December 31, 2004
Did Kerry Get "Gore-d" in Ohio?
Did Kerry Get "Gore-d" in Ohio? or Maybe It's Time for America to Discover Columbus
by Steve Bhaerman
About ten days ago, I attended a community event featuring former Congressman Dan Hamburg (D-California), who recently returned from Columbus, Ohio where he and his wife got arrested -- yes, arrested -- for trying to get a petition to Ohio's Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell. Although you wouldn't know it from the mainstream press (if Will Rogers were alive today, he'd be saying "All I know is what I /don't/ read in the papers"), Ohio is the Florida of the 2004 election. In the orgy of self-blame that Democrats indulged in following the election, they faulted themselves for being too liberal, too out-of-touch, too strident. Most wouldn't go near the fraudulent vote issue afraid of being called "sore losers.?" Meanwhile, a few brave souls like the Green Party presidential candidate David Cobb and Libertarian candidate Michael Badnarik raised the money to petition for a recount. They were soon joined by Michigan Congressman John Conyers and Jesse Jackson -- and now by John Kerry himself. Finally, Democrats are stirring from their comfortable bed of victimhood and awakening to the possibility that maybe they aren?t sore losers after all -- maybe they're sore winners. As for the particulars of the electile dysfunction, they are truly unbelievable.
*TRULY UNBELIEVABLE /Amazing True Facts About Electile Dysfunction!/*
*Next Level in Voting Machine Technology: A Voting Machine That Can Cast a Vote Without Voter?s Help!*
/Election observers have testified under oath that more than a dozen voting machines in Mahoning County regularly switched Kerry votes to Bush votes while voters watched in amazement./ http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/1018
What?s even more amazing is that not one of these voting machines came out for Kerry, and why should they? Their manufacturers are all Republicans. http://nov2truth.org/article.php?story=2004121115234497
*Next Level Beyond the Rule of Law: * *The Overrule of Law.*
O/n December 21, notice of depositions were sent to President George Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell to appear and give testimony regarding the legal challenge of Ohio's elections results in the case Moss v Bush et al. But Republican Blackwell's attorney at the Secretary of State?s office told the attorneys issuing the notice of deposition and subpoena that Blackwell will not testify under oath. The Republican-controlled Attorney General's office has labeled any attempt to put Blackwell under oath, ?harassment.? Blackwell supervised the November 2 vote in Ohio at the same time he served as co-chair of the state's Bush-Cheney campaign./ http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/1015
Apparently, Blackwell has heeded the advice of his team of illegal advisors. Hmm. Maybe he needs to be put under oaf instead.
*Election Machinery Broken, Voting Machines Fixed*
/Sworn testimony from election observers in Greene County indicated that ballots had been left loose on tables in an unlocked, unguarded building, open to manipulation and theft, prior to a recount. And in Lucas County and Hocking County, it was revealed that technicians from the Diebold and Triad companies had inexplicably taken control of voting machines and dismantled them, rendering verifiable recounts impossible./ http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/996
*Next Generation Secret Ballot is So Secret, It Has to Be Counted in Secrecy!*
/*Faith-Based Vote Counting Touted By the President* /
/In Warren County, where election officers declared a homeland security emergency on Election Day, and barred reporters and others from watching the vote count, it now has been revealed that county employees were told the previous Thursday they should prepare for the Election Day lockdown. That disclosure suggests the lockdown was a political decision, not a true security risk. Moreover, statements also describe how ballots were left unguarded and unprotected in a warehouse on Election Day, and they were hastily moved after county officials received complaints. / http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/985
*Ohio Awash in Texas Crude*
/*Strike force team uses energy -- what the Chinese call ??ch?i? to take unfair advantage ... ch?i ting, it is called*/
/In Franklin County, a worker at the Holiday Inn observed a team of 25 people who called themselves the ?Texas Strike Force? using payphones to make intimidating calls to likely voters, targeting people recently in the prison system. The ?Texas Strike Force? members paid their way to Ohio, but their hotel accommodations were paid for by the Ohio Republican Party, whose headquarters is across the street. The hotel worker heard one caller threaten a likely voter with being reported to the FBI and returning to jail if he voted. Another hotel worker called the police, who came but did nothing. / http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/985
*250 Million to One Shot Comes In, and It Doesn?t Even Make the Sports Pages!*
According to University of Pennsylvania statistician Dr. Steven Freeman, the odds of a mismatch between the exit polls (used in countries like Germany with unfaulted accuracy to predict the winners while they take the time to hand count the ballots) and the voting results were 250 million to one. http://www.verifiedvoting.org/article.php?id=5293
/In one exit poll affidavit, Jonathan David Simon, an expert witness, notes that at 12:53 a.m. the exit polls altered the projected winner ? even though the same number of votes had been cast. ?Although each update reports the same number of respondents (872), the reported results differ significantly, with the latter (12:53 a.m.) exit poll results apparently having been brought into congruence with the tabulated vote results.? In other words, the exit polls were made to conform to a political decision to declare Bush the victor. / http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/985
*PROFILES in ENCOURAGEMENT /The Awesome Opportunity Behind the Awful Truth/*
So there we have the awful truth. But for every awful truth, there is an awesome opportunity. And that?s where we the people come in. On January 6th when the election is to be certified by Congress, the results can be challenged if just one U.S. Senator speaks up. One of the people at the Dan Hamburg meeting had personally asked Sen. Barbara Boxer to be that one Senator, and she said in effect, "show me the numbers." In other words, if we want higher level officials to stick their necks out we have to provide "cover" in the form of millions and millions of us challenging the legitimacy of the government.
What if Barbara Boxer and other key Senators and media folks literally got a million letters -- not just emails, but snailmail letters? What if there were three million emails? Yes, it's holiday season. But lies and stonewalling don't seem to be taking a holiday. We have a small window of time between now and the time the election is made "official." We need to do whatever we can to let the world know that we will not legitimize an illegitimate government. There are plenty of courageous people out there who realize that when a game is fixed, the only way win is by exposing the game.
So as you take some time off for rest and reflection this week, find the time to exercise some political muscle as well. Invite friends over for a letter writing party. Circulate this email to all of your email lists, and send emails to the Senators and officials listed below. The body politic is now stirring from a deep slumber, but as Swami says, "If we want a transparent government, we have to awaken from our apparent trance."
The following Senators are most likely to respond to this call. Please call them immediately, and urge them to object to the certification of the vote on January 6. PLEASE SEND THIS ON TO YOUR LIST ASAP!
Senator Barbara Boxer, (202) 224-3553, http://www.senator@boxer.senate.gov
Senator Robert Byrd, (202) 224-3954, http://www.byrd.senate.gov
Senator Dick Durbin, (202) 224-2152, http://www.dick@durbin.senate.gov
Senator Russ Feingold, (202) 224-5323,
http://www.russ_feingold@feingold.senate.gov
Senator Tom Harkin, (202) 224-3254, http://www.tom_harkin@harkin.senate.gov
Senator Jim Jeffords, (202) 224-5141,
http://www.Vermont@jeffords.senate.gov
Senator Edward Kennedy, 202/224-4543, http://www.senator@kennedy.senate.gov
Senator Patrick Leahy, (202) 224-4242,
http://www.senator_leahy@leahy.senate.gov
Click here http://capwiz.com/pdamerica/mail/oneclick_compose/?alertid=6770366 to
sign and send the online petition.
And remember ... now is the time to act. Why? Because it is too late
to do it sooner!
Steve Bhaerman
http://www.wakeuplaughing.com/
http://www.comediansforroutinechange.com/
Steve Bhaerman
Posted by mwblog at 09:15 AM
Conyers to Object to Ohio Electors
Conyers to Object to Ohio Electors, Requests Senate Allies
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t Report, Thursday 30 December 2004
Representative John Conyers, ranking minority member of the House Judiciary Committee, will object to the counting of the Ohio Electors from the 2004 Presidential election when Congress convenes to ratify those votes on January 6th. In a letter dispatched to every Senator, which will be officially published by his office shortly, Conyers declares that he will be joined in this by several other members of the House. Rep. Conyers is taking this dramatic step because he believes the allegations and evidence of election tampering and fraud render the current slate of Ohio Electors illegitimate.
"As you know," writes Rep. Conyers in his letter, "on January 6, 2005, at 1:00 P.M, the electoral votes for the election of the president are to be opened and counted in a joint session of Congress. I and a number of House Members are planning to object to the counting of the Ohio votes, due to numerous unexplained irregularities in the Ohio presidential vote, many of which appear to violate both federal and state law."
The letter goes on to ask the Senators who receive this letter to join Conyers in objecting to the Ohio Electors. "I am hoping that you will consider joining us in this important effort," writes Conyers, "to debate and highlight the problems in Ohio which disenfranchised innumerable voters. I will shortly forward you a draft report itemizing and analyzing the many irregularities we have come across as part of our hearings and investigation into the Ohio presidential election."
There are expected to be high level meetings with high ranking Democratic officials next week to coordinate a concerted lobbying effort to convince Senators to challenge the vote. The Green Party and David Cobb, as has been true all along, will be centrally involved in this process, as will Rev. Jesse Jackson.
The remainder of the Conyers letter reads: 3 U.S.C. §15 provides when the results from each of the states are announced, that "the President of the Senate shall call for objections, if any." Any objection must be presented in writing and "signed by at least one Senator and one Member of the House of Representatives before the same shall be received." The objection must "state clearly and concisely, and without argument, the ground thereof." When an objection has been properly made in writing and endorsed by a member of each body the Senate withdraws from the House chamber, and each body meets separately to consider the objection. "No votes...from any other State shall be acted upon until the (pending) objection...(is) finally disposed of." 3 U.S.C. §17 limits debate on the objections in each body to two hours, during which time no member may speak more than once and not for more than five minutes. Both the Senate and the House must separately agree to the objection; otherwise, the challenged vote or votes are counted.
Historically, there appears to be three general grounds for objecting to the counting of electoral votes. The language of 3 U.S.C. §15 suggests that objection may be made on the grounds that (1) a vote was not "regularly given" by the challenged elector(s); and/or (2) the elector(s) was not "lawfully certified" under state law; or (3) two slates of electors have been presented to Congress from the same State.
Since the Electoral Count Act of 1887, no objection meeting the requirements of the Act have been made against an entire slate of state electors. In the 2000 election several Members of the House of Representatives attempted to challenge the electoral votes from the State of Florida. However, no Senator joined in the objection, and therefore, the objection was not "received." In addition, there was no determination whether the objection constituted an appropriate basis under the 1887 Act. However, if a State - in this case Ohio - has not followed its own procedures and met its obligation to conduct a free and fair election, a valid objection -if endorsed by at least one Senator and a Member of the House of Representatives- should be debated by each body separately until "disposed of". A key legal aspect of this is the second clause referenced in the letter. Rep. Conyers and the other House members involved do not believe the electors have been lawfully certified. They believe that there has been too much illegal activity on the part of Blackwell, other election officials, and Republican operatives on the ground and therefore, as stated in the letter, the electors were not "lawfully certified" under state law. Next week, the House Judiciary Committee Democratic staff will release the report referenced in the letter, which is now still in draft form, and which led Mr. Conyers to this decision.
The Senators who shall receive the greatest focus from Conyers in this matter are Biden, Bingaman, Boxer, Byrd, Clinton, Conrad, Corzine, Dodd, Dorgan, Durbin, Feingold, Harkin, Inyoue, Jeffords, Kennedy, Kerry, Lautenberg, Leahy, Levin, Lieberman, Mikulski, Nelson (FL), Jack Reed, Harry Reid, Rockefeller, Sarbanes, Stabenow, Wyden and Obama.
William Rivers Pitt
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/123104W.shtml
Posted by mwblog at 09:10 AM
December 21, 2004
Blackwell Locks Down Ohio Voting Records
Dear Friends,
It seems to me that this should be on the front page of every paper. What happened to America?
December 10, 2004
Blackwell Locks Down Ohio Voting Records
Ohio Election Investigation Thwarted by Surprise Blackwell Order
Dayton, Ohio Friday December 10, 2004
On Friday December 10 two certified volunteers for the Ohio Recount team assigned to Greene County were in process recording voting information from minority precincts in Greene County, and were stopped mid-count by a surprise order from Secretary of State Blackwell's office. The Director Board of Elections stated that "all voter records for the state of Ohio were "locked-down," and now they are not considered public records."
The volunteers were working with voter printouts received directly from Carole Garman, Director, Greene County Board of Elections. Joan Quinn and Eve Roberson, retired attorney and election official respectively, were hand-copying voter discrepancies from precinct voting books on behalf of the presidential candidates Mr. Cobb (Green) and Mr. Badnarik Libertarian) who had requested the recount.
One of the goals of the recount was to determine how many minority voters were unable to vote or denied voting at the polls. Upon requesting copies of precinct records from predominantly minority precincts, Ms. Garman contacted Secretary of State Blackwell's office and spoke to Pat Wolfe, Election Administrator. Ms. Wolfe told Ms. Garman to assert that all voter records for the State of Ohio were "locked down" and that they are "not considered public records."
Quinn and Roberson asked specifically for the legal authority authorizing Mr. Blackwell to "lock down" public records. Garman stated that it was the Secretary of State's decision. Ohio statute requires the Directors of Boards of Election to comply with public requests for inspection and copying of public election records. As the volunteer team continued recording information from the precinct records in question, Garman entered the room and stated she was withdrawing permission to inspect or copy any voting records at the Board of Elections. Garman then physically removed the precinct book from Ms. Roberson's hands. They later requested the records again from Garman's office, which was again denied.
Ohio Revised Code Title XXXV Elections, Sec. 3503.26 that requires all election records to be made available for public inspection and copying. ORC Sec. 3599.161 makes it a crime for any employee of the Board of Elections to knowingly prevent or prohibit any person from inspecting the public records filed in the office of the Board of Elections. Finally, ORC Sec. 3599.42 clearly states: "A violation of any provision of Title XXXV (35) of the Revised Code constitutes a prima facie case of election fraud within the purview of such Title."
Posted by mwblog at 11:30 AM
14 US Military Bases Under Construction In Iraq
For those who think we're such a "moral" presence...
14 US Military Bases Under Construction In Iraq
Iraqis also know that 14 US military bases are already under construction, enough to accommodate the (for the moment) 110,000 American soldiers who will stay in Iraq until at least 2007. No sovereign Iraqi government has approved the construction of these bases. Kimmitt - the No 2 Pentagon man in Iraq, and the one who launched total war on Fallujah - said the bases are "a blueprint for how we could operate in the Middle East". A ring of US military bases throughout what the Pentagon calls the Greater Middle East is a key element of the neo-conservative-driven strategy to control world energy resources as the way to control the destiny of America's economic rivals - the European Union and Northeast Asia.
Posted by mwblog at 11:22 AM
December 16, 2004
Oppose FBI Spying on Free Speech Activities
Do you want FBI agents following you or your neighbors into your churches, synagogues or mosques and documenting what goes on there? Recently released documents indicate that FBI agents have been spying on innocent people under guidelines relaxed by Attorney General John Ashcroft. Ashcroft restructured these guidelines -- without consultation with Congress -- to allow FBI agents to spy on religious and political activity even if there was no suspicion of criminal activity.
Ashcroft's new guidelines revoked long-standing protections from government abuse and there is evidence that the FBI and local police are using this opportunity to spy on environmental, political and faith-based groups. This spying is not only unnecessary but also invasive of personal privacy. The police should not spy on individuals because they attended a rally supporting better funding for their child‚s school or they expressed discontent with the government‚s policy toward Sudan.
In recent days, thanks to your hard work, many of the most grievous parts of the intelligence reform bill were stripped out. While the final bill has several problems, without the outcry against several of its dangerous provisions by concerned people like you, it would have been much worse. We now need to build on this momentum and reign in excessive FBI spying powers.
Take Action! Urge Congress to support proper checks and balances on FBI spying.
Click here for more information and to take action:
http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=17205&c=42
Help the Defense of Civil Liberties:
Click here
Pass this alert on to your friends.
Visit the ACLU's Action Center
Posted by mwblog at 12:48 PM | Comments (0)
December 09, 2004
Canada busy sending back Bush-dodgers
Dear Friends,
I don't know about you, but I needed this little piece of humor....
Marianne
Canada busy sending back Bush-dodgers.
The flood of American liberals sneaking across the border into Canada has intensified in the past week, sparking calls for increased patrols to stop the illegal immigration. The re-election of President Bush is prompting the exodus among left-leaning citizens who fear they'll soon be required to hunt, pray and agree with Bill O'Reilly. Canadian border farmers say it's not uncommon to see dozens of sociology professors, animal-rights activists and Unitarians crossing their fields at night. "I went out to milk the cows the other day, and there was a Hollywood producer huddled in the barn," said Manitoba farmer Red Greenfield, whose acreage borders North Dakota.
The producer was cold, exhausted and hungry. "He asked me if I could spare a latte and some free-range chicken. When I said I didn't have any, he left. Didn't even get a chance to show him ! my screenplay, eh?" In an effort to stop the illegal aliens, Greenfield erected higher fences, but the liberals scaled them.
So he tried installing speakers that blare Rush Limbaugh across the fields. "Not real effective," he said. "The liberals still got through, and Rush annoyed the cows so much they wouldn't give milk." Officials are particularly concerned about smugglers who meet liberals near the Canadian border, pack them into Volvo station wagons, drive them across the border and leave them to fend for themselves. "A lot of these people are not prepared for rugged conditions," an Ontario border patrolman said. "I found one carload without a drop of drinking water. They did have a nice little Napa Valley cabernet, though." When liberals are caught, they're sent back across the border, often wailing loudly that they fear retribution from conservatives.
Rumors have been circulating about the Bush administration establishing re-education camps in which liberals will be forced to drink domestic beer and watch NASCAR. In the days since the election, liberals have turned to sometimes-ingenious ways of crossing the border. Some have taken to posing as senior citizens on bus trips to buy cheap Canadian prescription drugs. After catching a half-dozen young vegans disguised in powdered wigs, Canadian immigration authorities began stopping buses and quizzing the supposed senior-citizen passengers. "If they can't identify the accordion player on The Lawrence Welk Show, we get suspicious about their age," an official said. Canadian citizens have complained that the illegal immigrants are creating an organic-broccoli shortage and renting all the good Susan Sarandon movies. "I feel sorry for American liberals, but the Canadian economy just can't support them," an Ottawa resident said. "How many art-history majors does one country need?" !
In an effort to ease tensions between the United States and Canada, Vice President Dick Cheney met with the Canadian ambassador and pledged that the administration would take steps to reassure liberals, a source close to Cheney said. "We're going to have some Peter, Paul & Mary concerts. And we might put some endangered species on postage stamps. The president is determined to reach out."
Posted by mwblog at 01:41 PM
December 07, 2004
Compromise, Hell! by Wendell Berry
Dear Friends,
Wendell Berry is one of the wisest men in America, connecting concerns of the earth to concerns of the spirit in ways few can. I think we need to listen to him, and heed his call.
Marianne
Compromise, Hell!!
Wendell Berry
WE ARE DESTROYING OUR COUNTRY -- I mean our country itself, our land. This is a terrible thing to know, but it is not a reason for despair unless we decide to continue the destruction. If we decide to continue the destruction, that will not be because we have no other choice. This destruction is not necessary. It is not inevitable, except that by our submissiveness we make it so.
We Americans are not usually thought to be a submissive people, but of course we are. Why else would we allow our country to be destroyed? Why else would we be rewarding its destroyers? Why else would we all -- by proxies we have given to greedy corporations and corrupt politicians -- be participating in its destruction? Most of us are still too sane to piss in our own cistern, but we allow others to do so and we reward them for it. We reward them so well, in fact, that those who piss in our cistern are wealthier than the rest of us.
How do we submit? By not being radical enough. Or by not being thorough enough, which is the same thing.
Since the beginning of the conservation effort in our country, conservationists have too often believed that we could protect the land without protecting the people. This has begun to change, but for a while yet we will have to reckon with the old assumption that we can preserve the natural world by protecting wilderness areas while we neglect or destroy the economic landscapes -- the farms and ranches and working forests -- and the people who use them. That assumption is understandable in view of the worsening threats to wilderness areas, but it is wrong. If conservationists hope to save even the wild lands and wild creatures, they are going to have to address issues of economy, which is to say issues of the health of the landscapes and the towns and cities where we do our work, and the quality of that work, and the well-being of the people who do the work.
Governments seem to be making the opposite error, believing that the people can be adequately protected without protecting the land. And here I am not talking about parties or party doctrines, but about the dominant political assumption. Sooner or later, governments will have to recognize that if the land does not prosper, nothing else can prosper for very long. We can have no industry or trade or wealth or security if we don't uphold the health of the land and the people and the people's work.
It is merely a fact that the land, here and everywhere, is suffering. We have the "dead zone" in the Gulf of Mexico and undrinkable water to attest to the toxicity of our agriculture. We know that we are carelessly and wastefully logging our forests. We know that soil erosion, air and water pollution, urban sprawl, the proliferation of highways and garbage are making our lives always less pleasant, less healthful, less sustainable, and our dwelling places more ugly.
Nearly forty years ago my state of Kentucky, like other coal-producing states, began an effort to regulate strip mining. While that effort has continued, and has imposed certain requirements of "reclamation," strip mining has become steadily more destructive of the land and the land's future. We are now permitting the destruction of entire mountains and entire watersheds. No war, so far, has done such extensive or such permanent damage. If we know that coal is an exhaustible resource, whereas the forests over it are with proper use inexhaustible, and that strip mining destroys the forest virtually forever, how can we permit this destruction? If we honor at all that fragile creature the topsoil, so long in the making, so miraculously made, so indispensable to all life, how can we destroy it? If we believe, as so many of us profess to do, that the Earth is God's property and is full of His glory, how can we do harm to any part of it?
In Kentucky, as in other unfortunate states, and again at great public cost, we have allowed -- in fact we have officially encouraged -- the establishment of the confined animal-feeding industry, which exploits and abuses everything involved: the land, the people, the animals, and the consumers. If we love our country, as so many of us profess to do, how can we so desecrate it?
But the economic damage is not confined just to our farms and forests. For the sake of "job creation," in Kentucky, and in other backward states, we have lavished public money on corporations that come in and stay only so long as they can exploit people here more cheaply than elsewhere. The general purpose of the present economy is to exploit, not to foster or conserve.
Look carefully, if you doubt me, at the centers of the larger towns in virtually every part of our country. You will find that they are economically dead or dying. Good buildings that used to house needful, useful, locally owned small businesses of all kinds are now empty or have evolved into junk stores or antique shops. But look at the houses, the churches, the commercial buildings, the courthouse, and you will see that more often than not they are comely and well made. And then go look at the corporate outskirts: the chain stores, the fast-food joints, the food-and-fuel stores that no longer can be called service stations, the motels. Try to find something comely or well made there.
What is the difference? The difference is that the old town centers were built by people who were proud of their place and who realized a particular value in living there. The old buildings look good because they were built by people who respected themselves and wanted the respect of their neighbors. The corporate outskirts, on the contrary, were built by people who manifestly take no pride in the place, see no value in lives lived there, and recognize no neighbors. The only value they see in the place is the money that can be siphoned out of it to more fortunate places -- that is, to the wealthier suburbs of the larger cities.
Can we actually suppose that we are wasting, polluting, and making ugly this beautiful land for the sake of patriotism and the love of God? Perhaps some of us would like to think so, but in fact this destruction is taking place because we have allowed ourselves to believe, and to live, a mated pair of economic lies: that nothing has a value that is not assigned to it by the market; and that the economic life of our communities can safely be handed over to the great corporations.
We citizens have a large responsibility for our delusion and our destructiveness, and I don't want to minimize that. But I don't want to minimize, either, the large responsibility that is borne by government.
It is commonly understood that governments are instituted to provide certain protections that citizens individually cannot provide for themselves. But governments have tended to assume that this responsibility can be fulfilled mainly by the police and the military. They have used their regulatory powers reluctantly and often poorly. Our governments have only occasionally recognized the need of land and people to be protected against economic violence. It is true that economic violence is not always as swift, and is rarely as bloody, as the violence of war, but it can be devastating nonetheless. Acts of economic aggression can destroy a landscape or a community or the center of a town or city, and they routinely do so.
Such damage is justified by its corporate perpetrators and their political abettors in the name of the "free market" and "free enterprise," but this is a freedom that makes greed the dominant economic virtue, and it destroys the freedom of other people along with their communities and livelihoods. There are such things as economic weapons of massive destruction. We have allowed them to be used against us, not just by public submission and regulatory malfeasance, but also by public subsidies, incentives, and sufferances impossible to justify.
We have failed to acknowledge this threat and to act in our own defense. As a result, our once-beautiful and bountiful countryside has long been a colony of the coal, timber, and agribusiness corporations, yielding an immense wealth of energy and raw materials at an immense cost to our land and our land's people. Because of that failure also, our towns and cities have been gutted by the likes of Wal-Mart, which have had the permitted luxury of destroying locally owned small businesses by means of volume discounts.
Because as individuals or even as communities we cannot protect ourselves against these aggressions, we need our state and national governments to protect us. As the poor deserve as much justice from our courts as the rich, so the small farmer and the small merchant deserve the same economic justice, the same freedom in the market, as big farmers and chain stores. They should not suffer ruin merely because their rich competitors can afford (for a while) to undersell them.
Furthermore, to permit the smaller enterprises always to be ruined by false advantages, either at home or in the global economy, is ultimately to destroy local, regional, and even national capabilities of producing vital supplies such as food and textiles. It is impossible to understand, let alone justify, a government's willingness to allow the human sources of necessary goods to be destroyed by the "freedom" of this corporate anarchy. It is equally impossible to understand how a government can permit, and even subsidize, the destruction of the land and the land's productivity. Somehow we have lost or discarded any controlling sense of the interdependence of the Earth and the human capacity to use it well. The governmental obligation to protect these economic resources, inseparably human and natural, is the same as the obligation to protect us from hunger or from foreign invaders. In result, there is no difference between a domestic threat to the sources of our life and a foreign one.
It appears that we have fallen into the habit of compromising on issues that should not, and in fact cannot, be compromised. I have an idea that a large number of us, including even a large number of politicians, believe that it is wrong to destroy the Earth. But we have powerful political opponents who insist that an Earth-destroying economy is justified by freedom and profit. And so we compromise by agreeing to permit the destruction only of parts of the Earth, or to permit the Earth to be destroyed a little at a time -- like the famous three-legged pig that was too well loved to be slaughtered all at once.
The logic of this sort of compromising is clear, and it is clearly fatal. If we continue to be economically dependent on destroying parts of the Earth, then eventually we will destroy it all.
So long a complaint accumulates a debt to hope, and I would like to end with hope. To do so I need only repeat something I said at the beginning: Our destructiveness has not been, and it is not, inevitable. People who use that excuse are morally incompetent, they are cowardly, and they are lazy. Humans don't have to live by destroying the sources of their life. People can change; they can learn to do better. All of us, regardless of party, can be moved by love of our land to rise above the greed and contempt of our land's exploiters. This of course leads to practical problems, and I will offer a short list of practical suggestions.
We have got to learn better to respect ourselves and our dwelling places. We need to quit thinking of rural America as a colony. Too much of the economic history of our land has been that of the export of fuel, food, and raw materials that have been destructively and too cheaply produced. We must reaffirm the economic value of good stewardship and good work. For that we will need better accounting than we have had so far.
We need to reconsider the idea of solving our economic problems by "bringing in industry." Every state government appears to be scheming to lure in a large corporation from somewhere else by "tax incentives" and other squanderings of the people's money. We ought to suspend that practice until we are sure that in every state we have made the most and the best of what is already there. We need to build the local economies of our communities and regions by adding value to local products and marketing them locally before we seek markets elsewhere.
We need to confront honestly the issue of scale. Bigness has a charm and a drama that are seductive, especially to politicians and financiers; but bigness promotes greed, indifference, and damage, and often bigness is not necessary. You may need a large corporation to run an airline or to manufacture cars, but you don't need a large corporation to raise a chicken or a hog. You don't need a large corporation to process local food or local timber and market it locally.
And, finally, we need to give an absolute priority to caring well for our land -- for every bit of it. There should be no compromise with the destruction of the land or of anything else that we cannot replace. We have been too tolerant of politicians who, entrusted with our country's defense, become the agents of our country's destroyers, compromising on its ruin.
And so I will end this by quoting my fellow Kentuckian, a great patriot and an indomitable foe of strip mining, Joe Begley of Blackey: "Compromise, hell!"
.WENDELL BERRY farms in Port Royal, Kentucky, with his family. He is the author of more than thirty books of fiction, essays, and poetry, including Citizen Papers, The Unsettling of America, and Another Turn of the Crank (essays); That Distant Land (stories); and A Timbered Choir: The Sabbath Poems 1979-1997. His new novel, Hannah Coulter, will be published this fall by Shoemaker & Hoard.
Posted by mwblog at 03:48 PM
December 06, 2004
Fly Me to the Moon By Thomas L. Friedman
Dear Friends,
The article below caught my eye, and I thought you might like it. Let's all hold the thought that the United States can be become energy independent, using clean and sustainable energy sources, in our lifetime. What a gift to future generations....
Marianne
December 5, 2004
OP-ED COLUMNIST
Fly Me to the Moon
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Of all the irresponsible aspects of the 2005 budget bill that the Republican-led Congress just passed, nothing could be more irresponsible than the fact that funding for the National Science Foundation was cut by nearly 2 percent, or $105 million.
Think about this. We are facing a mounting crisis in science and engineering education. The generation of scientists, engineers and mathematicians who were spurred to get advanced degrees by the 1957 Soviet launch of Sputnik and the challenge by President John Kennedy to put a man on the moon is slowly retiring.
But because of the steady erosion of science, math and engineering education in U.S. high schools, our cold war generation of American scientists is not being fully replenished. We traditionally filled the gap with Indian, Chinese and other immigrant brainpower. But post-9/11, many of these foreign engineers are not coming here anymore, and, because the world is now flat and wired, many others can stay home and innovate without having to emigrate.
If we don't do something soon and dramatic to reverse this "erosion," Shirley Ann Jackson, the president of Rensselaer Polytechnic and president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, told me, we are not going to have the scientific foundation to sustain our high standard of living in 15 or 20 years.
Instead of doubling the N.S.F. budget - to support more science education and research at every level - this Congress decided to cut it! Could anything be more idiotic?
If President Bush is looking for a legacy, I have just the one for him - a national science project that would be our generation's moon shot: a crash science initiative for alternative energy and conservation to make America energy-independent in 10 years. Imagine if every American kid, in every school, were galvanized around such a vision. Ah, you say, nice idea, Friedman, but what does it have to do with your subject - foreign policy?
Everything! You give me an America that is energy-independent and I will give you sharply reduced oil revenues for the worst governments in the world. I will give you political reform from Moscow to Riyadh to Tehran. Yes, deprive these regimes of the huge oil windfalls on which they depend and you will force them to reform by having to tap their people instead of oil wells. These regimes won't change when we tell them they should. They will change only when they tell themselves they must.
When did the Soviet Union collapse? When did reform take off in Iran? When did the Oslo peace process begin? When did economic reform become a hot topic in the Arab world? In the late 1980's and early 1990's. And what was also happening then? Oil prices were collapsing.
In November 1985, oil was $30 a barrel, recalled the noted oil economist Philip Verleger. By July of 1986, oil had fallen to $10 a barrel, and it did not climb back to $20 until April 1989. "Everyone thinks Ronald Reagan brought down the Soviets," said Mr. Verleger. "That is wrong. It was the collapse of their oil rents." It's no accident that the 1990's was the decade of falling oil prices and falling walls.
If President Bush made energy independence his moon shot, he would dry up revenue for terrorism; force Iran, Russia, Venezuela and Saudi Arabia to take the path of reform - which they will never do with $45-a-barrel oil - strengthen the dollar; and improve his own standing in Europe, by doing something huge to reduce global warming. He would also create a magnet to inspire young people to contribute to the war on terrorism and America's future by becoming scientists, engineers and mathematicians. "This is not just a win-win," said the Johns Hopkins foreign policy expert Michael Mandelbaum. "This is a win-win-win-win-win."
Or, Mr. Bush can ignore this challenge and spend the next four years in an utterly futile effort to persuade Russia to be restrained, Saudi Arabia to be moderate, Iran to be cautious and Europe to be nice.
Sure, it would require some sacrifice. But remember J.F.K.'s words when he summoned us to go to the moon on Sept. 12, 1962: "We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win."
Summoning all our energies and skills to produce a 21st-century fuel is George W. Bush's opportunity to be both Nixon to China and J.F.K. to the moon - in one move.
Posted by mwblog at 04:00 PM
December 03, 2004
A Message from Susan Sarandon
Violence against women is a global epidemic. It's the most brutal manifestation of the worldwide inequality of women and girls. And it's one of the most inexcusable human rights violations of our time.
What You Can Do
Your leadership gift today will give our campaign the momentum it needs to succeed when we reach out to the general public next week. :: DONATE
You share my commitment to women's rights. Chances are, you've acted on that commitment too.
That is why I am writing today, to invite you and a small group of uniquely concerned people to help launch an important initiative to stop violence against women at home and abroad.
Amnesty International USA has set a goal to raise $500,000 between now and December 31st to fund the next year of its global Stop Violence Against Women Campaign.
In a minute, I'll be asking for your financial participation, but right now, all I ask is a few moments of your time. We've created a special Web site for you and other potential leaders in this cause. It's at women.amnestyusa.org . On this site, you can view a short video about our campaign. Read our case for giving. Join with our leadership committee.
Please visit the site today to better understand the campaign and what we plan to accomplish in the coming year.
Violence against women is a global epidemic. It's the most brutal manifestation of the worldwide inequality of women and girls.
In the U.S., a woman is raped every 6 minutes; a woman is battered every 15 seconds. In North Africa, 6,000 women are genitally mutilated each day. This year, more than 15,000 women will be sold into sexual slavery in China. 200 women in Bangladesh will be horribly disfigured when their spurned husbands or suitors burn them with acid. More than 7,000 women in India will be murdered by their families and in-laws in disputes over dowries.
We have seen rape and brutalization of women and girls as an instrument of war and terror - in Kosovo, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and most recently, in the Darfur region of Sudan.
You already care, so I won't bury you with any more statistics.
Instead I offer you an opportunity to help forge the solution. Your leadership gift today to Amnesty International will give our campaign the momentum it needs to succeed when we reach out to the general public in seven days. The next year is a critical one for women's rights and the movement to end violence against women and girls. Please donate now using our secure and convenient Web page
Your gift today will inspire others to follow suit. Support will lead to more support and needed public attention for this global crisis. One thing we know -- the bright light of public scrutiny goes far toward changing hearts, minds and laws.
Amnesty International has long been a leader in the fight for global equality for women.
Our plan of action for 2005 is simple:
-- Demand that governments abolish discriminatory laws and practices that perpetrate violence against women.
-- Aggressively research and act on individual cases of violence against women worldwide and against specific patterns of such abuse.
-- Highlight and protect women in war and conflict. Darfur is only the latest horrific example of women being terrorized as an instrument of war.
-- Win U.S. ratification of Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (or CEDAW). Considered by many to be a "global bill of rights" for the world's women and girls, the treaty has been in force since 1977, but without U.S. participation.
-- Protect women human rights defenders. Champions like Burma's Aung San Suu Kyi and Kenya's Wangari Mathai deserve our fullest support - and protection.
-- Shine the light of justice on violence against women as a human rights issue. In many countries, including the United States, violence against women goes unpunished, or unrecognized.
Read more details of our ambitious plans in the case for giving .
Why Now?
America's role abroad has never been more precarious and uncertain than it is today. Fighting violence and upholding the rights of women should be a no-brainer in this day and age. As we witness the appointment of only the second woman Secretary of State in our nation's history, certainly this is one issue that is ripe for leadership by soon-to-be Secretary Condoleezza Rice and her colleagues at the United Nations.
Amnesty International will focus its worldwide energies on stopping violence against women in 2005. Reports and actions from around the world will give this issue unprecedented visibility. In short, this may be our best chance to make great strides on protecting the rights of women for years to come.
So I ask you to do three things today:
1 - Visit our special Web page at women.amnestyusa.org . Watch the short video, and read the case for giving.
2 - Let your friends know about the site , and about the worldwide epidemic of violence against women.
3 - Finally, please - make a generous leadership gift to our $500,000 action fund to win U.S. leadership in the UN and elsewhere.
I think you'll agree that few organizations are better situated than Amnesty International to lead the fight to stop violence against women. For more than forty years we've led the fight against some of the most serious human rights violations worldwide.
Amnesty sought from the beginning to document the unique ways in which women struggle for their rights and, working with governments and the United Nations, to craft a comprehensive solution.
The next year is critical, and with your help, will be a watershed for the global campaign to stop violence against women. Please help today.
Yours sincerely,
Susan Sarandon
P.S. If those of us who already understand and care about the rights of women do not act now, who will join us?
Posted by mwblog at 03:13 AM
