The American Why

Ramblings...political and social, and whatever else I feel like writing about.

My Photo
Name:
Location: Lakes Region, New Hampshire, U.S. Outlying Islands

You don't know me...you've never met me...I'm some other 'steve'...(I'm not Lisa, my name is Julie, Lisa left you years ago...)

Monday, April 23, 2007

Union Leader actually printed my letter!

The Manchester Union Leader, once called the "...worst newspaper in the U.S..." by Hunter Thompson, has actually printed one of my letters! (NH House to allow civil unions, found below) To say the Leader leans to the 'right' really is an understatement, and doubly so for it's op-ed page. So, without further adieu, here it is!

http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Steve+McBrian%3a+Bigoted+homophobes+hide+behind+the+call+to+%27protect+marriage%27+in+NH&articleId=e6d83d96-5693-4d3b-89ba-a55568d1a654

Friday, April 20, 2007

Vermont Senate: Impeach the President

By ROSS SNEYD Associated Press Writer

April 20,2007 | MONTPELIER, Vt. -- Vermont senators voted Friday to call for the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, saying their actions have raised "serious questions of constitutionality."

The non-binding resolution was approved 16-9 without debate -- all six Republicans in the chamber at the time and three Democrats voted against it.

The resolution says Bush and Cheney's actions in the U.S. and abroad, including in Iraq, "raise serious questions of constitutionality, statutory legality, and abuse of the public trust."

"I think it's going to have a tremendous political effect, a tremendous political effect on public discourse about what to do about this president," said James Leas, a vocal advocate of withdrawing troops from Iraq and impeaching Bush and Cheney.
Vermont lawmakers earlier voted to demand an immediate troop withdrawal from Iraq in another non-binding resolution.

Democratic House Speaker Gaye Symington has kept a similar resolution from reaching the floor in her chamber. She argued that an impeachment resolution would be partisan and divisive and that it would distract Washington from efforts to get the United States out of Iraq, which she says is more important.

In the Senate, Republican Lt. Gov. Brian Dubie had opposed the resolution, but he was absent Friday. That left Democratic Senate President Pro Tem Peter Shumlin in charge, and he immediately took up the measure.

Forty towns voted in favor of similar nonbinding impeachment resolutions at their annual town meetings in March. State lawmakers in Wisconsin and Washington have pushed for similar resolutions.

Thursday, April 12, 2007

Listen. Billy Pilgrim has become unstuck in time.

Kurt Vonnegut died yesterday. A smart, funny, and cantankerous voice has been silenced. I will miss him.

"The only proof I need for the existence of god was music." - Kurt Vonnegut

Wednesday, April 11, 2007

A good quote

"The cruelty of most people is lack of imagination, their brutality is ignorance."
~Kurt Tucholsky

Tuesday, April 10, 2007

In other words

Can you beleive this guy? If he's riffing off the cuff, well, we know he's a terrible public speaker. But what if this was written for him? Good God, he's lost in a sea of idiots! Read on!
_____________________________________________________________

In other words
War Room, Salon.com - originally posted by Tim Grieve


From the Congressional Quarterly transcript of George W. Bush's talk today at an American Legion post in Fairfax, Va.:

"This is a -- this is an unusual era in which we live, defined on September the 11th, 2001. See, that's a date that reminding us the world has changed significantly from what we thought the world was ... My attitude about the world changed, and I know the attitude about the world from a lot of folks here in America's attitude changed ...

"I vowed that day that we would go on the offense against an enemy, that the best way to defeat this enemy is to find them overseas and bring them to justice so they will not hurt the folks here at home. In other words, we don't have the luxury of hoping for the best, of sitting back and being passive in the face of this threat. In the past, we would say oceans would protect us and, therefore, what happened overseas may not matter here at home.

"That's what changed on September the 11th. What happens overseas affects the security of the United States ...

"I vowed that, 'If you harbor a terrorist, you're equally as guilty as the terrorist.' That's a doctrine.

"In order for this country to be credible, when the president says something, he must mean it. I meant it. And the Taliban found out that we meant what we said. And therefore, we ended al-Qaida's safe haven in a failed state.

"The two points I want to make is, doctrine matters; and secondly, a failed state can lead to severe consequences for the American people ...

"In other words, there was reprisal ...

"In other words, the lack of security would have created an opportunity for extremists to move in ...

"In other words, in sending troops in, it is -- I recognize that this is more than a military mission ...

"In other words, this operation is just getting started ...

"In other words, part of the effort is not only to provide security to neighborhoods, but we're constantly training Iraqis so that they can do this job ...

"So, in other words, it's a combination of providing security in neighborhoods through these joint security stations, and training ...

"I'm always amazed at the men and women who wear our uniform. Last week, before I went down to Crawford -- for a snowy Easter, I might add -- I was in California at Fort Irwin. And I had a chance to visit with some who had just come back from Iraq and some who were going over to Iraq. And it just amazes me that these young men and women know the stakes. They understand what we're doing. And they have volunteered to serve.

"We're really a remarkable country and a remarkable military. And therefore we owe it to the families and to those who wear the uniform to make sure that this remarkable group of men and women are strongly supported -- strongly supported, by the way, during their time in uniform and then after their time in uniform through the Veterans Administration.

"I tried to put this war into a historical context for them. In other words, I told them that they're laying the foundation of peace. In other words, the work we're doing today really will yield peace for a generation to come."

-- Tim Grieve

Thursday, April 05, 2007

UPDATED! The New Hampshire House has voted to allow civil unions for gay and lesbian couples.

I’m going to jump right in, before a single letter is published regarding civil unions and label every one of you sitting at your computers preparing to decry the moral degradation of New Hampshire, bigoted homophobes. Ready? Here goes:

“You are all bigoted homophobes!” And now I’ll tell you why:

This has nothing to do with the church. Are you married? Your marriage has NOTHING to do with the church other than the fact that it may have taken place within one. The legally binding document in question, the one that makes you ‘married’ and grants those rights and privileges that come with marriage, is bestowed upon you via the civil laws of New Hampshire. Without that document you are not married in the eyes of the law. So don’t go there. No one is legally compelled to be married in a church in order to be considered ‘married.’ There are those that say ‘the Bible says homosexuality is wrong!’ For those of you who don’t know, the passage in question is located within Leviticus. So what about Leviticus? You either take it as whole cloth, or dismiss it outright. So, hopefully any of you who are using the passage from Leviticus to bolster your argument better not be fans of shellfish. It says that it’s wrong in Gods eye’s to eat shellfish in Leviticus.

This has nothing to do with ‘tradition.’ There were those who thought interracial marriage was an outrage, there were those that thought woman not having the vote, and not being allowed to own property, was good and traditional. There were those that traditionally thought the mentally ill were criminals. Humans have worshiped trees, rocks, and bodies of water; we used to pay homage to Zeus and a pantheon of other deities. Traditions change, we learn, we grow up.

I don’t want to hear a single one of you bring up the ‘sanctity of marriage.’ Don’t make me laugh! Have you SEEN the divorce stats lately? If you want to protect this pie in the sky ‘sanctity’ then perhaps you should make divorce illegal! Furthermore, I better not find out that any one of you have actually been divorced yourself, you hypocritical, bigoted, homophobes! If you’ve been divorced than you are automatically disbarred from this discussion, as you obviously have no respect for the ‘sanctity’ of marriage.

There’s also the sub-topic of marriage being for the procreation of children. This one is monumentally insulting to ANY married, childless, couple. So we’re rating marriages somehow now? My marriage is better than my friends’ marriage because I have a kid and they don’t? Their marriage is somehow ‘less’ sanctified than mine? Good luck with that one.

Lastly, what’s the real problem? Did a gay or lesbian person drop you on your head when you were a kid? Do they ‘scare’ you, or do you feel that they are somehow a threat to your sexuality, or man-hood, or woman-ness? Well, guess what? YOU will not be made to go to ‘gay/lesbian’ school. YOU will not be forced to participate in, or bear witness to any civil unions against your will. YOU and your family will not be rounded up and put into vast, Disney-like, ‘breeder camps’ in order to further the species. What’s left?

You, my friend, are a bigoted homophobe.

UPDATE!
4/16/07 - Looks like the Union Leader is actually going to print this!

Wednesday, April 04, 2007

Another day in the herd...

I was flailing around yesterday trying to put into words my frustration and anger at the general publics willful ignorance and the dichotomy of people hating to be told what to do, while at the same time longing to be told what to think, when I found the following quote:

"It is infinitely easier to suffer in obedience to a human command than to accept suffering as free, responsible men." - Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Seems Herr Bonhoeffer nailed my whole essay in one sentence.

Tuesday, April 03, 2007

So who's playing politics with war funding? - By Tim Grieve

The president goes before the cameras this morning to talk about the funding packages for Iraq and Afghanistan that have made it through both houses of Congress. Only that's not how he'll be describing them.

He'll argue that by passing supplemental funding bills he won't accept -- which is to say, ones that include timelines for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq -- Congress hasn't really passed any supplemental funding measure at all. As the White House puts it in today's "Morning Update," "it has now been 57 days and counting since the president submitted his emergency war supplemental funding request to Congress. While Democrats are trying to score political points, our military is preparing to make budget cuts forced by Congress' inability to pass a responsible troop funding bill that does not force retreat, handcuff our commanders, or include billions of dollars in wasteful pork spending."

A couple of points here.

First, if the administration were budgeting for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as if they were the ongoing things that they are, it would be including more than token amounts to fund them in its annual budget requests. Having chosen instead to get war funding through a seemingly unending string of "emergency" spending requests, the administration has all but invited down-to-the-wire scrambles on funding.

And maybe more to the point, this particularly funding package isn't really as down to the wire as the White House would like to suggest. The president has been painting dire pictures of deprivations for the troops if the supplemental spending bill isn't signed into law by April 15, and he's sure to do so again today. But as the Associated Press (Ed. note: see article printed below this one)reported last week, the Pentagon has the "bookkeeping flexibility" to keep the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan going as is until at least mid-July by simply shifting around money it already has. "The steps under consideration include borrowing from training, maintenance, personnel and procurement funds set to be spent later in the budget year, which runs through September," the AP explains. "They have become routine in recent years."

Routine? That's another way of saying "that's how the Pentagon did it last year." Bush didn't sign the 2006 version of the emergency supplemental appropriations bill for Iraq and Afghanistan until July 15, 2006 -- and that's when the Republicans controlled Congress. Did the White House respond with high-profile, live-TV projections of doomsday scenarios then? Not exactly. As the AP notes, the administration's protest then was pretty much limited to a single, "little-noticed letter from the White House budget office."

-- Tim Grieve

Real deadline for Iraq war money weeks beyond Bush's deadline By Andrew Taylor - AP

WASHINGTON — The real deadline for Congress to provide more money for the war in Iraq is well beyond the April 15 deadline cited by President Bush and Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

The Pentagon can take several penny-pinching steps without harming troop readiness or other dire consequences predicted by the Bush administration until Congress actually comes up with the money.

Mid-April is about when $70 billion provided by Congress for the war will run out. After that, Pentagon accountants will move money around in the department's more than half-trillion dollar budget to make sure operations in Iraq and Afghanistan are not disrupted.

In fact, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, the Army has enough bookkeeping flexibility to pay for operations in Iraq well into July. Lawmakers and Capitol Hill staff aides view mid- to late May as the deadline for completing the war spending bill to avoid hardships.

The Army, Gates testified this past week, "will be forced to consider" altering training schedules for reserves and units to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as delays in repairing equipment and renovating barracks.

The steps under consideration include borrowing from training, maintenance, personnel and procurement funds set to be spent later in the budget year, which runs through September. They have become routine in recent years.

The money is repaid, usually with minimal disruption, when the president signs the war spending bill. But you might not realize that, given the recent rhetoric from the White House.

"If Congress does not approve the emergency funding for our troops by April the 15th, our men and women in uniform will face significant disruptions, and so will their families," Bush said March 23.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said Friday, "Every day that the Congress fails to act on this request causes our military hardship and impacts readiness."

Such criticism was scarce when the GOP-controlled Congress was tardy in providing war dollars last year. At the time, there was a warning about "serious impacts" if the money was delayed further, but it came in a little-noticed letter from the White House budget office. Congress ignored the warning and went on vacation.

Last May and June, when $66 billion in Iraq and Afghanistan money was late, the Army faced a "near disastrous 'cash flow' experience," Gen. Peter Schoomaker, the Army's chief of staff, told Congress in February.

But there was no effect on troop readiness and training missions, nor delays in rotating troops out of Iraq. Instead, the Army froze civilian hiring, fired some temporary employees, stopped nonemergency travel and delayed purchases of information technology, Schoomaker said.

That is why many lawmakers view Bush's April 15 deadline more as a target date. The private signal many are getting from the Pentagon is that mid-May is when the money will be needed to avoid disrupting activities such as training missions.

"The president is once again attempting to mislead the public and create an artificial atmosphere of anxiety," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

The Congressional Research Service report said the Pentagon has only begun to start "reprogramming" money between various accounts to make sure overseas operations are not disrupted.

The Army, which has the biggest duty in Iraq, can last into the summer by using this transfer authority. That is especially true when shifting money set to be spent in the current budget year's fourth quarter, from July through September.

"They can move china around pretty much until we get to the fourth quarter," said Gordon Adams, a former Clinton administration budget official who specializes in defense issues. "So into June, while it's painful, it's possible."

Democratic Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania, who heads a subcommittee that oversees defense spending, said the real deadline facing lawmakers is about June 1. That is in line with last year's experience, when a $94.4 billion bill providing war money did not pass Congress until early June.

Nonetheless, Democrats are a little nervous about leaving Washington on their long-scheduled Easter vacation without first delivering the $120 billion-plus Iraq spending bill.

Negotiators have not even meet to reconcile differences between House and Senate versions of the spending bill. Bush has pledged to veto the measure because it has timelines for a U.S. exit from Iraq and nonwar spending added by lawmakers.

Reid told colleagues on Thursday that aides from both parties and both the House and Senate will be working on a compromise during the congressional break.

The House, however, does not return until April 16. Even if a tentative deal is reached by then, getting it through the House and Senate and to Bush would take a week at a minimum. If Bush follows through on his veto, a new bill would have to be written and put to votes.

With that ticking clock in mind, the White House is taking a harder line with Congress now that Democrats are in control.

"Day 53 And Counting Since The President Submitted Emergency Supplemental Funding Request," read the subtitle of a White House news release Friday.

Added White House spokeswoman Perino: "The president was surprised to learn that Congress went on vacation today."

Copyright © 2007 The Seattle Times Company