A True Senator

When the founders put together the American government, they made the senators up for reelection every six years, as opposed to four years for the president and two years for representatives. Why? Because the Senate was intended to be an august body, where wise and experienced men could rationally debate the issues, free from the shifting whims of the body politic. And yet, most senators today are concerned solely with their own reelection--witness the Democrats numerous votes on the Bush administration's war on terror legislation. No senator wants to be branded as "weak on terror," so we have many Democrats marching lockstep with the administration. Fortunately, there is Russ Feingold, Democrat from Wisconsin. Feingold was the lone senator to oppose the Patriot Act. And now, Feingold (along with Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd) has pledged to filibuster the telecom immunity bill working its way through the Senate. Regardless of what you think of Feingold's politics, it is refreshing to see at at least one senator standing on principle and forgoing the politically expedient decision.

Evolution Debate

Full disclosure: I am a hard-core Darwinist. I started studying Darwin's theories seriously in college, and came to conclude, to paraphrase an eminent biologist, "That nothing makes sense except in terms of evolution." So it is with particular antipathy that I see that a McCain vice president possibility, Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal, is on the record defending "intelligent design" theories as the "very best science." For those of you who haven't followed the debate, intelligent design is a creationist alternative to evolution. Advocates of the movement are determined to get god back into the classroom through the introduction of this spurious theory. Not one paper on intelligent design theory has made it into a peer reviewed biology journal. It is junk science of the highest degree, no better than astrology or phrenology. Intelligent design proponents argue that they are being discriminated against by the establishment, that evolutionists hold as tightly to their theory as creationists do to theirs, but this is flatly untrue. Any biologist who discovered a viable alternative to Darwinian evolution would usher in a true revolution, tantamount to Einstein's overthrow of Newtonian physics. Such a breakthrough would be embraced. Intelligent design is not such a breakthrough.

Obama Disappoints Again

In the wake of his decision to avoid debating John McCain in a series of town debates, Barack Obama now elects to forgo public financing of his campaign. Obama is the first candidate to do so since 1976 (when the system began), so I suppose that technically he is the "change" candidate. Not only did Obama renege on his pledge to accept public financing, but he is setting a poor political example. Yes, it's true that Obama opted out of the system because he has the ability to raise far more money via private donations, but that is not the point. Presidential elections should be entirely publicly financed. No corporate money, no lobbyist money, no two thousand dollar a plate dinners. Either continue the "$3 dollar system" in which a tax payer elects to contribute to the fund or simply appropriate the three dollars from every tax return filed. Furthermore, airtime on the major networks should be free--after all, the public owns the airwaves, not the networks. With such a system, the elected president will truly be a servant of the people because his campaign was financed by the people and the people alone. And not just his supporters or members of his own party, but a wide cross section of Americans. Currently, public financing makes approximately $85 million dollars available to each candidate. That is more than enough to run a presidential campaign.

Another Story That Must Not Be Ignored

The media barely covered the story about the release of the Senate's "Phase II" report on the administration's statements justifying the Iraq war. That report, if you hadn't heard, more or less indicated that Bush, Cheney, and Rice lied (that's right, lied) about the nature of intelligence concerning Iraq. Now comes the release of a report on the abuses at Guantanamo Bay. In it, the Army general who led the investigation states "there is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes." I would think that this story would create a serious inquiry into the polices and practices of the Bush administration. But I fear that it will be buried by the 24 news cycle and quickly forgotten. What does that say about our citizens' interest in their democracy?

Change, or More of the Same?

Obama says he's the change candidate. He says he's tired of politics as usual. So why has his campaign rejected McCain's offer for 10 town hall style, unmoderated debates? I have always found the heavily scripted debates in the presidential campaign to be insufferable (why can't the candidates ask each other questions?). But McCain's proposal would allow the voters to really engage the candidates and also allow the candidates to spar with each other. Unfortunately, Obama's campaign, although initially enthusiastic about the prospect, has responded with a counter offer consisting of a paltry two debates. Obama appears to be the frontrunner and his campaign fears that putting McCain next to him on stage in a format that McCain is comfortable with can only help the senator from Arizona. So Obama, instead of giving the voters something new and different and in their best interests, is looking out for his interests. And that is not change, that is politics as usual.

Obama Monkey Doll

A company based in Utah has produced a doll representing Obama as a monkey in a suit. While the company claims the doll is a "fun and lovable" creation designed to help get young people involved in "the political process." I say it an overt sign of the deeply held racist sentiments in this country which Obama will be hard pressed to overcome come election day.

Worst Supreme Court Decision?

John McCain called the recent Supreme Court decision upholding habeas corpus "one of the worst decisions in the history of this country." I'm sure many fans of the Supreme Court could point to a few other decisions, such as the Dred Scott case and Plessy v. Ferguson, that far outstrip Boumediene v. Bush. Whereas Plessy v. Ferguson was decided in direct contradiction of the 14th Amendment, Boumediene v. Bush upholds the Constitution, which clearly states that "writ of habeas corpus cannot be suspended except during a time of invasion or rebellion." Note that this right is enshrined in the Constitution proper, not in the Bill of Rights, which were later additions to the document. Such a prominent placement of the right most likely indicates the reverence the Founders held for the right. Simply put, there is no better path to tyranny than the suspension of habeas corpus.

Military Empire

According to a recent report, The U.S. is seeking to establish 58 military bases in Iraq, as well as rights to Iraqi airspace and the ever popular "immunity from prosecution for U.S. troops and private military contractors." Iraqi and even some American politicians seem reluctant to agree to such a deal and negotiations are described as "ongoing." The U.S. will likely maintain some sort of military presence in Iraq for years to come; currently, we have over 700 bases in some 130 countries worldwide.
I mention this because it dovetails nicely with a book I'm reading, "Lies My Teacher Told Me," by James Loewen. One of Loewen's interesting points is that American history is taught in such a sanitized way that it creates students who are unprepared to critically evaluate the world and America's place in it. For example, almost no mention is ever made of the U.S. military presence in so many countries (I wasn't aware of it until I read some Gore Vidal). My own feeling is that such distorted portrayals of American history have led to the bitter political climate we have today. At a young age, many students are exposed to stories that cast America as the "shining beacon" of the world. Historical events that contradict this image, such as our assassination attempts on Castro or our overthrow of democratically elected governments in order to further business interests, are left out of the textbooks. This romanticized image of America leads to a generation of citizens who believe America has not and never will do anything wrong. It also sets up a number of students for eventual disillusionment and cynicism about America after they learn of some of its darker dealings. This cleavage manifests itself in the vitriol between the left and the right, the "blame America first" crowd versus the jingoists.
A first step to healing this divide may be to present a more accurate version of American history to our next generation of youngsters.