The "War" on "Terror"

Aren't "quotation marks" fun? You can "do" so many things with them. What does it really mean to put something in ""? Am I being funny? Sarcastic? Serious? Am I actually quoting someone? All good questions. I'm not sure which is right. What I do know is that today I want to talk about the "War" on "Terror."

War conjures images, most of them ugly and horrific of distant battlefields strewn with the bodies of heroes and villains. In this sense we are indeed at war. American soldiers are fighting and dying in faraway places. They do so heroically, combating an enemy that is determined and propagates a mythology of evil.

However there is more to this than the traditional war being fought. The "War" on "Terror" is much more than a bang-bang fight. It is a battle for the hearts and minds of millions of people spread throughout the world. We could go on killing Muslim extremists in perpetuity and never win this war, which is why the "War" on "Terror" is neither a traditional war, nor is it being fought against "Terror" - whatever that means.

Like the Cold "War," the "War" on "Terror" will not be won with guns but with ideas. Our democratic and capitalist society, despite its flaws, was greater than a Communist society for decades and it is greater than the oppressive theocracies facing it down today. Though our might may stem from our bombs, our greatness does not. Winning this war will require showing the people of Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan and many other countries that the United States isn't about oppression. We're not at war against Islam and the such. We're very good at killing the bad guys; we're not nearly good enough at convincing the people of other countries that we're trustworthy.

What about "terror?" Are we fighting terror? Are we fighting terrorists? When we talk about the War on Terror, what do we actually mean? Again, we can find comparisons in the Cold War. The terrorists against whom we claim to be fighting are evil people, deserving of what is coming their way. However, many of our enemies aren't necessarily awful human beings. The goatherd who picks up a Kalashnikov in Afghanistan may simply be buying into an ideology of hatred that he is bombarded with daily by the real bad guys, the Osama bin Ladens of the world.

People then, are simply the manifestation of the idea that we are actually combating. Many - though certainly not all - of those people find themselves in terrible socioeconomic conditions. They feel oppressed by the United States, sometimes justifiably, other times only in their imaginations. They fail to see that the people recruiting them are far more oppressive and evil than we could ever be, but their plight is understandable, even if it isn't justifiable.

To win this "war" will take far more than the billions of dollars and thousands of lives it has already cost us. It will take wholesale reanalysis of what we're up against and how to best combat those people. I'm not alone in thinking that Osama bin Laden and his ilk would have a lot more trouble finding recruits among a group of people who were well-educated and incorporated into the world economy, who had a say in their own government and who were allowed the freedoms we enjoy in America. To win this war we'll need our guns, but we'll also need a whole lot more. We'll need to understand the enemy and we'll need to unravel the fabric of his mythology with our goodwill while making sure our guns are aimed at the real bad guys and not the people trapped in the middle.

"Culture War"

I've just finished reading an interesting article on "culture war," the idea that there is a war going on for the future of America. The author postulates that 30% of Americans want to make our country a European-style welfare state while the other 70% wants to embrace free enterprise. Unfortunately, our author tells us, the 30% are in charge and they've tricked the rest of us into thinking that their minority is trying to improve the country. Woe unto us!

The author uses "examples" like health care reform and the financial regulatory bill to "prove" his point. America, he warns us, is becoming a country where wealth is redistributed, and thus American morality is being undermined.

While it's certainly true that America is a welfare state - perhaps too much of a welfare state - the idea that free enterprise in our country is being undermined is outrageously silly. Let's begin by observing Europe, the archetype of welfare states. It's worth pointing out that, as a block, the EU is the world's largest economy. Germany itself is the world's fourth largest economy, only having recently been passed by China. Furthermore, Greece's debt crisis, caused by egregious spending, has been exacerbated by the Euro. Greece can't adjust it's currency and therefore can do little to rectify many of the problems it faces. Is the EU a welfare state? Yes. Does that mean we should fear becoming like Europe? No. Does it mean we should emulate Europe? Again, no.

Now let's examine America and see what the 30% have done to hijack our country and make us socialist. First there is health care reform, the ultimate "socialist" law and one that undeniably undermines our liberties. After all, is there anything less American than making people buy health insurance? Of course, that insurance policy will still be created and sold by a private company. It's true that the health care law is anti-free enterprise. After all, it forbids insurance companies from taking your money then dropping you when you get sick and it makes pre-existing conditions a thing of the past. How terribly, terribly socialist.

Then of course, there are the unpopular financial and auto bailouts. The bailouts were unfortunate, but they were also necessary. Try imagining what the state of the economy would be today if major American banks had collapsed. In my mind, it's not pretty. Do we want a system in which the taxpayers bail out the irresponsible bankers? I don't. I also don't want to live in a country in which those same bankers are allowed to do whatever they want with no repercussions. If that means I'm against free enterprise then I guess I'm against free enterprise. I'd like to know that the bankers to whom I give my money aren't going get greedy with it. I'm for some regulation. By the way, the government has profited from the bailouts, those were loans, they get paid back with interest.

The point here is that this mysterious 30% of the population trying to move us toward socialism isn't a real group. There is no organization with that aim, and none of the "proof" presented in support of this theory has anything to do with undermining free enterprise. This is America. We encourage innovation; we're the world's leader in innovation. No one wants that to change. The policies enacted by both the Bush and Obama administrations have done nothing to limit free enterprise.

The idea that our way of life is under siege and that the very foundations of our society are in peril is nothing more than fear-mongering. It's simply untrue. America will remain the world's leading innovator and the free enterprise system that exists in our country will remain intact...now if only that system would encourage movement in the direction of green and alternative energy.

Realistic Politics

There may be no such thing, but because we need a functioning government let's consider the idea. It looks something like this: intelligent people with opposing viewpoints sitting down together and talking about solutions. They find common ground, compromise and produce legislation that benefits everyone. Sounds like a good idea to me.

Unfortunately, it's not happening. Mixed in with our intelligent elected officials are some loons. Even worse, the increasingly loud and influential extremists on both sides of the political spectrum, particularly the Tea Party, are making it difficult for smart people to do their jobs for fear of losing them. This is bad for everyone.

Let me explain. I'm thrilled about Rand Paul's victory in the Kentucky GOP primary because I think he is a fool and I believe he will scare moderate Republicans and centrists away. But what if I'm wrong? Would disaster befall us? Actually, perhaps it would. If elected, Rand Paul isn't bringing his radical ideas to Washington with any success, but he is bringing them. And if he is actually as committed to some of these asinine thoughts as he appears to be, he is going to stick with them, the result being a frozen and ineffective government? Rand Paul can't do it along, but what if the ultra-conservative from Utah and the ultra-liberal from Arkansas (there's a funny thought) also get elected. What if a handful of these crazies from both sides end up in the Senate? Perhaps stalemate. A stalemate we can't afford as a nation.

There is hope for our frozen government yet. Just yesterday, the Senate passed a financial regulatory bill. Without delving into the specifics of the bill, it is worth pointing out that four Democrats voted against it and four Republicans voted for it. That's a good thing. It means people are thinking, sharing their ideas and actually trying to do what they think is right, not just what is politically expedient.

Let's make America better today. Let's be rational when choosing our candidates. I'm an open opponent of the Tea Party, but I'm not just talking about them here. In order to function, our government must be made up of people that are pragmatic and thoughtful, not ideologues catering to nut-cases. Think before you vote. If we all do that, we'll take a big step forward.

The problem with American education

Well it's impossible to put your finger on the problem because it is multi-faceted. But this is part of what's wrong.

You may remember my post from a few weeks ago about crashing the Tea Party. Well unfortunately, it got shut down because the creator advocated stealing people's SSNs. Oops. Not a good idea, don't do that. However, it's worth pointing out that the teacher who started that website was put on probation for insulting those idiots, but this guy in Alabama isn't even getting that. I don't think he deserves any real punishment, but one guy causes an uproar by poking fun at idiots while another guy's lesson on assassinating the president is swept under the rug? That doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

I propose we ship this teacher to Arizona, whose new laws against ethnic studies are going to eliminate discrimination and foster assimilation and tolerance. Maybe this math teacher can learn a few things about said tolerance in the America's new beacon of acceptance.

While I'm busy making fun of the Tea Party I do have them to thank for something. The Tea Party has given us Rand Paul, son of Representative Ron Paul who is famous for wanting there to be no government, or something like that. Yesterday, Rand Paul won the Republican nomination for Kentucky's open Senate seat. This is fantastic news for America because Rand Paul, like his daddy, wants to get rid of the government. Paradoxical isn't it, running for office so you can...do nothing? Anyhow, that's besides the point. The good news about Rand Paul is that his radical ideas are very likely to isolate intelligent republicans and terrify moderates, making it much easier for a reasonable Democrat to be elected in November. Thanks Tea Party.

Global Warming, 2012, and why we must act NOW!

As you may have heard, the ancient Mayans unequivocally proved that the world is going to end in 2012. Their failure to extend their calendar indefinitely has destined us all to certain doom. If you're not convinced that the Mayans knew what was up, then surely you can at least trust John Cusack...right? So as 2012 approaches I propose the stockpiling of weapons and Chunky Soup, or, for a lighter alternative, liquor and party favors.

Okay that was fun, but let's be serious. The world will survive well into 2013 despite the lack of political will to face the environmental threat. Global warming, a real threat that needs to be taken seriously, is not going to fry, freeze us or drown us in the short term. These things are over-hyped. But there is a very real problem. You see we are defiling our planet. Our "Caveat Terra" approach to industry is making the world warmer. But to understand the nature of the problem, we need to look to the future, not fret about the present.

Currently, there are roughly six billion people inhabiting our decreasingly lovely planet. That number is going to increase...by a quite a bit...soon. According to UN projections, there will be 9 billion people by 2050, perhaps as many as 11 billion. That's a lot of folks, folks. Because of globalization and an increasingly integrated global economy, several billion of these people are going to expect a standard of living similar to the one that we enjoy in America. This is not sustainable. Mother nature will notice and respond. We will not be pleased with her response.

It's not too late. Even by Mayan reckoning we have a couple of years But we must get moving. All those grim things in "The Day After Tomorrow" may be reality for our children. Why wait until it gets to that point? Why not show a little bit of foresight and start investing in alternate energy now so that we can be the ones selling it when the rest of the world demands it?

2012 is just two winters away. Let's start acting like the future depends on us.

Fear and Loathing in Arizona

What happens when you put xenophobic people in the desert? You get Arizona.

This is the second time I've felt compelled to blog about the state that seems to be our nation's looniest.

There is no way I could ever condone Arizona's recent anti-immigration measures. Arizona does face a serious issue along its border. North Mexico is chaotic and the government needs to take steps to prevent the violence from spilling into our country.

This is not the solution to the border problem. Congratulations to the Democratic Party which has just scored an important political victory. If Hispanics weren't angry enough about the inevitable racial profiling that is headed their way, they're sure to be frustrated by the denial of their cultural heritage. What really frightens me and amuses me about this law is the rationale behind it. "State schools chief Tom Horne, who has pushed the bill for years, said he believes the Tucson school district's Mexican-American studies program teaches Latino students that they are oppressed by white people."

Clearly Mr. Horne doesn't know much about the recent history of his own state. Okay, that was an unfair shot, but since when do ethnic studies programs promote division, and more importantly, since when did America become the country of assimilation? I thought the whole premise of our great nation was that you can come here and work whatever job you want, believe in whichever god you choose, say whatever you want about idiots like the Tea Party, and just be yourself. I guess I missed the part where it's not acceptable to be different in America anymore and that it's now wrong to be proud of your ancestry.

How was it that so many people were infuriated about extending health care to 30 million Americans but people are then fine with denying people the opportunity to study their history. I find that aggressively offensive.

What's the next step Arizona? The elimination of gender studies? Wiping out religious studies? I bet Arizona history isn't on the chopping block. America is better than that. We are better than that.

Let's make America better by showing that we're better than bigotry. Let's secure our borders and our freedoms and let's remember that America's greatness comes from our ability to welcome the world's people, not shun them.

Politics on Pause

This could be a post about the Party of No and how they've boycotted making improvements to our country thus leading to a political pause.

I'm going to lay off bashing the bad guys today to talk about a much happier phenomenon, one for which I don't have a name.

It has become fashionable lately for people to plan public dances and spontaneously unleash them on unsuspecting bystanders. Check out the scenes in Oxford, MS; Brussels, Belgium; and London, England.

These videos made me laugh and they made me smile. A world in which people can perform surprise public dances for the entertainment of random people is a world worth living in, and signals to me that, despite our problems, we're moving forward. I'm happy this coincides with a movement like the Tea Party so that the world's idiots are balanced by the world's choreographers.

So I'm writing today to encourage any and everyone to take part in a "spontaneous" dance performance if the opportunity ever presents itself. Spontaneity and dance are a great combination and anyone who wouldn't enjoy seeing such an outbreak in real life needs to pull their head out of their butt and take in the sunshine.

Why do guns make us crazy?

That's a real question. Why? I can't understand it. Why is the right to bear arms seemingly more important than any other, especially when it's the one right that causes the most harm? I'm befuddled.

In light of the failed terrorist attack in Times Square there has been much debate on the rights of terrorists and suspected terrorists. There has been some outcry about reading Miranda rights to suspected terrorists and, just recently, there has been debate about whether suspected terrorists have the right to keep and bear arms.

For whatever reason, some of the enlightened people that we have voted into office seem to think that it is acceptable to deny American citizens their rights. I don't understand how that is okay, but what confuses me even more is the idea that we can take their rights but we can't take their guns.

That's right America, suspected terrorists do not have rights, but they can get guns. It's fine to strip the rights from someone who hasn't even been convicted by either a civilian or military court, but it's not okay to ban them from buying guns. They're not allowed on airplanes, but I'll be damned if they can't get a gun. This is America after all. I've said it before, if you don't own guns you're a wuss and a communist.

But seriously, why do guns make us crazy? Who thinks this is a good idea? One of the most sensible Republicans in the Senate, Lindsay Graham, for one. When asked about why terror suspects can't fly but can buy guns Graham said, "“when the founders sat down and wrote the Constitution, they didn’t consider flying.”

Good point, Senator. They also didn't consider automatic weapons and assault rifles, but let's not get technical.

I'm not here argue for gun control, though if you pushed the issue, I certainly would. I've always been amused by the adage, "guns don't kill people, people kill people." Lindsay Graham would love that. And it's true, guns don't kill people. People with guns kill people. I guess people with sticks also kill people but with a much higher degree of difficulty. So we can rephrase this to say, people with weapons kill people. If we accept this postulate then we must ask ourselves, why make it easy to get weapons? This of course leads us to the next question. If we know that there is a list of terror suspects who would kill if given the opportunity, why make it easy for them to get guns?

Of course, there is no good, logical, or even real answer to that question and anyone who tells you otherwise is a damn fool...and of course, a communist. But guns make us crazy. So until we figure out why, we're letting the bad guys stockpile weapons. Might as well, it's the only right we're granting them.

Blame BP?

No, blame America. Blame our dependence on foreign oil and our gas guzzling SUVs. Blame a culture that makes it cool to have a car that gets 12 miles to the gallon and has very little utility although it is sporty and is certainly a vehicle. But most of all, blame our stubborn reluctance to admit that climate change is happening and adopt legislation that will spur the development of green energy.

If an environmental disaster like this one isn't a slap-in-the-face wake-up call then I don't know what could be. With the potential for the devastation of wildlife that effects our economy, this calamity could significantly hurt Americans and the Earth. I hope you're happy Hummer owners.

So as an oil slick approaches the coast of Louisiana, maybe we can take a few minutes to think about a form of energy that dirties the air, pollutes the water and costs billions of dollars. Maybe we can arrive at the conclusion that we would be better off with clean energy produced in the United States than dirty oil that has to be dangerously extracted or expensively bought. Maybe we can determine that it's past time for the United States to take the not-as-difficult-as-it-seems step towards greenifying our economy.

Don't blame BP, blame us. We're addicted to oil. Let's make America better today and use this catastrophe to galvanize our country to action. Let's go green and let's do it right now.