Several reasons why not to jump on the DSA bandwagon

 (Self-disclosure:  I was a member of DSA for thirty years, from March of 1996 until I resigned in March 2026 in protest of DSA not being as it had once been, an organization devoted to socialist democracy.  Ever since 2016 it had become increasingly ultraleft and pro-Stalinist, and I could no longer be a member in good conscience--GF) 

Hamilton Nolan, one of the chief labor writers for In These Times, a now pro-DSA far left socialist newsmagazine that used to be social-democratic (and was arguably better when it was), has an article in the August-September 2026 issue, “Unions Should Hop on the DSA Train,”[1] on why today’s U.S. trade unions should enthusiastically support DSA and support its “extremely pro-union” (Nolan’s words and emphasis) candidates and program.  Nolan goes on to add that U.S. unions, notably in New York City, which is the geographical focus of his article, “are not really ‘progressive’ as much as they are full members of the Democratic Party power structure,”[2] which he sees as a mixed bag—conferring real benefits, to be sure, but also tying labor unions to the Democratic Party Establishment.  Which Nolan feels should be broken up by the left, and that unions should unite with DSA to do precisely that. 

 

Nolan focuses primarily on leftist Democratic candidate Claire Valdez, who had been a UAW organizer prior to becoming a House of Representatives candidate, even as he concedes that her defeated opponent in the Democratic primary, Antonio Reynoso, was “a strong progressive himself, and would have likely been as pro-labor as anyone in Congress.”  Valdez is the only one of the three famous New York City Democratic primary candidates who had the endorsement of Mayor Zohran Mamdani and won that Nolan focuses on—perhaps because, not only does she have a prior union background, she also does not carry the excessively ultraleft political baggage Avilla Chevalier carried from her earlier social media posts (where she said “fuck Kamala Harris,” questioned the validity of interracial relationships, and urged seizure of the “means of production,” among other things); and Valdez is also a member of DSA, where the third candidate, Brad Lander, is not.  But what Nolan leaves out is that all of these “progressive” candidates were running not against Democratic Party centrists, but against fellow progressives, all of them; and it wasn’t labor or economic issues that propelled the three to victory, it was accusing their opponents of being pro-Israel and accepting money from AIPAC.  In other words, the three left candidates made their campaigns a referendum on Israel’s war against Hamas, and garnered their strongest support from the white, college-educated youth living in gentrified neighborhoods and working as members of the PMC, the Professional-Managerial Class.  The more traditional working-class voters and nonwhite racial minorities tended to vote for their opponents, according to the voting records of the neighborhoods the candidates carried.[3]

 

So, the Democratic Party primary races didn’t pit socialist-minded progressives against centrists or DINOs (Democrats in Name Only) as much as they did the further left against the already-substantially-left.  It was not a gain of new left faces so much as a shuffling of those already progressive in the first place—with Valdez, Lander, and Avilla Chevalier only somewhat further to the left in actual stated politics aside from Israel than their already-left opponents.

 

Nolan also touts another reason for his enthusiasm for Valdez:  that she wants to introduce legislation “for the federal government to fund union organizing.”  He notes this bill “has little real momentum in the Democratic Party,” but that, somehow, if labor unions would get behind it, it could most likely become law, even if other pieces of pro-labor legislation, such as the PRO Act, don’t.  Of course, what’s to prevent counter-legislation to Valdez’s proposal to “level the playing field” by providing a role for the federal government to fund organizing of employers’ associations or chambers of commerce?!  Hamilton Nolan doesn’t say, just as he doesn’t address the Constitutional challenges that might well arise.  But then, DSA is remarkably silent on Constitutional questions in any serious way, even as it cavalierly advocates scrapping the U.S. Constitution (including the Bill of Rights?), abolishing the Senate, and greatly expanding the House of Representatives, as it states in its program as adopted at its last Convention in 2025.

 

DSA supports far, far more than standard progressive issues such as Medicare for All, the Green New Deal, and heavily taxing the rich.  It also supports a raft of programmatic proposals that are bound to be controversial, to say the least, among ordinary working-class voters, unionized or not (and the vast majority are not unionized at present, of course).  These include abolishing both police and prisons, fully open borders for the U.S., abolition of ICE, and no deportations for any reason.  Not reforming the police or providing social workers and mental health professionals to help defuse police-citizen confrontations, not making prisons more humane and enabling them to be better rehabilitators, not reforming ICE and correcting its abuses, not better immigration policies and border safeguard procedures, but outright abolition across the board—that is DSA’s fully stated position, which even many socialists would regard as ridiculously ultraleft and unworkable. 

 

Certainly I would, as a democratic socialist, a “mere” social democrat who looks for inspiration for the kind of socialism I want to the New Deal and the Scandinavian countries, as well as the welfarism of Europe; and not to the authoritarian “socialisms” of the former U.S.S.R. and Eastern Europe, China, Vietnam, or Cuba; and certainly not to North Korea, which DSA’s International Committee says we should be allowed to visit as tourists—and see first-hand the North Korean Potemkin Villages on the official guided tours??

 

But back to workers, who may often be economically populist (hence, supportive of measures today such as Social Security and Medicare, and who could be supportive, thus, of Medicare for All, and even the Green New Deal, as it would deliver lower energy prices); but they are also often socially and culturally conservative, and yes, oftentimes even given to racism and an attitude of “as long as it doesn’t happen to me, I don’t object to it.” 

 

Such is hardly likely to bring ordinary working people to embrace DSA, which, by its own internal polling, has a membership that is both overwhelmingly white and college-educated, far more likely to be PMC rather than traditional working class (only 4% of DSA’s membership was blue-collar in 2021), and while its members identify strongly as “working class,” are not likely to be working-class themselves, except in the broad sense of being employees, oftentimes in the arts, the non-profits, and the professions, and in jobs that require a college degree.[4] So, it’s a socialism that DSA has built around the frustrated ambitions of the PMC.  Which is not to say these frustrations aren’t legitimate, and don’t thwart people, and even cause harm (look, e.g., at adjunct faculty, Ph.D. holders barely eking out a living by onerously having to teach multiple college courses, sometimes at multiple schools; or liberal arts college graduates who are delivery drivers, and thus part of the precariat).  But this is a different appeal than the bread-and-butter socialism of traditional socialist movements, which were overwhelmingly working class in composition, and were usually shunned by the college educated.

 

Then there is the matter of Stalinism within DSA, which complements its ultraleftism.  Currently, DSA is taking its political strategy from the Popular Front era of the Communist Party in the late 1930s and the 1940s, when the CP tried to present itself as just impatient, thoroughgoing liberals who worked actively in the Democratic Party of FDR.  DSA emphasizes running now as Democrats and left-wing challengers in the Democratic primaries, while also simultaneously wishing to eventually form a third party of the left; however, that is off into the indefinite future.  But DSA’s political program, as we’ve shown above, is ultraleft, so that currently DSA is using a Popular Front policy to advance a political program more akin to the ultraleft period of the CP, Third Period Communism of the early 1930s, when the Comintern directed a hard left turn by world Communists, and declared infamously, “Fascism and social democracy are twins.”  William Z. Foster, a prominent CPer back then obligingly contributed a book outlining Third Period Communism’s aims, Toward Soviet America.  In it, he wrote, in Chapter V, “Under the dictatorship [of the proletariat established by the Communist Party] all the capitalist parties—Republican, Democratic, Progressive, Socialist, etc.—will be liquidated, the Communist party functioning alone as the Party of the toiling masses. Likewise, will be dissolved all other organizations that are political props of the bourgeois rule, including chambers of commerce, employers’ associations, rotary clubs, American Legion, Y.M.C.A., and such fraternal orders as the Masons, Odd Fellows, Elks, Knights of Columbus, etc.”   (Found in William Z. Foster, Marxists Internet Archive, marxists.org)  Certainly then, no electoral democracy or freedom of association as we’d understand the terms!

 

But the overwhelmingly young DSAers of today (73% of its members are Millennials or younger as of 2021, according to the North Star survey) have no sense of left history, and know little, if anything, about the various permutations of the Communist Party, and are often enamored with Marxist-Leninist or Leninist-Trotskyist “vanguardism.”  Consider that the caucus representing the majority of members of DSA’s National Committee (DSA’s leading body between conventions), the Red Star caucus, a Maoist/Marxist-Leninist tendency (but all the leading caucuses in DSA nowadays are essentially Marxist-Leninist or Leninist-Trotskyist), states boldly and publicly, “We do not condemn Hamas, and neither should you.”[5]  In fact, one of DSA’s Co-Chairs, Megan Romer, is a member of the Red Star caucus!  This is indeed a far cry from the DSA of yesteryear, which was much smaller, but undoubtedly more politically astute, and was committed to a social-democratic version of democratic socialism, what DSA founder Michael Harrington called the “left wing of the feasible.”  The feasible, in the here-and-now.  Not ultraleft programmatic measures and postures, not rampant Israel-phobia, not a pro-Hamas posture, not uncritical support given to repressive regimes that call themselves “socialist” or allege “anti-imperialism,” not a blind Third Worldism and automatic support extended to the Global South; in short, not much of anything in DSA politics today,  This is, in summary, why the left and the labor movement today, or at least its saner sections, should not automatically endorse DSA or  jump on the DSA bandwagon.

 

 

 

 

 

   

---

[1] Online at https://inthesetimes.com/article/labor-unions-dsa-democratic-socialists-of-america

[2] Unless otherwise attributed, all quoted passages are from Nolan’s August-September 2026 In These Times article.

[3] From the Substack column, “The Lamppost,” of Anton Alterman, a democratic socialist professor in New York City, this from his June 30, 2026, column, “Genocide again: Goldman, Poetica, Anti-Semitism “:  “Chevalier, a Columbia-educated black professional of Dominican heritage, lost significantly in majority black, majority Hispanic and majority low-income areas; she won overwhelmingly in young, college-educated, higher-income areas. Brad Lander won an overwhelming victory with every constituency except working class neighborhoods like the Lower East Side, though Goldman [his primary opponent] also prevailed in higher income Wall Street areas (he is, after all, one of them, the heir of a Levi Strauss fortune). Claire Valdez won handily with everyone except poor and black voters; Antonio Reynoso outpolled her by a full 51 percentage points among black voters. This is the constituency for DSA ideologues who run primarily on anti-Israel platforms: white, disaffected college grads.”. lamppost@substack.com

 

[4] Taken from the DSA membership survey of 2021, as provided by the North Star Caucus within DSA, https://www.dsanorthstar.org/uploads/1/1/8/2/118222942/2021_member_survey_gdc_report.pdf

[5] Organizational statement of the Red Star caucus.  The quote is the title of the statement.  https://redstarcaucus.org/we-do-not-condemn-hamas/

The "Letter to the Editor:" In These Times Refused to Print

 I wrote a highly critical "Letter to the Editor" of the left newsmagazine In These Times on an article it published in its November 2024 issue, Shane Burley's "Jewish Institutions Are Purging Their Staffs of Anti-Zionists and Cease-Fire Activists," which can be found here:  https://inthesetimes.com/article/anti-zionist-israel-gaza-jewish-institutions.  In These Times refused to publish my "Letter," which is not surprising, since In These Times does not publish, it seems, anything critical of its magazine.

Here is my "Letter to the Editor":

To the Editor:

 

Shane Burley’s article in the November 2024 In These Times, “Jewish Institutions Are Purging Their Staffs of Anti-Zionists and Cease-Fire Activists,” elicits the following reaction as a longtime democratic socialist subscriber and contributor to ITT:

 

First, I think that these “pro-Palestine” former staffers at mainstream Jewish institutions are trying to have their proverbial cake and eat it too.  They want to work there as anti-Zionists and pro-Palestinian activists when much of the other staff, the leadership, and even much of the clientele of these mainstream Jewish institutions are going to see them as hostile pro-Hamas infiltrators into these very Jewish spaces, not as genuine, if critical, Jews.  I think a good example of this is the person Burley first documents in his article, Dan Fischer, who was fired for attending an “All Out for Palestine” rally on October11, 2023, a mere four days after Hamas’s violent killings, mutilations, rapes, and taking of hostages in Israel, and well before the Israeli government launched its campaign against Hamas in Gaza.  The leadership of the synagogue where Fischer worked rightly saw this participation as hostile and pro-Hamas, and said so openly to Fischer.  Also, Fischer stated at the rally he attended that he was “proud to be in solidarity with the people of Gaza and Palestine,” not even mentioning Hamas, and in fact, de facto conflating the civilian people of Gaza and Palestine with blood-stained Islamist Hamas!  Being “in solidarity with” the murderers, mutilators, and rapists of Jews is hardly a “Jewish value” that commends itself to employment in a Jewish synagogue!

 

Second, it’s the same with all these people who were fired, all of them, tellingly, after October 7, 2023, a “day in infamy” that ranks with Pearl Harbor and 9/11.  All of them will protest, no doubt, that they stand for “inclusiveness,” yet they deliberately “other” all those Jews and Israelis who were murdered, raped, or taken hostage, along with their families, friends, and those who cared deeply about people being victims of such atrocities—be they either Israelis or Jews of the Diaspora.

 

As for wearing the keffiyeh, it, too, changed its meaning after October 7, 2023, and became not just a symbol of solidarity with Palestine, but, since the Hamas butchers themselves wore the keffiyeh while committing their atrocities in Israel, it became as well as a symbol of support for Hamas.  But none of those fired have even one word to say against Hamas!  Not one!  No, they all implicitly conflate support for Palestinians with support for Hamas—and their silence on this very important issue speaks loudly and in volumes!  Keeping on staff those who cannot even condemn Hamas would indeed be difficult for any mainstream Jewish institution—it would be akin to employing someone who cannot condemn the Holocaust!

 

As for a ceasefire, I’m all for it; but it cannot be, as so many pro-Palestinian activists want it to be—a unilateral move on the Israeli side, with no reciprocity from Hamas.  While Netanyahu certainly deserves much blame for there not being a ceasefire, much more blame goes to Hamas, in my opinion.  Hamas’s intransigence in the face of every ceasefire offer proffered is what has prevented a ceasefire to date.  And when there was one, a brief ceasefire and hostage exchange in November 2023, Hamas unilaterally broke it.

 

Last, almost all states have Work at Will labor laws—in the absence of a labor contract, an employee can be fired for any reason, or no reason at all.  Similarly, many employers also have dress codes, which one is expected to conform to as part of employment.  A ban on wearing a keffiyeh would fall under such a code.  Same as, where I work, I was formerly banned from wearing jeans, and had to wear only a company shirt and either black or tan slacks.  One may not like such rules, but they’re there.  And no, wearing a Magen David, or Star of David, necklace around one’s neck is not “political clothing.”  It’s cultural clothing, indicating solely that one is proudly Jewish.  The Magen David existed long before the state of Israel, and was also used by the—Nazis—as a mandatory badge to be worn to mark oneself as Jewish!  If the Magen David means Zionism, then why doesn’t it also mean Nazism?

 

Those are some of my thoughts on Burley’s article from the vantage point of a socialist internationalist upholding the socialist values of secularism and humanism, opposing all right-wing religious fanaticism such as that which animates Hamas, and a democratic, as opposed to an authoritarian, socialist.

 

George Fish,

ITT long-time

subscriber and

several times

published ITT

contributor,

Indianapolis, IN 

 

   

 

 

I Am Angry, Sick and Tired

 I wrote this poem on November 1, 2023, in response to Hamas's unconscionable attack on Israel, October 7, 2023--GF

 

Of the incessant, ongoing carnage

in the Middle East, this time in

the latest round of violence

between Hamas and Israel,

violence first promulgated by

the atrocities of Hamas against

Israelis on October 7, 2023, and

inevitably followed by the

retaliatory violence inflicted

against the Hamas stronghold of

Gaza, where innocent civilians are

held hostage by this Islamofascist

nightmare of an organization,

same as innocent Israeli Jews and

Arabs had murderous violence inflicted

on them by Hamas in the first place.

Hamas started it, Israel will finish it,

and well-meaning public opinion

calling for a cessation of hostilities

be damned and cast into hell!  

Cast there by intransigence on both sides,

each side held openly captive

by fanatical religious belief

that sees only righteousness on its

side, and regards the other side as

subhuman—as if further proof

were needed that religion poisons everything,

that men (and women) are not good because

of religion, but in spite of religion! 

The whole thing explodes as

an ongoing Greek tragedy, where

impersonal Fate triumphs over the wishes

and caprices of mere humans, whether

they like it or not—because impersonal Fate

cares not what the wishes and caprices of

mere mortals are.  Once again, an endless

spinning wheel of hate, carnage and bloodshed,

all of which leads not to a resolution, but only

to further cyclical irresolution.  “Enough!”

I cry out angrily, but in despair; cry out

in the name of a common humanity

once again thwarted and rendered

powerless in the face of it.  So, thus does it

seem once again, forever, and forever,

                                                world without end, Amen.  Fuck

Letter to the Comrades of Central Indiana DSA (CINDSA)

 

Comrades,

 

The strength of Central Indiana DSA (CINDSA) has lain in its positive, non-ideological, pragmatic approach that has concentrated on such vitals as housing and union organizing, items that directly

affect the working and personal lives of ordinary working people.  This has enabled CINDSA to reach out positively into the Indianapolis community, and draw support from people who would not ordinarily be drawn to an organization espousing socialism.  With good results, as we’ve seen in the recent campaigns for seats on the Indianapolis City-County Council for its new term that starts in 2024.  While CINDSA members may not be “thoroughly informed” on the often arcane left ideological causes of DSA at the national level and in the key national chapters, and where CINDSA has also been blessed by not having warring national caucuses who are roiled on these issues, its non-ideological, pragmatic approach has paid off and enabled CINDSA to do good work, from what I can see from my limited vantage point of not being able to participate much in CINDSA.

 

I have of necessity to work a political life-killing second-shift job at Kroger, which, because it is in retail, also means not having weekends available either.  (However, politically I’m able to somewhat make up for this by being a member of my union at Kroger, UFCW Local 700, and participating in the movement to build a strong reform caucus within this union.)  I participate somewhat more at the national level through Facebook, through a network of left Friends there, and I keep abreast of what national DSA is doing.  Although I am not a formal member, politically I’m aligned with the traditional social-democratic caucus within national DSA, North Star, and a strong adherent of DSA founder Michael Harrington’s “left wing of the feasible.”  I too am essentially pragmatic, and strongly believe that positive results, far more than “correct” ideology, are what are crucial and draw ordinary working people to support DSA politics and proposals.  However, I will say bluntly that much of what comes out of national DSA and its leading chapters is ultraleft, often drivel, and is even a throwback to neo-Stalinism. 

 

CINDSA has not become embroiled on issues such as Ukraine and the Israel-Hamas War, which are very much dividing points for DSA at the national and key local levels.  That is in fitting with CINDSA’s pragmatic approach.  For myself, I do not believe the struggle in Ukraine is a “proxy war” between Russia and the US and NATO.  I support the Ukrainian drive to preserve its independence, and achieve national self-determination.  This is, to me, consistent with the Marxist principle of, above all, the right of small nations to self-determination, even independence, and to be free of Great Power bullying.  For this same reason, I support (support which is only theoretical at this time) the rights of Xinjiang, Hong Kong, Tibet, and Taiwan to their own rights of self-determination, and to be independent of China should their peoples wish.  I wrote this up in an article published earlier this year by the excellent left group, the British Trotskyist Alliance for Workers Liberty, which is linked here, and which I hope CINDSA comrades will read.  (https://workersliberty.org/story/2023-06-26/marxist-case-tibet-xinjiang-hong-kong-and-taiwan-independence; see also, published as an addendum to my post here, https://workersliberty.org/story/2023-06-26/stalin-1913-and-national-question-note) On Hamas-Israel, I consider what Hamas did on October 7, 2023 to be atrocious and reprehensible, and although I am not at all an automatic pro-Israel supporter, I do defend Israel’s right to defend itself (which Sen. Bernie Sanders also supports), and believe Hamas must be extirpated, as it is an Islamofascist entity.  I know I differ from some comrades here, as the issue came up with two of them on Facebook, and they defriended me over my views, but that’s no matter—friendships often come and go on Facebook.  What was appalling to me was DSA’s support of the antisemitic “Free Palestine” rally in support of what Hamas did that occurred the very next day, October 8, in New York City, and which both New York DSA and national DSA doubled down in support of.  No, comrades, terroristic attacks on civilians are not, decidedly not, “resistance” and “decolonization,” and anybody who asserts so has lost both moral compass and intellectual bearing!  Some things are just simply beyond the pale; so atrocious there is no way to ever justify or excuse them.  Examples are the Pearl Harbor attack of December 7, 1941; 9/11; and the October 7 attacks by Hamas.  No one, now matter how grievous it is alleged they acted (and in the case of the October 7 attacks, all the Israeli victims did was be in the wrong place at the wrong time), certain things are never, ever justified.  We must be morally and intellectually clear on that, in my opinion.  It is to the great discredit of both national DSA and certain key DSA chapters that justified or even celebrated the Hamas attack that they did so.  Such is to be rooting for, act as cheerleaders for, unconscionable mass murderers, and far too many in DSA were simply, egregiously, wrong here.

 

Comrades of CINDSA, you are youthful for the most part, far younger than am I, 77 years old now.  I am a veteran of the 1960s left, an active left force that existed long before many of you were born, and which also petered out from both an onslaught from the right (Nixon, Reagan) and, just as tellingly, from its own inadequacies, principally its substitution of moral indignation for concrete political programs.  Comrades, the great US early 20^th Century philosopher, Santayana, tells us so well:  “Those who do not remember history are condemned to relive it.”  So, please, Comrades, I urge you—learn the history of earlier left movements, both for the positive lessons they can give us, as well as for the negative ones.

 

On a positive note, youth is a time of vitality and questioning; however, it is also a time of know-it-all arrogance and stupidity.  Be willing to learn from older comrades, many of whom are resigning now in disgust from DSA, despite being members for decades, because of DSA’s present de facto pro-Hamas attitude.  This, Comrades, is no time for “Good riddance!” flippancy.  One of the great failures of the 1960s New Left was the great youth of its activists and leadership.  We of the New Left were young and arrogant, and so we made a lot of mistakes we needn’t make.  And in the end, following the fiasco of the 1969 SDS National Convention, literally went “poof!” overnight—from an organization 100,000 members strong to nothing!  That could happen too easily to DSA too—already it has lost 20% of its membership.  The youthful enthusiasm of those under 35 who are now drawn to DSA because of Israel-Hamas are not enough to make DSA grow if DSA alienates those of the population 35 and older, who are far more pro-Israel than those younger, with ignorance notable among the young, I’m sad to say.  A recent poll indicated that 20% of Gen Zers believe the Holocaust was a hoax!  67% believe that Jews as a class are “oppressors.”  Far too much of the US public believes there was an independent country called Palestine before the creation of Israel (as a fact, there was no such entity).  Comrades of CINDSA, “left” antisemitism is a big problem, every bit as significant, or even more significant, as Islamophobia. 

 

Which brings one more point.  What can I do now to participate well in CINDSA given my work limitations?  Well, for one thing, I could serve as an intellectual resource.  I’m well read on left literature, am a university graduate, am an extensively published writer in left magazines and on left websites, and have also taught adult education courses on China after Mao, Marxism, and the Communist Manifesto.  I also have a BlogSpot blog, “Politically Incorrect Leftist,” (politicallyincorrectleftist.blogspot.com), which I urge all of you to check out.  This Letter will also be posted there.

 

Finally, to end on a positive note, you Comrades of CINDSA are so much better than the hidebound, tired old leadership you replaced!  A leadership that no longer gave a damn about DSA, and certainly didn’t give a damn about you, young Comrades who wanted to carry on the organization.  You will be interested to know that these hidebound oldsters also were against me too.  Even though they had participated positively in my Marxism and Communist Manifesto classes, and was not the ogre I had been portrayed as being by the equally hidebound “peaceable religious progressives” of Indianapolis (with whom several of these old DSAers overlapped), I had committed the “unpardonable sin” of criticizing one of their cronies for designing and installing for Indianapolis DSA a most inadequate website.  In Indiana, overgrown high school clique that it is, one just does not criticize cronies!  And so, these hidebound “leaders” plotted against me.  I’ve published two blogs on what happened with them on my “Politically Incorrect Leftist” blog, the first one on August 14, 2010, “Dregs” (linked here:  https://politicallyincorrectleftist.blogspot.com/2010/08/dregs_14.html), and a second one that drew on the critical testimony of a lifetime resident of Indianapolis pointedly noting he’d never even heard of DSA here before meeting me.  This second blog, published on February 17, 2011, with the pointed subtitle, “Letter from One of ‘the Masses’” is linked here:  https://politicallyincorrectleftist.blogspot.com/2011/02/dregs-aftermath1-letter-from-one-of.html, I bring up this old history not to re-fight old sectarian battles, but to let you know, much younger Comrades, that roiling conflicts with the hidebound “old ‘progressives’” are nothing new here in Indianapolis, or in Indiana, truly a State of Mediocrity!  (Which the dictionary tellingly defines as “not good enough.”)  I hope you young Comrades will check out these blogs of mine, and realize the fight for a good, effective left confronts many obstacles, some of them even internal.  So, thank you, Comrades, good luck, and keep up the good fight!

 

In solidarity with you,

Comrades of CINDSA! 

 George Fish,

DSA member

since 1996

Special Celebrity Pizzas

I've been away from my blog for awhile due to illness and work. so I thought I'd start again by posting a little satirical humor. "Specialty Celebrity Pizzas" grew out of a conversation with friends about a pizzeria that specialized in unique offerings named after celebrities. Sh here are my own Specials, brought to you by Chef and Humorist George Fish!

Barry Manilow Pizza (has to be really lame)--topped with Chef Boy-Ar-Dee spaghetti and meatballs

George W. Bush Pizza--a half-baked pizza crust topped exclusively with American cheese. Hold the hummus!

Glenn Beck Pizza--severely undercooked male cow meat on a half-raw pizza crust: 100% bull, and the whole thing only half-baked

Barack Obama/Bill Clinton Pizza--topped with waffles

Rush Limbaugh Pizza--topped with corn and sprinkled liberally with bullshit. Served with vitriol on the side

Fox News "Fair and Balanced" Pizza--all the toppings so placed that the whole pizza tilts sharply to the right

Hu Jintao Pizza--topped with American-style club sandwich. Hold the Ma-o!

Benjamin Netanyahu Pizza--stolen pita bread topped with Kosher corned beef

Islamic Suicide Bomber Pizza--a heavenly delight served exclusively by virgin waitresses

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Pizza--we deny this pizza contains any Kosher pastrami, lox and bagels, or Gefilte fish! Or that it ever did!

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer Pizza--Mexican-style taco pizza with 100% made-in-USA ingredients only

Senator Mitch McConnell Pizza--contains absolutely nothing, because we can't afford it!

Rand Paul Pizza--topped with ribs, collard greens and chitlins: proprietor reserves the right to refuse to serve it to anyone he pleases!

Wall Street Pizza--topped exclusively with massive amounts of money

BP Pizza--massively spread all over with Louisiana Gulf oil: so popular Bobby Jindal demands more!

Healthcare Reform Pizza-- a healthy mixture of fruits and vegetables with no recisions, but sprinkled liberally with deductables, exclusions and loopholes

Afghan War Pizza Buffet--all you can stomach, with no end in in sight