yes indeed, robert koehler, let's talk about peace on earth! i do both admire and thank tulsi gabbard for speaking out. yet, had i not read this essay, i would not have known that she stepped down from her post in order to speak frankly about "war and peace."* we know of several organizations bent on promoting peaceful coexistence, veterans against the wars, greenpeace, wikileaks, the green party and the like. however, our faux journalists in the mass media choose instead to ignore us peaceniks! we, not a small swath of the populace, have been left out of the public discourse while the media focuses on so many hot button non-issues designed to stir the emotions of xenophobia, fear and hatred. as you say, bob, "The presidential election is supposed to be a distraction, not some kind of public accountability process." for example, divisive issues such as same sex marriage or a woman's right to choose for which many among us may have strong opinions we must acknowledge that the repercussions from these very personal decisions affect the few. in the true spirit of democracy the majority has no right to impose its will on the minority. each of us has the responsibility of making the best moral and ethical decisions s/he sets as guidelines, but not one of us wants to be ruled by the opinion of another. until we_the_people take personal responsibility, stop looking for a "leader" and wrest the reins of control from the political class we will continue to view life through the narrow political lens!
although i thank ms. gabbard for speaking up, one point in her endorsement of sanders as cited in the nyt op/ed bothers me, "“I know how important it is that our commander-in-chief has the sound judgment required to know when to use America’s military power and when not to use that power." we, who wish to support a peace agenda, should see the office of president as head of the executive branch; not as commander-in-chief! that very term is reserved for the unique circumstances when our nation is forced by some aggressor into declaring war for self-defense. wasn't the last time congress actually declared war the date was december 7, 1941?
gee, i would love to believe that sanders would embrace dave lindorff's advice to immediately slash the military budget, but have lost faith in empty political rhetoric. already, he has promised that if not selected by the dnc, bernie will throw is support to whomever the super delegate choose. what kind of a revolution is that?! also, some years ago while running for a senate seat from vermont, sanders supported continuing vermont's investment in manufacturing f35s while at the same time admitting that this stealth war plane is a costly fiasco. he suggests that the u.s. manufacture and sell these war planes to "our friend" the king of saudi arabia. war by proxy is still war! whenever some politician like john kerry takes a stealth bomber to a "peace negotiation" peace is not the true goal.
also, sanders shies away from denouncing israel's aggressions. if, however, hillary gains the nomination and bernie decides to continue promoting the grassroots revolution reneges on his promise to support whatever the dnc dictates, then i will join with utmost entusiasm the revolution for peace
* just checked with democracy NOW! and sadly no mention of tulsi gabbard