I just finished reading the article written by David Rebhein that appeared in the May 8 2009 Wall Street Journal http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124174121748398901.html.
While I believe that the American Legion does great work, I feel that the views expressed by Mr Rebhein are not in line what I believe a free society should be about.
Mr. Rebhein thinks that releasing more photos of detainee abuse will only inflame America's enemies, but I am convinced that in the long run, openness is better for this country. I am convinced that people like Mr. Rebhein and other on the political right would rather have the pictures suppresses so that they can continue to perpetuate the myth that Abu Ghraib was just "an aberration" or the work of a "few bad apples".
Until the full evidence is shown to the American people, we will never be freed of the ghosts of Abu Ghraib. In addition, we have got to get real about making the people whose policy decisions that lead to detainee abuse accountable in some way. It could very well be that this government does not have the stomach or political capital to bring these people to the bar of justice there is always the court of public opinion.
How many generals were allowed to retire quietly and pick up their nice pension and go on the right wing rubber chicken dinner circuit? How many DOJ attorneys who signed off on torture were allowed to go into places like the Heritage Foundation some other sympathetic think tank?
I am all in favor of making life for these politicians and generals at least somewhat uncomfortable and make them think about what they have done.
I would like to draw a parallel with the recent flap over the flight of Air Force One over the Statute of Liberty that was kept under wraps. If the folks had been open about the flight, there would not have been any panic and people would not have thought about the expense of the flight. Now, the administration has had to deal with people's anger (however muted and short term) and the hew and cry over the expense.
I keep thinking that our government does not trust us. It seems that Mr. Rehbein does not either. He would rather keep the photos under wraps on the chance it will inflame our enemies.
Maybe Mr. Rehbein needs to think about the larger policies of the present and past administrations that put troops at risk and not just photos of detainee abuse.
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Monday, May 11, 2009
Sunday, September 14, 2008
A Letter to Both Candidates
Below is a letter I drafted and mailed to both Senator McCain and Senator Obama.
Dear Senator McCain and Senator Obama:
I want to congratulate both of you on the nominations you received from your respective parties. My reason for writing to you is to give you some thoughts that I have had for some time on the nature of politics in this country. Please understand I am not writing to ask for anything or to request a specific action on any policy number. I would hope you would count this as one more voice in this campaign.
First, please let me tell you a little bit about who I am. I am a 44 year old Caucasian male. My wife and I live on the northwest side of Chicago. We have no children but we have been taking care of my wife’s mother in our home since December of 2002. We live in what could be classified as a middle or upper middle class community in Chicago. My wife and I have both experienced job loss. I was unemployed from August of 2002 and found full time work as a law librarian in April 2007. My wife was unemployed from April 2006 to September 2007. I took a pay cut of $20,000 to enter my new field of librarianship. During this time, we were able through God’s grace to keep our home and health insurance.
I want to let you know that for myself, I feel that neither political party has much to offer me, either economically or socially. The problem is the partisanship I see manifest in both parties and brought into sharp focus during this summer’s conventions. I realize that conventions are meant to rally the party faithful it should be no surprise that there are little signs of national unity at these conventions.
My alienation from the political process stems from the fact that many ideals that I hold are not honored or respected by one party or the other. Thus, I don’t feel I belong in either party. For example, I am person of deep and abiding faith. The Catholic faith was one of my bulwarks during my protracted unemployment and I don’t believe that a woman has the right to an abortion. This makes me suspect among many Democrats and progressives. I also try to hold a strong position on the church’s option for the poor and social justice. This makes me suspect among many Republicans who might think I have common cause with them on social issues. I believe in a strong commitment serving the nation, especially in the military. The profession of arms is not honored among many progressives. I see this attitude in the way military recruiters are often treated and the fact that ROTC program are not found in many universities. I grew up as a child of the labor movement and think that labor unions can have an important role in commerce. I am hearing more strident voices from Republicans on ways to thwart union organizing. I could go on and on with other examples.
The problem as I see is it is that both parties have allowed the more doctrinaire elements to set the tone of the discussion and have allowed the demonization of the opposition. I, like many Americans, question our role in the world and think that we should act in a more humble fashion. Many on the right often take this as America bashing or America hating and would question my patriotism. I also think that personal responsibility and initiative are the bedrock of which our nation’s economy is built. Many on the left would say that I want to continue to oppress those in our country and other nations to satisfy and sustain a capitalistic system.
I wish that both sides could treat each other with more civility and recognize the inherent goodness of the other. I saw no such civility or humility in both parties’ convention and that is shameful for such a great nation. As leaders in your party you must start to not only “distance” yourself from the more strident and radical elements of your party but to start pressuring these so called surrogates to tone down their rhetoric for the sake of moving our country forward.
I feel that harsh words towards the opposition and the ad hominine attacks are even more detrimental to the ability of the next president to govern because they are often wrapped up in the flag, a sense of patriotism or freedom for the economically or socially downtrodden.
Both of you have the power to fundamentally change the nature of political discourse in this nation. I have no illusions that often times, the loudest and most strident voices are the ones with the most to lose if public policy does not go that way. I also know that these voices are also the moneyed interests and that modern day politics run on money. It is real leadership that can tell these voices that their strident rhetoric is not helping the nation. The time is coming when it won’t matter who has the upper hand politically because neither side will be able to get anything done, and that is when our nation will begin its slow decline to irrelevancy. We may seeing the start of that irrelevancy, with a resurgent Russia, a China that has now taken its place on the world stage through its Olympic spectacle and the enrichment of oil rich countries of the Middle East through petro-dollars. The time for bold action is now, not at some future date when a “comfortable” majority is in place.
I have no illusions that there is very little chance of this letter ever crossing your eyes. I l don’t live in a battleground state and I don’t have the financial resources that would make you want to listen to me. All I can hope is that some junior staffer on your campaign may see this and become food for thought.
At one time, I had great hopes for the political process, but I grew up watching the Watergate hearings and since then, my confidence and connection in politics as they are done in this country has become more tenuous and irrelevant.
I’m hoping one of you can change that.
Dear Senator McCain and Senator Obama:
I want to congratulate both of you on the nominations you received from your respective parties. My reason for writing to you is to give you some thoughts that I have had for some time on the nature of politics in this country. Please understand I am not writing to ask for anything or to request a specific action on any policy number. I would hope you would count this as one more voice in this campaign.
First, please let me tell you a little bit about who I am. I am a 44 year old Caucasian male. My wife and I live on the northwest side of Chicago. We have no children but we have been taking care of my wife’s mother in our home since December of 2002. We live in what could be classified as a middle or upper middle class community in Chicago. My wife and I have both experienced job loss. I was unemployed from August of 2002 and found full time work as a law librarian in April 2007. My wife was unemployed from April 2006 to September 2007. I took a pay cut of $20,000 to enter my new field of librarianship. During this time, we were able through God’s grace to keep our home and health insurance.
I want to let you know that for myself, I feel that neither political party has much to offer me, either economically or socially. The problem is the partisanship I see manifest in both parties and brought into sharp focus during this summer’s conventions. I realize that conventions are meant to rally the party faithful it should be no surprise that there are little signs of national unity at these conventions.
My alienation from the political process stems from the fact that many ideals that I hold are not honored or respected by one party or the other. Thus, I don’t feel I belong in either party. For example, I am person of deep and abiding faith. The Catholic faith was one of my bulwarks during my protracted unemployment and I don’t believe that a woman has the right to an abortion. This makes me suspect among many Democrats and progressives. I also try to hold a strong position on the church’s option for the poor and social justice. This makes me suspect among many Republicans who might think I have common cause with them on social issues. I believe in a strong commitment serving the nation, especially in the military. The profession of arms is not honored among many progressives. I see this attitude in the way military recruiters are often treated and the fact that ROTC program are not found in many universities. I grew up as a child of the labor movement and think that labor unions can have an important role in commerce. I am hearing more strident voices from Republicans on ways to thwart union organizing. I could go on and on with other examples.
The problem as I see is it is that both parties have allowed the more doctrinaire elements to set the tone of the discussion and have allowed the demonization of the opposition. I, like many Americans, question our role in the world and think that we should act in a more humble fashion. Many on the right often take this as America bashing or America hating and would question my patriotism. I also think that personal responsibility and initiative are the bedrock of which our nation’s economy is built. Many on the left would say that I want to continue to oppress those in our country and other nations to satisfy and sustain a capitalistic system.
I wish that both sides could treat each other with more civility and recognize the inherent goodness of the other. I saw no such civility or humility in both parties’ convention and that is shameful for such a great nation. As leaders in your party you must start to not only “distance” yourself from the more strident and radical elements of your party but to start pressuring these so called surrogates to tone down their rhetoric for the sake of moving our country forward.
I feel that harsh words towards the opposition and the ad hominine attacks are even more detrimental to the ability of the next president to govern because they are often wrapped up in the flag, a sense of patriotism or freedom for the economically or socially downtrodden.
Both of you have the power to fundamentally change the nature of political discourse in this nation. I have no illusions that often times, the loudest and most strident voices are the ones with the most to lose if public policy does not go that way. I also know that these voices are also the moneyed interests and that modern day politics run on money. It is real leadership that can tell these voices that their strident rhetoric is not helping the nation. The time is coming when it won’t matter who has the upper hand politically because neither side will be able to get anything done, and that is when our nation will begin its slow decline to irrelevancy. We may seeing the start of that irrelevancy, with a resurgent Russia, a China that has now taken its place on the world stage through its Olympic spectacle and the enrichment of oil rich countries of the Middle East through petro-dollars. The time for bold action is now, not at some future date when a “comfortable” majority is in place.
I have no illusions that there is very little chance of this letter ever crossing your eyes. I l don’t live in a battleground state and I don’t have the financial resources that would make you want to listen to me. All I can hope is that some junior staffer on your campaign may see this and become food for thought.
At one time, I had great hopes for the political process, but I grew up watching the Watergate hearings and since then, my confidence and connection in politics as they are done in this country has become more tenuous and irrelevant.
I’m hoping one of you can change that.
Sunday, June 01, 2008
In Defense of Lobbyists?
Below is a letter to the editer that I submitted to the Wall Street Journal.
I found the article entitled “In Defense of Lobbyists” written by Mr. Tom C. Korologos and published in the Wall Street Journal on Friday May 30, 2008 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121210874509231275.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries to be an extremely self serving article and does nothing to enhance the public perception of lobbyists.
First of all, Mr. Korologos is correct in stating that all lobbyists should not be tarred with the brush of Jack Abramoff but he also wants us to consider all lobbyists equal in that he equates the lobbyists hired by corporations and industry groups to be the same as those hired by unions and public policy organizations. I doubt that the lobbyists hired by unions and public policy organizations have the same cash resources as corporate and industry lobbyists.
This brings us to the second about the “coin of the realm” of the lobbyists being trust and respect. I would submit that Mr. Korologos is delusional if he thinks that the real coin of the realm of the lobbyist is indeed the money that they can control and generate for the ever growing, ever voracious appetites of political campaign. We need only to look at Tom Delay’s self styled “K Street Project” for evidence of this.
Thirdly, no one should be misled by Mr. Korologos in thinking that lobbyists are performing a public service strictly in the public interest. Organizations do not hire lobbyists to look out for the public’s welfare, whatever that might be. Lobbyists are hired to protect the interests of their respective clients and that should not be forgotten.
Mr. Korologos also equates lobbying with citizens petitioning government for redress. I would submit that lobbying as it is practiced in the United States is a far cry from what the Founding Fathers had intended.
As an experienced reference librarian, I categorically reject the notion that the lobbyist is the best place that legislators, their staffs and executive department agencies can get the information they to make policy. The United States government is the largest single source of information, much of it gathered by agencies such as the Congressional Research Service or agencies of the executive branch.
The real cure for lobbyist abuse is to make the legislature and executive branch agencies less dependent on them for information to assist them in promulgating public policy or the funds to run political campaigns.
I found the article entitled “In Defense of Lobbyists” written by Mr. Tom C. Korologos and published in the Wall Street Journal on Friday May 30, 2008 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121210874509231275.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries to be an extremely self serving article and does nothing to enhance the public perception of lobbyists.
First of all, Mr. Korologos is correct in stating that all lobbyists should not be tarred with the brush of Jack Abramoff but he also wants us to consider all lobbyists equal in that he equates the lobbyists hired by corporations and industry groups to be the same as those hired by unions and public policy organizations. I doubt that the lobbyists hired by unions and public policy organizations have the same cash resources as corporate and industry lobbyists.
This brings us to the second about the “coin of the realm” of the lobbyists being trust and respect. I would submit that Mr. Korologos is delusional if he thinks that the real coin of the realm of the lobbyist is indeed the money that they can control and generate for the ever growing, ever voracious appetites of political campaign. We need only to look at Tom Delay’s self styled “K Street Project” for evidence of this.
Thirdly, no one should be misled by Mr. Korologos in thinking that lobbyists are performing a public service strictly in the public interest. Organizations do not hire lobbyists to look out for the public’s welfare, whatever that might be. Lobbyists are hired to protect the interests of their respective clients and that should not be forgotten.
Mr. Korologos also equates lobbying with citizens petitioning government for redress. I would submit that lobbying as it is practiced in the United States is a far cry from what the Founding Fathers had intended.
As an experienced reference librarian, I categorically reject the notion that the lobbyist is the best place that legislators, their staffs and executive department agencies can get the information they to make policy. The United States government is the largest single source of information, much of it gathered by agencies such as the Congressional Research Service or agencies of the executive branch.
The real cure for lobbyist abuse is to make the legislature and executive branch agencies less dependent on them for information to assist them in promulgating public policy or the funds to run political campaigns.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
