The End, Or Just The Beginning?

The recent execution of Saddam Hussein has been condemned and celebrated in equal measure. While I question the value of executing anyone, I shed no tears for a man that was a despot and committed atrocities against his own people.

History has been full of such people. Our own country has had its share, despite the pretense of life, liberty and equal rights for all. On an objective level, the atrocities Saddam conmmitted are by no means the worst in history, but they were most assuredly bad enough. Did his actions warrant his death? That is for others to decide.

What I question is the rapidity of it, the value of it. Was it for revenge? Was it to silence him? Was it to give the Iraqi people a sense of closure? Did the execution really do anything to help the situation, or will it end up making the situation worse? Was this an example for all who wish to pursue a life of power and abuse?

There have been many examples of such people like Saddam meeting their fate, and I don't see where those examples have stopped anyone so inclined from doing the same type of things. I do believe in what goes around comes around. Even if an evil person is never brought to formal justice, their fate is the same as anyone else. No matter how much power a person has gotten, evil or good they have done, fortune or fame or anonymity they have, none of us is getting out of this life business alive.

Depite so many years of U.S. involvement in the Middle East, I don't think we even begin to understand the differences between our culture and theirs. Like a rock skipping over a pond, our collective knowledge of Islam and the many cultures that comprise the Middle East are superficial at best. I do not understand how we as a nation can be so involved, and expect to do any positive things, without a deeper understanding of the region.

But there is one thing for sure: Saddam is dead. Whatever lessons, if indeed there were any, he could teach us by being alive are now gone. He was a despot that was once an ally, and then became an enemy of this country. He was given aid and weapons to assist his fight against our 'enemy' Iran, and no doubt used some of those weapons and technology against us. So there are still lessons to learn from people like Saddam, but I doubt that we will learn them.

With the relative speed of Saddam's trial and execution, I can't help but feel that we have lost some further insight. In the political expediancy of silencing a former ally that could have been an embarrasement, (and make no mistake, the U.S. had a lot of influence on the court and the decision) history perhaps has not been well served. But in the long run, it probably doesn't matter. We have proven over and over again that whatever history can teach us, as a nation we choose not to learn.

Surge, Thy Real Name Is Escalation

Once again, the language patrol for this adminstration is out in force. A new plan to merely 'stay the course' is being touted as a necessary action in the continued occupation of Iraq.

For security reasons, President Bush is proposing a 'surge' of anywhere from 10,000 to 30,000 more troops to be deployed to Iraq. The language control can spin this any way they choose, can call it anything they wish. What it amounts to is an escalation in the number of troops that are to be put in harm's way in an area of a country that is in a civil war.

The word 'surge' implies a temporary action. Like a temporary increase in electricity, an all-out linebacker blitz in football, an increase in consumer spending during the holidays, a temporary circumstance. But how long will this 'surge' in troop levels last? What is the definite goal of doing it? And why now?

These are questions that more trusting citizens do not ask. The administration knows more about the situation. If it says more troops are needed, it must be so. I am not one of those trusting citizens, and the recent elections show that I am not alone. As long as the tragedy of Iraq continues, no other pressing problems within our country will be addressed. The last thing, the absolute LAST thing that needs to be done is to escalate that tragedy.

Whatever words are used doesn't matter. This is a blatant attempt to not only continue but increase the gross mistake of Iraq. And what is with this quote from Senator Joe Biden?

"There is nothing a United States Senate can do to stop a president from conducting his war," Biden said. "The only thing that is going to change the president's mind, if he continues on a course that is counterproductive, is having his supporters walk away from his position."

Does this president have carte blanche to do whatever he wants? Is the Senate truly powerless to stop it? Is that why the American people voted Democrats into office, gave more control of congress to them, just for a top-ranking Senator to declare there is nothing that the Senate can do? Or does this mean there is nothing the Senate WILL do?

No surge. No escalation. It's time to see Iraq for what it was and continues to be. A mistake.

The War Against Christmas...BAH HUMBUG!

The things associated with the holidays such as Christmas trees, lights, decorations, gifts, has been added to. Every year the 'War Against Christmas' crowd comes forth. I get emails like the following:

Dear Family & Friends,

This is a reminder that it is time to send those Christmas cards (NOT "season's greetings" or "happy holidays" but a Christmas card!) to the ACLU. Maybe this will remind them that this country was founded on Christain (sic) principles by Christain (sic) people, and that the silent majority is speaking out regarding OUR RIGHTS. It won't take long or cost very much, and who knows? It might get someone's attention!

ACLU
Broad Street
18th Floor
New York, NY 10004

So my random thoughts about the War On Christmas:

• The ACLU has also defended the rights of Christians. Some examples can be read here, and the Internet has many more. While I do not agree with every case the ACLU takes on, for me it is a sign that our country is healthy that such an organization exists. The 'War Against The ACLU' is prompted by those who do not know the full story about what the ACLU stands for.

• Protesting the ACLU in this manner is another indication that in this country, we all have the right to peacefully protest. But it seems to me that the spirit of the holiday, which some Christians feel is so in jeopardy, might be better served by sending Christmas cards to others that may not get any. Shut-ins, folks in nursing homes, hospitals. At the very least for every card sent to the ACLU there could be a card sent to someone all alone for the holidays.

• For those who insist that this country was founded on Christian principles, I ask whose Christian principles? Baptist, Catholic, Methodist, Presbyterian, etc.? With countless denominations and non-denominations that profess that they are Christian, there is a multitude of differences in belief. Perhaps a slightly better case could be made that the founding fathers believed in God, but even that is tenuous. I offer no examples. Those that wish to investigate can do so through many avenues, but I have a feeling those that are promoting the myth that this country is based on Christian values won't bother.

• There is no one actively engaged in denying a Christian their right to express their beliefs. There is always much ado made over the displaying of nativity scenes on public and government property, for example. Whether this is truly a case of separation of church and state can be argued, and has been argued on both sides. But at least where I live, most of the decorations I see in people's yards and on their houses do not reflect any religious part of the holiday. If a person is so adamant about a nativity scene being rightly displayed at city hall, I would think there would be one in their yard also. The 'right' that many seem to think is being denied them is actually their preference for what they want.
  

• There is no one denying a Christian's personal right to say Merry Christmas instead of Happy Holidays. If a business makes the decision to use 'Happy Holidays' instead of 'Merry Christmas', it is a decision made by the ones in charge. By all means a Christian can protest those decisions, but that decision has nothing to do with any perceived 'War On Christmas', and the Christian has the right to respond with a 'Merry Christmas' to whomever and wherever they want. Also, if an employee in a business is ordered to say 'Happy Holidays', is it a violation of their rights, or a condition of employment like any other company policy?

• The term 'silent majority' is a misnomer. The evidence that Christmas is just as much a secular holiday as a religious one is obvious. Whether a person sees it as secular or religious is a matter of their own choice.
  

• Some Christians lament the lack of observance for the 'reason for the season'. Of course that is their right. But I offer the Christmas season of 2005 up for an example. Christmas day fell on Sunday. Some churches, including fundamentalists where I live offered up no services that morning. It's a time for family, opening gifts, very few would attend services, the excuses were many. Christmas and Easter are the two most important Christian holidays, and it is incredible that because the 'birthday' of the one that the entire church is built on happens to fall on a Sunday, that services would be cancelled.
  

• And a word for the extremists that want to eliminate any influence of religion on society: Ain't gonna happen. Religion, like it or not, in one form or another will always be a part of society. We can make sure that a certain religious belief does not become a weapon against ones that do not believe the same. To my mind, that is the purpose of the separation of church and state.

• This is purely nit-picking, but I could not resist. Whomever wrote the email sent to me, if their objective is to promote the rights of Christians, really should learn how to spell CHRISTIAN.
  

So the War On Christmas is but another myth put forth by ones that wish us all to believe as they do, to toe the line. People like Bill O'Reilly, the king of the no-spin zone. Christmas has become a secular as well as a religious holiday. Whether someone wishes me Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays, Happy Hanukkah, Merry Ramadan, whatever, they are wishing me well. I am not about to scold them for not saying specifically what I wish to hear. Honestly wishing someone well is becoming a rare thing. Far be it from me to complain when it happens to me.

A New Year Letter To Congress

I await the New Year and the meeting of the new congress with great interest. Now that the playing field has been leveled somewhat, with Democrats having a slight majority, expectations from myself and the country in general are high.

In my opinion, the number one priority is Iraq. In addition to the horrendous loss of life and destruction, there has been billions and billions of dollars spent on Iraq. The recent documentary ‘Iraq For Sale’ shows where much of that money has gone. So many actions done in Iraq are not done by our military, but ‘defense contractors’. For reasons I will never understand, the outsourcing of traditionally military obligations to defense contractors are looked upon as being more efficient and less costly. The monies spent in Iraq show the fallacy of that belief.

With contractors such as Halliburton and Blackwater, to name but a few, the U.S. Government is in essence supporting mercenary forces. Not forces under direct control of civilian authority as our military, but forces that are controlled solely by business executives whose primary concern is profit. Profit motive, when applied to armed conflict does not serve the best interest of our country. Blackwater alone has seen an increase in profit of 600% from 2002. Indeed, approximately 30 miles from where I live in Mt. Carroll there is being built Blackwater North. A facility that, despite what Blackwater’s website says, is a private army military training base.

I urge the new congress to re-open the investigations of war profiteering. With so much money being squandered in Iraq, there is no way that anything can be done regarding affordable health care for all, assured funding of Social Security, education, and the other issues that need addressing. The war in Iraq and the subsequent occupation is bleeding this nation white. The revelation that defense contractors are making huge profits at the cost of human life and the welfare of citizens is absolutely criminal.

I agree with Gov. Howard Dean when he says that the recent election results are not a mandate, but a temporary giving of power. Rest assured, if the new congress does not perform any better than the preceding one, that loan of power will indeed be temporary, and short.

The issues that need addressing are varied and wide. With so many years of neo-conservative control, I fear it will take some time to correct the damage that has been done. But in the two years before another major national election, the Democrats need to show that they not only recognize what needs to be done, but put forth legislation to actually address those issues. If this is not done, it will not bode well for the Democratic Party. But more importantly, it will not bode well for the nation.

Iraq For Sale...A Most Disturbing Documentary

To wage a war, whether in antiquity or the modern world, takes money. Money to equip and pay troops, for the weapons of war, and for many other things. There are those that profit politically and economically from war. The documentary Iraq For Sale lays the current war profiteers bare for all to see. The video can be found here, for viewing online or downloading.

Some of the things featured on the video:

• Much of the actual diplomatic security in Iraq is done by outside contractors, not the U.S. military.
  

• There are many military personnel that do not re-enlist because they can work for one of the contractors at a greater rate of pay. What a soldier makes in one month is surpassed by what he can make as a contracted employee in a week. There are representatives from these contracting firms that actually are in Iraq and actively 'recruit' soldiers out of the military and into their company. A contractor can make more money in a week, doing the same job, as a soldier makes in a month.
  

• Civilian contract workers are routinely put into harm's way unnecessarily. There are interviews with former contract employees that desribe this in gruesome detail.

• Contractors are in charge of doing military personnel laundry. They use small net bags that laundry is put into and washed. The fee for this service? $99 a bag. There is an interview with an Army Seargent where he says that his clothes don't get clean in the washers, so he washed his own in a sink. He was reprimanded and given an order that he was not to do this. All clothes must be washed by the contractor.
  

• Most mess halls are run by contractors. These contractors keep strict schedules oftimes for meals. The insurgents have figured out when these times are, and take advantage of the long lines of soldiers to attack. When this was pointed out to the contractors and a request was made by the military to stagger the meal times to avoid this, the contractors refused, as that would be less cost-effective.

• Contractors provide many vehicles, such as tanker trucks. The cost of these is around $75,000. When a truck needs repair, or even gets a flat tire, there are no spare parts. The vehicle is subsequently of no use, and is burned to avoid theft by the insurgents. It is then replaced by a new vehicle.
  

And that's just a few instances. Every American, regardless of their position on the issue of Iraq, should see this documentary. This is what much of the taxpayer's money is really going towards: The gaining of obscene economic benefit by war profiteering corporations, with the cooperation of our government, at the cost of human lives. Support the troops? Indeed!

Random Thoughts On The Aftermath Of Election '06

With Democrats having a majority now in the House of Representatives and in the Senate, the American electorate has spoken. It tends to happen that congress switches controlling parties, many times congress switches to the opposite party of the sitting adminstration. This in itself can be looked upon as evidence that the American electorate prefers a division of power between the parties. And is most evident in this current election result after six years of one party controlling two branches of government.

So now the question is, what does this mean? After one of the greatest do-nothing congresses in American history, does the shift of power mean that finally some much-needed legislation will be forthcoming from the new congress? Being a born-again skeptic, the best I can be is cautiously optimistic. Some reasons for that optimism:

• The 'resignation' (more like a boot out the door) of Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense. Rumsfeld in my opinion, along with Vice-President Cheney is one of the torch-bearers of neoconservatism. In one move, President Bush has removed one torch-bearer, and gone against the influence of another. Perhaps for the first time in his presidency, Bush made a decision that is counter to an ideology that was taking this country down the road to fascism. Some analysts have taken this to be the death-knell of neoconservatism. Time will tell if that is a fact. If it indeed is a fact, everyone in this country, including conservatives, should celebrate. Neoconservatism has been the wolf in sheep's clothing, for there is nothing 'neo' (meaning new) or 'conservative' about it. It is but a reclothing of undue corporate influence in government, erosion of freedom, militarism, and power-mongering.
  

• The President's jab at Karl Rove. Asked about an apparent 'book reading contest' between Bush and Rove, Bush replied that since he was busy campaigning, Rove had more time to read. This may not look like much, but as Rove is also a torch-bearer of neoconservatism, it was significant, and it implied that Rove didn't 'come through' this time. Rove's predictions of Republican victory in the election did not hold true. Has Bush finally seen the writing on the wall?
  

• The President's agreement that comprehensive immigration legislation will be easier to accomplish with a Democratic congress. For a Republican president to say any legislation would be easier to arrive at with the opposition party in power is huge.

• Bush's 'We took a thumpin' statement. Actually, what he said was a 'collective thumpin'. Admitting that many of the races were close, collectively it was a thumpin'. Perhaps Bush realizes that he has to work with the opposition? Time will tell.
  

• Absence of much of Bush's previous swagger and arrogance. Have the neoconservative ideologues' failure to 'bring home the bacon' in this election caused the President to feel a loss of power? Again, perhaps. Again, time will tell.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that I am now a full supporter of Bush. He has been the President after all, and has either gone along with the neoconservatives out of personal conviction or convenience. Either way, Bush still has much to atone for in my book. And this one press conference could have been an anomoly for an otherwise arrogant President. But with power comes arrogance, and without control of congress perhaps that arrogance will be stifled.

The liberal/progressive community has had a long dry spell. The Republican-controlled congress and executive branch have accomplished very little, if anything, constructive for the country as a whole. The dry spell is over. The Democrats now are in a position to lead instead of being led. Hope springs eternal.

I sincerely hope that the Democrats use their power for the constructive solving of issues, that they leave room for compromise where there is an opportunity for compromise. And let's not go off on the use of the word 'compromise'. Compromising can only be done when there is room for compromise. I am not suggesting that Democrats need to kow-tow to anyone or sacrifice basic liberal/progressive beliefs. Not every issue is compromisable to be sure.

I would hope that the Democrats will offer a hand to the opposition, realize that a loyal opposition is vital to the working of our government, work towards changing the incredible nastiness that the Republican majority have injected into politics. It may be a tall order, after so many years of being in the minority, to not lapse into the same rut of power politics and vindictiveness. We have seen how the opposite side of the political fence operates, and it was not good for anyone. It will not be good for anyone if the Democrats do the same.

I'm A Bradult Too?

A blogger with some definite opinions about your truly. The original post can be found here. I include the original post in plain text, my reply is in italics:

No one in America should feel more blessed by the Warhol syndrome – our 15 minutes of undeserved fame – than Alan Beggerow. You might remember Mr. Beggerow from his front page appearance in the July 31, 2006 edition of the New York Times (Times Select subscription required). The article’s title is, “Men Not Working, And Not Wanting Just Any Job.”

Blessed? Do you think I agreed to the Times interview to promote myself, or out of some sense of ego? No, I was approached to do the interview and I have some definite feelings about the changed workplace. That was my motivation. 15 minutes of fame, or a lifetime of anonymity are all the same to me.

The Times, attempting to portray a growing underclass of unemployed workers victimized by compassionless big business, made Beggerow its poster boy. Having worked for 30 years as a union steelworker, Mr. Beggerow found himself, at age 53, unemployed, his mill closed. But instead of finding another job, any job, to put food on his table, Beggerow used his layoff as an excuse to retire to a life of unproductive leisure.

Are you certain that my life is full of ‘unproductive leisure’? You seem to know a lot of my daily activities by reading a short article and a short TV interview.

While one’s initial reaction to Beggerow might be sympathy, what is revealed in the NYT article is a level of personal immaturity best described as self-determined emotional adolescence. Listen to his adolescent-like irresponsibility as he defends his refusal to pursue a mature course in life.

So, after 30 years of working 10-12 hrs a day, swing shift, in a steel mill in NW Illinois, I am now considered immature and irresponsible because I have chosen to live on a shoestring and accept retirement because of the present situation within the workplace? As for sympathy, I have no need of yours or anyone elses. There’s a lot of folks in worse shape than me.

''I have come to realize that my free time is worth a lot to me,'' he said. To make ends meet, he has tapped the equity in his home through a $30,000 second mortgage, and he is drawing down the family's savings, at the rate of $7,500 a year. About $60,000 is left. His wife's income helps them scrape by. ''If things really get tight,'' Mr. Beggerow said, ''I might have to take a low-wage job, but I don't want to do that.''

In an accompanying audio interview on the NYT web site, Beggerow says he saw a want ad for a full-time graphic designer at a local newspaper and it interested him. He even said he was qualified. But then he confessed that the job wouldn’t afford him the creative free time to which he had become addicted. So he chose not to pursue the job opportunity.

My free time is very valuable to me. What is so heinous about saying that? It makes no difference any more how valuable my time is to anyone else. I have spent 30 years working very hard. I exchanged those years for wages and benefits. I now choose to make my way differently.

Last Friday ABC-TV’s 20/20 gave Mr. Beggerow an extension on his 15 minutes of fame, featuring him on a segment about laziness. Again, as he did with the NYT, Beggerow proclaimed himself the renaissance man who has made the mature decision to pursue quality of life instead of materialism brought by earned income. For this we are supposed to applaud him. Reality? Alan Beggerow is a bradult; an adult brat. At age 53 he embodies all the classic signs of an adolescent.

Keep your applause for ones you deem worthy of it. I have no use for it. As for your accusation on adolescent behavior and your term bradult, you are entitled to your opinion on that. This quote from your profile “The lessons about human nature that Ron learned from these youth provide him with the principles he shares with corporations worldwide. His expertise is on the role that employee behavior plays in work team dynamics, particularly people interaction.” Makes me wonder how much about adult human nature you are aware of. I worked as a problem solving team facilitator and coordinator the last 3 years in the mill, worked directly with over 50 teams. While I have no degree or diploma,I had a world of experience in those three years, and 27 years in the plant, to know that most people that have spent most of their lives working for a living are not adolescents. Perhaps if you had the actual work experience I have, you would see things differently.

Sociologists define adolescence as the pursuit of two questions: “Who am I?,” and, “Who will I be?” Men like Mr. Beggerow beg that a third question be added: “When will I be?” Clearly, he has not grown past emotional adolescence because he’s still seeking answers to the fundamental questions asked by them.

Again, because I have chosen a different path because of workplace changes I do not agree with, I am immature? I have not answered the essential questions as defined by you? Actually, I have answered those questions, but I doubt you would understand or agree.

The immaturity of adolescents is characterized, among other things, by unrealistic expectations of what is due them, postponement of long term good for temporal fulfillment, and irrational thinking designed to excuse the pursuit of responsible behavior.

I worked 30 years in a steel mill, so my pension is an unrealistic expectation? I saved what money I could, and these funds are assisting my chosen lifestyle. Is that an unrealistic expectation? I paid into SS for over 30 years, and when I reach the qualifying age, is it an unreasonable expectation to think I should receive the benefit?

Welcome to the world of Mr. Beggerow, adult adolescent. He should be ashamed. One day, perhaps soon, when his financial resources run out and he finds it too late to get a job, he will become a burden to society. The 15 minutes of fame he now proudly possesses will turn into a till death load to the taxpayer.

I have no need to feel any shame for what I have done, what I have worked for, and what I think I am entitled to. My wife and I live very frugally to preserve our funds as long as possible. It is already too late for me to get many jobs due to my age, previous union affiliation, and various physical problems I have. If you really understood the plight of worn out laborers of my age, you might understand that. So go ahead and pat yourself on the back for being ‘productive’, and label me a burden to society. Make your remarks about 15 minutes of fame that is inconsequential, and worry about the poor taxpayers that will have to take care of me til death. You have no understanding of the situation, you have but extended the myths that the NY Times article was investigating, and you are perpetuating the ‘Great American Work Ethic’ of a bygone era. For many, that work ethic no longer applies because of globalisation, poor economy, etc.

If you’re interested in actually learning about me further, here is a link to a post on my blog:Random Thoughts. I invite you to explore other things I have written there that may give you further insight. That is, if you’re interested. If you’ve already made up your mind about me, by all means don’t bother.


The Bradult,

Alan Beggerow