do you propose at this point, other than electing someone more sensible next time? So much of the damage has already been done despite our best efforts. We are stuck with the long-term consequences of this out-of-control administration; the next President will have the unenviable task of beginning to extract the country from the muck, a process that is likely to last beyond our lifetimes. Accountability is lacking mainly because Americans have voted in a lot of people who have been looking the other way and rubber-stamping Bush administration policies.

The Supreme Court has weighed in finally, at least on the extralegal actions of the Executive with respect to detainee trials, and that's a good start. Short of us all flying down to Guantanamo and sorting out the detainees ourselves, however, which isn't bloody likely or realistic, I think we'll have to await further results of that decision and continue to "demand" fair treatment of our detainees however we can. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), God bless it, has filed a variety of lawsuits on this and other civil liberties and human rights transgressions, and they're working their way through the courts; sending money to the ACLU seems like a good way to fight back. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., is reportedly planning to file suit to demand accountability where possible with respect to the Ohio election problems, and has written a much buzzed-about and well-researched article on the subject in the Rolling Stone.

So I'm all ears as to what John Q. Public should do now, other than blog his little heart out, if not signing petitions, marching, giving money to candidates, and calling our congresspeople (also known as the democratic process), which Ms. Madrak listed in a disdainful tone as if that's not enough. Sounds like a plan to me. This is still America, as Ms. Madrak acknowledged, and we still have a system, pock-marked though it may be, which most of us (I hope) still believe is better at solving problems of governance and accountability than a military coup or, barring that, dissing one's neighbors. She suggested risking the loss of one's job (other than a few administration whistleblowers, how will this help?) or hurting someone's feelings, as if insulting our family, friends, and neighbors will bring down the regime. Seems to me there's too much of this type of sound and fury going on already, signifying nothing. Although I share Ms. Madrak's outrage, such arguments sound more like an excuse to be shrill at others' expense than a recipe for real change. And if we go further than insulting people and take to the streets now to attempt the overthrow of this despicable regime, what would it accomplish, other than getting ourselves arrested or even shot?

I'm not saying that more overt action is *never* called for (see 1776), but those earnest "more activist than thou" bloggers advocating radical solutions at this juncture seem short on specifics, beyond admonishing people to get up off their fat behinds. I'm standing up; now what?

Barack Obama in '08, maybe?