Holy crap this is FANTASTIC. Did gravel make this himself or is it a remix of some speech or something? It looks like a mash-up except for the bit with the tape and the flag...

(Is this from the guy who did Bush singing "Sunday Bloody Sunday"?)

"Islamofacism" -- I cringe every time I hear that made up, misleading neologism.

He's living proof that not so long ago the people of his state actually had the good sense to elect decent people. Well, who knows, after "Bridge to nowhere" Ted they might have again..

It is indeed the same guy who did Sunday Bloody Sunday He met Gravel at the alternative debate in Vegas and interviewed him in L.A. Perhaps he'll fill in some additional details here. He is working on a documentary of candidates Mike was first.

Odd--most of the stuff I've heard from Mike Gravel have been from doctored YouTube offerings. It seems that some people are favoring a guy who they're using as video editing fodder.

The only real interview I have seen with Gravel made him look crazy. Suggesting a national referendum system that would bypass the representative system. Sounds great until you realize that the kinds of referendums that could get passed on issues like immigration.

I am not sure that a well edited music video is going to reinvigorate my enthusiasm.

Reed77: I'm not sure which interviewed you watched, or maybe you skipped some parts, but the National Initiative would not necessarily bypass the Legislative branch. The NI will place citizens in a law-making relationship with their representatives.

Besides, many states already have Citizen's Initiative laws and we haven't seen patently insane legislation coming from them. If you want to shoot down the idea you have to attack the argument.

I misspoke(mis-wrote), I actually listened to a show on Air America.

Ok, so to attack his argument . Voters in places like California generally vote for spending and against taxes, a tenancy that doesn't exactly balance budgets.

And if you think it was a problem that Congress didn't read the patriot act, try getting the general public to read it.

Without a whole lot of media reform and education reform leading to an informed electorate, referendum voting is a dangerous way to govern. The host of that show I listened to, repeatedly asked about how majority rule can often violate one of the textbook requirements for a democracy. Mainly, that in a democracy, Majorities can't legislate minorities out of existence. Gravel had no good response.

"And if you think it was a problem that Congress didn't read the patriot act, try getting the general public to read it."

but isnt the whole point of representative democracy that people dont have enough time and skill to do it themselves (like them crazy swiss) so they give that responsibilty to an elected politician of their trust?

im just saying isnt it too much to ask of people to know of all the issues a politican has to know? but point taken that by know you guys over there shouldve given it a read on the toilet.

I agree with Reed77. The populist movement was all in favor of initiatives, which is why the states that wrote their constitutions around 1900 almost all have some voter initiative system. Most of the laws that are passed under these systems are fiscally irresponsible, they legislate private morality (drinking, gambling, etc), or they're anti-minority. They're also sometimes unconstitutional. And in almost all cases they're not some groundswelling of popular demands, they're passed through the operation of well-financed, irresponsible demagogues that cannot be held accountable when their policy ideas go bad. At least in ancient Athens they could fine people or exile them if their proposals turned out poorly.

I'm just fine with representative government, except without partisan districting, single-member district voting, or moneyed interests writing our legislation. The are plenty of smart, good people willing to serve in government, we just need a system that allows us to put them there.

Excellent edit; I'm looking forward to the full documentary.

Re: national referendum

Fair criticisms above. As Jefferson said: "the tyranny of the majority", etc etc.

However, with rational limits, I think a national referendum system might provide an excellent additional check on foreign policy. Something along the lines of: any military action is subject to national referendum for immediate termination every X months.

Such a system would not have prevented the Afghan war of 2002; but it would have ended Iraq II back in '06.

Either way: kudos to Mike Gravel for bringing some new ideas to the table. We are witnessing nothing less than a total transformation of American government, and I am feeling very optimistic for the first time in a long while.

Athens was unique not because the decision-making power was in the hands of the people (hardly a new idea), but because it combined that with the nascent ability to force majority decisions upon others.

The rise of the nation-state was detrimental to traditional forms of democracy as practiced (which were mostly consensus-based).

I'd take the democracy of the Five Nations or the Tsimihety over our representative "democracy" any day.

Id vote for him if he runs with ron paul.

or kucinich.

Gravel is ineloquent and easily frustrated. While it's true they don't give him much time to speak at debates, he has sometimes shortchanged himself by giving extremely brief answers to open-ended questions.

Kucinich on the other hand is generally able to make very good use of the small amount of time they give him and he doesn't get flustered or angry during the debates either.