Tuesday, September 25, 2007
NELSON MANDELA
(sent to the IC PressCitizen)
Who is the greatest person of the second half of the 20th century?
Of course, there are many worthy contenders and varying criteria. Certainly Martin Luther King was a great man and leader. Amongst others, Mikhail Gorbachev deserves high consideration who as the last leader of the Soviet Union, allowed the Eastern Bloc Countries to break away and then for the Soviet Union itself to break up. More than any other person, he is responsible for the ending of the Cold War. Both he and Doctor King were rightly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
As great and important as these men were, my vote is for Nelson Mandela. As a prominent leader in South Africa’s anti-apartheid movement he was imprisoned for 27 years, most of it at the notorious Robben Island. While imprisoned, he became the international face of the anti-apartheid movement and it was a cause for world wide celebration when he was released in 1990. By then, he was an elderly man, but his spirit was unbroken and his mind not perverted by hate or a desire for revenge. Instead he quickly adapted to changes in society and again was a foremost leader in the anti-apartheid movement. He became president of South Africa in 1994 and his greatness became all important and an example for humanity. He pursued national reconciliation and unity rather than revenge on the minority white citizenry. South Africa still faces many challenges, but it was a gift to all of its people that it did not have to deal with the violence, turmoil and loss that could have easily transpired with the change from white minority to black majority government.
Since voluntarily stepping down in 1999, he has remained a world leader who has given wise consul. Although his body is enfeebled, his mind is still sharp.
For his ninetieth birthday, Britain honored him with a prominent statue in Parliament Square. I would like to see our country honor him in a similar way.
Jerry Aldeman
Coralville
Who is the greatest person of the second half of the 20th century?
Of course, there are many worthy contenders and varying criteria. Certainly Martin Luther King was a great man and leader. Amongst others, Mikhail Gorbachev deserves high consideration who as the last leader of the Soviet Union, allowed the Eastern Bloc Countries to break away and then for the Soviet Union itself to break up. More than any other person, he is responsible for the ending of the Cold War. Both he and Doctor King were rightly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
As great and important as these men were, my vote is for Nelson Mandela. As a prominent leader in South Africa’s anti-apartheid movement he was imprisoned for 27 years, most of it at the notorious Robben Island. While imprisoned, he became the international face of the anti-apartheid movement and it was a cause for world wide celebration when he was released in 1990. By then, he was an elderly man, but his spirit was unbroken and his mind not perverted by hate or a desire for revenge. Instead he quickly adapted to changes in society and again was a foremost leader in the anti-apartheid movement. He became president of South Africa in 1994 and his greatness became all important and an example for humanity. He pursued national reconciliation and unity rather than revenge on the minority white citizenry. South Africa still faces many challenges, but it was a gift to all of its people that it did not have to deal with the violence, turmoil and loss that could have easily transpired with the change from white minority to black majority government.
Since voluntarily stepping down in 1999, he has remained a world leader who has given wise consul. Although his body is enfeebled, his mind is still sharp.
For his ninetieth birthday, Britain honored him with a prominent statue in Parliament Square. I would like to see our country honor him in a similar way.
Jerry Aldeman
Coralville
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
WORST PRESIDENT EVER
WORST PRESIDENT EVER
(letter to the editor - IC Press Citizen)
George W. Bush - Worst President ever! Where to start? We could start with misleading America into the Iraq war followed by the utter incompetence, arrogance and politicizing of the occupation? Or there are the Bush deficits and the associated long term problems? Or the administrations ignoring and denying man’s role in global warming? Or should it be the long list of other failures and abuses?
As for Iraq, the administrations rush to war, misleading Americans as to the reasons for starting that war and then the extreme incompetence of the occupation are well documented. Yes, Saddam Hussein was a terrible ruler and a threat, but on balance, the Iraq fiasco has made us less safe. Iraq is a recruiting bonanza for terrorist organizations. Plus, in terms of opportunities lost, Iraq is a huge mistake. It diverted attention and resources away from our justified and key war in Afghanistan. Osama Bin-Laden escaped when we did not commit enough troops and had to outsource his capture to so called War Lords. Today the Taliban is resurgent, Osama is free, Al-Qaeda is very much a treat and Afghanistan is at risk. Our military is stretched thin and military recruiters have had to lower entry requirements. We have spent over 440 billion dollars with many 100s of billions to come, not only for the war, but also for long-term veteran’s health care and to resupply our depleted military. Former Republican Congressman Jim Leach has referred to Iraq as maybe America’s worst foreign policy decision ever. I think he is being generous.
The Bush tax cuts for the wealthy along with the Iraq War have created a huge debt problem that will impact our country for decades. Fiscal responsibility is a joke to W. and his team. The limiting effects of his deficits will be felt in our ability to confront health care issues amongst other problems. We are running up a huge debt to China and other countries. Not renewing the tax cuts for the top 1% of earners will go a long way to correcting the Bush deficits.
This administration is at odds with science. Nowhere is this more evident than in there approach to global warming. Only recently have they even acknowledged that man is impacting the environment. But they are still postponing any action on this very important issue.
There are many other issues and points that illustrate the incompetence, folly and stubborn wrong headedness of W. and his administration. Too many to discuss in the short space allotted here. The next president, whether Democratic or Republican, will have an enormous job to begin to undo the damage of the worst president ever.
(letter to the editor - IC Press Citizen)
George W. Bush - Worst President ever! Where to start? We could start with misleading America into the Iraq war followed by the utter incompetence, arrogance and politicizing of the occupation? Or there are the Bush deficits and the associated long term problems? Or the administrations ignoring and denying man’s role in global warming? Or should it be the long list of other failures and abuses?
As for Iraq, the administrations rush to war, misleading Americans as to the reasons for starting that war and then the extreme incompetence of the occupation are well documented. Yes, Saddam Hussein was a terrible ruler and a threat, but on balance, the Iraq fiasco has made us less safe. Iraq is a recruiting bonanza for terrorist organizations. Plus, in terms of opportunities lost, Iraq is a huge mistake. It diverted attention and resources away from our justified and key war in Afghanistan. Osama Bin-Laden escaped when we did not commit enough troops and had to outsource his capture to so called War Lords. Today the Taliban is resurgent, Osama is free, Al-Qaeda is very much a treat and Afghanistan is at risk. Our military is stretched thin and military recruiters have had to lower entry requirements. We have spent over 440 billion dollars with many 100s of billions to come, not only for the war, but also for long-term veteran’s health care and to resupply our depleted military. Former Republican Congressman Jim Leach has referred to Iraq as maybe America’s worst foreign policy decision ever. I think he is being generous.
The Bush tax cuts for the wealthy along with the Iraq War have created a huge debt problem that will impact our country for decades. Fiscal responsibility is a joke to W. and his team. The limiting effects of his deficits will be felt in our ability to confront health care issues amongst other problems. We are running up a huge debt to China and other countries. Not renewing the tax cuts for the top 1% of earners will go a long way to correcting the Bush deficits.
This administration is at odds with science. Nowhere is this more evident than in there approach to global warming. Only recently have they even acknowledged that man is impacting the environment. But they are still postponing any action on this very important issue.
There are many other issues and points that illustrate the incompetence, folly and stubborn wrong headedness of W. and his administration. Too many to discuss in the short space allotted here. The next president, whether Democratic or Republican, will have an enormous job to begin to undo the damage of the worst president ever.
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
In honor of Jim Leach and Lincoln Chaffy
I voted against Jim Leach. Nonetheless, I salute him. There are a lot of good things you can say about Congressman Leach both in regards to the way he has conducted himself and to his relatively independent approach. He opposed the Iraq Invasion from the beginning and has called it “the biggest foreign policy mistake in United States history”. He opposed some of the Bush tax cuts, although not the big one in 2001, had a strong environmental record and did not support the far right social agenda. He spent 30 years in the House of Representatives. He came in as a moderate and to his credit, he leaves the same way. The Republican Party made a sharp right turn and he stuck to his principals and would not buy into the far right agenda. Even more, he exemplified integrity and never more than in this year’s election. Here in Iowa’s second district he ran zero negative ads and strongly refused help from the Republican Party. The rumor is that he threatened to leave the party if they did. Despite these positives, I voted against him and would do so again. Party does matter, whatever the failings of the Democratic Party, its values and policies are in my opinion vastly better than what the Republican Party has become. And that trumps the good things I can say about Jim Leach, especially this year when it was so important to send a message to George junior. I also note that Congressman Leach lost to a very worthy opponent and it was a high caliber campaign between two thinkers.
Since he lost, there has been speculation about what Congressman Leach would do next - all of it in high praise. The two most interesting ones are the open presidency of the University of Iowa and to become ambassador to the UN. Now fellow Congressmen are promoting him to be UN Ambassador. He would be a great choice. However, it seems inconceivable that he would be the Bush administration’s choice. They are trying to confirm John Bolten who is in demeanor and policy is the opposite of Jim Leach. And frankly, given his early opposition to the Iraq War, I don’t know how Congressman Leach could work with the administration. He would be a great choice in 2009 whoever wins the presidency.
The most moderate / liberal Republican in the Senate, Lincoln Chaffy, also lost. He like Congressman Leach, although well thought of, could not overcome voter’s dissatisfaction with the Bush administration. He had the added election problem of representing a very Democratic state, Rhode Island. Following is a opinion and letter he wrote that was in the NY Times - very illuminating.
Holding to the Center, Losing My Seat - New York Times
By LINCOLN D. CHAFEE
Published: November 12, 2006
Exeter, R.I.
LAST Tuesday, I was one of the many moderate Republican casualties of
the anti-Bush virulence that swept the country. Despite my having voted against
the Iraq war resolution, my reputation for independence, the editorial
endorsement of virtually every newspaper in my state, and a job approval rating
of 63 percent, I did not win. Why?
Back in December 2000, after one of the closest elections in our nation’s
history, Vice President-elect Dick Cheney was the guest at a weekly lunch
meeting of a small group of centrist Republicans. Senators Susan Collins and
Olympia Snowe of Maine, Senator Jim Jeffords of Vermont, Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and I were honored to have the opportunity to visit with him on the eve of a session of Congress in which, because of Republican defeats, the Senate would be evenly divided at 50-50. As we sat in Senator Specter’s cozy hideaway office and discussed the coming session, I was startled to hear the vice president dismiss suggestions of compromise and instead emphasize an aggressively partisan agenda that included
significant tax cuts, the abandonment of international agreements and a
muscular, unilateral foreign policy. I was incredulous. Instead of a new atmosphere of cooperation and civility which, after all, had been the promise of the Bush-Cheney campaign, we seemed
ready to return to the poisonous partisanship that marked the
Republican-Congress — Clinton White House years.
In response to the vice president’s comments I quickly sent him a letter to
reinforce the views I expressed at the lunch. Excerpts follow:
As a follow-up to our meeting, I would like to pose a few thoughts.
In my view, one of the most popular refrains expressed by Governor Bush during the presidential campaign was, “I am a uniter, not a divider.” I believe
moderate Republicans can help the new administration develop a unifying agenda in the next session of Congress. We are on an encouraging course toward reducing the national debt, and I believe we must maintain discipline both in discretionary spending and in proposals for significant tax cuts. This time of continued relative prosperity and peace is an extremely important opportunity for our country to stay on a firm pathway toward elimination of the debt. Majorities from both parties in Congress expressed support in the past year for reform of the estate tax and repeal of the so-called marriage tax penalty. This appears to be an area of great promise for early bipartisan cooperation. Progress on environmental issues could do much to enhance the new administration’s program. I hope the new administration will be open to
proposals to reduce the country’s reliance on foreign oil through energy
conservation and greater investments in mass transit.
I hope we can work together to resolve some of the controversial subjects that
Democrats exploited during the campaign. If we could take such issues off the
table in the early part of the new administration, I believe it would strengthen
public support for the work ahead.
Obviously, my suggestions were not heeded. Our country faces daunting
challenges. I believe my letter of six years ago is worth reviewing as the
administration prepares for its last two years in office and as Republicans
contemplate the direction our party will head in the future.
Do I have any regrets about Tuesday’s outcome? Yes. I regret that I will not be
able to participate in the difficult, but critical, healing process that must
take place in our government if Democrats and Republicans are going to solve the serious problems facing this great nation.I hope the new Congress and the administration that received, in the president’s
words, “a thumping,” can find common ground for the common good.
Since he lost, there has been speculation about what Congressman Leach would do next - all of it in high praise. The two most interesting ones are the open presidency of the University of Iowa and to become ambassador to the UN. Now fellow Congressmen are promoting him to be UN Ambassador. He would be a great choice. However, it seems inconceivable that he would be the Bush administration’s choice. They are trying to confirm John Bolten who is in demeanor and policy is the opposite of Jim Leach. And frankly, given his early opposition to the Iraq War, I don’t know how Congressman Leach could work with the administration. He would be a great choice in 2009 whoever wins the presidency.
The most moderate / liberal Republican in the Senate, Lincoln Chaffy, also lost. He like Congressman Leach, although well thought of, could not overcome voter’s dissatisfaction with the Bush administration. He had the added election problem of representing a very Democratic state, Rhode Island. Following is a opinion and letter he wrote that was in the NY Times - very illuminating.
Holding to the Center, Losing My Seat - New York Times
By LINCOLN D. CHAFEE
Published: November 12, 2006
Exeter, R.I.
LAST Tuesday, I was one of the many moderate Republican casualties of
the anti-Bush virulence that swept the country. Despite my having voted against
the Iraq war resolution, my reputation for independence, the editorial
endorsement of virtually every newspaper in my state, and a job approval rating
of 63 percent, I did not win. Why?
Back in December 2000, after one of the closest elections in our nation’s
history, Vice President-elect Dick Cheney was the guest at a weekly lunch
meeting of a small group of centrist Republicans. Senators Susan Collins and
Olympia Snowe of Maine, Senator Jim Jeffords of Vermont, Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and I were honored to have the opportunity to visit with him on the eve of a session of Congress in which, because of Republican defeats, the Senate would be evenly divided at 50-50. As we sat in Senator Specter’s cozy hideaway office and discussed the coming session, I was startled to hear the vice president dismiss suggestions of compromise and instead emphasize an aggressively partisan agenda that included
significant tax cuts, the abandonment of international agreements and a
muscular, unilateral foreign policy. I was incredulous. Instead of a new atmosphere of cooperation and civility which, after all, had been the promise of the Bush-Cheney campaign, we seemed
ready to return to the poisonous partisanship that marked the
Republican-Congress — Clinton White House years.
In response to the vice president’s comments I quickly sent him a letter to
reinforce the views I expressed at the lunch. Excerpts follow:
As a follow-up to our meeting, I would like to pose a few thoughts.
In my view, one of the most popular refrains expressed by Governor Bush during the presidential campaign was, “I am a uniter, not a divider.” I believe
moderate Republicans can help the new administration develop a unifying agenda in the next session of Congress. We are on an encouraging course toward reducing the national debt, and I believe we must maintain discipline both in discretionary spending and in proposals for significant tax cuts. This time of continued relative prosperity and peace is an extremely important opportunity for our country to stay on a firm pathway toward elimination of the debt. Majorities from both parties in Congress expressed support in the past year for reform of the estate tax and repeal of the so-called marriage tax penalty. This appears to be an area of great promise for early bipartisan cooperation. Progress on environmental issues could do much to enhance the new administration’s program. I hope the new administration will be open to
proposals to reduce the country’s reliance on foreign oil through energy
conservation and greater investments in mass transit.
I hope we can work together to resolve some of the controversial subjects that
Democrats exploited during the campaign. If we could take such issues off the
table in the early part of the new administration, I believe it would strengthen
public support for the work ahead.
Obviously, my suggestions were not heeded. Our country faces daunting
challenges. I believe my letter of six years ago is worth reviewing as the
administration prepares for its last two years in office and as Republicans
contemplate the direction our party will head in the future.
Do I have any regrets about Tuesday’s outcome? Yes. I regret that I will not be
able to participate in the difficult, but critical, healing process that must
take place in our government if Democrats and Republicans are going to solve the serious problems facing this great nation.I hope the new Congress and the administration that received, in the president’s
words, “a thumping,” can find common ground for the common good.
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Wonderful
It’s a great day. The sun is shining, its warm and the country took a very positive turn last night.
Where to start? It’s almost all good.
-in the big picture, this was a huge vote against George Bush and his administration – I think that is obvious. Also obvious, this was a call for significant change in the administration’s Iraq policy. Will that happen?
-furthermore, – I view this as a move against the far right and most especially the so called “social conservatives”. I hope the Republicans will move away from the extreme positions. The are plenty of signs that “business” conservatives and “moderate” are fed up with the current Republican direction and are realizing that basically allowing “social conservatives” to determine the direction of the party is a losing proposition.
-an interesting result was the solid defeat (56 – 44) of the ballot measure in SD that would have outlawed abortion. In a conservative state – surprising
-many races cheer me and have a extra meaning – one especially is the Missouri Senate race and Claire McCaskill’s defeat of a GOP incumbent and where a stem cell research measure was approved. When Michael J. Fox came to Missouri and made an ad for McCaskill and for stem cell research, Rush Limbaugh physically mocked Michael Fox’s Parkinson’s symptoms. Given the Character of Rush Limbaugh - not surprising at all. I wonder if that attention made a positive difference for McCaskill? (in full disclosure – I view Rush Limbaugh as a very good talker, but a truly terrible terrible human being)
-in Iowa, Democrats did very well including the defeat of this district’s congressman, Jim Leach. I voted against Jim Leach along with other Democrats and Progressives who nonetheless hold him in high regard. His replacement, Dave Loebsack, will do a good job and has many of the same personal qualities.
Late this morning, Montana was called for Jon Tester. The Senate now comes down to Virginia. Jim Webb, is ahead, but we’re probably looking at a recount – perhaps a long recount. Last night I did imaginary cartwheels on the house change, if the Senate goes to Democrats - I’ll upgrade that to IMAGINARY backflips.
(more later)
Where to start? It’s almost all good.
-in the big picture, this was a huge vote against George Bush and his administration – I think that is obvious. Also obvious, this was a call for significant change in the administration’s Iraq policy. Will that happen?
-furthermore, – I view this as a move against the far right and most especially the so called “social conservatives”. I hope the Republicans will move away from the extreme positions. The are plenty of signs that “business” conservatives and “moderate” are fed up with the current Republican direction and are realizing that basically allowing “social conservatives” to determine the direction of the party is a losing proposition.
-an interesting result was the solid defeat (56 – 44) of the ballot measure in SD that would have outlawed abortion. In a conservative state – surprising
-many races cheer me and have a extra meaning – one especially is the Missouri Senate race and Claire McCaskill’s defeat of a GOP incumbent and where a stem cell research measure was approved. When Michael J. Fox came to Missouri and made an ad for McCaskill and for stem cell research, Rush Limbaugh physically mocked Michael Fox’s Parkinson’s symptoms. Given the Character of Rush Limbaugh - not surprising at all. I wonder if that attention made a positive difference for McCaskill? (in full disclosure – I view Rush Limbaugh as a very good talker, but a truly terrible terrible human being)
-in Iowa, Democrats did very well including the defeat of this district’s congressman, Jim Leach. I voted against Jim Leach along with other Democrats and Progressives who nonetheless hold him in high regard. His replacement, Dave Loebsack, will do a good job and has many of the same personal qualities.
Late this morning, Montana was called for Jon Tester. The Senate now comes down to Virginia. Jim Webb, is ahead, but we’re probably looking at a recount – perhaps a long recount. Last night I did imaginary cartwheels on the house change, if the Senate goes to Democrats - I’ll upgrade that to IMAGINARY backflips.
(more later)
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
Cartwheels
It's 12:20 PM CST.
I don't/can't do cartwheels, but I'm turning IMAGINARY cartwheels in my mind. This is a big night and big start back for America.
Jerry
I don't/can't do cartwheels, but I'm turning IMAGINARY cartwheels in my mind. This is a big night and big start back for America.
Jerry
Saturday, November 04, 2006
The lesson of John Kerry
What an incredibly stupid wrong thing he said this week about US troops in Iraq – both on the substance and on the politics.
I suspect what happened in his thought process is this – he is still angry about the lies of the Swift Boat group in 2004. That’s understandable and justifiable and not such a big problem. He may also be mad at himself for being slow to react to the Swift Boat ads.
However, to let it get to him is not OK. My guess is his pent up resentment led to a lack of judgment and making a so called joke that he didn’t mean.
He illustrated the point of not to let past “wrongs” and resentments get to one to the point of saying or doing really stupid things - seems obvious, but admittedly not always as easy.
A positive counter example is Al Gore. He has as much to be angry about in regards to the 2000 campaign as Kerry and then there is Florida. He has handled the situation far better and has made a huge contribution on the Global Warming issue.
I suspect what happened in his thought process is this – he is still angry about the lies of the Swift Boat group in 2004. That’s understandable and justifiable and not such a big problem. He may also be mad at himself for being slow to react to the Swift Boat ads.
However, to let it get to him is not OK. My guess is his pent up resentment led to a lack of judgment and making a so called joke that he didn’t mean.
He illustrated the point of not to let past “wrongs” and resentments get to one to the point of saying or doing really stupid things - seems obvious, but admittedly not always as easy.
A positive counter example is Al Gore. He has as much to be angry about in regards to the 2000 campaign as Kerry and then there is Florida. He has handled the situation far better and has made a huge contribution on the Global Warming issue.
Sunday, October 22, 2006
Nobel Peace Prize
Muhammad Yunus, the father of micro lending, won the Nobel Peace Prize - a good choice, in my opinion. Micro lending is hugely successful in his country, Bangladesh. Many very poor people have raised their standard of living because of the small loans they would otherwise not be able to acquire. Micro lending concepts are now being employed elsewhere, especially in the third world.
A link to the Nobel Foundation is http://nobelprize.org
A link to Muhammad Yunus’s Grameen Bank is http://www.grameen-info.org/
A link to the Nobel Foundation is http://nobelprize.org
A link to Muhammad Yunus’s Grameen Bank is http://www.grameen-info.org/
Key Political Races
As you know, I am a long time political junkie and not surprisingly have been watching the mid-term elections closely. This year it’s more fun because it appears the mid-terms will be a referendum on George and a real chance to alter or at least significantly slow down the seriously wrong directions of this administration. And if that happens, when his term is over in 2009, the country will not be in as deep a hole. There is reason for optimism.
What I have done is make small contributions to five candidates. Though my puny contributions are of no consequence, I enjoy playing this minute part and picked competitive races. Hillary doesn’t need any more money. There are plenty of other worthy campaigns, but I found these particularly interesting and important or in the case of Chet Culver, relevant to Iowa. Here is a thumbnail sketch on the five:
1)John Baldacci for Maine governor – What I really like is that he, as governor, pushed forward a significant step towards universal health care with what Maine calls the Dirigo Health Reform. He has also spoken strongly about Global Warming.
2)Harold Ford for Senator from Tennessee – He is a young, moderate, articulate, black, Democratic congressman who is running an exceptional campaign and currently has a very slight lead. For a Democrat to win in a senate “red” state is something. And for Ford to win would be truly historic. (on an interesting side note – David Brooks, a NY Times opinion writer, said on the Lehrer News Hour that Barak Obama is considering running for president in 2008 and a Ford victory would be a positive factor in his decision)
3)Jon Tester for Senator from Montana – He is running against Conrad Burns who amongst other negatives was the largest recipient of Jack Abramoff “aid”. Tester is a down to earth guy and a third generation farmer who has also been a teacher, game butcher and head of the Montana Senate. And I like that he is an organic farmer.
4)In Iowa, Bruce Braley for Congress. Besides his positions, what prompted me is the competitiveness of this open house seat and the extremely dirty campaign that is being waged against him. No surprise there, his opponent is being supported by Bob Perry, the rich friend of Karl Rove, who financed the lies of the Swift Boat group against John Kerry in 2004. This district does not include Iowa City, but his ads filter into local network television. Other than the news and sports, I watch very little non PBS TV, but yet have seen these ads many times. Believe it not, they have been bringing the Communist Party into it and are trying to tie Braley to it (is this 1950?). Add to this, that Braley’s opponent is very conservative and is playing to fear (should we say prejudice) on the immigration issue.
5)Also in Iowa, Chet Culver for Governor. To be honest, I wasn’t all that impressed with any of the Democratic primary candidates for governor. However, his November opponent is Jim Nussel who is vacating the open congressional seat that Bruce Braley is running for. Nussel is a key member of the Republican House leadership and has been a force on conservative issues. And he is also getting aid from Bob Perry of the Swift Boat ads.
Another race that is especially interesting and very important is for Pennsylvania Senator. Incumbent Republican, Rick Santorum, is third in the Republican Senate leadership and part of the hard hard right. Beating him would be a huge statement and plus. Bob Casey is the moderate Democrat who has been and is leading, but Santorum has lots of money and is an energetic campaigner and the race is not over. This is probably the premier election in 2006.
What I have done is make small contributions to five candidates. Though my puny contributions are of no consequence, I enjoy playing this minute part and picked competitive races. Hillary doesn’t need any more money. There are plenty of other worthy campaigns, but I found these particularly interesting and important or in the case of Chet Culver, relevant to Iowa. Here is a thumbnail sketch on the five:
1)John Baldacci for Maine governor – What I really like is that he, as governor, pushed forward a significant step towards universal health care with what Maine calls the Dirigo Health Reform. He has also spoken strongly about Global Warming.
2)Harold Ford for Senator from Tennessee – He is a young, moderate, articulate, black, Democratic congressman who is running an exceptional campaign and currently has a very slight lead. For a Democrat to win in a senate “red” state is something. And for Ford to win would be truly historic. (on an interesting side note – David Brooks, a NY Times opinion writer, said on the Lehrer News Hour that Barak Obama is considering running for president in 2008 and a Ford victory would be a positive factor in his decision)
3)Jon Tester for Senator from Montana – He is running against Conrad Burns who amongst other negatives was the largest recipient of Jack Abramoff “aid”. Tester is a down to earth guy and a third generation farmer who has also been a teacher, game butcher and head of the Montana Senate. And I like that he is an organic farmer.
4)In Iowa, Bruce Braley for Congress. Besides his positions, what prompted me is the competitiveness of this open house seat and the extremely dirty campaign that is being waged against him. No surprise there, his opponent is being supported by Bob Perry, the rich friend of Karl Rove, who financed the lies of the Swift Boat group against John Kerry in 2004. This district does not include Iowa City, but his ads filter into local network television. Other than the news and sports, I watch very little non PBS TV, but yet have seen these ads many times. Believe it not, they have been bringing the Communist Party into it and are trying to tie Braley to it (is this 1950?). Add to this, that Braley’s opponent is very conservative and is playing to fear (should we say prejudice) on the immigration issue.
5)Also in Iowa, Chet Culver for Governor. To be honest, I wasn’t all that impressed with any of the Democratic primary candidates for governor. However, his November opponent is Jim Nussel who is vacating the open congressional seat that Bruce Braley is running for. Nussel is a key member of the Republican House leadership and has been a force on conservative issues. And he is also getting aid from Bob Perry of the Swift Boat ads.
Another race that is especially interesting and very important is for Pennsylvania Senator. Incumbent Republican, Rick Santorum, is third in the Republican Senate leadership and part of the hard hard right. Beating him would be a huge statement and plus. Bob Casey is the moderate Democrat who has been and is leading, but Santorum has lots of money and is an energetic campaigner and the race is not over. This is probably the premier election in 2006.
Eyes on the Prize
I watched the powerful Civil Rights documentary, “Eyes on the Prize”, on PBS. It’s hard to imagine that voting and integration were issues in the United States 100 years after the Civil War. On one hand, we have come a long way. On the other hand and more broadly, there are still large social justice issues.
I’m old enough to remember much of the struggle and even though Iowa City was far removed from the actual scenes and when I attended City High, minority students could be counted on ones fingers (maybe just one hand), I was aware of and interested in the struggle.
I suspect that most American children today, even black children, know very little of this important time and movement. That is a shame. That these conditions existed is a huge shame, but that they were overcome with mostly non-violent methods and the caliber of the movement leaders is something all Americans should be proud of.
And the pure elegance and grace of Martin Luther King is a very refreshing change from the political blather we hear from both parties today. Maybe that is part of the reason why Americans like Tony Blair. Agree or disagree with him, he speaks with an elegance not often heard on this side of the Atlantic - Barak Obama being a rare exception.
I very much like documentaries dealing with history and this one is absorbing and truly important. I highly recommend it.
A link to Martin Luther King’s “I have a Dream Speech” - http://www.amazon.com/Martin-Luther-King-Jr-Dream/dp/6300200086
I’m old enough to remember much of the struggle and even though Iowa City was far removed from the actual scenes and when I attended City High, minority students could be counted on ones fingers (maybe just one hand), I was aware of and interested in the struggle.
I suspect that most American children today, even black children, know very little of this important time and movement. That is a shame. That these conditions existed is a huge shame, but that they were overcome with mostly non-violent methods and the caliber of the movement leaders is something all Americans should be proud of.
And the pure elegance and grace of Martin Luther King is a very refreshing change from the political blather we hear from both parties today. Maybe that is part of the reason why Americans like Tony Blair. Agree or disagree with him, he speaks with an elegance not often heard on this side of the Atlantic - Barak Obama being a rare exception.
I very much like documentaries dealing with history and this one is absorbing and truly important. I highly recommend it.
A link to Martin Luther King’s “I have a Dream Speech” - http://www.amazon.com/Martin-Luther-King-Jr-Dream/dp/6300200086
In Awe of the Amish
To me the unhesitating and immediate response of forgiveness after the tragic schoolhouse shooting is an inspiration. That they could be concerned about the family of the shooter and make clear that they were welcome to stay in the community speaks volumes for their values and genuineness.
