Category Archives: Politics

Fielding the Field

Leave a reply

I’m writing from Manchester, NH where I am attending the College Convention. This conference invites all the presidential contenders to come and have a chat with college students from across NH and the region. Today we heard from Dennis Kucinich and Joe Biden. While I enjoyed Kucinich and think he says pretty much all the right things, I’m just not crazy about him.

I was surprised by Biden’s presentation, which was quite strong. Regarding style, he seemed confident and comfortable addressing the audience. He also stayed for over an hour and a half. But to the issues: Biden rightly points out that Iraq is the major stumbling block which is impeding progress in every other matter. He stated clearly that he’d end the war within 6 months in office, a commitment that none of the other Democratic candidates are willing to make. He also touted the fact that he was not a millionaire, noting only 3 Senators fit into this classification. This really struck me.

As you know, I’m a fan of Edwards, largely because he talks about class inequalities in this country. I did not know that Biden was not independently wealthy, and his comments on the need to re-think the role of money in politics were well delivered. Although I won’t say that I’m on the Biden bandwagon now, I do think he is strong; his command of language, experience and outrage could be just what we need. I look forward to hearing from more of the candidates, both Democratic and Republican. I’ll keep you posted.

This and That

1 Reply

A few things:

1. Pictures from my trip to Istanbul have been posted in the photo gallery. Find them in the Peace Corps Romania album… enjoy!

2. You may now select which skin/theme you prefer for this site. Look for “Select Theme” under “Search:” on the left hand side. This is not 100% yet, but the front page is all set.

3. Click here to read a pithy commentary about a broken social contract viewed in the context of the armed forces medical care scandal. The author, a Vietnam vet, states: “There is a social contract between a country and those it sends to war, and America’s social contract is broken… Less than half a percent of our population is being asked to bear the burden of this “long war.” Our all-volunteer military has allowed most of the country to remain oblivious to the horrors of our wars. We must begin to equitably distribute this sacrifice – not by sharing the burden of combat, but through the burden of political engagement.”

A commenter replies: “Sadly, the results you describe are inevitable when the ENTIRE burden of the war is carried by those serving and their families. As far as most Americans are concerned, this war has been outsourced. Too bad if a soldier gets hurt: he knew the job was dangerous when he took it. It is this attitude, varients of which exist all through American society, that is so shameful. People picking crops can’t make a decent wage? Too bad, it is simply supply and demand. Your job was sent to India? Too bad, but that is the way the new economy works now.”

I am particularly interested in the issue because it DOES appear that this entire war has been outsourced (or perhaps down-sourced to the most desperate members of our own society.) When I look at the maps showing where most of the dead have come from, I see few coming from priviliged areas. Though this is not new, past wars have called for shared sacrifice, such as rationing in WWII and the draft in Vietnam. Thus, if this GWOT is indeed the generational struggle that it is trumped up to be, ought not we all be asked to sacrifice? (and no, not our Constitutional liberties…)

4. Spring is beginning to show itself here. Though it’s raining and nasty out now, I’ll take some photos as soon as we see some blue skies. And, on that topic, have you heard the song “Mr. Blue Sky” by ELO? It’s fantastic. I’m starting to feel this way for many things…

American Crisis: Part I

1 Reply

This week in my American History class we have been studying the the New Deal. As we deciphered all the alphabet agencies and reached the late 1930’s, we were able to conclude that while all those programs did help get America back to work, it was ultimately the massive armament for the Second World War which truly brought the country back from the brink of massive social and economic ruin. As a precursor to next week’s lesson, World War II, we looked briefly at the situation in Weimar Germany during the 1930s.

*****

As Germany had been destroyed during the first World War and the Treaty of Versailes imposed extremely harsh punishments on the nation, its economy was never able to regain footing. As a result, the tenuous ability of the Weimar government to maintain control and win the confidence of the populace was destroyed as the depression’s effects were felt worldwide. In this void, Hitler was able to gain a following among the German people by presenting himself as savior of the nation and architect of a great German revival. Just one month after he was sworn in as Chancellor, the Reichstag was destroyed by fire. Blaming the fire on Communists, Hitler and President von Hindenburg were able to pass a sweeping decree suspending many constitutional liberties. This decree was predicated on the assumption that Communist violence against the state posed a danger to public safety, and thus appropriate measures needed to be taken to counter this threat. The decree abolished: habeas corpus, freedom of speech, press and the right to protest, and privacy rights for postal and electronic communications. Legislation following soon thereafter granted expanded powers to the executive (Hitler,) allowing it to create new laws and amend the Constitution as it saw fit, without the approval of the Reichstag. Though these powers, granted in response to a specific Communist threat, were to last for only four years, they continued until the end of the Second World War.

*****

The American economy had been destroyed by globalization, and as a result, people began to lose faith in the ability of government to protect their interests. In this time of uncertainty, George W. Bush was able to strike a chord in many Americans by promising a great cultural and spiritual revival. Just half a year after his election as President, the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were attacked. Blaming the attacks on terrorists, Bush and a compliant Congress passed the Patriot Act, curtailing many of Americans’ constitutional rights. Habeas Corpus was denied to individuals held on terrorism charges, a massive extra-judicial wiretapping effort against the American people was undertaken, and the executive branch continued to exercise powers in contravention of Congress’ wishes through signing statements. Although many of the key components of the Patriot Act were written to expire in four years, it has since been twice renewed and remains the law of the land…

*****

Next Post – PNAC, 9/11, and the New Pearl Harbor

A Sad Day For America

6 Replies

I deliberately waited until I was done with school and had a snack to look up Bush’s speech on Iraq. Although I was already 99% sure about what he was going to say, I needed to see it. Watching Bush’s speech left me feeling angry, sad and powerless. In addition to asking that more American troops be sent to fight in the same manner which has thus far resulted in little but increasing bloodshed (and record profits from some segments of society,) Bush has outlined his strategy for Iran and Syria. Granted, I am no fan of either of the regimes in those nations, but I cringed as he said:

Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity and stabilizing the region in the face of extremist challenge. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria… We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.

While I agree with the premise of rooting out terrorist networks, history has shown that Bush’s actions upon such threats lack any semblance of nuance. The recent war in Lebanon should be an indication of what may be in store for Iran. Also infuriating was the lack of any mention of Israel, whereas almost every other Middle Eastern nation was mentioned by name. Although the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is oft used as a scapegoat for inwardly directed grievances within the Muslim world, to deny that Israel is a key part of this entire larger picture is astonishing. To many within the Muslim world, the belligerence of the state of Israel coupled with Western backed incursions serve only to reinforce the notion that a larger crusade is being waged against them. Although this may be incorrect, out government, certainly, is aware that perception often trumps reality…

So I did what I could, and I called my Senators and House Representative. Luckily for me I come from a very blue state, and at each Congressman’s website, a statement opposing Bush’s speech had already been posted. All I did was lend my two cents, expressing support for a concerted opposition to this recycled nonsense. And no, I do not know what the “correct” answer is at this point; in fact I believe that we have gone too far for there to even be one anymore. We must retreat.

Let me add that last night while looking for some good examples of speeches for my students, I stumbled across one by Charles Lindberg advocating isolationism during the buildup to the Second World War. The rhetoric, with its thinly veiled anti-Semitism, was truly chilling. But his sick speech served only to reinforce my pride at the sacrifices that our soldiers made during that war, for no doubt a great leap of faith must be taken even when one is presented with a just case. But in that epochal struggle, the sacrifice ran deep, including those who remained at home.

Thus, when George Bush claims that, “the challenge playing out across the broader Middle East is more than a military conflict. It is the decisive ideological struggle of our time,” I would like to think that if we are indeed faced with a threat of such magnitude that every American would be asked to sacrifice. Yet, on December 20th of 2006, Bush encouraged us to “go shopping more.” I am reminded of Terry Gilliam’s dystopian film Brazil in which disobedience to the state carries the penalty of a reduced credit rating; the masses shop amid violence and terrorism. Indeed, it is frightening how easily it is for Americans to go about business as usual just as 20,000 more of us are being asked to again do that which has gotten us nowhere.

And so the war goes on, a tired and thinly stretched army is pushed even further, we are told to hold our judgment until November (a year!) and war-profiteering corporations breathe easier knowing that new contracts will be penned and existing ones extended. If this does not get the American people onto the streets demanding change, it seems as if nothing will.