EULOGY FOR OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM

By all accounts, 23-year-old David Hickman (below, left) from Greensboro, N.C. was pretty excited about coming home for Christmas. It is widely reported that he called his mother on November 13 to say so, but that would be their last conversation. On November 14, Hickman, an infantryman, was killed by a roadside bomb in Iraq. Critics of the Obama administration contend the president should never have announced in October that all U.S. troops would be withdrawn from Iraq by Christmas. According to some, Obama’s pronouncement only served to make the Iraqi insurgents step up their quest to knock off as many Americans as possible before the deadline. They may be right, and Hickman may be the unfortunate consequence of Obama’s grandstanding.

This week marked the official end of U.S. troop involvement in Iraq. It has been nine years since the U.S. involved itself in the ill-conceived “Operation Iraqi Freedom.” Many Americans believe it was not this country’s responsibility to ensure democracy in Iraq. It is now well known that the U.S. entered the war with faulty intelligence and under less than noble circumstances. It is known that President George W. Bush's aggressive stance toward Iraq after 9/11 was a knee jerk reaction that proved ill-fated and fatal for many Americans.

As usual, the numbers tell the story. According to the government’s own figures, here is the human toll: U.S. Troop Casualties - 4,486 US troops; 98% male. 91% non-officers; 82% active duty, 11% National Guard; 74% Caucasian, 9% African-American, 11% Latino. 19% killed by non-hostile causes. 54% of US casualties were under 25 years old. 72% were from the US Army.

Here is the ongoing human toll: US Troops Wounded - 32,226, 20% of which are serious brain or spinal injuries. (Total excludes psychological injuries.) US Troops with Serious Mental Health Problems - 30% of US troops develop serious mental health problems within 3 to 4 months of returning home.

We learned from the Vietnam War that the human toll exacts consequences that transcend generations. Vets who are mentally or psychologically disabled try to re-acculturate and live somewhat normal lives, but their injuries and psychological wounds affect spouses, children, co-workers and most anyone with whom they interact. We know anecdotally that marriages crumble, domestic abuse skyrockets and child abuse intensifies among many vets.

And so there was little celebration this week, and there won’t be ticker tape parades or victory services at the National Cathedral or anything to truly mark the end of this war. That is because we know that people who were 20-something when they lost their eyes or their arms or legs or sanity will spend decades trying to right themselves. And we know that many of those 4,486 US troop casualties had children that will never know their parent(s). And we know that people like George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Colin Powell who actively engaged the U.S. in this war will not be held legally accountable for their misguided decisions.

It is from the vets themselves that we learn the most about how bad decisions in Washington wreak havoc in lives from coast to coast. Watch and listen to vets recap their own experiences in a CNN report:
The war in Iraq was one of the most significant mistakes I've ever witnessed the American government make. With no weapons of mass destruction, and no evidentiary connection between Iraq and 9/11, 4,486 men and women were ordered to their deaths for absolutely no reason. That is how history will see the Iraq debacle.

It is critical that we recognize now the enormity of the error that was Iraq. I am hoping that our collective realization of the vulnerability and poor judgment of our government officials puts a kink in our blind trust of them. Every reasonable American knows now that we should never have gone to Iraq. If something similar happens in the future, we Americans are likely going to demand far more accountability from the president on down.

Like Vietnam, American history has nothing to be proud of with the Iraq war. Not a thing. And that, all by itself, should tell us Americans to become more engaged with the political process, to more carefully choose who will govern and to clearly convey to them what we expect.

GREAT MOMENTS IN TV: VENTURA vs. HASSELBACK

What happens when former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura debates torture with neocon TV host Elisabeth Hasselback? Ventura, who has been waterboarded, appeared this morning on ABC's "The View." Interesting to hear from a guy who knows from where he speaks, as opposed to Hasselback who...well...not so much. This clip is priceless, especially Ventura's last line:

Two decisions that affect every one of us came down from on high this week, and by “on high,” of course I mean Washington. First, the Senate is pushing hard for a bill that would more tightly reign in credit card companies, but would not place any limit on interest rates. Second, President Obama reversed himself on his recent decision to release photos depicting harsh treatments of suspected terrorist detainees.

Let’s talk credit cards first. No, better yet, let’s rant about credit cards first. Feeling gouged by your particular credit card company lately? That’s because you are. Right now, the credit card companies have almost full freedom in setting and raising interest rates. So what was 15% last month, can easily show up as 30% this month. The Senate is probably going to pass a bill that will impose some new restrictions on the company, but not in any way cap the interest rates. Here is what the bill will do:
• The bill will ensure that any existing balance you have cannot be subject to a raise in interest rate. However, if you are two months behind in your payments, they will be able to raise the rate. (You might wonder how this makes sense: If you can’t pay what you already owe, how does it help them to collect if they add more on top of it, right?)
• Instead of surprising you with a raise in your interest rate, credit card companies will have to give you 45 days notice.
• If you open a new credit card account, the company will not be allowed to raise your interest rate for at least one year.

Consumer advocates and many credit card customers were hoping for much more stringent new rules. Don’t hold your breath. I see the new bill as a recipe for economic disaster. For example, if a college student must put his or her tuition on a credit card, and the company can still raise the interest rates at random, the student will likely be in serious debt for years, with the debt compounding monthly. If an unemployed homeowner must put his or her insurance and/or taxes on a credit card, simply in order to be able to hold on to the property, they end up in the same boat as the financially beleaguered college student. Where is the concern for the average citizen at a moment in our nation when unemployment is at its highest rate since 1993, and home foreclosures have never been more numerous? The Senate is soft pedaling this issue to keep the banks quiet and calm and to lay the economic downturn squarely at the average citizen’s doorstep. Unacceptable. Write some letters.

The second decision this week has to do with the release of those abuse photos. You know the ones, like those you have already seen from Abu Ghraib. Without rehashing old details, the government reached an agreement with the American Civil Liberties Union some time ago to release photos showing alleged prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib and six other prisons. Last month, President Obama announced his administration would not stand in the way of releasing those photos. This week, the President reversed himself, saying that releasing the photos (which were taken in the early years of the Iraq war) could endanger our troops and possibly turn up the heat on the already existing anti-American sentiment worldwide.

So much for transparency. We are a visual culture. We are now fully accustomed to being privy to information and visual representations of world events. Who is President Obama to now deny us that freedom? And if he indeed plans to block the release of those photos, what about the above-mentioned agreement? Well, it turns out the Justice Department has informed the United States District Court in New York, which had backed the A.C.L.U.’s request, that it would appeal the previous ruling that would have ensured release of the photos. Unfortunately, Obama’s reversal smacks of censorship. And if appearances count, it appears that it is the American citizens who are being denied access to these photos. Why? Because it has already been stated that the photos are not even as incendiary as those that can already be seen all over the Internet of Abu Ghraib. So what is the real point of withholding photos of lesser impact than those we have already seen?

Here is the essential point: If the government can deny you the right to see photos of war time activity that is distinctly against acceptable American behavior, what else can you be denied? Can you be denied documents that have previously been available through the Freedom of Information Act? If that sounds far-fetched, just weeks ago it would have seemed just as unlikely that you would not see photos the President of the United States promised you could see.

Write some letters, people. Do it now.

Yes, Virginia...They REALLY Said That

I am constantly amazed at the things that come out of the mouths of public figures. I am starting to think that some younger people in the public eye do not care that much what people hear them say, while some older people still don’t get the fact that whatever they say publicly will be heard around the world within seconds. A few recent examples:

JOE BIDEN: It could have been a non-news event when Vice-President Joe Biden appeared at Washington D.C.’s Union Station to announce $1.3 billion in stimulus funds for the nation’s rail industry. That is, until a Senator addressed him as “Mr. Vice President.” Biden’s response? “Give me a fucking break.” Poor Joe didn’t know the mic was hot. I don’t know about you, but I’m picturing an endless echo in the cavernous D.C. train station. Say it ain’t so Joe?

DICK CHENEY: The (mercifully) former Vice President, Dick Cheney, is evidently having a tough time adjusting to life out of the spotlight. He keeps talking. And talking. This week, Dick, as I now really enjoy calling him, had this to say about the country’s current financial crisis and Iraq:

Did Cheney just say “Stuff happens?” Note to Dick: Dick, how interesting that you still contend that the Bush administration did not create this financial havoc. Just one example of the last administration’s reckless spending: To date, according to the National Priorities Project, a research organization that analyzes how tax dollars are spent, the war has cost the U.S. $605,247,741,697. By the time you read this, that figure will be way low. As a reminder, this is an ongoing war that the American people do not support and the international community has largely abandoned. Oh, and although I believe you would see this as nothing more than an aside, I feel compelled to remind you that there are now 4,257 confirmed U.S. deaths as a result of this fully pointless war. Oh, and Dick, now that you are not terribly important anymore, you probably do not get all the latest updates on casualties, so I want you to know that one of the most recent is 22-year-old Jessica Y. Sarandrea, of Miami, FL. Jessica, a supply specialist, who was reportedly hit by shrapnel that pierced her liver and severed a main artery. Now that you have been retired, perhaps you’d have time to call Jessica’s husband, and her father, and her siblings, and get a true taste of how successful we have been in meeting our objectives in Iraq.

LAURA INGRAHAM: Honestly, aren’t the most extreme figures in the far right conservative movement starting to do some real damage to their cause? This week, radio host Laura Ingraham reacted on-air to some comments Meghan McCain (daughter of former presidential candidate Senator John McCain) made about conservative extremism. Rather than address the issues, Ingraham leveled blatant personal attacks against McCain. The worst of her comments came when she said this in a mocking “valley-girl” tone, supposedly imitating McCain: “Ok, I was really hoping that I was going to get that role in the Real World, but then I realized that, well, they don’t like plus-sized models. They only like the women who look a certain way. And on this 50th anniversary of Barbie, I really have something to say.”
Laura, once again you’re all about grabbing attention rather than establishing credibility. That does not make for real longevity in broadcasting, but then, you knew that.

ROSEANNE BARR: Don’t you love how everybody has become an instant psycho-analyst since 19-year-old Chris Brown allegedly pummeled 21-year-old Rihanna? Now Roseanne Barr (Dr. Roseanne?) weighs in on the story, insinuating that Rihanna is a violent, control freak. Oy. Roseanne says:
Rihanna "thinks she has him right where she wants him now. His career is over, and he is working her to help him get it back. She thinks that since he needs her and has shown some contrition that she can call the shots now. Violent people are control freaks, and she thinks she is in control right now. Violent couples also have passionate make up sex, and that keeps a lot of battered and beaten women hooked. Once she realizes that her fans and their parents are going to write her off completely and end her career as well as his if she stays with him, that might convince her not to do that."

Why Sometimes It Is Better to Say Nothing at All

(Photo from BushLegacyTour.com)

We bloggers and citizen journalists are sometimes criticized for distorting facts or misquoting sources. No such luck today, blogophiles (that’s you). Today I quote directly from the mouth of President George W. Bush, specifically from text released by the White House from an interview the President granted his sister, Doro. He said this – I swear:

“I’d like to be a President (known) as somebody who liberated 50 million people and helped achieve peace; that focused on individuals rather than process; that rallied people to serve their neighbor; that led an effort to help relieve HIV/AIDS and malaria on places like the continent of Africa; that helped elderly people get prescription drugs and Medicare as a part of the basic package; that came to Washington, D.C., with a set of political statements and worked as hard as I possibly could to do what I told the American people I would do.”

Swiss cheese, I say. So many holes are there in this statement that we may just slap some ham on it, find some rye and call it lunch. Please. Let’s deconstruct the President’s most foolish 95 words, shall we?

For those unfamiliar with PEPFAR, it was the President’s initiative called President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. Read all about it if you wish, but as you peruse the propaganda, know this: The plan had two fatal flaws. First, it specified that fully one-third of its funding had to be used to promote sexual abstinence. How’s that working for us, Mr. President? Well, as usual, the numbers tell the story: A study published in the British Medical Journal (Aug. 2007) reveals that school abstinence programs “do not decrease or exacerbate sexual risk among youths” in US schools. One wonders if sexual risk among the same subjects might have decreased with some type of safer sex training. But then, there was no line item built into the PEPFAR budget for that.

While PEPFAR spent valuable days, hours, weeks, years trying to validate its own questionable moral code, the Bush administration skimped so heavily on health funding over the past eight years that sex education is almost non-existent. And all the while, minority populations steadily increased their levels of new HIV infections, with Mr. President doing virtually nothing to address the issue.

So, while it is true that PEPFAR has provided HIV retroviral drugs for nearly a million people worldwide, the pandemic was much broader and faster moving that the administration’s willingness to truly fight it with all possible artillery. PEPFAR also stipulated that the only drugs it would distribute anywhere would be those that had been approved by the Food and Drug administration. The FDA is not always the most reliable source for such approval, since their fast track system sometimes puts drugs in the marketplace before they are fully investigated. What about drugs that have shown similar effectiveness, but in testing in other countries? Some are less expensive, but not qualified under PEPFAR.

Additionally, PEPFAR has been slow to embrace financial support of generic drugs. Instead the U.S. government has favored the support of brand name drugs, which are much more expensive. According to the Report to Congress by the U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator on the Use of Generic Drugs in the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, by 2007, only 57% of the drugs supported by PEPFAR were generics. Why? Further, the report seems to express governmental pride in the fact that from 2005 to 2007, this percentage increased from a mere 11 percent. Why was PEPFAR not supporting a greater percentage of generics sooner? Draw your own conclusions.(Ron Wurzer/Getty Images)

Among those who truly understand HIV/AIDS, Bush will not leave a legacy of progressive thinking or significant accomplishment domestically or internationally in this arena.

Bush is somehow proud of the fact that during his watch, Medicare’s Part D was introduced. This was the plan whereby seniors might be somehow relieved of some of the financial burden of their prescription drug costs. Gosh, there’s just one problem, and it’s been dubbed the “Donut Hole.” It concerns the discontinuation of benefits once the total paid by the member and the plan hits $2700. Then the citizen is required to pay 100% of the costs up to $4,350. Find me a senior with health care issues who has an extra $1650 lying around and I’ll bet his name is Cheney. Further, there’s a whole list of drugs the plan will not cover, including those for erectile dysfunction. I guess the administration is all for sexual abstinence among seniors, as well. Someday when you are feeling very ambitious, take some speed and read the whole Part D. You’ll need the pharmaceutical help to do it because it’s so boring, poorly written and incomprehensible. Oh, and for the record, amphetamines aren’t covered under Part D.
(photo from Medicareprofessor.com)

I will not insult your intelligence by addressing Bush’s statement about liberating 50 million people and achieving peace. I will simply prognosticate that the outgoing chief exec will likely not join former President Jimmy Carter and former Vice-President Al Gore in the long list of Nobel Peace Prize winners.

Still, one wonders how President Bush will explain his supposed legacy of peace to the mother of Staff Sgt. Matthew J. Taylor, 25, who died Sept. 21 in Baghdad, Iraq, of wounds suffered when he received small arms fire during dismounted operations. Taylor, who felt he needed to seek justice for the 9/11 terrorist attacks, enlisted in the infantry so that he could have a frontline fighting position.

Taylor's parents and wife last spoke with him by phone one day before he died.. According to a piece in his home town paper, the Charleston Post & Courier: "He called to wish his 5-year-old daughter a happy birthday. But his heart sounded heavy because he hated missing those special occasions. The next day, Sunday, Staff Sgt. Taylor patrolled in Baghdad with his unit when shots rang out in an alleyway. Taylor was struck multiple times by enemy small arms fire." He died in a military hospital, many thousands of miles away from anyone who loved him. He died in George Bush's war about nothing.

On December 1, Bush said, "I think I was unprepared for war...I didn't anticipate war." Mr. Bush's lack of preparation for his job, and his severe lack of foresight cost Staff Sgt. Taylor his life. Taylor and 4,206 other Americans died in vain.

Those deaths, combined with millions of Americans who now suffer with HIV/AIDS and a lack of medical care and appropriate drugs, along with senior citizens who cannot even afford medicine, make George Bush's comments to his sister not just delusional, but reprehensible.