War in Iraq = Future Lack

Reframe the war in Iraq for all its negative consequences, by connecting its full cost to our full future lacks.
Balance all the costs of this type of unjust war to all these

Future Deficits:

• lack of safety from terrorism
• lack of fuel*
• lack of money
• lack of clean environment to live in
• lack of jobs, life, liberty, health.

Costs of Iraq war

• the lives lost
• the growing ill-will with millions of Muslims
• billions $$$ spent will bring future national bankruptcy
• environmental DU damage
• health costs of all the injured or contaminated troops
• moral danger of setting the first attack precedent (Bush says "pre-emptive strike", let's start naming it for what it really was).

In the longer term, if we keep using fossil and nuclear fuel instead of developing clean renewable sources, we risk environmental damage to the atmosphere, and radiation damage in the ground, air, and food.
*Here's the reason I say it will cost us fuel instead of gain it: Grabbing their oil is a short-term fix. When it runs out in 30-50 years, we won't have the time or the money to fix the situation fast enough. Better to start working on safe alternatives before that crisis.

We could make the world safer by putting the billions of dollars we're spending on this war into renewable energy/ conservation breakthroughs now. The USA has left a oversized footprint of environmental damage to planet Earth. For all the damage we've done, I want to start repaying that debt asap!

Spending even half the huge amount of cash in the defense and pentagon budgets could create millions of jobs here in the USA and radically improve education as we retrain and rebuild ourselves into a green nation. For example, how many jobs will it create to super insulate every single dwelling in the nation, and rebuild many to passive solar standards?
By leaving Iraq we will reduce our terrorist threat. Every day we stay compounds the threat.This situation is breeding terrorists. Many Iraqis do not want to live under American occupation. I hear it's not very pleasant over there. Although we have transferred power in name, it is obvious that we still call the shots as long as we have permanent military bases and the controlling interests in the corporations handling the reconstruction.

Instead of creating ill-will, we could build good-will by withdrawing our full presence, but helping fund reconstruction of Iraq by non-American firms, chosen by Iraqis. Remember when Bush said France and Germany couldn't bid on any contracts, and then he went one step further and gave these profitable jobs with no bid to his American buddies? Well this time I think the blackout should be on all American interests. Then we will begin getting safer as our global image changes from greedy imperialists to a caring nation.
The other key step in reducing Islamic hatred of Americans will have to be a radical shift in our Mideast Policy, to be fair and equal to both the Israelis and the Palestinians.

Acting on the wrong side of justice will cost us the American Dream.

Unjust war = no more safety, no more plenty.

Senators call for a new "Truman Committee" to prevent War Profiteering

Something good in congress! Spread the word.
U.S. Senators Dick Durbin (Democrat-IL), and Larry Craig (Republican-ID)introduced a bipartisan resolution on Sept 15 to create a Senate special committee for oversight of contracts awarded to support the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the war on terrorism. Senators Daniel Akaka (D-HI) and Mark Dayton (D-MN) are also cosponsors of the resolution.
Often described as the most successful government investigation effort in U.S. history, the Truman Committee investigated billions of dollars in wartime contracts, saved millions, and serves as a valuable model today. Today, as in the World War II years, skyrocketing costs and rapid allocations of funds have outpaced the federal government's ability to oversee and audit the use of taxpayer funds. Congress has allocated more than $166 billion for war and reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan, and costs will continue to rise.
The Durbin-Craig resolution will create a new Truman Committee to examine bidding, contracting, subcontracting and oversight of private contracts, and also to investigate allegations of wasteful and fraudulent practices.
I found out about this from an amusing blogger, firedoglake.
Her post at dailykos is called
War Profiteering and You: A CALL FOR ACTION
here is an excerpt:

We all know that the so-called "reconstruction effort" in Iraq has amounted to little more than a depraved carnival of corporate greed. But just how bad is it? It's bad. Really bad.
So I decided to take a closer look at the Top Ten War Profiteers (as determined by the Center for Corporate Policy) and examine how each has fared in the news of late. This is what I found. (Warning: It's ugly.)

What can you do?
1. Inform yourself about the top ten offenders in Iraq at her article
http://firedoglake.dailykos.com/story/2005/1/3/9342/72417
2.Ask your Senator to join them in co-sponsorship.
3.Write these senators a thank you note.
Their e-mail adresses are a click away at the above link.

Here's my Thank You note. perhaps too brash for the Republican. oh well.

Thank You for calling for a new "Truman Committee" to prevent War Profiteering. I think this is a good idea. I am disgusted at how the current administration has attacked Iraq without just cause, and then moved in with no-bid contracts for all of Bush's crooked cronies. Let's see... American taxpayers pay for the war, but it costs more than we can cough up, so our future generations will be saddled with debt too, meanwhile, Bectel, Halliburton, BearingPoint ,BKSH & Associates,etc. executives get even richer by overcharging for work they never complete.
STOP THEM! Thank You.

Progressive Democrat Summit Inspiring

Our carpool of 6 braved the snow in DC, and returned safely with no ice or snow on the highways. What a fun and exhausting experience to gather with 500 progressives from all over the country. At our next Think Tank on Friday Feb 18, we plan to give a presentation of what we learned at the Summit, and discuss topics that came up there. I also plan to put up a webpage at the blog about the conference.
If you want to hear about what it was like right away, here are comments and ongoing discussions from other attendees at the PDA conference blog.
We heard David Cobb, the Green party's presidential candidate; Tom Hayden was inspirational; Medea Benjamin, a founder of Code Pink brimmed with good energy. Swami Beyondananda put his wisdom to rap music, and the Billionaires for Bush did some fabulous song and dance numbers.

We took notes through panel after panel after panel of intelligent, sensitive, well-informed multi-cultural speakers. Whew!
There wasn't enough smaller break-out meetings by topic, which was a little frustrating for all of us networkers. But we did have regional meetings, so I'll be filling you in on the North Carolina scoop soon. I took a blogging workshop, so I hope that our think tank blog may start reaching more people. My hope is that we can provide a suggested format to encourage other living room think tanks to start popping up.

Swami Beyondananda

Michael Moore & Hack-proof Voting

Our Jan 14 meeting was fun and productive. We began by watching Michael Moore's appearances on TV last week; the Today Show, the Tonight Show, and the People's Choice Awards Show. Fahrenheit 911 won the People's Choice Award for Best Movie of the Year, and it will be entered in the Oscars race. Michael said, "I will take that as a suggestion to make more Fahrenheit 911's." He commented on the Democratic party's choice of undynamic candidates, and feels they need to find someone well-loved by the American people, like Tom Hanks, or Oprah, or at least someone who can emotionally connect to people like Clinton did.

We brainstormed on phrases to use concerning "Vote Verification". I'll link to them later, when ready. These phrases can be used in speech or on printed flyers or stickers to spread around. Essentially a soundbite with a website address, such as whatreallyhappened.com, chuckherrin.com, and/or www.airamericaradio.com. If you haven't seen these sites, take a peek.
Chuck Herrin's site is the best to recommend to Republicans, since he is one, and he is a computer expert who is actively working for a switch to all hand-counted paper ballots, nationwide. That's right--
NO MACHINES!
Apparently that's how Canada does it, and it would be the safest way to limit fraud and tampering. At first, this seemed like a pipe dream to me, but as I learned more, I am coming to think it is an issue which could rise to America's attention with a lot more grassroots publicity.

Here is a Missouri bill calling for Hand-Counted Paper Ballots, submitted last May by Mo. State Representative, Edward W. Spannaus. I don't know if this bill got killed or not, but I repeat this excerpt from his presentation, because it gives me hope to see legislation in favor of of a totally manual method. And he gives such a clear argument, which can be your talking points for why we need this manual system.

"House Bill 1744 would require 100% use of paper ballots, and would prohibit all electronic counting or tabulation of votes. Additionally, every voter would be provided with a receipt—a copy of his or her vote—to be used in the event of a challenge or contest.
I would point out at the outset, that a comprehensive study of lost votes for the past four Presidential elections (1988, 1992, 1996, and 2000) found that paper ballots had the lowest rate of error of any voting system.
This study, known as the Caltech/MIT Voting Technology Report(Mar 2001), studied five general types of voting technologies: hand-counted paper ballots, lever machines, punch cards, optically scanned paper ballots, and touch-screen (DRE) machines. The study reported:

"The central finding of this investigation is that manually-counted paper ballots have the lowest average incidence of spoiled, uncounted, and unmarked ballots, followed closely by lever machines and optically scanned ballots. Punchcard methods and systems using direct recording electronic (DRE) devices had significantly higher average rates of spoiled, uncounted, and unmarked ballots than of the other systems."
...
Why Use Only Paper Ballots?
A system of paper ballots only, as envisioned by House Bill 1744, best meets the Constitutional requirements for fair elections, and provides the soundest basis for voter confidence in the electoral process.

The U.S. Supreme Court has declared that the right to vote includes the right of qualified voters within a state not simply to cast a vote, but to have their votes counted properly.

Impediments to vote fraud: Any use of computers opens the door to fraud. The speed and complexity of computers creates an inherently dangerous and fraud-prone situation, because, as we have noted, only a handful of people know how votes are being counted. Citizens can never have full confidence in any such system of vote counting.

By going back to a universal paper ballot, which is hand counted, we are creating additional impediments to fraud and tampering with results. If this requires more people to count the votes than is needed when using computers, all the better. The more people involved, the more obstacles we have created to carrying out vote fraud.

Transparency and voter confidence. The objection has been raised, that a total paper-ballot system would be a slow, inefficient system for counting votes. In our view, this is a great advantage. A slow, ponderous vote-counting system, where citizens can watch their votes being counted with complete transparency, is the best way not only to prevent vote fraud and election-rigging, but to establish public confidence in the integrity of the electoral process.

There is no requirement, Constitutional or otherwise, that vote totals must be made available instantaneously for the benefit of the news media or anyone else. There is, however, a Constitutional mandate that votes be counted fairly, and that all votes be treated equally.
A 100% paper-ballot system is the best means to ensure such an outcome."

- Edward W. Spannaus

Reframe Social Security

Does the wording "Ownership Society" feed the conservative frame?

Susan Carver Williams makes a good point in her perspective on the fight to protect Social Security from the Bush administration's sneaky tactics.

"I don’t know about you, but I’d rather live in a Generous and Kind Community that is strengthened by our connections than in an Ownership Society where we fight to protect what’s “ours” and expand what’s “ours” and keep others from having any of it."

I've put her analysis on how Bush & Co are cleverly marketing and framing their attack at my new page , Social Security Discussion Corner.

Please contribute to our conversation there... e-mail me or post a comment on the blog.

Here is a great succinct argument for why NOT to privatize Social Security or medicare. This is directly quoted from the Petition Site. In fact, please sign the petition there. Thanks!

Social Security is not facing an imminent crisis, and is not in danger of running out of money anytime soon. (The Social Security Administration estimates the trust fund will last until 2042; many economists estimate the fund will last much longer.) Also, privatization will cost a lot - and working families will be the ones who pay.

continued at Social Security Discussion Corner

Will lessons from history help us save the planet?

Happy New Year!
This January 1st Op-ed article in NY Times by Jared Diamond, "The Ends of the World as We Know Them" gives a fascinating background on ancient societies which failed or adapted and survived. I always wondered why 90% of the Mayans disappeared around 900AD. [I know... I'm weird, but I have visited there.] He also sheds light on the collapse of the Polynesian society on Easter Island three centuries ago, and the disappearance of the medieval Norse colonies on Greenland.
"When it comes to historical collapses, five groups of interacting factors have been especially important: the damage that people have inflicted on their environment; climate change; enemies; changes in friendly trading partners; and the society's political, economic and social responses to these shifts."
One of the key social responses for failure or success is insulation vs acknowledging the problem and modifying behavior.
Can we apply these lessons to our current situation? The author is hopeful.