On Iran

I have been resisting the urge to tell world leaders how to act, as they are the leaders, not me. I have also been resisting the urge to talk about Iran's actions as I may be fueling the fire. That, of course, assumes that anyone will read this. But this morning's article in the Post has pushed me past the point where I can keep it in. Even if I am am the only one ever to read these words, by putting them out there I feel a little better. There is nothing else I can do.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been jabbing at Obama and the west about our 'interference' in their affairs. The thing is that we haven't been interfering. We've been commenting and denouncing violence. Ahmadinejad has engaged in far more critical verbage than that which Obama used. Not only is Ahmadinejad a hypocrite, but he appears to be directly engaged in a diversion. He is pointing his finger at the west when the problem is internal.

He and the Ayatolah have been accusing the west of spreading lies and inciting the protests in Iran. This sort of conspiracy theory is the sort of stuff that makes us throw labels like crackpot at bloggers. All this while they are actively locking up and pushing out foreign press and releasing their own views through state media. If everything they are doing is truely legitimate and follows the law, they what do they have to fear? If everything is above the board, open the records to the public and the international media alike. Show the world definitively that President Ahmedinejad really won the election, and the world, and likely Iranian citizens, will respect the outcome.

By hiding the evidence the regime is discrediting themselves. Iranians and the world at large is suspicious of what occured. The Iranian people have notified the world through their protests and free nations everywhere want transparency for the people of Iran.

While Obama is not a hard line 'decider' like Bush was, he is still the Commander in Cheif of the US Military, and agression toward the US is likely to be dealt with harshly. Obama, thankfully, is much more diplomatic, and I am sure that he, like myself and many others, see through Ahmedinejad's empty rhetoric that just seeeks to veil internal woe and keep his own people in the dark. The people voted and they deserve to know the outcome and feel assured that it is accurate. That is all the US and the west want. That is what the citizens of Iran want. Ahmedinejad needs to grow up and look back at himself and his government and his people and do the right thing. It is Iran that is under the microscope, not the US or Obama.

I urge you to read the article that I linked to above, and any others you may find. Make your own decisions. Let the Iranian people do the same.

back to the USSR

today Dmitry Medvedev takes office as president of Russia. a Russia that has taken on more and more appearances that hearken back to the USSR. relations have bee strained lately as Moscow demands respect from the west and backs more oppressive regimes. but its not all that simple.

Russia's elections were widely viewed as fixed. Medvedev won by a large margin as Putin's hand picked successor and running on the widely popular United Russia Party, which also controls both houses of the parliament. further consolidating power under Putin's party, Medvedev's first official act was to name Putin his Prime Minister, a formerly weak and mostly ceremonial position that Putin himself helped to strengthen in his last months in office.

the fear is that with so much power concentrated within one party under Putin, and his protege in the Kremlin that the ways of the old USSR will be back. Medvedev has a marked populist twist to his speeches, and that is encouraging to a Russia that lacks much of a middle class. so many struggle and the few that make it tend to become millionaires.

i heard a story on this on NPR this morning in which a Russian analyst said that the Kremlin is demanding to be heard out as a world power while their soviet era infrastructure crumbles and the bureaucracy stymies efforts to use Russia's vast oil and gas wealth to benefit the people. he even went so far as to call Russia a third world country. his words, not mine.

having been there, i am fascinated even more so. i wouldnt call it third world, but there is a definite stratification of their society and most small towns we passed through could be so classified. the cities didnt seem third world, but in comparison to what i know, there is some improvement to be made. Russia is still going through growing pains. its still trying to figure out how to operate. my fear is that the United Russia Party will end up with a strangle hold on the state and youll see the people suffer, the borders close, and a few elite rise to enormous wealth and keep the whole thing going.

i hope that Medvedev's more populist rhetoric comes to pass. i hope that the people who have suffered can truly become middle class and not have so much hardship. i hope that Russia becomes a truly great nation, not through bullying or cold war style posturing, but through progressive policies and real leadership by example that the rest of the developing world can follow. time will tell.

post

13% of Americans think that Barack Obama is Muslim. i found this out when i was watching the news and eating my breakfast this morning. the bit started out with them interviewing random people on the streets of NYC to see what they would say. and at first, i felt a bit embarrassed as i wasnt sure, but i thought he was Christian, which, in fact, he is.

then i realized something. if i cared i would have known, im sure of that. so then i felt pretty happy realizing that the major candidate that i like best could have been a Muslim and i didnt care. he could be Jewish or an atheist, it really doesnt matter to me.

it was one of those realizations that you have to step outside yourself a bit to make. whether Senator Obama practices Christianity or Islam doesnt matter to me, and i really only realized when the news made a point about the perceptions of the public, and somewhat covertly about how believing that Obama was not Christian would affect their vote. im very happy that i can see past this and be able to look issues that really should matter when selecting a candidate.

this reminds me of the hoopla that surrounded Keith Ellison in his choice to use the Qur'an to be sworn into office as the first Muslim US congressman. there was a call for him to use the Bible, which makes no sense to me. the oath of office is taken over a holy book in order to promise to not just your constituents, but also to your deepest faith, to take your position seriously and abide by your values that got you elected and to honor your promises. having a Muslim take such an oath over the Bible is like a Christian saying "by Allah, i swear i will do my best." it means nothing. (check out the un-bias in this article)

the point here is that too much is made of things that really shouldnt be of great importance. have you heard anything of Keith Ellison since he was sworn into office? has he tried to topple our government from the inside? it really doesnt matter, and it doesnt matter that Obama has a Muslim father. it doesnt matter that Obama is in fact Christian. what matters is what he stands for.

i also find it interesting that the religious right attacks his links to Islam through his father and step father, they also take the opportunity to attack his connections to the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Wright has come to light lately and his sermons have been all over youtube. Obama has tried to distance himself from the man who baptized his children and married he and his wife, Michelle. its hard to ignore this connection. i dont see it as a liability, but many could. i like Ralph Nader, but i wholly disagree with some things he says. i like Rolling Stone magazine, but i think the lean a little too far left and sometimes go too far in endorsing and denouncing candidates. the point is that Wright probably helped Obama by encouraging his early political activism in Chicago, but that doesnt meant that Obama stands for all that Wright does. just like Obama's enrollment in a Muslim school does not mean he is in fact Muslim.

the important thing here is not what religion Obama is. its not who Obama is associated with, or whose sermons he has heard. the important thing is to look at the candidates yourself. to see who they are through your own eyes. dont let media spin make your decisions. dont let me make your decisions. take it all in, do your own research, and decide for yourself. then cast your vote for the person who you think will do best on the job.

i think that Obama's exposure to Islam and Christianity alike make him the best suited of all candidates to understand and better the situation in the middle east. he has already made trips to Iraq, Israel, and Syria. i think that he above the other candidates is best suited for diplomacy in that troubled region of the world. but its no up to me. its up to you and me.

i'm worried.

the thought of losing America's largest generation and soon to be largest portion of the electorate to a democratic party meltdown it terribly frightening and depressing. all those jokes that Jon Stewart and his contemporaries make about how the democrats will lose the election that Bush has served up for them now seem dangerously close to coming true. this article points out the problem and the consequences and i just hope that our country doesnt suffer as a result, but i fear it will.

Effect and Cause

i was listening to Icky Thump by the White Stripes on the way to work this morning. i have always really like the last song, Effect and Cause. and i kind of thought that it was the best come back to what John McCain has been spouting lately.

he has said repeatedly that 'we are where we are.' which has about as much substance as Jessica Simpson. really, i thought that we are where we were from what hes been saying. all the while claiming that he has the record to prove he is the one to lead. but then he missed the vote on the economic stimulus package. the economy has got to be in the top 3 of just about everybody's big issues this election year. if not the issue that determines who they will vote for.

so McCain is basically saying "dont look at the past, we need to focus on the present. and what makes me best to lead in the present is my past, which shouldnt be looked at, but trust me its what qualifies me." he is pulling a Bush/Cheney and riding the Iraq war, terrorism, and fear to success. he has made these issues his cause, but in reality they are the three musketeers' effect and legacy, not the cause. I dont understand how the republicans have been able to run on the same issues for more than 6 years.

now if we focus on what McCain is doing now, its not so bad, but what he has proposed for the future is a little scary. he has admitted that he doesnt know jack about the economy and says that we will be in Iraq for another 100 years. i dont understand how people can consider voting for a candidate that says these things. in contrast Obama has denounced NAFTA in an appeal to bring back jobs lost to our neighbors to the north and south. mostly south. he has also pushed to withdraw troops as quickly as possible and push for talks with Iran and other hostile nations. while this sounds better to me than McCain, its still has its problems as Michael Gerson of the Washington Post lays out.

the issue i have here is that McCain is deliberately redirecting our attention to a cause that is really the effect of what he is in large part responsible for. Obama and Clinton have made promises that are unlikely to be honored, mostly because they sound good, the idea is right, but as president all actions must be calculated, thought through thoroughly, and planned out. one cant shoot first and ask questions later or you end up in a prolonged conflict with people you dont really understand, hemorrhaging money in a place where you didnt belong in in the first place.

what we cant do is allow McCain to get away with turning a horrible thing that he is at least partially responsible for into a cause that he can ride to the white house. its like if i came into your house and crapped in your bed, then said 'i am the one to resolve this problem! over the next month we will use a tooth pick to slowly remove the shit, then leave the sheets on the bed for the next year, and maybe, sometime after that, we will rinse off the sheets.' when any idiot can see that you kick the asshole who fucked up your house out, clean up the mess, and get on with life.

people keep saying that this is an historic election, what with a black guy, and girl, and and old white guy vying for the presidency. but its also historic because of what is at stake. the economy, the war, the renewal of real diplomacy, the restoration of fundamental American rights, and restoring the world's respect for the US. i have been pointing the finger at McCain, but i have little more confidence in Clinton, and a bit more for Obama, but i fear that none of them is really bringing America together and proposing realistic solutions.

like i said before, ill probably become disenfranchised by the time of the election and vote for someone like Ralph Nader. while i dont agree with all that he says, he does address the issues at hand, propose solutions to them, and seem to actually care about America and Americans.

woe is me. when i think about the future, i get scared. maybe ill move to Denmark, not have to worry about social issues, work 3o hours a week, and stay out of the worlds business. except for the occasional inflammatory cartoon...

TJ inspired

with cuba now under the rule of the more moderate of the castro brothers, i wonder what might happen with our relations with them. i honestly dont know why we have been at odds with cuba in particular, why befriending other nations with less than democratic rule. (saudi arabia, for one) communism isnt the buzz word it once was. and cuba is no longer shored up by the ussr, and hasnt been for more than 15 years. it really bears no threat to us, and if we invade another country, it will obviously be in the middle east, not the carribean.

so lets start to build up relations with them. to extend the olive branch to raul castro and lift the ancient an silly embargo with them. its a start at least. and its diplomacy, rather than an invasion. i think people will be much more likely to like us if the see the benefits of it, rather then toppling their govt and causing general anarchy. we need to set up a mutually beneficial situation, and step one is to open trade.

ideally, we should have this with every nation. with a level playing field most products are cheaper the closer they are made to you. then the ones that cant be produced near you, you trade for with something you have and they dont. we should be able to trade grain we grow for spices that we cant, to break it way down. but in today's slanted playing field, it makes it cheaper to manufacture many things abroad due to low wages. this is partly because the US has been blessed with prosperity while other countries havent. this is also because some US wages(UAW) are unnaturally high. the new UAW contracts with the big 3 help to address this, but there are a number of jobs that are over payed in the US that make our products generally uncompetitive globally.

so there are a number of problems, but step one with cuba, and many others in my opinion, is to open up trade relations. all this comes from driving by a building in downtown DC with a Jefferson quote that was similar to this, but this one supports my conclusion better.

"I think all the world would gain by setting commerce at perfect liberty."

there is a growing evil in america that we must put to bed. it has been growing for some time. this is that the american electorate is largely uneducated and uninvolved in politics. i have been guilty of this, just as have been most americans. we owe it to ourselves to change this trend. to take this coming election very seriously. to do the research. to vote for who we feel is most qualified. to select the one person who can really lead our nation through a difficult time.

i don not envy our next president. he or she will inherit a colossal deficit, a seemingly endless war, and a country teetering on the edge of recession. thats just naming the real big ones. and whoever our next president is, he or she needs to be able to guide us through these times. and it is our voice who calls for that leader. our voice must be strong and clear. we must choose wisely. not just picking the guy we'd like to have a beer with, but the guy who can end a mired war, and turn around the economy.

i honestly dont feel confidant that anyone in the race will be able to do this. i hope that the candidates can lay out a way that they will approach these tough issues and we, the voters, can decide which path is best. but to find out what candidate is right for the job, we have to look into their past, their experience, their goals, their plan. it is their job to lead us. it is our job to choose the leader.

making the wrong choice again could be tragic. we have seen the deficit grow exponentially, an unjust war, and the erosion of our rights due to our past choices. to prevent more of this, and to right the wrongs we need to be active. we need to research, and think, and vote.

"Lethargy [is] the forerunner of death to the public liberty."

Ralph -a- Nader

if you have your head above the sand, youve heard by now that Ralph Nader has thrown his name into the race. while he, and most reasonable people, realize that he will not be president, he is sure to bring attention to some issues that the other candidates would not address. and this why he is important. hes the guy you can count on to say what he thinks, not what is politically popular, and in most cases, look out for the every day american. and whether his proposed policies would in fact help us is debatable, he will force the other candidates to address issues that they havent to this point.

i think that a candidate like him is essential in that he doesnt pander to anyone. he addresses the issues that he sees relevant and necessary. and he comes up with a solution that he thinks will work, not one that sounds good in sound bites. and by doing this he brings up the point that the answer in life is rarely a choice between a or b, but is a spectrum of choices and paths. it becomes a choice between 2 courses because of our political system that favors two parties over a number of them. as a result we receive only two possible spins on the situation. during election years sometimes, as this one, a party has two nearly even front runners who have differing plans, but frequently theres one from the GOP and one from the democrats, and only third parties bring attention to other possibilities and issues.

the down side, at least in the case the democrats say, is that he will be 'taking' votes from their candidate. they go as far as to say that in 2000 it was Nader's fault that Gore didnt win the presidency. i think its pretty much common knowledge that there were other forces at play in that election. and the fact that 4% of the popular vote went to Nader that year shows that a large number of people rallied behind what he said. perhaps if Gore had addressed these issues he would have taken some or all of those votes. i think it is silly to blame a candidate for 'taking' votes. you have to earn them. no one can take them.

Nader probably wouldnt run if he thought another major party candidate covered the issues. but he does run. he provokes thought in americans which is something we desperately need in large part. i hope he keeps running and long as he feels like he needs to. i dont know how much longer he will go on with it, but hopefully he or someone else will continue to raise awareness, provoke thought, and challenge the established parties.