When did the Language of War become so insensitive and pop-'culturized'?
You hear it with everyone from Wolf Blitzer to Peter Jennings. It used to be that the use of 'trendy' Language in the context of war topics was left to, well, Bloggers and bloggerheads. But now, with mainstream media crossing the gap to pick up the nasty habit too, there's an atrocious banter going on around some horrific moments of Our lives -- that's right -- Yours & Mine.
Today's abuse is pretty hard to miss. With a devastating attack on a U.S. military base near Mosul, killing and wounding untold numbers of U.S. and coalition troops, contractors, and civilians, the news was promptly discussed as a "Lucky Strike" on Mosul.
Macabre to you too? I mean, whose side are they/we on?
Why, oh why, was it not called a "Massacre at Mosul?"
OK, we get it that from the Insurgents' perspective, any successful and unanticipated assault on troops like ours who were eating their meals, could feel like a 'high five' moment. But please oh please, do NOT report it as "High Five for the Insurgent Team" because folks, this is NOT football or basketball! [A Sunday morning news program included one jughead who was so enthusiastic in his play-by-play discussion of the unfolding of the campaign leading up to the January elections, that he used every football metaphor I've ever heard. Even the all-male panel was somewhat speechless for a second or two.]
The 'Lucky Strike' remark was bad enough but then the wolf-hound went on to question a retired General about the soft-sided facility where the troops were eating, if they weren't out there like so many, "sitting ducks."
Listen up, more than 20+ families are going to get some pretty awful news this week and having a metaphor like 'sitting ducks' anywhere in the archives is just plain boorish. Nobody needs to hear it or think it because better judgment should prevail by the professionals who are reporting news. If there is a news item or an investigation into the armoring of camps, then fine, relate that topic to their vulnerability. Where is Walter Cronkite when we need him?
For those of us who haven't been to A.N.Y. School of Journalism but have a Fair Amout of Common Sense and can educate those poor fools who couldn't be trained about what we know, here are our basic principles -- let's call it --
The Human Decency Doctrine for Wartime Reporting
1. No use of cliches, metaphors or pop culture references (songs, movies, games) in the coverage of military assaults, kidnappings, beheadings, prisoners-of-war, heroic acts, lost limbs, etc.
2. When in doubt about showing pictures of human remains or humans in shock in response to the remains of their comrades, err on the side of not showing. If it's newsworthy, 72 hours later, ask permission of the commanding officer, the troop shown, and the next of kin, if they have been notified and with a military chaplain present. [Note: you won't get past the first checkpoint.]
3. Do not use Toll-free number or Internet polls to ask Americans what should happen to Sadden Hussein or Chemical Ali. This is not the 'Bachelorette' and we don't want you to use the characters of war and us to become part of Your Sweeps Week.
4. If you have gone to the time and trouble to track down an Expert to talk to Viewers and their perspective is valuable, let him/her speak. Shut up already! Tell your sponsors that you may be going over the normal time for advertising breaks because Real Life just doesn't fit neatly around 30 or 60 second segments for cellular telephone service or department stores.
5. Cover (photograph and text with date) every casket that returns to the states. Every life matters. Show some respect. Show them coming home.
Do you have others to add?
Write and we'll send a new & improved list to the AP, the network owners, major network sponsors, and the FCC.
Let's stake our claim on this piece of the Airwaves. They were intended for You and Me.
Together, we can make a difference.
12.16.2004
The Appointee -- Tuesdays at Ten
After another season of the Donald's, The Apprentice, it occurs to me that the White House could learn a lot about vetting their appointments to all sorts of positions including the cabinet, supreme court, and lesser crowns like ambassadorships. They could simply create a 'reality' tv show and let the country help weed out the candidates.
The recent embarrassment over NY's Bernard Kerik to Homeland Security isn't the travesty that the press is making it out to be. It would have been worse, sure, if he had already started the job. So, ok, enthusiasm ran high already, and in the 2nd term things got a tad sloppy with new people playing it a little loose on background checks. I don't think that 'bad' day [the day Kerik's sordid past hit the fan] begins to compare with the 'best' day in Baghdad, so why are we giving it so much newsprint? I don't think President Bush or Rudy G. should keep beating themselves up over it. Let it go already!
We can learn something from this, though.
We learned from the Clinton administration that nearly nobody is qualified to be Attorney General of the U.S. Save for missing a law degree, I used to think I could volunteer -- I never 'smoked' you know what (let alone had the inhalation issue to contend with), didn't have that nasty nanny-gate problem, but then, ooops, nevermind. . . forgot about dear Vera, the short-term house cleaner a life-time ago. She didn't want to report her income to the government and I didn't want to twist her arm about it so I didn't pay the 'employer's' part of the social security either. There I go, disqualifying myself from Attorney General. That was just one of Kerik's transgressions.
But just imagine -- if we had 100,000 candidates for the cabinet secretary of Homeland Security [The Apprentice gets 1 million applications; I'm assuming not nearly as many people would want this job as working for the Trumpster], and taking all sorts of prequalifications into account,we narrowed the search to 20.
Then, what if we planned a 20-week television program based on weeding out the undesirable candidates each week, pitting them against each other one by one, while we, the audience, learn more and more about them, their character, grace-under-fire pressure, and you know, whether they floss -- important stuff.
I think we'd have a hit all right. And we'd probably be no worse for the wear. We might even have a darn good Appointee for the position of whatever post we were trying to fill -- just name it -- the process works for any of them in the federal government.
Sure, we would still have the CIA and FBI clearances, newspaper leaks, old lovers' tapes discovered [a la Clinton], and quirks like practicing surgery on 'rescued' cats [see Sen. Frist online articles] but we would have a better chance of airing our dirty laundry in advance.
See, it's not that we couldn't wear dirty socks a 2nd day, but sometimes, well, you know. . .you just want to sniff them to be real sure.
The recent embarrassment over NY's Bernard Kerik to Homeland Security isn't the travesty that the press is making it out to be. It would have been worse, sure, if he had already started the job. So, ok, enthusiasm ran high already, and in the 2nd term things got a tad sloppy with new people playing it a little loose on background checks. I don't think that 'bad' day [the day Kerik's sordid past hit the fan] begins to compare with the 'best' day in Baghdad, so why are we giving it so much newsprint? I don't think President Bush or Rudy G. should keep beating themselves up over it. Let it go already!
We can learn something from this, though.
We learned from the Clinton administration that nearly nobody is qualified to be Attorney General of the U.S. Save for missing a law degree, I used to think I could volunteer -- I never 'smoked' you know what (let alone had the inhalation issue to contend with), didn't have that nasty nanny-gate problem, but then, ooops, nevermind. . . forgot about dear Vera, the short-term house cleaner a life-time ago. She didn't want to report her income to the government and I didn't want to twist her arm about it so I didn't pay the 'employer's' part of the social security either. There I go, disqualifying myself from Attorney General. That was just one of Kerik's transgressions.
But just imagine -- if we had 100,000 candidates for the cabinet secretary of Homeland Security [The Apprentice gets 1 million applications; I'm assuming not nearly as many people would want this job as working for the Trumpster], and taking all sorts of prequalifications into account,we narrowed the search to 20.
Then, what if we planned a 20-week television program based on weeding out the undesirable candidates each week, pitting them against each other one by one, while we, the audience, learn more and more about them, their character, grace-under-fire pressure, and you know, whether they floss -- important stuff.
I think we'd have a hit all right. And we'd probably be no worse for the wear. We might even have a darn good Appointee for the position of whatever post we were trying to fill -- just name it -- the process works for any of them in the federal government.
Sure, we would still have the CIA and FBI clearances, newspaper leaks, old lovers' tapes discovered [a la Clinton], and quirks like practicing surgery on 'rescued' cats [see Sen. Frist online articles] but we would have a better chance of airing our dirty laundry in advance.
See, it's not that we couldn't wear dirty socks a 2nd day, but sometimes, well, you know. . .you just want to sniff them to be real sure.
12.12.2004
Help the Troops & Their Families!
No matter your politics, there are U.S. troops around the world who are feeling the pangs of prolonged separation from their families and friends, many of whom are located in harm's way. Their conditions of daily living and survival at 'work' are not great; we all wish it could be better. Separating the causes and the finger-pointing for a moment, let us remember that there is something that we can all do. You pick what that something is and just DO IT!
FORGET THAT IT MAY NOT (PROBABLY WON'T) REACH THEM BY DECEMBER 25. They're still going to be there the day after, the week after that, and the month after that.
The need goes on. This is NOT just a Holiday appeal, Got it?
Whether it's a church activity sending sweatsuits to injured soldiers (there are too many to
list -- check with yours) or a centralized program to help those wounded with a variety of soft clothes and toiletries (see: http://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/), if you want to support specific goods going to troops, there are programs for you.
Http://www.anysoldier.com provides a wide array of options for you to choose from all the way from care packages to program support. It's admirable how this program began; be sure to check it out. Even the hardest of hearts can't help but be moved by some of the needs identified by representatives of individual units that can be selected all the way from Branch of Service to Male or Female to nurses or soldiers. You can read their list of needs and then take a look at your own grocery cart each week and suddenly you just know you CAN make room to help these courageous troops whose return home remains uncertain -- some turkey jerky, baby wash/wipes for basic hygiene, or batteries -- the needs are not beyond your ability to help. Pick one; in your mind 'adopt a battalion' or a unit and do the best you can.
Another great grassroot effort that has evolved into an amazing organization can be found at http://soldiersangels.org/heroes/index.php You can read about their work and select from a wide array of ways to help out including returning troops and families who try to reach wounded sons and daughters to support them during treatment and recovery.
The Red Cross working with the Red Crescent Society has tried to administer aid to civilians in Iraq. Most aid agencies are, for the present, in too much danger of being killed or kidnapped to provide direct support of civilians. However, there is hope that there will be a time again when they can resume their aid. Contact your local branch of the Red Cross (see your telephone White Pages) and ask how you can best help, typically through a financial contribution.
If you live within 200 miles of a military base you will likely find outreach programs in the community that you can join and support. Sometimes these are administered through VFW, American Legion Posts, or other community groups. If you are interested in particularly helping young, struggling families of deployed troops then this may be the best route for you to offer assistance. Sometimes the gift of telephone calling cards, grocery store gift cards, and help with school uniforms for children can provide amazing relief to the parent left behind trying to stretch a check until next pay period.
Again, don't confuse your personal ideology with politics or government and what's at stake in supporting the human beings from our country who are in positions of extraordinary risk and discomfort. You CAN help a fellow citizen, a fellow human being, without risking whatever opinions you have because that is what being a caring human being is all about. Have the courage to try it today, if you haven't already made the commitment to do so.
Then, keep on giving, even if it hurts, because it hurts them a whole lot more.
FORGET THAT IT MAY NOT (PROBABLY WON'T) REACH THEM BY DECEMBER 25. They're still going to be there the day after, the week after that, and the month after that.
The need goes on. This is NOT just a Holiday appeal, Got it?
Whether it's a church activity sending sweatsuits to injured soldiers (there are too many to
list -- check with yours) or a centralized program to help those wounded with a variety of soft clothes and toiletries (see: http://www.woundedwarriorproject.org/), if you want to support specific goods going to troops, there are programs for you.
Http://www.anysoldier.com provides a wide array of options for you to choose from all the way from care packages to program support. It's admirable how this program began; be sure to check it out. Even the hardest of hearts can't help but be moved by some of the needs identified by representatives of individual units that can be selected all the way from Branch of Service to Male or Female to nurses or soldiers. You can read their list of needs and then take a look at your own grocery cart each week and suddenly you just know you CAN make room to help these courageous troops whose return home remains uncertain -- some turkey jerky, baby wash/wipes for basic hygiene, or batteries -- the needs are not beyond your ability to help. Pick one; in your mind 'adopt a battalion' or a unit and do the best you can.
Another great grassroot effort that has evolved into an amazing organization can be found at http://soldiersangels.org/heroes/index.php You can read about their work and select from a wide array of ways to help out including returning troops and families who try to reach wounded sons and daughters to support them during treatment and recovery.
The Red Cross working with the Red Crescent Society has tried to administer aid to civilians in Iraq. Most aid agencies are, for the present, in too much danger of being killed or kidnapped to provide direct support of civilians. However, there is hope that there will be a time again when they can resume their aid. Contact your local branch of the Red Cross (see your telephone White Pages) and ask how you can best help, typically through a financial contribution.
If you live within 200 miles of a military base you will likely find outreach programs in the community that you can join and support. Sometimes these are administered through VFW, American Legion Posts, or other community groups. If you are interested in particularly helping young, struggling families of deployed troops then this may be the best route for you to offer assistance. Sometimes the gift of telephone calling cards, grocery store gift cards, and help with school uniforms for children can provide amazing relief to the parent left behind trying to stretch a check until next pay period.
Again, don't confuse your personal ideology with politics or government and what's at stake in supporting the human beings from our country who are in positions of extraordinary risk and discomfort. You CAN help a fellow citizen, a fellow human being, without risking whatever opinions you have because that is what being a caring human being is all about. Have the courage to try it today, if you haven't already made the commitment to do so.
Then, keep on giving, even if it hurts, because it hurts them a whole lot more.
12.11.2004
Any Town, U.S.A.
Across the country, scores of World War II servicemen, their wives, and the nurses who tended the troops are dwindling daily. Any newspaper in Any Town, U.S.A. lists the obituaries of the men and women whose commitment to duty made all the difference in a grueling era of deprivation and fear.
Yet there are still precious souls among us who, upon casual conversation, can be persuaded to take us back in time -- their time at war, to their lives interrupted.
It's interesting to hear the rationale for which service branch was selected. "Well, I knew I could use my mechanical engineering and machinery talents on a naval ship and frankly, I didn't think I would be much use with a gun. At 6' 4" I just figured I would be a splendid target, that's all," and the like explain why Earl entered the Navy instead of the Army as many of his New Jersey friends and neighbors did.
A couple of those Jersey fellows were Earl's high school buddies and before the war they practiced an extracurricular skill as a team -- acrobatic leveling or balancing. At one time (the now near-90 year old man was regaling me with stories encompassing the heart of a century), Earl was on his way to becoming a professional leveler. I never knew this term. But when Earl explained it to me, I could imagine how the performers who climbed higher and higher on top of him needed to count on the steady stance of the underpinning form of their colleague -- Earl. Earl, the human leveler.
As he talked, Earl's eyes twinkled remembering those days and I could almost see in my mind's eye the shapes of bodies climbing higher and higher to the sounds of awes from the audience. I felt goosebumps.
For a time it surely seemed that Earl and his band of brothers were headed for the professional performing circle. Favorable auditions were granted and they felt at age 18 the world was just beginning for them.
And then the U.S. entered WWII and the performance artists placed their skills in the hands of their country instead.
Earl and I talked about the twists and turns in one's life, how doors open and close without our awareness that sometimes they are altering our lives forever. That he would, post-war, meet a gal, Margie, in his college town, who shared his old love of acrobatics, herself using a trapeze at times, seemed almost too good to be true. Their love was immediate and he was overjoyed to discover that he could level her just like he had leveled the fellows a few years before. And so life was good for them.
As we talked over old times and how he came to become an engineer in Silicon Valley instead of the circus performer traveling on-the-road, lovely Margie walked over grinning to ask him a simple question. "What's the name of our road?"
Earl answered her gently and she happily walked back to her friends. His eyes weren't twinkling as before when he told me that Margie now has Alzheimer's Disease. But they still danced the night away at the holiday party with other retirees who returned to celebrate the occasion with fellow workers. We were grateful Earl and Margie were there.
And I was so thankful that he shared this and other vignettes of the lives of the WWII generation at a time when I'm communicating with soldiers in Iraq and some are struggling to adjust to life after Iraq. There's never a comparison between wars, eras, nor people of course.
I am reminded that real courage is born of those who serve. And those who keep a level head while continuing to 'Level' their beloved through the storms and trials of disease are heroes indeed, because their course too, like soldiers, is uncharted, yet steadfast.
Yet there are still precious souls among us who, upon casual conversation, can be persuaded to take us back in time -- their time at war, to their lives interrupted.
It's interesting to hear the rationale for which service branch was selected. "Well, I knew I could use my mechanical engineering and machinery talents on a naval ship and frankly, I didn't think I would be much use with a gun. At 6' 4" I just figured I would be a splendid target, that's all," and the like explain why Earl entered the Navy instead of the Army as many of his New Jersey friends and neighbors did.
A couple of those Jersey fellows were Earl's high school buddies and before the war they practiced an extracurricular skill as a team -- acrobatic leveling or balancing. At one time (the now near-90 year old man was regaling me with stories encompassing the heart of a century), Earl was on his way to becoming a professional leveler. I never knew this term. But when Earl explained it to me, I could imagine how the performers who climbed higher and higher on top of him needed to count on the steady stance of the underpinning form of their colleague -- Earl. Earl, the human leveler.
As he talked, Earl's eyes twinkled remembering those days and I could almost see in my mind's eye the shapes of bodies climbing higher and higher to the sounds of awes from the audience. I felt goosebumps.
For a time it surely seemed that Earl and his band of brothers were headed for the professional performing circle. Favorable auditions were granted and they felt at age 18 the world was just beginning for them.
And then the U.S. entered WWII and the performance artists placed their skills in the hands of their country instead.
Earl and I talked about the twists and turns in one's life, how doors open and close without our awareness that sometimes they are altering our lives forever. That he would, post-war, meet a gal, Margie, in his college town, who shared his old love of acrobatics, herself using a trapeze at times, seemed almost too good to be true. Their love was immediate and he was overjoyed to discover that he could level her just like he had leveled the fellows a few years before. And so life was good for them.
As we talked over old times and how he came to become an engineer in Silicon Valley instead of the circus performer traveling on-the-road, lovely Margie walked over grinning to ask him a simple question. "What's the name of our road?"
Earl answered her gently and she happily walked back to her friends. His eyes weren't twinkling as before when he told me that Margie now has Alzheimer's Disease. But they still danced the night away at the holiday party with other retirees who returned to celebrate the occasion with fellow workers. We were grateful Earl and Margie were there.
And I was so thankful that he shared this and other vignettes of the lives of the WWII generation at a time when I'm communicating with soldiers in Iraq and some are struggling to adjust to life after Iraq. There's never a comparison between wars, eras, nor people of course.
I am reminded that real courage is born of those who serve. And those who keep a level head while continuing to 'Level' their beloved through the storms and trials of disease are heroes indeed, because their course too, like soldiers, is uncharted, yet steadfast.
12.08.2004
Nixon's Right Hand Man Tells Troops to Suck It Up
Some news days are almost too surreal to believe. Today was one of them.
Chronicling both Pres. Bush and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld's flights of fury to Camp Pendleton, CA and Camp Buehring, Kuwait respectively allowed them to acknowledge the time-honored Pearl Harbor Day occasion with real troops, not just veterans. And of course, it was to buck up the morale of the troops, the ones already there and bone weary and those who are dreading going even with all of the honorable duty talk in the world hanging over their heads.
Not surprisingly, Pres. Bush's visit was, well, presidential. Pendleton has lost around 270 Marines in Iraq. Camp Pendleton understands what sacrifice is. During the emotional visit with family members and troops, he gave the broad appeal to all Americans to help out however they can with military families. So many Americans have been doing this from the first troops' deployment; he hardly had to ask, but it was a good, strategic request of the whole country in case anyone out there has had their heads buried in P. Hilton videos. He was in fine form, truly presidential. It was only a shame that he didn't send somebody else to Kuwait instead of old Rummy.
It's possible that there are many factors at play with Rumsfeld. Age, too many years with pharmaceutical companies, and the obvious -- he's got a 'lock-in' now as a lame-duck Defense Secretary so perhaps he thinks he's untouchable. After all, did you vote for him? Think about it. How do you impeach a Defense Secretary?
Well, Secretary Rumsfeld did not prepare enough for the tone of his encounter with troops in Kuwait. You know, the kind of drill that we all learned in Business 101 -- "Worst case scenario: what do you do if the cash register jams and customers are lined up at the door?" Duh. You have to be prepared for thoughtful, seasoned, and accommodating responses to your 'customers. . .'
Like it or not, Rumsfeld, that congressional-go-lightly Princeton fellow who kowtowed to Nixon all through his Watergate days (somehow never getting burned himself), is more than a little OUT OF TOUCH with reality, the kind of reality that troops know in the field. This is the same Rumsfeld who never got the tiniest bit dirty in bloody combat himself, lucky devil. His brief aviator days in the mid-1950's allowed him to miss WWII, Korea & Vietnam. Talk about luck.
Two major points stuck in the craw of troops in the audience. Too bad more women weren't there; he might have been hissed off the stage (kidding).
1. A serious and well-presented question was asked about by a true 'Volunteer' [that's what Tennessee troops are called historically] as to why they still have inadequate supplies of armor for their vehicles. Just imagine what Pres. Bush might have said way over at Camp Pendleton. I suspect he would have said something like, "It's my understanding that we're nearly up to full capacity with supplying armor for military vehicles, but I take your question seriously and we will look into it."
Not old Rummy. He just cracked that verbal whip right back at Army Spc. Wilson and said,
"You go to war with the Army you have."
Hmmm: LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT ONE OF RUMSFELD'S OWN QUOTES, ONE OF HIS OWN RULES OF THUMB,
"Arguments of convenience lack integrity and inevitably trip you up."
Let's face it, that whole audience in Kuwait had Rummy's number and was just too darn polite to carry him to his Limo in pieces.
2. The 2nd Hot Button issue that's on many troops' minds and is more than a bit sensitive as lawsuits flurry about like a Nor'easter is the "stop loss" problem which means the effective use [or abuse] of soldiers preventing them from retiring or quitting when their time is up. It's pretty hard to not know about this from newspapers and TV programs where disabled veterans are being dragged out of their homes, 4' 8" 60-year old grandmothers are being hauled back to training, and mothers of infants who thought they had fulfilled their commitment are now in uniform. Oh yeah, it's a sensitive issue.
To say that we don't have a Draft is, in light of all of this, just a plain Lie. We may not have a lottery like we did in the 60's & 70's (yet) but we have a draft, de facto. It's just that the people taking it on the chin are those already in the military and those who have ever been in who could in any way be hauled back by some technicality.
So when Rumsfeld was asked about how much more of this "stop loss" power they were going to use on troops who would otherwise be eligible to retire or quit, quick to answer, the Defense Secretary just said that this was a good, sound principle and
"It's nothing new, it's been well understood by soldiers."
But that presumes that all of these people could simply be misguided, crazy, or wrong. But maybe something ELSE was "well understood" by these soldiers, something RUMSFELD SAID:
"I can't tell you if the use of force in Iraq today will last five days, five weeks or five months, but it won't last any longer than that."
What do we make of this Secretary, the counselor to Nixon, Reagan's envoy to Saddam Hussein (remember when he was our friend?), a man on the board of a global technology group for nuclear power stations off North Korea (remember, the Bad Guys?), and curiously the CEO of Searle who might be called "old Bitter & Sweet" who got FDA approval for an artificial sweetener by the name of aspartame. Rumsfeld's very proud of his achievements for turning business profitability around -- usually, like at Searle, it's at the expense of the jobs of rank and file workers.
Do you think Rumsfeld got the war confused with a giant Widget Factory and by losing troops and not shipping all of the supplies needed he can demonstrate greater profitability? Wow, that's tough talk isn't it, kind of like calling someone guilty of war crimes.
But, to Quote RUMSFELD:
"Prune -- prune businesses, products, activities, people. Do it annually."
But what's clear is this: Rummy's a man who loves the Business of war but only tolerates troops. Can we afford to have a Secretary of Defense who is so indifferent, antagonistic, if not hostile to the men and women who implement his plans? Is he really the Best and Brightest that our Country can find for this important job?
I'd go back to Kuwait and ask some of the men and women who spoke up at the Secretary's apperance -- ask them who they would be inspired to follow. I have faith in my fellow Americans, something that Donald Henry Rumsfeld does not share. He was not forthcoming like that Tennessee 'Volunteer' at Camp Buehring.
No, Rumsfeld did not resign at the end of the first term like so many other cabinet members. But just because he didn't offer his resignation does not mean that our President doesn't know how to request it. Let's give President Bush our support NOW to help Secretary Rumsfeld retire. We don't want to 'stop loss' him now, do we?
And if it helps ease into it, LET'S REMIND RUMSFELD OF SOME OF HIS OWN WORDS:
"Be able to resign. It will improve your value to the President and do wonders for your performance."
Chronicling both Pres. Bush and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld's flights of fury to Camp Pendleton, CA and Camp Buehring, Kuwait respectively allowed them to acknowledge the time-honored Pearl Harbor Day occasion with real troops, not just veterans. And of course, it was to buck up the morale of the troops, the ones already there and bone weary and those who are dreading going even with all of the honorable duty talk in the world hanging over their heads.
Not surprisingly, Pres. Bush's visit was, well, presidential. Pendleton has lost around 270 Marines in Iraq. Camp Pendleton understands what sacrifice is. During the emotional visit with family members and troops, he gave the broad appeal to all Americans to help out however they can with military families. So many Americans have been doing this from the first troops' deployment; he hardly had to ask, but it was a good, strategic request of the whole country in case anyone out there has had their heads buried in P. Hilton videos. He was in fine form, truly presidential. It was only a shame that he didn't send somebody else to Kuwait instead of old Rummy.
It's possible that there are many factors at play with Rumsfeld. Age, too many years with pharmaceutical companies, and the obvious -- he's got a 'lock-in' now as a lame-duck Defense Secretary so perhaps he thinks he's untouchable. After all, did you vote for him? Think about it. How do you impeach a Defense Secretary?
Well, Secretary Rumsfeld did not prepare enough for the tone of his encounter with troops in Kuwait. You know, the kind of drill that we all learned in Business 101 -- "Worst case scenario: what do you do if the cash register jams and customers are lined up at the door?" Duh. You have to be prepared for thoughtful, seasoned, and accommodating responses to your 'customers. . .'
Like it or not, Rumsfeld, that congressional-go-lightly Princeton fellow who kowtowed to Nixon all through his Watergate days (somehow never getting burned himself), is more than a little OUT OF TOUCH with reality, the kind of reality that troops know in the field. This is the same Rumsfeld who never got the tiniest bit dirty in bloody combat himself, lucky devil. His brief aviator days in the mid-1950's allowed him to miss WWII, Korea & Vietnam. Talk about luck.
Two major points stuck in the craw of troops in the audience. Too bad more women weren't there; he might have been hissed off the stage (kidding).
1. A serious and well-presented question was asked about by a true 'Volunteer' [that's what Tennessee troops are called historically] as to why they still have inadequate supplies of armor for their vehicles. Just imagine what Pres. Bush might have said way over at Camp Pendleton. I suspect he would have said something like, "It's my understanding that we're nearly up to full capacity with supplying armor for military vehicles, but I take your question seriously and we will look into it."
Not old Rummy. He just cracked that verbal whip right back at Army Spc. Wilson and said,
"You go to war with the Army you have."
Hmmm: LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT ONE OF RUMSFELD'S OWN QUOTES, ONE OF HIS OWN RULES OF THUMB,
"Arguments of convenience lack integrity and inevitably trip you up."
Let's face it, that whole audience in Kuwait had Rummy's number and was just too darn polite to carry him to his Limo in pieces.
2. The 2nd Hot Button issue that's on many troops' minds and is more than a bit sensitive as lawsuits flurry about like a Nor'easter is the "stop loss" problem which means the effective use [or abuse] of soldiers preventing them from retiring or quitting when their time is up. It's pretty hard to not know about this from newspapers and TV programs where disabled veterans are being dragged out of their homes, 4' 8" 60-year old grandmothers are being hauled back to training, and mothers of infants who thought they had fulfilled their commitment are now in uniform. Oh yeah, it's a sensitive issue.
To say that we don't have a Draft is, in light of all of this, just a plain Lie. We may not have a lottery like we did in the 60's & 70's (yet) but we have a draft, de facto. It's just that the people taking it on the chin are those already in the military and those who have ever been in who could in any way be hauled back by some technicality.
So when Rumsfeld was asked about how much more of this "stop loss" power they were going to use on troops who would otherwise be eligible to retire or quit, quick to answer, the Defense Secretary just said that this was a good, sound principle and
"It's nothing new, it's been well understood by soldiers."
But that presumes that all of these people could simply be misguided, crazy, or wrong. But maybe something ELSE was "well understood" by these soldiers, something RUMSFELD SAID:
"I can't tell you if the use of force in Iraq today will last five days, five weeks or five months, but it won't last any longer than that."
What do we make of this Secretary, the counselor to Nixon, Reagan's envoy to Saddam Hussein (remember when he was our friend?), a man on the board of a global technology group for nuclear power stations off North Korea (remember, the Bad Guys?), and curiously the CEO of Searle who might be called "old Bitter & Sweet" who got FDA approval for an artificial sweetener by the name of aspartame. Rumsfeld's very proud of his achievements for turning business profitability around -- usually, like at Searle, it's at the expense of the jobs of rank and file workers.
Do you think Rumsfeld got the war confused with a giant Widget Factory and by losing troops and not shipping all of the supplies needed he can demonstrate greater profitability? Wow, that's tough talk isn't it, kind of like calling someone guilty of war crimes.
But, to Quote RUMSFELD:
"Prune -- prune businesses, products, activities, people. Do it annually."
But what's clear is this: Rummy's a man who loves the Business of war but only tolerates troops. Can we afford to have a Secretary of Defense who is so indifferent, antagonistic, if not hostile to the men and women who implement his plans? Is he really the Best and Brightest that our Country can find for this important job?
I'd go back to Kuwait and ask some of the men and women who spoke up at the Secretary's apperance -- ask them who they would be inspired to follow. I have faith in my fellow Americans, something that Donald Henry Rumsfeld does not share. He was not forthcoming like that Tennessee 'Volunteer' at Camp Buehring.
No, Rumsfeld did not resign at the end of the first term like so many other cabinet members. But just because he didn't offer his resignation does not mean that our President doesn't know how to request it. Let's give President Bush our support NOW to help Secretary Rumsfeld retire. We don't want to 'stop loss' him now, do we?
And if it helps ease into it, LET'S REMIND RUMSFELD OF SOME OF HIS OWN WORDS:
"Be able to resign. It will improve your value to the President and do wonders for your performance."
12.06.2004
Killed in Service
There will be many more analyses, investigative hours, and possible charges over the recent report that NFL player turned-soldier Corporal (Army Ranger) Pat Tilman was killed last April by ‘friendly fire’ in Afghanistan. The tragedy of his death stands alongside the collective tragedies of more than 1,400 coalition troops as of this writing.
When you step one hour, one day, one week or one year away from the fact of the individual case what remains is this – he or she is dead, just the same. However, wherever, and whenever the loss, the loss remains as true and real to those who know what loss really is.
Not all deaths are reported and counted in the same way, however. And the “KIA” (killed in action) numbers are the ones we, the public, tend to watch closely. (It makes me wonder if COs are given performance evaluations in which their mortality counts are a measure of their success so they don't want those car accidents, heart-attacks, and drug overdoses to drag their record down.)
Further, we can’t help but marvel at the slug-sticky trail left by those (official investigators?) whose tangled webs were well practiced to confuse or deceive us (to mix metaphors while mangling a quotation along the way) about the truth behind the big 'incidents.'
And that brings us back to Corporal Tilman. Much will be made of this friendly fire incident because of Tilman’s high profile case – he was well known, highly admired, fondly respected and loved by many.
But there are also lesser known cases of friendly fire that we ought to study just as earnestly if we are to learn anything about our commitment to troops and to truth.
Take Marine Corporal Jason David Mileo, for example. Mileo, from Pasadena, Maryland, survived the April 2003 assault on Baghdad but was mistaken for an enemy soldier when he was killed. It took a year for military investigators to lay partial blame on Cpl. Mileo (!) for causing the confusion that led to his own death.
According to the U.S. Central Command, Cpl. Mileo (at the time, unarmed) had removed his flak jacket and helmet and was smoking a cigarette – conduct violations – when he was shot in the back by fellow Marine snipers and spotter. Yet, the report, a full year in the making, absolved military responsibility by saying:
“Even though no one event or person was the catalyst for Corporal Mileo’s death, one break in the chain of events may have spared his life.”
Hmmm. . .I'd like to know who wrote that line; it's sort of Zen-like, kind of out of touch with the Reality that most of us know and live with.
Counting ‘friendly fire’ deaths is perhaps the hardest count of all because of the admission of guilt and the implicit responsibility (public outrage, loss of support for the war, lawsuits, to name a few) that accompanies it. But it’s hard to tell the survivors of those who died from accidents, ‘noncombat weapon discharge,’ disease, or even suicide that their loved ones’ deaths were not brought on at least in substantial part by their service to their country.
It’s time that the algorithm change. Since the U.S. Civil War, at least, military deaths have been tracked by disease, accident, suicide, death-in-combat, murder, among other categories.
But just as we don’t send out brightly dressed fifers and drummers in advance of marching troops anymore because it doesn’t fit modern warfare techniques, we need to stop segregating deaths-in-service by cause.
The aggregate death count – the total count of souls lost -- is good enough for me because they all matter, even those whose futile destinies lay in their own hands by their acts.
After we’ve seen the movie based on the death of Cpl. Tilman, try to remember the movies that you won’t see – of young fellows like Cpl. Mileo whose father's thoughts should linger with us all:
“His death was noble because he was a soldier who willingly went into battle to fight for freedom and liberty and he fell. And he lost his life.”
What else is there to say? The count with Tilman and Mileo?
Two more were “killed in service” of their country.
Period.
When you step one hour, one day, one week or one year away from the fact of the individual case what remains is this – he or she is dead, just the same. However, wherever, and whenever the loss, the loss remains as true and real to those who know what loss really is.
Not all deaths are reported and counted in the same way, however. And the “KIA” (killed in action) numbers are the ones we, the public, tend to watch closely. (It makes me wonder if COs are given performance evaluations in which their mortality counts are a measure of their success so they don't want those car accidents, heart-attacks, and drug overdoses to drag their record down.)
Further, we can’t help but marvel at the slug-sticky trail left by those (official investigators?) whose tangled webs were well practiced to confuse or deceive us (to mix metaphors while mangling a quotation along the way) about the truth behind the big 'incidents.'
And that brings us back to Corporal Tilman. Much will be made of this friendly fire incident because of Tilman’s high profile case – he was well known, highly admired, fondly respected and loved by many.
But there are also lesser known cases of friendly fire that we ought to study just as earnestly if we are to learn anything about our commitment to troops and to truth.
Take Marine Corporal Jason David Mileo, for example. Mileo, from Pasadena, Maryland, survived the April 2003 assault on Baghdad but was mistaken for an enemy soldier when he was killed. It took a year for military investigators to lay partial blame on Cpl. Mileo (!) for causing the confusion that led to his own death.
According to the U.S. Central Command, Cpl. Mileo (at the time, unarmed) had removed his flak jacket and helmet and was smoking a cigarette – conduct violations – when he was shot in the back by fellow Marine snipers and spotter. Yet, the report, a full year in the making, absolved military responsibility by saying:
“Even though no one event or person was the catalyst for Corporal Mileo’s death, one break in the chain of events may have spared his life.”
Hmmm. . .I'd like to know who wrote that line; it's sort of Zen-like, kind of out of touch with the Reality that most of us know and live with.
Counting ‘friendly fire’ deaths is perhaps the hardest count of all because of the admission of guilt and the implicit responsibility (public outrage, loss of support for the war, lawsuits, to name a few) that accompanies it. But it’s hard to tell the survivors of those who died from accidents, ‘noncombat weapon discharge,’ disease, or even suicide that their loved ones’ deaths were not brought on at least in substantial part by their service to their country.
It’s time that the algorithm change. Since the U.S. Civil War, at least, military deaths have been tracked by disease, accident, suicide, death-in-combat, murder, among other categories.
But just as we don’t send out brightly dressed fifers and drummers in advance of marching troops anymore because it doesn’t fit modern warfare techniques, we need to stop segregating deaths-in-service by cause.
The aggregate death count – the total count of souls lost -- is good enough for me because they all matter, even those whose futile destinies lay in their own hands by their acts.
After we’ve seen the movie based on the death of Cpl. Tilman, try to remember the movies that you won’t see – of young fellows like Cpl. Mileo whose father's thoughts should linger with us all:
“His death was noble because he was a soldier who willingly went into battle to fight for freedom and liberty and he fell. And he lost his life.”
What else is there to say? The count with Tilman and Mileo?
Two more were “killed in service” of their country.
Period.
12.05.2004
Milbloggers & the 'Experts'
[The following letter was sent to a Northeast newspaper to set the record straight on their reporting.]
Dear newspaper editor,
Thanks to the Internet, we're reading your newspaper in Baghdad as well as in Arizona. Your November 21, 2004 article ("Dispatches from the front") warrants some serious clarification for readers.
You see, as it is, the reporter might have left you with the impression that a Milblog by the handle "Life in this Girl's Army" was an easy kick-back "college kid's diary." On the contrary. Those of us who have kept up with Sgt. Lizzie's writings know that this Blog was a creative and expressive outlet for her and a way to stay in touch with family and friends.
Along the way (and not part of her own plan, I might add) she's educated perfect strangers like me and connected us with other Bloggers, creating a pretty powerful network of that old American spirit. You remember -- people extending their hands and helping each other as they best can.
Multiply the power that comes from someone like Sgt. Lizzie! Just imagine, because of her, in a small way I've helped a horribly injured soldier get his family to Walter Reed; 'adopted'
the family of a deployed Marine for holiday support; sent telephone calling cards to soldiers; and helped a returning reservist's family who unfairly lost his stateside job get back on their feet. Again, I say, multiply the power that comes from Sgt. Lizzie's impact on others.
Well, yesterday, Dec. 4, in that foreign soil, wearing her uniform in service of her country, Sgt. Lizzie's truck hit an IED. (We learned from her mother who updated her Blogsite.) You see, no one in Iraq is a "college kid" as you suggested. No one is exempt from great peril, pain, suffering, and death.
Sgt. Lizzie was injured, was hospitalized, but she was lucky; her comrade, the driver, behind her, God rest her soul, was not so blessed.
It would do a gross disservice to the military personnel who serve in Iraq or elsewhere in the world in harm's way (as well as Sgt. Lizzie, in particular, since she was identified in this article) if your information was not updated for readers.
"Dispatches from the front?" Not such a simplistic article to write, now is it?
You see, just like looking in our rear-view mirrors, "Objects may be larger than they seem." When you read a Milblog in the future, do not trivialize what you do not understand.
Dear newspaper editor,
Thanks to the Internet, we're reading your newspaper in Baghdad as well as in Arizona. Your November 21, 2004 article ("Dispatches from the front") warrants some serious clarification for readers.
You see, as it is, the reporter might have left you with the impression that a Milblog by the handle "Life in this Girl's Army" was an easy kick-back "college kid's diary." On the contrary. Those of us who have kept up with Sgt. Lizzie's writings know that this Blog was a creative and expressive outlet for her and a way to stay in touch with family and friends.
Along the way (and not part of her own plan, I might add) she's educated perfect strangers like me and connected us with other Bloggers, creating a pretty powerful network of that old American spirit. You remember -- people extending their hands and helping each other as they best can.
Multiply the power that comes from someone like Sgt. Lizzie! Just imagine, because of her, in a small way I've helped a horribly injured soldier get his family to Walter Reed; 'adopted'
the family of a deployed Marine for holiday support; sent telephone calling cards to soldiers; and helped a returning reservist's family who unfairly lost his stateside job get back on their feet. Again, I say, multiply the power that comes from Sgt. Lizzie's impact on others.
Well, yesterday, Dec. 4, in that foreign soil, wearing her uniform in service of her country, Sgt. Lizzie's truck hit an IED. (We learned from her mother who updated her Blogsite.) You see, no one in Iraq is a "college kid" as you suggested. No one is exempt from great peril, pain, suffering, and death.
Sgt. Lizzie was injured, was hospitalized, but she was lucky; her comrade, the driver, behind her, God rest her soul, was not so blessed.
It would do a gross disservice to the military personnel who serve in Iraq or elsewhere in the world in harm's way (as well as Sgt. Lizzie, in particular, since she was identified in this article) if your information was not updated for readers.
"Dispatches from the front?" Not such a simplistic article to write, now is it?
You see, just like looking in our rear-view mirrors, "Objects may be larger than they seem." When you read a Milblog in the future, do not trivialize what you do not understand.
Santa & His Grinch
Doesn't seem fair on top of everything else to be picking on Santa, does it?
But out there, in shopping malls and department stores around the U.S., thousands of children line up to sit on Santa's lap and tell their innermost secrets and wishes for the Christmas season. Turns out, this is good for business too. You see, Santa Claus helps bring in numbers of shoppers who spend extra time and dollars that keep the private sector as profitable as possible. That profit comes at our expense -- yours and mine. So, Santa's visitation is also being underwritten by you and me and the impact of our hard-earned dollars is seen in those centers of shopping delight. My thought is this: I 'own' part of Santa and you do too!
Here's what's on my list for Santa this year. Instead of telling children of soldiers who are deployed in military service in Iraq and elsewhere that their parents (who cannot afford the rip-off 'studio portrait package') may not use their own cameras to take a couple of their own photos of their kid on Santa's lap, welcome dependents of Military Families warmly and with Dignity to a modest giveaway package that won't break anybody's corporate bank account. That is, try a little human kindness. Give a little for goodness sake. For some of these families the 'kid-on-Santa's lap picture' was going back to Iraq with the troops for their next deployment -- any day now.
Don't make me name names you corporate Grinches! Get your magic marker and a poster board and mark up the latest special for Military Troops and Their Families (with ID of course) your best offer and win some goodwill and additional business besides.
Because the war will be over someday, so we hope, and some of us won't forget what corporate citizens do for our troops and their families when it matters.
But out there, in shopping malls and department stores around the U.S., thousands of children line up to sit on Santa's lap and tell their innermost secrets and wishes for the Christmas season. Turns out, this is good for business too. You see, Santa Claus helps bring in numbers of shoppers who spend extra time and dollars that keep the private sector as profitable as possible. That profit comes at our expense -- yours and mine. So, Santa's visitation is also being underwritten by you and me and the impact of our hard-earned dollars is seen in those centers of shopping delight. My thought is this: I 'own' part of Santa and you do too!
Here's what's on my list for Santa this year. Instead of telling children of soldiers who are deployed in military service in Iraq and elsewhere that their parents (who cannot afford the rip-off 'studio portrait package') may not use their own cameras to take a couple of their own photos of their kid on Santa's lap, welcome dependents of Military Families warmly and with Dignity to a modest giveaway package that won't break anybody's corporate bank account. That is, try a little human kindness. Give a little for goodness sake. For some of these families the 'kid-on-Santa's lap picture' was going back to Iraq with the troops for their next deployment -- any day now.
Don't make me name names you corporate Grinches! Get your magic marker and a poster board and mark up the latest special for Military Troops and Their Families (with ID of course) your best offer and win some goodwill and additional business besides.
Because the war will be over someday, so we hope, and some of us won't forget what corporate citizens do for our troops and their families when it matters.
11.18.2004
4 Degrees of Separation
Until 1947 the U.S. had a peculiar succession plan should disaster strike both the president and the vice-president. The reins of power in those days were to be turned over to the senior cabinet official -- the Secretary of State.
For many ponderous reasons, Congress debated this situation for years and finally enacted a law in '47 which placed 2 additional persons between the the White House and the Cabinet, in the line of Succession, that is. First the Speaker of the House would be the next in line for the office of the presidency and if he or she was unable to serve, it would turn to the Senate president pro tempore.
Clearly having ELECTED representation closer to the succession plan was at least part of the intent. Otherwise, you might end up with something unexpected, like someone, say who's never run for city council, never served a day in military service, never raised a family, or never sat around town hall tables listening to constituents and helping problem-solve their difficulties. You might end up with someone without a clue of diplomacy. You might also end up with someone in the Oval Office who doesn't have a close grip on what most of us call a sense of 'reality' -- a sense of the responsibility for the heartbeat of the nation.
In looking back at the days of the Cold War, the Kruschev regime, the dreaded 'duck & cover' atomic bomb drills of grade school in the 1960's, it's worth reflecting on the people who have held the office of Secretary of State. What negotiating skills, interpersonal warmth and appeal, and modern-day knowledge coupled with wisdom and savvy judgment from a long career did he or she bring to the U.S. - International table?
At any dinner party, you're going to be hard-pressed to get anyone to name 6 out of the last 12 Secretaries of State. They seem to matter a lot when they're in office. When they're gone, unless they're Henry Kissinger who never tires of the limelight, they mostly wait to collect their Presidential Medal of Freedom. Of course, there are exceptions.
What you notice, though, is that nearly all have had lives of deep public service long before being asked to fill the office of Secretary of State. Military service is just one component of public service such as seen in the histories of Dean Rusk, Wm. Rogers, Kissinger, Cyrus Vance, Warren Christopher, and notably Colin Powell. Although in the case of the first woman, Madeleine Albright (the first female Secretary of State --under Clinton), she did not serve militarily. Some Secretaries of State also had distinguished careers as elected officials such as Christian Herter (Gov. of Mass., & Congressman) and Edmund Muskie (Senator). Visibly serving the international diplomatic community through UN appointment is another way in which Secretaries of State in-the-making (in hindsight) have 'earned their spurs' such as William Rogers and Madeleine Albright.
Some recent Secretaries of State have served their administrations well beyond that office. George Schultz uniquely racks a resume as Sec. of State, Sec. of Treasury, and the Sec. of Labor crossing decades of service. James A. Baker III not only served as White House Chief of Staff, he was chair of the president's Economic Policy Committee and was Undersecretary of Commerce.
One cannot help but come away with a view that the last 40+ years worth of Secretaries of State is quite impressive no matter whose administration they served politically. It is not a merely partisan matter. The breadth of talent, personal command, wherewithal, meaningful interpersonal connections and genuine goodwill to draw upon all contributes to a tidy dowry that any Secretary of State brings to bear in the office.
So why are so many people, even those close to the president, having a giant Rolaid moment over his insistence that Dr. Condoleezza Rice (he nicknamed her "the Warrior Princess") is the best "American face to the world" and her nomination for Secretary of State should be expediently supported by Congress?
Recently both Pat Buchanan and Jay Rockefeller (a contrast, let's agree) shared their deep concern over President Bush's nomination of Dr. Rice. (Calling this to question is akin to calling the president's judgment to question; otherwise. . . why go there? The president's deep attachment to Dr. Rice is unsettling, though.)
Their reasons were different, however. Buchanan felt that a Secretary of State must be independent of the White House to be effective. That is, he or she must be able to bristle the White House from time to time if he or she is doing the job well. There's just too much at stake to be a 'Yes man/woman' token spokesperson for the White House. He didn't think that Dr. Rice could be independent. Rockefeller, on the other hand, felt that Dr. Rice's lack of 'sterling' success as a Leader in the NSA would hamper her ability at State and that she wasn't sufficiently 'seasoned' to step into 'shoes that big' (my metaphor, not his). That Dr. Rice's driving influence in international politics should be her professor/mentor, Dr. Albright's late father, Josef Korbel, is just a little more of the peculiar.
Dr. Rice has spent the last recent years grooming the president on foreign affairs particularly. They work hand-in-glove. Heck, they work so closely that she sometimes has been heard to slip and refer to him as her "husband." It's all understandable. And it's also understandable that his zealous laudatory remarks about her illustrious career would cause her to weep on stage. True, I can't picture Kissinger weeping for Nixon, but then it's an emotional time, right?
Having worked for years to see women and minorities advance in public service careers, this is a time when I want to feel good about the appointment of Dr. Rice. I don't though. She might make an amazing undersecretary to the Right person, who, though, I'm not even entertaining because the die is cast, I know.
Is she truly the BEST American to represent the U.S. to the world diplomatically at this critical time? No. It's simply not possible. Look at her credentials. Look at her performance. Look at her historic profile. We know more about her background in academics, ballet, piano, song, and sports than can be fairly articulated by a panel of spokespersons for her as a diplomatic leader.
Where are her supporters -- besides the Bush family that is? Bring out Al Haig, Kissinger, Albright, Baker, Schultz, and deeply examine what former Secretaries of State know must be present for a Sec. of State to make it work on the global front. Who knows better than they do?
Poll some of our strongest allies. We surely have some, right? Shouldn't we care what some of our allies think about, well. . . Anything?
Every cabinet appointment, especially Secretary of State, should not be the opportunity to pay back historic thanks for sticking around and working hard. Think about it -- who will turn the lights out in Texas at this rate?
Not long ago, 'Condi' Rice said in an interview that she would not stay for Bush's 2nd term. Of course, she was with the NSA then. After Powell's departure, is Condi really the answer? I think in fairness to her, the president should cut her some freedom and let her return to academia where she can write about an amazing four years. Because the next four will only read tragically for her, if not the nation, and we can ill afford that now.
Dig deeper Mr. President, you will find the likes of a Colin Powell, George Schultz, or William Rogers if you just scan the horizon beyond your security blanket.
Don't bring us a Warrior Prince or a Warrior Princess; bring us a Secretary of State worthy of the office and the responsibility. Bring us someone who will tell you to take a weekend and go home to Crawford when Karl just wants to meddle in world diplomacy just because he can.
But most of all, in that remote possibility, that you, VP Cheney, Speaker Hastert, and Senate Pres. Pro Tempore Stevens have all eaten a bad batch of oysters some weekend at Kennebunkport, appoint a Secretary of State who will be able to stand and deliver.
We deserve it. We ask it. To be clear, we demand nothing less. After the bad oysters, it's just 4 degrees of separation for the Sec. of State since 1947 -- to the Oval Office.
For many ponderous reasons, Congress debated this situation for years and finally enacted a law in '47 which placed 2 additional persons between the the White House and the Cabinet, in the line of Succession, that is. First the Speaker of the House would be the next in line for the office of the presidency and if he or she was unable to serve, it would turn to the Senate president pro tempore.
Clearly having ELECTED representation closer to the succession plan was at least part of the intent. Otherwise, you might end up with something unexpected, like someone, say who's never run for city council, never served a day in military service, never raised a family, or never sat around town hall tables listening to constituents and helping problem-solve their difficulties. You might end up with someone without a clue of diplomacy. You might also end up with someone in the Oval Office who doesn't have a close grip on what most of us call a sense of 'reality' -- a sense of the responsibility for the heartbeat of the nation.
In looking back at the days of the Cold War, the Kruschev regime, the dreaded 'duck & cover' atomic bomb drills of grade school in the 1960's, it's worth reflecting on the people who have held the office of Secretary of State. What negotiating skills, interpersonal warmth and appeal, and modern-day knowledge coupled with wisdom and savvy judgment from a long career did he or she bring to the U.S. - International table?
At any dinner party, you're going to be hard-pressed to get anyone to name 6 out of the last 12 Secretaries of State. They seem to matter a lot when they're in office. When they're gone, unless they're Henry Kissinger who never tires of the limelight, they mostly wait to collect their Presidential Medal of Freedom. Of course, there are exceptions.
What you notice, though, is that nearly all have had lives of deep public service long before being asked to fill the office of Secretary of State. Military service is just one component of public service such as seen in the histories of Dean Rusk, Wm. Rogers, Kissinger, Cyrus Vance, Warren Christopher, and notably Colin Powell. Although in the case of the first woman, Madeleine Albright (the first female Secretary of State --under Clinton), she did not serve militarily. Some Secretaries of State also had distinguished careers as elected officials such as Christian Herter (Gov. of Mass., & Congressman) and Edmund Muskie (Senator). Visibly serving the international diplomatic community through UN appointment is another way in which Secretaries of State in-the-making (in hindsight) have 'earned their spurs' such as William Rogers and Madeleine Albright.
Some recent Secretaries of State have served their administrations well beyond that office. George Schultz uniquely racks a resume as Sec. of State, Sec. of Treasury, and the Sec. of Labor crossing decades of service. James A. Baker III not only served as White House Chief of Staff, he was chair of the president's Economic Policy Committee and was Undersecretary of Commerce.
One cannot help but come away with a view that the last 40+ years worth of Secretaries of State is quite impressive no matter whose administration they served politically. It is not a merely partisan matter. The breadth of talent, personal command, wherewithal, meaningful interpersonal connections and genuine goodwill to draw upon all contributes to a tidy dowry that any Secretary of State brings to bear in the office.
So why are so many people, even those close to the president, having a giant Rolaid moment over his insistence that Dr. Condoleezza Rice (he nicknamed her "the Warrior Princess") is the best "American face to the world" and her nomination for Secretary of State should be expediently supported by Congress?
Recently both Pat Buchanan and Jay Rockefeller (a contrast, let's agree) shared their deep concern over President Bush's nomination of Dr. Rice. (Calling this to question is akin to calling the president's judgment to question; otherwise. . . why go there? The president's deep attachment to Dr. Rice is unsettling, though.)
Their reasons were different, however. Buchanan felt that a Secretary of State must be independent of the White House to be effective. That is, he or she must be able to bristle the White House from time to time if he or she is doing the job well. There's just too much at stake to be a 'Yes man/woman' token spokesperson for the White House. He didn't think that Dr. Rice could be independent. Rockefeller, on the other hand, felt that Dr. Rice's lack of 'sterling' success as a Leader in the NSA would hamper her ability at State and that she wasn't sufficiently 'seasoned' to step into 'shoes that big' (my metaphor, not his). That Dr. Rice's driving influence in international politics should be her professor/mentor, Dr. Albright's late father, Josef Korbel, is just a little more of the peculiar.
Dr. Rice has spent the last recent years grooming the president on foreign affairs particularly. They work hand-in-glove. Heck, they work so closely that she sometimes has been heard to slip and refer to him as her "husband." It's all understandable. And it's also understandable that his zealous laudatory remarks about her illustrious career would cause her to weep on stage. True, I can't picture Kissinger weeping for Nixon, but then it's an emotional time, right?
Having worked for years to see women and minorities advance in public service careers, this is a time when I want to feel good about the appointment of Dr. Rice. I don't though. She might make an amazing undersecretary to the Right person, who, though, I'm not even entertaining because the die is cast, I know.
Is she truly the BEST American to represent the U.S. to the world diplomatically at this critical time? No. It's simply not possible. Look at her credentials. Look at her performance. Look at her historic profile. We know more about her background in academics, ballet, piano, song, and sports than can be fairly articulated by a panel of spokespersons for her as a diplomatic leader.
Where are her supporters -- besides the Bush family that is? Bring out Al Haig, Kissinger, Albright, Baker, Schultz, and deeply examine what former Secretaries of State know must be present for a Sec. of State to make it work on the global front. Who knows better than they do?
Poll some of our strongest allies. We surely have some, right? Shouldn't we care what some of our allies think about, well. . . Anything?
Every cabinet appointment, especially Secretary of State, should not be the opportunity to pay back historic thanks for sticking around and working hard. Think about it -- who will turn the lights out in Texas at this rate?
Not long ago, 'Condi' Rice said in an interview that she would not stay for Bush's 2nd term. Of course, she was with the NSA then. After Powell's departure, is Condi really the answer? I think in fairness to her, the president should cut her some freedom and let her return to academia where she can write about an amazing four years. Because the next four will only read tragically for her, if not the nation, and we can ill afford that now.
Dig deeper Mr. President, you will find the likes of a Colin Powell, George Schultz, or William Rogers if you just scan the horizon beyond your security blanket.
Don't bring us a Warrior Prince or a Warrior Princess; bring us a Secretary of State worthy of the office and the responsibility. Bring us someone who will tell you to take a weekend and go home to Crawford when Karl just wants to meddle in world diplomacy just because he can.
But most of all, in that remote possibility, that you, VP Cheney, Speaker Hastert, and Senate Pres. Pro Tempore Stevens have all eaten a bad batch of oysters some weekend at Kennebunkport, appoint a Secretary of State who will be able to stand and deliver.
We deserve it. We ask it. To be clear, we demand nothing less. After the bad oysters, it's just 4 degrees of separation for the Sec. of State since 1947 -- to the Oval Office.
11.12.2004
Saving us FROM Private Ryan?
November 11, Veteran's Day, is already an emotional day for many of us. It's a day of remembering, of honoring those whose contributions in service of their county is brought full center once a year, once again.
Veterans come in all shape and sizes. Some are hospitalized; some don't remember much due to dementia type diseases or brain injuries in combat. Yes, some towns still put on remarkable parades to honor veterans and their families who made contributions on the homefront. Thousands of little flags blow in the winds across meadows and over hills of national cemeteries and town plots of the entire country.
Describing the concept of Veteran's Day is practically like describing Mom's home-made apple pie. Try to find someone to quarrel with it. Pretty dang hard to do. Ma's pie's not likely to go away anytime soon; neither will Veteran's Day.
Then this year, it got squirrely on us thanks to the lawyer-laden Federal Communication Commission (FCC), chaired by Michael K. Powell, coincidentally the son of General Colin Powell. Long before Michael Powell headed the FCC, he became a veteran who was injured during his military service. [Later he became an attorney. Then he was VP's Dick Cheney's policy advisor.]
It merits knowing a little more about the FCC because in anticipation of their Sanctioning (= Big $$ Fine) a television network, many tv stations felt they could not take the risk to show a particular movie due to its Violence and Profanity. This movie is particularly relevant to Veteran's Day and has garnered numerous awards and is recognized as one that has touched both the intellect and hearts of millions including veterans who have seen it since its release a few years ago -- "Saving Private Ryan."
The human miscalculations of war, military ego, human misfortune, life on the razor's edge, noble intent, pursuit of honor, execution of orders, doing the 'right thing,' the interminable legacy of memory on survivors, and putting another's life before your own are all insights learned from a cinematic portrayal of the World War Two D-Day Invasion. In gatherings of friends of a certain age, it was nearly impossible in the months following the movie's release not to have heard the remark that someone's father or uncle had experienced a significant break-through in repressed war memories and after a half century was beginning to talk about what happened so long ago. Peace, for war survivors, was coming although it had taken the shank of life in coming.
Now imagine that in 2004 TV programmers thought that a time when we have troops in harm's way and we have a Veteran's Day right at hand, an unabridged showing of "Saving Private Ryan," might be a good thing for people to see. Of course, we all know that the On/Off switch still exists on television sets and the channel changer button still permits a modification should someone not care to see the programming first displayed.
For my part this time (since I've seen "Ryan" twice), I watched the HBO special, "Last Letters from Iraq," a shorter yet powerful 1-hour program based on actual families and the significance of portions of actual letters they read out loud. The program did not intend to be representative of all of the 1100+ US troops lost in Iraq; it just meant to tell a story of loss, of some of those lost in the line of duty. It was provocative and did its job. I will remember it always. I wiped my eyes in reverence knowing that this hour-long program could be and might be 3-hours long someday soon.
I imagine anyone watching "Private Ryan" in the regions that had the guts to show it were wiping their eyes too. Were they harmed for the watching? Nah?
Were small children really up late watching it? Nah. . .can't imagine it.
Might they have observed an act of violence if they were in the room or heard what we now call 'expletives deleted' for a swear word. Hmmm -- yeah, might have, but probably no worse than heard in the neighbor kids' big brother's bedroom or walking across the high school basketball court during gym class.
And on the other hand, what if a high school English writing class had shown the HBO program "Last Letters Home?" Would anyone have been ruined for life? I don't recall any profanity. There were signs of family frustration and descriptions of learning about loved ones' deaths in painful ways. Families would need help with grief management for a long time to come. Would this disturb a student? I'd hope so. It would mean they are human after all. Should everyone see such things? Without hesitation, yes. Family and community pain is also a cost of war.
Moments, episodes, singular events of sorts are rarely ones that have such power for defining the totality of our lives. We are already 'set' in some direction; we are not aimless in all walks of our lives. And on this course, we just have to 'get a grip.'
But the FCC is the the Ultimate Judge and Jury of What will be in Your Interest and Mine. The commission serves 5-year terms by request of the presidents, with only 3 may be members of the same political party -- which indicates party affiliation is an explicit need-to-know issue.
Besides Chairman Powell, the other FCC commissioners are attorneys except for Michael J. Capps (PhD U.S. History) and Jonathan S. Adelstein. Kathleen Q. Abernathy and Kevin J. Martin both have prestigious law schools and bars behind them.
As a matter of the FCC's 'process engineering' it is not clear why the networks and stations perceive such a hostile relationship with them when they at best want to understand clearly the rules so that they will be on the 'right side of the law.' However, the FCC does not permit them to 'float' a scenario in advance for them to respond to, such as the "Saving Private Ryan" scenario; they will let them know afterword. Later would be. . . well, too late, unless you're Daddy Deep-pockets! So there's a kind of lunacy built into the system that is supposed to be working for you and me that must be extricated.
Listen, do we think there won't be at least a few movies made about our war in Iraq? Do we think that they won't contain scenes of violence and that to be authentic you might not hear profanity? Come on; you can practically get that by listening closely to the imbedded reporters' remarks real-time.
And how do you think it will play to those faces OVER There? Remember them? The ones who fight for us? The ones who dream of us and crave our approval of their performance? The ones who write those "Last Letters Home?"
If we can't let 'Private Ryan' have his due in a cultural setting, it sends the wrong message to present-day troops about what their stories will mean to us when they need to be heard and whether each of them will matter. Get it?
Maybe we're at a point where we don't need the FCC anymore. We may need something for checks and balances, but this kind of tyrrany shouldn't cause the whole USA so much heartburn. Take a Tums instead and do something constructive with your annoyance at Big Brother's zealous oversight once again.
You can email the commissioners by going to their website, www.fcc.gov.
Go ahead, you know you want to; just do it -- Share your thoughts with them!
Veterans come in all shape and sizes. Some are hospitalized; some don't remember much due to dementia type diseases or brain injuries in combat. Yes, some towns still put on remarkable parades to honor veterans and their families who made contributions on the homefront. Thousands of little flags blow in the winds across meadows and over hills of national cemeteries and town plots of the entire country.
Describing the concept of Veteran's Day is practically like describing Mom's home-made apple pie. Try to find someone to quarrel with it. Pretty dang hard to do. Ma's pie's not likely to go away anytime soon; neither will Veteran's Day.
Then this year, it got squirrely on us thanks to the lawyer-laden Federal Communication Commission (FCC), chaired by Michael K. Powell, coincidentally the son of General Colin Powell. Long before Michael Powell headed the FCC, he became a veteran who was injured during his military service. [Later he became an attorney. Then he was VP's Dick Cheney's policy advisor.]
It merits knowing a little more about the FCC because in anticipation of their Sanctioning (= Big $$ Fine) a television network, many tv stations felt they could not take the risk to show a particular movie due to its Violence and Profanity. This movie is particularly relevant to Veteran's Day and has garnered numerous awards and is recognized as one that has touched both the intellect and hearts of millions including veterans who have seen it since its release a few years ago -- "Saving Private Ryan."
The human miscalculations of war, military ego, human misfortune, life on the razor's edge, noble intent, pursuit of honor, execution of orders, doing the 'right thing,' the interminable legacy of memory on survivors, and putting another's life before your own are all insights learned from a cinematic portrayal of the World War Two D-Day Invasion. In gatherings of friends of a certain age, it was nearly impossible in the months following the movie's release not to have heard the remark that someone's father or uncle had experienced a significant break-through in repressed war memories and after a half century was beginning to talk about what happened so long ago. Peace, for war survivors, was coming although it had taken the shank of life in coming.
Now imagine that in 2004 TV programmers thought that a time when we have troops in harm's way and we have a Veteran's Day right at hand, an unabridged showing of "Saving Private Ryan," might be a good thing for people to see. Of course, we all know that the On/Off switch still exists on television sets and the channel changer button still permits a modification should someone not care to see the programming first displayed.
For my part this time (since I've seen "Ryan" twice), I watched the HBO special, "Last Letters from Iraq," a shorter yet powerful 1-hour program based on actual families and the significance of portions of actual letters they read out loud. The program did not intend to be representative of all of the 1100+ US troops lost in Iraq; it just meant to tell a story of loss, of some of those lost in the line of duty. It was provocative and did its job. I will remember it always. I wiped my eyes in reverence knowing that this hour-long program could be and might be 3-hours long someday soon.
I imagine anyone watching "Private Ryan" in the regions that had the guts to show it were wiping their eyes too. Were they harmed for the watching? Nah?
Were small children really up late watching it? Nah. . .can't imagine it.
Might they have observed an act of violence if they were in the room or heard what we now call 'expletives deleted' for a swear word. Hmmm -- yeah, might have, but probably no worse than heard in the neighbor kids' big brother's bedroom or walking across the high school basketball court during gym class.
And on the other hand, what if a high school English writing class had shown the HBO program "Last Letters Home?" Would anyone have been ruined for life? I don't recall any profanity. There were signs of family frustration and descriptions of learning about loved ones' deaths in painful ways. Families would need help with grief management for a long time to come. Would this disturb a student? I'd hope so. It would mean they are human after all. Should everyone see such things? Without hesitation, yes. Family and community pain is also a cost of war.
Moments, episodes, singular events of sorts are rarely ones that have such power for defining the totality of our lives. We are already 'set' in some direction; we are not aimless in all walks of our lives. And on this course, we just have to 'get a grip.'
But the FCC is the the Ultimate Judge and Jury of What will be in Your Interest and Mine. The commission serves 5-year terms by request of the presidents, with only 3 may be members of the same political party -- which indicates party affiliation is an explicit need-to-know issue.
Besides Chairman Powell, the other FCC commissioners are attorneys except for Michael J. Capps (PhD U.S. History) and Jonathan S. Adelstein. Kathleen Q. Abernathy and Kevin J. Martin both have prestigious law schools and bars behind them.
As a matter of the FCC's 'process engineering' it is not clear why the networks and stations perceive such a hostile relationship with them when they at best want to understand clearly the rules so that they will be on the 'right side of the law.' However, the FCC does not permit them to 'float' a scenario in advance for them to respond to, such as the "Saving Private Ryan" scenario; they will let them know afterword. Later would be. . . well, too late, unless you're Daddy Deep-pockets! So there's a kind of lunacy built into the system that is supposed to be working for you and me that must be extricated.
Listen, do we think there won't be at least a few movies made about our war in Iraq? Do we think that they won't contain scenes of violence and that to be authentic you might not hear profanity? Come on; you can practically get that by listening closely to the imbedded reporters' remarks real-time.
And how do you think it will play to those faces OVER There? Remember them? The ones who fight for us? The ones who dream of us and crave our approval of their performance? The ones who write those "Last Letters Home?"
If we can't let 'Private Ryan' have his due in a cultural setting, it sends the wrong message to present-day troops about what their stories will mean to us when they need to be heard and whether each of them will matter. Get it?
Maybe we're at a point where we don't need the FCC anymore. We may need something for checks and balances, but this kind of tyrrany shouldn't cause the whole USA so much heartburn. Take a Tums instead and do something constructive with your annoyance at Big Brother's zealous oversight once again.
You can email the commissioners by going to their website, www.fcc.gov.
Go ahead, you know you want to; just do it -- Share your thoughts with them!
11.04.2004
Free Turd Blossom!
Third-term President Bush (oops, that's 2nd for W and 3rd for their dynasty) implores all Americans including the 55 million people who voted to oust him from office to get behind him. [Note: that was on Nov. 3; by the 4th the tone had chilled considerably.] I think they will. No matter who sits in that oval office, Americans are watching closely, now more than ever.
With particular attention now we're watching the coming announcements of the 'changing of the guard.' The proverbial lazy susan spins on the table -- cabinet positions are up for grabs. Re-up or not? Some have performed poorly. Some are just lackluster, but fecklessly harmless on the surface--not particularly competent, but as good as any placeholder. Others, though, have done damage and they need to go. Ah, the president, the RNC, and even Laura & the Twinsters know who they are. Aren't performance reviews part of public record for government employees? Well, they should be.
But, it's a whale of a time (you know, like you'd see off Kennebunkport in the summers?) to pause and reflect on what a 2nd term is or can be.
Presidential historians, if they're to be given a nickel's worth of credit believe that *this* is when Legacy is Made. What will your Legacy be President Bush?
Here's a thought to help you in this pursuit. Besides considering the rotation and replacement of Cabinet posts, think of this as an Opportunity for a Change of the White House 'guard.' You know, the people who have had your 'back' for a few years and may have injected either intentionally or accidentally a little too much of their personae into your words, style, and decision-making need to enjoy some retirement, some fresh air, you know, a life outside of the inner circle.
Here's a thought: why not Free Karl Rove! Yes, liberate Karl Rove from the shackles of the Washington establishment that have surely consumed his life these last many years. He's done his time as a public servant; we don't want to see anyone drop over in their office you know.
Karl. . .well, he's tough on the outside, of course, we all know that. But you know, his psychological profile is really quite fragile. Damn, he could make an up-and-coming psychiatrist rich, just helping him untangle his convoluted life. Let's face facts: just don't know that old Karl can really take it any longer. It wouldn't do your presidency any good to find Karl flashed in a compromising position on the front page of the Post shown on a boat in the Bahamas with a cute blonde on his lap swigging margaritas, would it? Let's face it, men under endless duress can reach the end of their limit and start to, well. . .do aberrant things, you know, like sitting under the wheels of Air Force One, to name a recent example. We'd hate to see poor Karl, the orphan, the former nerdy & pathetic friendless kid who didn't graduate college (but, wait, didn't he get a military deferment for college?) who somehow became your Senior Intelligensia, multiple-married Karl might just blow his cork or something on L St. some afternoon. Hey, here's your buddy -- mano-a-mano, don't let him down!
Sure, his campaign dirty-tricks are legendary starting from his youthful days (Manchester Guardian, March 9, 2004) but who among us doesn't have a few 'indiscretions', right? Well, sure, he took his lessons to the road and advised people cross country on the How-To shenanigans and political ploys of the likes of the Segretti-Nixon maneuvers (W. Post, Aug. 10, 1973), but heck, he never told anyone to model him. Karl just told them how not to get caught. Hey, he was young. But, was there ever someone looking out for him when George H. W. Bush took him under wing, saved young Karl from himself (practically speaking), and hauled his arse to Tejas, where he learned to hang and twang with his new 'family.' Talk about falling into a shitload of luck! So even if he's not formally educated, he got the education of a lifetime there in Texas while helping the 'family' and then Laura take his 'brother' by the shirt-tails and groomed him into what's now our Commander in Chief. Voila! Like so much magic, good luck had finally come Karl's way and you can't blame any poor soul who was cursed with his lot in life for grabbing, clinging onto those Bushes, right? But. . . it's time to get back to that Legacy Thing. Sometimes, when people are just hammering away year after year they lose touch with judgment. Really now, for a fellow like Karl, after all, to be the creator of the new Moral Compass of our country is something right out of Mad Magazine.
He's served a valuable purpose being First Buddy, your Chief Advisor, and an intimate one at that. Imagine being able to speak for our president, metaphorically he can climb inside W's brain and finish his sentences for him. Now that's a pal for ya'. Heck, they're so close, Pres. Bush even has 2 Nicknames for Karl -- don't even know that sweet Laura has more than 1 (but in this case she might be grateful). The President calls Karl the "Boy Genius," and you can imagine how that triumphant sound feels rolling over Karl's proud shoulders in meetings when he's outfoxed the hunters. The 2nd nickname is named after that flower found all over Texas trails that just sort of springs up from cattle dung -- "Turd Blossom," Karl's called. That good ol' Turd Blossom -- well. . . he's been quite a Senior Advisor and an awesome political campaigner. But the campaigning is over now for you and it's time for a Fresh Start with some fresh blood and some clean, fresh records, not tarnished with some tawdry pasts that muddy up those lonesome trail streams like you find all over cattle-dung-bound Texas.
So, please, be humane, FREE KARL ROVE from his demons and from the burdens of the White House and serving you so intensely. You know it's true; he can't separate You from Himself and frankly, some of us think that's just bordering on a kind of sickness.
We're behind you Mr. President; we've got 'your back' now. See, we've got your best interests at heart because trust us, they're OUR best interests too.
With particular attention now we're watching the coming announcements of the 'changing of the guard.' The proverbial lazy susan spins on the table -- cabinet positions are up for grabs. Re-up or not? Some have performed poorly. Some are just lackluster, but fecklessly harmless on the surface--not particularly competent, but as good as any placeholder. Others, though, have done damage and they need to go. Ah, the president, the RNC, and even Laura & the Twinsters know who they are. Aren't performance reviews part of public record for government employees? Well, they should be.
But, it's a whale of a time (you know, like you'd see off Kennebunkport in the summers?) to pause and reflect on what a 2nd term is or can be.
Presidential historians, if they're to be given a nickel's worth of credit believe that *this* is when Legacy is Made. What will your Legacy be President Bush?
Here's a thought to help you in this pursuit. Besides considering the rotation and replacement of Cabinet posts, think of this as an Opportunity for a Change of the White House 'guard.' You know, the people who have had your 'back' for a few years and may have injected either intentionally or accidentally a little too much of their personae into your words, style, and decision-making need to enjoy some retirement, some fresh air, you know, a life outside of the inner circle.
Here's a thought: why not Free Karl Rove! Yes, liberate Karl Rove from the shackles of the Washington establishment that have surely consumed his life these last many years. He's done his time as a public servant; we don't want to see anyone drop over in their office you know.
Karl. . .well, he's tough on the outside, of course, we all know that. But you know, his psychological profile is really quite fragile. Damn, he could make an up-and-coming psychiatrist rich, just helping him untangle his convoluted life. Let's face facts: just don't know that old Karl can really take it any longer. It wouldn't do your presidency any good to find Karl flashed in a compromising position on the front page of the Post shown on a boat in the Bahamas with a cute blonde on his lap swigging margaritas, would it? Let's face it, men under endless duress can reach the end of their limit and start to, well. . .do aberrant things, you know, like sitting under the wheels of Air Force One, to name a recent example. We'd hate to see poor Karl, the orphan, the former nerdy & pathetic friendless kid who didn't graduate college (but, wait, didn't he get a military deferment for college?) who somehow became your Senior Intelligensia, multiple-married Karl might just blow his cork or something on L St. some afternoon. Hey, here's your buddy -- mano-a-mano, don't let him down!
Sure, his campaign dirty-tricks are legendary starting from his youthful days (Manchester Guardian, March 9, 2004) but who among us doesn't have a few 'indiscretions', right? Well, sure, he took his lessons to the road and advised people cross country on the How-To shenanigans and political ploys of the likes of the Segretti-Nixon maneuvers (W. Post, Aug. 10, 1973), but heck, he never told anyone to model him. Karl just told them how not to get caught. Hey, he was young. But, was there ever someone looking out for him when George H. W. Bush took him under wing, saved young Karl from himself (practically speaking), and hauled his arse to Tejas, where he learned to hang and twang with his new 'family.' Talk about falling into a shitload of luck! So even if he's not formally educated, he got the education of a lifetime there in Texas while helping the 'family' and then Laura take his 'brother' by the shirt-tails and groomed him into what's now our Commander in Chief. Voila! Like so much magic, good luck had finally come Karl's way and you can't blame any poor soul who was cursed with his lot in life for grabbing, clinging onto those Bushes, right? But. . . it's time to get back to that Legacy Thing. Sometimes, when people are just hammering away year after year they lose touch with judgment. Really now, for a fellow like Karl, after all, to be the creator of the new Moral Compass of our country is something right out of Mad Magazine.
He's served a valuable purpose being First Buddy, your Chief Advisor, and an intimate one at that. Imagine being able to speak for our president, metaphorically he can climb inside W's brain and finish his sentences for him. Now that's a pal for ya'. Heck, they're so close, Pres. Bush even has 2 Nicknames for Karl -- don't even know that sweet Laura has more than 1 (but in this case she might be grateful). The President calls Karl the "Boy Genius," and you can imagine how that triumphant sound feels rolling over Karl's proud shoulders in meetings when he's outfoxed the hunters. The 2nd nickname is named after that flower found all over Texas trails that just sort of springs up from cattle dung -- "Turd Blossom," Karl's called. That good ol' Turd Blossom -- well. . . he's been quite a Senior Advisor and an awesome political campaigner. But the campaigning is over now for you and it's time for a Fresh Start with some fresh blood and some clean, fresh records, not tarnished with some tawdry pasts that muddy up those lonesome trail streams like you find all over cattle-dung-bound Texas.
So, please, be humane, FREE KARL ROVE from his demons and from the burdens of the White House and serving you so intensely. You know it's true; he can't separate You from Himself and frankly, some of us think that's just bordering on a kind of sickness.
We're behind you Mr. President; we've got 'your back' now. See, we've got your best interests at heart because trust us, they're OUR best interests too.
11.03.2004
The Power of the Red, White & Blue
A parade is best enjoyed by two or more. Thank God, the election is over and no matter how we voted, individually, we voted and it's over -- for four more years. Turn off any channel that's already talking 2008 -- too soon! We need national recovery, national healing, unity of purpose, and getting back to the business of the country's business. While the media commentators kept a lively pace for hours through the night and into the morning, flipping their visual aids of maps with whirling red states and blue states, those beige, and some 'green' ones around the gills, finally. . . i t i s o v e r. No matter how it has concluded or even if it had ended differently, it takes more than 'red' states alone or 'blue' states alone to be the USA. That grand old flag has room for both colors and we need to remember that Division is what made our country fall once before from within. So HERE'S to the Parade that we all need, real or imagined, to celebrate that IT's over and we can reclaim some normalcy again.
11.02.2004
"Take a Good Look At My Face. . ."
Sometimes a tune gets stuck in your brain like: "People say I'm the life of the party 'cause I tell a joke or two; Although I might be laughing loud and hearty, Deep inside I'm blue; So take a good look at my face -- You'll see my smile looks out of place; If you look closer it's easy to trace the tracks of my tears." and then I just wait until it takes me where it's apparently supposed to. In this case, to -- www.militarycity.com.
This is an all-too handy site for looking up what are called the "Faces of Valor" -- the fallen in Iraq.
Since we're up to more than 1,100 U.S. fatalities now it's way past time to get to know some of these faces and clusters of faces more closely than we have heretofore. Some weeks, they dropped so quickly, it's seemed like a blur, didn't it? And if you don't have an immediate member of your family or a friend or an associate overseas in harm's way then "collateral losses" can feel, well, foreign. So I suggest you pull up a good map while you're at it. There are many online, such as the www.defendamerica.mil/iraq example. This isn't going to cost you a penny, just a few moments of your thoughts, your conscience, and possibly your prayers -- of course, that's all up to you.
In my case, having tracked all sorts of soldiers stories and groupings of soldiers incidents, I decided to take a closer look at all of the fatalities associated with the military base closest to my home. Within 300 or so miles of any of you, though, there's got to be such a military base. Why don't you follow along and replicate my exercise?
You look down the list and notice obvious characteristics such as those below. You can't help but wonder about the men and women whose names appear. With many there are pictures too; sometimes they were smiling.
> surname (ethnicity)
> rank
> unit assigned
> age
> home state
> enemy fire, accident, 'friendly fire,' under-investigation, suicide (an inexplicably high rate which nobody in the DOD wants to talk about)
> location killed
And then you take a highlighter and Dot the map where they fell. Then look back on the U.S. map and Dot the map of the hometowns where flags were at half-mast and families were left broken apart forever. Such a condensed area where they fell and such a sprawling country we are.
My list is long. Only a couple were our 'own' local residents. My list is made up of your Marines from DuQuoin, Illinois, Vancouver, Washington, Milford, Mass., Scio, NY, Mountain Grove, Missouri, Jefferson, Ohio, Ottawa, Kansas, Edinburg, Texas, and several other states. You shared them with us right here for awhile before sharing them with the Nation and then the World. Now they rest with the warriors of all time and God himself rules dominion.
Take a moment and get to know them before they go. Should they ever appear in a newspaper near you, get to know their faces. Remember their dependent children if you can (financially) and the myriad of lives forever compromised by their devotion to duty. Their execution of orders, of delivering democracy to the post-war occupational defenses of an unforgiving land, leaves an endless "track of tears."
The beat goes on. . .
Do I See A Hand Up At the Back?
You've heard it, someone saying, "I got out of jury duty by telling them. . ." Of course, there are a few valid excuses for not serving a civic role like jury duty. Mostly, though, people are just escaping personal inconvenience and putting their burden on someone else. Shame on you. Shame on me. But the country needs more than jury duty volunteers; they needed us during this election as poll workers. See, we were a half million poll workers short and that's not trivial given record electorate turnout. Unless we permit Privatization of the Election Poll Workers (Holy Gadzooks, what a great business plan!), we can't expect that companies are just going to let workers mosey on down to 'help out' out of the goodness of their hearts. Nah, won't fly. We can DO so much better. While we're examining how to DO better, put people to work, and build a better Democracy 'Plaza' [and I don't mean the one in NYC], we need to think about EQUITY -- sharing the responsibilities of democracy, b e y o n d the domestic front. If we can get workers to jury duty, then to election/poll duty, we can get them to International Service duty too. You know, let's give more of those 18-30 year olds who are serving abroad a break to come home for awhile while you and I temporarily fill positions in the commissary, supplies, laundry, transport, medics, chaplaincy and the like. Heresy? Nah. . . Just think about it. All of these major corporations that have invested millions in corporate training directed at following procedures, filing reports, customer service, and quality engineering like Dell Computer, Southwest Airlines, Starbucks, Walmart, Ford, Merck (they may have some time on their hands), and P&G. These are all skills that the military would highly value in non-combat roles. A month's exchange could be wildly enlightening to civilians about BOTH the needs of the military and those of occupied people. Going back to wearing that skimpy blue vest might look like heaven on earth after wearing 40 lbs. of armour. But most importantly, it's a way to give back and to share the load -- you know -- what we do when we act upon our civic duties by serving on Juries, by Voting and apparently by participating in bringing Democracy to another country. . . ready or not.
11.01.2004
The Tao of Fonzarelli
Early in Geo. H. W. Bush's presidency (the father), he pined for a "kinder, gentler nation," wishing that we-the-People were more like the Waltons (remember the depression-era barefoot clan in the hills who never had health insurance?) and less like the Simpsons. The power of TV, pop culture, even made it into the consciousness of the elite heads of state.
Nobody's recently suggested that we hunker down with the Waltons' reruns as we enter the final hours of the election race, but for my money, I'm thinking we'd be better off with a dose of Happy Days anyway. You know, the wisdom of the Fonz could go a long way about now. Or what about Gary Coleman's 'Arnold' ("what [are] you talkin' about?"] to help us decipher last minute political statements? That scenes from MASH remind us of parallel real-time inadequacies of troops' protection in Iraq would keep you up at night though. Art imitating life, you know.
Just another chunk of time and then another until we-the-People can pick up the pieces and move on in some direction or another without the political ads, 11th hour accusations, and the not-so-subtle appearances of OhnoOsama Productions.
Sigh. . .click. . .click. . .click. . .on one of these channels 'Touched by an Angel' must be playing right now.
Nobody's recently suggested that we hunker down with the Waltons' reruns as we enter the final hours of the election race, but for my money, I'm thinking we'd be better off with a dose of Happy Days anyway. You know, the wisdom of the Fonz could go a long way about now. Or what about Gary Coleman's 'Arnold' ("what [are] you talkin' about?"] to help us decipher last minute political statements? That scenes from MASH remind us of parallel real-time inadequacies of troops' protection in Iraq would keep you up at night though. Art imitating life, you know.
Just another chunk of time and then another until we-the-People can pick up the pieces and move on in some direction or another without the political ads, 11th hour accusations, and the not-so-subtle appearances of OhnoOsama Productions.
Sigh. . .click. . .click. . .click. . .on one of these channels 'Touched by an Angel' must be playing right now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
