Snap!

This is the longest I’ve gone without posting a blog entry. I’m not sure I can explain why. I think it was overload. It feels like a tsunami of political idiocy came ashore without warning and swamped my processing capacity. It began with a spate of Republican sniper shots that included:

John Boehner, the House Republican Leader, saying, "I listen to my Democrat friends and I wonder if they’re more interested in protecting the terrorists than protecting the American people." That’s political idiocy.

Dick Cheney going on national TV and saying that anybody who questions the administration is “emboldening the enemy”, adding that these questioners are “morally and intellectually confused”. More idiocy.

Tony Snow confirming in a press briefing that the confused people include Republican Senators Warner, McCain and Graham, and former secretary of state, Colin Powell. More idiocy.

Donald Rumsfeld, never wanting to be left behind in the hyperbole competition, trumping everyone by comparing anyone who questions the administration’s strategy in Iraq to Nazi appeasers. More idiocy.

So, there it is, in such simple terms. Anyone who disagrees with anything that George W. Bush and his merry band of warriors decides to do is aiding and abetting the enemy or, at best, appeasing the enemy, due to moral and intellectual confusion. These terms are so simple that even a child can understand them. These terms are so simple that only a simpleton can accept them.

This administration believes that this confusion is making appeasers even out of the Republican faithful. This administration believes that it is beyond question and above reproach from within or without. This administration believes that it and it alone is in full and sole possession of the light, the truth and the way, without exception, so help them, God. This administration believes that it has no need for a United Nations, or a United States Congress, or a U. S. Supreme Court, or the opinion of the American people, all of which are mere vessels of potential confusion, appeasement and enemy emboldening dissent that must be overcome through hyperbolic invective, ridicule and fear mongering.

Then, moving beyond mere verbal assault on every source or form of opposition, this administration leaped head first into what may be one of the most disturbing chapters in American history – their unprecedented insistence on abrogating the Geneva Convention in order to, among other things, secure the right to use “alternative interrogation methods” – aka torture – on prisoners of war, including those that until recently were held in secret and previously denied CIA prisons in countries that don’t have laws against torture.

The president almost became irrational when someone asked him if we were in danger of becoming like the torturers we cast from power in Iraq. Watching him get apoplectic when questioned about his intent was an indication that he considers himself accountable to no one other than himself and that he may be getting too close to losing whatever remaining grip he has on the responsible exercise of power.

Then along came the straw that broke the elephant’s back. We’re now being told about a recent National Intelligence Estimate, which reflects the collective opinion of all 16 American intelligence agencies, that concludes that there is now a greater threat from terrorism than there was when we invaded Iraq to bring an end to terrorism. The war on terror in Iraq, according to this NIE, is producing more terror not less. We are not safer, as the president would have us believe; we are in more danger now than we were on either 9/10 or 9/12, 2001, in large part because of actions we've taken since 9/11.

The point I want to make today is that sometime this weekend I snapped. I’ve come to the conclusion that this administration poses a serious threat to the security of the American people, perhaps as great a threat as “the enemy” it pretends to be defeating. This administration seems hell bent on a course of action that breeds rather than defeats terrorism. The Bush war on terrorism is failing; the Bush policy in Iraq is failing; not because of any military weakness or shortcoming, but because the Commander in Chief and his militant cohorts have severely misjudged the world situation; have set upon a deeply flawed strategy; and have failed to negotiate almost every tactical turn along the way.

This weekend I made a substantial monetary contribution to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. That shows how loud the “snap” was in my head. I’m a lifelong Republican; I’ve voted for the Republican candidate for president in every election except two; I’ve voted overwhelming for other Republican candidates; I will vote overwhelming for Republican candidates this November; I have never contributed one thin dime to the Democratic Party or any of its flag bearers, until now.

I’ve taken this action because I believe that either the senate or the house, if not both, must be controlled by the Democrats for the next two years so that some restraint and balance can be reintroduced into the decision making in Washington. The president cannot be allowed to continue blindly pursuing his goals for another two years without meaningful opposition. The president can no longer be trusted with the power of his office if the power of congress cannot be a counterbalance when necessary.

I’m not the only one who has snapped. In the last week, several of my colleagues at work and one of my children, each of whom voted twice for this president, told me they no longer trust the president. If you don’t trust the President of the United States then you have to constrain the exercise of executive power through the constitutional means available to the electorate.

I never thought I’d see this day. I’m ready for a new day to begin.

Five Years and Counting

A few observations on this September 11th:

Osama bin Laden is still at large and al-Qaeda is still very active. A compelling argument can be made that al-Qaeda is stronger and more active now than it was five years ago today.

The Taliban is reasserting itself in Afghanistan. Its resurgence is so significant that this year Afghanistan has the biggest opium harvest ever recorded, almost 50% larger than last year. The Taliban provides support and protection for the Afghan opium industry.

There have been no weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq, nor has any demonstrated capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction been found in Iraq. It’s safe to say at this point that none will be found.

The president, vice president and secretary of defense have now publicly acknowledged on several occasions that there was no connection between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks.

The recently declassified report from the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee finds that there was no connection between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. In fact, according to the report, Saddam wanted Abu Musab al-Zarqawi arrested as a disruptive force and considered al-Qaeda to be a threat to his regime.

The Senate report includes a summary of an FBI report in which Saddam claims that Iraq only opposed U.S. policies. According to the FBI report, Saddam said that "if he wanted to cooperate with the enemies of the U.S., he would have allied with North Korea or China."

In July 2006, former CIA Director George Tenet told the Intelligence Committee that the White House pressured him to back up the administration's case for war despite his agents' doubts about the intelligence it was based on. Tenet told the committee that complying with that pressure was "the wrong thing to do."

Democrats on the committee said that on October 7, 2002, the day the president gave a speech that linked Saddam and 9/11, the CIA sent a declassified letter to the committee saying it would be an "extreme step" for Saddam to help Islamist terrorists attack the U.S.

A senior Defense Department official recently told the media that, “The insurgency has gotten worse by almost all measures, with insurgent attacks at historically high levels.” A Defense Intelligence Agency report dated August 3 makes similar observations, noting that the number of daily insurgency strikes against Americans and Iraqi security forces has doubled since January.

Specifically, the number of roadside bombs planted in Iraq and targeted at American service members rose in July to the highest monthly total since the beginning of the war. In July, 2,625 bombs were discovered, of which 1,666 exploded. In January, a total of 1,454 exploded or were discovered, 45% fewer than in July.

Military commanders see the roadside bomb statistic as an important measure of insurgent strength because bomb attacks require a network: sources of financing; sources of materials; bomb makers; operatives to dig the holes, plant the bombs, watch for approaching forces, and detonate the bombs.

General John Abizaid, the U.S. military commander in the Middle East, told the Senate Armed Services Committee last month that Sunni-Shiite sectarian violence is “probably as bad as I’ve seen it, in Baghdad in particular”, noting that if it persisted “it is possible that Iraq could move towards civil war.”

General Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, agreed with General Abizaid’s assessment. Senator John McCain asked General Pace to confirm that there is now a possibility of civil war and General Pace did so. Senator McCain then asked, “Did you anticipate this situation a year ago?” General Pace said, “No, sir.”

Republican Senator John Warner, Chairman of the Armed Services Committee and a staunch supporter of the administration’s policy in Iraq, responded that the Armed Services Committee might have to reexamine whether the congressional authorization to use U.S. force in Iraq would be valid if Iraq fell into a civil war.

General George Casey, the U.S. military commander in Iraq, had indicated in recent months that the level of U.S. forces in Iraq might be significantly reduced by the end of this year, but General Abizaid noted, “Since the time that General Casey made that statement, it’s clear that the operational and the tactical situation in Baghdad is such that it requires additional security forces, both U.S. and Iraqi.” Thousands of additional troops have been sent into Baghdad in recent weeks.

A senior military affairs expert who received a briefing on Iraq at the White House last month has said that, “Senior administration officials have acknowledged to me that they are considering alternatives other than democracy” in Iraq.

On September 4th, I wrote about the number of U.S., Coalition and Iraqi military troops who have died in Afghanistan and Iraq. In the last week, 19 more U.S. troops, five more Coalition troops, and 42 more Iraqi troops have died. The total number of U.S. troops killed now stands at 3,005. While those numbers are significant, they’re relatively small when compared to the number of civilians killed in Iraq and Afghanistan since the war began.

After outlining the numbers on September 4th, I simply said, “Make of them what you will.” After making the above observations on September 11th, I again invite you to make of them what you will.

As I remember those who died on September 11, 2001, and those who have died since that horrific day, I know what I make of them.

The Enemy Among Us

WARNING: Ann Coulter is exceedingly bad for your health. On her best day, she’s caustic; on an average day, she’s toxic; at her worst, she’s carcinogenic. Ingesting her vile effluent in any form will cause the spirit in you to wither and withdraw.

On the day after 9/11, she spewed: "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. … We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war." Ann Coulter, "This Is War"; September 12, 2001.

That’s the rhetoric of a terrorist. It’s very easy to picture some semi-demented al-Qaeda “leader” saying, “We should attack their cities, kill their people, and convert them to Islam. We bombed their buildings; we killed civilians. That’s war. And this is war.” When we become no different than our enemy – we become one of our enemies.

In her book, Godless: The Church of Liberalism, and in her public appearances Coulter pretends to be a Christian voice while making public statements such as: "I think our motto should be, post-9-11, 'Rag head talks tough; rag head faces consequences.'" - Ann Coulter, Conservative Political Action Conference; February 10, 2006.

That’s a brilliant piece of commentary worthy of any blowhard kid who’s trying to rule the playground by yelling loud and often and pretending to be tough. Coulter isn’t tough, though; she’s just cold and hardened. She’s the proverbial blunt instrument that may be good for beating people about the head and shoulders, but it’s only a weapon for back-alley thugs.

I simply cannot picture Jesus standing by her as she continues to emit nothing but mean-spirited guile. Notwithstanding the cross she proudly displays around her neck, to me she represents the antithesis of Christian values. I know it’s pretentious to put words in Jesus’ mouth, but I have no trouble picturing him turning to her and saying, as he did to Peter, who thought he knew better than the Lord he professed to follow, “Get thee behind me, Satan.” That’s a harsh judgment of someone who offers the world nothing but harsh judgment.

President Bush says that we’re fighting the enemy there so we don’t have to fight them here. Well, there are enemies of freedom already among us and we need to fight them, too, here and now. Ann Coulter is a poster-child for the enemy within. People like her are a clear and present danger to freedom in America because history teaches that there is no liberty in a land where self-righteous arrogance rules, particularly when it pretends to do so in the name of God.

Get thee behind us, Ann.

Crikey, Mate!

A few months ago I wrote about being surprised at my reaction to the death of Buck Owens. I didn’t know that I cared enough to have the kind of reaction I felt. Today I feel the same thing about the death yesterday of Steve Irwin, the sometimes zany Australian naturalist, animal advocate and self-styled “Crocodile Hunter”.

Irwin died after being stabbed in the chest by the spiny barb on the end of a sting ray’s tail. Apparently, it pierced his heart. In a November 2004 interview with Larry King, a rerun of which my wife and I watched last night, Irwin talked about his trust of animals, particularly when he studied their behavior and prepared for and rehearsed any planned encounter. In an eerie moment, comparing animals to people, Irwin concluded, “An animal won’t come out of the blue and stab you in the back.”

When I think about Irwin I’m struck by one thing – his undeniable passion and enthusiasm for what he did with his life. Everyone who spoke of him made it clear that what we saw on TV is exactly what he was in real life – a man with a high-energy love affair with the animal kingdom who felt he had a conservation mission to fulfill. Friends and family said that his passion and enthusiasm were as evident in a living room chat as they were in one of his Discovery Channel specials. Said another way, Steve Irwin was the real deal.

He was raised by parents who pursued the same devotion to animals. Family photos show him chasing after and holding all manner of animals as a little boy. Irwin and his wife continued to operate the same Australian zoo that his parents started. Irwin’s belief, which might not be shared by all naturalists or conservationists, is that introducing people to animals in an up close and personal way would cause them to fall in love with those animals and develop a passion for their protection.

Because he knew the animals he loved, he didn’t fear them. He respected them; he accepted the risks that came with being close to them; but he let nothing come between him and the things he loved. Oddly, his only expressed fear of an animal was a fear of … parrots. When Larry King asked him about that, Irwin, leaning far away from the beautiful blue parrot that was standing on his hand, said, “Larry, look at the beak on these things!”

There are all manner of endangered species on this planet. In my opinion one of the most endangered is people who live their life enthusiastically devoted to the pursuit of a genuine passion. That’s why I mourn the loss of a man like Steve Irwin. People in the public eye, people who become celebrities, don’t often remain the “real deal”. But, it appears that this man did and people around the world responded to him because he did.

The Australian government is offering the Irwin family a state funeral for Steve. Some may regard that as weird, excessive or even inappropriate. But the Australian prime minister spoke lovingly of Irwin yesterday and seemed to convey a true national loss regarding a native son who died in the waters off his native shore doing exactly what he wanted to do with his life. Maybe a state funeral is more than appropriate.

Over the years I’ve encouraged my children to select careers in which they can spend their working lives in pursuit of a personal passion. Life is too short to cram our passions, whatever they may be, into a few hours after work or on weekends. I know there are practical concerns that seem to erect barrier reefs that impede such pursuits, but those concerns are usually just fears hiding behind a mask of practicality. A life directed by fear is a life directed away from the things we love – away from a love of life. Steve Irwin loved life and all living things. People like him are mourned and missed when they leave us behind.

I’m reminded of a great quote from Helen Keller, a quote that I recently discovered while I was in the midst of being fearful about my oldest daughter spending a couple of weeks in the Indonesian “outback”. Ms. Keller, who knew a thing or two about challenges and risks and a love of life, said:

“Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing.”

Steve Irwin’s life was a daring adventure. I’ll miss watching it unfold. May each of us find our own daring adventure in the form of an abiding passion and enthusiasm for what we do day by day.

Where Is The Tipping Point?

On September 11, 2001, a total of 2,976 people died as a result of the terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington, DC.

As of this morning, 2,980 U.S. service men and women had been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan since September 11. It is significant to me that the second number now exceeds the first. For some reason, exceeding the number of deaths on 9/11 in the response to 9/11 matters to me.

Tony Snow would probably say, as he did when the 2,500th soldier died in Iraq, “It’s just a number.” But, 2,976 isn’t just a number; it’s an indelible watermark that defines the purpose and seriousness of our response to that act of terror. 2,976 Americans and visiting foreign nationals were killed on our soil that day and there had to be an accounting for that despicable act. So, we rightfully declared, “Let’s roll,” and headed into Afghanistan with the support of the American people, the Congress and the world community. Osama bin Laden and his Taliban-supported organization operating out of Afghanistan were our targets. Very few people dissented.

Then, we turned our focus to Saddam Hussein and rolled into Iraq in full force, with less support at home and abroad. From the invasion on March 19, 2003, until the cessation of major combat on May 1, 2003, with the accompanying declaration of “Mission Accomplished”, only 140 U.S. troops were killed in Iraq. The remaining 2,507 Americans killed in Iraq have died in the subsequent fight with Sunni and Shiite insurgents.

Now, 2,980 Americans have died in our rolling response in this two-front war. That number has probably gone up since I checked the count early this morning. (Pause to check again)

Sadly, what I intended as an offhand remark is anything but. As of this afternoon, the tally now reads 2,986 Americans dead in Iraq and Afghanistan. The scale continues to tip. I wonder if I can get this posted before another American dies.

Of course, the total number of people killed in Afghanistan and Iraq long ago exceeded the number killed on September 11, as evidenced by the following additional counts as of this afternoon:

§ 368 troops from the U.K. and other Coalition countries have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, bringing the total number of U.S. and Coalition deaths to 3,354.

§ 5,323 Iraqi police and military troops have been killed in fighting the insurgency since the fall of Baghdad in 2003 (another estimate says 6,167). That means that a total of at least 8,677 U.S., Coalition and Iraqi military personnel have been killed in the fighting. No one knows how many insurgent fighters have been killed. As General Tommy Franks said, “We don’t do body counts.” The Brookings Institution estimates that 65,000 insurgents have been killed or detained since May 2003.

§ 349 non-Iraqi civilian contractors have been killed since the invasion of Iraq; the majority of them have been from the U.S. and Coalition countries.

§ 98 journalists have been killed covering the war in Iraq; the overwhelming majority of them have been from Iraq and other Middle East countries.

§ I’ve found few estimates of the number of civilians killed in Afghanistan since the U.S.-led invasion began in October 2001. A fairly consistent estimate is that 4,000 – 5,000 civilians died there by the end of 2002. I have found no estimate of the number killed since. The only thing we know for sure is that the number of civilian deaths there since the end of 2002 isn’t zero.

§ At least 40,000 to 50,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed since the invasion of Iraq. About 10% of those people have been killed just since July 1, 2006, a little more than two months time. Some estimates of Iraqi civilian deaths run as high as 80,000 – 100,000 or more (see the study published by The Lancet, an independent, peer-reviewed medical journal, on October 29, 2004).

The numbers in the last two bullets are the deaths for which the U.S. and its Coalition partners must be accountable. The dead in that column are civilians, just like the civilians who died on 9/11. They’re not part of any volunteer military force whose duty puts them in harm’s way. These include women, children, the elderly, and non-combatant men who are dying by the dozens, and sometimes dozens upon dozens, every day in Iraq. In July it was more than 100 a day.

In addition to those killed, 20,174 U.S. service members have been wounded in Afghanistan and Iraq. More than 2,000 troops from the U.K. and other Coalition countries have been wounded. Many of the wounded have been severely maimed; they’re missing arms and legs; they’ve been blinded; they’ve suffered debilitating brain injuries; they’ve been badly burned over significant areas of their bodies, including their faces. Thousands of these lives have been forever altered.

The official count of the wounded doesn’t include those who have been sent home due to mental stress or breakdown. There are estimates of 10,000 – 12,000 in this category. According to the Journal of the American Medical Association, 35% of all service members sent to Iraq are returning home and seeking mental health services and 20% return with some degree of post-traumatic stress disorder or similar mental health problem. The study reported by JAMA only covered service members who returned before April 30, 2004.

The number of wounded Iraqi civilians cannot be determined but it’s safe to assume that, as with U.S. and Coalition casualties, it’s far more than the number of civilians killed. If the wounded-to-killed ratio were the same for civilians as it is for the military that would suggest that more than 300,000 Iraqi civilians have been wounded.

These are the numbers as of this afternoon. Make of them what you will.

The questions in my mind today are: has the scale tipped? If the scale hasn’t tipped, when will it tip? Does one number ever outweigh the other? If so, which one and what is that number? If not, why not? If the price in human lives paid to date in this war isn’t enough, when will it be enough? What number breaks the scale?

Those are my questions as of this afternoon. Make of them what you will.

A Paper Cut That Heals

Yesterday my wife and I went to see the David Hockney portrait exhibit that has been showing at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art. Whenever we have a reason to go to LA we almost always include a stop at LACMA. It’s always worthwhile.

I don’t have much if any artistic ability in me, at least none that’s surfaced. My creative impulses have been confined to being able to turn a clever phrase from time to time. Microsoft Word is the only paint and palette I employ. Word pictures are good and I have a few of them in my portfolio, so I don’t mean to diminish the value and power of the written word. But, they’re not paintings or sculptures or any of the other myriad of visual arts that make someone stand transfixed in front of them and whisper, “That’s amazing” to themselves and to anyone around who will listen.

Okay, that’s not entirely true, either. A lot of people have stood transfixed before an orator delivering the written word in a way that stuns the listener to the core. And many of us have sat in a chair late at night and found ourselves moved deeply by what we’re reading. But, still, the written word doesn’t have museums and galleries built to house the creative genius among us. We build libraries for that. Libraries are nice and all … but … well … you know.

Obviously, I’m one of those people who admires the genius and talent that others have, while simultaneously discounting any ability, nascent or developed, that I may have. But, here’s a test that I think would underscore the point of the comparison: survey a group of outstanding writers and ask them if they long to possess the ability to express themselves in either a visual or a performing art. I suspect close to 100% would say, yes, they do. Then, go survey a group of outstanding visual or performing artists and ask them if they long to possess the ability to express themselves in written word. I suspect close to 100% would say, not particularly, I have my art.

My failings at the written word are evident in the fact that it often takes me more than a half a page of words to get around the to point I want to make. I get too much paint on my canvas too early in process. My point is that the visual and performing arts are absolutely essential to our quality of life. They are an expression of the best impulses in the human spirit. They uplift; they clarify; they transform; and they guide us to places we haven’t been before. They make explorers out of anyone who is willing to board the artist’s ship and make the offered journey.

This posting was prompted by my wife sending me a website for an artist who has created things of beauty from paper cuttings. What child hasn’t experimented with paper cutouts? This man simply decided not to give it up. The site is: http://www.oncotton.co.uk/peter/index.html. It’s an example of the myriad of means of artistic expression that can gently take us captive and speak to us in ways that words cannot.

I would like to try an experiment: take a group of angry men, with a few hateful ones in the mix, and have them spend the day in the Louvre, the Prado, the NYC Metropolitan or any other world-class art museum. Clear out all the other people and let these men spend their day alone with the art. I believe that at the end of the day they will emerge with significantly diminished anger or hatred, if not missing it altogether. Art transforms us. The alchemy of art morphs anger into awe. Art provides a means for the constructive expression of emotions that we otherwise express destructively.

Heck, forget the world-class art museums and just see what happens to an angry man when he stands in front of a refrigerator door recently decorated with the art created by his five-year old daughter. Watch his face change. In that moment, there’s another door presented to that man. He may not choose to open it and step into an altered life, but the opportunity is there.

Anyone who sees the incredible potentiality in art should examine and then challenge the fact that funding for art and music programs in public education is disappearing in America. As a country we’ve decided to invest not just first and foremost in English, math and science, but almost exclusively. When the funding pressure hits a school district, the first things jettisoned over the side of the sinking ship are the art and music programs. I don’t for a second mean to suggest that English, math and science aren’t core courses essential to a good education. I mean to suggest that art and music are just as essential to the development of our core.

After viewing the artist’s site mentioned above, I told my wife that it’s a great example of what artists bring to our lives, and that it points out how unfortunate it is that we don’t adequately fund art in public education in America. Anyone whose life is not being enriched by art is living poorly, and people in America should not be living poorly. This is a form of poverty that we should fight against.

But even if our politicians don’t properly balance educational funding for our children, there remains a rich repository of art in the world for us and our children to explore. Fortunately, there are museums, galleries, websites and refrigerator doors galore. May they forever be a central part of our lives. May they forever transform us. May they forever turn anger into awe. May they forever enrich us. And may they forever give us another door to step through so that we can discover a better life.