The primary purpose of this campaign is two-fold: to force everyone, on all sides of the question, to examine it and, of course, to give everyone who favors impeachment a chance to express themselves at the polls.
It's possible - even inevitable - that other candidates will jump on the bandwagon, as inevitable as bad news from the Bush war zone, as inevitable as further revelations of attacks on civil liberties. Will the economy, stretched to the breaking point by Bush's tax cuts for the rich and massive spending for military expansion, finally unravel, with who knows what consequences? Hell, by November 7th Don Young may be calling for impeachment! (not too likely.)

So what separates me from the other candidates, besides impeachment? Let me begin with a short personal history.
I came of age politically during the Vietnam/Nixon era, and progressed from protest and support of "left-Democrats" to the conclusion that the only way to prevent future Vietnams and future Nixons, and to address such issues as poverty and racism, was through the socialist reconstruction of society. Nothing in the intervening 35 years has caused me to change my mind, and I expect to carry this conviction to my grave. In future columns, I will apply this socialist perspective to a variety of questions, from gay marriage to immigration "reform". And maybe even tobacco and chewing gum! (both "filthy habits", according to some socialists, which will disappear when class tensions are eliminated!)
I was active in several unions before coming to Alaska in 1975 (Work was relatively easy to find then, and I was young and footloose.) In Ketchikan, I got hired by the state ferry system in the Stewards' Department. What started out as a summer job turned into a career. From the beginning, I was a militant member of the Inlandboatmen's Union, and later, its "adopted" parent, the ILWU. These unions were among the most democratic and progressive in the country. As a convention delegate, I fought for international solidarity among workers, improved social conditions at home, and above all, for an independent political party of the working class, i.e. a Labor Party. Eventually, I worked my way up in the Deck Department, getting a license in 1988 and advancing as high as Chief Mate. Before my retirement two years ago, due in part to health reasons, I was a member of the Masters Mates and Pilots negotiating committee in collective bargaining with the State of Alaska. If elected, I believe that I would be about the only member who had spent his working life actually working.

Wait a second. From impeachment to a Labor Party? What gives?
Whether you're a worker or not - and let's define our terms: class is a matter of social relations, not income. Some factory workers may be paid more than some college professors, but the former are working-class and the latter are middle-class - whatever your position in society, if you strive for human progress, or just a way out of the morass, your interests are the same as the working class', the producers of all wealth, whose natural aspirations are for the full value of their labor, i.e. socialism.
The Socialist movement has a long and rich history in this country. One high point was the 1912 presidential election in which Eugene Debs, that granite - if flawed - giant of American Labor, captured nearly 900,000 votes - nearly six per-cent of the total. Rebuilding this movement won't be easy, what with the decimation of so much of American basic industry, the betrayals of the trade-union bureaucracy, and the abject cowardice of the major media. Things don't look so bleak if we keep in mind that we have natural allies in the billions of working people around the world. Anyhow, this is our ONLY way forward, and therefore it MUST be done.
I see a Labor Party as the natural flag around which to unite all workers: organized and unorganized, immigrant and unemployed, and the disaffected millions who see absolutely no hope. While a section of the AFL-CIO bureaucracy sees the solution to Labor's decline in simply signing up new members, what is required are bold new initiatives, which can draw on these vast untapped resources. Such a party would welcome all others - even capitalists - who yearn for a world where everyone is provided with a decent standard of living, and the barbarism of genocidal wars of conquest is deposited on the junk-heap of history. Since the natural political theory of Labor is socialism, this should be the touchstone of the party. Otherwise, as has happened in the past, the party will be absorbed into the Democratic Party, or fade into oblivion.

The secondary goal of this campaign is to generate discussion about longer-term solutions to the problems we face. I have outlined my approach, but I don't claim to have any infallible inspiration, and I encourage readers to put forward their suggestions or alternative approaches in the Comments section. Wouldn't it be great if in the next election we can field a list of candidates under the banner of socialism, an Alaskan Labor Party?
After the 1912 election, Debs stated, "It is entirely possible that in four years more the Socialists may sweep the nation." He was wrong, of course, not foreseeing the intense drive toward war and the capitulation of nearly every Socialist leader, along with the AFL leadership. I am confident that things will be different next time. Once the idea of working people fighting for political power in their own right takes hold, it will sweep the country. The most difficult part is getting started, and I ask my readers to join me in this historic task. When it finally appears, the Labor Party - or whatever it's called - will seem to have come from nowhere, but in reality it will be the product of many hard-fought battles at the grass-roots level. I predict that our future will more closely resemble the early history of the Republican Party: formed in 1856 of disparate elements united around the principle of the ultimate abolition of slavery, they were indeed swept to power four years later.
We've seen what capitalism and its two-party system have to offer. Isn't it time to consider some other solutions?

I've received a couple of comments. The first writer advised me to tone it down, or risk alienating many otherwise sympathetic voters. I appreciate your thought and will do my best to control my anger, hard as it may be at times. Maintaining objectivity is critical, in the political or any other world. I pledge to do my best to tell the truth in these pages, and I will try to frame it in the least inflammatory way that I can. The whole truth? No, while that should be our aim at all times, I believe that humans are destined to always come up short. Certainly I'll never come close to achieving the goal, since I don't have a direct line to God.
The second writer expressed his concern that I include some positive alternatives to Bush politics in my program. You're absolutely right! I'll make a special effort to include in this blog a perspective of hope. For now, you can pretty much figure that whatever Bush stands for, my position is exactly the opposite. For example, Bush favors slashing Medicaid by the billions and giving this money to the rich in the form of tax cuts; I would fight to restore and increase Medicaid and pay for it by taxing the rich.
I think you understand that in the "Opening Salvo" it was important to lay out concisely the fundamental issue of this campaign, as given by its name. But thanks for your input, and I hope to hear lots more. It may be a truism, but this campaign will only be successful to the degree that it's a group effort.
One other question I'd like to address. Some might say, "I support impeaching Bush/Cheney, but your politics are too radical." I can and do reply that radical measures are necessary to get at the roots of the Bush/Cheney disease, but apart from that, I ask these critics to objectively consider the election. Don Young has been elected seventeen times since 1972, and barring some major development, the chances of his getting unseated in November are pretty slim. So any fears that I may embarrass Alaska in Washington, D.C. are grossly exaggerated. (Should the impossible occur, however, I promise not to have any dead animals in my office, nor will you read in the newspaper about Alaska's representative instructing the House that the planet is actually getting colder!)
Since your vote is essentially meaningless in determining the outcome of the election, I ask you to give it meaning by voting your convictions. If a significant minority votes to Impeach Now! I predict that the impact all around the country will be far greater than Don Young's returning to Washington for two more years.

PUT IMPEACHMENT TO A VOTE

My name's Bill Ratigan, and I'm running for Alaska's U.S. House seat. I am an independent with the ballot designation, Impeach Now!
If elected, on the first day of business of the next Congress, I will move that articles of impeachment be brought against George W. Bush and Richard Cheney, and I would continue that fight for as long as it might take.
Finding charges won't be a problem. Misleading the country, and the world, into a disastrous war against a defenseless people, should be first. The responsibility for the Haditha massacre does not end with a marine sergeant: the buck stops at the desk of his commander-in-chief, the man who recklessly sent him and other young Americans into an impossible situation.
On the domestic front, electronic eavesdropping brings to mind the Nixon impeachment. In fact, Bush and Cheney are guilty of violating with impunity the very laws that were enacted in the wake of the Nixon abuses, and other laws and traditions that are much older.
Abrogating treaties, flouting international law... no, finding charges won't be the problem. The problem is to remove these criminals from office before they can make further assaults on our democratic rights, and before they can undertake any more insane military adventures. Has God told Bush to bomb Iran, as He told him to "strike at Saddam"? People who followed the run-up to the Iraq war should be concerned.
The Democrats offer no alternative. They gave more votes for Bush's domestic masterspy to head the C.I.A. than they did even for the Iraq war, which they have consistently supported. They accept uncritically Bush's Iran fear-mongering.
For Don Young, I have one question: Since you voted to impeach Bill Clinton for having extra-marital sex with a consenting adult, and dubious evidence that he lied under oath about it, what do you make of the charges listed above?
My goal in this election is to offer Alaskan voters a referendum on the Bush presidency, the "straight up-or down vote" that our president craves. To find out more about my campaign, or to discuss these or other topics, please go to my blog, which I'll be keeping over the coming months: http://impeachnow.blogstream.com. I can use all the help I can get.
I'm as serious as an atom bomb falling on your hometown,
and let's face it folks,
WE ALL KNOW THAT THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES!