Great Feagler Article on Kucinich in Today's PD

Click on the link in this entry's title to read a great column on Congressman Dennis Kucinich by Dick Feagler that ran in the February 14th, 2007 edition of the Cleveland Plain Dealer.

Gates Foundation Report on Ohio's Education Policies

If you click on the title of this entry, you can read a Cleveland Plain Dealer article on a report that the Gates Foundation delivered to the Ohio Board of Education yesterday. It says that while Ohio has made progress in testing students and requiring them to demonstrate that they have mastered certain subjects, much more needs to be done, particularly about funding. The report points out the obvious, that Ohio needs to change its reliance on local property taxes which forces local school districts to go back for money every two years. All candidates thinking of running for Ohio office in 2008, especially for the General Assembly need to track down this report and read it.

Fear of the Other in Politics

Newsweek had a short interview with the author of Why Good People Do Bad Things, which you can read by clicking on the link in this entry's title. The reason for the interview was the sad case of Lisa Nowak, the astronaut who is charged with trying to hurt a romantic rival. In this interview he noted that there are two basic fears that humans have: a fear that "the other" will overwhelm us, and the fear that "the other" will abandon us. According to this author, each of these basic human fears can lead to extreme and even violent actions. He goes on to theorize that it was her fear of abandonment that led to Ms. Nowak's actions.

While his interview was about romantic obsession and why a person as accomplished as Lisa Nowak would do something that appears incredibly stupid, his remarks have application to politics. One thing that all political ideologues who preach intolerance and hate have in common is that they base their appeal on fear of "the other." Think of Hitler and Stalin. Both of them were able to convince followers that "the other" was a threat to those followers. Think of homegrown ideologues such as the KKK or the John Birch society. Each of them tell their followers that "the other" such as Afro-Americans or liberals are a threat to their existence, or at least the existence they have known. It doesn't matter that the threat may be trivial or even non-existent, what matters is that they are able to convince their followers that the threat is real. They are able to raise fears in the minds of their followers that have their origins in out primal past.

Listen to the statements of people like Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh and analyze them to see if they are based on appealing to a fear of "the other." "The other" being liberals, Democrats, feminists, non-Christians, or anyone else that isn't like them. They raise the spectre that their listeners will be overwhelmed by "the other" and that they have to aggressively resist "the other" to preserve their lives and the lives of their families. It is very hard to rebut such emotional appeals with reason or facts. The reasoning part of the brain isn't involved in processing such appeals.

Of course, fear of "the other" isn't always illogical. There are people in the world who do wish to destroy others, or harm their families. Think of people like Osma bin Laden who seem nothing wrong with killing people who have never met him or his followers, let alone harmed them.

This fear of "the other" explains the rise and fall of George W. Bush between 2001 and 2006. Following September 11, 2001, it was easier to convince Americans that "the other", in this case Islamic terrorists posed a direct threat to our existence than it was on September 10, 2001. It was easy to get political support for attacking the Taliban in Afghanistan. Then, before emotions could subside, he started hyping the threat from Iraq, even though Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11.
That's why it was essential to the Bush administration that Iraq possess weapons of mass destruction, especially nuclear weapons.

Once, though, the invasion took place and no WMDs were found, then Bush's popularity began to fall. Although it had not yet caught up with him by 2004, it had by 2006. His administration's attempts to use fear of "the other" to gain political power weren't successful since now Americans had plenty of evidence that instead of increasing our security, the Iraq War was hurting our security. Unlike 2002 or even 2004, fear of "the other" wasn't enough to overcome the empirical evidence of the harm that Bush's policies were doing to America.

The political use of fear of "the other" also explains why the Republicans in the House of Representatives don't want to debate the merits of Bush's plan to increase the number of troops in Iraq. Instead they want the focus of the debate to be on Islamic terrorists because such a debate appeals to people's fears and not their reason. They can possibly win a debate based on fear, but not win based on reason.

All this is not to say that there aren't Islamic terrorists that present a threat to America and Americans. After 9-11 only a fool would think that such threats don't exist. It is to say, however, that use of fear of "the other" can be a tool for political manipulation and as a instrument for obtaining and wielding political power, one that the radical right-wing Republicans won't hesitate to use.

Senate Republicans: Too Clever by Half?

According to an article in the Washington Post, Harry Reid is no longer backing the Warner-Levin Resolution, which is 1500 words. Instead he is backing the House Resolution which is against Bush's escalation of troops in Iraq and reaffirms support for funding the troops that are already there. (You can read the WP article by clicking on the link in this entry's title.) Reid believes he can get the House resolution before the Senate for a vote in about a week or so. This, of course, will put the Republicans once again in the spot of having to either support Bush or respect the will of the American people, of whom about 60% or more are opposed to any troop increase in Iraq.

Those pundits who thought that the Republicans get the better of Harry Reid when they successfully fought off an attempt to end their filibuster of the Warner Resolution should think again. Now, Republicans are going to face another difficult vote. One that once more will put several of their at-risk incumbents on record as either supporting Bush, and thereby ticking off independent voters, or defying Bush, thereby ticking off the conservative base of the party. It would have been far better to have let a vote take place on the Warner Resolution and be done with it.

Is the Mainstream Media Helping Bush Start War with Iran?

If you click on this entry's title you will link to a great article in the trade magazine Editor & Publisher which points out how both the Washington Post and the New York Times are aiding the Bush administration in its efforts to start a war with Iran. Once again these two "liberal" media giants are pushing an idea promulgated by the Bush administration without any critical analysis. In 2003 it was the idea that Sadam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction. In 2007 it is the idea that Iran is arming the Shia militia in Iraq and that such militia are using these arms to kill American soldiers.

Now, the point of the article isn't whether Iran is or is not arming such groups, it is that the mainstream media seems to have learned nothing from the Iraqi War experience. In the case of the New York Times the author of its article was the co-author with Judith Miller of a series of articles on the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction that has been totally discredited. Why in the world would a newspaper that trumpets its "excellence in journalism" assign a reporter to cover this story on Iran whose work on Iraq was so shoddy? Why in the world does the Washington Post allow officials to make claims that the "highest levels" of the Iranian government are involved in giving weapons to Iraqi insurgents without them going on the record?
Are they trying to out-Fox Fox News? Don't we deserve better from our media? If they can't or won't hold critically analyze this administration's claims, then what are they adding to the public debate that we couldn't get from a Bush administration public relations handout?

Obama Takes on the "Mainstream Media"

One of the charges leveled against Obama is that he doesn't have enough experience to be President. His response to that charge is interesting. He points out that the "mainstream media" doesn't cover his policy proposals, but covers burning issues like what sort of swimsuit he wears. According to his aides, he is very much against the kind of celebrity driven news coverage we have seen too much of in America. (You can click on the link in this entry's title to read more.)

There could also be another reason why he is criticizing the media. He has seen the GOP get away with it for years and has watched while it has been able to intimidate reporters with cries of "liberal bias." He has watched what Eric Alterman calls "working the refs". Just like a good coach will work the refs to get calls for his team or against the opposing team, Republicans have been working the refs for a generation or more to get favorable news coverage or critical news coverage for Democrats. They have successfully built a myth that news organizations are biased against them and that therefore people shouldn't believe what they read about Republicans unless it is favorable to them.

The attack that Obama is launching, that the media is too frivolous is actually much better than accusing the media of a "conservative bias." First of all, it is true. Second, the media would use charges of such a bias to tell the public that they are not biased. "See", they will say, "both sides claim we are biased, that is proof that we are not biased." Then, they will, with considerable self-satisfaction, go back to being just the way they have always been.

It is much harder, though, for the media to blow off the charge of being frivolous. In an age of celebrity driven journalism, when networks are cutting their news departments, when newspapers are forsaking investigative journalism of corporations and government to cover the shenanigans of Paris Hilton, it is hard to refute such a charge. Who knows, if all Democrats start doing this, it might just actually lead to better journalism.

Bush Incompetence: Thousands of Army Humvees Lack Armor Upgrade

The Washington Post has an article in its 2.12.2007 edition on now thousands of Army Humvees need armor upgrades. The lack of these upgrades make these vehicles vulnerable to roadside bombs that are favored by Shia militia. This story illustrates once again the incompetence of the Bush Administration. We have been in Iraq since 2003 and have been fighting insurgents for about as long. That is four years to figure out what our troops need and to get it to them. Yet, here we are, four years later, and American troops are still dying because of this administration's incompetence. Democrats need to remind Americans over and over that when you entrust your government to people who hate government, this is what you get: incompetence, lying, and thievery. (The WP article can be read by clicking the link in this entry's title.)

Republican Congressman Raises Question Whether Dinosaur Flatulence Caused Global Warming

This really speaks for itself and there is not much we can add:

"During the hearing, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) — one of the 87 percent of congressional Republicans who do not believe in man-made global warming — questioned the authors of the report about a period of dramatic climate change that occured 55 million years ago. “We don’t know what those other cycles were caused by in the past. Could be dinosaur flatulence, you know, or who knows?’"

To get the full effect, click on the link in this entry's title.

See Obama Announcement

Click on the link in this entry's title to see a video clip of the Barack Obama announcement that he is seeking the Democratic Presidential Nomination for 2008.

Karl Rove: "I don't want my 17 year old son picking tomatoes."

Karl Rove allegedly said that at a meeting of GOP House members when asked to explain Bubble-Boy's immigration policy. The meaning is pretty clear: "my son is better than that, and therefore that kind of work should be done by immigrants." That is how the conservative National Review took his comments when one of their staffers blasted Rove for making such an elitist statement. Here's a news flash for King Karl: When the National Review, a magazine started by William Buckley, is attacking you for your stupid statements, you are in big trouble. (Click on the link in this entry's title to read more)

Why Paul Krugman Likes John Edwards' Health Insurance Plan

Click on the link in this entry's title to learn why New York Times columnist and economist Paul Krugman likes the new healthcare proposal made by John Edwards. It is a very interesting analysis on the Edwards plan.

Vanity Fair Article on Neo-Con Planning for War with Iran

From the people who brought you the Iraq War: War with Iran! According to an article in Vanity Fair, the neo-cons, the people who advocate wars that the children of others will have to fight, have been pushing for war with Iran since the 1990s and especially since 2001. The question is: is the Bush Administration going to start such a war? The article argues that the views on that are mixed. Check this out, it is a fascinating article. You can link to it by clicking on this entry's title.

Harold Myerson Column on the Strengths & Weaknesses of Three Top Dems

Harold Myerson of the Washington Post has a very interesting column about the appearance of the three top Democratic presidential candidates at the recent DNC meeting. He writes that each of them displayed strengths and weaknesses.

Edwards strength was his ability to make the case on how Bush's economic policies are hurting Americans, especially Americans in union jobs. His weakness was that he didn't outline proposals to reach the unorganized part of the middle class, people who work at keyboards, not machines.

Clinton's strength was her ability to state how devastating Bush's policies have been to the entire middle class. Her weakness was that her policy proposals seem incremental and not enough to take on the wide scope of the problems she accurately identifies.

Obama's strength was his ability to speak to the destruction of faith and hope in government that conservative policies have brought about, but his weakness was that he didn't have policy proposals to match his language

The entire column can be read by clicking on the link in this entry's title.

Is Voinovich Feeling Some Heat?

According to a blog entry by Steve Clemons over at the Talking Points Memo website operated by Josh Marshall, George Voinovich and six other so-called Republican moderates have sent a letter to the Senate Democratic and Republican leadership complaining about what they call a "stalemate" on debating a resolution on the Iraq War. (Clemons' article can be read by clicking on the link in this entry's title.)

What we find fascinating is that earlier today we learned that an email was sent out seeking people to write letters to Voinovich and complain about his vote earlier this week regarding the debate on the Warner Resolution. We are wondering if it is dawning on Republican Senators that backing George Bush and preventing the Warner Resolution from coming to a vote wasn't the brightest thing they could have done.

Previous posts on this blog that dealt with Voinovich and stopping the Republican filibuster of the Warner Resolution can be read here: http://mcdac.blogspot.com/2007/02/will-voinovich-vote-to-stop-warner-from.html and here: http://mcdac.blogspot.com/2007/02/voinovich-votes-to-stop-debate-on-bushs.html

Lieberman Proposes "War Tax"

Sen. Joe Lieberman, (I-CT), proposed that Congress pass a special "war tax" to fund what he calls the "war on terrorism" and what the rest of us call the Iraq War. He pointed out in his remarks before the Senate Armed Services Committee that people have pointed out that the only Americans being asked to sacrifice are members of the military and civilians serving in Iraq, this blog among them.

This is actually an intellectually honest approach to funding the war, much more so than Bush's budget. It would also probably drive home to most Americans what this war is costing us in terms of money as well as American lives. Lieberman did not give any specifics on his tax idea and, of course, it won't get anywhere. Republicans prefer a borrow and spend approach to this war, as well as almost every other operation of the Federal government, and Democrats opposed to the war will find it very difficult to support any proposal of Lieberman's.

Politically, though, putting this idea in a bill form and discussing it would put pressure on Republicans to justify the cost of this war. As Lieberman pointed out in his remarks before the Armed Services Committee, funding this war will push out other domestic spending that the Democrats consider essential. His "war tax" would be an addition to Federal revenues and would theoretically free up more money for domestic spending.

Update: A better idea might to try and pass a law requiring that every time Congress authorizes military action it has to impose a special tax to pay for that military action. It might have the effect of making sure that our elected representatives think before they act and it would force all of us to recognize what military actions cost in terms of money since, with the advent of a volunteer military, most of us don't stop and think what they cost in terms of causalities.

Bush Administration Sent Billions Into Iraq Right After Saddam's Fall

It turns out that the Bush Administration sent billions of dollars into Iraq after Saddam's fall. The money came from Iraqi funds that had been frozen in America and came from Iraqi oil revenues. Here's the problem: they don't know what happened to the money or where it went. Now, they claim that the money didn't fall into the hands of insurgents, but let's face it, they really don't know that our troops aren't being wounded or killed by weapons purchased with this money. This fact came out during testimony in front of the House Committee on Government Operations and Oversight chaired by Rep. Harry Waxman, (D-CA). You can click on the link in this entry's title to read more about this.

Voinovich Votes in Favor of Bush's War Policy

George Voinovich, who claims that he is against escalation of the Iraqi War, just voted against ending a filibuster on the Warner Resolution. In short, he voted to make sure that there is not a vote on Bush's plan to escalate the war. Here is how the Washington Post explained the process:

At issue are four separate resolutions. The main resolution, worked out by Sen. John Warner (R-Va.) and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.), would put the Senate on record opposing the additional troop deployment and calling for a diplomatic initiative to settle the conflict, but it would also oppose a cut-off of funds for troops in the field of battle. The Republican leadership's alternative, drafted by Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) and Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.), would establish tough new benchmarks for the Iraqi government to achieve but would not oppose the planned deployment.
Against those competing resolutions are two others replete with political mischief-making. The first, drafted by Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), recognizes the power of the president to deploy troops and the "responsibility" of Congress to fund them before stating, "Congress should not take any action that will endanger United States military forces in the field, including the elimination or reduction of fund." A second, hastily written by Democrats, would simply oppose the president's plan and insist all troops are properly protected with body armor and other materiel.

The Democratic leadership gave Republicans a choice: Allow all four resolutions to come to a vote, with a simple majority needed for passage, or debate and vote on just two resolutions, Warner's and McCain's.

McConnell said each of the resolutions should only come to a vote if it attains the 60 votes needed to cut off debate. The reason was simple. Both Democrats and Republicans believe the only measure that could win 60 votes is Gregg's.

Democratic leaders feared that a debate designed to put the Senate on record opposing President Bush's war plan could conclude with passage of a resolution opposing a cutoff of funds for that plan.

To keep the heat on Republicans, Senate Democratic leaders charged that their opponents were simply trying to stifle a debate on the most hotly contested issue of the day.
"If Republicans cannot swallow the thin soup of the Warner resolution, how are they going to stomach a real debate on Iraq?" asked Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin (D-Ill.).

Ohio voters should remember the way that George Voinovich is acting on the Warner Resolution. He says that he is against Bush's escalation but doesn't want to go on record saying so. This is not exactly Voinovich's Profile in Courage moment we are seeing here. What we are seeing is a Republican who is against Bush's war except when it counts.

Poverty Increasing in Medina County

The Cleveland Plain Dealer ran a very interesting story about how poverty is increasing in Medina County. Medina County is one of the fastest growing counties in Ohio and its median income is about $20,000 higher than the median income for the metropolitan area as a whole, but, as the article points out, it is not immune from increasing poverty. This is shown by the increase in foreclosure cases, by the increase in students using the free lunch programs, and by increases in social service applications. This is a very interesting story and one that everyone in Medina County should read. You can read it by clicking on the link in this entry's title.

Will Voinovich Vote to Stop Warner Resolution From Going to the Floor?

Supposedly George Voinovich is against Bush's escalation on the war in Iraq, but the question becomes is he willing to allow a vote on the John Warner Resolution opposing escalation? Today, February 5, 2007, the Senate is scheduled to take a vote on whether the Warner Resolution will be allowed to come to the floor of the Senate. This vote has to obtain 60 votes. If it doesn't, it apparently won't be allowed to get to the floor. (An explanation of why this is so is found by clicking on the link in this entry's title.) Sen. McConnell, (R-KY), the Minority Leader of the Senate is claiming that all Republican Senators, apparently including Warner himself, will vote against allowing the Warner Resolution to come to the floor for debate.

All Republican Senators would include Voinovich, Snowe, Collins, Warner, and Hagel, all Republicans who have claimed to be against Bush's escalation. What they are trying to do is have it both ways, that is, they are trying to get public credit for opposing the escalation, but then cozy up to the White House in voting to block the bill from getting to the floor. Quite frankly they count on the public not being aware of what is going on and they count on the news media not telling the public what is going on.

Governor Strickland's Panel on Judicial Appointments is Seeking Franklin Cty. Muny Ct. Applications

The Ohio Supreme Court' s website has a short announcement on the make-up of the advisory panel that is advising Governor Strickland on applications for a vacancy in the Franklin County Municipal Court. The panel includes both state-wide members and local members from Franklin County. If you click on the link in this entry's title, you can read the Supreme Court announcement. It will give you a good idea on how this procedure will work.

NYT Article on John Edwards Shows Problem & Potential of Media

The New York Times ran an article about John Edwards in the Monday edition that shows both the problem with the media and also its potential. The article focused on several changes it claims that Edwards has undergone in the last two years or so. It does a very good job of explaining Edwards' positions, but then frames all of his policy proposals as changes he has made to get the nomination. The author of the article, John Broder, frames Edwards' positions as positions he is taking to get the nomination and not as heart-felt policy proposals.

This is typical of the news media. They no longer care about policy, to them everything is politics. That's one reason why they loved Karl Rove for so long because. like them, Rove doesn't care about policy, he just cares about politics. Most news media pundits look at political campaigns from a campaign viewpoint while voters look at political campaigns from a governing viewpoint. They want to know what the candidates will do if they are elected, not how they are going to get elected.

That is one thing that the Internet is doing for politicians. It used to be that the only way they had to get their message out without using paid advertising was to depend on the news media to report what they were saying and doing. Now, however, with the advent of tools like You Tube, blogs, and websites they can communicate with millions of people directly, without going through the media. This is one reason why the media resents the rise of blogs and similar Internet tools. They instinctively recognize that such communication tools transfers power from them to the candidates and to the voters. If candidates chose to do so, they can let us know exactly where they stand on various issues without going through the media.

The Internet is also influencing what stories get covered. A good example of this was the media controversy that broke out with former Senator George Allen and his macaca comments. That story wasn't driven by the media, because they didn't report it until the Webb campaign posted the video on You Tube. Once posted it garnered a lot of attention which then led to the mainstream media reporting on the incident. Instead of the media deciding what was a news story, Internet users were deciding what was a news story. That is a very significant power shift in mass communications.

John Edwards Proposes Tax Hike on Wealthy to Pay for Health Plan

John Edwards is releasing a health care plan on Monday that will provide for a tax hike mainly on the wealthy to pay for expanded health insurance. He is one of the first politicians to admit that taxes might have to rise to solve America's health care problems. Although he is for raising taxes, his plan apparently doesn't call for a single-payer system. His aim is to bring insurance to the uninsured, lower health care costs and bring competition to the markets. He would expand the Medicaid plan and ask employers to either provide health coverage or buy into what Edwards is calling "health markets." He also called for more focus on collecting taxes that are legally due, but are not now being collected. If you click on the link in this entry's title, you can read more about the Edwards plan.

Former Rep. Majority Leader Regrets Iraq War Vote

Dick Armey, Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives in 2002, regrets voting for the Iraq War Resolution. He also thinks that Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic nominee. It is a fascinating article and you can read it by clicking on the link in this entry's title.

Secretary of State Rice Drawing More Criticism

The New York Times reported on Sunday that with Rumsfeld leaving the administration, more and more people are examining Condi Rice's role in the Iraq diaster and finding her performance wanting. As National Security Adviser and now Secretary of State her fingerprints are all over Iraq policy, but because Rumsfeld and Cheney were so public in their support, her role has often been overlooked. With Rumsfeld gone, however, that changes. Both Republicans and Democrats are complaining about how she handles diplomacy, or rather doesn't handle it, and she is now taking hits from the right as well as the left. Indeed, she may have more problems with Republicans as they try to find someone other than Bush to blame for the mess this administration has made of Iraq. (You can read the NYT article by clicking on the link in this entry's title.)

Why Obama and Not Webb?

There has been a lot of praise for Jim Webb's speech given in response to the President's State of the Union speech. (An example of such praise is seen in the column by E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post which can be read by clicking on this entry's title.) It was a powerful speech and made the case not only against the war but for a different economic policy, one that is populist and not elitist in approach. Which brings us to this question: why is Barack Obama being hyped for President and not Jim Webb?

Both have made well received speeches that were covered by the national media, Obama in 2004 at the Democratic Convention, Webb's response mentioned above. True, Obama has four years of experience as a Senator while Webb was just elected, but Webb served in the Reagan administration as Secretary of the Navy. He actually has more Federal government experience than Obama. He also has the added advantage of having served in combat in Vietnam and being from a state, Virginia, that has voted mostly Republican in presidential elections but is one in which the Democratic Party is making inroads. Obama, on the other hand, comes from a pretty safe "blue" state, Illinois. Webb is also a white Southerner which was also true of the last three Democrats to get elected president since 1960: Johnson, Carter, and Clinton.

All of this is not to say that Obama wouldn't make a good Democratic nominee or that Webb should run for president. It is to say that it is odd that while the net roots are really buzzing about Obama there is no comparable buzz for Webb, even though he would have a lot to recommend him.

Columbus Dispatch: GOP Sued Brunner, not Strickland in Veto Lawsuit

According to this article in the Columbus Dispatch, http://www.dispatch.com/news-story.php?story=dispatch/2007/02/03/20070203-A1-05.html, the leaders of the General Assembly sued Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner and not Governor Strickland over his first day veto of the bill limiting damages in consumer lawsuits. This is a very interesting point that a lot of news organizations are not picking up on in their stories. Our guess is that they are suing Brunner because it is an easier lawsuit legally and because Strickland's popularity is high enough that the GOP doesn't want to go toe to toe with him over this issue. Another reason may be that Jon Husted, the House Speaker, reportedly has state office ambitions and maybe he wants to run against Brunner.

Under Bush Administration Government Contracting Soars

The New York Times ran an article in its Sunday edition about how, under the Bush administration, government contracting with private companies has soared. (A link to the article is in this entry's title.) The trend of using government contractors instead of government employees has long existed. It picked up steam under the Clinton administration when the rules regarding such contracting were streamlined. Under Bush, though, the practice has become much more widespread because of this administration's philosophy that using private contractors is always more efficient than using government employees.

The article notes that these companies are contributing millions to politicians running for Federal office. Which leads to this question: why don't Democrats advocate for a law that would prohibit an employee of any company, or his or her spouse, from making certain political contributions? Such a law would help ensure that contractors are chosen for competence and not political influence.

McCain Hires Political Advisers He Once Said Were Too Negative

John McCain has hired Republican operatives who are experienced in creating negative attack ads. His campaign has taken on people who helped develop the "Swift-Boat" ads against John Kerry and the infamous "Bimbo" ad against Harold Ford. In that past McCain has condemned such ads, but now is putting their developers on his payroll. What is interesting about this is not that he is hiring such advisers, but that the New York Times is calling him on it. The article, which you can read by clicking on the link in this entry's title, refers to McCain 'as a "one-time maverick". This article may signal an end to the media's slavish devotion to McCain and the beginning of treating him like any other candidate.

Cheney's Mid-East Views & U.S. Policy

Reed Hundt, a contributor to Josh Marshall's www.talkingpointsmemo.com, has posted a very interesting article on how Dick Cheney sees the U.S. role in the Mid-East. According to Hundt Cheney believes that for the next 60-80 years America will be dependent on imported oil, mainly from the Mid-East. During that same period America will be at war with Islamic fundamentalists. Therefore, America withdrawing militarily from the Mid-East is dangerous to our economic security and we have to keep on pouring troops and money into that region. Cheney also believes that withdrawing from that region would imperil Israel, a point of view also espoused by Lieberman.

Hundt also argues that at some point Democratic candidates for president have to confront and debate Cheney's views, especially since they are also being articulated by McCain and Romney. All this leads to a another point and that is that while Democrats are very good at challenging Republicans on particular policy choices, we need to do a better job of attacking the philosophy that underlies what Republicans advocate. This means in debates over domestic policy attacking the Republicans' market fundamentalism. It means in debates over foreign policy, attacking the Republicans' belief in a go-it-alone approach to foreign policy. If we don't attack the underlying philosophy, then we are allowing them to set the terms of the debate. Ceding to them the power to set the terms of the debate weakens our ability to win the debate.

Is Bush Protecting the Saudis?

On September 11, 2001, 21 terrorists killed over 3,000 Americans. Nineteen of those terrorists were from Saudi Arabia. Osma bin Laden is from Saudi Arabia. According to the article linked in this entry's title from December of 2006, Saudi Arabians are supplying money to Sunni fighters in Iraq, including money for anti-aircraft missiles that are portable. In the last month there has been a dramatic rise in the number of U.S. military and civilian helicopters that have been downed by insurgents. The Bush response? Blame the Iranians. Why? Because the Bush family and their fix-it man, James Baker, have long standing business ties withe the Saudis.

It is convenient for the Bushies to blame the Iranians, just like it was convenient to blame Hussein and imply that the terrorists who attacked us on 9-11 were supported by Iraq and not from Saudi Arabia. Hopefully the U.S. electorate will have learned its lesson and not elect more oil men in the future.

MCDAC Democratic Newsletter for 2.2.2007

MCDAC Democratic Newsletter for February 2, 2007

Turn MEDINA COUNTY BLUE: The Next Project
Repeat Item
Medina County Democrats helped to take back Congress and our state. Now we need your help to end one party rule in our county, cities, villages and townships.

If you want to know what you can do to help or if you are, or are thinking about being, a candidate, please join Democratic officeholders and operatives for a nuts and bolts conversation and training seminar --
TURN MEDINA COUNTY BLUE: The Next Project

9:00 am to noon
February 10, 2007
The Grace Drake Center for the Arts, 222 S. Broadway, Medina, OH.

For more information or to reserve your spot, contact the Medina County Democratic Party at 330-722-6655, or Pam Miller at 330-725-7487 or Pam450@bright.net.

Uncle Sam Needs YOU!
Repeat Item
You are needed to run for office in Medina County. The Medina County Democratic Party's Committee of Informed Citizens wants to make sure that there are Democrats running for every office this year.

Township Trustee, Township Clerk, Council, Mayor, and School Board positions are up for election in 2007. If you want to see a list of the positions that are not currently held by Democrats that are to be elected this year in a pdf file, please go to http://www.medinacountydemocraticactioncommittee.org/MedinaCountyLocalRepublicans.pdf
Please consider running for an elected position in 2007 or convince your Democratic friends to run. The deadline for filing for Brunswick and Wadsworth city offices is soon. If you are interested please contact Pam Miller, Chair of the Medina County Democratic Party at pam450@bright.net

Subscribe to MCDAC's Blog
Repeat Item
You can subscribe to receive daily digests by email from the MCDAC Blog. These digests have the title of the entry and then a link to click so you can read the whole entry. They only appear when we post a new blog item. To subscribe, go to http://www.mcdac.blogspot.com and fill out the form on the right hand side of the page.

MCDAC Blog Entries

This past week we posted entries on the following topics:

The Bush Economy: Great for those at the top.
Governor Strickland Sets Up New Judicial Appointing System
Dems Have to Challenge "Market Fundamentalism"
Hillary Clinton Drives the Washington Media Nuts
Representative Betty Sutton Named to Budget Committee
Newsweek Poll: 58% of Americans Wish Bush Presidency was Over
Gov. Strickland Reviews Minimum Wage Exclusion
Columbus Dispatch Reports 2006 Manufacturing Job Losses
Secretary of State Brunner Has New Ideas for Ohio Elections
Rep. Betty Sutton Signs on as Co-Sponsor for Education Bill
Congressman Regula Backs Five of Six Dem Bills in Start of 110th Congress
Ford Posts Record Losses, Considers Bonuses for Top Executives

All of these entries can be read at http://www.mcdac.blogspot.com

We are always looking for short postings by Democrats and links to interesting articles. If you would like to submit an article or a link for our 'blog, please send them to joycekimbler@medinacountydemocraticactioncommittee.org.

Correction
Last week's newsletter contained a link to an entry on our blog that claimed that Senator George Voinovich had voted against ending the Republican filibuster on the minimum wage. That was incorrect. Sen. Voinovich voted for ending the filibuster. We regret any inconvenience caused by our mistake.

MCDAC
Joyce Kimbler, Treasurer
P.O. Box 1213
Medina, OH 44258

The Bush Economy: Great for those at the top

If you click on the link in this entry's title, you can read an article about how Bush and Democrats look at the economy. To Republicans like Bush the economy is doing great. To Democrats like John Edwards, Jim Webb and Sherrod Brown, the economy is not doing well at all.

Why the difference? Because Bush looks at the economy from the perspective of a person born into the upper class in America. The stock market is doing well, unemployment seems to be going down, and new jobs are being created. Of course, millions have lost their jobs, house foreclosures are way up, millions don't have health insurance, the new jobs don't pay near what the lost jobs pay, but Bush doesn't see that because that is not his personal experience.

Edwards and Webb do see it. People like Sherrod Brown see it. This is because their personal experiences are different. They weren't born into the upper class. They have seen people struggle and know what it means to struggle financially. They can empathize with the working family that has seen its standard of living decline because of the loss of a good job, or a catastrophic illness not covered by insurance.

The problem with Republicans on economic issues is that they can't understand what they haven't experienced. Since a lot of them have never experienced economic difficulties, they just don't understand them. Democrats need to point this simple fact out to voters. When they do a lot of the media, whose executives also come from the upper class, won't like it. They will say that Democrats are practicing "class warfare." That's okay. Democrats should just keep on saying it. It doesn't matter what the media says, it matters what the voters say.

Governor Strickland Sets Up New Process for Judicial Appointments

Governor Ted Strickland is creating a bi-partisan advisory board for filling judicial vacancies. This board will be supplemented by six members from the community where the judicial vacancy occurs. This process will probably result in most judicial vacancies being filled by Democrats, but at least there will be a vetting process to make sure that the Governor appoints qualified judges. Under Taft, the local Republican Party sent three names to the Governor and Taft appointed a judge from one of those names. Governor Strickland's process will be more transparent. It is just another example of Ted Strickland putting his stamp on the Ohio Governor's office.

Update: Chief Justice Thomas Moyer, a Republican, issued a statement supporting Governor Strickland's action and commending him for taking this step to improve judicial quality in Ohio. You can read the Chief Justice's statement here:
http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/Communications_Office/Press_Releases/eNews/strickland.asp

Is Obama Putting Fox News in the Freezer?

According to the article linked to in this entry's title, Barack Obama has put Fox News in the freezer. While he has given interviews to CNN, ABC, CBS, and NBC, he has not given an interview to Fox News since commentators from Fox News claimed that he had attended an Islamist school. This report, which was thoroughly debunked by CNN, was picked up various right-wing outlets.

In the article there is a quote from an Fox News reporter who whines about Fox's reporters being punished for commentary by Fox analysts. Well, boo-hoo. If Obama is putting Fox in the freezer, good for him. Democratic candidates don't need Fox News to get their message out. If Fox News wants to be the official network of the Republican Party, that's fine, but don't whine when Democrats refuse to co-operate with Fox's reporters.

Dems Have to Challenge "Market Fundamentalism"

Here is a phrase that we just ran across: "market fundamentalism." It is a term used by critics of conservatives who insist that "free markets" will cure every social ill known to man and that government is never the solution, but always the problem. The author of the article linked to in this entry's title points out that progressives need to start attacking this philosophy. She argues that until we attack this philosophy, we will not be able to make permanent political gains because the underlying philosophy that has shaped politics over the last 27 years will not have been culturally discredited.

Since the 1960s, conservatives have pushed the idea that government is inherently wasteful and inefficent. They push the idea that government programs don't work and can't compare with the marketplace.

This philosophy is behind charter schools, privatizating Social Security, Bush's new health plan, which will tax working families for employer furnished health insurance, and the decision to shut down Iraq's state owned companies putting thousands of people out of work. In the past while Democrats argued against certain policies advocated by market fundamentalims, they usually have not argued against the philosophy itself.

This is starting to change. More and more progressives and Democrats are challenging the idea that unfettered markets always produce good results for society. They are challenging the idea that government programs are inherently bad. This is good because progressives have to do to conservatives what they have been doing for the last 27 years: attack the underlying philosophy of the opposition. Read the article linked to in this entry's title. We think you will find it thought-provoking.

Hillary Clinton Drives the Washington Media Nuts

First of all, let us make the following observation: this entry is not an endorsement of Hillary Clinton for President. MCDAC does not endorse candidates in primaries, including presidential primaries. That being said, however, we're going to tell you that we like the fact that Hillary Clinton being elected would drive pundits like David Broder nuts. Why? Because the Clintons don't care if the pundits in D.C. like them. They don't care if Republicans like them. They don't care if they're liked at all, they just care about winning. They are single-minded about winning. They will do what it takes to win, and they don't apologize for being that way either.

David Broder wrote this column criticizing Hillary Clinton for not asking one question of General Petraeus when he appeared before the Senate Armed Service Committee for his confirmation hearing. He contrasted her lack of questions with McCain's asking 14 questions. Now, we don't know if Clinton should have asked questions. We can understand why she chose to use her time to basically make a campaign speech, and we can also understand why Broder wants Senators to ask questions. But here is the point: Hillary Clinton won't worry for one minute what David Broder thinks about what she should have done at that hearing. Not one minute, and that is what drives the media crazy about the Clintons. If Hillary Clinton is elected it will be fun to watch the heads of Republicans and national pundits figuratively explode.

Representative Betty Sutton Named to Budget Committee

Representative Betty Sutton has been named to the Budget Committee as well as the Rules Committee for the United States House of Representatives. Previously we had discussed her being named to the Rules Committee but not the Budget Committee. This is quite a coup for a newly elected member of Congress. The Rules Committee sets the rules for how a bill is handled on the House floor. The Budget Committee deals with how money is spent.

Newsweek Poll: 58% of Americans Wish Bush Presidency Was Over

According to a new Newsweek Poll, 58% of Americans wish this Presidency was "simply over." The poll breaks down to 86% of Democrats feeling that way, 59% of independents, and even 21% of Republicans. The number of Americans who think that Congress should be more assertive in challenging the Bush administration on the way is 64%. The number of Americans who are satisfied with the direction of the county is 30% while the number of Americans who think that the country is headed in the wrong direction is 61%. (The link in this entry's title takes you to the Newsweek story about the poll.)

The challenge for Democrats is to take the distrust of this administration on Iraq and drive home the point that the Bush administration is the natural result of a radical conservatism that is in control of the Republican Party. A conservatism that believes that government is the enemy and that America should go in alone in foreign affairs. A conservatism that brought us reckless tax cuts, the Iraq War, and no response to Hurricane Katrina. A conservatism that cares more for the rich than the middle class. A conservatism that wants to dismantle the government's safety net for the middle class as well as the poor.

Gov. Strickland Reviews Minimum Wage Exclusion

The Cleveland Plain Dealer reported on its website Sunday that Gov. Ted Strickland is reviewing legislation passed by the GOP-controlled General Assembly in the last days of the late, unlamented Taft Administration, that exempts certain occupations from Ohio's new minimum wage amendment. (You can link to the article by clicking on the arrow next to this entry's title.)

The irony is that if a business doesn't pay the minimum wage and relies on the bill passed by the General Assembly, it could end up paying the attorney fees of an employee suing to enfore the provisions of the amendment. The sponsors of the minimum wage amendment were smart enough to insert that provision into the amendment's language. It would have been smarter, and even easier, to have just adopted the language of the amendment and not tried to exempt certain industries from paying the new minimum wage, but that would not have helped the GOP's business allies. Because, in the end, it all comes down to following the money.

Columbus Dispatch Reports 2006 Manufacturing Job Losses

The Columbus Reported that 2006 tied 2003 for record number of job losses in Ohio's manufacturing sector. Ohio has now lost over 200,000 manufacturing jobs. It's percentage of people employed in manufacturing has gone from 17% of the work force down to 14%. A big reason is competition from overseas companies. This state is seeing the loss of good paying jobs.

The media likes to report on unemployment figures. Unemployment figures, though, are only the tip of the analysis. If you are replacing manufacturing jobs with service industry jobs and if such jobs don't pay as much, then consumers have less money to spend. Consumers spending less will eventually result in fewer jobs in the service sector. It means consumers having less money to spend on doctors, lawyers, insurance, dentists, and other professions who think their education will protect them from the effects of Ohio losing manufacturing jobs.

Secretary of State Brunner Has New Ideas for Ohio Elections

The Columbus Dispatch reported that Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner set forth several new proposals at the winter meeting of Ohio election officials in Columbus. One was to have conduct elections totally by mail if only issues are on the ballot. Another was to try to select poll workers like we do jurors and allow poll workers to work 8 hour shifts. Brunner also announced plans to retest all Ohio voting systems to make sure that voting machines are working correctly. Finally, she announced that she and her staff would not be attending receptions at the meeting that were sponsored by companies that sell electronic voting machines such as Diebold.

After putting up with Ken Blackwell's machinations as Secretary of State, it is refreshing to see someone like Brunner in that office. Brunner is trying to make the office work for Ohio's voters. Blackwell tried to make the office into a subsidary of the Ohio GUP. We especially like her policy not to attend receptions sponsored by companies like Diebold. Brunner is sending a message that she is in charge of the office and that policy reinforces that message.

Rep. Betty Sutton Signs on as Co-Sponsor for Education Bill

Representative Betty Sutton has signed on as a co-sponsor to H.R. 627, also known as the Keep Our Promise to America's Children and Teacher Act or Keep Our PACT Act. This bill would require full funding of the No Child Left Behind Act. One of the things that Bush has done is get the Congress to pas the No Child Left Behind Act, but has never provided the money to make good on all its provisions. This is a bill that is long overdue and if it can get passed, it will be hard for Bubble-Boy to veto it. You can review the bill by clicking on the link in this entry's title.

Congressman Regula Backs Five of Six Dem Bills in 110th Congress

Congressman Ralph Regula, (OH-R), representing the 16th Ohio Congressional District supported five of the first six Democratic bills passed by the U.S. House of Representatives. He supported adopting the 9-11 Commission recommendations; allowing stem-cell research; increasing the minimum wage; cutting the interest on student loans; and for negotiation with drug companies to lower the cost of prescription drugs for Medicare beneficiaries. He voted against the Democratic energy bill.

There are a couple of explanations for Regula's support of these bills. One is that Regula is a moderate to conservative Republican and found these bills philosophically compatible with his views. The other is that he is getting ready to run for re-election in 2008 and wants to make sure he goes toward the center in case he gets a viable Democratic opponent. Or, of course, his reasons for voting for these bills is a mixture of both. In any event, however, Democrats in Ohio's 16th Congressional District should not be assuming that Regula is not running in 08.

Ford Posts Record Losses, Considers Bonuses for Top Executives

Let's say that you were the Board of Directors of a company that just posted a loss for 2006 of over 12 Billion Dollars. Would you give your executives a bonus because of their performance? According to the story linked to in this entry's title, that is exactly what Ford Motor Company is considering. At a time when over 30,000 employees are looking at losing their jobs at Ford, its market share is falling, and it is struggling to stay ahead of Toyota as the number two car seller in America, Ford Motor Company is considering bonuses for their executives.

Union Membership in US Drops to 12% of Workforce

This is disappointing news for Americans workers and for all of us who want a viable American middle class. Union membership is down to 12% of America's workforce. In the 1950s, with a much smaller population, union members accounted about 33% of America's workforce belonged to an union. Twenty years ago, the figure was over 20%.

The reason why this is bad for American workers is that unions drive up wages for all workers, not just those in the unions. When non-union employers have to compete for workers with unionized workers, they have to offer more money and more benefits. When there isn't such competition, then there isn't that incentive to improve wage and benefits packages.

This country was built on increasing the standard of living for the middle class, and especially for workers did not have a college degree. Those workers are now seeing their standard of living eroding. It will continue to erode as long as workers are not able to effectively bargain with employers for better wages.

Hopefully the new Democratic controlled Congress will pass legislation to make it easier to join an union. It is almost a certainity that such legislation would be vetoed by Bush, but it would set the stage for getting it passed and signed during the upcoming Democratic presidency.
________________________________________________________________________________________
You can read the whole article by clicking on the link in this entry's title.

Another Reason Why Sherrod Wins: People Like Him

We recently received this email message from a Wadsworth Democrat about meeting U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown in Washington:

I have been appointed as an FPC (Federal Political Coordinator) for the National Association of Realtors. I was in Washington DC the Jan 9-11th for training and called Sherrod Browns office to ask if he had any time to see me while I was there. His office scheduled me for a visit on Thursday the 11th for about a 10 minutes. I knew with this being a new year and his first tour as Senator his schedule would be packed. I arrived at Sherrod's office about 15 minutes early and was told that Sherrod was on the Senate floor and would be back in about 15-20 minutes. Sherrod´s Assistant Diana then came out to tell me that Sherrod was running late on the Senate floor and to please bring me over there to meet with him. WOW, how impressed and honored I was that she took me on the train underneath the Capitol and up to the Senate floor where he was voting. Sherrod came off the Senate floor to spend some time with me and give me a quick tour of the area where the voting was all done.

He was so very thankful for the Meet and Greet we had here in Wadsworth at the Masonic Temple the end of October. He asked me to please tell everyone at the Medina Democratic Headquarters HELLO and to THANK everyone here for all of the support he received. Sherrod said he never imagined such a large crowd would show up for him in Wadsworth!!

That was the highlight of my day!! Just had to share my experience!!

Marti Hallstrom

Marti's experience is typical of how Sherrod Brown treats people. He genuinely likes people and people like him because they recognize that he is sincerely interested in them. This is a little commented on, but very important character trait for politicians to possess. In the final analysis people aren't going to volunteer to do the grunt work of campaigns if they don't like you.

AP: Voinovich Opposes Bush Plan for More Troops

According to the Associated Press, Ohio Republican Senator George Voinovich is now listed as opposing the troop increase that Bush announced for Iraq. The number of GOP Senators who now opposing Bush on this matter is 8. The link for the AP article is in this entry's title.

GOP House Leadership Complains About Five Day Work Week

Raw Story reports that the House GOP leadership is upset that Pelosi and the Democrats are making the House stay in session five days a week. Apparently working a five day work week is too much for these men and women. Just one more reason to be glad there is a Democratic controlled Congress. (The link to the Raw Story article is in this entry's title.)

Washington Post Shows Bush At Record Low

The Washington Post and ABC News released a poll showing that Bush's approval rating is at 33% while his disapproval rating is at 65%. It also shows that there is no issue on which they poll that his approval rating is above 50%. 71% of those polled think the country is on the wrong track, up 12% since 11/4/2006. Meanwhile 54% of those polled approve of the job that Nancy Pelosi is doing as Speaker of the House.

The poll also asked about preference among Democrats for President for 2008 and the results were as follows:
1/19/07 12/11/06
Hillary Clinton 41 39
Barack Obama 17 17
John Edwards 11 12
John Kerry 8 7
Al Gore 10 10
Wesley Clark 1 1
Tom Vilsack * 1
Evan Bayh NA 1
Bill Richardson 1 2
Joe Biden 3 2
Chris Dodd * *
Dennis Kucinich 1 NA
Mike Gravel * NA
Other (vol.) 1 *
None of these (vol.) 2 2
Would not vote (vol.) * 1
No opinion 3 4

The poll also showed Clinton beating either McCain or Guiliani in head to head trial heats, with Clinton polling 49% to 47% against Guiliani and 50% to 45% against McCain. Obama polls stronger than McCain at 47% to 45% but is trailing Guiliani by 45% to 49%. What is interesting is that McCain's attempt to get closer to Bush by supporting him on the war is driving his popularity down with the public at large. Smart move, John.

Revolt of the Kool-Aid Drinkers

GOP Senators, especially those who are up for re-election in 2008, are signing on to a resolution being drafted by Sen. John Warner, R-VA, which will put them on record as opposing the escalation of troops being implemented by Bush. GOP Senators who are now on record as opposing Bush's escalation include Hagel of Nebraska, Snowe of Maine, Coleman of Minn, Collins of Maine, Warner of Virginia, and Smith of Oregon. (You can read the Washington Post article about Warner's resolution by clicking on the link in this entry's title.)

This means that Republican members of Congress, who have marched in lockstep with Bubble-Boy while he took them over the proverbial cliff, are beginning to see that the Republican Party could sustain even more losses in 2008 unless it begins to distance itself from the Bushies. Of course, we have to wonder if they hadn't lost control of Congress whether they would be seeing the light, but, maybe we are just being cynical.

Reader Submission: Some in GOP Consider Voters to be "Mob"

There is a revealing term being used in the editorial pages and partisan political chatter that, I think, unjustly criticizes our great Democracy. Some members of the Republican minority have been calling the majority of voters from the last election, well, a Mob, and. I think the use of the term is more that the petulant name-calling of poor losers.

When I think of a Mob, I imagine the powerful end of the Boris Karloff movie, Frankenstein. The scene where the villagers storm the castle with torches and pitchforks held aloft is what pops into my mind’s eye when I hear the word.

I expect the Republican mouthpieces might be afraid of that end for their Dr. Frankenstein, George W. Bush and his creation, The Iraq War. Of course, it won’t be pitchforks and torches that oust them; it will be the media, and polls and honest voting booths that remove our monsters from our castle.

Remember, we put the monsters in the castle and we will take them out the same way – nonviolently and systemically. I am optimistic. 70% of us understand the nature of this monster. Congress is aware that we understand, and consequently will do its job and represent the will of the people – like they always do - eventually.

Each of us can and should work to end this madness sooner. You can help. Put away your pitchfork and torch and pick up a pen and contact your Congressperson and both Senators and encourage them all to ask the hard questions and to demand honest answers from the creators of this Monstrous War.

After all, the Castle is ours and it is not just our right to take it back; it is our responsibility.

John Galish.

Did Politics Influence Bush Administration on Katrina Response?

The AP reports that Micheal Brown, former head of FEMA and also known by his Bush nickname of "Brownie", told college students that politics influence the Federal government's response to FEMA. Brown claims that he recommended to Bush that all 90,000 square miles of the Gulf Coast be placed under Federal control for purposes of Katrina hurricane assistance. Brown claims that unnamed members of the Bush Administration wanted to put Louisiana under such control but not Mississippi. Why? Because, according to Brown, Louisiana had a white, female Democratic governor and Mississippi had a white, male Republican governor. (You can read the whole article by clicking on the link in this entry's title.)

The Bush administration is, of course, denying that politics motivated the Katrina response. Since, however, it seems that all policy in this administration is subordinated to politics, it makes sense. It will be interesting to see if Brown's remarks leads to Congressional hearings on the Katrina response. As Bush might say, "Heck of a job, Brownie", for bringing this to the public's attention.

Over 700 American Civilians Have Died in Iraq

When we talk about American deaths in Iraq, we almost always talk about military deaths. This past week a family in Ohio lost their daughter in Iraq. She was working for an organization headed by former American Secretary of State Albright that promotes democracy. She was killed along with three other workers from that organization. By clicking on this entry's title you can read an article about an American family that lost a son in Iraq who was a civilian contractor. That article mentions that over 700 American civilian contractors have died in Iraq and over 3000 have been wounded. (Those figures are based on insurance claims that have been filed with the U.S. Defense Department.)

If you add in those causalities, then close to 30,000 Americans have been killed or wounded in Iraq. Most of these deaths have come after Bush had his "Mission Accomplished" photo-op opportunity back in May of 2003. Which, of course, brings up the question: Mr. President, if the mission was accomplished, then why are we still losing Americans in Iraq?

Reader Submission: Commissioner Geissman is being an obstructionist

Medina County Commissioner Pat Geissman is playing the old and stale republican argument against helping school districts. In her recent "Gazette" article she asked if the governor and legislature should have a chance to do something about school funding. The legislature’s political balance has been republican for about 16 years now. The past 13 years that same legislature has ignored 4 rulings by the Ohio Supreme Court to fulfill their legal duty and follow the Constitution of the State of Ohio. Is Ted Strickland going to make them suddenly change their posture? She states the obvious that voters don’t like property taxes. Evidently her obstructionist attitude has caused brain lock. A sales tax is not a property tax. It is the fairest way to spread an increase. The amount of the tax you pay is based on what you spend. Her shortsightedness also seems to ignore the fact that everyone who buys something in Medina County would pay not just those of us who live here. She has not done her homework when she says that a sales tax isn’t meant for schools. The very law language, which requires the county to put it on the ballot specifically, references school districts. Geissman’s blockading of a new concept is further supported by her argument that maybe the county will need an increase although she doesn’t think so. Thinking like that can be applied in almost every situation anyone ever faces. Something may impact on my decision someday so I will not have the courage to make a decision today. She admits that she isn’t an expert on school funding and that local school boards are very capable and responsive. Those boards put the issue on her desk and she has admitted she isn’t capable in school funding so she is going to ignore the wishes of the school boards and be unresponsive. Obviously Geissman has learned well from her school-funding mentor Chuck Calvert. Over 60% of Ohio spoke loudly last November and elected Democrat Ted Strickland Governor with the directive to fix school funding. Geissman evidently didn’t hear or read about that message. She needs to be sent her own message when she is next up for election.

Dave Osborne

Bloomberg Reports Wolfowitz Driving Away Managers at World Bank

Bloomberg News reported that managers of the World Bank are very concerned that Paul Wolfowitz, one of the geniuses who came up with idea of the Iraq War, is driving away experienced managers and replacing them with political allies. These political allies are connected to American action in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Once again the Bushies show that when it comes to government, what matters isn't competence but loyalty. Loyalty to Bush, to neo-con principles, loyalty to the cause. The Bushies trash every governmental agency or function they touch. One can only imagine the damage they will do to our country before they leave office.

The Rise of Suburban Populism?

David Ignatius is a columnist for the Washington Post who wrote a column recently quoting Rahm Emanuel, who led the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in the 2006 election. Emanuel referred to something he calls "suburban populism." Here is a quote from the Ignatius's column:

Middle-class voters are angry because they feel that their standard of living -- from education to health care to retirement -- is under assault. For a generation, GOP strategists encouraged these suburban voters to focus their anxiety and resentment on urban minorities, but Emanuel argues that isn’t working anymore.

“Today, the new welfare queen is corporate America,” he says. Suburban voters, like those in the inner cities, “are angry at powerful citizens who are getting a better deal than they are.” Thanks to this suburban populism, the Democrats picked up Republican seats in Pennsylvania, New York, Connecticut and other states.

The Democratic leadership is fashioning a legislative programme that tries to respond to this public anger quickly and decisively. Pelosi’s agenda for the first 100 hours is a set of tight, doable proposals -- raise the minimum wage, ease terms for student loans, tighten budget rules on congressional spending, cut subsidies for the oil industry, cut drug costs.What’s interesting is that these proposals, so far, have been getting scores of Republican votes. For the rest of the year, Emanuel says, the leadership hopes to stress energy independence (with fuel-saving efficiency standards for appliances and cars) and a move toward better health care for children. (You can read the whole column by clicking on this entry's title. )

Now, readers of this blog may know that we believe that concentrating on economic issues is the way Democrats win elections. We think that the Sherrod Brown's successful campaign here in Ohio shows how this works. As a friend of ours pointed out, Sherrod was the first politician in a long time to come out and explicitly say he was going to fight for the middle class. The result was a stunning victory over an established Republican, even in counties like Medina County which usually votes Republican.

What progressives and Democrats need to do is sit down and come up with policy proposals that can be used in the 2007 off year elections to show suburban voters that electing Democrats at the local level will make their communities better. Perhaps what is needed is a conference that focuses on using local government, like township, village council, and city council positions to make life better for voters.

In a democracy political campaigns are about what is the proper role of government. That question is, or should be, at the root of all political campaigns. Democrats need to make it the issue in this year's local elections.

Kucinch to Chair Domestic Policy Subcommittee, Attempt to Reinstate Fairness Doctrine

The Center for Public Integrity reports on a speech given by Dennis Kucinich where he announces that as chair of Domestic Policy Subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives, he is going to open the issue of re-establishing the "Fairness Doctrine". Until its demise in the 1980s, the Doctrine assured that opposing viewpoints were heard on electronic media such as radio and television. Since its demise, we have seen the rise of virulent talk radio represented by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Laura Ingram, etc. The reason why these shows predominate on the public's airwaves is because the owners don't have to give opposing viewpoints an opportunity to respond.

The article also reports that Kucinich wants to conduct hearings on the concentration of media into fewer and fewer corporations and on the role of the Federal Communications Commission in regulating the media. Kucinich also said that he supported a Federal shield law for both bloggers and journalists.

Kucinich gave his remarks at the National Conference for Media Reform. He made his remarks in an unannounced speech to about 2,000 delegates. You can read the Center for Public Integrity's report on Kucinich's speech by clicking on the link in this entry's title.

Find Out Who Owns the Media

The Center for Media Integrity has a really cool website in which you can find out who owns the media in a particular area using zip codes as a search term. You can see how this works by clicking on the link for the search page for the 44256 zip code by clicking on the link in this entry's title. The map that the site uses is interactive and you can find out ownership for both cable and broadband television stations, radio stations, and newspapers. The map allows you to change the area that you are looking at and to zoom in and out to make the area bigger and smaller.

The site tells you who owns what and links to websites of the owning companies. It is good to know which company owns what in the event you are organizing campaigns to pressure advertisers, or you want to know where to send complaints or inquiries.

Long Wait for Bush's New Way Forward a Mistake

Interesting article from the Washington Post about how the long delay in announcing Bush's plan from the release of the Iraq Study Group Report has hurt Bush's political support. The article also contains a short but significant sentence about how Democrats have offered several alternatives to Bush's plan. The fact that the writer decided to mention the fact that Democrats have offered alternatives is significant because it shows that the media is no longer accepting Bush's spin on events. Bush is going to have a difficult final two years in Washington getting anything done if Republicans keep bailing on him and the media doesn't cover for him. Of course, his problem is a nation's hope. (The WP article is linked to this entry's title.)

Bogus GOP Outrage over Boxer's Comments to Rice

Okay, so the Republicans thought about it overnight and realized that Sen. Barbara Boxer handed Secretary of State Rice her lunch on Thursday in front of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. This happened when Boxer pointed out to Rice that neither she nor Boxer had family members in harm's way in Iraq. Boxer doesn't because her children are too old and her grandchildren too young. Rice doesn't because no one from her immediate family serves in the U.S. Armed Forces. Boxer's point was that Rice like most of the Bushies don't have any family members who are sacrificing by being in Iraq.

Now, the Bushies understand this point. Even they aren't that stupid. They don't want people dwelling on this because people might begin to wonder why the Bush twins aren't over in Iraq helping to advance Daddy's noble crusade. So, they did what they normally do, they attacked Boxer for supposedly being against single women, being anti-feminist, (that came courtesy of Tony Snow and the New York Post) and being anti-black (That last one was courtesy of Rush Limbaugh.)

Now, we all know this is a crock. Tony Snow and the rest of the Kool-Aid drinkers who are still loyal to Bubble-Boy could care less about feminists. Rush could care less about black people. This is just some bs to try and distract attention from the point Boxer was making. For the Bushies sacrifice is for the other guy.

House Republicans Splintering

According the article linked to in this entry's title, House Republicans, freed from the heavy hand of Tom DeLay and his henchmen are leaving their party to vote with Democrats on issues such as increasing the minimum wage, adopting PayGo budgeting, and authorizing stem-cell research. This in the face of the Republican's leadership claims that the GOP would fracture the Democrats.

One of the facts that most of the mainsteam media doesn't really talk about is the ability of Nancy Pelosi to keep the House Democrats united. On the minimum wage bill, not one Democrat defected. Last year when Bush unveiled his Social Security plan no House Democrat supported it. As we go deeper and deeper into this legislation session, Democrats should pick up momentum which doesn't bode well for the Republicans. Increasingly Bush will be vetoing popular legislation, which will set the stage for the 2008 election cycle.

Bush Doesn't Ask for Tax Increase for War

According to the Bloomberg Reports, George W. Bush, aka Bubble-Boy, is the first president in 150 years not to seek a tax increase to finance a war.(You can read the whole Bloomberg article by clicking on this entry's title.) This is going back to the Mexican-American war in the 1840s. All other presidents were smart enough to realize that you can't fight a war without a tax increase unless you are willing to go into debt. Now, the Republicans will try to argue that the national debt is going down. This is because the national debt doesn't count intra-governmental debt, ie, what the American government borrows from the Social Security trust fund to finance the government.

If Democrats wanted to go after Bush on the deficit, the first step would be to resurrect the lockbox concept that Al Gore talked about in 2000. This means passing a law that prohibits Social Security and Medicare funds from being used for anything other than those two programs. The immediate effect of this would be to illustrate how bad off the government finances are and to force reality into the debate about our government's spending and tax policies. It would also put the Bush administration into a real bind. They couldn't support such a move and opposing it would be politically unpopular. It would also reinforce the Democratic Congress's reputation as a defender of these two very popular programs.

The Iraq-Iran War?

According to the article linked to in this entry's title, NBC News anchors were very puzzled by comments Bush made to them during an off the record briefing on his speech. This article quotes Tim Russert as saying that apparently Bush expects Iran to surface as a problem very soon.

This would also explain why, during his speech on Wednesday, he announced that the U.S. is sending Patriot missiles to Iraq. Since these are missiles used against military airplanes and missiles, and since the insurgents in Iraq don't have such military assets, why are these units being sent to Iraq? Could it be because the Bush administration expects a military confrontation with Iran?

A friend of ours once told us that Bush will get out of Iraq by trying to go through Iran. We thought he was joking. He said that he wasn't joking and was being serious. It sounds like the same sort of thinking that got us embroiled in this war in the first place.

Sacrifice Increases for Army Reserve & National Guard

The U.S. Army is increasing the time that a Army Reserves or National Guard may be called for service in either Iraq or Afghanistan. In the past the Army had a policy that the Reserve and Guard could not be called for duty in Afghanistan or Iraq for more than 24 cumulative months. The new policy is that they may not be called for duty for more than 24 consecutive months, but there is no limit on the total amount of time they may be called. The Pentagon spokesperson said, however, that the Pentagon wants to limit deployments to 12 consecutive months. (Click on the entry's title to read the whole article.)

Let's see: Bush won't tax the rich to pay for his war, he won't call upon his supporters to join the Army to fight the war, but he will extend the amount of time that citizen-soldiers are ordered to fight in the war. Yep, that's Bubble-Boy's idea of shared sacrifice.

Newsweek's Fineman Sees Fear in Bush's Eyes During Iraq Speech

Howard Fineman has a well deserved reputation in Washington as being an exceptional purveyor of conventional wisdom. His reputation doesn't depend on original thinking or on pungent analysis. It depends on his ability to figure out what the conventional wisdom is among the Washington elite and then report on it. So, when he writes that he sees fear in Bush's eyes, it is significant. Not because it is true, although it may very well be true, but because this may become the conventional wisdom of the Beltway elite.

If you click on the link in this entry's title and read the article another fact jumps out at you. He apparently believes that one thing that drives Bush is his fear of being branded a "loser." Not that over 3,000 Americans have lost their lives in Iraq. Not that thousands of Iraqis have lost their lives in Iraq. Not that our reputation around the world has been totally trashed or that we have lost the moral high ground that we had after the attacks on September 11, 2001. No, according to Fineman what Bush is afraid of it being branded a "loser."

This brings up the problem with George W. Bush and indeed the whole Bush clan. They are in government not to serve the public, but to satisfy their egos. It is not about us, it is about them. It is not about solving America's problems, but about filling their need for public adulation. As far as we can tell, the history of the Bush family in politics is a history of self-gratification.

New American Troops Going to Iraq Without Better Humvees

The Baltimore Sun is reporting that new troops bound for Iraq will be arriving without the more armored transports that are supposedly being made for the Pentagon. So let's see if we have this right: initially Bubble-Boy doesn't send enough troops to do the job. Then he doesn't have body armor for the ones that he sent over. Not only doesn't he have enough body armor, but he also doesn't have appropriately armored transport vehicles. When all this is pointed out to the Pentagon, it promises to develop a better transport vehicle, only its not ready in time to be used by the troops that are being sent as BB escalates the war. If the consequences weren't so terrible for our troops, this would almost sound like a bad joke. (You can read the Sun article by clicking on the title of this entry.)

Strickland Vetoes First Bill within 16 Hours of Taking Office

The Columbus Dispatch noted in the story linked to in this entry's title that in his first 16 hours after taking the oath of office, Ted Strickland issued tough ethics regulations for his administration. His regulations are stricter than the law passed by the General Assembly. He also did something that took former Governor Robert Taft four years to do and that was veto a bill. In the waning days of the last session of the General Assembly, the Republicans passed a bill that limited damages for lead paint manufactuers. The bill was then sent to Taft, who neither signed it nor issued a veto. Instead his plan was to allow this bill to become law without his signature. Under the Ohio Constitution, a governor has 10 days to either sign the bill or veto the bill. If he does neither, then the bill becomes law without his signature.

Now, in this case, Taft believed that since the General Assembly ended his session on December 26, 2006, the ten days started then and consequently would end on January 6, 2007, before Strickland took office. The problem for the Republicans, though, is that while the General Assembly ended its session on December 26th, the bill wasn't received in the Governor's office until December 28th, 2006. By this calculation, the ten day period had not yet expired when Strickland issued his veto. Naturally, of course, Republicans are outraged by this position and are vowing to wage "war" against Strickland.

What's important isn't whether Strickland is right or wrong. What's important is that he just showed the GOP-led General Assembly that he won't be pushed around and that he will use his powers to stop them from unilaterally enacting their agenda. If the Republicans in the General Assembly thought they could bully Ted Strickland, they just got a quick lesson in gubernatorial prerogatives. Let's hope they heed it.

Gallup Poll Finds Big Majority Opposes Iraq War Escalation

The Gallup organization ran a pre-Bush speech (scheduled for Wednesday) poll on the issue of escalating the Iraqi War and found that a big majority opposes such escalation. (You can get the details by clicking on this entry's title. ) Gallup believes that support for the Bush's plan may increase after he gives the speech, but initially over 60% of the public is opposed to increasing the number of troops in Iraq.

Note that we are avoiding using the term "surge" to describe the planned troop increase. The word "surge" implies a short-term increase in troops, but there is nothing in this administration's recent history to give us confidence that the troop increase will be short-term, no matter what Bush says or doesn't say Wednesday night. We also think that the media is playing into Bush's hands when they allow him and his supporters to decide what language is going to be used to describe their actions.

One of the ways that Bush controls the media is by getting it to accept his language. His supporters use a label and if the media doesn't accept that label, it is accused of "bias" or more specifically, "liberal bias." Apparently the charge of "liberal bias" is so intimidating that grown men and women feel that they have no choice but to give in to the demands of Bush and his radical right-wing supporters.

Here is a news flash for the media: you get to decide what language to use to describe Bush's actions. That's part of your job. You are more than just stenographers blindly reporting what Bush and his supporters say.

Why Hawks Win: A Provocative Essay

Foreign Policy magazine has an article about why "hawks' prevail over "doves" when it comes to influencing policy-makers. The article, which can be linked to by clicking on this entry's title, argues that humans have a built in "bias" that leads policy makers to prefer the advice of "hawks" over "doves." It is a fascinating article and if you are interested in a psychological explanation of why Bubble-Boy got us into Iraq, this article is for you.

Hunters Pressuring NRA to Break With Bush Administration on Access to Public Lands

According to an article in the Washington Post, (which you can link to by clicking on this entry's title). hunters inside the National Rifle Association are pressuring the NRA to resist the Bush Administration's efforts to open Federal lands to development. Why? Because such development destroys hunting habitats. The Clinton Administration proposed and adopted a regulation during the 1990s that allowed hunters to walk in and ride horses into Federal lands, but prohibited the building of roads on such lands. At first both hunters and wildlife officials resisted such regulations, but now, after watching the Bushies turn over the Federal lands to mining and drilling interests, are beginning to support such regulations.

Is Bush Losing Utah?

According to a poll by the Salt Lake City Tribune only 42% of Utah residents support Bush's handling of the war. Only 44% support a escalation of the number of U.S. troops in Iraq. Just six months ago support for Bush on Iraq was over 50% in Utah. If Bubble-Boy is losing Utah, the GOP is in BIG trouble. _____________________________________________________________________
Click on the title of this entry to read the Tribune story about the poll.

Advice to Progressives: Dream Bigger Dreams!

Katha Pollitt of the Nation magazine has advice for liberals: dream bigger dreams! Advocate universal healthcare for all, cheap or free higher education, and a minimum wage of $9.00 an hour and indexed for inflation. Build a movement and stop worrying about finding a leader. If you have the right movement, leaders will emerge and come to you. It is a provocative article and can be read by clicking on the link in the title heading.

Will 2008 Mark the End of "Boomer" Obessions in American Politics

Since 1968, when Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew first used what was perceived as the rise of the counter-culture to gain political power, presidential politics has been shaped by the forces unleashed in the 1960s. Most of the time this has been to the detriment of the Democratic Party. In that period Republicans won elections in 1968, 1972, 1980, 1984, 1988, 2000, and 2004. During that period Democrats won elections in 1976, 1992, and 1998. If you are keeping score, that's Rs 7 and Ds 3.

The decade of the sixties unleashed a form of passionate politics because the challenges of that era were very divisive. America faced challenges to the established order from movements that advocated civil rights for blacks, women, and gays, from the anti-Vietnam War movement, from the environmental movement, and from people who challenged the existing sexual mores of the time. All of those movements found a political home in the Democratic Party and all of them were bitterly opposed by other Americans. It is not surprising that their opponents found a political home in the Republican Party.

It is no wonder, then, that the politics spawned by that era was and remains very personal and divisive. Time, however, changes everything. The "baby boom" started with people born in 1946 and ended with people born in 1960. The oldest boomers are now 60 and the youngest are 46. They are starting to give way to the next generation.

According to Howard Fineman of Newsweek this could lead to a politics that is no longer dominated by boomer obsessions. (You can read his article by clicking on the title of this entry.) Although his article doesn't go on with this analysis, Democrats far more than Republicans will benefit from America moving past the "culture wars." From our perspective it can't happen soon enough.

Reader Submission: Getting the Government We Deserve

A Cleveland columnist recently said no one should expect state government to save the state. He said it should get out of the way so the entrepreneurs and big business can save us. Do we actually believe that?

State government is the 500-pound gorilla. Ohio has been terribly ill-served by this state government and particularly this legislature for more than 10 years. They have taken university and public school systems that were once considered in the elites of this country and practically dismantled them. Think employers want poorly educated workers?

This legislature has sent a resounding message around the country that Ohio is not an inclusive and welcoming state. Think cutting-edge industry and innovative entrepreneurs want to locate here with a message like that?

While declaring they've lowered taxes, this legislature has ferociously pushed the tax burden down to the local level. Upset about your local school taxes? Point your finger at this legislature.
What concerned parents will move to a state that doesn't value public education?

Look around this country and you find prospering areas have forward-thinking, innovative governments unafraid to lead. Those areas not doing well often have self-serving governments more interested in the next election than defending the people's interests.

We usually get the government we deserve. Unfortunately, right now we are getting exactly what we deserve. We swept the executive offices clean this last election. We'll see how our new leaders perform. However, the lame duck legislature's performance this month should have shamed all Ohioans. A majority of those folks are back next year. That does not bode well for our state.

Wake up, Ohio. Government does matter. Until we begin voting our economic interests we will continue our descent into the lowest-tier states. You and I and Ohio deserve much better.

Michael E. Kovack
Medina County AuditorMedina, Ohio
___________________________________________________________________
Mike Kovack is a Democrat and has been county auditor for Medina County since 1993. He was re-elected in 2006 without opposition.

Ken Blackwell: A Sore Loser Until the Bitter End

Ken Blackwell, the outgoing Secretary of State, has decided that he will not turn over the keys to his office until 12:01 am on Monday, January 8, 2007. Since the election he has refused to meet with Jennifer Brunner, the incoming Secretary of State. We have always wondered whether Republicans are worse losers than they are winners. As far as Blackwell is concerned, we know the answer, he is equally obnoxious in defeat as in victory.

You have to wonder where this kind of attitude comes from, since it is shown by a lot of Republicans. Basically we think that it stems from a belief that they are better than others, and that kind of mindset cannot handle voter rejection. We believe that they are overlooking the opportunity their recent state-wide defeats have given them. Now they will be able to put into practice their belief that the private market is better at economic evaluation than government. They will now have a chance to show everyone just what the private market thinks of their abilities. On second thought, maybe that is exactly what they are afraid of and could explain why they are so bitter about losing power.
___________________________________________________________________
Click on the title of this entry to read a news article on the transition of power in various state offices.

ABC News Reports: Senators Regret Iraq War Vote

ABC News is reporting that at least 57 Senators would vote against the Iraq War Resolution if it was presented for a vote today. ABC News reports that, at most, only 43 Senators would vote for the resolution. _________________________________________________________________
You can get the full details by clicking on the arrow next to this entry's title. Thanks to the blogger Minor Ripper who sent us the link to this story.

State Senator Capri Cafaro's Swearing-In

State Senator Capri Cafaro was sworn in this week as a new Ohio State Senator. Capri had run for Congress in the 13th District and had campaigned extensively in Medina County. She was kind enough to send us photos of her swearing in and we decided to share them with our readers. If you have photos of Democratic events and would like to share them with MCDAC, send them to us at the email address below the picture of State Senator Cafaro.

joycekimbler@medinacountydemocraticactioncommittee.org.

Dems Adopt "PayGo" in the U.S. House

The Democratic controlled U.S. House of Representatives voted yesterday to change the budget rules for the U.S. House. They went back to a system that the Republicans used during Clinton's presidency, but abandoned when George W. Bush became president. The system's nickname is PayGo and works like this: any new spending increase proposed has to be backed by either tax increases or spending cuts elsewhere and any new tax cuts have to be backed by either spending cuts or tax increases elsewhere. (You can link to the CBS News story about PayGo by clicking on the arrow next to this entry's title.)

Adopting PayGo will help to restore fiscal sanity to Congress, but only a third of the Republicans voted for it. Why? Because it will make it harder to extend Bush's reckless tax cuts when they expire in 2010. Given a choice between cutting taxes and moving toward a balanced budget, most Republicans chose cutting taxes. This vote, more than any other that will be taken this session, shows that Republicans are not the party of fiscal responsibility, they are the party of reckless tax cutting. Republicans used to call Democrats "tax and spend liberals". Well, the vote on PayGo shows that they are "borrow and spend radical conservatives."

Republican County Treasurer vs. Republican County Commissioners

The Cleveland Plain Dealer reported on Wednesday that earlier this week Republican Medina County Treasurer John Burke sent a letter to the three Republican Medina County Commissioners demanding that they personally help reimburse his office for a missing tax payment. (The story can be viewed by clicking on the arrow next to this entry's title.)

In 2006 approximately $1,000.00 that was received as a tax payment was found to be missing from the County Treasurer's office. Employees of the Treasurer's office made up the missing money from personal funds. In the letter Burke claimed that the missing payment was the result of the Medina County Commissioners not providing him with adequate computer software and equipment. He therefore suggested that the County Commissioners each contribute $12.00, which was the same amount contributed by each of his employees. The Commissioners are refusing this request.

Bush to Blame General George Casey for Iraq Problems?

The New York Times published a report that Bush has supposedly lost confidence in General Casey, the head of the American military in Iraq, and is going to replace him as the top commander. The article, which can be read by clicking on the arrow next to the title of this entry, quotes unnamed administration sources as saying that Bush lost confidence in Casey over the last year. Never mind, of course, that Bush and Cheney kept singing Casey's praises in 2006, someone has to take the fall for Bubble-Boy's screw-ups, and Casey's name has come up.

The attempt to blame Casey for the mistakes of the Iraq War brings this question to mind: is there anyone involved with George W. Bush who has not suffered a loss to their reputation? Think about it. Tony Blair, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, George Tenet, even Dick Cheney, to name just a few, have all suffered damage to their reputations. The United States Supreme Court has seen its reputation decline since it put him in office with the dubious reasoning of Bush v. Gore. The American people have suffered an enormous blow to its reputation because of the Iraqi War. Bubble-Boy trashes the reputation of everyone involved with him.

Bush to Call for Sacrifice?

The BBC is reporting that President Bush, aka "Bubble-Boy", is going to call for sacrifice when he announces to America that he is increasing the number of troops in Iraq. (You can read the article by clicking on the arrow next to this post's title.) That brings up this question, just who is sacrificing for Bush's war?

The over 3,000 American troops killed have made the ultimate sacrifice. Their families have sacrificed. The over 22,000 American troops wounded have sacrificed. Their families have sacrificed. The men and women serving in Iraq are sacrificing. Their families are sacrificing. That's it. No one else. Why? Because George W. Bush has not demanded that his supporters, who don't fall into one the above categories, sacrifice anything to support his war.

He has not demanded that they support a tax raise to pay for the cost of this war.
He has not demanded that they consider enlisting to support this war.
His children are not enlisting to support this war.

In short, he has not demanded any sacrifice of the American people or of his supporters in support of this war, unless they fall into one of the groups listed above. It just seems to us that if our government is going to send American men and women to war, it should at least ask the rest of us to bear some cost of that war.