Death and Life of American Journalism

Be Glad Bayh is Gone, Now Progressives Need to Fight!

Lots of news these days... First of all, people should not be so upset that Senator Evan Bayh has decided a reelection bid.  This guy is scum.  Not saying he is a bad man, but he is an obstructionist.  If you have been wondering who to be mad at over health care paralyzation, honestly you ought not blame the Republicans.  Democrats, with a supermajority have not been able to make any of the sweeping reforms that they promised.  That the people elected them to accomplish.  It is because people like Evan Bayh's wife have received millions of dollars from mega-interests like Wellpoint, a giant health insurance company.  These interests certainly expect something in return (i.e. no comprehensive health reform!).  Evan Bayh is not a "centrist" Democrat, he is a corporatist, plain and simple.  Glad to be rid of him.

The downside to his decision, however, could be that someone worse will win the seat.  This is within the realm of possibility, but hopefully Indiana progressives can rally behind a strong candidate.  Of course, the weakness of the progressive movement is a serious problem.  I can only resort to books and articles to recall a time when progressives actually cared enough to act in the streets.  Or at least to have a regular conversation on political matters.  To be informed.  Nowadays, these behaviors are considered taboo.  I know because I experience it on a regular basis.  Americans, particularly kids, are severely distracted by technology and pop culture.  Dangerously so.  We are in the 7th and 9th year of two serious wars, and who could give a damn?  During the Vietnam War college student protesters were shot and teargassed for their opposition.  Sure, we elected Obama, but if there is no substance behind the vote, then where is the change?  If there is no spirit to fight for the most important of causes, to hold Obama and Congress to the fire for health care, climate change, and financial reforms then who would expect them to happen?  Congress is terribly corrupt, so it will take a lot of pushing to get these things done.

The push is stronger than in the Bush years, but still not enough to make critical changes for our society's sake.  We need to wake up.

Wall Street Reform (or lack thereof) Update

Obama takin on Wall Street?
Part 1:

Part 2:

Time to Pressure Evan Bayh, Hoosiers!

This democracy stuff is tough business for sure. The legitimacy of the process is in a constant war with destructive media elements and corporate favoritism in Washington, and the American people have been slow to realize the game being played at their expense. If you want to get things on the right track again, participation must become the norm in American politics and ignorance can no longer be an acceptable excuse.

Today the good fight is in health care reform, and while there is an ideological debate to be had on the size and role of government, now it is time to decide for the future. I've already made my case for a robust public option tied to Medicare rates (Medicare rates are crucial in preventing private influence on the government's purchasing power. Simply, Medicare rates will let the government negotiate rates and keep the costs down), and now we need to push the politicians. My targets are now set on Senator Evan Bayh, a Democrat from my home of Indiana.

Evan Bayh represents the most typical of corporate politicians striving to maintain a centrist persona with his fiscal conservative values, tough-on-terror media tactics, and that unmistakable midwestern candor. He is not the progressive his father, Senator Birch Bayh, once was.

Regardless, my Hoosier friends and family should pay particular attention because Evan Bayh plays an especially influential role in the future of health care reform. Though Bayh has received most of his campaign funds from the finance, insurance and real estate sector (career, $4,295,250), his $1,100,536 from the health industry makes him a man for health business--not fundamental reform.

As much as I hate calling attention to these unsettling facts, it is important to know whose interests our leaders are actually serving. Evan Bayh is deeply vested in the health industry, so the people of Indiana must rise up to let him know that we will not stand for anything less than a public option!   It's time to make some phone calls to his office, and organize with others who believe in forcing the insurance conglomerates to compete in a marketplace (check out the revealing competition map).  Bayh needs to know that if he does not support real reform, he will have a tough time in the mid-term primaries.  I for one will support a real progressive in 2010, not a closeted Republican; but hopefully I won't have to.

Hoosiers, I know that you are a conservative people in general.  That you are wary of the federal government meddling in your affairs.  This a legitimate concern, and one that I often share.  But you must realize that this reform can either go for the people or against. If there is no public option, big insurance will continue raising premiums while limiting coverage.  They will continue forcing small businesses into bankruptcy, and persist in maximizing already exorbitant profits.  Our country cannot afford it, and the 45,000 people who die from lack of coverage every year didn't deserve it.  It is time for Evan Bayh to know where you stand.  He must understand that reelection is not guaranteed in 2010 because WE have the power to decide, not the insurance lobby.

call him: (202) 224-5623 (DC office); (317) 554-0750 (Indianapolis office)  
email him: http://bayh.senate.gov/contact/email/

The Pressure of Peace

While I'm not sure I understand exactly why the Nobel Committee in Norway decided upon Barack Obama as winner of the Peace Prize so early in the game, I'd like to try and imagine the potential of this strategic gesture.

This award is a call of expectations of the freshman President.  It is also a vote of confidence in the American electorate.  You see, President Bush changed the world forever-- he began a war of fear and intimidation.  He destabilized entire regions of the globe, and caused Iran to rush to arms.  Mr. Bush was a President for war, and one who reflected the values of the imperial elites of the United States.

But America said no, and elected a man who promised peace.  For this, every American deserves this award because it is WE who determine our country's policies and rulers.  We chose peace, and this seems to have been recognized by members of the international community.

Now the pressure of the world is on, and the world demands a peaceful USA.  But it is vital that we ask ourselves: what does their opinion matter?  Why should we listen to the desires of other states?

These are common questions-- and they are fair questions.  We are a sovereign state with the power to act in whichever way we see fit.  But what must not be forgotten is that because of our extraordinary wealth, power and influence, our choices ripple throughout the world in ways that we cannot imagine.  It is easy for American to lose touch of global realities because we are essentially an island.  We are not surrounded by nations with ancient traditions of conflict.  We do not know what it was like to be invaded and occupied by brutal militaries.  We cannot fathom the imagery of a holocaust in our backyard.

The fact of the matter is that there are deep global problems that cannot be solved without an engaged, informed United States.  Europe understands it.  We seem to be realizing it.

While Americans are essentially a peace-loving people, they are
also a distant, and easily convinced people.  We are duped into wars of "liberation" and "freedom."  We want peace, but our fault lies in the belief that war solves all problems.  That war yields peace.

Some of our allies across the pond understand that if the people of the United States of America do not break free from the bondage of the industrial-military complex, we will go the way of all empires.  Our potential to do remarkable things will wilt away, and the story of American democracy will be mere whispers of legend.

So let us unleash ourselves from this militaristic society.  Let us fight in ways we haven't yet thought.  Let us take the Nobel Prize and show everyone that we can be with the world, not at odds with it.

People, call your congressmen and women and senators--tell them where you stand.  President Obama, fight those generals and do what is right.  Be strong and call your people to action.  We'll fight with you.

Or against you.

Later this week... 10 Best Congresspeople: Dennis Kucinich

Stay tuned for my second entry of 10 Worst, 10 Best: Your United States Congress. This time: Representative Dennis Kucinich of Cleveland, Ohio. Will be up by Thursday.

Also, I've just created a Facebook Page that anyone can 'fan' to receive updates on your NewsFeed. I promise, the updates will not dominate your wall!

We Will Work Against You

For hours I've been watching the Senate Finance Committee debate two different amendments calling for a public health care option. Both proposals have failed, and I'm angry, a bit sad too... but not particularly surprised.

Though SkyeWire's frequent posts may bother some of my Facebook friends, you should know that I only write such things because I believe that these issues are of vital importance. As a citizen of the United States of America I feel a certain duty to remember the sacrifice and struggle of the founding fathers; to remember that this government was to be THE finest product of the Western Enlightenment-- a government created for people and of people.

The genius of Thomas Jefferson and the others was in giving individuals the power to take control over the fate of governance. Indeed, the expectation was that ordinary people would take this responsibility to heart... that civic duty would reign supreme over any and all detrimental interests.

But something has gone terribly wrong.

My friends, times have never been worse. As this nation fights to reclaim its identity, we are faced with the most catastrophic environmental threat of our existence. As the ice caps melt faster and faster, we sit idly... tweeting about silly boys and girls. While the interests of the few dominate our government's decisions, Facebook takes precedence for the apathetic masses who feel too impotent to do anything.

Allow me to put this into perspective.

...When the glacier that feeds into India's Ganges River melts away and dries

...and leaves half a billion of the world's

poorest

without drink and irrigation

...When the trees you loved so much as a kid

...and the crops you depend upon for nourishment

shrivel and die

in a rapidly changing ecosystem...

...when the health system fails for good

...when Wall Street gets away with losing

everyone's money for the

...second

...third

...sixth

time

...when you realize that this country is no longer a leader of

morality

and freedom

...when such things happen, you will wish you had said...

something.

anything.

You'll wish you had stood for something when there was still something worth fighting for.

Like the man who watched in silence as

Jews

gays

Jehova's witnesses

Romani

dissenters

got rounded off to death camps...

...only to find himself a victim in the end.

Like him, you too will regret when these forces begin affecting your life.

So I'm sorry for being bleak at times, but these are realities; and insulating yourself in the Facebook bubble will not change them.

Don't get me wrong, we can change things... we really can. But if you're heart isn't in it, it will not happen! During Vietnam there was a revolution in this country. Millions marched and some died in a revolution of peace... how remarkable. Can you just imagine? Can you imagine if the masses used the internet for unprecedented citizen involvement and organization? A taxpayer revolt against the Congress that persistently fails to represent the people.

You have to fight and argue and VOTE!! You must learn the issues and find out if your Senator or congressperson is representing good things. Democrat or Republican or whatever.

If they aren't... work against them. Find like-minded others. Spread the word. Grow. Believe. Take back the power. Before it's too late. This is our responsibility.

Yes we can.

10 Worst, 10 Best: Senator Max Baucus

For a long time I've wanted to begin a series that takes a careful look at our federal representatives and their actions. As caretakers of the most powerful country in all known history, we ought to know who they are and what they stand for. When I worked in the United States Senate this Summer as legislative intern (more on that another time), I found an article in a 1970s Washington Journal that called out the best and the worst of the U.S. Senate. So today I begin a similar, albeit more timely, piece called: "10 Worst, 10 Best: Your United States Congress Exposed."

And today I begin with Senator Max Baucus, a Democrat from Helena, Montana and Chairman of the Finance Committee. Mr. Baucus earned both his B.A. and law degree at Stanford University, and went on to work for the Securities and Exchange Commission in D.C. Eventually, he returned to his home state, won a seat in the state House of Representatives, and ultimately a seat in the United States House. In 1978, the Montanian won his Senate seat; a seat that has grown stale and dank and saturated in the corrupt puss that seeps from every pore of Max Sieben Baucus.

Such a scathing judgement is undeserved by most, but let us remember that we are dealing with the United States Senate--a body representative of the most powerful interests this country has to offer. Max Baucus, in particular, has received massive campaign donations from the most invasive and influential industries. OpenSecrets.org reveals the top 5 contributors to this Blue Dog's campaigns: Lawyers/Law Firms ($1,608,823), Securities & Investment firms like Goldman Sachs ($1,480,535) Insurance ($1,190,463), Health Professionals ($1,032,276), and Pharmaceuticals/Health Products ($751,605). In total, Baucus has received $2,880,631 from the Health Care Industry and $4,710,818 from Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate sectors!

If those numbers don't bug you, check out where his former staff members work. Jeff Forbes, once Baucus's Chief of Staff, went straight to K Street when he opened a lobby firm for the health industry. David Castagnetti, another ex-chief of staff, went on to work in the insurance industry itself! Several other staff member have gone similar routes, and some (including Forbes and Castagnetti) have met with Baucus in exclusive meetings on Health Care Reform 2009.

These facts would be meaningless if big industry donors wanted nothing in return; but alas, this is the root of corruption. Of course powerful Wall Street bankers and health care hotshots want their interests protected and enhanced! As we have seen in the Bailout and TARP spending--intended to stabilize the economy--the Democrats are just as keen as Republicans in helping big business at the expense of taxpayers. And Max Baucus is in a particularly powerful position as Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee--arguably the most influential of all committees since nearly every bill that involves spending must go through it.

Now let me tell you how twisted Senator Baucus's health care reform bill is going to be. For one, the man refuses to support the Public Option, which is now the last remaining hope for true, fundamental reform...for the change we can believe in. This corporate Dem will fight any attempt to uproot the perverted and financially idiotic health care system that this country has been victim to for so many years. Instead, cooperatives have been proposed as a substitute for the public option--this is a petty appeasement, and will be destined for failure since co-ops will not have the funding to sustain themselves; eventually they will be used as "proof" that non-private health plans do not--cannot work.

Baucus's bill is being determined by his "Gang of 6" which, besides Montana Max, includes Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Mike Enzi (R-Wyoming), Kent Conrad (D-North Dakota), and Jeff Bingaman (D-New Mexico). Seems like a lot of Republicans determining reform they do not even seem to want! Is there not a Democratic majority? In fact, Baucus has shut out certain members of the Finance Committee who do indeed support the public option! And I refuse to believe that the Gang of 6 states are representative of the entire country.

True health care reform is looking more and more unlikely by the hour, and this is largely due to the influential Baucus. How have we allowed this kind of paralyzing corruption to happen? Don't the people of Montana see that this man has little desire to represent their true needs? The needs of the country at large? Must things get bad enough that we must revolt to reform our policies and cut the puppet strings once and for all?

I refuse to believe we have reached that point, but I do know that a voter revolt is needed--that is, people like this can and must lose reelection. If change is on the horizon, it certainly will not come from hacks like Max Baucus--a man perhaps best explained by his response to single-payer advocates (a group of 8 doctors and nurses) demanding to have a seat at the table: "We need more police!"

And so it is official... Max Baucus: you, sir, are my first WORST CONGRESSPERSON

Pakistan Crisis: the Military, Politics, and Role of the USA Pt. 3

Here is the final part of a Pakistani perspective. Regardless of how you believe, this is a thoughtful essay and important to think about.

Judgement Day for the Pure, Part III
by G, the Legend
The US of A: Can they be trusted?

o Everyone in the Muslim / Arab / Developing world loves to bash America. For most countries its enough that they’re rich, we’re poor, and they seem so much happier than us and that just can’t be fair at all. With Muslims and Islam in the mix, the picture gets murkier. Their policies to the Arab world vis a vis their unflinching support for Israel and turning a blind eye to all atrocities committed against Palestinians has been a gaping, open wound to all Muslims around the world. The fact that the US has become almost incapable of changing its tone and taking an objective view of ground realities has become inexcusable; the policy of choosing who to negotiate with is over, as organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah now have strong local, democratic support, largely due to the success of successive Israeli military campaigns in creating alienation, oppression and hatred amongst the people they rule over. The presence of American troops in Saudi Arabia, as a response to the aggression of a repressive, inhuman military dictator in Iraq who was himself a recipient of US funding and support against Iran, just crystallizes the West’s image in the Muslim world as a power with double standards and worthless promises. The trust deficit of the US from a Muslim standpoint is too great; we cannot simply take their word for it that they won’t leave us high and dry the next time they want to sell things to India, but I doubt our political leaders have the stature or vision to stand up for Pakistani interests.

o The current problem of Talibanization in Pakistan has its roots in the oft repeated saga of American cold war support of the Afghan Mujahideen. While it’s true and we did fight the American’s war for them, the reality is that we did so on extremely favorable terms of payment and by means left entirely up to our own devising. The army received huge payments during the entire Soviet occupation, and the method of adapting an ideology to prey on the marginalized, poor, downtrodden and persecuted is a creation of Pakistani operational needs. This was not the only way to win that war, but we chose it wholeheartedly and kept at it many, many years after the war ended. The Americans are notoriously shortsighted, and the patchwork of American military bases and precarious diplomatic ties in every region shows just how much vision (or lack thereof) they exercise in conflict zones. However, our problems at this juncture, the growing polarization between rural and urban areas, the spread of jihadist, sectarian and extremist organizations across the country, and the lack of any social discourse on a contrary national ideology to fundamentalism, are entirely of our own making.

We need to accept that whatever the US does, its job has always been to supports its people’s global interests, not holding our hand and nursing us out of sickness; as a sovereign nation ourselves, if anyone we have been remiss in putting the priorities of Pakistan above the requirements of other countries, and it is our leaders who are to blame. It is us, the privileged, English speaking, big spending elite that has let this country down by being uncaring, un-patriotic spectators of a grand Tamasha. We are complicit in the looting of our national resources over the last 60 years because not once have we exerted influence or tried to be heard, mainly because we have benefited quite well from the injustice. The economics of neglect and apathy has been exceptionally generous to the rich in Pakistan, and that is why we find ourselves here today; in 4 provinces, those with means see a different, modern, progressive Pakistan, while the majority of our countrymen’s lives are so miserable that they can only see the world of salvation or death. We failed them by not demanding that they be fed, clothed and educated as is their right, we never gave them a chance to escape the dark specter of poverty as it snatched away children, tore apart families, shot up neighborhoods and reduced hundreds of thousands to starvation. These are the sins we pay for today, so please Pakistanis, don’t simply blame America. If you need someone to hate, look in the mirror. We have slipped and fallen, our halo is gone, our face is wrinkled and our skin is decaying; we can no longer cling to the names of Iqbal and Jinnah like talismans, hoping their spirit will guide us through the dark. We need to act now to save Pakistan from becoming a polarized, fractious, ethnic hodge-podge of a country, where our cities have curfews and rampant violence, and our villages grow terror and hatred rather than wheat and maize. If we are to live and prosper, we must act now; else we must recognize that tomorrow may never be the same again.

Pakistan Crisis: the Military, Politics, and Role of the USA Pt. 2

Judgement Day for the Pure, PART II
by G, the Legend

Politics: The security situation of the country is better known to insiders, this is simply a summary of speculation and analysis available in the world media and on your local TV channels. The real inside story may yet be far too real for us to handle. This is probably why most elected leaders have chosen this critical time to remain silent and meditate on what to buy with their recently increases salaries.

o It is an indictment of our political leaders that the passing of the Peace Accord / Surrender Agreement in Swat was done with a unanimous vote and without disagreement, with almost all major political parties on board. To give credit where it’s due, the only party that actually staged a walkout and has been on the case of this peace deal from the very beginning has been the MQM. This is while the ANP continues to extol the virtues of ‘peacemaking’ in spectacularly shortsighted fashion, while the PPP dishes out its daily dose of inane, nonsensical statements and political gaffes. The PML-N has done absolutely nothing to oppose this deal, and despite riding back to power on the coattails of the ‘people’, it seems content to wait around in the Punjab till this whole thing blows over. Maybe they’re planning to make Lahore the capital once the Taliban take over Islamabad, who knows; for now, I think its about time for Nawaz Sharif to make use of the immense political leverage he can gain in the West by coming out against the militants. Some recent anti-Taliban statements suggest that he may be positioning himself to the US as a better qualified, better supported and more legitimate leader for the country. Whether this plan works or not depends entirely on how bad Zardari lets things get, and how fast.

o What does Zardari really want? When I discussed the military’s thought process above, it was under the assumption that the PPP government was for a resolution of the Swat situation under peaceful means. Whether this is true or not is also another aspect up for debate. The PPP historically went into Karachi, its own city, with all guns blazing to cleanse it from the ethnic violence of the 90s, yet now it balks at the concept of establishing the writ of the government and prioritizing national security over shortsighted ‘peace’. Maybe I’m just cynical, but more talking and less shooting just doesn’t strike me as their administrative style. I guess the real question is who is really in charge? Are Zardari’s hands tied by the military, is he calling the shots or are both colluding to keep the Americans spinning? We won’t know for many years till its all over, and I can’t speculate any more based on my information than I already have; but if one thing is for certain, inaction, incompetence and insincerity on behalf of the incumbent government is a great part of why we are here today.

Pakistan Crisis: the Military, Politics, and Role of the USA Pt. I

Hey all, not sure sure if you've been following the situation in Pakistan (it's the big country sharing borders with Afghanistan, India, and Iran), but since the civilian government took power not long ago, instability has been on the rise. Taliban militants have gotten close to the capital, and this is worrisome not only to the global community, but to the people of Pakistan. Remember that this is a country with a nuclear arsenal, so the resolution of this crisis is of utmost importance. I will dedicate the next three entries to addressing this issue. Here is the first part of an essay by a friend of a friend:

Judgement Day for the Pure
by G, the Legend

As of today, the Swat Taliban have expanded the territory under their influence from North & South Waziristan, Bajaur and Swat to the adjacent district of Buner, and have made clear their intentions of continuing to push towards Mardan, Shangla and onwards. Wherever they go they bring with them their brand of hardcore ideology, a perversion if Islamic beliefs that reflect nothing but the bare essentials needed to subvert the local populace and wield power with an iron fist.

The Pakistani Taliban are different from the Afghan Taliban in the respect that these fighters have no need to justify their existence by relying on an ideological position, such as the expulsion of US & NATO forces from Afghanistan on religious grounds; rather they are simply opportunists taking advantage of a socio-economic meltdown and gross government mismanagement to make as many gains as they can before consolidating their position. All they are really doing is making use of the disenchantment of the poor by offering them money and weapons to take on the status quo. They are preaching ‘empowerment’ and ‘virtue’ derived through the barrel of a gun, and they are taking areas under their control to a system of anarchy, barbarism and ignorance, matched only by the 7 years of Taliban rule in Afghanistan. Can we afford to let wide swathes of our land be occupied and governed by terrorist organizations that would rather enslave or kill us than enter the political mainstream? Will we let our next generation be brainwashed into becoming the tools of hate-mongers and extremists? These questions need to be answered with facts, not conjecture, rhetoric or bombast, as our nation to know the truth. If you feel the need to be informed, search no further, just read on:

Wait, Global Terrorist State, What!! How on Earth Did We Get Here?

Many Pakistanis who left the country in the last decade would be surprised to see just how far we have fallen in so short a time. Under the heavy cover of Musharraf’s 10 years in office, the Pakistani people rarely knew what deals were struck with militant groups in the North in exchange for peace or what resources were shared with the Americans in exchange for a free flow of easy money into our system. With civilians in power our policy making has been exposed as shortsighted in the least and a shambles at best. We pretend we can sign ‘peace’ agreements with terrorists who strike at the hearts of our cities, attacking innocent civilians, infrastructure and security installations with gusto and proudly taking responsibility for their actions. Our military and intelligence establishment thinks it can play both sides, funding and propping up militant leaders who have been useful in the past as well as trying to sell the idea to the Americans that we have accepted the idea of ‘Pakistan’s War’. Truly, sieving truth from all the garbled information is difficult, but it’s always good to start with what we know:

* Military: Despite the end of the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan over 2 decades ago, the Pakistan army has continued to fund militant groups both in Pakistan and along the border areas of Balochistan and Afghanistan. Part of this policy is a legacy issue from the Zia regime, but today there are known links of the Pakistan Army to militant groups like those run by Mullah (Col.) Nazir on the Pak-Afghan border, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar along the Baloch-Afghan border and Jalaluddin Haqqani in the area close to disputed Kashmir. These groups have served Pakistan’s security interests in the past by taking on the armed struggle for liberation in Kashmir, reducing India’s influence in Afghanistan to prevent the opening of ‘two fronts’ in the event of a conflict, and working with the army against even more dangerous groups like Baitullah Mehsud’s network of Taliban that is decidedly anti-government. They have been on our payroll for decades, and the big question is whether the army has the will to take the tough decisions Pakistan finds itself faced with. The return of Pakistan to democratic rule (not democracy by far) has seen a complete turnaround in public statements and the PR policy of the Pakistan government. Whatever the government’s actions, under Musharraf we had a fixed public position on terrorism:

o Pakistan doesn’t fund or support any kind of militants or terrorist groups
o All Taliban are foreigners and have no indigenous support
o Differentiate between Pakistani tribal militant groups who fight for economic gain and self interest, and fundamentalist Jihadi/Terrorist groups like Al Qaeda
o Osama bin Laden is NOT in Pakistan
o The military and civilian government is in complete agreement and unity over the fact that Pakistanis are FOR Peace, Democracy and ‘Enlightened Moderation’

As a result of this unified policy, the Republicans were kind enough to fund our nation’s economy for a good 7 years before the global economic collapse. Under civilian government, our arguments radically changed, becoming akin to a daily airing of years of dirty laundry:

*
o Taliban are Pakistanis, extremists are Pakistanis, and so the army can’t fight ‘its own people’. Ironic?
o ‘Rogue’ elements of the ISI exist not under Pakistani government control (who can apparently carry off attacks on Mumbai hotels and embassies in Kabul)
o The Pakistan army ‘surrendered’ and ‘lost’ to 6,000-8,000 militants in Swat, forcing our hand on the peace deal
o ‘Osama is our muslim brother and is welcome in our areas anytime’ (a widely reported quote from the Swat Taliban spokesperson)

This is a startling change in our public discourse. Where once we battled Uzbek, Tajik, Arab and Chechnyan Taliban on our borders, less than a year later it seems they are all made up of Pakistani militant leaders who are better established in those areas than our own army. Did all of this happen magically while we weren’t looking? On one hand, while these revelations show the incompetence of the incumbent government in handling national security matters in the media, it is also a reflection of how populist politics results in shortsighted and ultimately costly decisions for Pakistan. I don’t believe for a second that our army can’t totally eradicate the Pakistani Taliban if it wanted to…after all, these are the same militant leaders that have been funded and nurtured by our security establishment for over 20 years. It is a known fact that these organizations count amongst their numbers several former army personnel. If we don’t have the ability to carry out an operation on our own territory, 60 miles from the capital city, then I’m assuming we just bought our nukes right off a shelf in Beijing. It is obvious governments cannot be telling the truth, and that such a huge change cannot happen in less than a year. As to what it does mean, I boil it down to three options, as follows:

* The Pakistan Army does not have the will to fight Pakistani Taliban groups, because:
o It is waiting for its security concerns to be recognized by the West, and assurances/arrangements be made to protect Pakistan before turning on the Pakistani Taliban support network, OR

o It is creating a situation where the US views a civilian government as a liability, and is more than happy to accept a military ruler as state head as long as the job gets done, OR

o This last one is the scariest: It could just be that the military cannot make up its mind. 20 years and many ideologues later, perhaps building the support within the nation’s security and intelligence establishment to take on groups viewed for some time as a virtual extension of Pakistan’s last resort security policy isn’t as easy as giving out orders. An internal split between our national interests and the ulterior motives of select security personnel/agencies represents the gravest danger to our nation imaginable. Why? Because it means we can’t trust the army, the Americans can’t trust us, and then the line between Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq begins to go even blurrier in the minds of the foreign geo-strategist. If, at any point, the world begins to actually listen to the Indian argument (let us send Indian troops to Taliban areas with your blessing, we’ll ‘secure’ everything), it could be the end of an entire nation.

Wondering Where Your Democracy Went?

When President Reagan gave his famous "City on a Hill" speech, he declared the United States the pinnacle of civilization--the city...on the hill. But when John Winthrop said those words he was talking about an America that ought to be. Not that is. Perhaps it is too hasty to assume that we have reached this ideal.

To the wide-eyed masses: you did not choose Barack Obama as president. To those who believe in the potential of liberty and democracy: your country has forsaken its highest ideals. In an age where the issues are not discussed and the candidates are interchangeable photogenics, you must question what it is you should be doing here. In this country. As a citizen.

In the election of 2008, this facade went on before our very eyes. Ron Paul raised over $6 million in a single day--the most of any candidate; he had millions of supporters and was leading a sort of movement. But he was, for some reason excluded from the later and more important debates. This was the sole Republican with truly unique views--and more conservative ones at that. He suggested to the people that U.S. imperialism is the cause of the terror--not our values and "freedom." Dennis Kucinich, a Democrat, ran on a platform of peace. Mike Gravel ran to end U.S. militarization and establish a direct democracy. All were left out of the later debates.


Perhaps these candidates simply did not register enough votes in the early primaries, and were rightfully asked not to return. Maybe the media did its job. For the people. But then you look at who we ended up with. Hillary vs. Obama--two candidates with identical policy platforms. Debating. What I am saying is that maybe, just maybe there is something larger at work. Not a conspiracy, but a system rather. A system that has developed over the years and fuels a sham of a democracy. Corporate media, corporate candidates. There are powerful interests at stake and a lot of profits to be made. Be wary.

"The genius of our ruling class is that it has kept a majority of the people from ever questioning the inequity of a system where most people drudge along, paying heavy taxes for which they get nothing in return." - Gore Vidal

Important Vids: Obama and Economy

Sorry I've been away... this week has been hell. Please watch these videos on Obama and the economy... they are unique from all the other news I have seen, and frame all the goings on in a very interesting way.

Please share your thoughts. PS: None of these are actually as long as it says because there is a 3-4 commercial at the end of each. Enjoy.

Obama is a "liberal wolf in centrist clothing"?:







On ECONOMIC CRISIS:

WTF?? Part 1: The Crimes of Israel... can you even imagine?

Welcome to Part 1 of a new Israel-Palestine segment I call "WTF??"... The point is to try and be more responsible citizens of the world by understanding what is really going on in the region.

As I prepare for a major post on the situation, I just want to show you some of the atrocities that have been going on.  

Have you ever heard of white phosphorous?   Well it's a nasty chemical weapon that is dispersed via smoke screen, and incinerates anyone who gets caught in its way... and no, kids aren't immune.

Politics aside for now... I want you to watch these videos and try to appreciate the human side of this conflict.  If you have any thoughts, please share.

Goodbye Señor Bush, Hello Ambiguous Future

As an eleven year old, I wasn't much into politics. I had a faint grasp that Clinton got into trouble over something with a lady (not his wife), that we had bombed someplace far away (which my family watched on the news... in night vision), and that Bush beat Gore after some confusion in Florida. Yes, George W. Bush claimed the presidency before I became politically aware; and for millions of young Americans like myself, this is truly significant.

Tomorrow we say goodbye to the man who played a crucial role in shaping the views of so many in this country. After 9/11, I remember the leadership the President showed... I remember how much support he had. Bush was confident and on message-- he assumed the role of valiant leader during a time when so many were confused and afraid... including myself.

W. told me to stand with the country. He assured me that this great nation would prevail and defeat evil. I believed and defended him for many years. But George Bush did not teach me how to be a patriot-- he did not teach me the inspirational power of our ideals. Instead, he showed me that in times of terror, we must fear and act with that fear in our hearts. No, Bush will never be known as the man who reassured us, once again, that "the only thing we have to fear, is fear itself--nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror..."

George Bush, along with nearly every member of the Congress, taught me that the United States could do whatever it wanted. That our government is free to spy on Americans. To torture. I was duped, and became cynical. Bush's words brought American arrogance to center stage, and his blunt style made this country a laughing-stock. He is an embarrassment to liberty and to the Republic... forever a stain on the American tale.

But in this final night of his presidency, perhaps it is time to put a hold on the character assassination; perhaps a moment of self-reflection is in order. Let's start with a question: Who is truly responsible for the last 8 years? The blame-game is fun, but not so much in a democracy-- for in a democracy, the people get the government they deserve.

It was ultimately American apathy, disillusionment, and ignorance that brought us Bush. Our inability to understand clear threats to the democratic fabric, and unwillingness to demand the best possible representatives has put us in a truly unfortunate position--one where the very essence of our ideals are slipping away.

But perhaps we are beginning to wake up... Obama did win an astonishing victory. He seems too good to be true, and maybe there is more truth to this statement than people would like to admit. Americans have, at the very least, denounced the ways of the Bush Administration, which is a start. But the complicit Democrats have escaped the wrath of voters, and will one day have to be reckoned with.

It is clear that Americans are ready for a new day, and tomorrow the next chapter of our story begins. The new President must help lead us out of the darkness that we have brought upon ourselves, but as he has said time and time again: this movement is about what we can do ourselves. President Bush is no more responsible for the economic crisis than a weatherman is for the weather, and a President Obama will not be able to fix the world. We must demand receptive and honest lawmakers. We must fight for reform and for our vital causes. We must rethink what place corporate America has in government, and what place America has in this world. And, indeed, we must develop the tools of the Internet so that we may enter an age of unprecedented civilian involvement in government.

President-elect Obama has taken serious strides, but America must be wary. Simply electing new people will not be enough. The restoration of responsible citizenship is the only way for us to survive.

With optimism and resolve.

Obama Must Lead the Fight on Climate Change

I've noticed that there has been very little coverage of climate change on the SkyeWire, which is odd because it is certainly the most significant impending disaster that the world faces--and we are not doing enough to stop it. There is a lot of talk about governments, politics and social issues on here, but I want to bring to light the climate issue with a somewhat disheartening article from the Guardian, which showcases a very interesting study.

The survey, "supported by groups including the World Bank, the United Nations Environment Programme and the Pew Centre for Global Climate Change, questioned 1,000 senior figures across governments, pressure groups and companies in 115 countries over the last few weeks." The results conclude that climate experts have lost a significant amount of faith in the effectiveness of alternative energy sources against climate change.

One answer to this perplexing dilemma: "As the climate crisis deepens they could be becoming less optimistic that individual technologies may be able to solve the problem" (Eric Whan). 44% of respondents also agreed that the economic crisis will significantly set back efforts to act on climate change.

The world is in agreement that something must be done--for the lives of a billion hang in the balance--but in this time of confusion, Barack Obama must set an ambitious path towards completely sustainable society, while also addressing the drastic economic situation--in fact, he ought to set the framework for a plan that will help solve both.

We need his charisma and his wit to not only lead the United States, but to bring all powerful nations into the fold for the "green" economy of the future. I am talking about a Green Revolution led by the United States and executed by the global economy. Scientists are losing hope ... it may already be too late according to many ... but we must not wait for the final proof ... we must change the way we live now, so that we may live another day.

Yes we must. Yes we can.

How to Break a Terrorist

I just watched a good interview on the Daily Show with a guy named Matthew Alexander who wrote the book "How to Break a Terrorist." This guy was an interrogator for the U.S. military and has been a part of hundreds of hundreds of interrogations, but now he is speaking out against the torture techniques.

Basically, he is saying that the best way to extract information from a prisoner is not to demonize them--by treating them like animals and putting them in pain (both psychological and physical)--but to understand them. Alexander is advocating that by coming to terms with insurgents, you can work to establish an agreement with the goal of helping Iraq in the best way possible.

In fact, he explains that the insurgents aren't ideologues like Al Qaeda; they are mostly regular people who fight for community or for money--suggesting that they would be much more than willing to cooperate if you build a bond of trust.

Alexander says that these methods are proven in many interrogations, but that the Department of Defense does not wish to concede that point--going as far as trying to stop the book from being published. He says to Jon Stewart: "I never saw coercive methods pay off..."--but rather rapport building and relationships yielded the results.

I think it's time that we find a better way. Isn't it obvious? We as a civilization are more advanced than any that has preceded us. Of course there is another way. We know what is right, so let's just do it.

Here is the interview:

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM - Th 11p / 10c

Matthew Alexander

Barack Obama Interview
John McCain Interview

Sarah Palin Video
Funny Election Video

The Military-Industrial Complex: It's Real

The "Military-Industrial Complex". It characterizes one of the most influential (and terrifying) undercurrents of power in the United States government, and conceptualizes the fusion of government and military business. The term, immortalized by President Eisenhower in his farewell address, refers to the dangerous relationship between government and "for-profit" business, which fuels "for-profit" conflicts and wars. And what a perfect example we have in front of us!

On the Iraq war, author and journalist Naomi Klein said on Democracy NOW:

And one of the things that I think is most important for progressives to challenge is the discourse that everything in Iraq is a disaster. I think we need to start asking and insisting, disaster for who [?], because not everybody is losing. It’s certainly a disaster for the Iraqi people. It’s certainly a disaster for US taxpayers. But what we have seen—and it’s extremely clear if we track the numbers—is that the worse things get in Iraq, the more privatized this war becomes, the more profitable this war becomes for companies like Lockheed Martin, Bechtel, and certainly Blackwater. There is a steady mission creep in Iraq, where the more countries pull out, the more contractors move in...

Do you know how many American troops are currently stationed in Iraq? Answer: 160,000

Do you know how many Blackwater-soldiers-for-hire (aka mercenaries...not all BW) there are in Iraq? Answer: 180,000 (highlight to see answer... so you can guess) ...source.

And guess how many Blackwater mercenaries have been prosecuted for crimes in Iraq? Answer: 0!

Moral implications aside (like how the war has cost probably over 1 million Iraqi lives), let's try to bring this back to the economy. Francis Ferguson, phD economist, explains his view:

As the US slides into recession, economists wonder why the massive government spending on Afghanistan and Iraq provides so little economic stimulus. World War Two brought an immediate end to the Great Depression, yet a current $600 billion dollar defense budget (not counting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan) does little to stop the emerging recession. Part of the minimal effect results from the fact that we were already spending well over $300 billion on the military prior to 9/11, whereas the US defense budget was trivial prior to the beginning of World War II. The other reason for the minimal economic stimulus lies in the fact that so much of the expenditure goes to fund wages and corruption in Iraq and Afghanistan, and so much flows as excess profits to American corporations rather than into the pockets of American workers who would have a greater tendency to spend those earnings here. Finally, even the portion of war spending that does flow to American workers has, today, a very high probability of being used to buy imported consumer goods, providing stimulus, ironically, to our friends the Chinese—the very people who fund our wars (but that's another story).

So why do I bring this up today? Well it's still quite relevant, and I think people should be concerned about it and the effects upon the country and world. But the New York Times actually brought me back to this important issue in their 11/29 article entitled "One Man’s Military-Industrial-Media Complex"--which places special emphasis on the media's role is fueling the MIC. It's long, but important... please read. Thanks.

Change.gov: Your Administration?

I know that I just posted something new, but something ELSE has just come up that ties in very nicely to what I was saying!

My post-election theme is grassroots organization and how important it is that we form a progressive coalition for true change.  Well, there is already a massive coalition in place--that being the Barack Obama campaign.  What I have just seen is change.gov-- a President-elect Obama site dedicated to citizen involvement and transparency on the transition.  This is extremely promising.

Here are some of the site's objectives:

• up-to-the-minute updates and information about all aspects of the transition
  
• offers an opportunity to be heard about the challenges our country faces and your ideas for tackling them
  
• people united around a common purpose can achieve great things
  
• innovative approaches to challenge the status quo in Washington and to bring about the kind of change America needs
  
• The story of bringing this country together as a healed and united nation will be led by President-Elect Obama, but written by you

The potential this has to truly change the face of democracy is staggering... I'm very excited.  We must keep a careful eye on this form of communication, and see how it develops.  Could this be the end of government secrecy?  Will this be the medium for progressives to push our vital agendas?  Will this be a way for the people to overpower the lobbyists and corporate power-hold on government?  Is this the next revolutionary step to create our perfect union?

We shall see.  The SkyeWire is on the case.

No Takers? Well, I was on C-SPAN

Since there doesn't seem to be much interest in the questions posed in my previous post, I suppose I will move on, but I thought I'd show you my little spot on CSPAN from last week (below).  You see, this  important Ambassador came to Denison (my school), and spoke about the recent 6-party talks with North Korea (Christopher Hill--the leading diplomat to the Republic of Korea).  He said that much progress has been made--just this month, the North Koreans have agreed to replace the nuclear seals and continue the dismantling of their nuclear facilities.  

His talk gave me more optimism in our diplomatic skills--Hill spoke not as a politician, but as someone who has invested himself into the success of these talks.  To further this idea, I asked his what it meant to be and "enemy" of this country.  He begins his answer with "I think I know what you're getting at"--and I believe that was his way of acknowledging the "Axis of Evil" rhetoric that does not seem to help diplomatic efforts.

My hope was to get a little conversation started on the topic of enemies and evil before showing you the video... but perhaps Hill's response to my question will spark some critical thinking.  I'm working on cutting the clip onto YouTube, but for now you can see it here... just skip to the 33:34 timecode, and ignore my stuttering.