The End and the Beginning
It went off like a charm. No calls for recounting, no Supreme Court intervention, no irregularities with hanging chards.
All the hype about challenges at the polling sites, all the anxiety about disenfranchisement, all the concern over a battle that will stretch out over days or weeks vanished in the face of a six point margin and one of the largest electoral wins in years.
The concession speech came literally minutes after polls closed on the west coast.
Surely, it was a grand concession speech; filled with admiration and a promise to work with the new boss.
Some who heard the concession were unable to move to the next place and like rotten losers, they booed even the mention of his name.
The acceptance speech by our President-elect, just after midnight, was a focused and sober beginning. Mr. Obama began his transition to the Presidency as he began his candidacy, clearly and intelligently. Like a President. Like someone we would be proud to have lead us and this great nation.
The end of the campaign to win the White House was transformed into the beginning of a new era of leadership, one of hope and promise.
An Obama Presidency is what this country needs now.
Strength, intelligence, political savvy, and calm, clear, thoughtful diplomacy.
The Obama administration has a lot on its plate; Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Palestine, Russia, oil, energy, education, Wall Street, Main Street, and saving the earth from the savagery of human insolence.
Our outgoing President has left Mr. Obama a mess for sure.
Let's not count the days after January 20, 2009 and evaluate Mr. Obama by how fast things are ticked off, taken care of and solved.
It is entirely possible that, as he said in his acceptance speech, it will take some time to deal with the mess left him. If we question a timeline, if we suppose that he will fail because things aren't done in a week, a month or in 100 days, we fall into the trap of being shortsighted. We elected Mr. Obama to lead us for the next four years, at least.
Let's remain confident that he will, with our collective help, bring us and our nation better days. We are in this together. Not just the blue states, all of the states, united and strong. We can do it. Yes, we can.
Friday, November 07, 2008
Thursday, November 06, 2008
A View of the World
Celebrations in Kenya, Indonesia, and across Europe. Impromptu street celebrations across the US. Well over 60% of the American voting public cast their ballots, some weeks or months ahead of time. Voting irregularities were minimal at best, non-existent in most areas.
Barack Obama is the 44th President of the United States of America.
Born of parents from different races, different cultures, different beliefs; he lived in different cultures, nations and neighborhoods. He traveled across oceans and nations as a child. He experienced languages, diversity, the richness of cultures so unlike the American experience.
Yet he remains an American model. He is someone to look up to, someone to admire, someone to strive to be like.
How wonderful it would be if, in a few years, young children add his picture to their wall, along side the sports heroes and other cultural icons of our age.
How meaningful it would be if , in the coming months and years, people truly become colorblind.
Wouldn't it be just astounding if, instead of looking at our differences and dismaying at the gaps that keep us apart, we begin to look at our similarities, and revel in our shared diversity.
Wouldn't it be just perfect if in our lifetime, we take a world view and the world takes a world view. In many ways, this world already is a small neighborhood inhabited by families that sometimes get along and sometimes don't.
In the flatness that is our world, it is just grand that this leader, our leader, brings us back into the world through his vision, experience, and intelligence.
It is about time.
Celebrations in Kenya, Indonesia, and across Europe. Impromptu street celebrations across the US. Well over 60% of the American voting public cast their ballots, some weeks or months ahead of time. Voting irregularities were minimal at best, non-existent in most areas.
Barack Obama is the 44th President of the United States of America.
Born of parents from different races, different cultures, different beliefs; he lived in different cultures, nations and neighborhoods. He traveled across oceans and nations as a child. He experienced languages, diversity, the richness of cultures so unlike the American experience.
Yet he remains an American model. He is someone to look up to, someone to admire, someone to strive to be like.
How wonderful it would be if, in a few years, young children add his picture to their wall, along side the sports heroes and other cultural icons of our age.
How meaningful it would be if , in the coming months and years, people truly become colorblind.
Wouldn't it be just astounding if, instead of looking at our differences and dismaying at the gaps that keep us apart, we begin to look at our similarities, and revel in our shared diversity.
Wouldn't it be just perfect if in our lifetime, we take a world view and the world takes a world view. In many ways, this world already is a small neighborhood inhabited by families that sometimes get along and sometimes don't.
In the flatness that is our world, it is just grand that this leader, our leader, brings us back into the world through his vision, experience, and intelligence.
It is about time.
Saturday, October 27, 2007
Hang 'em High
We have now come to this. In Connecticut this week, a homeowner was coerced to taking down a Halloween decoration. After a two hour meeting in City Hall, with the mayor and chief of police present, along with several community activists, this homeowner drove home followed by the mayor and the police chief and removed a figure that looked like a bady decomposed Freddy Kruger from the tree outside her home. It seems that "Freddy" was hanging from the tree. A noose was around his neck.
Ever since the Jena case hit the national headlines, the noose issue has been on the front burner all over the country.
In Indianapolis, a sanitation worker was suspended for having a noose in his truck. The driver said it was a Halloween decoration. The truck was festooned with other assorted ghoulish items.
The Connecticut homeowner said that every Halloween she tries to outdo the previous year's ghoulishness. Photos of the house show dark and scary figures, knives sticking out of heads, skulls and other decorations. The assorted public officials arrived at the home, assembled by the tree and watched as the homeowner removed the offending figure. She then took this decoration and sticking a long pole down its back, stuck it in a pot with some sticks and fake flames and announced to the crowd, "how about burning at the stake. Is that okay?" The church clergy assembled responded with "sure, that's ok. I don't have a problem with that."
Well, I do.
Are we, as a community, only going to respond when an outraged leader, or group, threatens us? Sometime during the two hour meeting in City Hall, one of the community activist leaders threatened the homeowner that unless she remove the hanging decoration, he would have picketers outside her home until it comes down.
It's a Halloween decoration. It is not a black man being hanged for being black.
The Department of Justice recently said, "A noose is a powerful symbol of hate and racially-motivated violence, and it can, in certain circumstances, constitute the basis for a prosecution under federal criminal civil rights law." (foxnews.com - Oct. 19, 2007)
Shouldn't we learn how to discern the difference between a holiday decoration and a racial epithet?
Shouldn't we prosecute those who, whether for publicity or 'just because I can," engage in violence against others, either through physical assault or intimidation?
Shouldn't we be mindful that we don't lose track of the forest for the trees? When we begin to saythat any depiction of a rope made to look like a noose is a racial statement, aren't we lessening ourselves as a society, giving in to mass hysteria, or worse, being bullied by those who overreact to every little thing?
I'd like us to be.
But I'm not sure we can.
Yet.
We have now come to this. In Connecticut this week, a homeowner was coerced to taking down a Halloween decoration. After a two hour meeting in City Hall, with the mayor and chief of police present, along with several community activists, this homeowner drove home followed by the mayor and the police chief and removed a figure that looked like a bady decomposed Freddy Kruger from the tree outside her home. It seems that "Freddy" was hanging from the tree. A noose was around his neck.
Ever since the Jena case hit the national headlines, the noose issue has been on the front burner all over the country.
In Indianapolis, a sanitation worker was suspended for having a noose in his truck. The driver said it was a Halloween decoration. The truck was festooned with other assorted ghoulish items.
The Connecticut homeowner said that every Halloween she tries to outdo the previous year's ghoulishness. Photos of the house show dark and scary figures, knives sticking out of heads, skulls and other decorations. The assorted public officials arrived at the home, assembled by the tree and watched as the homeowner removed the offending figure. She then took this decoration and sticking a long pole down its back, stuck it in a pot with some sticks and fake flames and announced to the crowd, "how about burning at the stake. Is that okay?" The church clergy assembled responded with "sure, that's ok. I don't have a problem with that."
Well, I do.
Are we, as a community, only going to respond when an outraged leader, or group, threatens us? Sometime during the two hour meeting in City Hall, one of the community activist leaders threatened the homeowner that unless she remove the hanging decoration, he would have picketers outside her home until it comes down.
It's a Halloween decoration. It is not a black man being hanged for being black.
The Department of Justice recently said, "A noose is a powerful symbol of hate and racially-motivated violence, and it can, in certain circumstances, constitute the basis for a prosecution under federal criminal civil rights law." (foxnews.com - Oct. 19, 2007)
Shouldn't we learn how to discern the difference between a holiday decoration and a racial epithet?
Shouldn't we prosecute those who, whether for publicity or 'just because I can," engage in violence against others, either through physical assault or intimidation?
Shouldn't we be mindful that we don't lose track of the forest for the trees? When we begin to saythat any depiction of a rope made to look like a noose is a racial statement, aren't we lessening ourselves as a society, giving in to mass hysteria, or worse, being bullied by those who overreact to every little thing?
I'd like us to be.
But I'm not sure we can.
Yet.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
The debate rages over Iraq. The President says the American people won't stand for a reduction of support forthe troops. The Congress, reflecting the will of the people in the last election, has spoken their mind and determined that it is time to end the fiasco. Does the fact that both the American people and the Congress have said that enough is enough influence our President?
Four years ago, using faulty at the least, and false at the worse, data, our President, along with his top aides, said that Iraq posed a clear and present danger to the United States. Iraq was responsible for the attack in New York and had the capability (or soon would) to deliver nuclear weapons to a target of their choosing.
The UN and many in the world, including some in our Congress and in our military, expressed caution. Indeed, knowledgeable people in government ascertained that the materials needed to prepare nuclear weapons were not "heading for Iraq" from other nations, as indicated by our President and his top aides. This last item didn't make it to the people until a spy was "outed" as retribution for the report. Nonetheless, with the faulty data, our Congress voted to attack, even though the "coaltion of the willing" nations did not even come close to being representative of the world body.
It was America's war. We brought England along for the ride, as well as several nations that held no real influence in global political circles.
Quickly, the American people realized that the Iraq war was not about world protection, nor was it about the war on terror (remember, almost all the suspects in 9/11 were Saudis, and were in the US on bona-fide visas and passports).
So, what was the response of our President? As many legislators began to realize the error of beginning this war, many began to come out in opposition to continuing this war. No apologies were needed, the legislators made their decision based on the information that their government gave them. On the left and right, Republicans and Democrats alike publicly asked hard questions about the initiation of the war, the need to establish a peace, the response of the civilian populations to the invading army. The answers were chillingly clear.
The military said from the outset that more troops were needed to go in, invade, and establish the peace. Institutions were sacked by gangs of roving thugs, militias sprouted immediately, loyalists to various sides coalesced in the vacuum created by the minimal force provided by the invading army. There was no strategy to win the "hearts and minds" of the Iraqi civilians. There was only an invasion, an occupying force, and military exercises aimed at short term targets.
This President and his top aides have read the American people well. We don't want to appear to be in opposition to such a great idea - supporting our troops in a time of war. The word-smithers have crafted the language well. To be for a pullout puts our troops in harm's way; it gives comfort to our enemy, it is un-American. You are either with us or against us.
Words are so powerful in our society. Let's look at other words.
I submit that this President has done enough damage. Over 3,000 good men and women in the US Armed Forces and countless others have died because this President believes that he alone has the right to determine the course of this country. We live in a democracy. Or I used to think so.
Four years ago, using faulty at the least, and false at the worse, data, our President, along with his top aides, said that Iraq posed a clear and present danger to the United States. Iraq was responsible for the attack in New York and had the capability (or soon would) to deliver nuclear weapons to a target of their choosing.
The UN and many in the world, including some in our Congress and in our military, expressed caution. Indeed, knowledgeable people in government ascertained that the materials needed to prepare nuclear weapons were not "heading for Iraq" from other nations, as indicated by our President and his top aides. This last item didn't make it to the people until a spy was "outed" as retribution for the report. Nonetheless, with the faulty data, our Congress voted to attack, even though the "coaltion of the willing" nations did not even come close to being representative of the world body.
It was America's war. We brought England along for the ride, as well as several nations that held no real influence in global political circles.
Quickly, the American people realized that the Iraq war was not about world protection, nor was it about the war on terror (remember, almost all the suspects in 9/11 were Saudis, and were in the US on bona-fide visas and passports).
So, what was the response of our President? As many legislators began to realize the error of beginning this war, many began to come out in opposition to continuing this war. No apologies were needed, the legislators made their decision based on the information that their government gave them. On the left and right, Republicans and Democrats alike publicly asked hard questions about the initiation of the war, the need to establish a peace, the response of the civilian populations to the invading army. The answers were chillingly clear.
The military said from the outset that more troops were needed to go in, invade, and establish the peace. Institutions were sacked by gangs of roving thugs, militias sprouted immediately, loyalists to various sides coalesced in the vacuum created by the minimal force provided by the invading army. There was no strategy to win the "hearts and minds" of the Iraqi civilians. There was only an invasion, an occupying force, and military exercises aimed at short term targets.
This President and his top aides have read the American people well. We don't want to appear to be in opposition to such a great idea - supporting our troops in a time of war. The word-smithers have crafted the language well. To be for a pullout puts our troops in harm's way; it gives comfort to our enemy, it is un-American. You are either with us or against us.
Words are so powerful in our society. Let's look at other words.
- Lying to the American people.
- Falsifying intelligence data and covering it up.
- Punishing top diplomats for finding truth that contradicts the "lie" by placing family members at risk.
- Hiding accurate funding costs in special appropriations bills so the real cost of the war is more difficult to determine.
- Providing antiquated equipment and personal safety systems to the soldiers in the field.
I submit that this President has done enough damage. Over 3,000 good men and women in the US Armed Forces and countless others have died because this President believes that he alone has the right to determine the course of this country. We live in a democracy. Or I used to think so.
Saturday, June 24, 2006
The American flag is a flag; its a symbol of the United States. So is our money, and the image of our US Capitol building. The famous statue of blind justice and our Supreme Court building are also symbols of this great democracy.
I heard a politician say that thousands have fought and died for our flag. The current Republican majority in the US Senate is distressed, as is our President, that the recent measure that would have brought the issue of a constitutional amendment to the US Constitution outlawing desecration of the flag to the voters failed by one vote.
The flag is a symbol; that's it. I can't speak for the thousands of people who have died fighting for our country, but I'm pretty sure they fought and died for the democracy and freedom we hold so dear in this country. How petty to sum up this democracy in a flag. How ridiculous to imagine that we can trounce on one freedom (the freedom to express ourselves) to preserve a symbol. I'd rather we work to preserve our freedoms, our democratic values, and our economic stability as a trust for our children. I'd like to pass on to my children a strong faith in our American ideals, formed by the framers of our Constitution and in our Declaration of Independence, achieved 240 years ago next week.
We are the oldest democracy in the world. Our core democratic ideals have withstood the test of time.
This administration, from the President to his closest advisors, has been described as the most secretive administration in history. He has also engaged in the most intrusive activities on US soil, in the name of national security.
Now, in the name of US pride, he suggests that the flag IS our democracy. He's wrong. Let's hope we, the people, don't let the erosion move into the absurd.
I heard a politician say that thousands have fought and died for our flag. The current Republican majority in the US Senate is distressed, as is our President, that the recent measure that would have brought the issue of a constitutional amendment to the US Constitution outlawing desecration of the flag to the voters failed by one vote.
The flag is a symbol; that's it. I can't speak for the thousands of people who have died fighting for our country, but I'm pretty sure they fought and died for the democracy and freedom we hold so dear in this country. How petty to sum up this democracy in a flag. How ridiculous to imagine that we can trounce on one freedom (the freedom to express ourselves) to preserve a symbol. I'd rather we work to preserve our freedoms, our democratic values, and our economic stability as a trust for our children. I'd like to pass on to my children a strong faith in our American ideals, formed by the framers of our Constitution and in our Declaration of Independence, achieved 240 years ago next week.
We are the oldest democracy in the world. Our core democratic ideals have withstood the test of time.
This administration, from the President to his closest advisors, has been described as the most secretive administration in history. He has also engaged in the most intrusive activities on US soil, in the name of national security.
Now, in the name of US pride, he suggests that the flag IS our democracy. He's wrong. Let's hope we, the people, don't let the erosion move into the absurd.
Monday, June 12, 2006
On September 11, 2005, the Israeli military removed its last soldier from the Gaza strip. On that same day, rioters moved in to the vacated cities and looted and destroyed pretty much everything. The greenhouses that had brought economic prosperity to the settlers were severely damaged. The Palestinian Authority (PA) had none on those first days. The reports received during the first few weeks were of chaos; although the PA assured the world that they were governing; that Gaza, now free of the Israeli occupiers, would be the beginning of a new Palestine.
As we know, Hamas now rules the Palestinian Authority. Hamas is the elected government in Gaza. Politics is never so easy; it is no different with the Palestinians. Mahmoud Abbas, leader of Fatah, still holds the reigns of the Presidency, having been elected directly by the people. His organization is at odds with the new government. Abbas continues to hold onto the belief that negotiations will bring about a two-state solution. Hamas is a terrorist organization and has renounced all peace plans except the one that ends with Palestine on all of Palestinian land, usually defined as 'from the river to the sea', referring to the Jordan River on the east and the Mediterranean on the west.
Now we come to the latest incident in the Gaza experiment. It has been almost a year since Israel removed Israelis from Gaza. In that time, Palestinians began to jockey for position, usually against each other. The gang leaders took the choice sea-front land. The refugee camps still exist, squalid as ever. Palestinian politicians espouse the claim that they are in control, yet there are street fights between Fatah and Hamas, military style commandos roam the streets, and the terrorists continue to rule. Rockets are fired into Israel daily, the Palestinian Authority does nothing to stop it. Terrorists funded and supported by the duly elected Palestinian government rain rockets onto civilians living in Israel.
Last week, a horrible incident. An explosion on a Gaza beach killed many civilians, many from the same family. Several were so badly injured, the Palestinian hospital sent them to Israel to be cared for in an Israeli hospital.
Israel immediately expressed regret for the loss of life (something never heard from a Palestinian official when innocent Israelis die at the hands of Palestinian terrorists) and suggested a joint investigation. The Palestinians refused. As a matter of fact, para-military Palestinians shoed up at the beach minutes after the explosion and gathered "evidence" according to independent reports. The injured victims who showed up in Israeli hospitals had no shrapnel. It was removed prior to moving them to Israel.
The world media immediately pounced upon the "regret" statements and the "investigation" reports and blamed Israel.
Ghazi Hamad, a spokesman of the Hamas government, said "They (Israel) killed innocent civilians who were enjoying their time on the beach and have nothing to do with military affairs," he said in a telephone interview. "So I believe that we the Palestinians, including Hamas, have the right to respond and defend ourselves" (reported in Haartez on June 10, 2006).
Here's an interesting fact; the Israeli military can confirm that the last artillery shell fired in the direction of a firing range (about 400 yards from the beach group) used by terrorists to fire rockets into Israel was fired a full 15 minutes before the explosion on the beach.
How can we find a partner for peace when the government in power refuses to even acknowledge the existence of Israel and refuses to cooperate in investigations? If it was an Israeli shell, wouldn't Hamas revel in showing pictures and videos of the shrapnel, proving it was an Israeli shell, as they've done countless times before?
Of course, the world media is complicit in the immediate condemnation of Israel. Maybe fences, walls, and unilaterally established borders will be the start. Maybe not. But waiting around for Hamas to recognize Israel and discuss a peaceful future is folly.
As we know, Hamas now rules the Palestinian Authority. Hamas is the elected government in Gaza. Politics is never so easy; it is no different with the Palestinians. Mahmoud Abbas, leader of Fatah, still holds the reigns of the Presidency, having been elected directly by the people. His organization is at odds with the new government. Abbas continues to hold onto the belief that negotiations will bring about a two-state solution. Hamas is a terrorist organization and has renounced all peace plans except the one that ends with Palestine on all of Palestinian land, usually defined as 'from the river to the sea', referring to the Jordan River on the east and the Mediterranean on the west.
Now we come to the latest incident in the Gaza experiment. It has been almost a year since Israel removed Israelis from Gaza. In that time, Palestinians began to jockey for position, usually against each other. The gang leaders took the choice sea-front land. The refugee camps still exist, squalid as ever. Palestinian politicians espouse the claim that they are in control, yet there are street fights between Fatah and Hamas, military style commandos roam the streets, and the terrorists continue to rule. Rockets are fired into Israel daily, the Palestinian Authority does nothing to stop it. Terrorists funded and supported by the duly elected Palestinian government rain rockets onto civilians living in Israel.
Last week, a horrible incident. An explosion on a Gaza beach killed many civilians, many from the same family. Several were so badly injured, the Palestinian hospital sent them to Israel to be cared for in an Israeli hospital.
Israel immediately expressed regret for the loss of life (something never heard from a Palestinian official when innocent Israelis die at the hands of Palestinian terrorists) and suggested a joint investigation. The Palestinians refused. As a matter of fact, para-military Palestinians shoed up at the beach minutes after the explosion and gathered "evidence" according to independent reports. The injured victims who showed up in Israeli hospitals had no shrapnel. It was removed prior to moving them to Israel.
The world media immediately pounced upon the "regret" statements and the "investigation" reports and blamed Israel.
Ghazi Hamad, a spokesman of the Hamas government, said "They (Israel) killed innocent civilians who were enjoying their time on the beach and have nothing to do with military affairs," he said in a telephone interview. "So I believe that we the Palestinians, including Hamas, have the right to respond and defend ourselves" (reported in Haartez on June 10, 2006).
Here's an interesting fact; the Israeli military can confirm that the last artillery shell fired in the direction of a firing range (about 400 yards from the beach group) used by terrorists to fire rockets into Israel was fired a full 15 minutes before the explosion on the beach.
How can we find a partner for peace when the government in power refuses to even acknowledge the existence of Israel and refuses to cooperate in investigations? If it was an Israeli shell, wouldn't Hamas revel in showing pictures and videos of the shrapnel, proving it was an Israeli shell, as they've done countless times before?
Of course, the world media is complicit in the immediate condemnation of Israel. Maybe fences, walls, and unilaterally established borders will be the start. Maybe not. But waiting around for Hamas to recognize Israel and discuss a peaceful future is folly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
