Governor Gregoire

It's official. At least we think so. Christine Gregoire has been pronounced Governor-Elect of the State of Washington. Republicans are no doubt feeling that their candidate has been robbed. Democrats are jubilant. Any thinking person knows that yes, Dino, this has been a "mess". However, no matter which candidate won, at least half of the state would be seeing this as an illegitimate and unfair election.

It was close, but the laws of the State of Washington have been followed. The only thing left for Mr. Rossi to do is to appeal the results in court or before the legislature. Read up on exactly what happened. I had a good link in a previous posting and today's Seattle Times had a good Q & A article to explain things.

I think that becoming the governor of the State of Washington in 2004 has to be a lousy job. The State has a huge budget deficit, nobody wants new taxes, and most voters are expecting more out of our government. The people of the state are being realistic. At least when Ron Sims ran for the Democratic nomination earlier this year, he talked frankly about the need to overhaul the State's tax system. Neither Rossi nor Gregoire seem to have the nerve to make the voters swallow the bitter medicine that will be needed to face up to our State's needs.

Read up on this and tell me what you think.

South Asia Tsunami Disaster

The news and the images of the disaster victims from Sri Lanka, India, Malaysia, and the other affected nations make our problems seem small by comparison. I spent some time looking at the images and reading stories about this last night with my wife at the New York Times site. There are some good graphics and moving images along with the news stories. It is very sad and it made us want to do what we could to help. As I write this, the number of dead is being reported at 70,000 and still climbing.

Unfortunately the only thing most of us can do now is to contribute money to help. There are a lot of good organizations out there helping these victims. If you or someone you know wants to make a donation, click here to see a list of groups accepting donations.

Governor Gregoire?

Well, I'm not so sure it is over yet, but for now, the official results of the gubernatorial election say that Christine Gregoire defeated Dino Rossi by 130 votes. The Sunday edition of the Seattle Times did a good job of trying to explain how we got to this point and what might happen next.

After considering what has happened, do you think the election is over? Do you think Gregoire is the deserving winner? Was the recount fair or at least as fair as possible? These are important questions...

The Land that Due Process Forgot

Guantanamo Bay has become a national embarassment. Many of us were uncomfortable with the detention of "enemy combatants" from the very beginning. A case is making its way through the justice system that may deal another blow to the Bush Administration's scheme of hiding these people from any accountable justice system.

The Administration's strategy and rationale are simple: hold these 550 prisoners somewhere that none of the rules apply. They claim that the Geneva Conventions don't apply because they are not "prisoners of war". The U.S. judicial branch has no jurisdiction because they are not U.S. citizens being held on U.S. soil. So, the president as commander-in-chief, gets to make the rules about how they are treated.

Every American should be outraged for two reasons: 1) this subverts the very spirit of the rule of law, a cherished principle of our government that we have been trying to encourage the world community to commit to ever since the days of Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points; 2) it is a dangerous violation of our system of checks and balances. The presidency was never meant to run wild with due process and make its own rules. Any immediate threat that might justify emergency powers had abated. The Supreme Court was correct in reigning in the President's powers in the cases decided in June regarding U.S. citizens being held (Hamdi v. Rumsfeld). The courts may make similar rulings with regard to foreigners soon.

We as citizens should demand the balance of power between the branches be restored.

Christmas & the First Amendment

The yearly battle over how to celebrate the holidays in public schools has resurfaced again this year against the backdrop of the recent election that highlighted the divide in the United States over moral issues and the place of religion in public life. The Christian Science Monitor published an interesting article today on the subject of how difficult the issue has become for some schools.

Part of the problem of course is that rather than understand the law, many administrators and teachers are quick to ban anything that might be controversial. (I submit that this is often the case with other school issues as well.) This year we saw controversies over the "pagan holiday" of Halloween. The Washington Post also published an article about Christian groups filing lawsuits to have religious themes reintroduced into school celebrations of the winter holiday season.

What do you think? Have schools been appropriate in observing Christmas and abiding by the First Amendment or have they swung too far to one side or another? I used my "Charlie Brown Christmas" t-shirt as a discussion starter in one of my classes last week.

What should I say to my students as they leave for break? Happy Hannukah? Merry Christmas? Happy New Year? Happy Holidays? Wonderful Winter Break? Be of Good Cheer for Whatever Reason You Might Have For Being of Good Cheer?

Rumsfeld-Piercing Questions

Our good friend Donald Rumsfeld is staying around for the second term at the request of President Bush. Is this bad for our troops? Rumsfeld was one of the big proponents of a smaller, lighter, and quicker military which proved to be good for invading a country, but really bad at occupying and subduing one. As soldiers keep dying, the misinformation from the Bush administration keeps coming.

I hope you all heard the exchange at last week's press conference in Kuwait. Rumsfeld was asked point-blank by soldiers about the lack of armor on Humvees with one reservist claiming that they had to go digging through local land-fills to find armor for their vehicles. (Click here to watch the clip.)

Rumsfeld's answer that the Army couldn't produce the vehicles any faster has proven to be quite misleading and suddenly the military is finding a way to produce 100 more armor plated Humvees per month. All politics aside, does anyone in the United States really believe the Bush administration is not lying to us about the war? Should Rumsfeld resign over this? Should Bush fire him? John McCain and former General Schwarzkopf blasted Rumsfeld on national T.V. over the weekend. What do you think about this?

If you want to read a good rant on this issue, check out the guest column in yesterday's Seattle Times by a local teacher and Vietnam veteran Steven Simpson.

More human rights concerns

The government of China just doesn't get it. It really is shocking to me to see how stubbornly this government clings to power by suppressing the free exchange of ideas. Many of you are too young to remember the Tiananmen Square uprising, but the memories of the 1989 protests by students who wanted more democracy in China still haunt me. They were crushed by the Chinese military and hundreds died in pursuit of liberty.

Today we get news, that is so commonplace that it doesn't get many headlines. Three Chinese intellectuals who have been critical of the government in their writings (mostly on the internet) have been jailed. Although it is believed that they were released after the police copied everything on their computer hard drives, it is said that these detentions are indications of a new crack-down in China on those who favor democratic reforms.

They are brave people. Here is how they are described by the Washington Post:

The detained dissidents -- Yu Jie, 31, an essayist who once called on the party
to remove Mao Zedong's embalmed body from public display; Liu Xiaobo, 49, a
well-known writer who has already been jailed three times for criticizing the
party; and Zhang Zuhua, 48, an author and political theorist -- represent the
more daring end of a spectrum of prominent intellectuals who favor greater
political openness in the country and have been under official pressure in
recent weeks.

I found the word's of Yu's wife to be quite defiant in her bravery:

Reached by phone Monday night, Yu's wife, Liu Min, said police told her
that her husband was "suspected of endangering state security." The officers did
not provide details, she said, but one said she should have stopped her husband
"from writing essays on the Internet."
She also said police were preventing her from leaving her home and had ordered her not to tell "outsiders" about her husband's arrest. "They severely threatened me, but I'm not scared. I have to save my husband," she said.

International Human Rights Day!

December 10th is Human Rights Day!

Shame on me for not talking about this in class this week!

Oh well, my mind is getting older and more feeble with each passing day. So, at least here on my blog, let us honor and rededicate ourselves to the cause of human rights. December 10th commemorates the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations in 1948.

I encourage everyone to visit Amnesty International's website and write a letter or sign an online petition on behalf of human rights. Also, the more you know about rights, and the more you talk to others about them, the more awareness we create. So read something about rights, or is you are feeling kinda brain-dead, simply visit UNICEF's site that has posted it's top cartoons about the rights of children.

As we recognize this day, human rights issues are very much in the news. For one, the Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded to Wangari Maathai today. Her environmental and political actions are inspiring.

At the other end of the spectrum we have Zimbabwe's President Mugabe banning human rights groups from his country, and the continuing crisis in the Darfur region of the Sudan.

Don't let the day go by without doing something!

Some American Heroes

There are a lot of American heroes, but a few that stand pretty tall in my book are Kristen Breitweiser, Beverly Eckert, Mary Fetchet, and Carol Ashley. Their husbands were killed in the 9-11 attacks and have fought tenaciously to get the 9-11 Commission up and running and a reform bill enacted.

Over the last two years, I've seen these women on T.V. and radio a number of times and I've been so impressed by their intelligence and their commitment to turn their grief into action to make the United States a safer and better place. Breitweiser and Eckert were interviewed this morning on NBC, and you can access the video by visiting MSNBC's news video page on the internet. I highly suggest watching it for some insight into the power of citizen action. (From their homepage, select "News Video" from the menu on the left side. From there open up the "News" menu on the video page, and double click on the video clip titled "9/11 kin react to the bill". If you don't have a high speed connection, it might be difficult.) Fetchet and Ashley are featured in a story by the Washington Post.

I've gotten to read several analyses of the bill in the last few hours, and I think it is a good first step, but a lot of important measures that could be taken were stripped out of the bill. As for the new "Director of National Intelligence", I think it is only going to work if Bush appoints someone who will stand up and tell him the truth, not just what he wants to hear. I still fear that "W" only hears what he wants to hear, and that has been his achilles heel.

For more information, NPR has a "primer" on the bill, giving some background. They also have an audio report that addresses some of the civil liberites concerns some folks have with this bill. Check it out. "We the People" is all about this stuff!

Intelligence Bill Finally Passes

It has been a long and winding road for the intelligence bill that finally passed Congress.

It is a very interesting story. The best part, of course, started with ordinary citizens. Of course, these ordinary citizens were the families of the September 11th victims. They demanded that the government do something to investigate attacks and whether the government could have done something to prevent them. President Bush and many in Congress ignored their pleas for a long time and went on the record as being against the creation of the commission.

To make a long story short, these people went to their representatives in Washington, D.C. and made sure that their voices got heard. Now granted, since they were the families of 9/11 victims, they probably got more attention than most of us would get, but they still had to fight hard and learn the system to get the government to move on their requests.

The 9/11 Commission Hearings were fascinating and their report that was made public this summer was a best-seller. Not all of their recommendations have been included in this bill.

My big complaint is that again, the media has done a poor job of covering this story. I've had a busy last week or so, and I haven't had the time to dig deeply into what this bill is all about. In following the news, the way most people do, all I've been able to learn is that there was a lot of in-fighting among Republicans on this bill. There were, if fact enough votes to pass the bill (many Democrats supported it along with most Republicans) but but House Speaker Dennis Hastert wouldn't bring it forward for a vote without the support of two key Republican Committee Chairs.

But that shouldn't be the part of the story that gets most of the coverage. In the short amount of time I had to learn about this bill, most of what the media gave me was the politics of the story, not the facts and information about what the bill will do. Those are my real concerns. Will the intelligence reform bill make the U.S. safer?

In a nutshell, here is what I know:
1. The bill will create a new cabinet level position. This "Director of Intelligence" will be responsible for coordinating all of the 15 government agencies that collect intelligence.
2. The Pentagon opposed parts of the bill because they believed it took away some of their authority to collect and use intelligence data, and might harm military efforts.
3. Two well-meaning Republican members of the House frustrated the President and Republican leaders of the Congress by refusing to compromise on certain provisions before today. (One of them is Rep. Duncan Hunter from CA; he actually has a son serving in the military in Iraq.)

Is this bill a good idea? I don't know and it frustrates me. The original proposal by the 9/11 committee seemed like a wise recommendation, but I can't tell you, at this point, what Congress has done to their recommendations in this bill.

The press needs to do a better job of informing the public on crucial details, and stop focusing on all the political drama.

Only 6 Days Till the Election!

Yes, that's right. In six days the Electors selected to this year's Electoral College will be casting their votes for President and Vice-President.

I still have my Kerry/Edwards bumper stickers on both cars. Do you think it will help to push the Dems over the top?

PS - Yesterday Ohio certified their election results - Bush won by almost 120,000 votes; there are still a few legal challenges pending regarding voting irregularities. The conventional wisdom is that those challenges won't get too far.

Bush picks Jesse "The Body" Ventura as the new Director of Homeland Security! (Well, actually he is the former police commissioner of N.Y., Bernard Kerik, but there is a resemblance, eh?)

Torture at Guantanamo Bay

It is very hard for me to try to be even-handed on this one folks. I was disappointed and sickened by what the International Red Cross has been discovering at our prison for "enemy combatants" at Guantanamo Bay. Again, my country is violating some its most basic principles in order to fight the "war on terror". We are better than this. We don't need to torture people to bring terrorists to justice. In fact, our violations of human rights and international laws create more hatred for the United States.

What is this all about? In case you missed it, some concerned individuals leaked to the press a report that the International Red Cross made to our government about what has been going on with the 550 or so prisoners we are still holding in Guantanmo Bay Cuba. According to the New reports, "the American military has intentionally used psychological and sometimes physical coercion 'tantamount to torture' on prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba."

While not the worst forms of torture imaginable, the methods used have been classified as such. According to the Times, the Red Cross made these findings in June and that U.S. interrogators "had found a system devised to break the will of the prisoners at Guantánamo, who now number about 550, and make them wholly dependent on their interrogators through 'humiliating acts, solitary confinement, temperature extremes, use of forced positions.' Investigators said that the methods used were increasingly 'more refined and repressive' than learned about on previous visits."

Some of the tactics were mentioned in the report. "It said that in addition to the exposure to loud and persistent noise and music and to prolonged cold, detainees were subjected to "some beatings."

A final disheartening aspect of the report is that medical professionals seem to have been a part of the ill-treatment:

also asserted that some doctors and other medical workers at Guantánamo were
participating in planning for interrogations, in what the report called "a flagrant violation of medical ethics."
Doctors and medical personnel conveyed information about prisoners' mental health and vulnerabilities to interrogators, the report said, sometimes directly, but usually through a group called the Behavioral Science Consultation Team, or B.S.C.T. The team, known informally as Biscuit, is composed of psychologists and psychological workers who advise the interrogators, the report said.

How can a society based on due process protections allow our government to do these things? Share your thoughts with me.

FBI Reports More Than 7,400 Hate Crimes

How far does this society have left to go to achieve the dream of equality? That is a good subject for debate. Affirmative action remains a hot topic, and the direction of the civil rights movement decades after its major achievements is unclear. However this news item should give us some poise. According to an article by the Associated Press:

Over 7,400 hate crime incidents occurred nationwide last year, more than half of
them motivated by racial prejudice most often against black people, the FBI
reported Monday.
Hate crimes motivated by anti-black racial bias totaled 2,548 in 2003, more than double such crimes against all other racial groups combined. There were 3,150 black victims in these cases, including four who were murdered, according to the annual FBI report.

Some other information included in the article shows that African-Americans are not the only targets:

The report shows that crimes categorized as anti-Islamic remained at the about
same level in 2003 - 149 crimes - as the year before. There had been a spike in
such crimes immediately after the 2001 terror attacks, helping drive the overall
hate crime number much higher that year.
By far the most hate crimes based on religion were directed at Jews, with 927 incidents in 2003, about the same as in 2002. The report also found more than 1,200 hate crimes based on sexual orientation, including 783 against male homosexuals. That included six murders.

You can read this article at the following link:
http://news.findlaw.com/ap_stories/a/w/1152/11-22-2004/20041122084503_13.html

Especially for Jon Maus

I couldn't help but think of you when I saw this Jon. And just in case anyone is wondering, I don't think Atkins has a prayer of winning this case.

Atkins Diet Company “Pleads First Amendment,” Seeking Protection from Heart Disease Claim in Florida Court

Atkins Asks Court to Find Life-Threatening Diet Advice Protected Under Free Speech Guarantees; Judge May Rule Next Week

West Palm Beach, FL—Rebuffed in its first attempt last month to have a Florida court throw out a landmark personal injury lawsuit challenging the safety of the controversial Atkins Diet, Atkins Nutritionals has submitted a motion arguing that “the ideas and information in a generally circulated self-help book and an associated website are fully protected by the First Amendment even if they cause harm to some readers,” even speech with potentially life-threatening consequences.

Atkins contends that the First Amendment permits it to make false and misleading statements in the course of its business, without incurring liability to its customers. But Dan Kinburn, Gorran’s attorney and senior counsel for the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, notes First Amendment free speech guarantees do not apply in cases of false speech. “You can’t yell ‘fire’ in a crowded theater, you can’t run false ads in magazines, and you can’t tell people anxious to solve a health problem that it’s safe to follow a dangerous diet,” he says.

http://www.pcrm.org/news/update041119.html

If you are in the mood for a rant...

...and won't be insulted by some jabs at pro basketball players, humvee owners, Congressional Republicans, and American selfishness you may want to take a look at an op/ed piece written by Thomas Friedman for the New York Times last week. It has been making the rounds on the internet and I think a lot of people shared his outrage.

It's a good piece of writing and I'd say I agree with him about 75 - 80%. Let me know what you think.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/25/opinion/25friedman.html?oref=login

Medical Marijuana

The Supreme Court finally is going to hear a case on this issue tomorrow morning. The issue boils down to this. Does the federal law banning marijuana as a legal drug trump the laws in states such as Washington and California where it has been legalized for medicinal purposes?

The following article is very good. It goes into all of the Constitutional issues involved and the relevant case law. I love that kind of stuff! Plus it has a cool map of which states have acted on this issue. Read it and tell me what you think of this issue.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/1129/p02s01-usju.html

For some reason, I love that the case is named Ashcroft v. Raich. I guess it is the possibility of his name being associated with losing something.

Challenges to Democracy - Part 3

Iraq:

Elections are scheduled for January 30th. George W. Bush and interim Prime Minister Aiyad Allawi have insisted that the election will take place on that date.

However, there are a significant number of individuals and groups calling for a delay in the elections because of the on-going violence. They say that many voters will be too afraid to go to the polls, and important towns and cities will be left out of the process.

The answer from Allawi, seen in some parts of Iraq as a pawn of the Bush administration, is that they will not give in to what the insurgents want: a disruption of the process leading Iraq back to independence.

Is it better to have an election sooner, that may leave significant numbers of people out of the vote and risk more lives being lost; or is it more important to forge on ahead and not let the insurgency feel they are succeeding in their attempts at disrupting the process. This is a tough question. What do you think?

Check out more info about this first at:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/1129/p01s02-woiq.html

Challenges to Democracy - Part 2

Ukraine:

As I mentioned in a blog below, many Ukranians are up in arms over the outcome of last weekend's Presidential election. It appears that there was considerable vote fraud, and Ukranians have been bravely protesting the results in the streets. What makes this election especially interesting to the United States is that the Kremlin (Russian President Vladimir Putin) was backing the candidate who won the election. Influence over the Ukraine (which was formerly a part of the USSR) is considered very important to Russia, both politically and economically. Our Secretary of State, Colin Powell, has called the results of the election "unacceptable". How will this all impact our relationship with Russia?

A few details:

The election results were declared official on Monday

Numerous election monitors have reported widespread voting fraud and irregularities

On Thursday, Ukraine's Supreme Court has put publication of the election results on hold until the allegations of fraud and abuse can be investigated.

Today, the Parliament called the vote an inaccurate representation of the will of the people and the results invalid. (But parliament doesn't actually have the authority to overturn the results of the vote.)

Some in the country are calling for the entire election to be redone. Avoiding violence is a concern.

Details are all over the news, including the following link:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6374820/

Challenges to Democracy - Part 1

Democracy is a great system, but we no it is not perfect. That is why so many of the principles constitutionalism, natural rights, and republicanism are so important. There are three examples of the news this weekend that show some of the difficulties democracy can face.

Washington State: Getting an accurate vote count is difficult. The recount for our governor has put Dino Rossi ahead by 42 votes. By my calculation that is 42 votes out of 2,808,342 votes cast. It is truly mind blowing. Gregoire's campaign now is calling for a hand recount, which they will have to pay for under state law, and that means that we won't have a winner declared until sometime around Christmas.

Rossi won the first count by 261. It seems to me with almost 3 million votes to count, that a hand recount will probably result in yet a different result. If Rossi wins, then I think Gregoire will have no choice but to concede the election. If Gregoire comes out on top in the hand recount, Rossi will undoubtedly take action demanding the first tallies be recognized as the legitimate.

What are the consequences of such a close elections? Besides the issue of who the actual governor will be, what are the positive and negative impacts this election will have on political participation in this state?

Thursday's papers had lots of info on the election. If you want to access an it on the web try the link below.

http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=recount25m&date=20041125&query=Rossi%2C+Recount

Laws and Sausages

No one wants to take the blame for the mess Congress got itself into this week. Former German Prime Minister Otto Von Bismark once remarked that "Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made." Well, it is still true.

Congress passed a $388 billion omnibus appropriations bill a few days ago that no one had time to read. It was over 3,000 pages long and included an outrageous provision that would have allowed members of a Congressional committee to pry into anyone's IRS records. They say that they are going to undo that little invasion of privacy in a special session, but a closer look at the bill shows that it had a lot of other things in it that people should be upset about. It spent money on all sorts of things to make individual members of Congress look good to their constituents back home. According to the New York Times, the bill is "a cornucopia full of money designated for specific highway projects, locks and dams, parks, libraries, airports, museums, zoos, hospitals, schools and universities in every corner of the country." Here is a sample of a few of the goodies that members of Congress snuck into the bill to make the people in their home states and districts happy:

In earmarking money, Congress left little to chance - or to the judgment of
officials in the executive branch of the government. It set forth long lists of
specific projects to be financed with federal money. One list itemizes 1,032
economic and community development projects. Some of the grants are relatively
small: $20,000 for a jail in Winston County, Ala., and $25,000 for a park in
Chambersburg, Pa.

Another part of the bill sets aside $15,000 for
cameras to be installed in police cars in Berryville, Va., and a similar amount
for the Police Department of West Buechel, Ky.

Critics of such local
projects sometimes refer to them as pork barrel spending, or simply pork. The
2005 spending bill includes $1 million for the Missouri Pork Producers
Federation, to see if hog waste can be used as a source of energy.

The
bill also includes $1 million for seafood marketing efforts in Alaska, $269,000
for harvesting seafood in Mississippi, $200,000 for a new seafood plant on the
coast of Oregon, $4 million for "shrimp aquaculture" in seven states and
$443,000 for research to develop "baby food containing salmon," plus $236,000
for blueberry research in Maine and $133,000 for maple research in Vermont.

This process has gone on for years and it needs to be fixed. The problem is that too many members of Congress help themselves at the expense of the tax paying public. They wait until the end of the year and take numerous bills that haven't passed and roll them all up into one piece of legislation that is needed to keep the government running. There is very little accountability in the system. It is too bad that this issue was given almost no attention in the recent elections.

Happy Thanksgiving! At the Coraggio house, instead of turkey and football, it will be potatoes and Halo! Hope you all enjoy the holiday!

This coulda been us on November 3rd! Many Ukranians are outraged by the election fraud which they believe allowed Prime Minister Viktor Yanukovich to be re-elected. International observers have agreed. The winner is the guy Russia's President Putin is backing, so I don't think these people have a "Democrats chance in Ohio" of getting what they want. 

How we win State...

This post is mainly for my current 12th grade WTP class, but if anyone else has some suggestions, please feel free to post your comments.

During WTP class on Friday, many of you weren't there, but those of us who were talked about how we go about winning State. We know that we are on track, but there lies a lot of hard work ahead. We will do it though if we not only work hard, but work smart. So, in the best tradition of civic discourse, I'd like to have your input on how we do this.

Based on my years of teaching/coaching teams, I have some ideas. Please comment here and give me your feedback. Do you have other ideas? Things you think will or will not work? Post your ideas!

First, I think there are a few important things I can do:

1. Be hard on all of you in terms of getting those speeches written and revised BEFORE winter break. January 13th seems like it is far away right now, but it isn't with the goal that we have.

2. Require that each group meet with me outside of class once a week. I have found this time to be very valuable – fewer distractions – I can help with more specific needs. It is kind of hard to find that much time, but I think it is worthwhile.

3. Drill you with follow-up questions as much as possible. It is the most important practice we can do.

4. Schedule some good guest speakers & helpers to work with you. Brian Snure has already told me that he would like to work with one or two of the groups on Friday afternoons, which is when we have free time. I think he’d be a good resource. I’ve also already booked Julia Patterson, Dave Upthegrove, and Congressman Adam Smith to visit with you in during December. I’m trying to get some people that specialize in Constitutional law to visit with us as well. Shay Schual-Berke can also visit. Health care is her big issue (she was a doctor) and I think she can help us understand that issue.

5. Put together some events like our District Qualifier to help us practice. Maybe some of you know a group that would like to hear our presentations. I’d like to do one before winter break and one after winter break.

What we do?

Stay on top of the news and current events. Learn about important issues that you may not completely understand.

Read important historical texts. There are some readings, court cases, speeches that are important for all of us to cover that we haven’t yet. Federalist papers, anti-Federalist papers, de Tocqueville, M. L. King and others are required reading for this kind of subject.

I think Tom Ellington had two good ideas he shared with us in October:
a) each unit create an extensive “things to know” list from their unit that they share with everyone else in the class
b) each unit creates a timeline of important events, court cases, laws, etc. that are important to your unit.
I think that these can kind of be done together to save some time.

Finding someway not to forget everything over winter break and keep moving forward. Some of us will be out of town and some will be here. Tahoma has usually scheduled regular practice sessions over winter break.

Not burning out and having fun with each other as we take on this challenge. Maybe we can find some ways to have fun and get rid of some stress together.

Let me know what you think. I’m very excited about the time between now and January 13th. I’m so impressed with how much you have learned and accomplished. I’m awe-struck at the thought of how good you guys can be.

Keep the faith!

My Class Will Win State!

I know that the State Competition for We the People is not until January 13th, but after the performance by my class on Wednesday evening at the District Qualifier, I can say with confidence that my class will win the State Competition this year.

They are a great group of students, they are well on their way, and I sense the motivation and desire in them to do what is necessary to win.

I'm looking forward to working with them!

Mess with Texas!

That is what the U.S. Supreme Court did today! The case was Smith v. Texas.

The judicial system by which the state of Texas executes criminals is an embarassment to the entire nation. According to the New York Times, "Of the 943 executions in the country since 1976, Texas has carried out 335, more than the next six states combined. It has 457 people on death row, second to the 635 in California, which has conducted 10 executions."

I have been passionately opposed to the death penalty from the time I was a very young person, and I've only become more convinced that it is a barbaric practice that needs to be abolished if we are to develop a civilized society that doesn't teach its children that killing is the answer.

BUT, you don't have to be opposed to the death penalty to be appalled at what has been going on in Texas for decades.

The Times article states, "The errors committed by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals in upholding the death sentence of LaRoyce L. Smith were so clear to a majority of the Supreme Court that the justices decided the case in the inmate's favor on the basis of the briefs, without hearing arguments."

According to an AP report, in this case, Smith v. Texas, "The Supreme Court on Monday overturned the death sentence of a convicted Texas killer because jurors in his trial did not consider his learning disability and other evidence."

"There is no question that a jury might well have considered (Smith's) IQ scores and history of participation in special-education classes as a reason to impose a sentence more lenient than death," the court wrote in Monday's decision.

The Supreme Court went on to reprimand the Texas high court according to the Times:

The justices said Monday that the Texas appeals court ignored problems the Supreme Court had already identified and that it should have known, when it affirmed the sentence last April, that the jury instructions made the death sentence unconstitutional. The state court "erroneously relied on a test we never countenanced and now have unequivocally rejected," the justices said.

If that isn't enough to convince you something is seriously wrong in Texas, the AP report concludes with this:

Earlier this year, justices lifted inmate Delma Banks' death sentence and delivered a strong rebuke of Texas officials and lower courts for failing to ensure he received a fair trial. The court said prosecutors hid key information that might have helped Banks' case.

And last year, the court sided with a black Texas death row inmate, Thomas Miller-El, who claimed prosecutors in Dallas County stacked his jury with whites. The Miller-El case will be reviewed by justices for the second time next month because an appeals court again found that he should face the death penalty.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/16/politics/16scotus.html

http://news.findlaw.com/ap_stories/a/w/1154/11-15-2004/20041115091501_06.html

AAAAHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!

Why is there never enough time to do everything?!? Why are there so many papers left to grade? Why can't I survive on two hours of sleep? Why won't Ashcroft shut up and leave yet?

All of these questions have been bothering me this weekend.

I have an awesome We the People class this year

I do. Today they made a presentation in front of the Rotary Club as a warm up for the 9th Congressional District "Competition". (We have no challengers again this year.) My class is making excellent progress, and a number of people familiar with the program have commented to me that they have an excellent chance of making a run at the State Championship.

I wonder -- Would some of you who have been in the program in past years would be interested in helping them as they prepare, or simply offer them advice via this blog?

Our District Competition is Wednesday evening, Nov. 17th at 7:00 in the MRHS library.

Our State Competition will be January 13, during the day in Olympia.

Bye, Bye Ashcroft

As you may have heard by now, Attorney General John Ashcroft is resigning. He made himself into one of the most controversial members of the Bush Administration, and a favorite target of the left.

With this turn of events it is an excellent time to review the debate over the Patriot Act. Any of the articles out there about Ashcroft and his legacy would be a good start. It is vital that ALL of my WTP students understand the controversy over the Patriot Act.

Why was Ashcroft such a lightening rod for criticism of the Bush administration? In case any of you have forgotten why, let me sum it up for you. Ashcroft had a leading role in crafting the Patriot Act and zealously used it to prosecute the war on terrorists here at home. You can certainly make one very strong argument in favor of his leadership of the justice department, and he made it in announcing his retirement: there have been no new terrorist attacks on U.S. soil since Sept. 11, 2001.

However, at what cost? Ashcrofts critics point out that he severely limited civil liberties and engaged in unfair profiling of Arab and Muslims living in the U.S. A great place to start with understanding these criticisms is with an interview Newsweek has on their website. Constitutional scholar David Cole from Georgetown University calls Ashcroft the worst Attorney General in American history. Read his criticisms carefully. You can find them at:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6454887/site/newsweek/

Ashcroft was also controversial because of his combative style. In December of 2001 he lashed out at those who raised concerns over civil liberties and questioned their patriotism during testimony before a Congressional committee.

"To those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my
message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorists for they erode our unity and
diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America's enemies and pause to
America's friends.”

Just this past summer he ridiculed librarians who had concerns over the loss of privacy for patrons' records.

So, I'm happy he is gone, but unfortunately Bush has not used this occasion to reach out to those of us in "blue" America by picking a moderate to replace Ashcroft. Nominee Alberto Gonzales is equally fervent in his approach to fighting terror suspects at home. More on him another time.

17 Reasons

Thanks to Yosef for posting Michael Moore's "17 Reasons Not to Slit Your Wrists". (It is one of the 9 comments under the smiling picture of Bush.)

I appreciate you and the rest of the Kerry supporters sharing your grief. I, too, had some pretty depressed hours over the past few days. But hey, those of you Bush supporters, feel free to weigh in here! Maybe you can convince some of us that it really won't be so bad.

I mean, Ashcroft seems to be on his way out. That's a good start!

Red and Blue America, county by county. USA today has a pretty cool section with interactive election maps. http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/front.htm?POE=HFQLCAMP 

He is laughing at my pain... 

Bush receives Kerry's concession call. 

Can we all just get along?

Well.

Well, well, well.

The election is over and the guy I wanted to win has conceeded. Bush and Kerry both spoke today and eloquently called for the people of the nation to come together in a spirit of unity.

Those were nice words, but I'm not so sure it is going to happen that way. I have a lot of thoughts on these issues, but first, what do you think? Will Bush reach out to Democrats? Will Democrats give him a second chance? Or has the bitterness and the harsh rhetoric of the past year left scars that will not heal anytime soon?

(I hope you all remember that this all goes back to those ideas of general welfare and civic virtue. Remember that many of the Framers feared diversity and nation full of factions would poison the spirit of republicanism!)

Indecision 2004

I think Jon Stewart and the Daily Show got this one right. It looks good for Bush, but Kerry still has a slim chance of pulling out a victory in Ohio.

I need to go to bed. Nothing will be decided soon.

One last interesting observation - more voters (according to exit polls) cited cultural issues as their main concern in this election. More than the Iraq War, more than terrorism, more than the economy. Why do these cultural issues stir such passion?

A nail-biter!

Wow. This is close. I'm very nervous about the results. Ohio and Florida are still the big prizes. I'm getting a feeling they are starting to look like they might go to Bush. At least NBC has put Washington and Oregon in the Kerry column.

Patty Murray has been declared the winner. I'm happy for her and for our state. I think she has been a great member of Congress.

So far things look good for Rossi. Ultimately, I voted for Gregoire because she was making stronger statements about supporting teachers and the schools, but I can live with Rossi. I don't think it is going to make a lot of difference which one wins. I think the budget is so tight in our state that they will have few choices about how they govern.

Back to the T.V.!!!

Say it isn't so Florida!

They have to count 1.6 million absentee ballots yet!

Electronic voting machines are failing in southwestern Florida. They are trying to get software guys to fix this as I write. There is no paper trail for these votes! I say we give up the war in Iraq and attack Florida if they screw this up again!

Still to close to call

No surprises yet - Bush is winning where he is supposed to, Kerry is winning where he is supposed to and Coraggio just got finished voting for a lot of Democrats! I didn't even have to wait! The poll workers have said it is very busy, and our state is looking at a record turnout of almost 85%.

The voter turnout among minorities in Florida is encouraging for Kerry. Bush is looking very strong in Michigan - it used to be a Democratic strong-hold.

Keep your eye on these states - also, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

And this is interesting:

Keith Olbermann of MSNBC is reporting that there is concern at the White House tonight....
"Discouragement" at the White House. That’s the term used by NBC’s White House Correspondent David Gregory in his 7:05 PM report, describing the reaction of President Bush’s “top advisors” in a war room within the war room at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. David’s sources report a “tense” set of advisors, who have already determined an unwanted “tightness in the race,” not unlike what they saw in the waning days of the 2000 Gore-Bush vote.


How do you think this will turn out?????

First Results

They are already projecting winners in several states and Bush is leading 39-3 in the electoral vote!

Of course none of these states are surprises, and the old South of the Confederacy is expected to go for Bush.

I don't like that they are calling any states before we on the west coast get to vote! The networks had pledged not to do this a few years ago, but I guess the competition in the news biz is too great.

Ohio closed its polls, but they are still open for voters who haven't gotten in. I finally get to vote. Even though I'm a die-hard democrat it did my heart good to see 5 or 6 of my students out on Marine View Drive waving signs in the cold and the rain for Bush. You ARE good Americans!

Almost votin' time!

Ok, school is over and I can't wait to get to the polls. I am surprised how nervous this election is making me. First I've got Amnesty International though.

It is very cool that a bunch of students are doing last minute electioneering. My current WTP class is split half and half between Dems and Reps. A lot of people are going out to wave signs. Others are doing some canvassing.

It is so exciting that so many people are voting. I do hope I don't have to stand in line forever.

A day at the polls

Well, the big day is here and it already looks like we will in fact have a record turnout for this election. I’m not going to make it to the polls until after school today. What has been your experience out there? Long lines? Anything unusual? Let me know.

It was really cool reading the posts from so many of you. I haven’t had a chance to respond much to people, but I really enjoyed hearing from you.

I’m going to try to post several times today, so visit this blog site early and often! Give me your comments as the day goes on….

Dump the Electoral College?

We talked about this in class today. What do you think about the electoral college?

There was an interesting column written in the Seattle Times Saturday. Here are a few of the quotes from it:

"Why is it that the people of Afghanistan can vote directly for the Afghanistan president, unlike Americans, who cannot vote directly for the American president?

Why is it that Iraqis can vote for their president, but Americans cannot vote for the American president?

...How important can the Electoral College be when America does not export the Electoral College to other new democracies? If the Electoral College is so important in America, then shouldn't Afghanistan have an Electoral College? Shouldn't Iraq have an Electoral College? The answer is that they don't because it's not relevant.

Let the democracy that George Bush is exporting to other countries be imported to America so that Americans can vote for the president directly. "

My point is that the electoral college makes a lot of people feel disenfranchised. This patchwork system that the Framers worked out as a compromise now has morphed into a system that is confusing and less democratic than it could be. I know that if the candidate I am favoring loses, I would be able to deal with that loss a lot better if I knew it was because most Americans really wanted the other candidate to hold that office. This system is too much of a game as I see it. What do you think?

There are organizations dedicated to voting reform. Not all of them call for an abolition of the electoral college, but they do have interesting ideas. Check them out at their websites:
http://www.fairvote.org/e_college/
http://www.reformelections.org/learn/related_links.php
http://www.nvri.org/

Now there are those out there who believe that the Electoral College has served us well. Their views are important to consider as well, but in the end I think the time has come for a change.

William Raspberry published a column calling for reform a couple of weeks ago.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40886-2004Oct17.html

For another viewpoint, David Broder is skeptical of electoral fixes. Check it out.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50016-2004Oct20.html

War is always a crime

Why is this not in bold-face on the front-page of every U.S. newspaper? American and Iraqi researchers, led by doctors from Johns Hopkins University's Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, write in the prestigious British medical journal, The Lancet, that more than 100,000 Iraqis have died since the US-led invasion of the country than would have died otherwise. These new figures are much higher than any previous estimates, which generally said that between 10,000, and 37,000 Iraqis died directly or indirectly as a result of the March 2003 invasion. The Times of London reports Friday that the survey attributes most of the extra deaths, many of whom were women and children, to "airstrikes by coalition forces." The international team that did this study by visiting homes of people in Iraq say that their estimate is conservative. British and U.S. officials are not responding seriously to the numbers but are conceding that they were done by a respected and reputable group. People need to demand answers. People need to understand the nature of war and the suffering it causes.

It must be evident to anyone that the war in Iraq has been out of proportion with any risk posed to anyone inside or outside of Iraq. I fail to understand how anyone can look at what has gone on in Iraq and not believe it was a mistake. Yes, Saddam is gone. (Those of us involved in the human rights struggle had been protesting his rule since the late 1980's. No one paid attention until he invaded Kuwaiti oil fields.) The world benefits whenever a despot is deposed.

We, however, defied the United Nations best judgment, using faulty intelligence on weapons of mass destruction which provided the rationale for this war and launched a violent assault upon Iraq without exhausting every other avenue available to us.

The results have been a nightmare-come-true. Over 1,100 American deaths. Over 8,000 Americans wounded. Now, we must face the fact, that we may have caused, directly and indirectly, the deaths of 100,000 deaths in Iraq. Even Saddam didn't kill at that pace.

My bottom line: If Bush loses on Tuesday, it will be because enough U.S. citizens have seen the truth in what Winston Churchill once said:

“Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events.”

If Bush wins, it is because too many of us have wrapped ourselves in the flag, and turned a blind eye to the folly of war.

Death Penalty for Teen Offenders?

Lee Boyd Malvo, the teenage partner of assassin John Allan Mohammed that terrorized the East Coast over a year ago has been sentenced to life in prison. He was 17 at the time he took part in the shootings.

This brings to light a question that was argued before the Supreme Court a couple of weeks ago. Should 16 and 17 year old murderers be sentenced to death? While the Supreme Court has ruled that the death penalty does not, in and of itself, constitute cruel and unusual punishment (Gregg v. Georgia, 1976), they are re-visiting the practice of applying capital punishment to teen offenders.
http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=scotusexecute14&date=20041014

Why might the Court reverse itself? In a recent decision, Atkins v. Virginia (2002), the Court ruled that it WAS a violation of the 8th Amendment to execute offenders that are mentally retarded. Does it logically follow that teens should not be given the ultimate punishment?

What do you think? Should the Court revise the meaning of “cruel and unusual punishment” with respect to juvenile offenders or do you think this is a matter best left up to the Congress and the individual states to decide?

Civil Discourse, factions, and Jon Stewart

There has been a lot of discussion about the intensely bitter debate that we have seen this political season. Is it a sign that our republic is in decline? Can we overcome the insults and personal attacks to come together as a nation? Whose fault is this? Does it take a late-night comic like Jon Stewart to public smack around the “partisan hacks” that masquerade as journalists these days? I hope that all of my current “We the People” students are forming ideas about this topic. The Framers feared this sort of thing would tear apart our republic.

In reality, this nasty tone has been building for years. One factor may be the rise of iconoclastic political commentators. People like Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Michael Moore, Al Franken, Ann Coulter and others have developed large audiences by using humor and outrageous statements to make their political points. (Except for Ann Coulter. I've never found her to be funny or clever. My guess is that if she was overweight and her face was more asymmetrical that she would have never landed herself a job as a TV commentator.)

You can make an argument that these entertaining political writers, filmmakers, etc. are doing good because they reach people who might not otherwise be paying attention. Hopefully a lot of those people go beyond the infotainment they provide and search for some real and serious discussion of politics.

Others say that we sowing the seeds of destruction by spreading political hatred. I encourage you to read a piece republished in today’s Seattle Times by Gary Alan Fine. (He is John Evans Professor of Sociology at Northwestern University – a big shout out to Jessica Joslin!) He makes some excellent observations about today’s political climate.

When I was young, my parents insisted that I show respect for the president,whoever he was and whichever party he represented. He was the president of all Americans, and we collectively selected him. My parents were not alone.

The hatred that has spewed across the land — first in conservative "red" territory under Clinton, then in liberal "blue" regions under Bush — has the potential, if allowed to continue, to erode the very possibility of political compromise.

Professor Fine continues:

I believe that our parents were correct for two reasons.

First, a nation consumed with bitter partisanship makes compromise and political transition more difficult. Hatred easily translates into mistrust and suspicion. The remarkable aspect of American politics is that despite a vibrant two-party system,
electoral losers lose gracefully and winners win with admiration for those over
whom they have triumphed. But intense anger in the system has the potential to
make a transfer of power difficult and has the potential to create political
deadlock when such vitriol enters the halls of Congress.

Second, the translation of policy difference into claims of extremism ignores that our two major parties are, in general, quite similar in their policy prescriptions. Both parties support national defense, economic growth through capitalism, protection of the environment, participation in global peacekeeping organizations, quality education and aid to families in need.

He concludes that:

We surely can judge what a politician has done during a political career and what policy prescriptions he or she is proposing, and we can be noisy in our support or rejection. We should judge the recent past and the alternative
futures proposed. This is productive civic engagement; anger and vituperation
over imagined youthful failures is not.

Understanding this may help us step back from the precipice of our politics of passion. Intense anger may satisfy our lust for absolute certainty. But in a society in which we must negotiate, this anger hardens our souls and debases our options. Politics becomes war, not persuasion.

If you'd like to read the piece in its entirety, click on the following link: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002070413_polhatred24.html

For a similar view from a Christian pastor, Rev. Dr. Joan Brown Campbell, click on http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/1025/p09s01-coop.html

Her conclusion is wonderful:

So in a divided nation where passions are running high over war, a tight presidential race, joblessness, and antagonistic media, let us remember the
common good....

But being civil to an adversary does not mean sacrificing core principles, because in challenging an adversary, you can separate what that person says from who they are.

A word to the wise: Reserve your passions for loving, speak forcefully to what you believe, and always reserve for yourself the possibility that you might just be wrong.

What do you think? Follow the directions at the top of my page to post your comments!

Who is gonna take this election?

Well, I haven't posted anything here in a long time. I had a busy summer and the school year is a little crazy. My son Anthony is sophomore at MRHS now and is the treasurer of Amnesty International. My wife is teaching 1st grade in the Kent School District. My youngest son is doing well in 7th grade and might be the most anti George W. of the whole darn Democratic family.

Anyway, I am wondering what you are thinking about the upcoming presidential election. It is less than two weeks away, and may be as unbelievably close as in 2000. Have you gotten "into" this election? Who do you think is going to come out on top? Would you like to persuade any other visitors to this site that they should vote for Bush or Kerry?

Respond here and let us know what you think!

I am very nervous about the whole thing. I am planning on doing some canvassing for Kerry this weekend. I encourage you to get involved. It is going to be close, and for a lot of reasons, I think this is an extremely important election!

More than 1,000 military deaths in Iraq

We have reached a sad milestone in the war in Iraq. The following information was taken from today's Christian Science Monitor:

US military deaths in the Iraq campaign passed 1,000 Tuesday, an Associated
Press tally showed, as a spike in fighting with both Sunni and Shiite insurgents
killed seven Americans in scattered clashes in the Baghdad area.

The count includes 998 US troops and three civilian contractors
killed while working for the Pentagon. The tally was compiled by the AP based on
Pentagon records, AP reporting from Iraq, and reports from soldiers' families.

It includes deaths from hostile and non-hostile causes since
President Bush launched a campaign in March 2003 to topple the regime of Saddam Hussein. A few deaths occurred in neighboring Kuwait.

The grim milestone was surpassed after a spike in clashes that has killed 14 American service members in the past two days. Two soldiers died in fighting Tuesday with militiamen loyal to rebel Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. Five other Americans died Tuesday in separate attacks, mostly in the Baghdad area.

Given all that we have learned about the circumstances surrounding our initiating this war, and that we are currently losing men and women at a greater rate than earlier in the war, why aren't Americans more upset? Why aren't they more angry with George Bush and the Congress that authorized the action?

I'll admit it - I'm an anti-war type and was against this war from the beginning. I think the whole notion of "pre-emtive war" makes our world a more dangerous place. Maybe I just don't get it. Give me your comments on this.

However, unlike others in the anti-war movement, I don't think we can just cut and run now. I do think that we made certain things a mess in Iraq and we have a moral obligation to help make those things right. Do you agree or do you think the U.S. should get out as soon as possible and let the chips fall where they may in Iraq.

Please share your wisdom with me....

Kerry-Edwards Ticket

Yesterday was a very good day for the Democrats. Let's face it, this year is all about beating Bush, and Edwards is going to help Kerry do just that. I was very worried he might choose his close friend Dick Gephardt, or someone else with which he had a longer personal relationship. But Kerry didn't make that political mistake.

The election is now the Democrats' to lose. Edwards can bring the charisma and "regular guy" appeal that Kerry lacks. He is intelligent and connects with audiences. He is a moderate (voted for the war in Iraq, pro-death penalty) and will force the Republicans to spend more time in money on Southern states they can't quite take for granted any more.

Like a lot of you, I've worked and voted for Democrats that were much closer to my solid left-wing ideals, but this year we understand that the stakes are too high not to go with a ticket that has lots of broad appeal.

We Democrats chose Kerry not because we loved him, but because we thought he could beat Bush. Kerry has now done us a favor in return by choosing his ex-rival Edwards, not because he loves him, but because he can help him win the election.

Or, as one Republican web-site has put it, is Edwards "a disingenuous, unaccomplished liberal and friend to personal injury trial lawyers."

What are your thoughts????

Saddam in Court

It certainly was strange footage to see Saddam appear before the Iraqi court. He was the man that we haven't seen since they pulled him out of the hole in the ground looking like hell.

This time, he did have moments of appearing nervous, but soon reverted to the same old Saddam, blaming the United States and Iran for the crimes for which he stands accused.

There are a couple of important questions about this trial. The first is whether, in the long process of gathering and presenting evidence against Saddam, it will bring a sense of justice to the Iraqi people. Will the ultimate conviction of Saddam under an Iraqi Court bring a sense of closure to nightmarish episode in the life of that nation?

Will Saddam be able to use the trial as a pulpit for his ideas and anger? Will he be able to use the trial to speak out against the American occupation and the legitimacy of the new government? Remember that when Adolf Hitler was convicted in the 1920's after the failed Beer Hall Putsch, he was able to use his trial as a springboard to public acceptance. Similarly, ex-Serbian President Slobodan Milosovic of Yugoslavia has dragged out his war crimes trial and blamed all of his political enemies for everything that has gone wrong in the Balkans in attempt to deflect attention from his own crimes.

Let's face it. Saddam can say a lot of things that will embarrass and implicate the CIA, the Reagan and Bush administrations, as well as Russia, France, and a host of others that aided his rise to power. We not only tolerated, but supported and sold arms to Saddam in the 1980's. Our actions in Iraq are only one example of the morally dubious actions of United States foreign policy since the beginning of the Cold War. We have tolerated and supported many brutal regimes because it served our immediate purposes. We continue to this tradition by supporting the government of Pakistan because it is supposedly helping us track down bin Laden and his followers. (We can all see how well that is working out.)

The United States likes to celebrate the good it has done around the world (like liberating the Iraqi people from Saddam's rule) while ignoring the costs of our foreign policy (the deaths of tens of thousands of Iraqis, the destruction of their infrastructure and the creation of unstable and nearly ungovernable nations in Afghanistan and Iraq, all while destroying 60 years of support for international law).

What do you think? Will Saddam’s trial bring to light not only his crimes, but those of the United States, and other members of the international community that were often complicit in his crimes? Or will the trial be rigidly censored to eliminate any embarrassing evidence from reaching the American public?

Let me know what you think. For more on the CIA and Saddam, see the link on this posting.

Bush Administration Checked and Balanced!!

George Bush says that he does not read newspapers. He relies on others to keep him up to date on what is happening out there. Putting aside the obvious “Emperor’s New Clothes” analogies, I certainly hope that someone has kept him up to date on what has been going down at the U.S. Supreme Court.

Earlier this week, in three separate decisions, the Court struck down a basic operating principle of the Bush Administration’s war on terror; namely that the President has the authority to detain any person it claims to be a member of a terrorist organization. For almost two years we have seen an executive branch wield powers unparalleled in modern times. Many of us have been frightened at the growth of the new powers being exercised by this government. Many seemed to betray some of the most basic principles of our constitutional system.

Fortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court sent a very strong reality check to the White House in recently announced decisions.

more #@%! on Cheney

Dick Cheney (who I've never liked or respected) recently told Senator Patrick Leahey (who I've liked and respected for a long time) to "f@#^-off" the other day on the floor of the Senate.

Characteristically, after it was reported in the press, Cheney neither apologized nor appeared contrite in any way. In fact, he said it made him feel good to say it! Here is how it was reported in the Seattle Times:

"I expressed myself rather forcefully, felt better after I had done it," Cheney told Fox News' Neil Cavuto. The vice president said those who heard the putdown agreed with him. "I think that a lot of my colleagues felt that what I had said badly needed to be said, that it was long overdue."

The forceful defense by Cheney came as much of Washington was discussing his outburst on the Senate floor. Cheney, serving in his role as president of the Senate, appeared in the chamber for a photo session Tuesday. A chance meeting with Leahy became an argument about Cheney's ties to oil-services giant Halliburton and President Bush's judicial nominees. The exchange ended when Cheney offered some crass advice: "Go (expletive) yourself."

So, concerned as I am about the well-being of our vice-president (see previous posting)I am wondering what other things would make Dick Cheney "feel better". Here are a few suggestions. Please feel free to add your own!

1. Barge into a meeting of the Congressional Progressive Caucus with an automatic weapon and exclaim "It's Cheney Time!"
2. Telling Pope John Paul II to "Can the anti-war crap old man!"
3. Removing animals from the endangerd species act and telling them to "deal with it or die you maladaptive freaks"
4. Drill like mad in the Alaskan Wildlife Refuge, rape the pristine environment, and tell the environnmentalists who complain to "bite me!"
5. Standing on street corners, waiting for hybrid energy efficient cars to pass and then yelling to "get a real car you wimp"!

Farenheit 9/11

Michael Moore's new film opens today, and it promises to take some pretty good shots at the President. Moore is calling it the equivalent of an op-ed piece. Some conservatives are up in arms and have tried to get theaters to refuse to show the film.

With all the controversy that has come up over this film, I was wondering how many of you are planning to see it? Liberals, progressives, Democrats, and the anybody-but-Bush crowd are expected to be out in big numbers to see it. What about those of you who are independent or Republican? Are you considering seeing the film?

I probably will see the movie in the next few days and will post a review. In the meantime, let me know what you think about the movie. Also, Moore was upset the movie got an "R" rating. Do you think it deserved the rating and why?

The Mighty We the People Rams - 2004 

Who for V.P.?

Who will John Kerry select as his running mate? In a close race like this one, the candidate for Veep might have the ability to help him pick up enough votes to make the difference in the race.

Yosef Fufa suggested that I throw this topic out for comments and I think it is a good idea. I'd like to know who you think would be the best choice for V.P.

First, however, I must say that I think George Bush made a big mistake in keeping Dick Cheney as his running mate. Yes, Cheney is a solid conservative, and that makes the right-wing of the party happy, but there are plenty of strong Republicans in the party that would bring more to the ticket.

First of all, Bush could have dumped Cheney by simply asking the man, who has no ambition to be President, to step down because of his health. The public would have bought that. I mean really...how many heart attacks has the man had? Bush wouldn't even have to kick him out of the government entirely. He could take a lesser cabinet position; become the next ambassador to Iraq; become a test subject for the Surgeon General; anything!!!!

Secondly, and more seriously, the man has given the President some of the worst advice of his Presidency. Cheney was one of the neo-conservative hawks demanding that we invade Iraq. Cheney insisted (and still insists!) that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and had dangerous ties to al-Queda. It is pretty well established that these things have been proven false.

Thirdly, Cheney trusted and promoted Ahmed Chalabi more than anyone else in the Bush administration. He was being paid by the U.S. government up until a few months ago, for his help and intelligence reports. Of course a few weeks ago, when we found out that Chalabi had been selling U.S. secrets to Iran, we cut off ties with him and ransacked his house in Iraq looking for evidence.

Fourth, he was the CEO of Halliburton from 1995-2000. He made millions from them, now they are making billions off of rebuilding Iraq. Oh yeah, Cheney still has tons of Halliburton stock. 'Nuff said.

Lastly, I don't think Cheney brings anything to the ticket to help Bush get re-elected. He's from a state with a tiny population, he has no charisma, and he is unwilling to admit that he has made mistakes. The good thing for Bush is that he doesn't look to bad in comparison to Cheney.

Bush could have tapped someone like Colin Powell as his running mate. Powell has been a loyal soldier to Reagan, Bush Sr., and "W". He went along with the war in Iraq only after encouraging the President to wait longer and get more support from our allies before going in. He made a presentation to the U.N. that turned out to be full of untruths, but he has admitted the intelligence he relied on was faulty. Compare this to the pig-headed obstinancy that we keep getting from Cheney.

Powell or someone else could create excitement for Bush and place a sane, rational man a heart-beat away from the presidency instead of this crusading ideologue.

Am I wrong? Has Cheney got some sort of redeeming qualities that Bush sees that I don't?

Oh, yeah. The Democrats. I think Kerry would be crazy not to select John Edwards as his running mate. I think he offers the best chance to help Kerry get votes.

Post some comments and let me know what your political strategy would be.

"under God"

So much for the Supreme Court not being political!!!!

Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision (or non-decision) in the case of the Elk Grove School District v. Newdow. It dealt with one of the most controversial cases of this term - whether the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance constituted a violation of the Establishment Clause if recited by students in public schools.

In short, the Court allowed the Pledge of Allegiance to continue being recited in public schools with the phrase "under God" intact. But...

...the Court did not rule on the central question presented in the case: does the phrase "under God" amount to a violation of the principle of the separation of church and state?

Instead, they ruled that the young girl's father, Michael Newdow, who did not have legal custody of his daughter, did not have the right to bring the suit against the school district. The mother (and the daughter) are Christians and have no objection to reciting the Pledge. The Court said that Mr. Newdow did not have the right to sue in Court to over-ride a decision made by the parent (mom) with legal custody. But, if the Supreme Court decided to take the case, one would assume that they were prepared to deal with the difficult question of the separation of church and state. But they didn't.

What do you think about this? Did the U.S. Supreme Court wimp out? Is the Pledge, which has contained the words "under God" since Congress added them in the 1950's a violation of the 1st Amendment?

I could say a lot more about this case, but will leave it at this for now: I think the ruling was a good thing for the nation. Maybe I'll add some more of my opinion of this if a few of you have some interesting comments.

Let me know what you think...

Thanks for the response!

Thanks for the response from those of you that posted some comments. It was great to hear your thoughts. I enjoyed hearing from all of you that posted! This seems like it might be a fun thing to try to get going. I hope to catch up on some personal e-mails to a few of you soon. For now, I'm taking the advice of my wife and Nate Porter, who suggest I get my grades done!

I guess I wasn't the only one feeling a bit "off" about the coverage of Ronald Reagan's death.

I missed the coverage of the big ceremony in D.C., but I did watch in full the coverage of the "Final Farewell" in California at Sunset. I thought hearing the personal comments of his children - Michael, Patti, and Ron Jr., were quite moving. Each of them had difficult relationships with their father at different points in their lives, and it was nice to see that they had reconciled and come to be at peace with the relationship they had with their father before his death.

For now, I'm much to busy to get into any more detail about serious world affairs, but I've realized that a lot of the e-mail addresses that I have are old, so if you would like to pass on the e-mail addresses of more MRHS alumni, I'd love to have them. Or, if you know they might be interested in popping off on some political issues, send them to this blog site.

brain-dead reflections on the news...

I don't really think I have anything intelligent to say...my mind has been numbed by reading inane research papers and listening to bland, pointless discussions of "Reagan's Legacy" on network and cable news.

Are we really supposed to expect people to engage in a critical analysis of Reagan's policies and deeds while he is laying in state in the Capitol? Give me a break - the networks are spending all this time covering Reagan's death, people naturally want to remember the good in him at a time like this, but true to form, the networks ALWAYS feel the need to present two sides to every issue. (As if there are only two!)

So in response to those people that want to put Reagan's likeness on Mt. Rushmore, we get these weak, half-hearted statements saying Reagan was responsible for record budget-deficits, and played a dangerous game of berating the Communist system of Russia early in his presidency.

Why don't they just give it a rest? There is pleny of time for historians and political pundits to analyze the effects of Reagan's presidency. The news is that he has died after a long illness and the country wants to take some time to remember the man who served in the highest office of the land for most of the 1980's.

Isn't that enough of a story? Do we really need to have the appearance of "hard news" analysis by a bunch of Democrats and Republicans that are in no position to make an unbiased assessment?

Please! Don't waste my time. Once again, the U.S. media doesn't get the point. I think grading those 11th grade research papers doesn't seem like such a waste of time after all.

Am I the only one thinking this way???

Click on comments, and let me know what you think!

Why visit this site?

I have enjoyed teaching and working with so many great Mt. Rainier High students in my "We the People" classes over the past years. Unfortunately, it is pretty hard to keep up e-mail correspondence with more than a few of you, so I thought creating a web log might be a great idea for us to reconnect.

I thought it would be fun to have some "virtual" class discussions with you again. I'd like to invite you to share your views on current events with me and the rest of the alumni from my WTP classes.

During the summer I plan to post some questions and comments on the big questions facing our nation and the world, and I'd love to have you post yours here as well.

For the first topic though, I thought I would just send out a general question. I think it will be the first presidential election most of you will be able to participate in as voters. Are you excited about voting in the up-coming fall election? Do you like any of the candidates enough to work or contribute to their campaign? Or if not at the Presidential level, are you excited about any of the other races?

Let us know what you think, and feel free to give us a personal update on where you are and what you are up to these days!