| Soapbox |
"We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is afraid of its people." The Soapbox is a forum for the members and friends of the Chequamegon Democratic Party of Ashland and Bayfield Counties. The opinions expressed are those of the individuals who wrote them and do not necessarily represent policies or positions taken by the party (see Guidelines below). | ||
“What the invasion of Iraq has in common with the c "When the president, during the campaign, said he was against nation building, I didn't realize he meant our nation." - Al Franken
Enough Already: Stop the War By Pat Ortman, President George Bush has figured out how we can have “guns and butter.” Remember that saying from Lyndon B. Johnson during the Vietnam war? Johnson could have probably gotten away with it but he had the draft which meant a lot of human sacrifices (even in some cases effecting the elite and the rich) so therefore the American people said "enough already! Stop? Then we had a majority. Now, GWB, with a minority of support can keep this Alice in Wonderland war going, ad nauseam! After all the Chinese, among some others, are paying for it. Only one problem exists, they want their money back with interest. So who will pay? why, our children, of course, and their children and their children......This generation gets off scot-free. Just one little catch, 3,781 American military killed, 27,848 wounded, some grievously. Just a few of our young people that ostensibly didn't have anything better to do than join the military and offer up their souls and bodies for this country. It is too bad their nobility isn't honored for a noble cause. Why is Osama bin Laden still running free and able to make his taunting little messages every Sept. 11? Could it be that he is serving a useful purpose by providing a handy little smoke screen for the real reason why we are in Iraq? There were no Iraqi bombers on the 9-11 planes. Most of them were Saudi citizens. Why are we not holding them accountable? Saudi Arabia is NOT a democracy but a monarchy whose constitution is the Qur'an and is governed by Islamic law. We suck up to them as if they are the ones wearing the white hats! If you feel upset by this war please join the peace vigil which is held every Tuesday evening (5-6 p.m.) on the corner of the Ashland post office. P.S. And before anybody jumps to conclusions my family has done its share in every war, including my grandson who is now serving his third combat tour. Homeland Security -- by John Smart In March of 2005, Tom Barry published an article on the International Relations Center's website regarding Michael Chertoff, the current Secretary of Homeland Security. Mr. Barry is the Policy Director of the IRC, and it sounded to me like he knew whereof he spoke. I recently reread it on Common Dreams, and it certainly did not make me feel more secure. Regular readers of my commentaries will know of my concern for the people of Uzbekistan. I served in that Central Asian nation for three years as a Peace Corps volunteer from 1995 through 1998, and I have been trying ever since, in my small way, to help the wonderful Uzbek people as much as I can. The regime there is widely regarded as one of the most repressive in the world. I was embarrassed that the Bush administration treated them like favored buddies for several years, sending dignitaries to Tashkent to praise their "President-for-Life," Islom Karimov, and to greet him as a trusted friend when he visited the White House. What Bush's planners were doing was angling to get control of the huge old Soviet airbase at Karshi-Khanabad, which was later used by the U.S. military in the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan. But then, on May 13, 2005, Uzbek "Homeland Security" troops fired on peaceful demonstrators in the streets of Andijan, a city in eastern Uzbekistan, killing many -- the exact number is still in doubt but ranges from the official 187 to 5,000. [For more information on this outrage, check Uzbekistan.] The European Union was the first to criticize the Uzbek regime for this violent atrocity, and the U.S. was finally shamed into joining them. This led to the Uzbek regime angrily turning from the western powers and concentrating on re-establishing ties with Russia and China. They also expelled the U.S. military from that airbase, which finally soured the favored nation relationship that the Bushies had fostered. One of my former students, a young journalist named Ruslan Sharipov, was caught up in this conflict. Ruslan was arrested in Tashkent and charged with violating the country's antiquated laws against homosexuality. Ruslan is indeed gay and has never denied it. That was not, however, the real reason he was arrested, tried and thrown into prison: it was his effective work as an underground, anti-regime journalist who spoke out powerfully against the human rights abuses in his country. This work led to his being awarded the Golden Pen of Freedom by the World Association of Newspapers, based in A number of people all over the world worked very hard to obtain Ruslan's release from that Uzbek prison. The World Association of Newspapers, PEN and Human Rights Watch were untiring in his cause. I worked with Senator Feingold's staff from this end, and my Senator enlisted help from several of his colleagues, notably Senator Blanche Ruslan told me that his guards came to him one day in October of 2004 and said, "Come with us." He was certain that they were going to take him out and shoot him. It had happened to many others before, after all. But someone helped him to escape, and put him on a train to Russia. Human Rights Watch personnel met him in Moscow and arranged for him to be hospitalized for several weeks. After the frighteningly harsh prison conditions, he was understandably very ill. Eventually, we managed to get Ruslan a U.S. visa and official status as a political refugee, and he was flown to Here is where the Department of Homeland Security comes in: Uzbekistan is no longer on the "favored nation" list, of course, and Ruslan is now being denied permanent resident status or a "Green Card," which would allow him to earn his living as a journalist, because of the original charges of homosexuality brought by the Uzbek government. The official term used is he was guilty of the "commission of a crime involving moral terpitude." Does that make any sense? It should be clear that deporting him back to Uzbekistan would not be in Ruslan's best interests at all. The human rights record of Karimov and his henchmen is much worse these days, and Ruslan would be treated very badly - guaranteed. So why is Ruslan being denied permanent residency status? Here is where Secretary Chertoff comes in. A brief study of his actions and opinions as a U.S. Circuit Court judge, federal attorney and Deputy Attorney General describes a major hardliner when it comes to cases like Ruslan's and immigrants in general. Like so many other Bush appointees, Chertoff's principle qualification seems to be absolute loyalty to the Bush/Cheny agenda, and that doesn't make me feel more secure either! The facts demonstrate that, in Chertoff's eyes, all Muslims and anyone who comes from a country with a Muslim majority is automatically suspected of being a terrorist, and should not be allowed into our pristine nation -- or, if already here, should be deported. I've written about this before, pointing out that this is not "The American Way." The number of refugees we've accepted from Iraq, people who, after all, owe their refugee status to us, is shamefully small. We've allowed less than 500 Iraqi refugees into this country since the war began, while Sweden, the European champion for accepting refugees, has accepted over 80,000! We can't go on like this. We must allow Iraqi refugees to come here, as we have refugees from wars past. President Gerald Ford personally arranged for thousands of refugees from Southeast Asia to come to the U.S. in the aftermath of the Vietnam War. And we must allow people like Ruslan Sharipov, who has the probability of becoming a highly functioning and valuable member of American society, to stay here and enjoy a future free from oppression. Isn't that why almost all of our ancestors came here? Do we really want to end this great experiment in democracy? The current congressional brouhaha over immigration reform is being watched closely all over the world. We talk loudly about American values and generosity, and we claim that we are determined to spread democracy and the American ethos all over the world. But again, the people of the world are watching. Is that really the message we're sending? This article was written for the Daily Press, Ashland. John Smart is retired in Park Falls. He is a member of the Wisconsin Governor's Commission on the United Nations, the UN Association of the USA and Citizens for Global Solutions. He was a Peace Corps volunteer in Uzbekistan from 1995 through 1998, serves on the Park Falls School Board and chairs the Democratic Party of Price County. The Press Meets Hillary By Paul Clark Landmann Two new books have been added to the nearly two dozen about Hillary Clinton. Surprise revelations: she is ambitious, she has goals, she is ego-centric (like many politicians, especially those running for president), and she was not passive dealing with her husband's marital infidelity. I wonder how much of the publishing interest in Hillary reflects misogyny. Some of the criticism leveled against her would not be attached to a male politician. Most of the presidential candidates in both parties have super-sized egos and most are aggressively ambitious. Who else would run for president? Were they talking on television, these authors would probably call her “shrill” as Chris Mathews has done repeatedly on his MSNBC program, “Hardball.” Get over it guys, women are going to be a major part of America’s political scene. Your “journalism” should apply the same standard to female candidates that they use for their male counterparts. It must be noted that the Democratic Party is a party of diversity. The seven candidates who debated earlier included: a woman, a Hispanic-American, an African-American and a 77-year-old. The 10 Republicans were all white males. The oldest, John McCain, turns 71 in August. Of course, the Clintons are celebrities like the Kennedys, British royalty and Hollywood stars. Unfortunately, Bill’s notorious infidelities damaged the prospects his political agenda and weakened the party. It sells checkout counter tabloids, however. Bill and Hillary make those gossip sheets as often as alien babies from outer space. The books and tabloids might actually help Hillary Clinton’s campaign especially the chatter about nearly divorcing him. Hillary is not my first choice for the Democratic nomination. I favor John Edwards and Bill Richardson, the first for his strong populist platform and the second for the breadth of his experience. Should Hillary get the nomination, however, I will vote for her and I will encourage my friends to do the same. Cinco de Mayo "Give me your tired, your poor, The New Colossus, Emma Lazarus (1883) It happens that my birthday falls on the 5th of May, which is Cinco de Mayo in Spanish. Back in 1999, when I turned 50, I wanted to avoid having anyone throw one of those embarrassing “decade birthday” parties for me, so I scheduled a fundraising event on that day. It has since become my tradition to have a fundraiser on that date each year. Cinco de Mayo is also a minor Mexican holiday, commemorating a minor regional military victory over the French. It is celebrated more colorfully and extensively here in America than in Mexico, just as St. Patrick’s Day is celebrated with much more excitement in America than it has ever been celebrated in Ireland. So, I often include some reference to Cinco de Mayo on the invitation to give it a festive feel. This year, that reference resulted in receipt of a vicious, racist and xenophobic rant against Mexican immigrants. The writer apparently feels that the entry into America of a few million Mexicans, two-thirds of them legally, comprises a major threat to our continued existence. He also seems to feel that their celebration of their homeland is somehow anti-American. This “nativism,” as it used to be called, has a venerable tradition in America. At various times, it has been directed against German immigrants, Irish immigrants, Jewish immigrants, Chinese immigrants (sometimes referred to as “the Yellow Peril” at the time) and Polish immigrants. It seems that only the real natives of this land welcomed newcomers openly, at least initially. Ironically, they are the only ones who suffered the fate “nativists” predicted for Americans of their time. Emma Lazarus wrote the poem The New Colossus, inscribed on the base of the Statue of Liberty, out of concern over the maltreatment of the immigrants of her own time, especially the Ashkenazi Jews then fleeing violent persecution in Central and Eastern Europe (among them my grandparents). The truth is that America has always benefited from the contributions of immigrants. As they strive to move upward in our competitive economy, they revitalize areas of our cities that have fallen into blight, begin businesses, work at low paying jobs, educate their children and pay more in taxes than they cost in social services. They serve in our armed forces and bring cultural traditions that become part of the national consciousness. Today, as we struggle to staff a military stretched thin around the world, immigrants (including illegal immigrants) make up a substantial and important part of our armed forces. Even the World War II “Greatest Generation” was necessarily composed overwhelmingly of immigrants, their children, or at most grandchildren, including my “first generation” father. The rant writer, a self-proclaimed veteran of Guadalcanal, is quite likely no more than second generation himself. As these previous immigrants have publicly celebrated their homelands with events like St. Patrick’s Day, Chinese New Year, and even made-up entirely fictitious holidays like St. Urho’s Day, America has grown prosperous and strong, rather than been weakened by the cultural cross-pollination. I expect that we will not only survive Cinco de Mayo, but will have our culture enriched by its attendant customs, as well. Representative Gary Sherman Skillful, Unique By Bob Mackreth In 1992, I settled in northern Wisconsin, after living in a half-dozen other states. Very quickly, I realized that we had two wonderful things here that no other state can boast: · The · Congressman Dave Obey I have often reflected on just how fortunate we are in northern Wisconsin to have a Congressman who is not only a progressive in the best sense of the word, but who has also been so skillful in translating hopes into accomplishments, talk into action. Now, however, Congressman Obey’s hard work and legislative skill has made possible the first concrete step in disengaging the U.S. from President Bush's disastrous misadventure in Iraq, and I am forced to say that the nation is lucky to have Dave Obey. I am not prepared to share the Packers, however. Time to Change Course The Supplemental bill recognizes that it is long past time to change course. It fully funds our troops and provides a plan to responsibly end the war. The bill holds the Iraqis accountable for securing their nation and forging political reconciliation. The bill ensures our troops are combat-ready before being deployed to Iraq, and provides them with all the resources needed on the battlefield and when they return. A Presidential veto will deny our troops the resources and strategy they need, and send exactly the wrong message to Iraq's political leaders. The President needs to read this bill and join us in giving our troops the resources and strategy the need and deserve. After more than four years of a failed policy, it's time for this nation to change course and Iraq to take responsibility for its own future. The Congressional Supplemental Bill: Fully Funding the Troops and Changing Course in Iraq fully supports the troops by providing more than $100 billion for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, an increase of $4 billion over President's request and delivers the change of course needed in Iraq:
Stephen Krupin | Sen. Jack Reed Responds to Sept. 13, 2007 Senator Jack Reed delivered the Democratic response to President Bush's address to the nation on Iraq. Good evening. I'm Senator Jack Reed from Rhode Island, and I was privileged to serve in the United States Army for 12 years. I opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning. It was a flawed strategy that diverted attention and resources away from hunting down Osama bin Laden's terrorist network. And since then, too often, the President's Iraq policies have worsened America's security. Hundreds of billions have been spent. Our military is strained. Over 27,000 Americans have been wounded, and over 3,700 of our best and brightest have been killed. Tonight, a nation eager for change in Iraq heard the President speak about his plans for the future. But once again, the President failed to provide either a plan to successfully end the war or a convincing rationale to continue it. The President rightfully invoked the valor of our troops in his speech, but his plan does not amount to real change. Soldiers take a solemn oath to protect our nation, and we have a solemn responsibility to send them into battle only with clear and achievable missions. Tonight, the President provided neither. As a former Army officer, I know the great sacrifices our soldiers and their families make. Our military can defeat any foe on the battlefield. Yet, as General Petraeus has repeatedly stated, Iraq's fundamental problems are not military, they are political. The only way to create a lasting peace in Iraq is for Iraqi leaders to negotiate a settlement of their long-standing differences. When the President launched the "surge" in January, he told us that its purpose was to provide Iraqi leaders with the time to make that political progress. But now, nine months into the surge, the President's own advisers tell us that Iraq's leaders have not, and are not likely to do so. Meanwhile, thousands of brave Americans remain in the crossfire of another country's civil war. So tonight, we find ourselves at a critical moment. Do we continue to heed the President's call that all Iraq needs is more time, more money, and the indefinite presence of 130,000 American troops -- the same number as nine months ago? Or do we follow what is in our nation's best interest and redefine our mission in Iraq? Democrats believe it is time to change course. We think it's wrong that the President tells us there's not enough money for our veterans and children's health care because he is spending $10 billion a month in Iraq. We have put forth a plan to responsibly and rapidly begin a reduction of our troops. Our proposal can not erase the mistakes of the last four and a half years, but we can chart a better way forward. That is why our plan focuses on counter-terrorism and training the Iraqi army. It engages in diplomacy to bring warring factions to the table and addresses regional issues that inflame the situation. It begins a responsible and rapid redeployment of our troops out of Iraq. And it returns our focus to those who seek to do us harm: Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. An endless and unlimited military presence in Iraq is not an option. Democrats and Republicans in Congress and throughout the nation can not and must not stand idly by while our interests throughout the world are undermined and our Armed Forces are stretched toward the breaking point. We intend to exercise our Constitutional duties and profoundly change our military involvement in Iraq. We ask Americans of good will of whatever party to join with us in this historic effort to restore the strength and security of the United States. I urge the President to listen to the American people and work with Congress to start bringing our troops home and develop a new policy that is truly worthy of their sacrifices. Thank you. The Democratic Response to the President’s State of the Union Address, January 23, 2007, by Senator Jim Webb Good evening. I'm Senator Jim Webb, from Virginia, where this year we will celebrate the 400th anniversary of the settlement of Jamestown an event that marked the first step in the long journey that has made us the greatest and most prosperous nation on earth. It would not be possible in this short amount of time to actually rebut the President's message, nor would it be useful. Let me simply say that we in the Democratic Party hope that this administration is serious about improving education and healthcare for all Americans, and addressing such domestic priorities as restoring the vitality of Further, this is the seventh time the President has mentioned energy independence in his state of the union message, but for the first time this exchange is taking place in a Congress led by the Democratic Party. We are looking for affirmative solutions that will strengthen our nation by freeing us from our dependence on foreign oil, and spurring a wave of entrepreneurial growth in the form of alternate energy programs. We look forward to working with the President and his party to bring about these changes. There are two areas where our respective parties have largely stood in contradiction, and I want to take a few minutes to address them tonight. The first relates to how we see the health of our economy how we measure it, and how we ensure that its benefits are properly shared among all Americans. The second regards our foreign policy how we might bring the war in Iraq to a proper conclusion that will also allow us to continue to fight the war against international terrorism, and to address other strategic concerns that our country faces around the world. When one looks at the health of our economy, it's almost as if we are living in two different countries. Some say that things have never been better. The stock market is at an all-time high, and so are corporate profits. But these benefits are not being fairly shared. When I graduated from college, the average corporate CEO made 20 times what the average worker did; today, it's nearly 400 times. In other words, it takes the average worker more than a year to make the money that his or her boss makes in one day. Wages and salaries for our workers are at all-time lows as a percentage of national wealth, even though the productivity of American workers is the highest in the world. Medical costs have skyrocketed. College tuition rates are off the charts. Our manufacturing base is being dismantled and sent overseas. Good American jobs are being sent along with them. In short, the middle class of this country, our historic backbone and our best hope for a strong society in the future, is losing its place at the table. Our workers know this, through painful experience. Our white-collar professionals are beginning to understand it, as their jobs start disappearing also. And they expect, rightly, that in this age of globalization, their government has a duty to insist that their concerns be dealt with fairly in the international marketplace. In the early days of our republic, President Andrew And under the leadership of the new Democratic Congress, we are on our way to doing so. The House just passed a minimum wage increase, the first in ten years, and the Senate will soon follow. We've introduced a broad legislative package designed to regain the trust of the American people. We've established a tone of cooperation and consensus that extends beyond party lines. We're working to get the right things done, for the right people and for the right reasons. With respect to foreign policy, this country has patiently endured a mismanaged war for nearly four years. Many, including myself, warned even before the war began that it was unnecessary, that it would take our energy and attention away from the larger war against terrorism, and that invading and occupying Iraq would leave us strategically vulnerable in the most violent and turbulent corner of the world. I want to share with all of you a picture that I have carried with me for more than 50 years. This is my father, when he was a young Air Force captain, flying cargo planes during the Like so many other Americans, today and throughout our history, we serve and have served, not for political reasons, but because we love our country. On the political issues those matters of war and peace, and in some cases of life and death we trusted the judgment of our national leaders. We hoped that they would be right, that they would measure with accuracy the value of our lives against the enormity of the national interest that might call upon us to go into harm's way. We owed them our loyalty, as Americans, and we gave it. But they owed us sound judgment, clear thinking, concern for our welfare, a guarantee that the threat to our country was equal to the price we might be called upon to pay in defending it. The President took us into this war recklessly. He disregarded warnings from the national security adviser during the first Gulf War, the chief of staff of the army, two former commanding generals of the Central Command, whose jurisdiction includes Iraq, the director of operations on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many, many others with great integrity and long experience in national security affairs. We are now, as a nation, held hostage to the predictable and predicted disarray that has followed. The war's costs to our nation have been staggering. Financially. The damage to our reputation around the world. The lost opportunities to defeat the forces of international terrorism. And especially the precious blood of our citizens who have stepped forward to serve. The majority of the nation no longer supports the way this war is being fought; nor does the majority of our military. We need a new direction. Not one step back from the war against international terrorism. Not a precipitous withdrawal that ignores the possibility of further chaos. But an immediate shift toward strong regionally-based diplomacy, a policy that takes our soldiers off the streets of Iraq's cities, and a formula that will in short order allow our combat forces to leave Iraq. On both of these vital issues, our economy and our national security, it falls upon those of us in elected office to take action. Regarding the economic imbalance in our country, I am reminded of the situation President Theodore Roosevelt faced in the early days of the 20th century. America was then, as now, drifting apart along class lines. The so-called robber barons were unapologetically raking in a huge percentage of the national wealth. The dispossessed workers at the bottom were threatening revolt. Roosevelt spoke strongly against these divisions. He told his fellow Republicans that they must set themselves "as resolutely against improper corporate influence on the one hand as against demagogy and mob rule on the other." And he did something about it. As I look at Iraq, I recall the words of former general and soon-to-be President Dwight Eisenhower during the dark days of the Korean War, which had fallen into a bloody stalemate. "When comes the end?" asked the General who had commanded our forces in Europe during World War Two. And as soon as he became President, he brought the Korean War to an end. These Presidents took the right kind of action, for the benefit of the American people and for the health of our relations around the world. Tonight we are calling on this President to take similar action, in both areas. If he does, we will join him. If he does not, we will be showing him the way. Thank you for listening. And God bless America. Suggested Bumper Stickers Sometimes lampooning George W. Bush is just too easy. (One wonders what will the late-night comics talk about when he is gone?) Some of these found on the Internet are really cleaver, however. —pcl Bush: End of an Error That's OK; I Wasn't Using My Civil Liberties Anyway Let's Fix Democracy in this Country First If You Want a Nation Ruled By Religion, Move to Iran Bush. Like a Rock. Only Dumber. If You Can Read This, You're Not Our President. Hey, Bush Supporters: Embarrassed Yet? George Bush: Creating the Terrorists Our Kids Will Have to Fight America: One Nation, Under Surveillance They Call Him "W" So He Can Spell It Jail to the Chief No, Seriously, Why Did We Invade Iraq? Bad President! No Banana. We Need a President Who's Fluent In At Least One Language We're Making Enemies Faster Than We Can Kill Them Is It Vietnam Yet? Bush Doesn't Care About White People, Either Where Are We Going? And Why Are We In This Hand basket? You Elected Him. You Deserve Him. When Bush Took Office, Gas Was $1.46 Pray For Impeachment The Republican Party: Our Bridge to the 11th Century What Part of "Bush Lied" Don't You Understand? One Nation Under Clod Bush Never Exhaled At Least Nixon Resigned
Patriot Act Powers Misused Statement from Sen. Russ Feingold Today the Committee – and the country – will have the opportunity to revisit a particularly flawed piece of legislation that was passed shortly after the 9/11 attacks. I am referring, of course, to the USA Patriot Act. The National Security Letter, or NSL, authorities were dramatically expanded by Sections 358 and 505 of the Patriot Act. Unfortunately, in its haste to pass this flawed legislation, Congress essentially granted the FBI a blank check to obtain some very sensitive records about Americans, including people not under any suspicion of wrong-doing, without judicial approval. So it is not surprising that the Justice Department’s Inspector General has identified serious problems with the implementation of these broad authorities. Congress gave the FBI very few rules to follow. As a result, Congress shares some responsibility for the apparently lax attitude and in some cases serious misuse of these potentially very intrusive authorities by the FBI. This Inspector General report proves that “trust us” doesn’t cut it when it comes to the government’s power to obtain Americans’ sensitive business records without a court order and without any suspicion that they are tied to terrorism or espionage. It was a grave mistake for Congress to grant the government broad authorities and just keep its fingers crossed that they wouldn’t be misused. We have the obligation, the responsibility, to put appropriate limits on government authorities – limits that allow agents to actively pursue criminals and terrorists, but that also protect the privacy of innocent Americans. Congress needs to exercise extensive and searching oversight of those powers, and it must take corrective action. The Inspector General report has shown both that current safeguards are inadequate and that the government cannot be trusted to exercise those powers lawfully. Congress must address these problems and fix the mistakes it made in passing and reauthorizing the flawed Patriot Act.
| |
Guidelines: Keep submissions to Soapbox simple and direct. George Orwell advised, that “…the worst thing one can do with words is surrender to them.” Best known today for writing 1984 and Animal Farm, Orwell was also very active in British Labour Party politics. To help others write better prose, he penned an essay, Politics and the English Language in 1946. You can find Orwell’s short essay with six common-sense rules at: http://www.web-landmann.com/orwell.htm . Submissions must not include obscenity, libel or plagiarism. We cannot reprint copyrighted articles without permission of the copyright owner. We can, however, rewrite or paraphrase published articles, but we should limit direct quotes to fewer than 75 words for the entire essay. | ||
