Pages

S/SW blog philosophy -

I credit favorite writers and public opinion makers.

A lifelong Democrat, my comments on Congress, the judiciary and the presidency are regular features.

My observations and commentary are on people and events in politics that affect the USA or the rest of the world, and stand for the interests of peace, security and justice.


Wednesday, November 30, 2005

The Scientific Method meets The Arts


In my classes I was taught the scientific method (See Wikipedia's definition of this linked to the title of this post.)
Some say that there is an assault on science by the religious Right wing. There are regular news stories alluding to this, for sure.
The line between my faith and science, and the arts and science, is often blurred for me.



Saturn's moon, Titan, may be like our primordial earth. The heavens and space have deeply fascinated me since I was a small child learning to find the "big dipper" in a sparkling night sky. MSNBC reports:

Saturn’s planet-size moon Titan has dramatic weather, with turbulent high-altitude winds, periodic floods of liquid methane and possibly lightning, scientists said Wednesday in describing a world that may look like Earth before life developed.


There is a new exhibit about Charles Darwin in New York. As for me, I stand firmly on the side of the theory of evolution. I have no problem meshing the theory with my spiritual beliefs. To quote CBS:
Amidst a roiling national debate on whether intelligent design deserves a place in public school curriculums, a new exhibit in New York sheds light on the man behind the controversy: Charles Darwin. The new exhibit at the American Museum of Natural History is being hailed as the most in-depth exhibition ever mounted on Darwin, the father of evolution theory. The exhibit features artifacts from his life, and elements of his studies on beetles and animals of the Galapagos
Islands.
French surgeons have been the first to do a partial face transplant. This is still a highly controversial procedure in the healing arts, fraut with ethical and medical problems. But, as a therapist, I can see where it could be psychologically healing in cases of severe facial disfigurement. According to the new York Times:
Surgeons in France have for the first time performed a partial face transplant, a surgeon who led one of the two teams that performed the operation said yesterday. The recipient of the transplant was a 38-year-old woman who had been severely disfigured in an attack by a dog, said the surgeon, Dr. Jean-Michel Dubernard of Lyon. The operation was carried out in Amiens on Sunday.


One of my special TV favorites, Dr. Carl Sagan, host of the Cosmos series, will return at 8:00 p.m. on Tuesdays to the Science Channel. Marking the 25th anniversary, the next show is about "The Persistence of Memory." There is no more artistically beautiful show than "Cosmos." Enjoy! Again . . .

The players in the upcoming Iraq election

The current leader in Iraq is Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari. He heads the interim government, to be replaced by a permanent government to be elected soon. (Their website was last updated September 7, which tells you how things have been going there).
How will he and other current leaders influence the outcome of the December 15 election in Iraq?



Who are the other key players in what eventually happens half a world away?

  • President Bush outlines his strategy for "victory" in a speech today. My favorite resource, Steve Clemons, posts about it here.
  • Ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, has been trying to build bridges between the various factions. He has been called a soft neocon, by some who know him well.
  • Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld wants to be sure tha we know that there is no insurgency in Iraq. But the current violence is certainly at play in the outcome of the elections.
  • Iraq's national security adviser Mowaffaq al-Rubaie, asserts that up to 30,000 U.S military forces can leave Iraq next year.
  • The Arab League organized a conference recently hoping that the seeds of reconciliation could be sown amongst Iraq's leading influencers. It did not go well, but it eventually is in the hands of the region to make lasting peace. Neighboring countries must take leading player roles or it will never work.
  • U. S. journalists have roles to play in Iraq. The top notch investigative journalist Seymour Hersh writes a "must read" story for The New Yorker about what the military thinks about the future of the war in Iraq. Coalition partners Great Britain and the United States, according to Hersh, have a "candidate of choice" in former Iraq official Ayad Allawi. Discussing the role of the British PM, this quote:
Blair has assigned a small team of operatives to provide political help to Allawi, the former adviser told me. He also said that there was talk late this fall, with American concurrence, of urging Ahmad Chalabi, a secular Shiite, to join forces in a coalition with Allawi during the
post-election negotiations to form a government. Chalabi, who is notorious for his role in promoting flawed intelligence on weapons of mass destruction before the war, is now a deputy Prime Minister. He and Allawi were bitter rivals while in exile.
  • TPM Cafe's Matthew Yglesias posts an interesting story about a key Iraqi player, Muqtada al-Sadr, asking "where is Muqtada?" Quoting the post:
Spencer Ackerman thinks Sadr may actually be the best hope
for national reconciliation in Iraq, since he's a Shiite Arab with anti-American and nationalist sentiments that have allowed him to build some ties with anti-occupation Sunni Arabs.
  • Al-Jazeera wants to make sure that it is not impeded in its coverage by being bombed by the U.S. The White house vehemently denies the report by a British tabloid that there was a U.S. plan to bomb their Qatar headquarters. British "leakers" were hauled into court over the report.

Who will probably not appreciably influence the election outcome?

  • Congress could be an influential player in the outcome of the election. But a study by the Congressional Research Service reports that we lack ways to accurately measure progress in the so-called war on terror. Congress will be asked to appropriate $3.9 billion to help train and equip the Iraq military. And the lawmakers will probably not question the request.
  • Saddam Hussein's trial in Iraq will resume December 5. He sees the U.S. as an "occupier." Former Attorney General Ramsey Clark, will be on his defense team.


Tags:

Tuesday, November 29, 2005

Out of step with the prevailing view?



Just what is wisdom?


It is hard to be out of step, coming down on what feels like the wrong side of issue after issue in my previous blogposts (to which I have linked in each bullet).

Exploring the conventional wisdom on why it is thought to be the wrong side is the subject of this post.

  • Seeing Congress as a potentially positive force for change: With Senators and Members of the House needing to spend so much time raising campaign funds (mostly from special interests to whom they are then beholden), they do not have time to write legislation, serve on important committees, or stay in touch with what their local constituency needs. Most of them have "safe" seats because of re-districting.
  • Favoring former President Clinton's New Democrat Third Way ideas: Clinton's Third Way has been discredited because of his impeachment. Free trade has hurt United States workers. His 8 years did not produce any real reform, just small change around the edges. He was weak on foreign policy. His Third Way is too "touchy-feely," all charm and no substance.
  • Being Just Left of Center along the political spectrum: The only way for Democrats to differentiate themselves from Republicans is to get back to their most Liberal roots. Centrists don't really stand for anything; they are boring.
  • Working to find common ground with opposing views: Bloggers have to hold very strong positions in order to differentiate themselves. Rants get noticed. A good argument gets the juices going. Conflict is healthy for the body politic.
  • Having nostalgia for the Kennedy inspirational years: Get over it; they are almost all gone. Besides the times have changed; the sixties were awful anyway. Those were never the good old days. You must keep up with today.
  • Worrying about poverty and hunger: We can no longer afford a welfare state. We are the richest nation in the world. The rising tide has floated all boats. Single mothers are to blame; if everybody would just get married there wouldn't be a problem.
  • Giving credence to what is in mainstream media: The concentration of ownership into just a few stratified companies means that corporate interests trump the interests of journalism. All reporters do, anyway, is just report the two sides in a conflict. There is not enough money for investigative journalism. Public trust of the media is at an all time low.

Monday, November 28, 2005

The rule of law inspires young judge

Today there is a great story by Jim Yardley in the NYT about a young judge who has a deep respect for the law. Judge Li Huijuan, age 32, acted out of that belief in the rule of law with a legal decision that was very risky for her career, but significant for the history of her native land.

The twist to this story is that Judge Li lives and works in China. Yardley summarized her dilemma,


Faced with a conflict between national and provincial law, Judge Li had declared the provincial law invalid. In doing so, she unwittingly made legal history, setting in motion a national debate about judicial independence in China's closed political system.

This young jurist's experience resonates half way round the world - Friedman's flat world - because it has so many universally human elements:

  • A daughter had the example of a father who had deep personal integrity in the way he lived his own life.
  • As she grew up, she first had role models in TV drama, and later inspirational teachers and professors, who taught her to love the rule of law.
  • The young judge was in a "commuter marriage" with a man who supported her ability to make the right decision when she needed it.
  • Like Rosa Parks, this young idealistic woman inspired leaders older than herself to rally to her side when she took the risky but correct stance. She also instinctively knew when to practice quiet passive resistance.
  • Like women in their 30's around the world, she took maternity leave recently and then went back to school to further her legal education.

The irony of this story is that there has not been radical change in the current Chinese legal system. But here are hopeful signs. Judge Li did not lose her job. And judges now get a different kind of "required continuing education." The story continues:

On the campus of the National Judges College on the outskirts of Beijing, the primary educational arm of the People's Supreme Court, roughly 10,000 judges spend a month of every year on professional training. In the past, judges were taught to serve the interests of the Communist Party, but now a different message is emphasized.
"We train them with a modern theory of law: that the courts are impartial, on the need for legal justice and of innocence until proven guilty," said Huai Xiaofeng, president of the college. "We stress that
during a trial, you cannot favor the government or the National People's Congress. In the past, they told them to emphasize the political qualities. "Now, we tell them to emphasize the law and the facts."

But the system remained largely intact, the story concludes:

In summer 2004, the Standing Committee announced the creation of a new review panel to mediate conflicts of law. Some lawyers have hailed the panel as the equivalent of a constitutional court. Others are concerned about the panel's secrecy and believe the responsibility should belong to the courts.
Judge Li still believes in the rule of law, but she is no longer the impressionable teenager who watched soap operas about judges. "Judges are confused," she said. "It is not that they do not know how to do cases professionally. It is just all these relationships to coordinate. And they also have to weigh consequences."
In 2004, Henan's High Court reheard the seed case. It ruled exactly as Judge Li had, with one exception: it criticized her for invalidating the provincial law.

In the United States is where Marbury vs. Madison happened. That U. S. landmark case was cited by a Chinese legal scholar in an op ed piece supporting Judge Li during her challenge of the Chinese court system. It fundamentally changed the direction of our own court system, affirming that the good of the larger whole must take precedence when it conflicts with the purely local. China has a start now.

This story reminds me of why I have such reverence for our own rule of law. It is why I feel so disturbed when anyone in the current administration takes an expedient, fudging, wink and look the other way legal stance. And it also why it is good that Congress is increasingly saying "no" to the administration. With a few welcome legislative initiatives, such as those having to do with detainee rights, leaders are finally standing on the right side of the rule of law.
Tags:

References to previous posts:

  1. The rule of law makes the front page
  2. Recovery of the "Dissatisfieds"

Sunday, November 27, 2005

New Democrat Clinton-Presidential Conference

In the past I have posted about the DLC's Third Way. Democrats must begin to help govern our nation in 2006. It is my opinion that New Democrat centrist politics has not been eliminated as the most logical position for the party as a whole to adopt. We cannot win elections from the far Left only. There are just not enough of us. Moderate voters in both parties will decide which way they want the nation to lean for the remaining two years of the current administration .

Earlier this month a large number of key people in the Clinton administration gathered on Long Island to talk about the hallmarks of that administration. According to a press release from host Hofstra University,

Hofstra's 11th Presidential Conference, William Jefferson Clinton: The "New Democrat" from Hope, took place November 10-12, 2005, at Hofstra's Long Island campus in Hempstead, NY. The conference, including an address by Clinton, was made up of a slate of keynote speeches and panels that took an academic view of a wide variety of aspects of Clinton's presidency. Among those participating in the conference were members of Clinton's White House staff, military experts, journalists, economists and scholars in a wide spectrum of areas.

Included here are text highlights of each days activities, with a quote from what seemed to be significant that day about the Democratic Leadership Council's Third Way principles of governance used by former President Clinton. (for video of key elements of the conference, go to the main website title linked above)

Day One

. . . the main topics of the 1992 campaign were key to Clinton's victory, as he battled for the "forgotten middle class."
"[Clinton] would talk about the ladder," said (Senior advisor Stanley) Greenberg, "how there needs to be the opportunity for responsibility at the top and the bottom. He was for making a broke and corrupt government work for average Americans."

The middle class in 2005 has shrunk. More people are hungry on the bottom rungs. The gap between them and the very rich, favored by the current administration, has considerably widened.


Second Day

Redefining Liberalism: At a panel on "Redefining Liberalism," Clinton was credited with mixing and matching policies that defied the conventional wisdom that Republicans are conservative and Democrats are liberal. The panelists noted Clinton's frequent use of the themes of "community, opportunity, and responsibility" to define his new Democratic platform. Commentator David Gergen, Clinton's counselor for Foreign Policy and Domestic Affairs in 1993, said that
these words were "vague abstractions.(and) don't have concreteness.(but) got back to Democratic liberalism."
Al From, founder and CEO of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) and part of Clinton's Democratic Platform Drafting
Committee in 1992, stressed that while Clinton may have taken a center stand on some issues, he was a liberal. "(The) Democratic philosophy was to progress ideas and create opportunity.Clinton tried to reconnect the Democratic Party with the deep strands of liberalism," From said, such as creating jobs and working to eliminate poverty.

The country today has lost its sense of community, becoming much more polarized than in the 1990's. And we are not as much a part of the "community of nations" since our invasion of Iraq. Only the very rich have been given much opportunity since the turn of this century. And the way I see the current administration's manifestation of responsibility is played out in their religiosity. Believing the way they do is seen as everyone's responsibility; otherwise we are excluded.

Ending Day

Former U.S. Department of Health and Human Service Administrator Bruce Vladeck felt "the new democrats got it wrong when it came to health care," reminding the audience that the United States is the only industrialized nation without universal health coverage, with Clinton Senior Adviser Ira C. Magaziner stressing "Nobody failed for a lack of effort." The panel concluded with Senior Health Care Adviser Chris Jennings's theory that the main reason of failure was Clinton's effort to do "too much, too quick."


And not much has changed since then. Far too many people still cannot afford health care. The health care industry, including pharmaceutical companies continue to make record profits, while consumers lose out. There was a need for health care reform in 1992. The same needs are there today.

In conclusion, here is an opportunity to learn what the Democratic Leadership Council is doing these days. Visit this DLC site for a very important and informative Al From presentation about what New Democrats are currently proposing to again win at the ballot box. Take a peek!

Tags:


Saturday, November 26, 2005

News in the future?


For many of us there is no one source of news. We learn what is happening from TV, the papers , magazines and from the Web. My Bloglines news aggregator brings me updated versions of many RSS news feeds, including popular blogs and the New York Times. But, if I want to read the columns of MoDo or any of my other favorite NYT columnists, I must subscribe to the Times Select service for $49.95 a year. So I read Maureen Dowd in my local newspaper, or watch her on television talk shows.
Many younger readers get their total news online rather than from a regular newspaper or TV. Adam Penenberg, writing for Wired News states that,

Don't think for a minute that young people don't read. On the contrary, they do, many of them voraciously. But having grown up under the credo that information should be free, they see no reason to pay for news. Instead they access The Washington Post website or surf Google News, where they select from literally thousands of information sources. They receive RSS feeds on their PDAs or visit bloggers whose views mesh with their own. In short, they customize their news-gathering experience in a way a single paper publication could never do. And their hands never get dirty from newsprint.

Craig Newmark, is developing a new venture that will capitalize on the popularity of the Internet. According to David Osborne, writing for the Common Dreams newsletter,


While he has yet to discuss the specifics of his next venture, he has hinted at an interactive website on which users could decide which parts of the news really matter to them and even report some of it themselves.
"Things need to change," he said. "The big issue in the US is that newspapers are afraid to talk truth to power. The White House press corps don't speak the truth to power - they are frightened to lose access they don't have anyway."
There is widespread mistrust of the mainstream press and journalists, this Harvard study reports. Carroll Doherty, of Pew Research, says (in Summer 2005-Neiman Reports) that, "The press isn't buying press credibility. The seeds of public distrust were sown long before the recent round of scandals."

There are a number of pressures coming to bear on those from whom we get our news:

  • There is the problem of keeping an audience, because the public has less and less confidence in the mainstream media.
  • The average TV watcher is 60 years old.
  • There is widespread consolidation of the mainstream media into fewer and bigger media companies.
  • It has been reported that newspapers make only 10% of their income from their online editions.

Thus there is trouble on the horizon for the press. They will be forced to find ways to "monetize" the Internet, or they will provide less news coverage through that venue. What will they do to make money in the future, as regular newspaper readership goes down? That is the next big question.


Tags:




Friday, November 25, 2005

Standing between taller presidents

It must be very hard for our current president to be in this position, walking in the footsteps of the two men flanking him. The history of the presidencies of George Bush One - Bush's father, and Bill Clinton - who defeated and replaced his father - stands in stark contrast to George Bush Two's making of current history.

These three articles from Yahoo! News bring to mind that our current president has to deal with the shadows of his two predecessors every day.

The first President Bush fought the original war in Iraq in the early 1990's. It was his decision to remove the invading Iraqis from Kuwait and then withdraw our troops, enforcing the U.N. resolution against that invasion. President Clinton eventually and reluctantly went to war in Kosovo, then left the peace keeping to NATO. But now in 2005, we are at war with almost no international help. U.S. military personnel spent their third Thanksgiving in Iraq Thursday. Yahoo! quote:

U.S. troops around the world marked the holiday in a variety of ways, serving a traditional turkey meal to Serb schoolchildren in dining on food ladled out by senior officers in Afghanistan and staging a parade of makeshift floats in Kyrgyzstan.

The original Gulf War did not engender much opposition to President Bush's father. President Clinton admits that one of his deepest regrets is that, despite much protest, he did not move in more quickly to stop the genocide in the former Yugoslavia. In contrast, the current Iraq war has now become so unpopular that people are actively protesting it. Currently a protest continues outside of Crawford, Texas. Cindy Sheehan arrived to join the protestors who have gathered near where President Bush is staying. Yahoo! quote:

Sheehan asked protesters to return to Crawford this week during Bush's family Thanksgiving gathering. She was unknown when she set up camp outside Bush's ranch during his August vacation, but as the vigil drew thousands, she attracted national attention.


George Herbert Walker one headed the CIA. So he knew the agency well. He would have obviously listened to their input, but would have kept them within bounds based on the needs of the period, even intitating a downsizing due to the end of the cold war. President Clinton continued the downsizing and redirected the CIA more towards economic intelligence during his administration. The current administration's problematic dealings with the CIA make headlines almost every day. The story of alleged secret CIA prisons for U.S. detainees has now moved to the European front. Yahoo! quote:

The Council of Europe has opened an investigation into the allegations, which Washington has refused to confirm or deny. EU states agreed on Monday to write a joint letter to the United States seeking clarification about the allegations.

My purpose here is not to paint white vs. black portraits of the three administrations. The point is to show that different presidents see things very differently. Our current president's worst choices, in my opinion, too often come out of an unconscious opposition to what his flanking predecessors did or stood for. Many of the consequences of the Iraq war were produced by those blind spots. What causes so much trouble for this administration is the certitude of the extreme fundamentalist positions driving their decisions. An absence of doubt is alarming.

Thursday, November 24, 2005

Thankful-we may exit Iraq


As a nation we have many things for which to be grateful this Thanksgiving.

Among these things is this. The talk of moving military forces from harm's war in Iraq is gaining momentum. And there seems to be an emerging consensus that the withdrawal needs to be gradual and perhaps tied to meeting benchmarks.
The WaPo oped (title linked above) asks the central political question. Which party will spearhead the movement to get our troops home from Iraq? The administration is certainly looking at the public opinion polls. Amazingly Defense Secretary Rumsfeld even said the words out loud as he made the rounds of last Sunday's talk shows. By the way, does anyone believe it is mere coincidence that the Pentagon is now actually talking about cutting the number of troops serving in Iraq?
Democratic Senator Barack Obama spoke out recently, calling on the Bush administration to admits its errors regarding Iraq and draw down the number of troops there next year. Other Democrats aslo seem to favor a gradual pullout. The article goes on to say,
As other Democrats are finding their voice against Iraq policy, Obama took an approach closer to one taken by Senate Foreign Relations Committee colleague Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.) than to that of Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.). Murtha, a former Marine, called last week for an immediate pullout of nearly 160,000 U.S. troops.
Four prospective Democratic presidential candidates -- Biden, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.) and former North Carolina senator John Edwards -- have advocated a more gradual approach, with no sudden steps. Biden called Monday for the withdrawal of 50,000 troops by the end of next year and all but 20,000 to 40,000 out by January 2008.


The mood is tentative, but my hope is emerging that there may be enough wisdom present in both parties to get us out of this mess. After all foreign policy is supposed to be bipartisan.
tag

Wednesday, November 23, 2005

Some will be hungry this Thanksgiving

How does it feel to be hungry, really hungry? It is not the kind of hunger that comes with having missed a meal. It is also not the kind of hunger one feels when doing a very purposeful "cleansing fast," or fasting on Fridays, in the old days of an observed liturgical holy week.

This hunger is that which comes from not getting anything to eat, or very little to eat, on a regular basis for days, weeks, months or years at a time. It comes from not getting a nutritionally balanced diet. This kind of hunger makes it difficult, if not impossible for mothers to nurse their infants. Infants do not grow and thrive if they live. People - adults and children - starve to death, or they die of diseases brought on by malnutrition. There are entire nations starving or desperately endangered today; right now. And there far too many people in these United States that are also hungry. This week, this coming Thanksgiving Day, the weekend following , millions are hungry. For many of the rest of us, we will be trying to figure out what to do with all our leftovers.

A recent Reuters story focused on the just published United Nations report on hunger in the world which states that 6 million children a year die from hunger related causes. (see also the teriffic pop up map in the title link above) Quoting Reuters,
Most of the 6 million child deaths a year are not due to starvation but
rather to neonatal disorders and diseases like diarrhea, pneumonia, malaria and measles which would be easily curable if the victims were not weakened by lack of nutrition.
The food crisis brought about by climate change is also part of the larger hunger picture. The BBC article begins,

Climate change threatens to put far more people at risk of hunger over the next 50 years than previously thought, according to new research. Scientists say expected shifts in rain patterns and temperatures over that time could lead to an extra 50 million people struggling to get enough food.


(BBC image) In Africa people in Malawi face a maize crisis. Quoting,

The worse harvest in a decade and failed rains are being blamed for what aid agencies warn is a rapidly emerging food crisis. What is making matters worse is HIV/Aids. One in seven people in Malawi is affected and it is fuelling the problem of extreme hunger. Money that households would normally spend on buying seed and fertiliser, is being spent on transporting the sick to hospital and buying basic medicine instead.

In Zimbabwe even their own soldiers are hungry enough that there are shortages of food in the barracks and forced leaves. High food prices are a factor in Niger's hunger problems, because of the high demand for food in the surrounding countries. The crisis of African hunger was debated in this BBC feature; some of the discussion comments were excellent. Millions are at risk in Africa, but so are millions in southern Asia

Earthquake survivors face winter hunger in the Kashmir area. It is a major crisis for the millions left homeless by the quakes in Pakistan, Kashmir and India. The article states, "As of 16 October, food had reached 440,000 people but an estimated 560,000 remained in "desperate need of assistance".

In our own hemisphere hunger is a major problem in several contries. The BBC reports that Guatemalans face hunger as a result of the recent natural disaster, Hurricane Stan. Rats ate the crops of many people in Nicaragua, one of the poorest nations in the Central America. The BBC article headlines, "The UN is to send 230 tons of emergency food aid to thousands of Miskito Indians facing hunger in Nicaragua."

Here at home, the Food Research and Action Center is an excellent site for exploring hunger in the United States. America's Second Harvest, the nation's food bank network, has excellent material on hunger in the U. S. The Children's Defense Fund explores the question of U.S. children's hunger in this 6-page PDF document. Here is what the USDA site has to say about "food security" in the U.S.:

Eighty-eight percent of American households were food secure throughout the entire year 2004, meaning that they had access, at all times, to enough food for an active, healthy life for all household members. The remaining households were food insecure at least some time during that year. The prevalence of food insecurity was 11.9 percent in 2004, up from 11.2 percent in 2003. The prevalence of food insecurity with hunger was 3.9 percent in 2004, up from 3.5 percent in 2003.

Since our population was 290,342,554 in July of 2003, the "3.9% of food insecurity with hunger" translates into 11, 323,360 hungry people in the United States. Is there anything that can be done about the recent increase in hunger? The above paragraph on hunger in America includes several references in the linked articles to organizations that endeavor to feed people who go to bed hungry. In your own city, there is probably a food bank, a soup kitchen or a homeless shelter that could use some help, either volunteering or donating. And many churches, synagogues and mosques as well as other faith based organizations focus of food pantries or feeding programs.

World wide, diminishing poverty and the predominance of violence and war will help. Improvements in agriculture are key to the long term solution. For example, unravelling the DNA code of the rice genome may be an answer for many countries where rice is the predominant staple.

Reference: Wikipedia's excellent section on hunger discusses many aspects of the problem and includes links to many organizations that work on hunger.


Tag

Tuesday, November 22, 2005

Truth need not be obscure

"Sophistry" seems like a rather arcane word for a blog post. But we hear a lot of sophistry on the Sunday morning talk shows. So it is pertinent.

  • I just looked it up in the dictionary to make sure my understanding was correct. The word means 1) "Plausible but fallacious argumentation." or 2) "A plausible but misleading or fallacious argument."
  • My online Thesaurus offered these words as similar: "Plausible but invalid reasoning: casuistry, fallacy, sophism, speciousness, spuriousness."
  • The Famous Quote given by my Bartlett's online resource is this:

AUTHOR: Alexander Pope (1688-1744)
QUOTATION: Destroy his fib or sophistry—in vain! The creature 's at his dirty work again.
ATTRIBUTION: Epistle to Dr. Arbuthnot. Prologue to the Satires. Line 91.

My point is this. The word sophistry has been pertinent to the political debate for many years. Armando at DailyKos used the word in his recent post on the possible appointment of Judge Alito to the Supreme Court, pairing it with obfuscation.

Obfuscation is often the reason that people in a debate resort to sophistry. The idea is to distract from the truth of the argument on the other side, to obscure waht the argument is really about, to throw one's opponent off, or to reiterate a lie often enough to make it seem plausible. The goal is to win the argument with a preemptive strike, not to further the discussion or explore the truth.

So is it any wonder that such tactics make our heads spin? Democrats have been having a hard time finding their footing in these fierce debates. However, we may be getting some help. Three leading Republican Senators now apprear to also be trying to oppose the administration's sophistry about the so-called "war on terror" in Iraq. To quote from this NYT article:

For Democrats, who have spent months trying to put the public spotlight on the issues of detainee treatment and the war in Iraq, the three Republicans are like some kind of gift from the political gods. After the Senate overwhelmingly adopted Mr. Warner's measure on the war, Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., Democrat of Delaware, stood slack-jawed. "It's gigantic," Mr. Biden said.

Sunday, November 20, 2005

Bobby would have been 80 today

Echoes of Another Day. . .


seeing through the glass darkly
"All of us might wish at times that we lived in a more tranquil world, but we don't. And if our times are difficult and perplexing, so are they challenging and filled with opportunity." Robert F. Kennedy

The blog Dreaming up Daily has a series of recent posts and photographs about Robert F. Kennedy that I want to recommend. His 11/20 essay begins with "This would have been Robert F. Kennedy's 80th birthday." One of Kennedy's great speeches is included. It also has a number of haunting photos of Kennedy. The essay was cross posted in this blogger's Daily Kos diary Captain Future. It was good enough to be listed as a featured diary, and is getting a large number of heart felt comments. Check it out. And here is a site inspired by Kennedy called Ripple of Hope.

Now, it is hard to believe this young and vital man would be an elder statesman. Many of us remember the disbelief surrounding his assassination, the blur of shock, dashed hopes and loss. Even now it is difficult for me to write about it. RFK's violent untimely death was the third, after President John Kennedy and The Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. The year 1968 was all too much, too dark, too sad, too scary.

They Marched Into Sunlight, by Davis Maraniss, is one of my favorite books because the author chronicles that year with such brilliance. My own chronicle of that year is much more personal, less global. Our four kids ranged in age from 7 to 12. I was a stay-at-home mom then, in the PTA and at the ironing board. Watching those bloody days march across the TV screen in front of me, I was not in circumstances nor the right generation to protest for peace. But my heart was there, and my eyes full of tears.

Soon it will be forty years since then. I still feel passionately that we should not be at war. The width of the disagreements that separate neighbor from neighbor, party from party is still troubling to me.

What has changed in the 21st century is the availability of outstanding leaders. Where today are the men and women who can inspire the kind of admiration those three men inspired in us back then? We, like the Marines, "need a few good men"--and women to run for public office.

Polarization?

Shiite vs. Sunni
????????????????????????
Republican vs. Democrat
???????????????????????????????????????
The (title-linked) story prompting this post is from the New York Times. It is a sad story in so many ways. To quote,

Two and a half years after the American invasion, deep divides that have long split Iraqi society have violently burst into full view. As the hatred between Sunni Arabs and Shiites hardens and the relentless toll of bombings and assassinations grows, families are leaving their mixed towns and cities for safer areas where they will not atomatically be targets. In doing so, they are creating increasingly polarized enclaves and redrawing the sectarian map of Iraq, especially in Baghdad and the belt of cities around it.

In the United States we have our own problems with religious polarization, as this US News article asserts. It was about "Justice Sunday" held earlier this year. To quote,

Accusing the Democrats of running a jihad against believers clearly implies that people who vote Democratic are either terribly ignorant or simply not good Christians, Jews, or Muslims. This is a surefire recipe for increasing polarization within the churches. One Baptist website complained caustically about "Injustice Sunday," quoting one minister who said: "There are people of faith on both sides; neither has God in their hip pocket on this issue."

I have to admit that I sometimes feel polarized myself. I fantasize about moving from my so-called "red state," to a really "blue"one, where I would be among more like-minded folk. And I have often posted angrily about Republican views on contentious issues.

But I also often have contended that the better way is to try to look for common ground. For example, in a previous blog post, this article on "The Politics of Polarization," by Galston and Kamarck, got me to thinking that there is just such a way for Democrats to return to governing. One author, however, Michael Barone writing in US News & World Report, believes we may move away from being as divided in the 2008 presidential election as we now appear to be.

Robert Samuelson wrote an interesting column titled, "How Polarization Sells," in June of 2004. He contends that the real polarization is between the true believers on both sides and everyone else. He may have a point. What do you think?

Article references:

  1. The Case of the Vanishing Moderates: Party Polarization in the Modern Congress, by Professor Sean Theriault (pdf format)
  2. Polarization, by Michelle Maese and Tova Norlen - from the Beyond Intractability Knowledge Base Project at the University of Colorado.

Saturday, November 19, 2005

House foundation rocked






Watching Congress these days makes my head spin. In the vacuum of leadership left by our current president's ineptitude and absence abroad, the Republican leaders and members are making mischief.
In an article quoted from the Washington Post (linked to post title),




Differences over policy on the Iraq war ignited an explosion of angry words and personal insults on the House floor yesterday when the chamber's newest member suggested that a decorated war veteran was a coward for calling for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops.
As Democrats physically restrained one colleague, who appeared as if he might lose control of himself as he rushed across the aisle to confront Republicans with a jabbing finger, they accused Republicans of playing political games with the war.

Yesterday's actions in the House of Representatives showed particular cynicism on the part of Republicans and astonishment on the part of Democrats. Stooping to name calling, demagoguery and parliamentary maneuvers that were utterly irresponsible, Republicans did not show themselves well at all. And Democrats were furious, getting a bit out of hand themselves. The players:



  • Representative John Murtha of Pennsylvania- a Democratic hawk and war hero revealed earlier this week that he is for redeploying U.S. troops out of Iraq as soon as practicable, feeling it could be done by the end of six months.
  • Representative J.D. Hayworth - Republican of Arizona (rumor has it) had the original idea for the cut-and-run resolution proposed by Rep. Hunter.
  • Representative Duncan Hunter - Republican of California was author of a House Resolution proposing that U.S troops "be withdrawn immediately" from Iraq. It was defeated after much angry debate from both sides of the aisle.
  • Representative Jean Schmidt - Republican of Ohio who was just elected in August. She was the Member who called Mr. Murtha a coward, and "took her words down" (retracted them) later.
  • Representative Harold Ford - Democrat of Tennessee, charged across the aisle to the a group of Republicans jabbing his finger at them.
  • House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi closed one element of the debate vigorously with this from the WaPo article,
    Top Democrats attacked the GOP tactic. Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said the Republicans "engaged in an act of deception that undermines any shred of dignity that might be left in this Republican Congress." She called Hunter's resolution "a political stunt" and "a disservice to our country and to our men and women in uniform."

All in all it was not a good day to end the week. Everybody goes home now for Thanksgiving. I wonder what kind of feedback they will get from their constituents.

Some things are clear to me. The war in Iraq continues to divide our nation, calls for inordinate sacrifices from the military, and feeds an insurgency making mahem in an Iraq that must become stronger very quickly.

Friday, November 18, 2005

Honoring Elders


John Murtha stunned members of Congress yesterday by proposing that we bring our troops home from Iraq as soon as possible. The veteran US lawmaker said that the US military operation in Iraq is a lost cause.
"Our military has done everything that has been asked of them, the US cannot accomplish anything further in Iraq militarily," said Murtha, a Vietnam War veteran considered more hawkish than most members of his party. "It's time to bring them home," Murtha said.
Representative Murtha spoke with compassion and intensity about the sacrifices made by the troops and their families. He is held in high regard because of his own military record of service.
Murtha, a defense hawk, decorated Vietnam War veteran and retired Marine colonel, made a reference to the draft deferments that kept Cheney out of Vietnam.

Another bill was passed yesterday in the Senate. It is meant to shore up the pension plans of seniors.
Hoping to reverse the deterioration of pension plans covering 44 million Americans, the Senate voted Wednesday to force companies to make up underfunding estimated at $450 billion and live up to promises made to employees.

Finally, at my other blog, I honor my very special mom's upcoming 90th birthday. I wish you all could know her.

Thursday, November 17, 2005

Back in the District

(image by bigfoto.com) Congress will be going back to the districts very soon. And there they face the same dilemma about money as in Washington, D.C. Campaign donor corporations, special interests and monied individuals will be there, too, demanding access and preferential treatment.

In the current flap over whether oil executives lied to Congress about a White House meeting, we have one of the most egregious examples of undue influence over legislation. There is growing evidence that representatives of the major oil companies met secretly with a Vice Presidential task force on energy early in the first Bush administration. The purpose was to draft the administration's energy bill. Given their current level of profits, do we doubt that they were successful? Given that they were not required to testify under oath about their participation in the earlier meetings, do we believe that they were entirely forthcoming? The Sierra Club's Carl Pope elaborates on additional aspects of this story. To quote him briefly (italics mine):

So what will happen next week when Congress returns? A lot depends, I suspect, on how sour a mood the members, particularly the moderate Republicans, encounter back home over the Veteran's Day weekend. I suspect that, at the end of the day, Committee Chairmen like Pombo and Barton will vote for a reconciliation package that cuts social spending, even if doesn't drill the Arctic and the coasts. They're trying to give the leadership leverage to bully the moderates again. If
the moderates were to stand firm, then Washington would become a different town for the next year.

A recent story reveals that lobbyist Jack Abramoff, associated with the current troubles of Congressman Tom DeLay, was involved with arranging donations to a large number of lawmakers to attempt to influence gaming in Louisiana. Many of the recipients were not even from Louisiana. According to the AP,

Nearly three dozen members of Congress, including leaders from both parties, pressed the government to block a Louisiana Indian tribe from opening a casino while the lawmakers collected large donations from rival tribes and their lobbyist, Jack Abramoff.

What can Senators and Members do that people back in their districts will approve of and appreciate? Perhaps this recent action by the Senate, is an example of what is possible when our legislators remember who they actually represent - US - back in the districts. To quote the AP article:

The Senate, in an unusually bipartisan 97-2 vote Wednesday, approved legislation to tighten rules for companies that underfund defined-benefit pension plans — a shortfall currently estimated at $450 billion. The bill also shores up the financial viability of the federal agency that insures pension plans for some 44 million Americans.

Though the inordinate influence on Congress of special interests is of concern, people back in the districts are most upset over the war in Iraq. And both Democratic and Republican lawmakers are beginning to behave differently towards the Bush administration as a result. To quote from the AP:

The GOP-controlled Senate rejected a Democratic call Tuesday for a timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq but urged President Bush to outline his plan for "the successful completion of the mission" in a bill reflecting a growing bipartisan unease with his Iraq policies.

The money dilemma for Members of Congress and Senators is difficult. They know they cannot have any chance to govern if they are not in office. They have to run for reelection every four or six years. Campaigns are overly expensive, so fund raising has to be constant. Individual voters cannot contribute at the same level as special interests can. So to whom do these legislators naturally feel beholden? Too often, it is not those of us back in the districts.

There are two other influences, however, to which they do respond. They pay attention to their mail, and to public opinion polls. Polls are in the hands of the pollsters; few of us actually get to register an opinion. But any one of us can write an e-mail or a letter, even to our legislator on the other side.

Wednesday, November 16, 2005

On hand to give thanks because . . .


I am a citizen of the United States. I take many things for granted that should more properly be noted. On the one hand, I gripe a lot about the state of the world. On the other hand, I have much for which to be thankful:
  • In the 1600's a group of pilgrims and their Native American neighbors got together to give thanks for their blessings. And Americans are still doing it every year around this time. I am also keenly aware that too many citizens of other countries are not yet as free.
  • In the 1700's, my freedom to gripe about anything that bothers me was guaranteed. Even today, however, not all bloggers around the world have this same freedom.
  • A hundred years later our country managed to avoid permanently ripping itself apart in a civil war that ended slavery. My great-great grandfather lived despite being injured and imprisoned in South Carolina. But civil war still rages in several places in the third world.
  • Millions of us get to go to the polls to secretly vote for some new people to represent us, or to retain those who do a good job on our behalf. And in December Iraqis will again, amid much risk, go to their own polls to vote and dye their fingers purple.
  • Thousands of idealistic people remain willing to fight and die in the name of our country, or to help out in other countries or natural disasters. But thousands of others, stateless radical jihadis, are perverting their own religion by killing innocents in places all around the globe.
  • Dozens of interesting states are still waiting for my first visit. Too many evacuees, however, will not be able to travel back to their homes for the holidays this year.
  • More than twenty members of our extended family will gather at our house next week to join us again in giving thanks again for all our own blessings. But we will dearly miss those who have passed away in the interim.
  • My own spouse still wants to be with me enough to look forward to our fiftieth wedding anniversary next spring. In humility I say, I feel lucky and blessed for that.

Tuesday, November 15, 2005

For peace in the world

(pic by Bigfoto.com)
Today I share this wonderful poem by Mary Oliver, winner of thePulitzer Prize for poetry and of the 1992 National Book award for poetry. It is from her
New and Selected Poems.
Sunrise
You can
die for it--
an idea,
or the world. People
have done so,
brilliantly,
letting
their small bodies be bound
to the stake,
creating
an unforgettable
fury of light. But
this morning,
climbing the familiar hills
in the familiar
fabric of dawn, I thought
of China,
of India
and Europe, and I thought
how the sun
blazes
for everyone just
so joyfully
as it rises
under the lashes
of my own eyes, and I thought
I am so many!
What is my name?
What is the name
of the deep breath I would take
over and over
for all of us? Call it
whatever you want, it is
happiness, it is another one
of the ways to enter
fire.
. . . Peace . . .

Finding common ground for sustainable investment

People on the Left, in the Center, and on the Right disagree about the direction of the country. But our political futures are tied together. We could benefit from finding what common ground we can within the important questions we are currently facing.
(pic by bigfoto.com)
In the Common Dreams newsletter, former President Jimmy Carter writes movingly about his concerns with the fundamental direction of the nation. And former Vice President Al Gore is featured in a piece (linked above) about sustainable investments in his new business venture. Translating his idea about the business sector to the public sector, our nation should think hard about the consequences of its investments. After all, we "put our money where our mouth is," and all must live with the results.

  • The consequences of embarking on a war of choice in Iraq are profoundly damaging to America's leadership capital within the family of nations. We are putting billions of taxpayer dollars or money borrowed from foreign investors into fighting the wrong war (at the original behest of Ahmad Chalabi) at wrong time. It is a huge mistake. And it simply is not sustainable. Our military cannot sustain the numbers; their families should not have to sustain their inordinate sacrifices, and our deficit dependency on international dollars is too risky to our kids future.
  • The consequences of our national leaders' squandering of their ethical capital is worrying. A vacuum in governance, when so many people are under a cloud of illegality or scandal, leaves citizens feeling anxious and vulnerable to harm from a terrorist attack, or natural or man made disasters. The Republican majority in Congress has become fractured as moderates did in their heels against their own wounded leadership.
  • The consequences of putting our economic capital too heavily into fossil fuel driven industry are deeply damaging to the environment. We, and those who come after us, depend upon a sustainable climate with our very lives.
  • The consequences of spending our nation's moral capital on questions like "intelligent design," women's rights of choice with our own bodies, the Ten Commandments in public places, etc., are far reaching. Paternalistic moralisms pushed through by a minority of people impinge on issues when the number of those in the majority would win by any accounting. The pendulum of opinion cannot sustain such a swing to the radical right for very long, because pendulums are weighted towards the center.
  • The consequences of our current president's overspending his remaining political capital are becoming clear in his falling poll numbers. He has little influence left in the bank here at home. And, as he travels around the globe trying to persuade world leaders to our way of thinking, the broad base of international opinion is also hard to sway towards our side. On several crucial questions, the president's leadership capacity will fall short of what it once seemed to be.

The answer to sustainable investments from the human capital comprising our national leadership seems to me to be found in building bipartisan coalitions at national and state levels. They will have to work hard and in good faith to find common ground within the issues, but we know that is what is needed. And there are small signs that this is already happening. We hope so.

Monday, November 14, 2005

Changing the course of the war in Iraq

(photo by bigfoto.com) Former Secretary of State Colin Powell said before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, "You break it, you own it." We really do not know whether Iraq is broken or not.
But we should know one thing. It is not possible to "make war on terror." It does not work that way. The U.S. can only fight terrorists where we find them. More accurately, these Islamist extremists, radical jihadis, or whatever, were almost everywhere but in Iraq. It never made sense to arbitrarily invade Iraq for the reasons given. There was no connection between the World Trade Tower attacks on 9/11/01 and Iraq. It has been a distraction from the subsequent real threats ever since.
The effect of the invasion and occupation has been to increase the number of terrorists wanting to kill Americans, not to decrease them. And now they have the perfect urban training ground for beginner jihadis, the cities of Iraq. They can "make their bones there," and move on to Jordan or any other neighboring Middle Eastern country.
The time has come for making a sensible plan for a timely, not precipitous, withdrawal from Iraq. The continued presence of coalition forces feels like an occupation to many Iraqis. Those Iraqis who like and respect us, but who think we should leave, hear no commitment from us that there will not be permanent U.S. bases there. Our forces are stretched too thin and redeployed too often to remain at a high level of effectiveness. The Iraqi defense forces do not have enough incentive to improve when we prop them up indefinitely.
More and more leaders are saying that we are in a "quagmire." More and more will admit they wished they had not voted to give the president permission to make war there, that they made a mistake.
We as a nation must ascertain the actual motivation for the war in Iraq. We have a right to know that before we go any further with permissions. My own suspicion is that the neocon goal is to establish a permanent jumping off point in Iraq. Their ideas are to 1) change the countries of Middle East, one by one, into western style democracies, and 2) safeguard a ready supply of oil for the U.S. Our current president's motivation, in my opinion, was to finish what his father started in the early 1990's, and to finally go into a battle, since he had avoided fighting in Vietnam.

Sunday, November 13, 2005

Living in the Southwest

Southwest people are friendly, open and hospitable.

I first came here in high school, moved back to my home state for a short time, and returned here as a young adult.

Local air is polluted and water is scarce. Summers are hot. Trees and wildflowers are plentiful, as well as open prairies. There is enough wildlife for hunting.

Men love sports . . . And football a lot. They work hard and play hard. Many of them drive pickups. They generally make good fathers and grandfathers.

Kids work hard in school; their teachers are underpaid. A fairly good percentage of them go to private schools.

Women can be relatively independent, some even "sassy." Many have careers or a paid or volunteer job. They are wonderful friends. Some, just like their men, can be rather conservative.

This is the Bible belt. I am a "blue" living in a very "red" state. The Democratic party used to predominate, now Republicans are clearly in the majority. Judges run for election and belong to political parties. We have only one newspaper, but several TV and radio stations.

Help for vulnerable people in need is relatively limited. "Pulling yourself up by the bootstraps" is what is too often expected by the state government. Our city has a very good mayor, and a diverse city council representing a highly diverse population.

The military, space and defense industries play a major part in the economy. So does high technology. This is not a union town. Shopping malls have the same homogeneous chain stores as the rest of the nation. Most freeways are crowded. Drivers are too aggressive in some cities and more polite in others. Public transportation takes a back seat to automobiles.

The seasons are not evenly divided in length. There is a long summer, a short spring and fall and a medium length winter. Fall is my favorite season; the winters are relatively mild. Occasional ice storms cause chaos on the roads, and we get a small amount snow which usually melts within a day or so.

We have tornados. These storms or threats of storms come far too often. As skies fill with tall thunderheads of a very strange green tint, an eerie quiet sets in, and the sirens start to wail. Really big tornados can scourer a wide swath of death and destruction and they scare us to death.

Housing is relatively good and inexpensive. Our city has an active center city life, with many people living downtown in converted vintage buildings. There are also some very old and beautiful homes of historical significance that have been preserved. However, the preservation movement is not as well supported as in other parts of the nation.

Medical care is excellent, though not very accessible for poor people. Culture - music and the fine arts - is active and well patronized. Charities are well supported. Higher education is, compared to the rest of the nation, pretty affordable. Both community colleges and universities are well attended. Our college sports teams rate nationally, though there are occasional recruitment scandals.

I live here by choice. Our quality of life is good, I think, and we feel blessed by having our family and friends nearby. We live in a wonderful city that feels like a hometown.

Saturday, November 12, 2005

Messing with my head

Someone sent me a number of pictures like this in an e-mail. They all messed with my head.

This imaginative work reminds me of some of the politicians who most often drive me crazy.

They stand up there on a very small platform.

They make chin music to their adoring hoardes of blockheads.

They shout from the rooftops with out-of-tune refrains about Values, Hearth and Home.

You can't tell where the truth begins or ends.




They won't face people straight on, singing in oblique verses, designed to entertain, not to inform.

They make me feel bluer than blue.

Recovery of the "Dissatisfieds"

One of the favorite sayings in 12-step recovery program lingo is, "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, each time hoping the result will be different."

Our current president is going about his business in that mode. Yesterday, on Veteran's Day, he did not go to Arlington National Cemetery to honor our military dead. Instead, as he has since 9/11, he made a political speech attacking the patriotism of Democrats who question the war in Iraq, characterizing them as hypocrites. And he sent Vice President Cheney to do his job at the National Cemetery. Over and over, their choices are political, rather than substantive. I am dissatisfied that the current administration is unwilling to adjust in the face of plummeting public support for the current direction.
Despite the shame of Abu-Garaib and the Supreme Court's ruling that enemy combatants have basis human rights, this administration and like-minded Republicans are still fighting against our nation's core values of human rights and freedom. That Supreme Court ruling, exposure of "black" torture sites in secret corners of the world, the military's insistence on following the rule of military law with interrogations - none of these facts deter those in power from their pursuit of lawlessness. They act above the law over and over again, hoping that we will not notice. I am dissatisfied that our nation appears to the world as if arrogantly operating outside the rule of law.
Despite being under a possible indictment, Karl Rove still sits at the center of power in the White House, claiming to be winning the battle of ideas. And neocons still staff the Vice-President's office, despite the indictment of Lewis Libby, a neocon "darling." Over and over, isolation from wiser counsel, such as what to do about Ahmad Chalabi under FBI investigation, and divisiveness within the administration's staff prevent them from taking the smart approach to solving these serious problems. I am dissatisfied that the executive branch of the government is not up to its job of executing the laws of the land, those passed by the legislated branch, and sanctioned by the judicial branch.
Let's take a look at our current president's ability to govern just based on who voted him into office. The latest population figures I could find put the number of U.S. citizens at 290,342,554 in July of 2004. The 2004 voter turnout was 122,293,720. President Bush won 62,041,268 votes or 50.73%. Senator Kerry won 59,028,548 votes or 48.27%. According to these numbers, Mr. Bush never got what he called a "mandate." As a matter of fact, in 2000 he did not even get the majority of the popular vote.
Obviously I am not the only one who is dissatisfied. Currently not even all those who voted for the president are satisfied with his job performance, according to the latest poll numbers. As I think about it, a growing number of people, many millions, including Republicans, may be nearly as dissatisfied as I am. There is growing disagreement even in Congress. Moderates and right wing conservatives have not been able to come together enough to pass a budget. And Bush's ally, Tony Blair, UK PM, suffered a parliamentary defeat for his policies on terrorism.
Let us hope that all of us "Dissatisfieds" will not fall into the trap of doing the same things over and over again hoping for different results. We cannot just constantly complain, hoping our complaints will bring change. We cannot silently fume forever, hoping someone else will speak out and take the heat. We cannot repeatedly vote in incompetents, hoping they will eventually learn how to govern. These are the stances of the 12-stepper's "insanity." We all have to get into recovery, throwing off the addiction of magical thinking.

Friday, November 11, 2005

Something new in the political atmosphere

IRAQ

The war in Iraq seems to be what worries Americans the most. Most recent opinion polls show that we think the country is going in the wrong direction. And we don't trust those who lead us to change for the better.

Quoting a recent USA Today article,

Only 42% in the new poll said they approve of Bush's handling of foreign policy and terrorism, his lowest rating yet in an area that has long been his strongest issue.
The war in Iraq is at the core of the public's unrest, polling found. In an AP-Ipsos poll in early October, almost six in 10 disapproved of the way Bush was doing his job, and Iraq was a dominant factor. When those who disapproved of Bush were asked in an open-ended question the top reason, they most frequently mentioned the war far ahead of the second issue, the economy.
"To use an unfortunate metaphor, Iraq is a roadside bomb in American politics," said Rich Bond, a former national Republican chairman.

Despite this knowledge, I am beginning to feel more hopeful for the future. That is a new feeling for me, and might seem counterintuitive. I credit this feeling to last Tuesday's election results, and to what Democratic leaders and elected officials have been saying and doing in recent weeks.

What should we as thoughtful citizens do to help increase the momentum for change? (the links are my own examples)

  • Stay informed, even though the issues are varied and complex. If you haven't already, try C-SPAN.
  • Add progressive online magazines to your "favorites list."
  • Break the rules: talk about politics in polite company. Hone your arguments beyond mere ranting. Wonkette is a great example of good gossip.
  • Do not skimp on your support for U.S. servicemen and women, because they are making huge sacrifices on our behalf.
  • Even if you live in a flaming "red" state, pledge to write your senators, and your Representative at least one letter each in your own words.
  • Write a letter to the editor of your local paper.
  • Communicate with your local TV station managers about their coverage of the war.
  • Make sure you are registered to vote in the next election.
  • Comment regularly in the blogs that propose useful solutions to the dilemma of the Iraq war.

Thursday, November 10, 2005

Election emboldens opponents of the Republican Right


Happily, the right wing of the Republican party has lost some influence over the direction in which the country is going. Moderate House Republicans may already be exercising a bit of muscle in the wake of Tuesday's election outcomes.


"There is a clear message from the election results all over the country," said Representative Sherwood Boehlert, Republican of New York, an influential moderate. "The American people, by and large as a body politic, are looking for a more centrist approach."
At the urging of this group of 14, the proposal to open drilling for oil in the Alaskan wilderness area has been dropped from the current budget bill. Compromises with moderates have also includes dropping measures for coastal oil exploration and reducing the cuts in food stamps for legal immigrants. The budget bill includes more than $50 billion in spending cuts, incuding reductions in spending on Medicaid and food stamps. The bill will get a vote today.
DNC chairman Howard Dean says the Democrats stand ready to lead in light of their widespread victories on Tuesday. And Congressional Democrats are also exercising some muscle. From The Hill an article (written on November 8) outlines ideas from a number of Democrats who were planning to highlight the heavy budget cuts with some planned activities of their own. At a mock hearing, quoting The Hill,
"Democrats plan to argue that the spending cuts will be used to fund tax cuts rather than reduce the deficit; that the cuts will threaten vital services such as Medicaid, student loans, child support and food stamps, some of which benefit hurricane victims; and that the budget resolution will still increase the deficit even after these cuts are taken into account. Aside from the mock hearing, other members are heading up separate events this week.
Members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus and possibly the Congressional Black Caucus will hold an event on the Capitol steps to talk about “Republicans’ misplaced priorities,” according to a House Democratic aide.
Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) and members of the caucus’s 30-Something Working Group are planning to serve lunch at a school in Washington to call attention to Republicans’ planned cuts in the school-lunch program.
Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.) will host a conference call for reporters with a Wisconsin college student who is poised to lose student financial aid under the GOP plan.
On the floor, Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) plans to coordinate a series of one-minute and special-order speeches throughout the week lambasting the budget plan.
Democrats will likely criticize the cuts using variations on internal talking points distributed last week.
According to Pelosi’s Morning Message Points from last Thursday, Democrats will tie the budget cuts to the plight of Hurricane Katrina survivors.
“Republicans are moving forward to impose even greater sacrifice on Katrina families with a fiscally irresponsible budget that cuts student loans, healthcare and rural programs,” read one bullet point.
The Emergency Campaign for America’s Priorities, a labor-funded group aligned with Democrats, continues to pursue moderate Republicans in their districts, targeting 38 lawmakers in 16 states with press conferences and ads."

You go Dems!

Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Democrats win big-cautious optimism


emocrats
are waking up to very good news this morning. Our candidates won the governors' races in New Jersey and Virgina. And the referendum questions in California have been defeated.
But opinion makers are cautioning against too much jubilation on the part of Democrats. At the very least, however, these results are a reflection of the general angry mood of the country. Voters registered their frustrations with the directions that the Right Wingers have been taking us. This is very bad news for Republican leaders at almost every level. According to Reuters News Service,

The outcome in conservative, Republican-leaning Virginia was a particularly bad blow for Bush, who stopped there on election eve for a get-out-the-vote rally with Kilgore. Bush's mounting political problems and Kilgore's poor showing could make Republicans hesitant to call on him for help next year. (full story at above title link)

This NYT story is an excellent summary of the potential implications for next year's elections for the Democrats. From these victories I see that they might start the good momentum that will be necessary to make significant gains in 2006. However, I agree with Kos' take on the election results. At the conclusion he says:

"But I have to say, while this beats the losing we've experiened the last couple of years, this is still quite unsatisfying. Let's call it the appetizer."

These are my feelings exactly. I am reluctant to be jubilant. Perhaps what accounts for my caution is thinking about what a long three years it will be until 2008. Our country will be forced to endure the continuing difficulty the Republicans have with governing. There will be far too many opportunities for my head to spin in disbelief at the next big thing that will be exposed.

This is the "what do you think about this" thread at TPM Cafe. These folks always have interesting opinions; California bloggers seem particularly pleased that "the people spoke" against Governor Schwarzenegger's leadership.

In one of my recent posts Dems Opposition for the next 3 years, I laid out some ideas I think could be useful to keep in mind as we continue to encourage Democrats towards 2006 and 2008. They must unite and stand for ideas.

My list of possibilities:

  • Support the forgotten middle class.
  • Ask for sacrifices from the wealthy.
  • Remind critics that Republicans do not own patriotism.
  • Pay attention to jobs and the economy.
  • Propose solutions to ending the war in Iraq.
  • Fight for fiscal responsibility in government spending.
  • Expose wrong-doing by officials.
  • Exercise more Congressional oversight.
  • Create the climate for election victories in 2006.
  • Build the party's grass roots organization.
  • Stay away from scandal; remember ethics.
  • Finish mending fences within the party.