WHY I'M VOTING FOR BARACK OBAMA

In the early days/weeks/months of this primary season, I often said that either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama would be good presidents, and I would vote for whichever one won the nomination. While this is still true, my opinion of Mrs. Clinton has gone way downhill as a result of the campaign she has waged. In her zeal to be the nominee (and ultimately, the President) Mrs. Clinton has increasingly waged a dirty campaign against Mr. Obama, most recently painting him as an elitist and no friend of the fabled white, blue-collar working class of America. Big Dog Bill has shown on the campaign trail what a jerk he really is, and Hillary's use of innuendo to malign and undermine Mr. Obama and his wife is striking in its nastiness. How ironic that these now upper-class multi-millionaires can get by as working class posers.

There has always been something about Hillary that has bothered me (no, it's not latent sexism on my part), which has been difficult for me to put a finger on. I think it is her political ambition which, based on the campaign she's waged, seems to have no bounds and appears to be more important than the good of the country. Clinton and Obama are both politicians, of course, and each is driven by ambition. But in a recent column, Joe Conason made a statement that had me enthusiastically nodding my head in agreement: "The historic prize [a black president] is almost within the grasp of one of the most talented politicians America has ever seen." I tend to see Hillary Clinton as an old-style politician, and I dread another Clinton administration - yes, including having Bill in the White House again as First Husband and Meddler-in-Chief.

Barack Obama is from a younger generation, and I believe he has a very different political and world view than Hillary Clinton. Is he a miracle worker? No. Anyone who gets the job can only do as much as the system will allow him or her to do. But I'm willing to give Obama a chance, and hope that he will be able to move this country forward. I'm convinced that another Clinton presidency will only be more of the same old business-as-usual.

Obama's speech on racism, by the way, was for me one of the most important political speeches in our nation's history. If you've only heard the sound bytes, you're doing yourself a great disservice, and you should find the speech in its entirity on You Tube and watch it. Obama wrote the speech, and felt that it was important enough to say, no matter what his "handlers" urged. This is the kind of person I want as president. Obama is a person who does not run away from and try to cover up controversy; he has repeatedly addressed it head-on and honestly.

The New York Times columnist Frank Rich has a very important must-read column about race in politics this season. He clearly points out the free pass given to John McCain by the press by which the men of faith tied to the presumptive Republican nominee get no air time, while the Rev. Jeremiah Wright is the focus of a media blitz. The Revs. Hagee, Falwell and Robertson, all with ties to McCain, have made outrageous public pronouncements about such things as the reasons for 9/11 (to punish abortionists, feminists, gays and A.C.L.U. lawyers) and Hurricane Katrina (god punishing New Orleans for its sins, specifically a planned gay rights parade), and bashing the Roman Church as "the Great Whore" that drinks Jewish blood. But this double standard, Rich points out, goes beyond the media to the Republican Party itself that has not a single African-American among its 247 elected senators and representatives.

Rich points out that the U.S. Census Bureau data shows that white people will be a minority in the U.S.A. within three or four decades, the result of a surging Latino population. I think that this is the subliminal fear within the white working class that the Clintons are trying to tap in to, using "elitism" as a code word for racism.

Barack Obama, in my opinion, is our best hope, if there is any, for rescuing America. The eight years of Cheney-Bush have wrought tremendous harm to America internally and world-wide (read the excellent column by Tom Friedman in todays NY Times about the decline of America). By taking on racism openly and bluntly, Obama has demonstrated what kind of leader he will be - and we in the U.S.A. are in desperate need of leadership in a very different world than the political world view of the Clintons.

It's unfortunate, in a way, that the Democratic Party nomination process has gone on so long with no apparent winner. The real battle has not yet begun - McCain vs. Whoever - which is a proxy for regression vs. progress. The United States is a post-industrial nation in a world becoming increasing dominated by new powers (China, India, Brazil, Venezuela - to name a few) that we have too long ignored. Barack Obama is the only candidate left standing who has the world view, balanced thinking, intellect and understanding of reality to change the course of this country in an attempt to keep us relevant in a new world.

[note to readers: unfortunately, my links to New York Times columns won't open for you unless you have an account with the Times - sorry about that]

I WRITE AND THE WORLD READS

I use a web tracker (StatCounter) to monitor the traffic on my blog. This is a lot of fun, particularly since they added a Google Map feature that shows the location of the internet service provider from which each hit originates, along with a whole bunch of statistics and information about each hit.

Here's the map showing the origins of recent traffic. Wow - even India! I've had hits from Europe, South America, and Asia (including China, so I must not be too out there for the Chinese internet censors). I even had one that appeared on the map as a point in the ocean off the west coast of Africa, near the equator, and there was very little information about this particular hit - hmmm, maybe a U.S. spy ship checking up on me?

The stats include the duration of each hit - and unfortunately, some of the more exotic ones had a duration of 0 seconds, which means they didn't stop long enough to read anything. I did have a recent hit, however, with a duration of over 14 hours! Must have either read everything I've ever written, or just left the computer on my blog all night.

Anyway, I can delude myself into thinking that I have a world-wide audience for this blog.

IS JOHN McCAIN THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE?

The Manchurian Candidate movie, originally released in 1962, was about a former Korean War POW who was brainwashed by Communists (Chinese) into becoming a political assassin. (If you haven't seen this film, with an all-star cast, it's worth renting.)

The more I watch John McCain on the campaign trail, the more puzzled I am by his behaviors and ideas. There's something strange about this guy, from the way he calls everyone "my friends," to his often trance-like affect, to the truly bizarre things he says that have little or no relation to reality (example: his comments while in Iraq recently about the relationship between Iran and Iraq - Joe Lieberman (Joe Lieberman!!) had to correct him).

I'm not trying to impugn McCain's reputation as a war hero, but he was a POW, and he was subjected to torture. Might his tormentors have implanted subliminal codes into his brain that would lead to his becoming an assassin of politics in America? Certainly G.W. Bush has done significant damage already to American politics, not to mention our Constitution and many laws and treaties. But now we see "the presumptive Republican Party nominee" cozying up to Dubya, embracing the Bush invasion and occupation of Iraq, the Bush doctrine of foreign policy, supply-side economics, and etc. In other words, we ain't done yet, if this Candidate gets elected.

Keep an eye on this guy as the campaign clicks into high gear following the Republican and Democratic conventions. Watch for that glazed look, the robot-like speech, the strange pronouncements. Is his "handler" nearby? Is Mrs. McC a Stepford Wife, or a secret agent carrying the magic code word that will set him off?

Stay tuned.

PRESIDENT JIMMY CARTER AND HAMAS

A lot of ink and electrons have been spent on President Jimmy Carter's recent meetings with Hamas leaders and the President of Syria. Although his efforts appear to have been in vain, I support Carter's effort for a number of reasons.

First - let me set some givens about some things:
1. Hamas is an organization labeled as "terrorist" by most of the world; I prefer not to use that loaded term, but instead to refer to Hamas as a criminal organization that plans and carries out international crimes (mostly in Israel) including murder of civilians
2. Hamas was put into power in the Gaza by a democratic election
3. the focus of this post is Carter and Hamas, not Israel

Carter pissed off the Israeli and U.S. governments by meeting with Hamas because neither government will talk with terrorists, and certainly not a terrorist group that refuses to recognize the legitimacy of Israel. Carters point, and one that I have made on this blog, is that a refusal to talk to your enemy means that peaceful change is not possible. Standard U.S. foreign policy under the Bush Administration for dealing with governments they don't like is to call them names (i.e. "Axis of Evil") and not talk to them (and one one occasion, invade and occupy them). Carter looked for an opening and tried to make some headway.

Did the meetings with President Carter give Hamas "legitimacy," as widely claimed by the press and certain government spokespersons? No. Their election to power by the people in Gaza gave Hamas legitimacy. The meetings with Carter did not change any one's view of Hamas; those who support Hamas as "freedom fighters" still see them that way, while those who consider them to be terrorists or criminals also have not changed their view. If anything, the actions and statements of Hamas immediately following the Carter meetings - more attacks and hate statements against Israel - clearly underscore the nature of the beast.

What if Carter had had some success, such as some movement towards continued talks, a cease-fire, the release of the captive Israeli soldier? Would Carter's mission have been so roundly criticized then? The probability of success was certainly extremely low, given the fanaticism and bellicosity of the Hamas leadership. But trying, in my view - and Carter's - is certainly better than not.

What I've never understood about Hamas is why the Palestinian people support their criminal actions against Israel. Israel will never be "driven into the sea" and the Middle East will never be the same as it was before the 1940's. This is fact. Wouldn't people rather find a way to coexist with their neighbor, build a Palestinian nation and economy, increase their safety, security and standard of living than be in a perpetual no-win struggle? World opinion, and opinion within Israel itself favor a two-state resolution of this 60 year conflict. There are a few difficult issues to resolve, but intelligent and willing people will find the way.

The railing against Jimmy Carter for trying to pursue peace in the Middle East is misplaced. Bush and Company ignored Israel-Palestine for seven years. Hamas (and other criminal fanatical organizations) has continued to provoke with daily rocket launches into Israel and attacks at the border and elsewhere. Israel has shown remarkable patience on the one hand, and occasionally, perhaps, too much force on the other. (I'm not overly critical of Israel on this; after all, if a group a couple of miles from my neighborhood started launching rockets and mortars towards me, I would demand a seek-and-destroy mission by my government immediately. Israel has put up with this for years.)


I appreciate the efforts by Jimmy Carter to find some path towards peace in the Middle East. While I'm not hopeful of success, I think engagement is the better policy.

EARTH DAY 2008

(written on April 22, 2008)
Thirty-eight years ago today, Sherry and I were the co-chairpersons of the committee for the first Earth Day at University of California, Irvine. At this moment, we're at about 30,000 feet above the planet, flying (in an airplane, of course) to Los Angeles for a visit with friends and family in L.A., Orange County, and San Diego. This will be a trip of memories as we visit people and places some of which we haven't seen in 30 years.

My memories of the first Earth Day are faded, but some images and conversations remain. I remember the feelings of excitement and importance we felt as we brainstormed what to do, what topics to highlight, what speakers to invite. Some of the topics I remember were trash and recycling, autos and mass transit, development and sprawl, and air pollution and human health. We built a huge human figure out of trash, and had a press conference at the County dump. It was a great event.

But I also remember some of the contradictions very clearly. I was a graduate student in ecology, and had a difficult time getting even a few of the ecology faculty interested in Earth Day. The Dean finally agreed to partially fund the event if an artist friend of his would be allowed to sell cast metal "earth symbol" pendents he had designed. The V.P. of the Irvine Ranch Company, just beginning their huge urban development projects, when asked why they were designing new communities around the automobile instead of mass transit, said that they would only build in mass transit if people wanted it, and people didn't want it. And the staff person at the American Lung Association, following a meeting where we put together our program elements about automobiles, air pollutants, and public health, confided to me that this all sounded great, but he would never stop driving his car because it defined his image. I remember that by the end of Earth Day I was feeling quite disheartened.

So here we are on Earth Day almost 4 decades later, and I'm wondering if much has changed. Certainly there have been changes in both laws and attitudes. But, as I've written here previously, most new American cars get the same or worse gas mileage than the car we were driving in 1970. Global warming is finally a recognized issue - even George Bush has a hard time denying it now - but our government is having to be dragged along, almost reluctantly, instead of leading. Urban sprawl continues unabated in most of our cities, big box stores are more plentiful, and so on.

The most progress towards a sustainable world, in regards to humans, is seen on three main fronts: individuals, local governments, and an increasing number of businesses, including major corporations. These are good signs, and hopefully this is a groundswell that will change society.

So Happy Birthday Earth Day - 38 years young.

(postscript: As we flew into L.A., the brown layer of smog enveloped the plane and obscured our vision of the landscape. My wife's asthma kicked in immediately. )

DEAR PEOPLE OF INDIA AND CHINA: YOU DON'T WANT TO BE LIKE US

At the risk of being self-aggrandizing, I think it is true that people in the developing nations want to be like Americans in many ways. They aspire to live like we do, in large houses, with as many cars, trucks and SUVs as we want, and with all the electronic gear we can accumulate. The only problem with this is that the planet probably can't support it.

Now before you get on your high horse and accuse me of some form of elitism, what I mean is that we Americans have created a life style that is selfish, ignorant and non-sustainable.

A few facts from an article in today's New York Times:

• the U.S. burns about one quarter of the oil used in the world
• fleet wide standards, in miles per gallon, for new motor vehicles for several nations:
• Japan 46.0
• European Union 43.0
• China 36.0
• U.S. cars 27.5
• U.S. light trucks 22.2
• Average miles per vehicle driven annually:
• Japan 7,097
• European Union 7,829
• U.S. 12,427
• For every 1 American who bicycles to work, 5 walk to work, 9 use public transit, 154 drive to work alone, 21 ride in car pools
• oil consumption increase (+) or decrease (-) since 1980, as percent:
• U.S. +21
• Japan +2
• Italy -13
• Finland -14
• France -14
• Switzerland -18
• Germany -20
• Sweden -32
• Denmark -33

In the United States, governmental policy rewards oil and coal production and discourages alternative energy development (U.S. spending on energy research has decreased by half since 1979, while spending on military research has more than doubled, and is about 20 times what we spend on energy research).

Changing light bulbs (to compact fluorescent) and driving Prius cars are good things, but they don't address the real issues that will be the major issues for our children and grandchildren. We in America live in an automobile culture - our cities are designed around the automobile, our consumer activities mostly demand an automobile, and the oil/auto/highway lobby primarily drives government policies that affect these industries.

We generally live far from where we work. We have very few transportation options outside of our cities - passenger trains in America are a joke, with the exception perhaps of the East Coast commuter corridor. Big box stores and shopping centers are the norm, and are typically located out on the highway. We pay a ridiculously low amount of money for gasoline, compared to the rest of the world, and complain bitterly when the price increases.

There are some positive moves, mostly on the local level such as Portland, Oregon and other cities, where light rail, green buildings, and sustainability programs are on the rise. These are good signs, but I believe that a much more fundamental change is needed. As individuals, we can live more sustainably, but our government needs to undergo drastic change before our impact on the world, as a nation, is more in line with the needs of the planet.

And so to our friends in India, China and other developing nations, please do look at the American life style as you contemplate your futures, but look at it with a critical eye. You can do better than we have.

ANALYSTS PREDICT STOCK MARKET SURGE FOR END OF WEEK

Numerous market analysts have predicted a week-ending surge in the U.S. stock market, allaying fears that the surge seen building all week in certain European markets would pass over the United States. "We've been seeing signs of this surge building all week" an analyst at the former Bear Stein said. The strongest portion is in the Kosher, organic and free-range sectors of the chicken stock market as members of the Jewish faith prepare for the first night of the Passover holiday on Saturday. Industry spokespersons attribute the stock market increase to the huge pots of chicken soup - with matzo balls, of course - bubbling on stove tops across America. All stock market analysts agree that this surge is good for the economy, good for the soul, and, of course, good for the common cold!

SPROING!!!

It started yesterday at 6:32AM. I heard it over the hissing sound of my morning shower. It woke my wife from her sleep. When I looked out the east window, there it was, a glowing orange orb above the horizon of Mt. Tabor, rising in a sky that was - how can I describe it - blue! I heard it again when I stepped out to get the newspaper from the front porch, only this time it was hundreds of small "sproings" as the flowers on the dogwood tree threw open their pink petals to bathe in the warming glow of the morning. The sproing cacophony grew as we rushed through the house throwing open the closed windows of winter to let the outside air flood our rooms with an almost liquid sweetness. I dug through my closet to find a short-sleeved pastel cotton print shirt for a mid-morning stroll in the neighborhood.

The sproing cascade grew louder as we approached Hawthorne Boulevard, where the previous day had been like so many others with a few people here and there. But on this day the sidewalks were like a circus of color and laughter and songs and smiles. People strolling just to stroll. Panhandlers and petitioners politely positioned with their asks and their "have a nice day." Musicians, including a rag-tag bluegrass band of joyous teens entertaining people at the bus stop. The outdoor tables at the corner pizza shop overflowing with laughing, youthful patrons, their tank tops revealing rainbows of tattoos below hair of pink and blue and green. The entire scene bathing in 70 degrees. Sproing -what a day!

The forecast for the rest of this week: low 50's and rain. Welcome to Portland.

ABU GHRAIB PRISON SCANDAL: WHY ARE THE REAL CRIMINALS STILL AT LARGE?

Here's another must-read article about the victims of the American occupation of Iraq, including Iraqis and U.S. soldiers. The subject of the article, Specialist Sabrina Harman, is one of the young American soldiers we saw in shocking photos from Abu Ghraib prison. Spec. Harmon took many of these shocking photos, like this one of a dead prisoner packed in ice. Because of the photos she took, and the ones in which she appeared, Spec. Harmon was convicted by court-martial of "conspiracy to maltreat prisoners, dereliction of duty, and maltreatment." She was sentenced to six months in prison, a reduction in rank, and a bad-conduct discharge. Others working at the prison were also convicted and sentenced. End of story, right? Wrong.

The article, using letters written home by Sabrina, interviews, and other sources, tells the inside story of young soldiers assigned to a physical and mental hell, and given orders to soften prisoners up for interrogation. The methods they used were either given to them or condoned by their superiors; basically they were told to do anything that would stress the prisoners and make them talk. The results are disturbing, and were very disturbing to Spec. Harmon and her colleagues.

Strangely, or perhaps conveniently, it was only the low-level personnel at Abu Ghraib who were "brought to justice" by the U.S. government. The photo of the body packed in ice, linked to above, was a prisoner who was said to have died of a heart attack. But Spec. Harmon knew better, because the body had many signs of severe beatings. In fact, the death of that prisoner, who was later found to be innocent of any crime or terrorist link, was eventually ruled to be a homicide, but neither the C.I.A. interrogator nor anyone else involved in the interrogation was ever charged. The photos of the corpse taken by Spec. Harmon, who claims she took them to document the horror of what she saw, were used to convict her.

But there's a back story, a very important one that gets little attention. Amazingly, there is an AP story in the news today that "Bush aides OK'd harsh questioning." According to "a former senior U.S. intelligence official" there was a series of high-level meetings in which senior members of the Bush administration signed-off on harsh interrogation techniques, including waterboarding and others considered by critics to be torture. The meetings coincided with a series of memoranda from the U.S. Justice Department justifying the use of these techniques.

Who were these high-level officials attending these meetings in the White House Situation Room? Lord Darth Cheney was "deeply immersed" in developing the CIA interrogation program, as were Attorney General John Ashcroft, Secretary of State Colin Powell, CIA Director George Tenet, and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice. These people authorized the CIA to use techniques considered to be torture, and then asked the Justice Department to consider the domestic and international legality of these techniques. The Justice Department issued a series of memos that basically OK'd the techniques, and immunized the President.

The above leads us to John Yoo, a former Justice Department attorney, who authored at least one of the key memos supporting the interrogation techniques. The memo was recently declassified, and it is chilling, as excerpts show. The memo justifies, under presidential war powers, numerous harsh techniques included under the definition of maiming, such as "poking an eye out, cutting ears and burning a prisoner with scalding water or corrosive acid." Yoo has stated that "the president has sole authority to interpret international treaties, such as the Geneva Convention, which forbids torture," and that his role in the Office of Legal Counsel "was to rehabilitate presidential protections that previous administrations allowed to languish in deference to Congress and the courts."

So the question is begged, "who were the real criminals at Abu Ghraib?" Several low-level soldiers were prosecuted and punished for taking pictures, mistreating prisoners, tampering with evidence, etc. Their superiors remain free and uncharged. And the Bush Gang, except those who have retired, are still in the White House, still violating the U.S. Constitution and various domestic and international laws and treaties. Why haven't these people been held accountable for the crimes they've committed?

As if need to ask.

AMERICANS: BETWEEN IRAQ AND A HARD PLACE

I had neither the time nor, quite frankly, the will to sit and watch the hearings with General Petreaus and Ambassador Crocker earlier this week. I watched a little of it, and I saw an interview of Gen. Petreaus on CNN. I think their message was that there is progress in Iraq, but it is very fragile and could go the wrong way at any moment. I could argue here, as I have before, that America should not be occupying another nation, but that argument doesn't seem to get much traction. We're stuck between the proverbial rock and hard place, where all the loftly language about American democracy and morality is called to question.

The occupation of Iraq (I refuse to call it "the War in Iraq") has become for the American public an annoying reality TV show, and one that is slipping in the ratings. We mostly see and read, unless we make an extra effort, the sanitized versions of daily life in Iraq - for our military as well as for the Iraqi citizens. We're told that the situation is better because the numbers of killings and bombings are less than last year - no matter that there are still a lot of killings and bombings compared to "normal." We're told that the Iraqi security forces are "standing up" - no matter that hundreds (thousands?) of them were standing up so they could find the nearest exit. We're told that the Iraqi government is making progress with important legislation - no matter that deciding what flag to fly is hardly the kind of "important" we would be proud of. We're told that the Iraqi economy is strengthening - no matter that we citizens of the U.S. are footing the bill.

So here we are, stuck between Iraq and a hard place. The most recent brilliant stratigery of Bush & Co. is to stay the course by stalling troop withdrawals and continuing business as usual. In other words, let the next administration deal with it. Oh, but there was one concession by Bush & Co. that resulted from the recent hearings: tours of duty to Iraq and Afghanistan (remember Afghanistan - the other little "war" we're in?) for our military personnel will be reduced from 15 months to 12 months. Now that's what I call real progress.

LET'S TALK ABOUT MUSIC. LET'S TRY TO TALK OVER THE MUSIC.

I've come to the conclusion that a growing number of coffee shops and restaurants play music for the enjoyment of their staff and not for their customers. Frankly, my wife and I have written some fine establishments off our list because we can barely hear ourselves think, let alone have a conversation, above the loud music.

You might think that we're just a couple of old fuddy-duddys who only like Perry Como and Barry Manilow - not. We actually like most kinds of music (OK - gangsta rap maybe not), and enjoy good background music when we're out for a drink, or a coffee, or dinner. But I can't understand the concept behind pushing some raucus, heavy rhythm section, cranked way up screaming music into the ears of your customers. If I want rock concert-level sound, I'll go to a concert.

Sometimes we'll ask nicely if the music can be changed or turned down - our request is often honored. But why do I have to ask in the first place? The only answer I have is: bad management.

btw - don't get me started on cars going down the street with music so loud my fillings rattle....

BUSH IRAQ POLICY: STAND UP, SIT DOWN (GET OUTTA TOWN!)

Ah the Bush Spin Machine - you've got to love it! The recent fighting in Basra between Iraqi forces and insurgents/militias is a positive change of events. WASHINGTON, March 30 (UPI) -- CIA Director Gen. Michael Hayden said Sunday the ongoing violence in Basra was an "inevitable" part of rebuilding Iraq. That's right kids, the increasing violence in Iraqi cities is a good thing, and it shows that progress is being made in the democratization of the Middle East. The Bush policy is a success, once again.

Does anyone believe this load of political double-speak cow manure? This is the old "when they stand up, we'll stand down" crap that's been chanted by the Bush policy cheerleaders for 5 years. The facts on the ground, that the Iraqi forces have not been able to dislodge the militias from Basra, speak truth to Bush lies. There is no end in sight to this war of occupation - John McCain has it right, a hundred years, maybe a thousand years. The actions by Iraqi security forces (and good for them for working hard against unsurmountable odds) won't save the failed Bush policies and the failed Bush war. They won't change the facts that the U.S. invasion of Iraq was not only a failure from the beginning, but certainly an unlawful invasion of a sovereign nation for no just cause.

Stay tuned for more "good news" from the Iraq war!

GLOBAL CHANGES INCLUDE MORE THAN CLIMATE WARMING

The realities of human-induced global warming, or global climate change, are well documented and accepted by most thinking people, many governments, and an increasing number of corporations. But global warming is not the only global change wrought by humanity. This realization is not new to me, but a number of recent news stories have helped me visualize our planet in a different way.

Let's begin in space, the area surrounding the planet Earth. The recent destruction of a U.S. satellite by a US Navy missile, and the 2007 successful anti-satellite weapon test by China have prompted increased discussion about weapons in space, and their impacts. Human societies have become very reliant on satellite technology for everything from telephone calls to military weapons guidance and battlefield communication; and all of these systems are vulnerable to attack by land- or space-based weapons. One aspect of this topic is the increasing amount of space debris accumulating in orbit around the Earth. A good summary is presented by the Union of Concerned Scientists. The ever increasing amount of debris in orbit puts satellites increasingly at risk. In other words, space is becoming more and more polluted.

From space, we can head towards the planet and into the atmosphere, where everyone is aware of the problem of climate change created by carbon emissions from human devices. A warming climate is linked to many changes in the physical, chemical and biological systems of planet Earth, which in turn have a multitude of effects on human societies.

As we drop out of the atmosphere, we might land in the oceans of our planet (splash!). Media reports abound about the numerous signs of problems in the world oceans: the recent break-up of a huge ice shelf in the Antarctic - years before it was predicted by climate and ocean scientists; the ocean-bottom "dead zone" off the coast of Oregon that has appeared annually for the last few years, and appears to be spreading; fisheries collapsing in many parts of the world; a recent study that could find no place in the world's oceans free from human pollution; and many more.

We might have fallen out of the atmosphere and onto the land of Earth (ouch!). Here we find equally disturbing signs of human-induced changes: a large number of pharmaceutical drugs in the waters of rivers and streams and groundwater, including drinking water supplies; expanding deserts; huge losses of tropical rain forests; loss of topsoil; record floods; and etc.

As the human population has grown at a faster rate, and technology has facilitated the rate of change in earth systems, we have witnessed a remarkable new reality - the capability of the human species to foul it's own world to an unprecedented degree, and at a scale heretofore unimaginable. Those of us reading this blog will not be here long enough to witness the eventual outcomes of these changes, but if we pause and think, we can try to imagine the planet our future generations will inhabit.

What is to be done about the impacts of humanity on the planet Earth? Is it unavoidable? Are we destined, as a species, to live in a world that our own activities make less inhabitable? To me, this is one of the big contradictions about the human species; we have the capability of rational thought and reason, but our actions seem to contradict rationality and reasonableness. How do I say "I'm sorry" to future generations?

BATTLE COMPANY: THE ON-GOING TRAGEDY IN AFGHANISTAN

You really have to read this article from the New York Times Magazine first. It's long, but not too long. It's important - very, very important. It will upset you, but you have to read it in order to honor those who are the subjects.

And then I hope you'll be angry. Really angry. Really pissed off! And I hope you'll write letters, make phone calls, talk to people you know.

Journalist Elizabeth Rubin has written about her time with the 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team, Battle Company, in the Korengal Valley, Afghanistan. She has held nothing back; she has spared few details. She has told it like it is, every day and every night, for this small group of U.S. soldiers. She describes the mental anguish, the fatigue, the simmering hatred, the moral conflicts, and the death that permeates the lives of these young people who are serving their country.

This "global war on terror" has gone to hell in a hand basket. Our troops are living in hell, and many come home in a hand basket. Why? How did it get to be like this? What is the purpose? What can be done now? Ask these questions! Demand answers!

The cost of the "Global War on Terror" since September 2001, according to a 2008 estimate by the Congressional Research Service (CRS), is about $700 billion ($700,000,000,000). About 75% of this amount ($526 billion) has gone to Operation Iraqi Freedom (the invasion and on-going occupation of Iraq); about 20% ($140 billion) to Operation Enduring Freedom (Afghanistan and other counter-terror operations), about 4% ($28 billion) to Operation Noble Eagle (military base security), and leaving about 1% ($5 billion) that CRS cannot allocate.

About 94% of the $700 billion has gone to the Department of Defense, 6% has gone for foreign aid programs and embassy operations. Less than 1% has gone to medical care for veterans.

The members of Battle Company whose stories are told in the NY Times Magazine article deserve our praise for their brave service and their many sacrifices. At the same time, the Bush Administration deserves our scorn and the wrath of the people for putting our military people in a situation that can no longer be won. The Bushies blew it - big time. They took their eyes off the ball and put their heads into a different game, one that was not as important. The reports I've read say that only Kabul is relatively secure in Afghanistan - the remainder of the country is in turmoil, and getting worse. Our presence there is a lost cause; a military solution isn't and can't work anymore. Read the article.

The voting citizens of the United States need to lAunch our own war - the War on the War on Terror. We need to wage this war on two fronts:

1. Put pressure on the three presidential candidates left standing to develop clear policies for ending the Iraq debacle while at the same time fixing the situation in Afghanistan and creating a realistic policy for fighting terrorism. We should demand alternatives that do not rely on more military actions, more troops on the ground, more weapons - Iraq and Afghanistan have proven the ineffectiveness of these. Villagers in Afghanistan don't side with the Americans when we bomb their villages and kill their women and children (read the article). We can't win against an insurgency. A much larger percentage of the billions being spent should go to non-violent foreign policy, with programs designed to help people improve their lives and choose stability and security over terror and fanaticism.

2. Demand from our elected representatives that they initiate impeachment hearings immediately for George W. Bush and Lord Darth Cheney. At a minimum, the lies and deceptions and illegalities perpetrated by these men and their underlings must be exposed to the light of day. Whether or not they are impeached, the goal is to clearly show what is wrong so that we can avoid similar deceptions in the future. The needless sacrificing of our military men and women is not the only casualty of this administration; the blatant disregard of our Constitution is the underlying, and more far-reaching tragedy played out by these men.

Read the article by Ms. Ruben. Channel your feelings of anger and frustration into political action. We live in a democracy, a fact that our present leaders have ignored for too long.

Comments here are welcomed. Suggestions for action are solicited.

DON'T PILLORY HILLARY

This is truly the most exciting election year in my 4+ decades of voting.  Each political party had a real race over the past few months, engaging many voters in the process.  And as of this writing, the Democratic Party nominee is not yet identified.  

Perhaps the single greatest historic change is that the two candidates left standing on the Democrat side are a woman and a black man.  Many of us longed for the day that a woman or a person of color would be the nominee for President; now that outcome is a sure thing. 

In February, 2007, I wrote here a short piece titled "Is America Ready for a Woman or Black President?"  This was a comment related to the media focus on this question.  Here it is:  

Unfortunately, the fact that this question is asked means that we're not ready. If this is truly a democracy, why does it matter what gender, color, religion, etc. a candidate is? I wonder if this would even be a question if the media didn't keep hyping it. Perhaps we need to get beyond gender and color and religion identity, and just talk about candidates in terms of their qualifications, experience and positions on critical issues. I look forward to the day when the news isn't that so-and-so is the first woman or black such-and-such, and the focus is on the real story.

Well, I don't need to "look forward to the day" anymore - that day has been here, and now the focus is on the "qualifications, experience and positions" of Barak and Hillary.  (An interesting tangent is that in this election we usually refer to the D candidates by their first names - I think because the Hillary campaign didn't want the focus of her campaign to be "Clinton."  But that's another discussion.) 

As a result of Barak's amazing results in Iowa and other early contests, and his recent string of "wins,"  the pundits have pretty much concluded that Hillary is on the ropes and will not be the winner (headline from today's NY Times, beneath a head shot of a resolute, tight-lipped Hillary Clinton: "Soldiering On, but Somber as the Horizon Darkens"). I think there's a lot of "piling on" re: Hillary's campaign and the primary outlook, and some of it is just plain mean. The campaign post-mortems will be endless - and interesting.  Many pundits think that her campaign has made fatal and presumption-of-victory errors from the very beginning, while the Barak machinery, by comparison, has worked carefully and methodically to build an amazing base of support. I'm certain that candidates in the future will look very closely at these two campaign strategies and teams.

But the bottom line for me is that Hillary Clinton is a good person and would be a good President. (For the record, I'm in the Obama camp - this week, and probably for good.) If she were to become the nominee, I would campaign for her and vote for her.  If she indeed does not become the Democratic nominee, there will be many and long discussions after the dust settles about what went wrong for Mrs. Clinton, including discussions about the role of sexism (gender bias?) in her ultimate failure to win the nomination.  And this discussion should be engaged; it is important.  But I have to ask; if Clinton wins the nomination, will we have similar discussions about the role of racism in the Obama defeat?  It seems to me that there has been more media time spent on the gender question than on the race question. (A confounding variable is "the Clinton question.") Is there more gender bias in the USA (and perhaps the world) compared to race bias?  If nothing else, I hope that this election year elevates these questions to a prominent place in our national dialogue. 

I hope that the American public gives Hillary Clinton the credit she deserves for breaking an historic barrier, for putting herself under the microscope of public scrutiny and on the grill of media heat, and for standing up for democracy.  You go girl! 

NEWS ROUNDUP: 15 FEB 2008

As a public service, I sometimes summarize the news of the day for readers who are too busy (or too lazy?) to read the newspaper themselves. So below is a summary of some of the news for today, [with my compulsory editorializing] all from the front section of The Oregonian newspaper. (Note: I need to also point you to Nicholas Kristof's column in the editorial section re: the shame of Guantanamo.)

"Run, he's reloading the gun" A former student walked into a lecture hall at Northern Illinois University and started shooting (a shotgun and 2 handguns), killing at least 5 (including himself) and wounding many. [Are we just going to accept that this kind of thing will happen once or twice per year, or are we maybe going to finally do something about gun violence in this country?]

"Dead zones off coast look like a first" and "Study finds no ocean areas untouched by human activity" The first story reports on an article in the journal Science about dead zones at the bottom of the ocean off the Oregon coast, resulting from lack of oxygen. After studying decades of oceanographic data, researches found that the appearance of dead zones every year for the past 6 years had not been seen previously off Oregon. Scientists hypothesize that some environmental "tipping point" has been exceeded, as a result of global warming, and that this could be a new "normal" for the coastal ocean. The second article reports about a presentation at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science during which a new map was shown of the world's oceans. Every part of the oceans on Earth have indicators of human activity, and the extent and level of impacts "looks much worse" than researchers expected. The impacts studied included: effects of structures such as oil rigs, commercial shipping, species invasion, climate change impacts including acidification, ultraviolet radiation and sea temperature, various types of fishing, and several types of human-related pollution. [I wonder what Sammy C. Lyon thinks about all this? (see 24 Jan 2008 post]

"Bush orders shootdown of satellite" [Cue the scary sci-fi music; this one is right out of a bad sci-fi movie, with Bruce Willis playing the reluctant hero who needs to save the Earth.] President Bush has ordered a Navy vessel to try something never done before - shoot down an orbiting rogue U.S. spy satellite before it plunges to Earth. The wayward spy satellite is loaded with "toxic fuel" (about 100 pounds of toxic hydrazine) that could create major problems if it lands in the wrong place after the satellite breaks up as it falls out of orbit. The goal of the missile shot is to break the huge satellite into smaller pieces, "most" of which will consequently burn up as it falls to Earth. [I sure hope they warn us before it starts to rain satellite pieces.]

"Governor ups ante against LNG sites" Three liquefied natural gas (LNG) plants are proposed for Oregon, two in the lower Columbia River. These very controversial projects have been receiving almost daily coverage in the press for months. At issue in this story is the conflict between the State of Oregon and federal agencies. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 preempted state authority over these kinds of projects, and the governor is asking federal agencies to do a better job of analyzing energy alternatives and environmental impacts for these projects. The State is also trying to wrest control over these projects back from the feds. [It's interesting that shipping super-cooled (liquefied) natural gas to the USA from Asia and warming it to its gas state can be profitable; but such is our unlimited appetite for energy in this country.]

"Charged Up" Obama is drawing huge crowds to his rallies compared to other candidates. [gObama!]

And that's just the front page! Here are a few more of my favorites from the front section.

"Hezbollah leader vows to hit Israel, avenge slain militant" Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, [OK, this guy is a total thug. This is the "religious leader" who recently bragged in public that Hezbollah has a lot of Israeli soldier body parts in storage from the 2006 war in Lebanon - "arms, legs, heads, torsos." He complained yesterday that the "Zionists" killed Imad Mughniyeh "outside the natural battleground..." Mughniyeh was killed in Damascus, Syria on Tuesday by unknown assailants. Mughniyeh was a terrorist strategist wanted for many attacks over the past 20 years, including hijackings, kidnappings, and the 1983 bombing in Beirut that killed 241 U.S. troops. In other words, his "natural battleground" was anywhere he wanted it to be. Hey Nasrallah - (expletive deleted!)]

"FEMA to speed trailer relocations" FEMA has suddenly found a sense of urgency to move Katrina victims out of the FEMA-supplied trailers because many of them have very high levels of toxic formaldehyde. [FEMA has known about the formaldehyde issue for a long time, and has even warned its employees not to enter these trailers because of the toxicity - at the same time they had not warned the people living in the trailers! Can anyone explain to me why FEMA gets away with all of this, in this age of "compassionate conservatism?"

"Official says waterboarding's legality isn't determined" Steven Bradbury is head of the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel. He told a congressional committee yesterday that waterboarding is no longer included in the authorized program of interrogation. [In a case of classic double-speak and obfuscation, this smart attorney said that the Justice Department has not made a determination that the use of waterboarding would be lawful under current law. He also stated that the Department has not made a determination whether or not the method would be unlawful. [It is worth listening to the report of this hearing on NPR today in order to hear the deliberate question-dodging by this guy, and the frustration of congressional members that the guy won't answer questions with anything specific.]

And there's more - lots more - for the reading. But enough from me.

IT'S THE AUTOMOBILE, STUPID!

I've said it before, and I'll say it again - the problem isn't the kind of fuel we use in our automobiles, the problem is our automobiles.

Some new studies published in the scientific literature conclude that "almost all biofuels used today cause more greenhouse gas emissions than conventional fuels if the full emissions costs of producing these “green” fuels are taken into account" (see NY Times article). At issue here is the amount of land being converted to agricultural uses to grow biofuel crops, and the greenhouse gas emissions created when forest, shrub or grasslands are cleared, burned and plowed to plant fuel crops.

We already know that there are many implications of biofuel production beyond the "green" aspects of cleaner burning fuels. Production of government-mandated ethanol in the USA from corn and soybeans has driven up the price of these crops, and therefore the price of food. There are even some shortages of these crops because of the demand for them by the biofuel industry. Ethanol production from corn and soy is more profitable than using these crops for food. This has far-reaching global implications in economic and social terms.

The problem, and solution, isn't the fuel we burn, it's burning the fuel in the first place. The number of automobiles in the world is increasing rapidly, with a related demand for fuel. We need to develop different concepts and methods of transportation, and we need to plan our communities around principles of sustainability instead of around the automobile.

There is no such thing as a free lunch; biofuels aren't the magic bullet. Let's get smart.

GEORGE W. BUSH - THE GRAND INQUISITOR

The news flash today: the White House asserts that torture is legal if The President approves its use. So The Decider is now The Grand Inquisitor!

In essence, if there is a threat to The Homeland, the President can authorize extreme measures of interrogation to protect The Homeland. In other words, waterboarding, which the CIA has admitted using and which is considered torture by most people, and other techniques can and will be used. (The head of the CIA has said that waterboarding "might be illegal" under current law.)

Torture is illegal under international law. It is considered illegal under various U.S. laws and Constitutional rulings. (A good FAQ on the illegality of torture is provided by Human Rights Watch.) Waterboarding is a technique that dates back to the Inquisition; some descriptions indicate that victims of this technique often died. We are led to believe, by the Axis of Weasels Spin Machine, that waterboarding and other "extreme interrogation techniques" employed by the CIA are performed by professionals in a controlled environment - in other words, we should not have an image of a dark, dank dungeon with implements of torture and big, hairy goons grinning as they torture the life out of their hapless prisoners. Yeah - right.

I'm truly outraged by this. I called the offices of our Senators and Congressman to voice my outrage that this President has taken our country to such depths of immorality. I hope all of you do the same.

PRIUS ENVY

Living in Priusland, Oregon is sometimes a self-image challenge, particularly for those of us who are Prius-less. This isn't a criticism of those who are among the Prius-pious, but rather, a plea for recognition for those who don't own one of Toyota's finest.

On a drive in downtown Portland the other day, I saw a large billboard advertising reduced parking fees for drivers of hybrid cars. How does this make sense? Does someone verify that the driver of the Prius getting the discount doesn't also own 2 or 3 other vehicles, including big truck and SUV gas-guzzlers? A recent survey (no time to find the link) found that many hybrid owners have added the eco-car to their family fleet of bigger vehicles. And many of the newer luxury hybrids, like the Lexus, use the hybrid technology to improve acceleration, with small gains in fuel efficiency.

In our 2-person family, we moved into an urban part of town 5 years ago, reduced our fleet to 1 car, and do a lot of walking to shops and restaurants. I ride my bicycle to the office probably 99% of the trips there - rain or shine, winter or summer. So why don't we get a parking discount downtown?

I lke the Prius and other hybrids. Hybrid vehicles are a good development for a variety of reasons. But let's not get too carried away with it. The reality is that the increase in the number of motor vehicles in the USA and work-wide results in rising fuel consumption and more emissions. The answer to our motor vehicle related problems isn't different fuels and engines, it's changing the basic concept of transportation for people and goods. We need fewer vehicles, period.


Well, gotta go - the sun is shining, and it' a good day for a walk.

NIGHTTIME OVER THE NORTH PACIFIC

The mostly empty 737 lifted off the runway at the moment when night has bested day, and images below were barely discernible. The cabin lights were off, and I was alone in the rear section. I watched the lights of Kodiak slip under the wing and disappear behind us; and then the veil of clouds obscured the planet's surface.

I settled into a traveler's reverie supported by the distinctive combination of the jet engines' muffled roar and the air rushing past the thin metal skin around me. Inside and outside were almost equally dark, with the exception of the bright wingtip light visible in the corner of my window view. Openings in the cloud cover drifted by, appearing below as dark spaces in the gray.

Then there appeared far below, in the slow-motion movie viewed through an airplane window like a strange television show, a yellow light. As it slipped by, I could see that it was the light of a ship far below, visible through a large opening in the clouds. The view focused as I glided overhead, and I could just make out the white wake signature of two screws - giving me a clue that this lone vessel on a black sea was perhaps an Alaska State Ferry or an ocean-going tug.

I was gripped at that moment by an incredible feeling of loneliness and insignificance. I in my tiny dim space hurtling through the air, they in their small vessel racing towards who-knows-what through the incredible darkness of the sea at night. I pictured the wheel house of the ship; maybe a lone crew member peering into the darkness over the glow of the instruments. I've been there, and I could feel it.

And then it was gone.

We continued towards Anchorage. At one point the clouds below were illuminated with a strange yellow glow in large patches - the lights of a town or some industries glowing against the cloud bottom. "How strange" I thought to myself, and I drifted deeper into that place between sky and earth, darkness and light.

The bang of landing gear on pavement jolted me awake. We were down, the lights were on, people were reaching for cell phones. Welcome home weary traveler.

WHO WILL SPEAK FOR THE SEA LIONS?

A bit of background is in order here for those who don't live in the Pacific Northwest. For the past few years, an increasing number of California sea lions have been making their way more than 100 miles up the Columbia River to the area below Bonneville Dam during the salmon spawning migration season. There the sea lions feast on adult salmon and some white sturgeon. Federal, state and Tribal fish managers are concerned that the predation by these large marine mammals on fish runs listed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) will further decimate these threatened and endangered species. Commercial, recreational and tribal fishers are very upset because sea lions often steal fish from their gear. Biologists estimate that the sea lions might be eating about 4 percent of the runs of ESA-listed species. After several years of mostly ineffective hazing with noise and small explosives, the agencies are close to getting a ruling that they can selectively kill the worst of these offenders (the ruling is required because the sea lions are a protected species under the Marine Mammal Protection Act.)

I was recently kayaking in the Columbia River and saw an old friend of mine, a sea lion named Sammy who visits every year when the salmon are migrating. We caught up on old times, and I let him use my pocket p.c. to catch up on the news on the internet (and, of course, to read my blog). He was very upset to learn that the federal agencies are close to a ruling that will allow them to kill sea lions. Sammy asked me if he could dictate a message to me that I would post on the blog. His message follows:

My name is Sammy C. Lyon. I live in the Pacific Ocean, and often visit the Columbia River for the annual salmon feast. I noticed that my picture was in the Oregonian the other day, kind of like a mug shot in the Post Office. According to the article, there will likely be a death warrant signed soon for me and some of my relatives.

I'm finding it difficult to comprehend this turn of events. Yes, I eat salmon, and an occasional sturgeon, while I'm enjoying the seasonal foods of the Columbia River. My ancestors have been eating these foods for many generations, and we've always followed the salmon upstream in the Columbia, historically up to Celilo Falls where we and the native people of the river shared the bounty of nature before your dams drowned the falls. But now it seems that we're taking the blame for something we really haven't caused.

I have a great sense of humor, and I chuckled when I read a published statement by the Regional Director of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife that my eating salmon at Bonneville Dam “is a very unnatural situation that requires active intervention to restore nature's balance.” What? Restore nature's balance by killing sea lions at the base of a dam? Um, excuse me, but my relatives and I didn't build Bonneville Dam, we don't dump billions of gallons of sewage into the river, we're swimming in a soup of toxic and radioactive wastes, pharmaceutical drugs, excess nutrients and other impacts of the wonderful “balance of nature” you humans have created. And we're not responsible for global warming. I don't see your government issuing death warrants for people who destroy habitat, dump toxic wastes, over harvest fish, and take so much water out of streams that salmon can no longer live there.

Wild salmon aren't imperiled because my sea lion brethren and I eat them. And we don't “steal” fish from humans fishing in the river – the wild fish don't really belong to you. You humans have always had a tendency to blame someone else for the problems you create. Killing sea lions might save some fish, but it doesn’t solve the larger problem. As reported by the Oregonian, the huge salmon recovery industry has spent hundreds of millions of dollars per year with few improvements in salmon populations.

I'm going to continue living my life, eating the foods I eat, and hope that I can avoid getting killed by the appointed executioners of your government. I only hope that there are enough people who choose to have salmon and sea lions by taking responsibility for salmon declines and making real changes in how humans affect the natural systems that sustain all of us.


Thanks Sammy - well said!

PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE DEBATES - A NEW REALITY T.V. SERIES?

Wow - now that was some excitement last night at the ol' CNN democratic candidate debate. Barak and Hillary having at it, big time! This was some of the best name-calling, mud-slinging, accusation-flinging "debating" I've seen (not that I've watched very many of these).

So I got to thinking, "how much of this can we stand?" But then I realized that this is really good prime-time entertainment when it's such a spark-fest. These people are becoming real professionals at presidential candidate debating; so maybe there's a future in it for them - Reality TV!

Maybe I should pitch this idea to some producers. Film crews can follow Hillary and Barak around all day and night, peeking into their strategy sessions, rehearsals, bus time, meals, ups and downs. We can watch as campaign staff dig for dirt on the opposition, develop stinging sound-byte quality zingers for their candidate to memorize, rehearse their candidate in the dramatic arts, such as double-takes, painful looks, hateful glares, and righteous indignation. Each week the tension can build towards the debate, where they will be in the glare of the lights, live on-camera for the world to watch.

Hey - who needs a President when we have reality TV? Who needs real issues when we have real drama? What could be better than the innuendos of race, gender, conservativism, back-room deals, big corporate donations, and hints of possible scandal?

Sounds great, doesn't it? My only problem is, I don't watch reality TV - reality is bad enough!

FED CHIEF PLANS STIMULUS PACKAGE

" President Bush and Federal Reserve Chief Ben Bernanke have both endorsed the idea of a stimulus package...."

In an announcement today, Chairman Bernanke announced an aggressive plan to implement a widespread stimulus throughout America. "We have been working closely with Pfizer and Merck on this stimulus package" said the Fed Chief. "As a result, we should very soon have billions of stimulants ready to distribute to Americans, particularly the working poor and unemployed."

The stimulation package, first conceived in the office of the Vice-President, Lord Darth Cheney, is a brilliant plan that will keep ordinary Americans so doped-up that the economic woes of the country will not be a concern to them. In the meantime, the wealthiest Americans will continue to reap the benefits of giant tax breaks and unprecedented profits.

Praise the Fed, and pass the Stimulants!

THIS KIND OF BEHAVIOR SHOULD BE ILL-EAGLE

It's a rather strange and disturbing story from Kodiak, Alaska. About 50 bald eagles, symbol of America, got into a dumpster-diving frenzy in a dump truck filled with fish guts outside a fish cannery. When it was all over, about 30 eagles had drowned in the pile because they were pushed and held under by their fellow eagles who were gorging on this rotting pile of scavenger delicacies.

Nature - go figure!

I've been to Kodiak; in fact, I'll be there at the end of this month. When the canneries are working, you can see hundreds of eagles on the short drive from the airport to town. Eagles soaring overhead, dozens of eagles sitting in every tree along the road. For people who have not seen many eagles, it is an awe-inspiring site.

So maybe the eagles should wise up and learn not to disappoint us humans with behavior that is undignified for a national symbol. I mean, magnificently snatching a salmon from just below the surface of the sea with outstretched talons below wide-spread wings is a glorious sight, and one to remember. But - drowning anyone who gets between you and a pile of rotting, steaming fish guts in the bed of a dump truck seems somehow diametrically opposed to the carefully cultivated image of power and glory.

Get with the program, eagles.

THE SHAME OF IRAQ

Isn't it nice that things are better in Iraq? Well, anyway, that how it seems because there is much less media coverage about it. Hey, The Surge is working! Violence is down, security is up, things are getting back to normal for Iraqis. And....Hillary and McCain won New Hampshire!

How convenient for the architects of the Iraq fiasco. How inconvenient for Iraqis and members of the U.S. military.

I used to feel anger and frustration about the U.S. war in Iraq. Now the feeling that overwhelms me is shame.

I feel shame when I think that my country invaded and is occupying another nation without provocation or cause.

I feel shame when I see the estimates of Iraqi civilian deaths and injuries, in the hundreds of thousands.

I feel shame when I learn about the plight of millions of Iraqis who have been forced to flee their homes and their country under threat to their lives.

I feel shame when I hear reports, such as the excellent series by Deborah Amos on NPR, about Iraqi refugee families in Jordan and Syria who are not allowed to work; children who are not allowed to attend school (many have not been in school for 2-3 years); Iraqis who worked for the U.S. military, at great risk to themselves and their families, and are not allowed to immigrate to the United States.

I feel shame that my government is not making reparations to the displaced Iraqi people, or helping them rebuild their lives.

I feel shame that the U.S. Army and Marine Corps have dishonorably discharged thousands of men and women who served tours of duty in Iraq and returned with mental disorders, and are no longer eligable for veterans medical benefits.

I feel shame about the thousands of American military families whose lives have been torn apart by frequent and extended deployments.

I feel shame about the conditions in military hospitals, in which wounded soldiers are ill-treated.

And I feel shame that the people of my country don't also seem to feel this sense of shame about this new kind of America.

Dennis Kucinich is correct, in my opinion, when he talks about Bush and Cheney and the other architects of this invasion and occupation as war criminals. But it goes beyond that - way beyond.

And I am ashamed that we, the people, allowed this to happen.

IS OBAMA THE ONE?

I wish Morphius was here to tell me if Obama is The One - our Neo.

In February of last year I wrote a piece about needing a new leader. Someone who understands that the world today is different from yesterday's world. Someone who actually has a different mind set about technology, politics, resources, etc.

For me, the speeches by the dem candidates after the Iowa results were in were very telling. John Edwards launched into his angry class warfare campaign speech - the big corporations are the evil doers. He reminded me of speeches I heard, and gave, about 30-40 years ago as a young radical. It's not that I necessarily disagree with his premise, but the class warfare rant is old politics, and I don't think it moves things forward.

Hillary Clinton was more polite than John - she actually congratulated the front-runners. But then she hit hard on her basic theme - she is the only one with experience. She's been there done that, in the trenches, in the White House, carry the good past forward, etc. Again, I tend to think we need new ideas, new constructs of global reality, new understandings.

So that leads me to Barak Obama. Does he really get it? Is he really in a different political generation than John and Hillary? Does he understand that globalization and all that it entails is a new paradigm in human history that requires a different politics?

Is he The One?

IOWA CAUCUS - IOWA SHMAUCUS

The headlines scream it: "Iowans ready to make or break candidates." What?? This is another bizarre aspect of the whacky US electoral system. Why does the Iowa caucus make or break candidates? Do Iowans really represent the majority of US voters? I don't get it.

I listened to a report recently explaining the Iowa caucus system, and believe me, I didn't understand it. The caucus rules are more complex than any board game, card game or sport - the only word I can think of to describe it is "weird." It's basically a popularity contest where the people participating get to select first and second choices, and change their votes.

And now we'll all have to endure the constant media blitz of reports, analyses, and the parade of talking heads that will tell us what it all means. Oy - where can I hide until it's over?

ATTENTION ALL EXTREMISTS

This is my first post for 2008. People typically have hopes and good wishes for a new year, and I certainly have those; however, numerous topics have been swirling about within my head since I started writing again last week, and this is what I've selected - extremism.

In many ways, the 21st Century has begun as a time of extremism. We're witnessing a growth in strength of all sorts of extremists in the world: religious, political, and nationalist among the most prominent. Islamic extremists have grabbed a major share of the headlines, but we shouldn't overlook the historic importance of the others.

To the religious extremists I have to say that your actions demonstrate the flaws of your beliefs. You jihadists who kill randomly with no regard for human life are not doing holy acts - you are the worst kind of murderers, and are despicable people who rain discredit upon your professed religion. You politicians who act "according to god's will" (yes George, including you) use the cloak of godliness to violate basic principles of humanity, wreaking havoc within your own jurisdictions and beyond. Those of you who find it acceptable to violate the human rights of others (women, homosexuals, "the other") because "the bible says it is so" go beyond acceptable in meddling where you shouldn't.

To you political extremists, both here in the USA and abroad, history will show you for what you truly are. Your use of fear and hate have brought ruin to many millions of human lives and whole societies. You care not what methods you employ to advance your extremism; you lie and cheat and pose enemies and call names - anything and everything to advance your extremist agendas.

To nationalists, at all levels, your short-sightedness poses doom for humankind. Included here are local, tribal, regional and national identifications that promote unity and hatred against "the others" because they are not you. These concepts of identification belong in the dustbin of history.

There are many unifying themes in the world today, important discussions and actions that we, as humankind, need to have. But you extremists are bent on preventing unification because your way is the only way. Can we humans get beyond primitivism? By this I mean the self-centered identifications and agendas that keep us at each others throats. On the scale of history, these are petty, meaningless things that serve no purpose for the future. Listen to the news - understand the world. Humanity has changed the physical nature of our planet's climate; we have overgrown our capacity to feed ourselves; we are rapidly losing the best and most valuable parts of the natural world out of greed; and we continue to kill each other for reasons that are beyond comprehension.

I dream of a time of great change - a global epiphany if you will - during which humankind comes to its senses and truly understands the concepts of cooperation, sustainability, respect and yes, love. Unfortunately, I know that this is most likely just a dream.

Happy New Year.

THE HOMELAND IS SECURE

These tidbits were gleaned from the local newspaper on December 20. They give me faith in the Cheney-Bush Team and their minions, faith that we Americans can rest safely in our beds at night knowing that we are safe from terrorists, our financial well-being is secure, and our environment is protected.

- The Customs and Border Protection folks at Miami International Airport spend significantly more time searching for and busting Americans with illegal cigars and rum from Cuba than they do looking for terrorists.

- The government of China is now the second-largest shareholder of the second-largest financial firm on Wall Street, Morgan Stanley, with a $5 Billion bail-out investment.

- The Environmental Protection Agency has ruled that the strict automobile emission standards implemented by the State of California (and many other states) can not be put into law, under provisions of the federal Clean Air Act. The EPA concluded that state law cannot be more strict than federal law, even though EPA has approved more strict state laws many times in the past. (A big party was certainly held at the auto industry lobby, with drinks probably donated by the White House.)

I feel so safe and secure right now that I think I'll jump in my big rig and go shopping out at the mall on the interstate!

CHENEY'S BRAIN JOLTS BLOGGER FROM LETHARGY!!

It has been about 5 months since my last post. Chalk it up to blogger block (blogck - maybe a new term that will catch on...). But more likely it's unbridled cynicism combined with a feeling of total helplessness. Can things get any worse than they are - yes.

But thanks to the NYT News Service, a story today jolted me back from blogckitude, and here I go again.

"A newly declassified document shows that J. Edgar Hoover, the longtime director of the FBI, had a plan to suspend habeas corpus and imprison some 12,000 Americans that he suspected of disloyalty." This plan was sent by Hoover to the Truman White House shortly after the Korean War began in 1950. The plan was not implemented (as far as we know).


This revelation solves a number of mysteries for me, particularly a nagging one about Lord Darth Cheney. It all comes together now with two possibilities: 1) Hoover's brain is alive and active in a big jar in Darth Cheney's office, where it provides ideas to Darth, or, 2) Darth Cheney actually had the living brain of J. Edgar Hoover implanted in his head. Both of these make sense, and explain where some of Lord Cheney's ideas and pronouncements originate.

Wow...I'm glad that one is solved!

BUSH-CHENEY HEALTH SECRETS

Stunning revelations in a 2-week period! Medical procedures reveal close-kept Administration secrets.

Last week, President George W. Bush underwent a colonoscopy procedure, and leaked reports have shed some light on one of the mysteries of the Bush years - the whereabouts of WMDs. After awakening from the routine colon exam, President Bush was overheard saying: "I saw them - Weapons of M'ass Destruction!!"

Meanwhile, Vice-Royal Darth Cheney has been hospitalized so doctors can replace his defibrillator. Replacement of the defibrillator provides some clues to the Vice-Emperor's success - his constant fibbing about Iraq, government spying, energy policy and many other topics is enabled by the defibrillator!

SPIN WARS, EPISODE 3: THE EMPIRE TAKES A BACK SEAT

When last we visited the Axis of Weasels and the Dark Lord, Darth Cheney (November 11, 2005), things were looking bad for the Lefti Knights and the entire galaxy. But cracks were beginning to appear in the Axis of Weasels armor, despite the spin-saber tactics of the evil MachiaRovean. But the forces of good underestimated the power of the Dark Side, particularly their Dark Lord. Darth Cheney continued to spin and lie and paint as evil and unpatriotic those who dared speak out against military campaigns of the Axis. The Dark Lord became more secretive and harder to find, all the while planning his evil doings.

And so it came to pass that, in the year of 7 in the Second Millennium, the Dark Lord, Darth Cheney, put in motion his secret plan to gain control of the Empire. The Dark Lord, brushing aside the puppet Emperor Dubya, declared a new branch of government comprised of - himself. Under this new ruling structure, Darth Cheney became part of whichever branch of the Empire he chose on any particular day, depending on the politics of the moment. If rules governing the behavior of the Executive Branch of the Empire got in his way, well, he was not part of that branch, despite his title of Vice Emperor. If rules governing the Legislative Branch got in his way, well, he was not part of that branch. Darth Cheney, the Dark Lord, was his own branch of the Empire.

And so the Axis of Weasels continued to careen down the path of history, leaving in it's wake a ruined planet wracked with war, greed, pollution and hatred. And Darth Cheney, the Dark Lord, smirked as he watched the results of his planning.

FROM CAMPAIGN HEADQUARTERS: THE UNIFYING ISSUE

We've been busy here at FISHMAN for POTUS galactic headquarters (see the last post for the announcement of my candidacy). The issues I want to address are numerous; the planks in my platform are many; and we've been pondering how to start off by "hitting the nail on the head," so to speak. At long last, the Unifying Issue became clear.

Global Warming is what I consider to be The Unifying Issue. Global Warming is not a for-or-against, Democrat vs. Republican, liberal vs. conservative, east vs. west, Christian vs. Jew vs. Muslim issue. This issue is reality smacking all of us up side the head and saying "do something now for future generations." This one issue demands all nations to rethink public policy, foreign policy, public planning, transportation, energy and environmental policy, tax structure, international trade, education and health care. This issue demands all people to rethink their life styles and consumer habits - particularly those of us who are privileged.

Look at the news on any day and consider each news item in the context of Global Warming. Think about your own activities and decisions through one complete day in the context of Global Warming. Think about the ridiculousness of fighting between people over religious beliefs, claims to land, ethnicity or old scores to settle contrasted to the future for everyone everywhere on a planet with a climate irrevocably altered by our own stupidity.

As President, I will consistently lead a national and international discussion about this Unifying Issue. I will work tirelessly to change the basic concepts of our society from one based on consumerism and greed to one based on principles of sustainability. I will work to change our foreign policy from one of domination to one of cooperation - using the innate creativity, generosity and compassion of Americans to lead by example.

Just as there is a major human-induced climate shift on this planet, I envision a human-induced paradigm shift towards a world with a future based on the realities of a finite planet.

FISHMAN for POTUS*
not just for the halibut


* President of the United States

ANNOUNCING MY CANDIDACY

I'm using this post to announce my candidacy for President of the United States.

This is not a decision made lightly. The tipping point was the recent candidates "debate" for the eight announced Democratic Party candidates. Although I only heard the media sound bytes, they were enough to push me over the edge. Basically, I'm tired of politicians dancing around the real issues because they don't want to alienate any potential constituencies. As a result, we have: Senator Clinton stressing that she's tough enough to retaliate against terrorists who attack us; Senator Obama endlessly reminding us that he was always against the Iraq War - from the beginning; and then there's Mr. Edwards, who admits that, yes, he lives a privileged life as evidenced by his $400 haircuts , but we need to remember that he comes from poverty. Oh give me a break!!

My candidacy stands firmly on one single pledge: I will always talk about the real issues - honestly and from my heart.

Future posts will provide details about my programs. I'll talk about foreign policy, the "Global War on Terror," education, environment, health care, justice, and communication.

I hope you'll visit again and read my opinion. I hope you'll comment so we can have a national, and international, dialogue about reality.

Thank you, and remember:

FISHMAN for POTUS
Not just for the halibut

MAYBE WE SHOULD ALL BE AFRAID?

I'm generally not a person who is afraid, particularly about things that could seem, well, weirdly paranoid, like fear of my own government. But we recently listened to an interview that scared me and kept me awake for a long time after going to bed.

Every citizen of the USA should listen to the interview broadcast on March 19, 2007 on the National Public Radio program Fresh Air. Jeremy Scahill is the author of the book Blackwater: The Rise of the World's Most Powerful Mercenary Army. "Blackwater USA is a secretive private army based in North Carolina with a sole owner: Erik Prince, a right-wing Christian multimillionaire." Their web site proclaims that Blackwater USA is the most comprehensive professional military, law enforcement, security, peacekeeping, and stability operations company in the world. Numerous media stories refer to the company as training and contracting out mercenaries. Blackwater has thousands of armed personnel for hire, aircraft, armored vehicles of their own design, and at least two very large training bases. Blackwater has played a large role in the Iraq war under contract to the United States, and has had numerous casualties.

The interview presents a picture that I found to be very chilling. Blackwater's presence is becoming more widespread both abroad and in the United States, and the politics of the company, based on those of it's owner, are very right of center.

What scared me is the realization that the right-wing politics of the Bush administration are matched by a large and growing private military with close ties to the White House. We citizens of the US have seen our civil liberties increasingly narrowed by the Bush-led government, and have witnessed large increases in the number of government services and jobs that have been out-sourced to private firms. The abuses at Abu Ghraib prison, Guantanamo prison camp, secret CIA-run prisons around the world, "extraordinary renditions" (disappearings) of people and their subsequent torture, abolishment of habeas corpus, etc., etc. are very disturbing, and not in line with what most Americans think America stands for.

Is there a scenario in which the President announces that, because of the imminent risk of terrorist attacks, our country is under martial law and elections are suspended, and this is enforced by military units and the Blackwater forces loyal to President Bush? This is just paranoia, right? These things don't and can't happen - not here - can they?

Maybe we should all be afraid just enough to speak up now - loudly and clearly and together.

DARTH CHENEY ON SUPPORTING THE TROOPS

"They're not supporting the troops. They're undermining them," is how Darth "Buckshot" Cheney referred to the House of Representatives. And, oh yes, let's not forget that these truly unpatriotic SOB's are "sending a message to terrorists that America will retreat in the face danger."

Oh give me a frickin break!! I'm beginning to believe that ol' Darth actually had The Big One a couple of years ago, and this dark-side apparition we see on the TV is really a robot who has been programmed with about three repetitive statements. Does anyone actually believe anything this old fart says? OK, yes, there must be some believers, those who take their daily dose of koolaid.

Darth, listen to me - it's time to retire. You've done enough damage to the world to last a lifetime. You have so totally screwed things up that the world will never be the same. Step down Darth - others are standing up, and you can stand down - NOW!

THE NUKALER CLUB: MEMBERS ONLY

The small article on page A-11 of The Oregonian today is about an announcement by the U.S. Energy Department for a new contract to develop a new Hydrogen Bomb, intended to replace the aging warheads now in the U.S. arsenal. With all the media attention, prompted by White House press releases and statements, about the impending doom represented by North Korea and Iran developing nukaler weapons, we are left in a fog of ignorance about our own nukaler capabilities.

What does this small article tell us? Mainly it's about the competition between the three U.S. national weapons laboratories, Lawrence Livermore, Los Alamos, and Sandia, for the lead position on this contract. The contract value is "secret," but experts say it is worth billions or tens of billions of dollars. We need this new H-bomb because the old ones are, well, old and maybe unreliable; however, "critics" say that the existing stockpile is reliable and can be safely maintained for decades.

I've always had problems with the nuclear nations (the Nukaler Club) telling everyone else that they can't become members because, well, nukes are bad. It's OK for the club members to have nukes, and I guess to also build new ones, but any other nation that moves in that direction is being evil.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not proposing that any and every nation should have nukes; quite the opposite, I don't think any nation should have nukes - they're bad. We've certainly gotten beyond the idea of nuclear deterrence within the Nukaler Club - it's inconceivable that any of the Club members would use nukes against another member because of the realities of nuclear warfare. And nukes aren't very useful against terrorist cells.

Imagine, if you can, being a North Korean or an Iranian. You've been named by an American President part of the "Axis of Evil" and one of the three countries in that Axis has been invaded, occupied, and basically destroyed by the American cowboy President. He's rattled his swords in your direction, moved warships into your neighborhood, used veiled threats of military action against you. So maybe your only defense, so you think, is the threat of nuclear deterrence - that just might be logical thinking. And, oh yeah, by the way, the US is also developing a new H-bomb.

The above is not to condone the actions of North Korea and Iran, and the actions of those countries are certainly much more complicated than this simplistic imagining. But why is it OK for a few nations to have The Bomb and tell everyone else they can't because it's too dangerous?