U.S. Democracy: Dumb All Over?

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 . . .

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

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

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

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 . . .

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.