Tue, 24 Apr 2007

War Funding and Political Posturing

So the Democrats are proposing a pull out timetable along with their funding bill. Bush says he will veto it and uses every opportunity to say that the Democrats are not supporting the troops. All of it appears to be political posturing on both sides. It's a game of political chicken. You know, like the teenage boys coming at each other full speed in their hot rods to see who will veer off first. Being a moderate, I can see both sides of the argument. I must admit that I'm strongly inclined toward the Democrat's position. I have felt that the war in Iraq was a mistake from the first and am more firmly convinced of it each day it goes on.

Bush and his supporters argue that giving the enemy a timeline means that all they have to do is wait us out. Maybe that is true, but just who is the enemy? Is it terrorists, the various factional militias, who? What do you do as a soldier when one day you go out with someone and the next day you are sent to arrest or kill them? Just who are we fighting this war against? Are we causing more of the problem than we are solving by being there? I really think that we are.

What will happen when (if) we pull out? For one thing lots of Bush's friends will stop making millions on the conflict. I think that's a good thing. The country might go in a direction which is unfriendly to the U.S. No great loss, I wonder just how many of the Iraquis are all that friendly to us now! Could we loose some oil? We detinitely will loose some oil revenues and I'm sure that is a large part of Bush's reasons for wanting to stay.

Will we foster a terrorist haven? Somehow, I don't really think so. At least not any more than there is now. In fact, I think we might even take away one of the terrorist's primary recruiting tools -- the occupation of Iraq by the U.S. Occupation in the eyes of those who don't really like the U.S. anyway.

Might Iraq split up? I guess so. I really don't know all that much about the region, but I do know that the Iraqi ethinc Kurds wouldn't mind it one bit. It's Turkey which really doesn't want that to happen, fearing problems in the south with their ethnic Kurds.

It's a complex situation, one well beyond my knowledge as a private citizen. But, I think that killing young Americans isn't the answer -- no matter how many of Bush's friends are getting rich from the war. I think we need to get out and let the region go the way that it will. I say, Democrats, go for it.

posted 18:23 [/Moderates] permanent link

Mon, 08 Jan 2007

A New Party?

Do we need a new party? Are the two existing parties moving to much toward the left and right to be effective? Is compromise dead?

All of these things have been going through my mind since the Democratic takeover of the U.S. House and Senate (barely). I really feel that both parties are moving too much to the radical elements in their parties. The Republicans are becoming too conservative and the Democrats to liberal to the point where they are unable to compromise and actually get anything meaningful done. I believe they are leaving the vast majority of the "American People" (whatever that is) wondering just which party they can vote for.

People want things done on the issues -- Iraq, education, health care, social security. They don't want some radical solution in most cases. I believe they would be happy with some compromise which worked to move those issues toward resolution. So what is the resolution?

Iraq - 3,000 Americans killed and nothing has been accomplished. Get our troups out, but leave something there for the Iraqis. What does this mean? I'm not sure, but I think it means have a plan to extricate our troups as soon as possible while leaving that country some hope of becoming stable and avoiding civil war (something I personally feel they are already in).

Health Care - It's a shame that we, as a leading industrialized country have so many of our citizens without health care. It's criminal that we have one of the poorest outcome rates of any industrialized country, given the amount we spend per person on health care. We need to fix the system and I don't believe that the private sector will do so alone. I hate it that insurance companies are some of the richest companies on earth, that pharmaseutical companies make record profits, etc.

Social Security - We need it, fix it. Enough said.

Education - Our kids don't compete in the world. "No child left behind" is leaving our country behind. We need to come up with new ways to education our kids? How are the other countries doing it?

In short, stop bickering, stop special interests and pork projects and get to the business of running the country or get out!

posted 12:06 [/Moderates] permanent link

Mon, 19 Dec 2005

Christmas: Conservatives gone beserk . . .

Who would ever think that "Seasons Greetings" would cause such a ruckus! This greeting has been around forever as a nice way of wishing someone the best of the holiday season. After starting around December, there are a lot of holidays

• Christmas
• New Years
• Chanukah (happens to start right on Christmas -- 25-Dec-2005 -- this year)
• Kwanzaa

If you want to cover more than just Christmas (yes, I'm a Christian), then I find "Happy Holidays" or "Seasons Greetings" the correct thing to say. Not politically correct just correct. I also find that Christian conservatives arguing with governments and stores over Christmas is offensive. Who cares what they want to call their tree or their sale or their . . . the birth of Christ is the important thing and what commercial establishments choose to do has nothing the least to do with that. I sometimes think that these conservative groups are just siezing on something to pull people's minds away from the REAL issues like the war in Iraq and political influence here in the U.S.

posted 16:29 [/Moderates] permanent link

Thu, 09 Jun 2005

The U.S. DemoTheocracy

Is the conservative Christian right driving the U.S. to a theocracy?

I sure hope not. Our country was founded on religious tollerance. The founding fathers took great care to keep religion out of the government and government out of religion. Yet more and more, I see religion--and more specifically Christianity--intertwined with government and politics. I am a Christian--specifically a Catholic--and practice my religion in my daily life. I believe that I should approach my life with the values of that religion. But, I stop short of imposing my views on everyone. The trend of involving a specific religion--and more specifically, a radical element of that religion as practiced by many of the religious right--with government bothers me greatly.

I believe that this also bothers much of the rest of the world, especially those parts of the world which do not practice Christianity. Tollerance and understanding are the keys to living with these parts of the world. And, I believe that we must live with these parts of the world. There is no choice to isolate the U.S. from the rest of the world or attempt to impose a religion on the rest of the world. Even the thought that we might be trying to do this could cause problems.

posted 15:12 [/Moderates] permanent link

Thu, 05 May 2005

Christian Right Rewrites History

I have just heard a story on NPR about the Christian Right version of U.S. History. They believe that they have found documentation which proves that the U.S. is a Christian country. I believe this group is being confused by Christianity and "Christian principles". I believe that the country is definitely based on Christian principles -- don't kill, honor your mother and father, treat your neighbor as you want to be treated -- but not on Christianity. In fact, the founding fathers when out of their way to avoid becoming a Christian country.

posted 17:38 [/Moderates] permanent link