That One

Was it just me, or did John McCain seem dismissive when he called Barack Obama “that one”?

If I had to choose between John McCain and Barack Obama, I would choose THAT one. When it comes to Barack Obama:

• That one will get us out of Iraq with honor.
  
• That one will raise our standing in the world.
  
• That one will end corporate welfare and tax cuts for the Exxon Mobil’s of the world.
  
• That one will focus on helping the middle class deal with their every day problems.
  
• That one will deal directly with our healthcare crisis.
  
• That one will focus on green energy, creating five million new jobs.
  
• That one will restore civil liberties after the dark days of extraordinary rendition, suspension of habeas corpus and Guantanamo Bay.
  
• That one will restore dignity and honor to the White House after eight years of heartbreak.

Maybe John McCain is right. Barack Obama is the one. That’s the one for me.

One Grain at a Time

Have you ever held a single dry soybean in your hand? What do you think it weighs: one gram? Imagine holding a soybean in your palm and see if you can get a sense of the weight of it. It’s very, very light – hardly noticeable. And yet, this year, somewhere in the Midwest, it is very likely that someone will probably die from the weight of soybeans.

At a grain silo, grain in the silo drains into several openings in the floor, then into an underground tunnel and onto a conveyor belt. The grain occasionally will hang up and not flow through those openings. When it hangs up, too often someone will enter the silo to move the grain. And too often, that someone will not make it out of the grain silo alive. It is too common an occurrence. Sometimes the person who enters the silo places their face too close to the grain, where there is a layer of carbon dioxide and they die from a lack of oxygen, but just as often the person suffocates by an avalanche of the grain inside. One tiny grain is very light, but when a man is under thousands of grains, they can take his life.

I don’t know what it’s like to suffer such a fate and I would not compare anything I’ve experienced to the suffering of the families of such a farmer, but I will say I know what it’s like to have thousands and thousands of tiny weights lying on top of me until I can hardly breathe. Every day tiny infractions of our rights as citizens, every human right and civil liberty that is violated, stack on us like so much grain, unnoticed and unimportant at first, until it is too late.

Today the news media reported that a deal has been struck for sharing oil revenue in all of the Iraqi provinces equally. This is good news, right? I should feel relieved, right? But then I found out that the dark side of the story went mostly unreported. It seems that big oil companies are being given absolute control over Iraqi oil, and it feels like another grain has fallen on top of me. A federal appeals court said it was fine to indefinitely hold prisoners without charge. “Tic,” goes the sound of one tiny grain striking my arm. Dick Cheney is saber-rattling with Iran. Tic. The Bush Administration continues to spy on us. Tic, tic, tic.

The horrible thing about imagining oneself suffocated in a grain bin is that you observe the phenomenon from within the tragedy. This is not like sitting in your car and watching a careening truck coming your way. You have no sense of dispassionate detachment. You are inside the tragedy as it happens grain by grain. As a citizen, I sit within the US and watch this imperial presidency implode upon itself and there is nothing I can do about it. Tic, tic, tic go the grains and I just can’t seem to get ahead of them. Soon their weight is alarming, but by the time I realize this, it’s almost too late.

All we can do is struggle. We must struggle for the oxygen of freedom, for overcoming the weight that besets us. We must struggle against imperialism and hubris; against the military-industrial complex. We must struggle against violations of human rights and civil liberties wherever they occur. If we do not struggle, then one grain at a time, we will be overcome. Struggle on!

High Temperature in the Body Politic

I wish my email inbox had a thermometer. You should feel the heat of the mail I’ve received lately. What did I do to bring on this wrath? I helped organize an event called “Congress is the Decider.”

The intention of this event was to remind Congress that the voters want to end the war in Iraq and to call for Congress to bring our troops home.

Although invigorated with new blood, Congress is still feeling its way toward consensus on a new Iraq strategy. But in order to do that they must overcome three obstacles.

First, there are the obstructionist Congressmen who want to “stay the course” or “increase speed on the old course” or anything else that will allow the President to save face.

There’s also a lack of a cohesive front in Congress. It’s hard enough to get 431 Representatives and 100 Senators to agree on much of anything, but with so many Senators running for the office of President, there are many Iraq plans to choose from.

Finally, Congress must navigate the unrealistic expectations of the American voters. It seems that many voters unrealistically believed that 48 hours after they cast their ballot the troops would be on their way home, the President would stop making ill-advised decisions, and we would all have universal healthcare. Even with the comparative lightning speed of the first 10 bills to make it through the House of Representatives, America does not seem impressed.

With a perceived lack of progress in Washington anger seeps into all things political. As voters, we are starting to turn our anger on one another. Even brilliant Presidential candidates, who should be saving their venom for a rogue administration, have turned instead to tearing each other apart. The few in Congress who could champion our cause for peace are being pasted with the same broad brush of anger which should be reserved for the real scoundrels. The body politic is so hot with rage that it’s beginning to break down.

Which brings me back to the temperature of my email inbox. On the morning of the event I sent out an email asking people if they would join me at the demonstration and rally in front of Rep. Dave Loebsack’s (D IA-02) office. In the email I mentioned that Rep. Loebsack has hit the ground running. He has co-sponsored no less than 3 bills to end the war in Iraq. He has worked closely with the House leadership to craft a unified strategy. He has co-sponsored bills in favor of universal healthcare, energy independence and a livable minimum wage. In fact, for almost every issue that the voters spoke to last November, he has co-sponsored a bill. You can see a list of the bills he has co-sponsored here.

The responses to this email caused my inbox to boil at a fever pitch. I was accused of being a corporate stooge, of being on Rep. Loebsack’s payroll, or worse…maybe I was really a Republican!

At first I was dumbfounded at the level of anger in my inbox; especially since it came from people who agreed with me on the goal of exiting Iraq. All I had done was to suggest that we not throw the baby out with the bathwater. But then I thought about what people were really angry about. They’re ready for change and they’re finished hearing excuses about it. And you know, I’m right there with them.

Here’s my one piece of advice for my fellow disgruntled voters. Let’s continue to find constructive uses for our anger. Let’s find ways to take the heat to the neo-conservative establishment in Washington instead of turning our rage on one another. A body that is filled with rage will eventually begin to break down. If the rising temperature of my email inbox is any indication of the health of the body politic, I think we’re about to reach that point.

Who Really Supports the Troops?

In Congress representatives position themselves as supporting the troops while painting the other side as not supporting the troops. This verbal skirmish is just heating up. Between now and March 19th, the fourth anniversary of the US invasion of Iraq the rhetoric will grow ever more shrill. Every word, every vote, every speech on the House or Senate floor is considered for how it will play in the next election advertisement. Energy is being spent on positioning the message while the troops are in the position of being in harms way.

Here’s one idea we can all agree on: The war in Iraq is a disaster. What has the Bush Administration told us about the War in Iraq?

• Our administration said the war would cost $50 billion dollars. So far it has cost over $365 billion and we’re adding billions more every month, even without an escalation of the war.
  
• They said there was an Al Qaeda connection with Iraq prior to 9-11. That was not true.
  
• The President said repeatedly that we would find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. We did not.
  
• The administration promised us we would have victory in 3 – 4 months and we would be out of Iraq in less than a year. On May 3, 2003, less than 2 months after the invasion of Iraq, President Bush stood on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln under a banner that declared “Mission Accomplished.” In fact, on March 19th, the US will mark the dark milestone of the 4th anniversary of the war in Iraq.
  
• We were told we would be greeted as liberators. More than 3,100 of our young men and women have died in Iraq. Another 23,417 have been physically wounded and thousands more suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

Furthermore, according to Congressman Jack Murtha (D-PA):

• The average weekly attacks [by insurgents in Iraq] have grown from 430 in July 2005 to well over 1000 today.
  
• Iraqi casualties have increased from 63 per day in October 2005 to over 127 per day.
  
• 91 percent of Sunni Iraqis and 74 percent of Shia Iraqis want the U.S. forces out of Iraq.
  
• In January 2006, 47 percent of Iraqis approved of attacks on U.S.-led forces. When the same polling question was asked just 8 months later, 61 percent of Iraqis approved of attacks on U.S-led forces.
  
• Less than 30 percent of Americans support the war and only 11 percent support the President’s plan to increase troop levels in Iraq.
  
• A February 2006 poll showed that 72 percent of American troops serving in Iraq believed U.S. should exit Iraq within the year and 42 percent said their mission was unclear.

Now I have to admit that I’ve never served in the military and my voice might not mean as much. But here’s an interesting fellow, Senator Jim Webb of Virginia. His credentials include a stint as the Secretary of the Navy under Ronald Regan. He was also a combat Marine in Vietnam where he was awarded the Navy Cross, the Silver Star Medal, two Bronze Star Medals, and two Purple Hearts. You would think he has a perspective that most of us don’t when it comes to the argument about supporting our troops. So, what does he make of all of these non-binding resolutions and the debates over whether or not to debate?

"I know what that's like when you're sitting out on an infantry unit and seeing what you're doing interpreted politically. But ... it's an inverted political logic for people to basically say that we have to continue doing this for the good of the troops. We are not continuing this war for the troops. The troops are fighting this war on our behalf because we're continuing it. That's a vital distinction in the debate here."

The President has asked for $100 billion for Iraq on top of the $70 billion he has already requested for this year. He also asked for $145 billion for next year. All of this on top of the 11% increase he is seeking for the Pentagon, raising their budget to $481.4 billion.

Well, with money on the line, let’s see who really wants to support the troops. Murtha has said he wants to approve the funding the president has requested, but he wants to put some conditions on the funds. For example he has said:

1. You can’t send troops into battle until they have the equipment and the training that is required to do their jobs.
   
2. You can’t continue to extend troops overseas if they have been there more than 1 year. And when they do come home, he would like to allow them to stay home for a minimum of one year. Traditionally soldiers are allowed to stay home for two years, but in the current situation many troops are rotating back to battle after only six or seven months at home.
   
3. He wants to end the “stop loss” practice that allows the military to keep people in harms way even after their enlistment is over.
   
4. He does not want any of the funds spent to build permanent bases. A permanent base is a multi-decade commitment to support staffing and infrastructure. If Congress is going to appropriate funds, they should go to the troops.

If I were him, I would call this the “Troop Protection Act of 2007.” Keep in mind that there are no more troops to “surge,” so if we’re going to add 21,500 more troops to the theater, we’re going to have to extend the stay of those going over and we’re going to have to shorten the leave of those who are coming home. Also, you can’t add 21,500 troops without adding more support personnel. According to the Congressional Budget Office the actual surge will be more like 48,000 troops.

It seems to me that the proposal by Congressman Murtha is the best way to show support for the troops. If the president wants to surge, that’s fine. He’s the commander in chief, but he should not expect Congress to roll over and rubber stamp his proposal.

In essence, the President has asked us to trust him again and again. As for me, my trust bank account has been overdrawn by the current administration. It’s time for Congress to grow some backbone and to stand up for our troops. Let’s put some real conditions on funding that will show unwavering support for the troops.

Who Counts?

According to an article on MSNBC, in his proposed 2008 budget, President “Bush has asked for an additional $100 billion for Iraq and the global war on terrorism this year, on top of $70 billion already sought…the Pentagon is scheduled to get a hefty increase in spending authority of 11 percent, pushing its 2008 budget to $481.4 billion.” Now, get this. We’re talking about $170 billion, plus $481.4 billion for a total of $651.4 billion. Maybe it’s just me, but this seems like a lot of money. As Senator Everett Dirksen is reported to have said, “A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you’re talking about real money.”

Since these numbers are a little hard to comprehend, let’s see if we can gain some perspective by doing a little bit of counting. If we counted $1 per second around the clock, it would take us 31.69 years to count $1 Billion. If we counted $1 per second, how long would it take us to count $651.4 Billion? It would take us 20,641 years. Even if we cheated and counted $100 bills, it would still take us over 200 years of around-the-clock counting to reach the combined defense and war budget.

So, the President wants us to hand over to the Department of Defense so much money that it would take over 20,000 years to count it at $1 per second. Of course, that’s not all. There is also a lot of additional military spending that falls outside of the Department of Defense. For example, did you know that the Department of Energy spends around $7 billion a year on nuclear weapons projects maintaining nearly 10,000 nuclear warheads?

If we’re going to understand President Bush’s priorities, we need to compare the Defense Department numbers to spending in other areas. For example, according to Reuters, Bush has asked for $56 billion for Education. Is the President saying that education is less than one tenth of the priority of defense and war? The Education budget is 8.6% of the combined defense and war budgets. So, despite brave rhetoric from President Bush about the importance of education, in the Bush budget kids don’t count.

How about the poor and seniors? Do they count? President Bush proposes cutting $78 billion for Medicare and Medicaid over the next five years. No, they don’t count either.

With the recently released report on global warming, you would think that the Environmental Protection Agency could count on a boost in funding, right? Guess again. The EPA will actually see its budget reduced. I guess in the world that President Bush occupies, the earth doesn’t count.

It seems that defense contractors and war profiteers are the only ones who can count on George W. Bush. The New York Times reports that spending on government contractors has nearly doubled from $207 billion in 2000 to $400 billion last year.

As President Eisenhower said, "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."

Isn’t it time that we have a government we can count on?

So THAT's Where All the Hippies Went!

Last October I wrote a blog entry asking the question, Where have all the hippies gone?. On January 27, 2007 I received my answer. Hundreds of thousands marched on Washington to say NO to escalation in Iraq. This included bus loads of Iowans. We are asking congress to craft a budget that reflects our priorities, which do not include escalating the war in Iraq. Not one more dollar, not one more day, not one more death.

The video can be found at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdNYbJQAZag .

Cedar Rapids Says NO to Escalation in Iraq (or Iran)

I am so very proud of the people of Cedar Rapids, IA. They came out to say NO to escalating the war in Iraq...or for that matter Iran. I am so very proud of these good people.

See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnU4Tl7orEY

Why Oppose an Escalation in Iraq?

Last night President Bush announced his plans for what is being euphemistically called a troop “surge.” In military parlance it’s called an escalation. When faced with over 47,000 wounded and more than 3,000 dead, the president has decided to escalate – to pick up the pace. That seems to me to be heading the wrong direction.

The President, when faced with the message from the American people that “stay the course,” was an unacceptable practice, was faced with two options. He could draw down the troops, or he could escalate the war. I don’t think the President quite understood what we meant. I say, support our troops. Bring them home now.

There are three reasons why I oppose the escalation of troops. First, the President has proven himself untrustworthy. Second, the President is asking us to NOT trust reliable experts. And third, we’ve already tried this strategy with tragic consequences.

In his speech, the president has said, in essence, “Trust me.” This is the president who said:

• Trust me. Iraq is linked to September 11th.
  
• Trust me. Iraq has weapons of mass destruction that are a clear and present danger to the US
  
• Trust me. We can do this war on the cheap with very few troops,
  
• Trust me. Armor only slows our troops down. We don’t need armor.
  
• Trust me. We will be greeted as liberators.
  
• Trust me. Your National Guard troops are needed for a short period of time.
  
• Trust me. Mission accomplished!

No, President Bush. Like the national debt, I’m afraid your “trust” account is badly overdrawn.

To trust President Bush, we have to NOT trust such experienced voices as the Generals on the ground, former Secretary of State Colin Powel and the entire bipartisan Iraq Study Group. In fact, General Abizaid stated before the Senate Armed Services Committee, "I met with every divisional commander, General Casey, the Corps commander, General Dempsey… And I said… if we were to bring in more American troops now, does it add considerably to our ability to achieve success in Iraq? And they all said no."

Keep in mind that this strategy has already been tried. Last summer we increased U.S. troops in Baghdad by 12,000. Unless you’ve been living in a cave, you already know the results – more injuries to US soldiers, more deaths, more civilian casualties and a strong upsurge in violence. The President and the military have had the opportunity to ask for more troops for several years.

In conclusion, I’d like to propose an alternative approach. If the President is looking for an escalation, he can escalate diplomacy. In a recent poll conducted by the University of Maryland, 82% of Democrats and 72% of Republicans said we should directly engage with Syria and Iran to establish a political solution in Iraq, as was unanimously recommended by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group. Otherwise, what he can expect is an escalation in protests from the American people.

Here are ten actions you can take today to oppose the escalation of the war in Iraq:

1. TODAY - Attend a rally to stop the escalation in Iraq. You can look at Moveon.org or AmericaSaysNo.org to find a local rally. Can’t find one? Create one!
   
2. Call, email and text message all of your friends and encourage them to attend a rally.
   
3. Call your Senators and Congressman/Congresswoman and express your concern over the plan to escalate the war in Iraq. Call 202-224-3121.
   
4. Join Tom Vilsack’s campaign to Communities Opposed to Escalating the War Resolution. After you sign the pledge, you’ll be given instructions on how to pass a resolution in your home town, county and state.
   
5. Use the power of the pen (or word-processor)! Write a letter to the editor at your local paper. It’s best to actually print it out and carry it in. If not, most newspapers will accept an email, but not as an attachment. Or you can blog for peace. Hey, you read this, didn’t you? Why not write your own blog? If you would rather speak than write, call in to local radio shows to oppose the escalation of the war in Iraq.
   
6. Go big or stay home – literally. Join in the March for Peace. See http://www.unitedforpeace.org. The government brought the troops home from Vietnam, after we took to the streets in massive numbers. It's time to take to the streets today. On January 26th I’m going to be on a bus headed for DC. What are you going to be doing?
   
7. Sign the Mandate for Peace.
   
8. Jump on a train that is already moving! Join your local peace and activist groups. There are general activists groups. For example, John Edwards has formed One Corps. Moveon.org has set up Operation Democracy. There are also specific groups that deal with Human Rights, such as Amnesty International or Civil Liberties, such as the ACLU. And there are groups specifically devoted to peace activism such as United for Peace & Justice, Gold Star Families for Peace or Code Pink.
   
9. Create a photo petition. See the instructions here.
   
10. Support a candidate who supports peace. Two declared presidential candidates have come out in favor of bringing our troops home - Tom Vilsack and John Edwards. You can contribute to their campaigns. You can volunteer to work for them. You can hold rallies in your home to support them. If you contact the campaigns, they will give you plenty to do to work toward peace.

Faith Without Works is Dead – the War in Iraq

You’ve probably heard that saying, “Faith without works is dead,” or more precisely, “In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.” So, now let’s apply that to the war in Iraq. It is not enough to say we want the war to be over. We have to take massive action if we want to end the war. If we believe in peace, but we take no action, our belief is dead. But with massive action, our belief can be realized on the earth.

Here are a few actions you can take today to bring peace to the middle east right now.

1. Take to the streets! Join in the March for Peace. See http://www.unitedforpeace.org. They brought the troops home from Vietnam, after we took to the streets in massive numbers. It's time to take to the streets today.



2. Support a candidate who supports peace. Two declared presidential candidates have come out in favor of bringing our troops home - Tom Vilsack and John Edwards. You can contribute to their campaigns. You can volunteer to work for them. You can hold rallies in your home to support them. If you contact the campaigns, they will give you plenty to do to work toward peace.



3. Believe it or not, you can end the war with a little popcorn. That's right - popcorn. Screen a film about the war in your home. Brave New Theaters makes it easy. Go there and sign up to screen Iraq for Sale, The Ground Truth, or Sir No Sir.



4. Make a suggestion to your Congressmen/women. How about this for a practical suggestion? Do NOT cut off the funding for the troops on the ground. Instead, cut off the billions of dollars for missiles and ships and other methods of traditional warfare. That will get some attention at the Whitehouse and the Pentagon without harming our troops. If the Pentagon wants to choose to spend their billions on a pointless war, let them. But they're going to have to give up their toys to do so.



5. Heal the real wound that is causing much of the strife in the Middle East. End the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. Join with others at PeaceNow.org.

So, there’s the bottom line. If you want peace now, you’ve got to work for it. Faith that we will have peace in Iraq without direct action, is dead. Let’s work together to bring peace to Iraq today.

An Open Letter to President George W. Bush

Dear President Bush,

I strongly oppose adding more troops to Iraq, in what is being described as a "surge." To do so would be to override the expressed concerns of Generals on the ground, Secretary Powell, the bipartisan Iraq Study Group and the American people. Please bring our troops home. There is no military solution to this political problem.

Furthermore I would like to see the findings of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group implemented right away. We need to engage in aggressive diplomacy, not aggressive military operations.

Sincerely,

Tony Loyd