Marat suggests mounting a militant counter-inaugural. To me this idea seems like more of the same, a lot of heat and no light, prompts me to think "so what?"

The fact that only 40-50 people showed up Wednesday nite should tell you something. The masses aren't ready to rise up, because they still need to be educated. The right-wing megaphones are drowning out the left. A silly demonstration is... silly. Been there, done that. It ain't working.

If the effort that went into organizing a counter-inaugural went into institutionalizing a small, lasting building-block, the left would be making progres. Instead, we get yet another suggestion to "react" instead of creating something that is a lasting step forward.

A radical idea? Create a campaign that says, "We choose not to waste our time at the Inauguration. Instead, we are going to 1) identify where Bush's support could be swayed, 2) craft an information campaign including the founding of three local radio stations, and 3) execute that plan on the Inaguration Day with great fanfare and solidarity across many disperate groups that oppose Bush."

When the event is over, we would leave behind (pick your number) three new radio stations, and a new message to the world: "We are moving beyond ephemeral protests. Instead, We're channeling our limited time and energy to build tangible, lasting institutions upon which the coming revolution will rest."

The left will continue to get it's ass kicked if it doesn't wise up and invest in something real and lasting, instead of investing in parade permits and making signs that end up as floxam in the Washingon, DC grabage pails.

I'm frustrated with the old failed methods. I'm tired of wasting my time. I'm tired of watching others waste their time. Aren't you tired of this too?

I am boycotting a counter-inaguration that doesn't build something.