Limner's Lines

Are abortion and contraception health care?

2012-02-14T14:57:00.000-08:00

I’ve had two abortions. Shocked? I certainly was when I learned D & Cs (dilation and curettage) are often coded as abortions for insurance purposes. Suddenly, abortion became a very personal issue.

When my husband and I were ready for a second child, I went through what was diagnosed as “recurrent miscarriages.” At one point, my body was expelling embryos so fast, the doctor could barely document the pregnancy.

And I carried two babies 12 weeks only to lose them. In both cases, our doctor recommended a D & C to prevent infection and future complications. I credit her care for the eventual birth of our daughter.

These memories come flooding back whenever abortion and contraception re-emerge as political footballs. Both are health care issues best left to individuals and their doctors. And their complicated nature is illustrated by personal stories.

For example, I read an account in Salon Magazine several years ago by a Catholic nurse whose family wanted a fourth child.

However, when they learned (after 20 weeks) their much anticipated daughter had a fatal condition that would precipitate her death shortly after birth – and one in which she would suffer – they felt they must make an unwelcome decision.

As a nurse, this woman did research to locate a facility that would perform a dilation and extraction to allow her family to bury their child and say goodbye.

But the pain didn’t end there. At a time when this family needed love and support, they were ostracized by friends, some family and their faith community.

Even the birth later, of a healthy fourth child, could not ease that pain.

So lately with the manufactured outrage over the decision to require all employers, including faith-based organizations (hospitals, charities, universities) to cover contraception as part of health insurance benefits for employees, I have been remembering all the women I know whose doctors have prescribed contraception to treat conditions like endometriosis or to prevent pregnancies that would endanger their lives due to other chronic conditions.

These memories prompt me to ask how we can deny that contraception (or abortion) is part of women’s health care?

And how can legislators in good conscience limit or deny access to treatments doctors need to care for patients?

With regard to this latest decision on contraception, it’s not really a controversial issue. As a story on ThinkProgress.org notes, DePaul University, as well as a number of other Catholic institutions, offers their employees a contraception benefit with their health insurance in accordance with state and federal law.

ThinkProgress also notes: “DePaul’s home state of Illinois is one of 28 to have adopted a contraception coverage requirement.

Eight of those states provide no opt-out clause for religious institutions and the administration’s new rule would expand conscience protections to those parts of the country.”

The story also referenced a Public Religion Research Institute poll indicating a majority of Americans, including a majority of Catholics, support the new coverage requirement.

So if the Obama administration is waging a “war on religion,” why did their decision “expand conscience protections to those parts of the country?” In other words, this decision allows more groups an exception to providing contraception.

Once again the mainstream media and politicians are using women’s health issues as a political football – to the detriment of women’s health.

So the libertarian in me wants to know, “Why do ‘small government’ Conservatives want to meddle in my health care?”

Keystone Pipeline: Do benefits outweigh risk?

2012-01-31T14:43:00.000-08:00

I was pleased to see President Obama made a decision with regard to the Keystone Pipeline last week. However, he left the door open to continue the project, so I’m not ready to celebrate.

I developed an interest in water supplies after teaching a Bible study on globalization a couple of years ago. From municipalities selling water rights to bottling companies to water supplies poisoned by fracking (the source of Keystone’s oil) and other industrial processes, I learned water is becoming an embattled resource due to growing scarcity.

So the idea of running an oil pipeline across one of the largest water sources in our country, the Ogallala Aquifer, concerns me. And after the Fukishima reactor disaster last year, I am skeptical when ads (paid for by an energy consortium) quote a single geology professor saying, “I guarantee” Keystone’s tar sands oil will NOT contaminate our water supply. I believe the energy company building the Fukishima plant gave Japanese residents similar guarantees. Yet how many times have we seen Mother Nature deliver unanticipated destruction?

I understand the hope that the pipeline will supply jobs, but the few studies conducted show the industry’s estimates are high.

A recent study by Cornell University disputes the industry’s 140,000 jobs (direct and indirect) estimate, noting a number of negative factors including: the temporary nature of the jobs, many of which will be filled by non-local workers, and the possibility of related job losses due to higher Midwestern fuel prices, spills, pollution and costs from climate change. To quantify it further, some estimates ballpark the real job numbers at 2,500 to 4,650 (temporary) jobs.

And did you catch the reference to higher Midwestern fuel prices? Contrary to the pro-pipeline ads, the Cornell report states: “KXL will divert Tar Sands oil now supplying Midwest refineries, so it can be sold at higher prices to the Gulf Coast and export markets. As a result, consumers in the Midwest could be paying 10 to 20 cents more per gallon for gasoline and diesel fuel.” Of course, China is one of the major markets for this oil.

As I watch the rise of wind turbines on our horizons, I wonder which project is creating safer long term energy solutions. And I have to ask again, do the benefits of the Keystone Pipeline outweigh the risks to our water supply and quality of life? Does the potential for 5,000 temporary jobs outweigh the cost of higher fuel prices?

The government’s environmental impact study includes information about leaks in existing pipelines included in the project, specifically Ludden, N.D., so it’s a given leaks will occur. To quote this study: “The Northern High Plains Aquifer system supplies 78 percent of the public water supply and 83 percent of irrigation water in Nebraska and approximately 30 percent of water used in the U.S. for irrigation and agriculture.”

Before we get an answer the hard way, I think we should look for renewable energy sources to replace the oil and study the project further. And perhaps Keystone’s resources would be better spent to research alternative energy sources as well.

In the meantime, read and study for yourself.

Executive Summary: Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Keystone XL Project http://www.keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/clientsite/keystonexl.nsf/03_KX...

Cornell GLI Study Finds Keystone XL Pipeline Will Create Few Jobs http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/Keystonexl.html

Cornell’s full report: http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_Keys...

Caucuses and Primaries: Do you know the difference between the two?

2012-01-19T07:24:00.000-08:00

Hallelujah, the caucuses are over! My phone no longer rings off the hook, we get through meals uninterrupted, and local TV news reporters are back to covering accidents, crimes and sporting events.

But after surviving the latest round of political reporting, I have to wonder how many people really understand our political system? Let me give you a couple of examples.

On the morning of the caucuses, I was watching the early news on one of the three Omaha network affiliates. The reporter interviewing a metro-area Republican Party official asked about the anticipated number of voters attending. However, the caucuses aren’t open to every voter; they are for the political parties’ members.

Those participating must choose which party caucus to attend and must be willing to register as a party member, even if it’s only temporarily.

Generally only a fraction of each party’s registered voters, usually those most active, participate in the caucuses.

Another point to remember is each party’s rules are different.

While the Republican Party uses a secret ballot voting system for caucus goers to choose their candidate, Democrats use a system of conversation, wrangling and consensus to distribute elected delegates to chosen candidates.

Iowa is one of few states still using the caucus system; most have primaries. But even the primaries, in which votes are cast, are a function of the parties.

And rules vary from state to state. Some states only allow party members to vote; others require open primaries that allow voters of any party to participate in the primary of their choice.

I bring it up because the same reporter used the terms “primary” and “caucus” as though they are interchangeable.

But not only do local reporters get things wrong. I was disappointed to hear Rachel Maddow of MSNBC, a political reporter who usually does better research than most, complaining the Iowa caucuses aren’t democratic. Hello? Party function, Rachel.

Which leads me to ask if American citizens know enough about our system and candidates to make informed decisions? It’s a question with which the founding fathers wrestled. It’s why our system elects presidents via both the popular vote and the Electoral College.

For those who don’t know, the Electoral College began as part of the original design of the U.S. Constitution and was established as a compromise between election of the president by Congress and by the popular vote. Citizens vote for the electors who then vote for the President.

However I find low citizen participation the most disappointing part of our system. For a country known for promoting its democracy, too many citizens choose NOT to exercise their rights. I am speaking from experience.

Although I have always voted in state and national elections and advocated on individual issues, I was a registered independent for 30 years.

But having lived most of my life in states with closed primaries and caucuses, I finally got tired of letting others choose my candidates for the general election.

So instead of complaining about my choices in 2008, I decided to participate in the process. I recommend others do the same.

You learn a lot by doing.

Whatever happened to statesmanship?

2012-01-04T04:37:00.000-08:00

“I got a lot of problems with you people!” yells George Costanza’s father on Seinfeld during the Festivus Airing of the Grievances.

And that’s how I felt watching our Congressional Republicans during the fight to extend the payroll tax cut and unemployment benefits.

At a time when millions of Americans cannot find work and many families open empty cupboards the latter half of every month, House Republicans were willing to raise taxes on working people and leave the unemployed empty handed.

For what? To protect wealthy Americans and corporate special interests, in this case, a Canadian energy company lobbying to build the Keystone pipeline – an enterprise with no proven long-term benefits and major environmental risks.

It’s like watching a parent with a tantrum-throwing toddler -- on one side is a reasonable willingness to work together while on the other is a determination to obstruct everything that might give the other party and, in most cases 99 percent of voters, help.

That’s about the level of conversation we’ve seen from Congress the last three years, especially since electing a group of Tea Party Republicans in 2010. And it becomes more infuriating the longer this recession lasts.

But most importantly to these Republican representatives, such obstruction prevents a Democratic president from “scoring” what they see as only a political win. I’ve heard some of these public officials say, “It’s a matter of principle.”

I have to question the principles of anyone willing to let the entire country slide off a cliff by shutting down our government and cutting off paychecks – employment, unemployment, Social Security – to the people most in need. Is it principled to deliberately destroy the nation’s financial standing because you disagree with the political philosophy of the democratically elected president and the opposition party?

And is it principled to ignore the voters who elected you to score political victories when these same voters desperately need policies to provide aid and encourage hiring? Is it principled to argue for policies proven, disastrously I might add based on the last 10 years, NOT to work, such as income tax cuts for wealthy Americans and corporations?

At a time when many Americans would take any work they could get, is it principled to sit on your hands instead of doing the work voters elected you to do?

Perhaps these Tea Party Republicans don’t understand they have been elected as statesmen.

Statesmanship requires conversing with the opposition to find common ground. It also requires a willingness to move, explore options and compromise to pass legislation that benefits as many citizens as possible. (And corporations are not citizens!)

It’s a balancing act because a statesman understands his or her constituents include a variety of interests. But instead, our current Congressional Republicans have decided obstructing everything proposed by the opposition is their job.

That’s the level of “public service” voters get when we elect representatives based solely on political advertisements, campaign speeches and party affiliation.

And let’s be honest, isn’t that what a lot of us do?

Until Americans demand information on policy, track legislation and voting records, and do their homework on candidates for office, it’s all we’re going to get.

Because it’s not the party that matters, it’s the person. And everybody has a history.

So make sure you do your homework before you cast your vote. The information is out there if you choose to access it.

Is there a war on Christmas? It's not that simple

2011-12-21T05:51:00.000-08:00

“Whatever this is, Hermione, it’s not simple,” Harry Potter tells his best friend in the fifth film of the series of the same name. And that’s what I keep thinking as I watch the annual “War on Christmas/Christianity” being waged.

This whole meme strikes me as another manufactured crisis drummed up to getting credulous Christians up in arms over the separation of church and state, which was developed, ironically, to protect the practice of faith.

Are you confused? Well, the older I get the more I’m coming to accept that many of the solutions we seek are “counter-intuitive.” In other words, they are not simple. And the separation of church and state is but one example.

I choose to address this now because it keeps coming up. I had a woman recently express surprise when I mentioned I’d sung The Hallelujah Chorus four consecutive years when I was in public high school. “Really?” she asked incredulous. For my part, I was surprised anyone would think the song forbidden. I don’t think of that song as religious so much as a classical piece of music history. And that highlights how much our individual viewpoints can vary.

Having served for seven-plus years on a school board, I’d like to add that we didn’t get too fussed about separation of church and state. We tried to follow the law, which prohibits teaching the practices of ANY faith in a public school. However, religious texts can be studied as literature or different religions as cultural history. Faith groups were welcome to use our facilities as a meeting space when available; we offered, with the help of the local ministerial association, an optional baccalaureate for graduates. We tried to honor Wednesday evenings as a time for church activities.

As a Christian in this country, I have never felt discriminated against or persecuted because of my faith. I’d note public institutions’ more careful adherence to the separation of church and state in recent years. But as a country growing ever more diverse and having family of another faith myself, I accept these changes as proof of our country’s guarantee that all beliefs will be respected in our civic life. I take that guarantee as a protection, rather than an assault. When and if I become a minority, I would welcome those protections, wouldn’t you?

And regarding Christmas, how can we complain? Isn’t Christmas the only religious holiday in our country written into the federal holiday calendar? Frankly the only war on Christmas I see is the way American business has used it to sell, sell, sell. It’s a marketing bonanza.

So where do these feelings of persecution toward Christmas/Christianity come from? Because from my perspective, there is no war on Christianity. Instead I feel others are using the Christian label to separate me from my Jewish, agnostic, Islamic, etc., brothers and sisters. As I celebrate the birth of the one my church calls The Prince of Peace, I suggest we abandon this war of words.

Merry Christmas AND Happy Holidays.

Does the Occupy movment need a message?

2011-12-06T12:10:00.000-08:00

Note: This is the latest Miner Queries column from The Red Oak Express

If you’ve been watching the news lately, you’ve seen reports about Occupy Wall Street (OWS). And if you watch mainstream news, you’ve probably heard a lot of talk about how the movement “doesn’t have a message or leaders.” Consequently, the tone is dismissive.

Mainstream corporate media have two reasons for such comments:

1. Corporate media owners and their cohorts on Wall Street want to know leaders, so they can remove them and possibly squelch what they see as a growing threat.
2. Today’s corporate media personalities don’t research and report so much as they present information from other sources, often via news releases. (I know this because I do just that for a living.) Newsrooms across America have been gutted of reporters and, especially broadcast media, pick up and use what comes in via the wires, the newspaper, Internet and fax machine. That’s why you can flip channels and see the same story told in almost the same words on every station at nearly the same time!

So key to OWS’s sustainability is its horizontal organization with no individual leaders. Additionally, without specific messages for press to take down stenographically, it requires actual reporting. That means time and money, which cuts corporate media profit – because news in now a business, not a public service.

As I watch events unfold, I keep thinking of my mother, who loved to say, “The squeaky wheel gets the grease!” Over the years I’ve learned the truth of that idiom. In the workplace, I learned to speak up if I wanted one of the new PCs coming in the next upgrades. Or if I was interested in a plum assignment, I didn’t just expect the boss to read my mind.

Unfortunately, I think voters in America quit squeaking generations ago. After casting a vote, it’s as if we just expect the winners to read our collective mind. We go back to daily life and grumble under our breath when we get nothing.

But even those who’ve spent time advocating for candidates and policies don’t seem to understand OWS. I participate in an e-mail dialogue group, and among this well read liberal group, concerns about OWS’ lack of message and organization exist. As I told them, those of us from older generations miss much of what is happening among our youth. We (parents and grandparents) assume OWS is just a rag-tag group camping on Wall Street.

I have read several articles about new types of efforts, including some technology tools, being created to support OWS. Additionally, I think we underestimate the ability of youth to combat poisonous media messaging. These young adults have been brought up with technology. They know how propaganda is created, and they take media reports with a grain of salt. They don't get their news from the places we do.

These young people give me hope. They will run circles around those who try to stop them. They don't believe in political parties, because they've grown up watching the parties give their parents nothing. I know that's how my 23-year-old son feels.

We're assuming this movement must have specific goals. But, I don't think it amounts to much more than to ask people to PARTICIPATE in our common life, which in America is supposed to be democracy. Actually, that may be the best message of all.

How did I get myself into writing this column?

2011-11-23T08:56:00.000-08:00

Note: This essay is my first column in the Red Oak Express. My column will appear bi-weekly beginning Nov.22.

I freely admit to being a political junkie. But I didn’t set out to write any columns. So how did I get myself into this?

I grew up with a quiet father, a farmer, who observed the world closely. He didn’t say a lot, but he didn’t miss much. And he read constantly. I spent evenings in his lap as he pored through the Des Moines Register and a stack of magazines. He built shelves for his growing library of history and biography books. He watched public TV. He asked lots of questions. He listened, and as a shy man, he spoke only when he felt called to speak. Usually, his comments delivered a whole new perspective to the discussion. I can also remember Dad writing letters to our representatives in Congress and serving on local boards. Mom did, too, and politics was always a lively topic of discussion at supper. (Mom was a Republican; Dad was a Democrat.)

That’s how I was raised. And like my father, I read – a lot because I learned from Dad it mattered. The political decisions we make – not individually but as a society – set our course. So if we choose poorly, we all pay. That is the tyranny of the majority. That’s democracy.

So for 30 years I’ve been tracking our political record. I’ve paid more in student loan interest, earned less and am now watching my kids (and yours too) struggle even harder than I did because my generation and succeeding ones have made poor choices based on misinformation we’ve been fed by corporate interests and media.

How do I know this? I’m part of the system.

I was trained as an artist to create illusion, and I work in business communication and public relations. I know how word choice affects perception, and I know how color, perspective and design play on emotions. So I can spot the spin, frame or sales pitch – whatever you want to call it.

Additionally, I care about the people I live with. I’ve spent 30 years watching family, friends and neighbors get hoodwinked by politicians bought and paid for by corporate interests. Election after election I watch them vote based on party, “likeability” and emotional reactions to ads and mangled rhetoric, rather than facts. Then they wonder what happened when their interests are ignored.
Consequently, I get a little frustrated when people assume I’ve just “drunk the Kool-Aid.” As I did with the still life in drawing class, I try to walk around situations and see them from as many sides as possible. I came very late to choosing a political party, and I’m not terribly comfortable there yet.

So I search for facts and policy solutions. I ask questions and look beyond the morning radio broadcast and the evening TV news for information. I delete chain e-mails. I check sources and track who’s paying for them. In conversation, I may ask uncomfortable questions and want to know your sources. And when I absolutely feel called to provide an alternative viewpoint, I write letters to the editor . . .

I guess that one came back to bite me.

I’d rather be wrong

2011-07-19T06:53:00.001-07:00

Thirty years ago, I watched helplessly as friends and neighbors fell for the amiable Republican candidate, Ronald Reagan, and his back-to-the-good-old-days message. I was five-months too young to vote. And I knew I would pay an economic price based on his policy proposals. That price? Two percentage points more on my student loans, disqualification for Pell grants, and lower starting wages when I entered the workforce. And I’m still paying as this country labors to shake off the myths of Reaganomics.

I saw it all coming again in 2000 when George W. Bush campaigned for office. It didn’t help that I had 20 more years of experience as a political observer, not to mention experience crafting messages and developing images as a communication and PR practitioner.

Again just as I predicted, W bankrupted our country as he had almost every business he’d run. He had a record, but the press reported on personality instead.

So as we approach the 2012 election, I’m going to make another prediction. With the Republican field currently in disarray, their fundraising numbers abysmal, and a total lack of accomplishment upon which to run, Jeb Bush will swoop in late to save the Republican Party.

Too soon for another Bush you say? Perhaps, but with our current economic crisis and voters’ tendency to blame the incumbent, the Bushes will see an opening. And their old money and corporate ties will line up behind their man. Traditional Conservatives to Tea Partiers will converge to support Jeb in a desperate bid to regain the White House. Like Republicans always do, they will fall in line and award him the nomination.

And Jeb Bush has a real record to run on. He is the one hope for the Republican Party and a real threat to President Obama’s incumbency. But if he wins, average Americans will be left in the cold again. His allegiance will be to the wealth he comes from and to the corporate moguls who fund his campaign.

Why I’m “obsessed” with politics

2011-07-04T08:56:00.001-07:00

If you’re on my Facebook Friends list, you know I’m a serious political junkie. And even if you’re not, you probably know it’s a vice I admit to freely. But you may not understand why.

I grew up with a quiet father who observed the world closely. He didn’t say a lot, but he didn’t miss much. And he read constantly. I spent evenings in his lap as he read the paper and a host of magazines. He read a variety of sources, and he never took any of them as the gospel truth. He asked a lot of questions, and he never assumed he had all the answers. But he worked diligently to inform himself. I’d venture he was one of the best read men in the neighborhood.

That’s how I was raised. And like my father, I read – a lot. Why?

I learned from my father that it mattered. The political decisions we make – not individually but as a society – set our course. So if we choose poorly, we all pay. That is the tyranny of the majority. That’s our democracy.

So for 30 years I’ve been tracking our political record, and it sucks. I’ve paid more in student loan interest, earned less and am now watching my kids (and yours too) struggle even harder than I did because my generation and succeeding ones have made poor choices based on misinformation we’ve been fed by corporate media.

How do I know this? I’m part of the system.

I was trained as an artist to create illusion, and I work in business communication and public relations. I know how word choice affects perception, and I know how color, perspective and design play on emotions. I can spot the frame almost before the words are out.

Additionally, I care about the people I live with. I’ve spent 30 years watching family, friends and neighbors get hoodwinked by politicians bought and paid for by corporate interests. Election after election I watch them vote based on emotional reactions to ads and mangled rhetoric, rather than facts, then wonder what happened when they get screwed later.

Consequently, I get a little frustrated when people assume I’ve just “drunk the Kool-Aid.” As I did in drawing class, I try to walk around situations and see them from as many sides as possible. I came very late to choosing a political party, and I’m not terribly comfortable there yet.

So instead of assuming I’m an ideologue, maybe you need to join me in the search for real information and solutions. Maybe you need to start asking questions and looking beyond the morning radio broadcast and the evening TV news for information. (And trash the e-mails – please!) Maybe we need to talk.

Because democracy begins with dialogue; tell that to your congress people as they play chicken with the debt ceiling.

Happy Independence Day.

It’s not the deficit, it’s the defunding

2011-06-22T16:27:00.000-07:00

Note: The following is my latest letter to the editor of the Red Oak Express. It's a response to an opinion column in which he proposed lowering the debt ceiling.

If you want to crash our economy, refuse to raise the debt ceiling. The deficit’s a red herring; government budget is not like your household budget. Do you control interest rates and print money?

Without tax revenues, government can’t operate. America’s problem is an eroding tax system, cowardly politicians and an apathetic citizenry.

For 40 years, conservative and corporate interests have worked to poke holes in our tax code. Loopholes allow them to pay less and less, while lower and middle class citizens take up the slack. Income tax rates are lower than ever, especially for the top income earners. Did you know the income tax rate for the top bracket was 91% under Eisenhower? Corporations have poked so many holes in the tax code, some pay no taxes even while their tax rate appears prohibitive.

You want a military, schools, emergency services, Medicare, Social Security, good roads, clean water, safe food and other things? You have to pay for it with taxes. And then you have to hold elected representatives accountable by voting, monitoring them and advocating for these things. What’s your record on that?

But first you have to inform yourself beyond what you hear on radio, TV or e-mail. ‘Cause this stuff isn’t simple, and it isn’t like your household budget. Again, see: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=692 from the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities for some history of taxes and deficits.

Thoughts on the “War on Christmas/Christianity”

2011-01-09T16:14:00.000-08:00

As a Christian living in America, I was surprised recently to hear someone express their distress about the assault on our faith, and I was struck by the very different perspective I have.

Having been raised within and choosing to stay as a United Methodist, I have never felt discriminated against or persecuted because of my faith. I have noticed some changes, such as public schools’ more careful adherence to the separation of church and state. As a country growing ever more diverse and having family of another faith myself, I accepted these changes as proof of our country’s guarantee that all beliefs will be respected in our civic institutions. I took that guarantee as a protection, rather than an assault. When and if I become a minority, I would welcome those protections, wouldn’t you?

And regarding Christmas, how can we complain? Isn’t Christmas the only religious holiday in our country that is written into the federal holiday calendar? Frankly the only war on Christmas I see is the way American business has used it to sell, sell, sell. It is no longer about a celebration of Christ’s birth, but a marketing bonanza. How much junk can we buy and wrap!

Where do these feelings of persecution come from? Whom do they benefit? Because from my perspective, there is no war on Christianity. Instead I feel that others are using the Christian label to separate me from my Jewish, agnostic, Islamic, etc., friends. In fact, I do not label myself.

I have always done this. I think of myself as a person. So in those times in which I have experienced sexism, it has come as a shock. Being evaluated based on someone else’s view of the label “woman” rather than on my skills and abilities as a person limits and demeans me.

This happens every time we attach a label to something – be it to ourselves or others. So I even avoid the term Christian. I think of myself of a “person of faith.” To me, that means I have a working relationship with God. And it allows me to respect other persons of faith, regardless of their chosen beliefs.

And frankly, I fear the label Christian because our history, like all human history, has been a story of abject failures and atrocities as well as triumphs – the Crusades, the Inquisition, our treatment of Native Americans, to just scratch the surface.

Our faith is the story of human struggle. Jesus calls us to love God and one another, and we fail at that every day. Yet it is our sacred responsibility. To be judged by that standard is enormous, and frankly, I fear it. So Christian is not a label I wear easily. Instead, to quote an old hymn, I hope people will “know we are Christians by our love.”

Is the GOP – just a one-trick pony?

2010-07-01T15:29:00.000-07:00

I am so sick of Republicans whining about the deficit and obstructing legislation designed to help their constituents.

"The only thing Republicans have opposed in this debate are job-killing taxes and adding to the national debt," said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky in an Associated Press story June 25. "What we're not willing to do is use worthwhile programs as an excuse to burden our children and our grandchildren with an even bigger national debt than we've already got."

No, they’d rather burden our children and grandchildren with the debt from two unnecessary wars and tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.

They continue to deny our own history – when President Franklin Roosevelt responded to a similar economic crisis with government spending to provide benefits to the poor and employment to the jobless. It’s called the New Deal, and it worked.

Go look at the record of tax cuts and economic growth at the Center On Budget and Policy Priorities at: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=692. The Republicans are full of baloney. Economics is complicated, and a simple proposal like “cutting taxes and spending” is a sound bite. But apparently it’s all the GOP has.

I’m ready for them to get out of the way and let the rest of us try something new to grow our economy. All they’re proposing is more of the same. This is simply political obstruction over governing; politics over people.

Tent of Heaven

2010-04-04T12:47:00.001-07:00

Needlework, 2010, 8" X 7 1/2"

Inspired by Psalm 19.

Sweep

2010-04-04T12:42:00.000-07:00

Needlework, 2010, 5" X 5"

The roads and terraces
sweep around the hills
and across the valleys,
caressing
the earth's folds
tenderly.

Wedge

2010-04-04T12:36:00.000-07:00

Needlework, 2010, 5" X 5"

Rolling between earth and sky,
thunderous clouds and arcing road
divide
diamond-studded dusk
and fertile furrowed fields.

Open letter to Congress

2009-09-08T20:11:00.000-07:00

Saturday morning of Labor Day weekend and Robert Reich, economist and former U.S. Secretary of Labor, is writing about the worst employment and wage numbers since the Great Depression. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/the-real-news-about-jobs_b_278098.html

Which is why I question opposition to a public option for health care.

I understand the fear of average citizens and their reactionary response. When media sources conflate fear and feed the public lies, they’re going to strike out at the biggest bogeyman they can find – government.

But your cowardice astounds and frustrates me. Where is your leadership? America is about to careen off a cliff, and you’re still playing politics!

The true measure of Washington cravenness is your inability to read the signs our entire economy is about to collapse. Instead, you let corporate executives push to keep their overblown salaries and fight regulation, actions doomed to send them crashing into the abyss, too. Their consumer market is shrinking. Who will buy their crap now? (And the last year has proven it’s crap!)

Members of Congress, particularly Republicans and conservative Blue Dog Dems, saw on the same old ideological platitudes while Rome burns. Meanwhile, corporate media looks the other way because they live in gated communities where everyone is still “doing OK.” Or they’re too dumb to understand the subjects they report on. (Witness Maria Bartiromo interviewing Rep. Ron Weiner about Medicare.)

Congress needs to study American history. When our economy has been at its worst, more government intervention (not less) has been required to stimulate growth and turn things around. This means deficit spending. And it has been government programs like Social Security, the Works Progress Administration, the GI Bill and Medicare that have stabilized the economy and allowed citizens to pursue new business ventures.

Right now, the American business sector is shrinking. This is largely due to rising health care costs. And only a government or public option will be large enough to ensure the competition to drive costs down.

But most disturbing to me is the loyalty of duly elected Congress men and women to the insurance and health care sectors instead of to the American people. Voters on all sides ought to be angry, and instead of shouting at each other, we ought to be taking names. Instead of letting Congress people like Charles Grassley scare the pants off us with comments about “pulling the plug on Grandma,” we should be asking him why he took more than $2 million from health insurers and providers.

You’re supposed to be working for us, and we need help – desperately.

Reagan was wrong

2009-09-06T12:24:00.000-07:00

Probably the most damaging legacy Ronald Reagan left America is his oft-quoted statement: “Government is not the solution to our problems; government is the problem.” That one sweeping statement rendered our democracy helpless and allowed government leaders to abandon leadership for profit and power.

And we the people fell for it.

Democracy, particularly American democracy, has always been about shared responsibility. In democracies, citizens are responsible for determining who represents them in government as well as for actively monitoring representatives’ work. Yet over the last 30 years, we’ve given up these responsibilities.

“If government is the problem, why vote? Why follow legislation and contact our senators and representatives with our opinions? It doesn’t make a difference.” This is the prevailing attitude.

And so more and more over the last 30 years, U.S. government has been influenced not by the people it was created to serve, but by corporations and wealthy Americans whose agenda is to further enrich and empower themselves. And not coincidentally, our media outlets, responsible for bringing us information about government, have covered less and less policy. Instead, their corporate ownership directs the focus to personalities, social issues like abortion, and deceptively titled legislation like No Child Left Behind or the Clean Air Act.

Make no mistake. This is propaganda, more commonly referred to as public relations in politically correct terms. And we’ve swallowed it hook, line and sinker.

But now that we’re in a real crisis, citizens are beginning to question things. I’ve waited a long time for this, because I believe government, and more specifically democracy, is the solution to our problems – when we all participate.

And that means more than flying your flag and putting red-white-and-blue magnets on your car. It even goes beyond voting. It means reading about local, state and federal legislation, and registering your opinion via phone calls, letters and e-mails. It means stepping up to serve in government if you feel capable. It means advocating for the causes important to you. And most of all it means questioning everything in search of the public good.

Reagan was wrong. Government isn’t the problem, but many of the people we’ve elected are. And with his attitude, he was one of them.

August 18 Letter to Grassley

2009-08-31T06:09:00.000-07:00

Dear Senator Grassley,

I attended your town hall in Afton, Ia., on Wed., Aug. 12, and I was disappointed to see you reinforce erroneous political talking points on health care instead of focusing on Iowans’ needs. I would also like to respond to your Aug. 4 letter, which references “independent analysis” which you subsequently don’t cite. I would guess this is the Lewin Report financed by the Heritage Foundation and conducted by a firm owned by UnitedHealth. Obviously, this report is not an unbiased independent source, which is probably why you didn’t cite it.

In your letter you also indicate we must “bolster the individual and employer-based insurance markets by crafting a public policy that encourages affordable, accessible coverage. We must lower costs for consumers by promoting efficiency, encouraging prevention and rewarding quality.”

I would remind you employer-based insurance has broken the U.S. auto industry and other manufacturing companies, forcing them to leave the country. Additionally, our nation cannot attract replacement industries due to this requirement. Instead companies settle across the border in Mexico and Canada where they have national health care. And as I have told your staff via phone calls, individuals with ideas for new businesses find health care costs prohibitive. Thus, the share of our economy held by new business ventures is shrinking. These are facts, not simply what I choose to believe. Meanwhile, the percentage of GDP eaten up by health costs is growing.

Still you deny these realities. And in fact, as I observed in Afton (and your Aug. 4 letter), you deliberately mislead ill-informed Iowans to stoke their fears and support the status quo against their own best interests. Shame on you! As a leader, you have a responsibility to educate and help these people, not frighten them. Also your allusions to “death panels,” though more subtle in Afton than in Winterset, strike a sour note with me. You see, 10 years ago, I went through such a situation with both my parents.

End of life consultations are an important part of the process of helping families decide how to help their loved ones die with dignity. For both Mom and Dad, who had terminal cancer, we needed to know what was available in rural Iowa, what Medicare and their insurance would cover, and what our role in care might be. This was especially important as we chose to allow our parents to die in their home. My sister and I provided daily care with the help of the Montgomery County Hospice program. You and other Republicans’ portrayal of these consultations as death panels determining who lives and dies is a lie and an outrage.

Instead of working to help Iowans, you have chosen to take up arms as a Republican warrior fighting Democrats as the enemy. You’ve bought into Newt Gingrich’s old lies.

But I see us all as Americans. And for the last 40 years, conservative ideas have shaped our government. It’s been self-fulfilling prophecy because you believe, “Government is not the solution to our problems. Government is the problem!” You’ve made government the problem; you’ve made sure you strangle it. Tax cuts, deregulation and corporate-friendly policies have gutted our economy. To improve our conditions, we must change course. That means the pendulum needs to swing back the other way. As a pragmatist, I expect we’ll surely have to change course again in the future. However, in 2009, we need to try some progressive ideas.

Which leads me back to health care and our economy.

You and the rest of the Republicans in Congress have chosen to ignore poll after poll indicating Americans want a public health care option. And for me, even that is a compromise. I favor a universal single payer plan or nationalized health care. Yet you refuse to even allow the public option compromise.

What I heard from you in Afton was a very carefully orchestrated message to conflate voters’ fears about a change, to appear to be negotiating with the Obama Administration for political cover, and then to write a plan that protects the health insurers and the status quo. Essentially, the insurers will give up nothing.

So you remember this prediction if you’re successful. If our health care and insurance system in this country does not change, I believe the entire American economy will crash. Your plans will not control costs or improve access. It will not help businesses, small or large, free up dollars for new ventures and jobs. Instead, the status quo will only increase the misery.

You have a choice to perform public service or to play politics. I think you’ve made your choice.

But I won’t support you. And because I care about my family, friends and neighbors, I’m going to fight for their best interests. That’s a promise.

Health care conflict

2009-08-13T15:17:00.000-07:00

After attending a town hall in Afton, Ia., held by Senator Charles Grassley, I can hone the health care battle down to a single essential conflict:

• Everyone wants health care – they want to be taken care of – but no one wants to pay for it.

I was disappointed, but not surprised, to see Iowa’s long term Republican Senator Grassley stick to the political talking points rather than acknowledge the needs of Iowans.

The event I attended had been scheduled at Afton City Hall, but too many people arrived, and the local Methodist church opened its doors to accommodate the crowd. Even then, people were crowded into the choir seats and overflow at the front and back of the church and standing in the aisles.

To open, Grassley rattled off a litany of votes against Obama administration policies. Then he declared he is against national health care and threw out the lies about British and Canadian systems denying old and sick people care. “I value life!” he declared. Finally, he tried to explain the process of negotiating in which he’s been engaged on health care to mollify those on the right who’ve criticized him for working with the current administration.

Grassley then introduced a member of the audience to come up and ask the first question and help facilitate the Q&A portion of the event. This gentleman threw out the suggestion that Congress put everyone on their health plan or else give it up and go on ours. Predictably everyone applauded.

Next came a question about the Cap and Trade legislation with Grassley noting he is for an RPS. The third comment came from an older woman who stated, “I fear my government.” Genuinely fearful, she posed a question using the old liberal vs. conservative language -- as if we are not all Americans. Again, Grassley did little to remind anyone attending we are all on the same team.

This was followed by comments and questions that moved into the realm of right-wing religious thought, one woman even comparing current events to 1930s Germany and implying President Obama is like Hitler. At this point, a gentleman in the crowd yelled out, “That’s racist!” and he was removed even though he showed no signs of being further disruptive.

Comments eventually came round to health care again, and voices from the side of care for all were raised. A retired doctor shared some of his experiences and noted Blue Cross/Blue Shield once operated as a non-profit, using 93% of their funds directly for care. He wondered why they needed profits now. Another woman inquired about out-of-pocket expenses. She has two children with major medical needs, she works full and part-time jobs to meet them, and she was wondering if she could afford to continue working.

My friend Lisa asked how Senator Grassley would address pre-existing conditions; if he would support regulating insurance companies. Grassley stated he wanted continued regulation by state departments of insurance, using “pre-emption” to legislate premium variations be within a certain range to help those with pre-existing conditions. So Lisa followed up by asking how companies would maintain profitability. That’s when Grassley cited the mandate for individual insurance.

Voices in the room raised further questions on both sides, but the essential conflict was never resolved. And it is the heart of the matter.

As a gray, rural state, Iowa has many seniors already on Medicare. These folks often get their “news” from talk radio and cable or network news, with little understanding of who is paying to broadcast this information. They do not understand the corporate profit motive is setting the editorial content and shaping what they see and hear. They want to trust what they hear the way they trusted Walter Conkrite.

So that’s who appeared in Afton, predominantly. These folks have been genuinely frightened by what major media broadcasts. And Senator Grassley did nothing to disabuse them of that. Instead, he chose to conflate those fears with Republican talking points. Of course, he has a long and impressive list of campaign contributors from the health insurance and health care industries.

But Iowa needs the help of a public health care option at the very least. As a rural state with a dwindling number of farm businesses, we need economic development. But access to affordable health insurance prohibits entrepreneurs from taking the plunge, which means even fewer businesses grow here. In fact, this scenario affects the entire country with the United States losing the battle for factories to Canada and Mexico because we require employers to provide health insurance.

The current economic state of our country is precarious. Too much of our GDP goes to health care costs. Health insurance companies are losing their market; they hope a health insurance mandate will help them maintain profitability and counter any controls current legislation may put on pre-existing conditions. That’s what Senator Grassley is negotiating so hard to protect. But even with that, I believe rising costs will diminish their market until they will crash just like the mortgage banks and financial companies. Health costs have already tanked the auto industry.

We’re still on the brink of the abyss.

Can you see me?

2009-08-10T09:17:00.000-07:00

I’m a news junkie, particularly political news. But more and more over the past 30 years, I’ve found it difficult to get information about what happens in the halls of government, which actually affects me. Thank God for the Internet. With the birth of the bloggers, I’ve found some individuals actually reading legislation and monitoring the actions of our government officials. Try to find that on network or cable news!

So after the last presidential press conference on health care, what was the lead story on NBC’s Today Show? The president’s final aside to a question about the arrest of Henry Louis Gates Jr.

And when they finally got to health care, they asked the same old questions about how government is going to pay for it. “He didn’t provide specifics.” As if they’d report them anyway -- their 15-second attention spans couldn’t handle the details. The president answered that question as well as can be managed without a solid bill to address, and they either didn’t understand it or chose to ignore it. They also trotted out the old canard about the deficit after ignoring it during the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, two wars and the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill.

Then they played the “What’s the rush?” line with the help of GOP lightweight Eric Cantor.

What’s the rush? People are suffering and dying out here.

The president, who spent months on the ground across the country talking to actual people during the presidential campaign, knows this. He reminds himself every day via his purple file.

Do our congressional representatives? How long has it been since your rep has visited your area? Do they acknowledge all the voters who are living with a medical crisis – with and without insurance? I can say my Republican Senator Grassley was in Iowa recently, but his answer to a constituent who asked why he can’t have access to the same health insurance as the senator was: “You can. Get a job with the federal government.”

And the corporate media allows them to get away with this by looking the other way. Instead, what do I get from them? At 7:30 a.m. (Central Time) each day on the Today Show, I can count on the latest update to the Michael Jackson circus. Enough already. That doesn’t affect me.

But health care does. So we all need to be calling, e-mailing and writing our representatives and the media talking heads and asking, “Can you see me?” ‘Cause I can see you, and I’m taking names.

Throw out the old conservative lies – ask more questions!

2009-07-01T14:06:00.000-07:00

Lie #1 – “Tax and spend Democrats”

Does anyone remember their high school government class? A public official’s job, regardless of political affiliation, is to tax and spend.

In our democracy, the government provides for the common welfare. (See our founding documents.) And how does government provide? Through the collection of taxes and spending based on public needs. Government -- of any variety – doesn’t happen without taxation.

So the whole idea that Democrats own taxing and spending is an outright lie. It’s a Republican or Independent’s job as much as a Democrat’s. It’s every public official’s job.

Americans need to get over their miserliness about taxes. We want a military, social security, financial aid, roads and bridges, quality public schools, hospitals, fire and police departments, safe food, vaccines and a host of other public services we take for granted. All of which are paid for by . . . taxes! And now we want public health care.

Which leads to myth #2 – “Government is the problem.”

To me, this statement was the worst legacy of the Reagan administration. If the old fraud believed this, then why the hell did he run for public office? Was it simply to destroy our American democracy? If you believe government doesn’t work, you have no incentive to work at a government job. Consequently Americans have gotten very little help from government during the Republican-dominated years which followed Reagan.

Today, Frank Luntz is trotting out the health care version of this meme in an attempt to tank a public health care option. “You won’t have any choice of doctors or hospitals. Government-run programs never work.” Except, see #1 for a list of public programs that have been working.

Lies, lies, lies . . . repeated so often most of us have accepted they are true.

#3 – The Great Socialist Threat!

Does anyone throwing out the term “socialism” really know what it means? Do you?

Conservatives routinely play the fear card; facts be damned. And they love to paint European Democratic Socialist countries as godless bastions of hedonism.

Yet for all our “patriotic” blathering about what a great democracy and country we are, our quality of life is declining. Americans are sicker. Our infant mortality rate is higher. We work more hours for less pay. We take fewer vacations. And we don’t vote in as high numbers as citizens in these social democracies.

That’s right. Perhaps the greatest privilege of our democracy – the vote – and Americans don’t exercise it.

Here’s my thought. Maybe we don’t pay enough taxes! You see, in Europe, citizens pay much higher taxes, so they have a greater incentive to vote. Of course, in many countries they also get health care, child care, much greater paid maternity (and paternity) leave, longer minimum paid vacations, education that includes pre-k through college -- a strong social safety net. They may have fewer cars and less plastic and electronic crap, but they don’t need it either.

Get past the fear and start asking questions

The founding fathers believed a healthy democracy demanded an informed populace. So instead of simply accepting 15-second TV news reports and commentary by radio and TV pundits as information, go read something. And read outside your comfort zone.

If you’re liberal, read a conservative publication like The Weekly Standard or The National Review. If you’re more conservative, read The Nation or Salon. Form your opinions after perusing many sources. Because the truth is somewhere in between, and the press is no longer free. Most media outlets are corporate minions, developed to make profits – not to serve the public’s need for information.

As a nation, we have forgotten that at our peril.

Put up or shut up!

2009-05-27T06:16:00.000-07:00

Americans love to complain. We complain about government as much as anything. But how many of us actually participate in the process? We are, after all, a democracy of the people, by the people, for the people. Are you doing your part?

As a progressively more active citizen, I’m losing patience with my fellow citizens. I hear lots of Americans complaining about the state of affairs at all levels: local, state and federal. But I don’t see too many doing much to change things.

And I believe you have to earn your right to complain.

If you complain about how you see local officials spending tax dollars, have you called and asked about how those spending decisions were made? Or have you written a letter to the editor outlining your concerns? Have you advocated for funds to go to your priorities?

If you’re worried about the number of young people leaving your state never to return, have you lobbied your local and state officials to build economic opportunities to bring them back? This means you have to get off your backside, go to the phone, computer or a desk, and call, e-mail or write a letter.

Do you read newspapers and magazines that provide actual policy information to learn what government (all levels) is doing? Because 15-second TV stories and radio commentary by entertainers/shock-jocks is not real information about the legislation that affects your life.

Did you vote in the last election?

And on the local level, what do you do to make a difference? Have you attended a school board meeting? Do you pick up trash? Do you volunteer at a school? Do you serve on a board?

If you spend most of your free time parked in front of your TV or computer and expect someone else to read your mind and give you the change you want, you’re a fool. The “Easy Button” only exists in Staples commercials. Real change happens when we get up and work for it.

And even then, you can’t expect it to appear exactly as you want it. Because the guy across the street may have a completely different need. The public good is a balancing act.

So here’s a warning. Before you open your mouth to complain about the status quo when I’m around, ask yourself what you’ve done to make change happen. ‘Cause I will. And I’m going to tell you that you have to earn your right to complain.

The House is on Fire

2009-02-19T06:27:00.000-08:00

The house is on fire. Our U.S. economy is an inferno, loosing 20,000 jobs a day, and the Republicans want to turn off the hoses. No more government spending!

No, the house is on fire, so let it burn until it burns itself out. In fact, let’s turn off the water while a select few hoard it. Let’s give more tax cuts to corporations and the wealthy.

That’s what Republican economic ideas amount to.

Despite the historical evidence that spending programs like the New Deal put Americans back to work and helped stimulate the economy, the Republicans refused to support President Obama’s stimulus package. Instead they try to tell us the New Deal didn’t work.

And despite further historical evidence aligning tax cuts with economic growth and proving tax cuts DO NOT stimulate the economy, the Republicans continue to sing the same song they’ve sung the last eight years or longer. The average American is finally accepting reality as their jobs disappear and they face losing their homes.

While the Republican Party continues to parrot their selfish, greedy ideology, more Americans lose their jobs, their homes, their healthcare and their security. So I have a question for the remaining die-hard Republicans out there. Do you really believe these same old lines?

November 2007 Sunset

2009-02-16T14:45:00.001-08:00

(For Maya Soetoro-Ng in honor of her Nov. 2007 visit to Red Oak, Iowa)

Your arrived on a warm November evening
as the sun slid behind our bronze
and burnished fields.
Visiting the city of red oaks
to speak with educators
in an old white brick home
on the hill --
sharing your shared history
with your brother.

For us, you painted the picture
of a compact, creative family
(Your mother watching
Kansas clouds and raising
children to make a difference.)

You noted the beauty of
an Iowa sunset,
yourself from a land
renowned for arresting
vistas,
and won my grateful
respect and appreciation.

Canopy

2009-02-16T14:37:00.001-08:00

Terraced hills
drape the creek bed,
flowing down
to a burbling brook.
Billowy bales of cloud
roll overhead
as spring blows
across the plains.

How dumb are we?

2008-09-10T11:54:00.000-07:00

Before you decide to vote for the military man and the self-proclaimed hockey mom, ask yourself if you’re doing better than you were eight years ago.

Then consider the facts:

McCain, while once willing to take stands against his own party, has consistently capitulated to the Bush Administration and the religious right in control of the Republican party. That’s how you get to vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.

Also consider this: Sarah Palin is the “made-for-TV” candidate. She studied broadcast journalism and worked for a time as a sportscaster. So she can read a teleprompter and deliver a script with style. She looks good, and she knows how to make a good impression. But she’s the real “empty suit” in this race. In fact, she has one of the lightest resumes (and a questionable record) ever in a candidate for national office, much like George W.

McCain’s now touting change, and using his VP candidate as a prop for that argument. So I have to ask, “How dumb are we?”

Are we going to fall for that because we’re uncomfortable with the idea of a black man as president, even though his policy will help 98 percent of us economically? Are we going to fall for it because a woman, any woman in the White House is more important than choice for our daughters and ourselves? Are we going to fall for that because we’re still voting on stupid measures like “likeability” and looking “presidential.”

Wake up America! This kind of decision making is what got us eight years of W. Instead of looking at Bush’s abysmal track record as a corporate executive and governor, we let the media focus on his folksy personality (which is largely a lie).

How dumb are we?

For once in your life read something, and look at what economic history tells you about the Democratic record versus the Republican. Turn off the TV and radio; quit listening to vapid sound bites and vote for your real economic interests.

I’ve spent an entire lifetime watching the lower and middle class in this country fall for these stupid campaign tricks. (Am I reliving 1980!?!) And we’re poised to do it again. You have to remember it’s not a candidate’s personality that matters, it’s the policies. Who’s going to provide healthcare, work for an equitable tax system, and rebuild our economy, national security and stature in the world?

Personally, I’m voting for the candidate who thinks I have a brain.

The Story of Willow Tree

2008-09-06T12:52:00.001-07:00

On Dec. 27, 2007, we received a phone call from Curt’s mother. Her brother, Harold Kohler, had died suddenly, apparently from a sudden heart attack brought on by shoveling snow in his driveway on the outskirts of Minneapolis.

Upon learning of their grandfather’s death, Harold’s two grandchildren reacted very differently. His 10-year-old grandson, Ben, openly expressed his grief with tears. But his 12-year-old granddaughter, Allison, turned quietly and shut herself in her room. As her mother describes it, she emerged silently about five minutes later bearing the following poem, Willow Tree.

If I could picture you as anything,
I would pick a willow tree.
So graceful, sweet, and kind,
Giving lots of love to me.

Giving shelter to every creature,
That tries to hide from the rain.
So strong, that when you get chopped down,
You feel not any pain.

Just sitting there so peaceful,
Letting the wind carry you around.
Always holding a smile,
and never once a frown.

Your trunk so big, your leaves so small,
Your branches swing left to right.
If you take one look, you will see,
The most beautiful, man in sight.

Upon reading the poem a second time, I began to see this image of the willow tree planted outside Harold’s home. In American folk art traditions, the willow tree was used in memorial paintings and needlework as a symbol of mourning. But to Ally, the willow tree simply represented Grandpa Harry.

Republicans, McCain and the Pottery Barn rule

2008-08-25T11:45:00.000-07:00

In 2003 during the run-up to the Iraq invasion, General Colin Powell warned the Bush Administration that military action in Iraq would follow the Pottery Barn rule: “You break it, you buy it.” And so here we are in 2008, bogged down in a quagmire of occupation with the tally of lives lost and dollars spent on this destruction rising hourly.

Similarly, the Republican Party should recognize their responsibility for their current presidential candidate. They may not be overjoyed with John McCain, but he is the product of the morally bankrupt administration they pushed into office in 2000 and 2004 – by any means necessary.

John McCain, once admired for his willingness to buck his party and take unpopular stands on principle, was broken by the Bush Administration, capitulating to their demands in his overarching desire to win the Republican nomination in the future. Now, they own him.

Once against Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy, now McCain wants to make them permanent. Once critical of the Iraq War execution, now he argues it’s a success. Once against torture, he quietly caved when the President watered down the legislation banning such practices. On so many issues, McCain has abandoned former thinking to embrace the stances of Bush Neo-con Republicans and their extreme agenda. This is only made more evident with the use of the current Karl Rove campaign tactics and talking points McCain was once the target of himself.

So I say to the Republican Party, “Good luck with McCain. You broke him; now you own him.”

Confluence of events

2008-08-20T13:19:00.000-07:00

For the last several months, I have been obsessed with the presidential election and the state of our nation. I am fascinated and appalled at the divergence of threats: our crumbling infrastructure, the mortgage crisis, rising gas prices and unemployment, further political breakdown and violence in Iraq, intra-party sniping among Democrats, eroding consumer confidence, and on and on.

What may appear to be an amazing confluence of events to many only reinforces observations I’ve made for years.

First, as an artist, specifically a drawer, I have been trained to observe -- and to observe relationships between objects so that I can reproduce them realistically. Nothing is ever seen in isolation. So I tend to connect events and actions in relation to other events and actions, as well as on the continuum of history.

Additionally, this observation requires an attempt to view things objectively, with as little emotion as possible. In fact, when you are truly observing and drawing with your right brain, there is a sense of detachment which allows you to analyze without making evaluations.

Similarly, when I observe political and current events, I view them as related. Thus for many years, I have observed that America’s economy, based on consumer spending and wall street stock prices, is a teetering house of cards. One stiff breeze would be enough not only to blow it over, but to scatter the cards in all directions.

So how did we think the War in Iraq was going to affect our economy, especially gas prices? When you attack and destroy the production capacity of one oil-producing nation, not to mention the surrounding oil-rich countries, do you really think gas prices will remain stable?

Also, based on the history of war in America, did we really think we could sustain tax cuts and support a sustained military offensive?

Add to these problems our long history of spiraling medical and drug costs, loss of jobs and spiraling education costs.

Yet as a culture, we compartmentalize these concerns. The presidential candidates and campaigns parcel their positions on individual topics: health care, energy, education, the military, the War in Iraq, etc. But the reality is these issues are a great complicated web.

For example, I want the candidates to discuss the possibility that universal single payer health care (yes, socialized medicine!) could provide a great economic stimulus by encouraging entrepreneurship and small business enterprise, as well as freeing capital for existing companies to retool and grow. I have always been taught small businesses were the best drivers for stimulating growth.

In addition, to battle unemployment as well as rebuild infrastructure, why not develop a new Works Progress Administration for the 21^st century? This could dovetail with a new national service requirement for all youth that would include civic as well as military options.

And as we repair our own country with service and shared sacrifice, we can rebuild our relationship with the rest of the world. Because it is not our freedoms that are hated, it is our foreign policy, especially with regard to the Middle East. As a nation, we must step back and observe our own actions dispassionately from another viewpoint if we are to change things for the better.

Viewed on the continuum of history, I see America where we were a century ago. And it will take a similar pendulum swing in the opposite direction if we are to undo the damage of 40 years of conservative greed. Because in historical terms, that what conservatism represents – individual greed and self-serving motivation over the community good. We Americans need to learn from our own history, not to mention centuries of world history.

Who really got thrown under the bus?

2008-04-30T09:49:00.000-07:00

Fifteen months into this presidential campaign I’m sick of it all. Sick of the candidates hammering away at each other as another state’s contest rolls nearer. Sick of the media echo chamber presuming to speak for the American people. Sick of Republicans and Democrats. Sick of endorsements and ads. And sick of hearing who got “thrown under the bus.”

Let me tell you. It ain’t Patti Solis Doyle or Barack Obama’s grandmother. It ain’t Jeremiah Wright or Mark Penn. It sure ain’t George Stephanopolous or Charlie Gibson.

It’s the American people.

While elected officials try to determine whether or not to endorse and mainstream media personalities chatter on about the latest trivial non-issue, we the people are gasping for breath out here. We can’t afford to fill up our cars and buy groceries. We’re praying no one in the family gets sick or has an accident. We’re hoping we can make the next mortgage payment while Charlie Gibson is worrying about his capital gains tax. Honestly! And it’s been like this for years.

I say it’s time we throw our political elite and media mavens under the bus. Vote ‘em out and unplug the radio and TV. Enough is enough.

Tired of whiney women!

2008-04-29T15:25:00.000-07:00

I am sick of hearing from whiney women about how sexist everyone else is. Enough already!

I’ve spent a lifetime listening to self-proclaimed feminists pontificating about how the world hates women. And I’m a woman.

I grew up the youngest of three sisters with one brother. My oldest sister gave me a “Sisters Unite” t-shirt, complete with raised clenched fist, that I lived in at age 8. And when I was in college, my brother’s girlfriend gave me a “69 cents” t-shirt that I wore at least once a week. My college roommate also referred to me as “Woman” because I insisted it was condescending for people to refer to us as girls at 18-plus years of age.

In graduate school, I pointed out to two of my professors that I felt there was some bias involved in providing older, single guys with teaching assistantships that put them on their own in classrooms, while some of us women were overlooked or given graduate assistantships pairing us with professors.

I’ve witnessed or experienced bias all my life. But I didn’t whine about it.

I simply spoke honestly when appropriate and went on to do the work, whatever it was. And I tried to do it better, smarter and more completely, acting as a person first.

So the Geraldine Ferraro flap sent me over the edge. I’ve been seeing for months whiney, self-righteous, bloviating statements and posts all over the Internet about how Hillary Clinton is so discriminated against. Cry me a river!

This woman has floated along on her husband’s coattails. Experienced! Only if you give her credit for her husband’s years in office. And what kind of “feminist” takes credit for her husband’s resume? Shouldn’t she do it on her own?

In reality, Clinton’s only served seven years in public office. And her resume of “working for change” includes one year with the Children’s Defense Fund. Most of her working life has been as a corporate attorney, and there are some questions of conflict of interest with that experience. Yet the mainstream media has given her a pass on her resume and tout her “experience” versus a man with nearly 11 years service as an elected official, plus years of public service as a community organizer, civil rights attorney and teacher.

But because she’s a woman, other women refuse to look at her as a person and evaluate her more broadly. I’ve seen post after post by Taylor Marsh, Kathleen Reardon and Roseanne Barr, among others, touting the knee-jerk reaction that everyone is a woman-hater. Can they not comprehend that some of us are choosing to evaluate the candidates based their resumes, experience and skills? That we’re evaluating them as people? That perhaps Hillary being a Clinton is more of a detriment to her candidacy than the fact she’s a woman?

I’m tired of women who want to blame all their troubles on how someone else perceives their gender. I’m a human being.

Being the change

2008-02-08T09:10:00.000-08:00

“Change will not come if we wait for some other person – or if we wait for some other time. We are the ones we have been waiting for. We are the change that we seek.” -- Barack Obama

I take this 2008 presidential race personally. Yes, I have chosen to support Barack Obama with my time and money. But let me tell you why.

In June 1998, my family and I came back to Iowa to visit my parents at their farm. During that week, I drove my parents to Nebraska Methodist Hospital Oncology Center for their comprehensive check ups. Mom, who was battling colon cancer, had now developed two tiny spots on her liver. And Dad, who was a five-year survivor of pancreatic cancer, was holding his own, but barely. The long-term outlook for both was not optimistic.

Later that week, my dad and I sat at the picnic table in the backyard talking about what would happen to the farm. He shared his disappointment that Iowa had never developed the economic opportunities to keep his three daughters and one son closer to home. He also mourned the loss of rural culture. That conversation, Dad’s deep disappointment and cracking voice, have stayed with me.

A little more than a year later, Mom and Dad were gone. We spent two years sorting out the estate. My older sisters inherited 80 acres of farm ground, the land where Dad had grown up, now rented and farmed by our cousin. My brother and I (the younger two) inherited the farm and house where we’d grown up. My brother, who was best suited to live here and maintain the place, searched for employment, but ran straight up against all the economic factors Dad lamented. So my husband, a special education teacher, found a job, and we moved almost two years after dad’s death. I was not upset to leave my corporate job behind and concentrate on our kids, then ages one and 13.

I did not anticipate what happened next. Six months after returning to the place of my birth, my neighbors approached me about becoming a write-in candidate for school board. Knowing the abysmal turnout for school board elections, I said, “Sure.” Much to my surprise, I won the election, and the work has been non-stop ever since. (For the record, school board directors are not paid in Iowa.)

In addition to taking on school board leadership, I ended up with leadership roles in my Methodist church and a historic preservation group. The new work included: starting an after-school program at the church, writing and administering grant dollars, helping our school district develop a vision, establishing 501(c)3 status for the preservation group, and on and on. On top of this, my son entered and graduated high school and my daughter went from toddler to elementary school.

Behind it all, though, replaying in my brain was that conversation with Dad. I had returned to this place I love, disappointed to see so little had changed in the 18 years I’d been gone. Decline was the only change. And I was surrounded by people discouraged and confused – too cynical or worn out to fight for change. Many didn’t know where to begin.

Yet I returned at a good time. A few stalwart leaders are building some things here: exploring economic development, opening small businesses, and pooling resources. We’re beginning to show people that, “Yes we can” make a difference, whether it’s picking up the neighborhood or reopening a park. But it’s a battle every day to get people to work for change; to believe it’s possible.

As a community organizer and civil rights attorney, Barack Obama wrestled with these same challenges and barriers on the South Side of Chicago. So for me, it’s exciting to see a national leader, who has lived this experience, speak this truth and ask us to believe in ourselves. Because until we decide to make America a better nation and to work for it, nothing will change.

Taking Hillary at her word

2008-01-29T11:44:00.000-08:00

I should have known what was coming when Hillary Clinton announced her intention to run for president. “I’m in it to win it!” she said. And with the Clintons, that means by any means necessary. Which is why I don’t see much difference between Hillary Clinton and George W. Bush.

I know, here it comes. Now I’m a Hillary hater.

Far from it. I voted twice for Bill Clinton, although I had reservations about his support for big business and NAFTA. Personally, my family was able to recover some financially during his tenure in the White House. And I always felt Hillary took way too many hits for being a strong woman.

During the impeachment debacle, I joined Move On because I felt Congress should get on with the people’s business, not the Clinton family’s personal affairs. Now, I’m ready to tell the Clintons, “Move on.”

Why this change? Since becoming a senator, Hillary’s record on key votes has not impressed me. And her inability to admit mistakes, such as voting for the resolution leading to the Iraq War, only serves to remind me of the current occupant of the White House.

As does the Clintons' current behavior on the campaign trail. Lies, innuendo, allegations of voter suppression – all the things we have lived through under George W. Bush.

It simply appalls me. How could a former president and his wife so endanger their own legacy? Do they care about their party and country?

To me, it demonstrates a lack of concern for the people’s needs and the people’s business. “In it to win it” tells me all I need to know. For Bill and Hillary Clinton, the presidency is about them, not me and my family. That’s why Hillary won’t get my vote.

What’s wrong with Hillary?

2008-01-12T06:58:00.000-08:00

I keep hearing this question – from the media, pundits and Hillary supporters. And I’ll try to give my perspective, as someone not quite 45 and in the Obama camp.

It’s not that there’s anything wrong with Hillary. It’s who she associates with and what she represents. It’s her ties to Wal-Mart and her support from Rupert Murdoch – you know, of Fox News.

It’s her fundraising help from Alan Quasha, who helped bail George W. Bush’s failing oil company out by folding it into Harken Energy. She also hosted Ken Lay at the White House. You remember Ken Lay, former CEO of Enron?

It’s her ties to failed healthcare reform, NAFTA, Monica Lewinsky and impeachment proceedings. Yes, it’s her ties to Bill Clinton.

It’s her association with the Iraq War, and like George W., her inability to admit a mistake. It’s her association with the politics of “triangulation.”

It’s her association with James Carville, Bob Shrum, Terry MacAuliffe and all the other Democratic Leadership Council strategists who have consistently lost the Democrats elections with their focus on fundraising and polls over grassroots activism. They’ve got theirs; screw the rest of us. We’re simply votes to be won, not people to be served.

It’s not that there’s anything wrong with Hillary. I believe she’s a good person, very intelligent and capable. But her time is past. All her ties will lead us straight back to politics as usual.

I want a president who will lead Americans to shared sacrifice and service. Hillary, because of these associations, will only perpetuate old divisions.

If only she and Bill could see it.

Thank you, Mrs. Hoogeveen

2008-01-12T06:53:00.000-08:00

As American Education Week (Nov. 11-17) came to a close and I concluded my week at the Iowa Association of School Boards Delegate Assembly and Convention this year, I was steeped in memories of 8^th Grade Social Studies.

That year, I was blessed to study American history and civics under Mrs. Lila Hoogeveen. She had taught my sister, Linda, art, and she had been my first grade teacher – the wonderful lady who rescued my new doll, bringing it to my home when I’d left it at school. Somehow, Mrs. Hoogeveen knew I’d be distressed.

So I was expecting an invigorating year. Mrs. Hoogeveen was obviously an accomplished teacher. And she was known among middle school students for her signature project – the Constitutional Convention of the Continental Congress.

A masterpiece of integrated instruction, this activity included a homework assignment to make a powdered wig to wear while the Congress was in session; a reenactment of the Congress’ agenda to create a Constitution for the United States; and ongoing personal journals, written in the voice of the characters we were assigned.

The entire process modeled democracy in a way which still resonates with me. The hours we delegates spent arguing our positions demonstrated powerfully the difficulty of our founding fathers’ work. We could not adjourn until we completed a Constitution. And not surprisingly, ours did not match the Constitution developed by the real Continental Congress. We learned via experience that democracy depends greatly on the people who participate.

The long hours of discourse and disagreement taught us the hard work that is democracy. And I find myself revisiting that experience as I work at the school board table and as I see our nation prepare for the 2008 elections. Too few people get involved; too few people discuss policies and events; too few people communicate with their representatives.

Although it wasn’t always pretty, Mrs. Hoogeveen’s Constitutional Convention modeled how democratic government should work. And it’s a lesson I’m coming to appreciate more all the time.

So thank you, Mrs. Hoogeveen, for teaching about democracy in way that stuck.

U.S. Democracy: Dumb All Over?

2007-12-05T10:19:00.000-08:00

For the last 30 years or more, we’ve been assailed with the conservative mantra that government is bad. And all the repetition has led many of us to buy that line.

But throughout that period, I have observed and absorbed more and more about the workings of democracy. Through high school and college government classes, independent reading of our Constitution and Bill of Rights and most recently participating as a local school board member, I have learned first hand how democracy works.

And it does.

What fails is not our system, but the people we put in it. Government is not bad; we simply put the wrong people in place. And that’s our responsibility. Remember “we the people?”

Then to paraphrase Frank Zappa, if the government is dumb (or bad), then we’re dumb. And maybe even a little ugly on the side!

As a citizenry, 2008 is our accountability moment. Our founding fathers wrestled with empowering ordinary people with the responsibility of selecting and monitoring their own leaders. They knew it was a grave responsibility. And so they also championed a free public education. The system they created was marvelously designed, flexible and self-correcting provided citizens exercised their responsibility to participate through monitoring, communicating, voting and serving.

I’d give us a failing grade.

Throughout my lifetime I’ve watched citizens abandon the political process. Then they whine about being left behind! This is our government until we abandon it, and someone else hijacks it. And I think we’re very nearly there.

So let’s act. Engage in the 2008 elections. Learn about the candidates and vote. But don’t stop there.

Monitor government. Demand media cover not just prurient details of officials’ lives, but their votes on policy. Communicate and advocate with those officials. E-mail and the Internet make this easier than ever. Phones and letters work, too.

And finally, consider serving at some level yourself. Because democracy is shared responsibility, and more people should get involved.

In honor of the protests Oct. 27 . . .

2007-10-26T14:21:00.000-07:00

Tomorrow in 11 cities across the country, protests and marches to end the war in Iraq will be held. Living in the boondocks, I won't be near enough to attend one. But I'll be thinking about all the marchers, and my heart will be with them.

For to quote the great Molly Ivins in her final column, "Every single day, every single one of us needs to step outside and take some action to help stop this war. Raise hell. Think of something to make the ridiculous look ridiculous. Make our troops know we're for them, and that's why we're trying to get them out of there. Hit the streets. Bang pots and pans. Demand, 'Stop it, now!'"

Here's my contribution for today.

Complacent Citizens – 2007

(After Max Ehrmann)

Complacent citizens, apathetically silent,
speaking not to question power;
following blindly like lemmings.
You mourn the lost lives
of our soldier sons and daughters,
but will not stand to shield them.

Complacent citizens, apathetically silent,
how many more lives and limbs lost
before you move to protest
the death and destruction
of this unjust and vengeful war?

Is there in your heart no love for others,
no respect for life, and no concern for country
that you will demand an end to this war?
Complacent drones or ignorant automatons,
I exhort you to act; urge movement
to stop this bloody conflict now!

What the SCHIP battle says about our society

2007-10-19T17:37:00.000-07:00

I’ve been closely following the SCHIP battle, and I feel it demonstrates some ugly truths about our country. How can the richest nation in the world refuse to provide healthcare for its children?

Well, when the general public has been bludgeoned with the meme about welfare mothers in Cadillacs for more than 30 years, this is what you get. And it’s especially puzzling this narrow and mean agenda has been supported by the rise of the Christian Right. Didn’t Christ preach to care for the poor and to help your neighbor?

For years, conservatives have bombarded us with their dominant message of the failure of government and its social programs. Stories of abuses are flaunted in the media, while countless social service successes are ignored. In the meantime, people simply believe government doesn’t work because the only reports we receive (Thank you Main Stream Media!) are negative.

To complicate matters, you also have the Christian Right preaching a narrow view of “values” that emphasizes sexual mores rather than humanity. Therefore, homosexuality is a greater threat than hunger. At the same time, these hypocrites follow front men like Joel Osteen, who preach they will receive monetary rewards on earth for their faithfulness. Forgive me if I cannot quote chapter and verse, but didn’t Jesus preach to leave behind your worldly possessions?

To me, this is the picture of the conservative movement in America: “We don’t believe in government. We don’t believe in evolution, but we believe in Social Darwinism. Profit over people. If you can’t earn an adequate living, you just aren’t working hard enough.” Never mind that they’ve rigged the system to make it damn near impossible for someone born into poverty to move up the ladder. And never mind that many of these conservatives have never had to work from the bottom up. This is why Bush doesn’t “get” poor people.

Overworked, exhausted, broadcast-hypnotized Americans have bought these lies hook, line and sinker. Like the saps in the Staples commercials, we’re all looking for the Easy Button. We seldom question what’s presented.

So now that the tide is turning and average Americans are waking up to the fact they’ve been snookered, what line does the GOP trot out to defend their SCHIP veto? “Poor kids first!”

In the past, that line might have worked. But now that more of are us are flirting with the poverty line, we’re finally starting to care.

Opinions range on candidates

2007-10-17T10:36:00.001-07:00

I've just been visiting Talking Points Memo and watching the TPMTV interview with Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos. He has a whole different perspective of the candidates, and of course, it comes down to what you may experience on any given day on the campaign trail.

I was struck because his description of attending an Obama rally in Oakland, California, was very different from what I've seen on the ground here in Iowa. So, below I'm posting my essay about attending this year's Harkin Steak Fry. It sums up my impression of the candidates attending.

And I've seen Obama in small town Iowa since, and I'd say the reaction is pretty much the opposite of Moulitsas'. People seem to be looking for truth, integrity and someone who'll craft policy with them in mind. My impression is Obama is hitting that chord with people on the ground here.

Hope vs. Glory

On Sunday, Sept. 16, my husband, 6-year-old daughter and I joined 12,000 other Iowans on the balloon fields in Indianola, Iowa for Senator Tom Harkin’s 30^th Annual Steak Fry.

Tired from two days at a school boards symposium, I was not enthusiastic. Nor was my daughter who kept asking what she would do. But my husband, who is being courted for his Democratic caucus vote, had been recruited by the Obama campaign to attend their pre-Steak Fry rally. And he signed us all up, so accordingly, we lumbered to the car and took off.

Upon entering Indianola, I was impressed by the crowds of youthful campaign workers, especially for the Edwards and Obama campaigns. I was also struck by the sea of signs, mostly dark blue with white type, sporting each candidate’s name. And amidst that sea of blue, conspicuously different, stood large white signs reading, “HOPE.” Underneath in much smaller type was “Iowa.BarackObama.com.” The accompanying circular logo used the O in “hope” to create an image of a sunrise, bringing to mind Reagan’s “It’s morning in America” theme.

As we drove through Indianola in search of the Obama rally, traffic grew thicker. For once, the early gene my husband and I both carry paid off, as we were able to get parking at the balloon fields directly across from the park hosting the Obama rally. There, we camped near the spot where Senator Obama would enter and address the crowd.

Our early arrival also gave me a chance to observe the campaign staff at work. Young and enthusiastic, they all seemed to know their jobs and be where they were needed. They were attentive to needs (press, the handicapped and elderly) and knew the schedule; they were confident and friendly. And they knew how to warm up the crowd with the help of a student drum corps.

That attitude reflected their leadership. When Senator Obama arrived, he strode confidently to the stage in his open collar and rolled-up sleeves to deliver a short dress rehearsal for his full speech. It had us “fired up” and “ready to go” as he led the march across Highway 92 to the balloon fields. A line of supporters at least a quarter-mile long streamed toward the Steak Fry, chanting all the way. It was an impressive entrance, after which everyone broke up to get their food and wait for the speeches to begin.

As an independent, I was interested in hearing all the Democratic candidates speak. And all but Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich were there to address the crowds spread across the green Iowa hills. Each had 15 minutes to share their message.

I sat on the grass with my daughter, braiding grass blades as I listened. Obama launched the event, using his earlier address about the power of one voice to fire up people and get them ready to go make a difference as his springboard. But the interesting thing was he wasn’t talking about himself. He told stories of real people he’s met, who are changing the world for the better, and he emphasized that a new president can’t create change alone. We’re in it together.

Obama was followed by Bill Richardson, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, John Edwards and Joe Biden. And of that group, only Edwards broke away from the traditional campaign rhetoric of “When I am president, I promise to . . . ”

Like Obama, Edwards used his time to share stories about real people in America, and like Obama, he asked us to make real sacrifices and do real work for change.

From the hillside, I felt I was witnessing a shift from old to new. Obama and Edwards represented the new face of politics in America versus the old guard, politics-as-usual self-aggrandizement of the political establishment. And Edwards even noted government shouldn’t be about corporate interests, the wealthy and the powerful; it’s about us.

No more glory seekers. What America needs is hope – like a shining white sign on the hillside.

Silent No More

2007-10-15T13:58:00.000-07:00

Is anyone else having flashbacks to fall 2002?

Back then, I was reading everything I could dig up about the war in Afghanistan and the inspectors in Iraq. I read articles by former diplomats and Pentagon employees with expertise in Middle East affairs, like General Anthony Zinni, and reports in British and European newspapers to get another perspective on events. I took to turning off network news within 10 minutes after turning it on and perusing online publications.

I also began to seek out nonpartisan media and political monitoring sites like Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (fair.org) and Factcheck.org. I was desperate to learn the facts as I watched the administration in Washington bang the drum to attack Iraq.

My reading led me to conclude two things. First, no tie had ever existed between Saddam Hussein and Al-Quaida. Second, a power shift was taking place within the Pentagon. Old guard professionals with a real world view of Mid-East affairs were being systematically purged to make way for a cabal of neo-cons tied to the Project for a New American Century. Even I could see, from my PC in Southwest Iowa, that intelligence reports were being massaged to reflect the agenda of the neo-cons.

Meanwhile, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the inspection team were gathering information from the ground and finding nothing that was a threat to the U.S.

When Congress voted on the authorization to use force in Iraq, I was flabbergasted. If I could obtain and analyze information from my front room, why couldn’t federal lawmakers? Could they really be so shallow as to cast their vote simply on political expediency? This authorization was essentially a vote for military action, which meant lives would be lost – including civilians.

I had arguments with my son and husband who wanted to believe our president and Congress had inside information. Like so many Americans, they wanted to trust our leadership. But the facts were against them.

I watched in horror that night the following March when the bombs began to drop in Baghdad. I have personal ties to that country as my brother-in-law’s family fled from Iraq in 1948. I also went to graduate school with an Iraqi woman. So to me, this was not an abstract military action. This was the destruction of people’s lives and homes – for no good reason!

Today, I’m watching our president run through similar rhetoric about Iran. And again I’m seeing reports from the IAEA contradicting the president’s views about Iran’s nuclear capabilities. In addition, reports of the current Iranian leader’s support among Iranians are mixed, and their economy is not stable.

Yet as soon as Secretary of Defense Gates and Secretary of State Rice begin U.S. efforts to engage in diplomacy, something changes Bush’s mind, and he starts to bang the war drum again. Reports of plans for air strikes in Iran have been circulating for the last year thanks to the dogged reporting of Seymour Hersh and the insider’s perspective of former inspector Scott Ritter.

But the final pieces fell into place for me recently. The first piece was the report of the B-52 carrying armed nuclear warheads to an air base in Barksdale, La. As reported on the blog site, TPMCafe, by Larry Johnson (http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2007/sep/05/staging_nuke_for_iran), that base is a jumping off point for Mid-East operations. The second piece was Sydney Blumenthal’s article “Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction” in Salon Magazine on Sept. 6, 2007 and also posted on Common Dreams. Bush knew the facts, but he refused to acknowledge them.

We’ve come full circle.

I read the signs right last time, and I didn’t speak up. I thought, “How can I, a single average individual from rural America, change anything?”

This time, I won’t be silent.

One more thing I swore I'd never do . . .

2007-10-15T13:17:00.000-07:00

So today I find myself launching a blog, just one more thing to cross off my list of "Things I'll never do." As an artist and writer, I always argued that just because it's so easy to write a web log, doesn't mean everyone should do it.

And I still hold that last part's true. There are a lot of people posting work (of all types) on the Internet who shouldn't be.

But in a world looking for online content, you can't fight it forever. And I feel like I've reached the point where I have a lot to say -- whether in words or images. So here goes.