A bit of a weird day. Thursday my wife slipped on some ice, fell, and broke her left leg just above the ankle. She managed to break both bones. By the time we got home from the emergency room it was late and by the time she got situated in bed it was even later. Those people who talk about how efficient our medical system is and then try to scare people with what they call "socialized medicine," and how bad it might be, should perhaps visit an ER some evening. The staff were nice, friendly, and helpful, but efficient isn't the word I would use to describe our experience. I understand the concept of triage, but for someone to sit with a broken leg for three hours before getting an x-ray doesn't seem right. After the last round of x-rays, and while the Dr. was putting on the cast, the head Doctor came twice to check on Beth, and both times he apologized for the lengthy wait. I guess it made him feel better but it didn't do much for me.
I had promised to help at Edwards campaign appearance Saturday afternoon in Washington, so Dirk helped out, Beth's mother came down, and I took off for Washington. The job I was assigned was to get people who were attending to sign in so the Edwards people had an idea how many folks came. The Washington library meeting room can maybe hold 75 people comfortably at most. They crammed a lot of people inside - I'm sure the fire marshal would have been unhappy, if Washington has such a thing. By time they were done over 300 people had signed which was a lot more than they were expecting. I can't say how the speech went, or how Edwards answered questions because I didn't hear any of it. I stayed downstairs and talked to people who didn't want to stand on the stairway to try and hear some of what he had to say. As people came out I was to help ask people if they were willing to sign up to caucus for Edwards. Quite a few signed, or said they already had. Most of the people were positive and enthusiastic about what they heard.
One of the interesting things was the number of people present from other states. I talked with folks from North Carolina, Colorado, Illinois and Kansas. Most had grown up in Iowa and were visiting relatives over Christmas. There were even some people from Australia taking in all the activity. Most made it clear they were just taking the opportunity to see a candidate while they were in the area.
Saturday, December 29, 2007
Friday, December 21, 2007
Huckabee
I saw my first Republican candidate this afternoon when I went to Coralville to see Gov. Mike Huckabee. There were well over 200 people in the room at the Marriott when Huckabee was introduced about twenty minutes late. It took him less than 10 seconds to say "Chuck Norris" as he read off some of the signs people brought. We then got to hear how wonderful Norris is and he promised Norris would be campaigning with him the week before the caucus.
Huckabee talked for forty minutes during which time he referred to Isaiah, Chuck Norris, Jesus Christ, Billy Jack, and Colin Powell. I found it to be a rather odd mix of names.
Next, Huckabee talked about the importance of the Iowa caucuses in allowing underfunded candidates a chance. He then gave us a history of the Declaration of Independence, the Revolutionary War, and a bit about the Constitution. It seems to me that when you combine religious belief, politics, and history you end with both bad theology and bad history.
Other topics he addressed were the need to overcome partisanship, immigration, the education system, and our failed energy policy. He noted that we pay for both sides of the war on terror when we fund the Pentagon and through our oil dollars, also fund terrorists.
He spent a lot of time criticizing the tax system which he claims taxes productivity and ingenuity. He talked about replacing the IRS and the current system with what he called a consumption tax. He didn't say anything specific but my guess is most of the people who clapped didn't understand he proposes replacing the income tax with a 23% sales tax. I'm no expert but it seems to me, ingenious Americans would find ways to avoid paying this fee, it would put a damper on the economy, or both.
After the lengthy discourse on taxes Huckabee quickly reviewed his pro-life credentials, his humble origins, and his desire for the strongest military ever. This is where he referred to Billy Jack, quoting the line about putting my heel on your neck and stomping.
He finished by thanking us and reminding us how important it is to caucus and participate in the political process. According to him, we were all expressing our patriotism just by coming to hear him.
My impressions- Huckabee is a folksy guy who relates well to a crowd. He didn't sound all that different from some Democrats who also talk about their humble origins and the hard times they have overcome. He can tell a good story and poke fun at himself so he comes across as a likable guy. When he talked about only using Lava soap, it seemed most of the crowd shared the experience of being scrubbed with that awful stuff.
Huckabee had an interesting way of shifting between references to Jesus, Isaiah and Christianity, and then referring to Chuck Norris, Billy Jack, and a take no prisoners kind of approach. Frankly I found his ability to do this to be a bit frightening. I found myself wondering who he would look like with a little patch of mustache over his lip.
What I didn't hear was also interesting. There was no mention of the war in Iraq or Afghanistan. There was little said about the economy and when he did mention it he talked about the need to cut taxes. He described how Maytag left Newton, Iowa because of the heavy tax burden. The John Edwards commercial which just aired, suggested Maytag left because of corporate greed and unfair trade agreements. My guess is the truth is somewhere in between those two arguments.
Compared to Romney and Guliani, Huckabee connects well with many Iowans and is a formidable candidate in the State.
Huckabee talked for forty minutes during which time he referred to Isaiah, Chuck Norris, Jesus Christ, Billy Jack, and Colin Powell. I found it to be a rather odd mix of names.
Next, Huckabee talked about the importance of the Iowa caucuses in allowing underfunded candidates a chance. He then gave us a history of the Declaration of Independence, the Revolutionary War, and a bit about the Constitution. It seems to me that when you combine religious belief, politics, and history you end with both bad theology and bad history.
Other topics he addressed were the need to overcome partisanship, immigration, the education system, and our failed energy policy. He noted that we pay for both sides of the war on terror when we fund the Pentagon and through our oil dollars, also fund terrorists.
He spent a lot of time criticizing the tax system which he claims taxes productivity and ingenuity. He talked about replacing the IRS and the current system with what he called a consumption tax. He didn't say anything specific but my guess is most of the people who clapped didn't understand he proposes replacing the income tax with a 23% sales tax. I'm no expert but it seems to me, ingenious Americans would find ways to avoid paying this fee, it would put a damper on the economy, or both.
After the lengthy discourse on taxes Huckabee quickly reviewed his pro-life credentials, his humble origins, and his desire for the strongest military ever. This is where he referred to Billy Jack, quoting the line about putting my heel on your neck and stomping.
He finished by thanking us and reminding us how important it is to caucus and participate in the political process. According to him, we were all expressing our patriotism just by coming to hear him.
My impressions- Huckabee is a folksy guy who relates well to a crowd. He didn't sound all that different from some Democrats who also talk about their humble origins and the hard times they have overcome. He can tell a good story and poke fun at himself so he comes across as a likable guy. When he talked about only using Lava soap, it seemed most of the crowd shared the experience of being scrubbed with that awful stuff.
Huckabee had an interesting way of shifting between references to Jesus, Isaiah and Christianity, and then referring to Chuck Norris, Billy Jack, and a take no prisoners kind of approach. Frankly I found his ability to do this to be a bit frightening. I found myself wondering who he would look like with a little patch of mustache over his lip.
What I didn't hear was also interesting. There was no mention of the war in Iraq or Afghanistan. There was little said about the economy and when he did mention it he talked about the need to cut taxes. He described how Maytag left Newton, Iowa because of the heavy tax burden. The John Edwards commercial which just aired, suggested Maytag left because of corporate greed and unfair trade agreements. My guess is the truth is somewhere in between those two arguments.
Compared to Romney and Guliani, Huckabee connects well with many Iowans and is a formidable candidate in the State.
Monday, December 17, 2007
Hillary
Dirk and I drove to Coralville this evening to see Hillary Clinton at the Johnson County Historical Society building which houses old cars. We were among the last people allowed into the building. The local fire marshal was exerting his authority to make sure the building would not be overcrowded so approximately 200 people waited outside.
She came out about fifteen minutes late, was introduced and then did her speech. She talked from 7:43 to 8:30 and spent 20 minutes of that talking about health care. The next topic was energy policy, the need for a spirit of optimism, education including reforming No Child Left Behind and cutting college cost. From there she moved to talking about "cronyism" in Washington, reclaiming moral authority in the world by bringing the troops home from Iraq "as quickly and responsibly as possible." From what I have read elsewhere the "responsible" part of her plan may leave troops in Iraq for up to four years after she would take office.
After the lengthy talk, she told us there were 200 cold people outside who she needed to visit but she wanted to answer some questions so she decided three would be the limit. The questions were about credit cards, Social Security reform, and one about why so many people dislike her.
A couple of observations, We were seated behind the stand for photographers. When they stood we couldn't see. How many pictures does a beat photographer need of Hillary Clinton - or any candidate for that matter? The crowd was large, and seemed to be made up mostly of older people. I didn't see a lot of college age folks or folks who seemed to be in their 30's. As for Hillary herself, I didn't see any horns and she wasn't carrying a pitchfork. I imagine she would make a decent President but I didn't find her to be all that inspiring. She didn't mention any of her Democratic rivals but she did take a shot at Edwards and Obama in her line about change. "You can't create change by demanding it, or by hoping for it, you create change by working for it." While a lot of people clapped for the line, I noticed quite a few around us who kept their hands in their laps.
I have now seen all the major Democratic candidates this election cycle. If the Des Moines Register can exclude Kucinich I suppose I can as well. For whatever reason the Republicans seem to be avoiding southeastern Iowa. I signed up with Romney and Huckabee's websites to make sure I get notices if they come to the area, but that has resulted primarily in negative emails aimed at each other. Such fun.
She came out about fifteen minutes late, was introduced and then did her speech. She talked from 7:43 to 8:30 and spent 20 minutes of that talking about health care. The next topic was energy policy, the need for a spirit of optimism, education including reforming No Child Left Behind and cutting college cost. From there she moved to talking about "cronyism" in Washington, reclaiming moral authority in the world by bringing the troops home from Iraq "as quickly and responsibly as possible." From what I have read elsewhere the "responsible" part of her plan may leave troops in Iraq for up to four years after she would take office.
After the lengthy talk, she told us there were 200 cold people outside who she needed to visit but she wanted to answer some questions so she decided three would be the limit. The questions were about credit cards, Social Security reform, and one about why so many people dislike her.
A couple of observations, We were seated behind the stand for photographers. When they stood we couldn't see. How many pictures does a beat photographer need of Hillary Clinton - or any candidate for that matter? The crowd was large, and seemed to be made up mostly of older people. I didn't see a lot of college age folks or folks who seemed to be in their 30's. As for Hillary herself, I didn't see any horns and she wasn't carrying a pitchfork. I imagine she would make a decent President but I didn't find her to be all that inspiring. She didn't mention any of her Democratic rivals but she did take a shot at Edwards and Obama in her line about change. "You can't create change by demanding it, or by hoping for it, you create change by working for it." While a lot of people clapped for the line, I noticed quite a few around us who kept their hands in their laps.
I have now seen all the major Democratic candidates this election cycle. If the Des Moines Register can exclude Kucinich I suppose I can as well. For whatever reason the Republicans seem to be avoiding southeastern Iowa. I signed up with Romney and Huckabee's websites to make sure I get notices if they come to the area, but that has resulted primarily in negative emails aimed at each other. Such fun.
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Joe Biden
This afternoon I drove to Washington to see Sen. Joe Biden at the public library. I left Wellman a bit late and though it had been snowing I figured the roads would be a bit better than they were. He was scheduled to arrive at 3:30 and I figured he would be late as well so I wasn't to worried. I parked across the street, helped a guy with directions who I found out was working for Obama, and was there to try and lure people coming to see Biden to visit the Obama office instead. I got inside, started running up the steps, and nearly ran into the Biden entourage.
There were 50-60 people in the room. A neighbor of mine was introducing him. I will only note that said neighbor was wearing sweatpants which did not have a hole in them, unlike the pair he was wearing a couple of years ago. He also had on a new t-shirt.
Biden introduced us to some of his family members including his granddaughter. He talked for about 20 minutes outlining some of his policies, focusing particularly on Iraq, Iran, economic policies, education, health care, and social security. It seemed he felt comfortable speaking about foreign policy more than some of the domestic issues. After the stump speech he asked for questions.
The first question had to do with taxes and campaign strategy, the second dealt with energy policy and the third was about Iraq. I was standing in the back of the room and it seemed the people he called on were ones wearing name tags or were people he seemed to know, so I figured I might not get a chance to ask a question. I was taking notes and trying to maintain eye contact when he pointed towards me and said, did you have a question, so I said "yes, I do." I said I had the opportunity to be in the West Bank for two weeks this past summer and I would like to know how he would approach the conflict between Israel and Palestine, and what he would do to improve conditions for Palestinians.
This was his response, First, he said the President of the U.S. needs to be engaged on an almost daily basis with the leaders of Israel, Palestine and other middle eastern countries. He said he favors a two state solution with the borders being more or less the green line. He talked about a "hectare for hectare" land swap where Israeli settlements which have been in place for more than 20 years would be allowed to remain, if land was granted to a Palestinian state elsewhere by Israel. He said there needs to be free entry to Jerusalem and east Jerusalem, and that there can be no guaranteed right of return because it would mean the destruction of Israel.
He went on to talk about the neocon approach to foreign relations which he said discounts diplomacy and focuses on a strong military approach. He talked about this being a time when a peace settlement might be possible. He talked about the Sunni Arab countries being more afraid of radical Shiia countries than of Israel, of Syria being key to solving the situation. It was apparent he is knowledgeable about the middle east and competent in foreign affairs.
I have no idea how Palestinians would respond to his ideas, particularly the idea of leaving some settlements in place, or his comments about east Jerusalem, though I suppose many would not be happy.
He answered two or three more questions. During his answer he went on a rant about letting Republicans talk about morality and religion. "How dare we let Mitt Romney lecture us self-righteously about morality, how dare we let some one like Guliani claim the moral high ground."
I was impressed with Senator Biden. He was dignified, intelligent, he had a sense of humor, he tried to keep from saying the word "hell" to often, and it was clear he has a lot of foreign policy experience. Biden would make a good President, much better than the person now filling the office.
There were 50-60 people in the room. A neighbor of mine was introducing him. I will only note that said neighbor was wearing sweatpants which did not have a hole in them, unlike the pair he was wearing a couple of years ago. He also had on a new t-shirt.
Biden introduced us to some of his family members including his granddaughter. He talked for about 20 minutes outlining some of his policies, focusing particularly on Iraq, Iran, economic policies, education, health care, and social security. It seemed he felt comfortable speaking about foreign policy more than some of the domestic issues. After the stump speech he asked for questions.
The first question had to do with taxes and campaign strategy, the second dealt with energy policy and the third was about Iraq. I was standing in the back of the room and it seemed the people he called on were ones wearing name tags or were people he seemed to know, so I figured I might not get a chance to ask a question. I was taking notes and trying to maintain eye contact when he pointed towards me and said, did you have a question, so I said "yes, I do." I said I had the opportunity to be in the West Bank for two weeks this past summer and I would like to know how he would approach the conflict between Israel and Palestine, and what he would do to improve conditions for Palestinians.
This was his response, First, he said the President of the U.S. needs to be engaged on an almost daily basis with the leaders of Israel, Palestine and other middle eastern countries. He said he favors a two state solution with the borders being more or less the green line. He talked about a "hectare for hectare" land swap where Israeli settlements which have been in place for more than 20 years would be allowed to remain, if land was granted to a Palestinian state elsewhere by Israel. He said there needs to be free entry to Jerusalem and east Jerusalem, and that there can be no guaranteed right of return because it would mean the destruction of Israel.
He went on to talk about the neocon approach to foreign relations which he said discounts diplomacy and focuses on a strong military approach. He talked about this being a time when a peace settlement might be possible. He talked about the Sunni Arab countries being more afraid of radical Shiia countries than of Israel, of Syria being key to solving the situation. It was apparent he is knowledgeable about the middle east and competent in foreign affairs.
I have no idea how Palestinians would respond to his ideas, particularly the idea of leaving some settlements in place, or his comments about east Jerusalem, though I suppose many would not be happy.
He answered two or three more questions. During his answer he went on a rant about letting Republicans talk about morality and religion. "How dare we let Mitt Romney lecture us self-righteously about morality, how dare we let some one like Guliani claim the moral high ground."
I was impressed with Senator Biden. He was dignified, intelligent, he had a sense of humor, he tried to keep from saying the word "hell" to often, and it was clear he has a lot of foreign policy experience. Biden would make a good President, much better than the person now filling the office.
Wednesday, December 05, 2007
signs and the Declaration of Independence
More political signs are starting to sprout in local yards. Scattered among the numerous "for sale" signs in town (this summer 20 plus houses were for sale in town) you see the occasional sign promoting a candidate. Tonight there were two Obama signs along Hwy 22 across from the Huckabee sign which has been up for a week. There is at least one Clinton sign, my neighbor has a Biden sign sort of hidden behind his cars, while I stuck an Edwards sign in my yard. I'm waiting to see a candidates sign incorporated into some one's Christmas light display.
On the way in to Indiana last weekend I saw more Ron Paul signs than any others. There was even a bed sheet hanging from a highway overpass which read "Ron Paul Revolution."
Today in World History class I had to wonder if students are becoming dumber or if I am just getting old and cranky. The chapter on the Enlightenment had a short section about how the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution reflect some of the Enlightenment ideals Montesquieu, Rousseau, Locke and others wrote about. I assumed the classes of mostly sophomores would be somewhat familiar with the two documents from 8th grade U.S. History. Only two of the 35 students admitted to having read any part of the Declaration before today. Most couldn't finish the line, "life, liberty...." So what was supposed to be a short review ended up using most of the shortened block period.
The lack of reading came up again when a group of seniors in Current Events class looked at a My Turn essay in the current Newsweek where the author writes about catching up on his reading since he didn't read as a teenager. The essay mentioned Siddhartha, Brave New World, 1984, Animal Farm, and Breakfast of Champions. One of the girls had read Siddhartha, two had read Animal Farm for a British Lit class and that was all. Some of the kids in my classes may as well be illiterate - some only read what is assigned and from test scores, I would assume that many don't even read what is assigned. I should quit ranting, but I fear for our democracy if people don't read.
How can people tell that our government is violating the Constitution if they never bother reading it?
On the way in to Indiana last weekend I saw more Ron Paul signs than any others. There was even a bed sheet hanging from a highway overpass which read "Ron Paul Revolution."
Today in World History class I had to wonder if students are becoming dumber or if I am just getting old and cranky. The chapter on the Enlightenment had a short section about how the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution reflect some of the Enlightenment ideals Montesquieu, Rousseau, Locke and others wrote about. I assumed the classes of mostly sophomores would be somewhat familiar with the two documents from 8th grade U.S. History. Only two of the 35 students admitted to having read any part of the Declaration before today. Most couldn't finish the line, "life, liberty...." So what was supposed to be a short review ended up using most of the shortened block period.
The lack of reading came up again when a group of seniors in Current Events class looked at a My Turn essay in the current Newsweek where the author writes about catching up on his reading since he didn't read as a teenager. The essay mentioned Siddhartha, Brave New World, 1984, Animal Farm, and Breakfast of Champions. One of the girls had read Siddhartha, two had read Animal Farm for a British Lit class and that was all. Some of the kids in my classes may as well be illiterate - some only read what is assigned and from test scores, I would assume that many don't even read what is assigned. I should quit ranting, but I fear for our democracy if people don't read.
How can people tell that our government is violating the Constitution if they never bother reading it?
Monday, November 19, 2007
Bonnie Raitt and Jackson Browne
I drove to Iowa City after school today to see John Edwards at the City High Auditorium. I got there about fifteen minutes before the scheduled start time and was fortunate to find a seat in the balcony as the place was full and more people were on the way. The program started about 5:15 with a couple of introductions and then Bonnie Raitt and Jackson Browne sang several songs including "Make me an Angel" (I don't know if that is the title or not but its how I remember the song) and "A Thing called Love." On the Make me an Angel song she had Greg Brown, Pieta Brown, Bo Ramsey and a women whose name I missed come up on the stage and sing along. She probably helped Edwards score some points with the local folk music crowd.
In between their songs they told us why they supported Edwards and encouraged us to caucus for Edwards. After half an hour of songs, John Edwards gave a rousing speech. He criticized Bush and reiterated his plans for getting the US out of Iraq, health care, and his concern for the poor. Compared to the last time I saw him speak Edwards spoke with a lot of passion and energy. Combined with the singing this was the nearest thing to a revival meeting I've been to, since I've been to a revival meeting and it has been awhile since I have been to one of those.
Edwards took a few questions but kept that part relatively short. He answered questions about global warming, education, health care, social security, and one on how he makes decisions. If you have heard him before he didn't really say much new, but the passion did come through.
When he talked about his plans and ideas in relationship to the other Democratic candidates he tended to compare his positions primarily to those of Clinton. He kept repeating that if you want traditional politics with leaders beholden to corporate interests then Clinton would be a good choice, but if you wanted change and a politician who would fight special interests than he was the best choice. It was the first time where I really heard him talk about his experience as a trial lawyer and how every day for 20 years he fought against the HMO's, the health insurance companies and other large business interests to protect his clients. He argued that he would bring that experience with him as he battled for universal health care and other improvements in life for the average American.
As he finished they played a Springsteen song over the speakers and many people went looking for autographs. A lot of people were picking up literature, signs, and stickers, but it is always hard to tell how much of it is people collecting campaign paraphernalia and how much is because they support the candidate.
In between their songs they told us why they supported Edwards and encouraged us to caucus for Edwards. After half an hour of songs, John Edwards gave a rousing speech. He criticized Bush and reiterated his plans for getting the US out of Iraq, health care, and his concern for the poor. Compared to the last time I saw him speak Edwards spoke with a lot of passion and energy. Combined with the singing this was the nearest thing to a revival meeting I've been to, since I've been to a revival meeting and it has been awhile since I have been to one of those.
Edwards took a few questions but kept that part relatively short. He answered questions about global warming, education, health care, social security, and one on how he makes decisions. If you have heard him before he didn't really say much new, but the passion did come through.
When he talked about his plans and ideas in relationship to the other Democratic candidates he tended to compare his positions primarily to those of Clinton. He kept repeating that if you want traditional politics with leaders beholden to corporate interests then Clinton would be a good choice, but if you wanted change and a politician who would fight special interests than he was the best choice. It was the first time where I really heard him talk about his experience as a trial lawyer and how every day for 20 years he fought against the HMO's, the health insurance companies and other large business interests to protect his clients. He argued that he would bring that experience with him as he battled for universal health care and other improvements in life for the average American.
As he finished they played a Springsteen song over the speakers and many people went looking for autographs. A lot of people were picking up literature, signs, and stickers, but it is always hard to tell how much of it is people collecting campaign paraphernalia and how much is because they support the candidate.
Friday, November 16, 2007
debate
The candidates seem to be campaigning in either the Des Moines or Dubuque areas so none have been coming near the cornfields where I live. I think Edwards is supposed to be in Iowa City Monday and Romney may be in Washington Wednesday. I have a couple of unwritten rules about going to these events. I won't drive more than 30 miles to get to the appearance - especially when gas is up to 3.10, and I won't go to an event where I have to pay to get in the door. I suppose there are others but those two seem to work for the most part.
I did watch the debate which raised questions about how CNN and other news media cover this whole race. CNN's website said something like, "Clinton dominates debate." They neglected to add that CNN reporters asked her the first question and that the first ten minutes of the debate were primarily Clinton and Obama going back and forth. Why shouldn't Clinton dominate the debate if she is asked the majority of the questions and allowed to respond any time one of the other candidates dared to criticize her by name.
If according to the news reports Guliani is the FOX news candidate, is Clinton the CNN candidate? If the rest of Iowa is like my town, most of the registered voters are undecided and will only say they are leaning towards a candidate. Howard Dean was surprised by the results last time, and I hope Clinton is surprised in this one as well. Maybe a third place finish in Iowa would derail her a bit.
Edwards finally got pulled into the mix and eventually the other candidates got some air time. The local paper said Biden didn't talk until 15 minutes in and Dodd, Richardson, and Kucinich were even later.
One thing I found disappointing was how many of the candidates said that national security was more important than human rights. I believe Richardson and Kucinich were the only two to either challenge the premise or to say human rights was more important. It reminded me a bit of Thoreau who we were looking at a bit this week in my American History class. One of his passages from On Civil Disobedience seemed appropriate; "The mass of men serve the state...not as men mainly, but as machines with their bodies. ...In most cases there is no free exercise whatever of the judgement or of the moral sense but they put themselves on a level with wood and earth and stones;.... Others as most legislators, politicians, lawyers, ministers... serve the state chiefly with their heads; as they rarely make any moral distinctions, they are as likely to serve the devil, without intending it, as God." I think we would all do well to read Thoreau again.
I did watch the debate which raised questions about how CNN and other news media cover this whole race. CNN's website said something like, "Clinton dominates debate." They neglected to add that CNN reporters asked her the first question and that the first ten minutes of the debate were primarily Clinton and Obama going back and forth. Why shouldn't Clinton dominate the debate if she is asked the majority of the questions and allowed to respond any time one of the other candidates dared to criticize her by name.
If according to the news reports Guliani is the FOX news candidate, is Clinton the CNN candidate? If the rest of Iowa is like my town, most of the registered voters are undecided and will only say they are leaning towards a candidate. Howard Dean was surprised by the results last time, and I hope Clinton is surprised in this one as well. Maybe a third place finish in Iowa would derail her a bit.
Edwards finally got pulled into the mix and eventually the other candidates got some air time. The local paper said Biden didn't talk until 15 minutes in and Dodd, Richardson, and Kucinich were even later.
One thing I found disappointing was how many of the candidates said that national security was more important than human rights. I believe Richardson and Kucinich were the only two to either challenge the premise or to say human rights was more important. It reminded me a bit of Thoreau who we were looking at a bit this week in my American History class. One of his passages from On Civil Disobedience seemed appropriate; "The mass of men serve the state...not as men mainly, but as machines with their bodies. ...In most cases there is no free exercise whatever of the judgement or of the moral sense but they put themselves on a level with wood and earth and stones;.... Others as most legislators, politicians, lawyers, ministers... serve the state chiefly with their heads; as they rarely make any moral distinctions, they are as likely to serve the devil, without intending it, as God." I think we would all do well to read Thoreau again.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
caucus preparation
My son tells me this is boring. I told him I would try and make it a bit more interesting, but then again I live in a small town surrounded by corn fields. To make it worse, at this time of year, after the corn is picked, the farmers begin emptying their hog manure pits. The smell which emanates from the liquid shit can permeate your clothes, fill your nostrils, and drive you mad. Last week when I walked out the school door I was assaulted by the stench. For those who have never experienced the smell, it can be overwhelming. A few years ago we played a soccer game in the evening after a local farmer spread his crap on neighboring fields. We won over a good West Point Marquette team that night. When I talked to their coach the following week he complained about not being able to concentrate because the smell was so bad. He said they smelled like manure when they got off the bus after a hour plus ride home. I can believe it because I smelled horrible when I got home. So, not only do I live in a small field in the middle of corn fields, but this time of year, they are smelly corn fields.
Last night I attended what was called a "caucus preparation" meeting in Washington organized by the John Edwards campaign. We met at the Pizza Ranch and went through the agenda established by the higher ups somewhere. We even got a pep talk from some guy over the phone. The material we were given is helpful and the young women staffer in charge of the area did fine, but my question as I sat there was, why do you send a young person who has never attended a caucus, to lead a caucus preparation meeting. I suppose it is because either she volunteered, or because she agreed to work for a minimal amount until the caucus is over, hoping Edwards does well, and that she will be hired to work in a State with a later primary.
The other troubling thing was that the Washington Demons football team was eating in a room next to ours. They were being typical boisterous high school kids, in other words they were loud. That wouldn't have been a problem except that four of the eight people in our meeting were frail, little old ladies who had a hard time hearing anyway, let alone with lots of background noise. The young women running the meeting knew enough to cut the meeting short and send us on our way. I did come home with a list of all the undecided Democrats in our precinct and the idea is to talk with them over the next two months. There are about 75 names on the list. I know at least one person who tells every candidate who calls that he is committed to someone else since it cuts down significantly on the number of phone calls he gets. I guess this is all part of "democracy in action" and I have to admit I do find it to be interesting to participate in the process even if it seems messy and inefficient.
mm
Last night I attended what was called a "caucus preparation" meeting in Washington organized by the John Edwards campaign. We met at the Pizza Ranch and went through the agenda established by the higher ups somewhere. We even got a pep talk from some guy over the phone. The material we were given is helpful and the young women staffer in charge of the area did fine, but my question as I sat there was, why do you send a young person who has never attended a caucus, to lead a caucus preparation meeting. I suppose it is because either she volunteered, or because she agreed to work for a minimal amount until the caucus is over, hoping Edwards does well, and that she will be hired to work in a State with a later primary.
The other troubling thing was that the Washington Demons football team was eating in a room next to ours. They were being typical boisterous high school kids, in other words they were loud. That wouldn't have been a problem except that four of the eight people in our meeting were frail, little old ladies who had a hard time hearing anyway, let alone with lots of background noise. The young women running the meeting knew enough to cut the meeting short and send us on our way. I did come home with a list of all the undecided Democrats in our precinct and the idea is to talk with them over the next two months. There are about 75 names on the list. I know at least one person who tells every candidate who calls that he is committed to someone else since it cuts down significantly on the number of phone calls he gets. I guess this is all part of "democracy in action" and I have to admit I do find it to be interesting to participate in the process even if it seems messy and inefficient.
mm
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
who is barak obama?
The candidates haven't been making the rounds nearby so I haven't seen any one recently. Guliani was in Iowa City last Wednesday evening but I had been asked to speak about my trip to the West Bank to a group called People for Justice in Palestine at the Iowa City Library. The Daily Iowan said there were around 40 people there but I thought it was closer to 60. Ben and Jerry of ice cream fame were also in Iowa City that evening and they were giving away ice cream. It is hard to compete with free ice cream. I thought my presentation went well. One guy thanked me afterwards and then added, "I didn't learn anything new, but I liked the way you told your story." He then said he had been to the West Bank 4 times. The program was taped and will appear occasionally on the public access channel in Iowa City.
Guiliani was also in town the week before but it would have cost $50 bucks a plate and I prefer to not pay to see any of these guys.
Now to the title of this post, "who is Barak Obama?" One of the other things I have been doing this fall is to interview some Amish folks in Iowa for some people in Goshen and Pennsylvania. It has been interesting to sit for an hour or two and ask them questions. Generally the interviews start out slow, then when I put away my notebook they start talking. The last guy I talked to liked to ask me questions as well. I'm not exactly sure how it came up but he asked me about interracial marriage and how the children of interracial marriages are treated. So I asked him if he him if he knew about Barak Obama. His response was, who? So I repeated the name, "Barak Obama." "Who is Barak Obama?" I told him Obama was one of the guys running for President and had been in Iowa quite a bit over the last month. He thought that was nice but didn't know who he was and he didn't particularly care. I can imagine him saying, "thats a concern for the world, not me."
It was sort of refreshing to talk with a man who didn't know who any of the candidates were after they have spent thousands of dollars in the state of Iowa trying to get their message to the people. It is one of the advantages of not having a television, a phone, or email all ways we are being bombarded by various candidates. This isn't to say this man was unconcerned or apathetic. He is a very bright guy, but for him, the main goal in life is to be faithful to God, scriptures and his church, and politics isn't going to help him with faithfulness.
mm
Guiliani was also in town the week before but it would have cost $50 bucks a plate and I prefer to not pay to see any of these guys.
Now to the title of this post, "who is Barak Obama?" One of the other things I have been doing this fall is to interview some Amish folks in Iowa for some people in Goshen and Pennsylvania. It has been interesting to sit for an hour or two and ask them questions. Generally the interviews start out slow, then when I put away my notebook they start talking. The last guy I talked to liked to ask me questions as well. I'm not exactly sure how it came up but he asked me about interracial marriage and how the children of interracial marriages are treated. So I asked him if he him if he knew about Barak Obama. His response was, who? So I repeated the name, "Barak Obama." "Who is Barak Obama?" I told him Obama was one of the guys running for President and had been in Iowa quite a bit over the last month. He thought that was nice but didn't know who he was and he didn't particularly care. I can imagine him saying, "thats a concern for the world, not me."
It was sort of refreshing to talk with a man who didn't know who any of the candidates were after they have spent thousands of dollars in the state of Iowa trying to get their message to the people. It is one of the advantages of not having a television, a phone, or email all ways we are being bombarded by various candidates. This isn't to say this man was unconcerned or apathetic. He is a very bright guy, but for him, the main goal in life is to be faithful to God, scriptures and his church, and politics isn't going to help him with faithfulness.
mm
Sunday, October 07, 2007
Chris Dodd
After church I drove to Washington to see Chris Dodd at Cafe Dodici's. Compared to the stockyards where I saw Obama, and Washington High School where Edwards and Richardson appeared, this was by far the classiest place I have seen a candidate. Dodd arrived about 15 minutes after the scheduled time and talked to around 50 people. Unlike the other visits, this one had food so the wait was enjoyable. They had these tasty spinach filled pastries which were exceptionally good.
After noting his Iowa connections by making references to Harken, Bedel, Culver, and other Iowa politicians, Dodd talked about his electability and the importance of the Iowa caucus in choosing a candidate who can win in November. As part of this he highlighted his experience and his ability to work across party lines to get legislation passed.
The first issue Dodd talked about was Iraq. He said he would remove U.S. troops from Iraq but that removing troops does not mean that we would not be involved in the area. "We have turned Iraq into a petrie dish for jihadists and terrorists." He also noted his service in the Peace Corps and his service in the National Guard.
Next Dodd talked about restoring the Constitution. He told the story of his father who worked as a prosecutor at the Nuremberg trials after WWII and how important it was to treat our enemies by the rule of law. He contrasted the response most people give to Nuremberg to the images most of us have when we hear about Abu Grahb or Guantanamo.
After 30 minutes of talking Dodd took questions from the audience. People asked about No Child Left Behind, Israel's bombing of Syria, rural Iowa, the electability of a Northeast liberal, fair trade, why Congress hasn't done more to halt the war in Iraq and the growing economic disparity in the U.S. Dodd's answers tended to be long and passionate, though he didn't always answer the question. He had an annoying habit of saying "I hear" after many statements especially when he was excited, "I hear."
Though I was sitting towards the front he didn't seem to want to call on me when I raised my hand. After saying it was time to finish I thought I would see if I could ask a question about Palestine. After getting his picture taken and signing some autographs he said, "I never got to your question." I told him I had spent two weeks in the West Bank and was wondering where I could find what his position is regarding Israel and Palestine. Dodd said first the President must be engaged in the area. "Condi can't just stop in every six months or so and expect to get anything done," so I would be more engaged in the area. He said when he visited with Olmert that Olmert told him Bush is the best President the U.S. has ever had. The reason according to Dodd is that Bush has never pushed Israel on any issue and has backed nearly every policy or plan pushed by Israel. Dodd added, I favor a two state solution and the Palestinian state needs to be a viable one. We can't always just accept what Israel does and need to be willing to push them to improve living conditions for Palestinians. Dodd also mentioned his support for the Peace Corps and that he has worked to maintain their presence in Jordan and would like to see the Peace Corps in Egypt and other Arab nations. Then he moved on to talk with some of the others. I grabbed a couple more of the spinach pastries, bought some chocolates for my wife and headed for home.
Dodd did a nice job and seemed knowledgeable about the issues. He tended to be a bit long winded but he showed some passion when addressing the issues. The problem is that he is a Senator and has been in Congress for 26 years at a time when many people seem to want change and a fresh face. In the words of my son who saw him in Wellman, "he's just another old white guy who wants to be President." Unfortunately for Dodd, I'm afraid that is how many people will see him.
After noting his Iowa connections by making references to Harken, Bedel, Culver, and other Iowa politicians, Dodd talked about his electability and the importance of the Iowa caucus in choosing a candidate who can win in November. As part of this he highlighted his experience and his ability to work across party lines to get legislation passed.
The first issue Dodd talked about was Iraq. He said he would remove U.S. troops from Iraq but that removing troops does not mean that we would not be involved in the area. "We have turned Iraq into a petrie dish for jihadists and terrorists." He also noted his service in the Peace Corps and his service in the National Guard.
Next Dodd talked about restoring the Constitution. He told the story of his father who worked as a prosecutor at the Nuremberg trials after WWII and how important it was to treat our enemies by the rule of law. He contrasted the response most people give to Nuremberg to the images most of us have when we hear about Abu Grahb or Guantanamo.
After 30 minutes of talking Dodd took questions from the audience. People asked about No Child Left Behind, Israel's bombing of Syria, rural Iowa, the electability of a Northeast liberal, fair trade, why Congress hasn't done more to halt the war in Iraq and the growing economic disparity in the U.S. Dodd's answers tended to be long and passionate, though he didn't always answer the question. He had an annoying habit of saying "I hear" after many statements especially when he was excited, "I hear."
Though I was sitting towards the front he didn't seem to want to call on me when I raised my hand. After saying it was time to finish I thought I would see if I could ask a question about Palestine. After getting his picture taken and signing some autographs he said, "I never got to your question." I told him I had spent two weeks in the West Bank and was wondering where I could find what his position is regarding Israel and Palestine. Dodd said first the President must be engaged in the area. "Condi can't just stop in every six months or so and expect to get anything done," so I would be more engaged in the area. He said when he visited with Olmert that Olmert told him Bush is the best President the U.S. has ever had. The reason according to Dodd is that Bush has never pushed Israel on any issue and has backed nearly every policy or plan pushed by Israel. Dodd added, I favor a two state solution and the Palestinian state needs to be a viable one. We can't always just accept what Israel does and need to be willing to push them to improve living conditions for Palestinians. Dodd also mentioned his support for the Peace Corps and that he has worked to maintain their presence in Jordan and would like to see the Peace Corps in Egypt and other Arab nations. Then he moved on to talk with some of the others. I grabbed a couple more of the spinach pastries, bought some chocolates for my wife and headed for home.
Dodd did a nice job and seemed knowledgeable about the issues. He tended to be a bit long winded but he showed some passion when addressing the issues. The problem is that he is a Senator and has been in Congress for 26 years at a time when many people seem to want change and a fresh face. In the words of my son who saw him in Wellman, "he's just another old white guy who wants to be President." Unfortunately for Dodd, I'm afraid that is how many people will see him.
Saturday, October 06, 2007
John Edwards
Tonight I made another trip to Washington, this time to see John Edwards speak in the old gymnasium at the high school. Beth and I had gone to the Pork supper at IMS and when it appeared she wouldn't get done in time for me to leave, I left her there - though I did make arrangements for her to get home. Fortunately she is understanding of my eccentricities. Then I faced the question of why, when you are in a hurry does every car you get behind go 40 - 45 mph down the highway with few if any places to pass.
I made it to the school and found a parking place right in front even though I was late. I found the old gymnasium, one of those cracker box gyms with a balcony or railing up above. The seats were full so I headed to a place where I could stand, when a young women came and offered to usher me to a seat. My seat was on the platform behind the speaker and in front of a large U.S. flag. Four years ago I caucused for Edwards so I have seen him several times and continue to view him favorably.
Elizabeth Edwards was introduced and received a standing ovation from the crowd of 100 to 200 people. She focused on electability and compared some polls showing how her husband compares to Obama, Clinton, Gulianni, Thompson, and Romney. She introduced John who came in to a Springsteen song. I couldn't tell which one because the sound system was not so good and it was compounded by the echoing of the gym.
Edwards talked about Universal health care, economic inequality, global warming, the war in Iraq and finished by mentioning the recent Senate vote on Iran. He did this all in 10 minutes or so and then asked for questions. After answering questions about renewable energy, Iraq and Iran, gun control ("tell your son, John Edwards won't take away his gun"), trade policy, and the Warren Commission, Elizabeth suggested he take some questions from the people sitting behind him. I raised my hand and after no one else in the section apparently did, he called on me.
I asked the same question I asked Richardson, saying I had been in the West Bank this summer and asked for his ideas on how he planned to approach the region. He said he favors a two State solution. He said we need to follow the road map which was established a few years ago. I don't know if he was referring to Camp David, Oslo, or something else. He said he had been "in the territories" a couple of years ago where he had a chance to meet with people from the Palestinian Authority. He said, "there are Palestinians who want peace and we need to work with them." He said we shouldn't work with Hamas as long as they do not recognize the right of Israel to exist and as long as they promote terror. "The President and the Secretary of State need to be involved in providing leadership in this region, something this President hasn't done."
Then he moved on. I would have liked to ask if he favored a return to the '67 borders, the road map he mentioned, or East Jerusalem. But I have learned it is difficult to get a follow up question in this type of setting. The candidates like to get as many questions asked as possible, even if some of them are goofy, or maybe they actually prefer the goofy ones, like the one about the Warren Commission.
Edwards didn't answer my question as completely as what Richardson did, but then most of Edwards answers were shorter than Richardson's. He did seem to know something about the situation, he answered the question in a way that didn't really offend anyone which I imagine was his goal.
After my question a women asked about Iraq and where he saw the situation 10 years from now, a women whose husband is in the National Guard and has been in Iraq asked about what pulling the troops from Iraq says to those who have served or to those who died. Elizabeth helped with this one telling a story about her father who served in Vietnam.
It was all over in less than an hour. When he shook my hand he said, "so you were in the West Bank?" I said yes but before I could ask him a question one of his staffers pulled him away. Where do I rank these guys so far? Right now I would go with Edwards, followed by Richardson, Obama, Dodd, Biden, and then maybe Clinton. Tomorrow if all works out I will see Chris Dodd, then I do my program at Washington Mennonite. Sometime I need to track down a couple of Republicans.
mm
I made it to the school and found a parking place right in front even though I was late. I found the old gymnasium, one of those cracker box gyms with a balcony or railing up above. The seats were full so I headed to a place where I could stand, when a young women came and offered to usher me to a seat. My seat was on the platform behind the speaker and in front of a large U.S. flag. Four years ago I caucused for Edwards so I have seen him several times and continue to view him favorably.
Elizabeth Edwards was introduced and received a standing ovation from the crowd of 100 to 200 people. She focused on electability and compared some polls showing how her husband compares to Obama, Clinton, Gulianni, Thompson, and Romney. She introduced John who came in to a Springsteen song. I couldn't tell which one because the sound system was not so good and it was compounded by the echoing of the gym.
Edwards talked about Universal health care, economic inequality, global warming, the war in Iraq and finished by mentioning the recent Senate vote on Iran. He did this all in 10 minutes or so and then asked for questions. After answering questions about renewable energy, Iraq and Iran, gun control ("tell your son, John Edwards won't take away his gun"), trade policy, and the Warren Commission, Elizabeth suggested he take some questions from the people sitting behind him. I raised my hand and after no one else in the section apparently did, he called on me.
I asked the same question I asked Richardson, saying I had been in the West Bank this summer and asked for his ideas on how he planned to approach the region. He said he favors a two State solution. He said we need to follow the road map which was established a few years ago. I don't know if he was referring to Camp David, Oslo, or something else. He said he had been "in the territories" a couple of years ago where he had a chance to meet with people from the Palestinian Authority. He said, "there are Palestinians who want peace and we need to work with them." He said we shouldn't work with Hamas as long as they do not recognize the right of Israel to exist and as long as they promote terror. "The President and the Secretary of State need to be involved in providing leadership in this region, something this President hasn't done."
Then he moved on. I would have liked to ask if he favored a return to the '67 borders, the road map he mentioned, or East Jerusalem. But I have learned it is difficult to get a follow up question in this type of setting. The candidates like to get as many questions asked as possible, even if some of them are goofy, or maybe they actually prefer the goofy ones, like the one about the Warren Commission.
Edwards didn't answer my question as completely as what Richardson did, but then most of Edwards answers were shorter than Richardson's. He did seem to know something about the situation, he answered the question in a way that didn't really offend anyone which I imagine was his goal.
After my question a women asked about Iraq and where he saw the situation 10 years from now, a women whose husband is in the National Guard and has been in Iraq asked about what pulling the troops from Iraq says to those who have served or to those who died. Elizabeth helped with this one telling a story about her father who served in Vietnam.
It was all over in less than an hour. When he shook my hand he said, "so you were in the West Bank?" I said yes but before I could ask him a question one of his staffers pulled him away. Where do I rank these guys so far? Right now I would go with Edwards, followed by Richardson, Obama, Dodd, Biden, and then maybe Clinton. Tomorrow if all works out I will see Chris Dodd, then I do my program at Washington Mennonite. Sometime I need to track down a couple of Republicans.
mm
Bill Richardson
This is an interesting week with several Democratic candidates coming to the area. Most are here for the Johnson County Barbecue but since I'm too cheap to spend $15 for a ticket I have been seeing them when they come to the nearby town of Washington.
Wednesday I took my Current Events class plus a few other students to see Barak Obama. Over 450 people checked in so I didn't get to ask any questions.
Today I drove to Washington to see Bill Richardson. I was running late and as I was coming in I saw Richardson introduce himself to three IMS girls who were at Washington high school for a volleyball tournament. In the auditorium Richards gave what I assume is his standard stump speech. He talked about education, health care, good jobs, and getting out of the war with Iraq all the while struggling with his microphone which kept cutting out on him. He finally gave up on the microphone and spoke loudly to the hundred or so people who were there. Through all of this he touted his experience as a governor and noted that seven of the last eight presidents were governors.
During the question time I said I had the opportunity to travel in the West Bank for two weeks in August and asked how he would work to resolve the conflict between Israel and Palestinians. This is what he had to say.
First he said he would appoint a Mid-East envoy. He noted that President Bush is the first President in many years who has not appointed an envoy to deal with this conflict He noted that he would "push both sides to work at arranging a peace."
Second, he "would talk to Syria, he would talk with Lebanon, he would talk with Israel." He noted he thinks it is important to talk with our friends, but "it is also important to talk to our enemies." I think it was here he mentioned negotiating with Saddam Hussein and having talked with Syria.
Third, "I am pro-Israel, I've always been a big supporter of Israel. I'm for a two State solution with a return to 1967 borders with some negotiations about East Jerusalem." "Look where their policies have gotten them (Israel). They have Hezbollah on one side, they have Hamas on the other, and then there is Iran which is pursuing nuclear weapons which is something I do not want to happen."
From there Richardson talked more about Iran . He said, we can't just threaten Iran, we need to talk with our enemies, we have to be firm but it is important to talk, not just to threaten to use our military.
He then moved on to other questions from the audience. It seemed to me that Richardson has a decent understanding of the Israeli/Palestinian question and the importance of the U.S taking leadership in helping to bring the two groups together. As he answered my question it seemed the question of the Palestinians got lost as he talked more about Iran and the middle east in general. It is probably something Palestinians are long accustomed to - being overlooked or ignored.
Overall I came away impressed with Richardson. He has experience as a governor, as a member of Clinton's cabinet, and as an ambassador. He handled questions well showing a broad range of knowledge and a good sense of humor. He was able to poke fun at himself and it looked like he was enjoying himself.
After the program was over I met a reporter from the Philadelphia Inquirer and we talked for awhile. It was interesting to talk to some one from the city where we lived for ten years.
mm
Wednesday I took my Current Events class plus a few other students to see Barak Obama. Over 450 people checked in so I didn't get to ask any questions.
Today I drove to Washington to see Bill Richardson. I was running late and as I was coming in I saw Richardson introduce himself to three IMS girls who were at Washington high school for a volleyball tournament. In the auditorium Richards gave what I assume is his standard stump speech. He talked about education, health care, good jobs, and getting out of the war with Iraq all the while struggling with his microphone which kept cutting out on him. He finally gave up on the microphone and spoke loudly to the hundred or so people who were there. Through all of this he touted his experience as a governor and noted that seven of the last eight presidents were governors.
During the question time I said I had the opportunity to travel in the West Bank for two weeks in August and asked how he would work to resolve the conflict between Israel and Palestinians. This is what he had to say.
First he said he would appoint a Mid-East envoy. He noted that President Bush is the first President in many years who has not appointed an envoy to deal with this conflict He noted that he would "push both sides to work at arranging a peace."
Second, he "would talk to Syria, he would talk with Lebanon, he would talk with Israel." He noted he thinks it is important to talk with our friends, but "it is also important to talk to our enemies." I think it was here he mentioned negotiating with Saddam Hussein and having talked with Syria.
Third, "I am pro-Israel, I've always been a big supporter of Israel. I'm for a two State solution with a return to 1967 borders with some negotiations about East Jerusalem." "Look where their policies have gotten them (Israel). They have Hezbollah on one side, they have Hamas on the other, and then there is Iran which is pursuing nuclear weapons which is something I do not want to happen."
From there Richardson talked more about Iran . He said, we can't just threaten Iran, we need to talk with our enemies, we have to be firm but it is important to talk, not just to threaten to use our military.
He then moved on to other questions from the audience. It seemed to me that Richardson has a decent understanding of the Israeli/Palestinian question and the importance of the U.S taking leadership in helping to bring the two groups together. As he answered my question it seemed the question of the Palestinians got lost as he talked more about Iran and the middle east in general. It is probably something Palestinians are long accustomed to - being overlooked or ignored.
Overall I came away impressed with Richardson. He has experience as a governor, as a member of Clinton's cabinet, and as an ambassador. He handled questions well showing a broad range of knowledge and a good sense of humor. He was able to poke fun at himself and it looked like he was enjoying himself.
After the program was over I met a reporter from the Philadelphia Inquirer and we talked for awhile. It was interesting to talk to some one from the city where we lived for ten years.
mm
Friday, September 28, 2007
Hillary Clinton on israel/palestine
Since this is Iowa the state is currently being overrun by presidential candidates. After a couple of the talks I've given I've been asked what some of the candidates positions are on Israel and Palestine so I thought I would start compiling some of them. This will take a while I suppose, but I'm going to start.
The Council of Foreign Relations website gives a nice summary of the candidates positions on Israel and Palestine. It can be found at http://www.cfr.org/publication/13579/
If you prefer a candidate with an even handed approach to Israel and Palestine it may be difficult to find a candidate you can support. In the next week Barak Obama, Chris Dodd and Bill Richardson will be stopping in nearby towns, so perhaps I can ask them their position in person.
Tonight, Hillary Clinton. Some quotes, this one from a speech given to the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, January 19, 2006
"They [American values] include our enduring friendship with Israel, our firm commitment to the security and well-being of our own people, our friends and our allies, and a belief that dreams of democracy and human rights are ones that America can and must help make real. The security and freedom of Israel must be decisive and remain at the core of any American approach to the Middle East. This has been a hallmark of American foreign policy for more than 50 years and we must not — dare not — waver from this commitment."
I believe Prime Minister Sharon will be remembered for his life-long commitment to Israel's security and his own remarkable journey that led him to the conclusion that Israel would be best served by creating the unilateral disengagement from Gaza and the separation of the Israelis from the Palestinians. But we will also remember and admire the strength and stability of the state of Israel and its people at such a challenging time.
The elections to be held by the Palestinians will, in the best case, lead to the emergence of a responsible, capable leadership that can rise to these security challenges. That is really what is on the ballot: whether or not the Palestinians are capable of creating an effective government and moving away from explicit and implicit support for terrorism and forward, toward peace and stability. What is not on a ballot, and cannot be put into question, is Israel's right to exist and exist in safety. These two elections in Israel and among the Palestinian are turning points. No more excuses for the Palestinians. They have to demonstrate clearly and unequivocally their commitment to a peaceful future and they have to also demonstrate their ability to deliver services to their people." Hillary Clinton
The complete speech can be found at http://www.senate.gov/~clinton/news/statements/details.cfm?id=250529
An interesting article describing Clinton's visit to Israel in November 2005 can be found at this website: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/13/nyregion/metrocampaigns/13hillary.html
It describes her support for the separation wall and the move of Israels capital to Jerusalem.
When different candidate representatives call they generally ask what issues I care most about or what questions I have. When a young man from Clinton's campaign called I told him I was concerned about her position of Israel and Palestine. When I told him I had been in the West Bank, he responded with "I know, its something I have problems with as well." So if you are interested in voting for someone who will be a strong supporter of Israel, Clinton is probably your person.
If on the other hand you want to support a candidate who has a more balanced position, and who seems to be understanding of the situation many Palestinians find themselves in, I would strongly encourage you to look to another candidate.
The Council of Foreign Relations website gives a nice summary of the candidates positions on Israel and Palestine. It can be found at http://www.cfr.org/publication/13579/
If you prefer a candidate with an even handed approach to Israel and Palestine it may be difficult to find a candidate you can support. In the next week Barak Obama, Chris Dodd and Bill Richardson will be stopping in nearby towns, so perhaps I can ask them their position in person.
Tonight, Hillary Clinton. Some quotes, this one from a speech given to the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, January 19, 2006
"They [American values] include our enduring friendship with Israel, our firm commitment to the security and well-being of our own people, our friends and our allies, and a belief that dreams of democracy and human rights are ones that America can and must help make real. The security and freedom of Israel must be decisive and remain at the core of any American approach to the Middle East. This has been a hallmark of American foreign policy for more than 50 years and we must not — dare not — waver from this commitment."
I believe Prime Minister Sharon will be remembered for his life-long commitment to Israel's security and his own remarkable journey that led him to the conclusion that Israel would be best served by creating the unilateral disengagement from Gaza and the separation of the Israelis from the Palestinians. But we will also remember and admire the strength and stability of the state of Israel and its people at such a challenging time.
The elections to be held by the Palestinians will, in the best case, lead to the emergence of a responsible, capable leadership that can rise to these security challenges. That is really what is on the ballot: whether or not the Palestinians are capable of creating an effective government and moving away from explicit and implicit support for terrorism and forward, toward peace and stability. What is not on a ballot, and cannot be put into question, is Israel's right to exist and exist in safety. These two elections in Israel and among the Palestinian are turning points. No more excuses for the Palestinians. They have to demonstrate clearly and unequivocally their commitment to a peaceful future and they have to also demonstrate their ability to deliver services to their people." Hillary Clinton
The complete speech can be found at http://www.senate.gov/~clinton/news/statements/details.cfm?id=250529
An interesting article describing Clinton's visit to Israel in November 2005 can be found at this website: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/13/nyregion/metrocampaigns/13hillary.html
It describes her support for the separation wall and the move of Israels capital to Jerusalem.
When different candidate representatives call they generally ask what issues I care most about or what questions I have. When a young man from Clinton's campaign called I told him I was concerned about her position of Israel and Palestine. When I told him I had been in the West Bank, he responded with "I know, its something I have problems with as well." So if you are interested in voting for someone who will be a strong supporter of Israel, Clinton is probably your person.
If on the other hand you want to support a candidate who has a more balanced position, and who seems to be understanding of the situation many Palestinians find themselves in, I would strongly encourage you to look to another candidate.
Sunday, September 02, 2007
traveling time
Last Saturday I drove with my son to Goshen for his third year in college. The trip was going well and we were making good time though the Illinois State Police had a much higher presence than normal. The trip to Goshen normally takes between 5 and 6 hours with traffic near Chicago being the variable. This time we cruised through Chicago without any trouble, stopping only at the toll booth. Then we got to the Indiana line and traffic came to a stop. We moved very little for the next 3 hours so a trip that should have taken us 6 hours ended taking us 9 hours. Now I know that isn't all that long to be in a car, but when you planned on 6 and your son is anxious to see his friends after a long summer of putting up with his parents it isn't the most pleasant situation. We found out later the delay was because the east bound lanes were covered by water from the heavy rains.
When I was with the CPT group in the West Bank, anytime we were delayed Jenette, one of our leaders would remind us that what we were experiencing was minimal compared to what many Palestinians need to deal with. According to B'tselem an Israeli peace group Israel has 78 checkpoints in the West Bank and that most of these are not on the border, or entrance into Israel. Because of the checkpoints traveling with in the West Bank has become much more difficult. A trip from Hebron to Jericho which we were told should take around 2 hours can routinely take over 9. In addition to the regular checkpoints there are also "flying checkpoints" which can be set up anywhere. We were told that at the checkpoints Israeli authorities can check such things as tire pressure, engines, go through luggage, in addition to checking ID's.
In the previous post I included a picture of the main checkpoint Palestinians need to go through to go from Bethlehem to Jerusalem. Palestinians from Bethlehem need a permit to travel to Jerusalem, and even with a permit, going through the checkpoint can easily take 3 hours. Because of the checkpoints and the hassle and indignity involved, many families have stopped traveling causing extended families to lose contact with one another. It is one of the ways that life is made more difficult for many Palestinians as they go about trying to conduct a normal life.
So If I remember the words of Janette, when I remember my three hour delay on the trip to Goshen I should remember the plight of the Palestinians, which I will do, but also hoping the next trip to Goshen goes much better.
marcus
When I was with the CPT group in the West Bank, anytime we were delayed Jenette, one of our leaders would remind us that what we were experiencing was minimal compared to what many Palestinians need to deal with. According to B'tselem an Israeli peace group Israel has 78 checkpoints in the West Bank and that most of these are not on the border, or entrance into Israel. Because of the checkpoints traveling with in the West Bank has become much more difficult. A trip from Hebron to Jericho which we were told should take around 2 hours can routinely take over 9. In addition to the regular checkpoints there are also "flying checkpoints" which can be set up anywhere. We were told that at the checkpoints Israeli authorities can check such things as tire pressure, engines, go through luggage, in addition to checking ID's.
In the previous post I included a picture of the main checkpoint Palestinians need to go through to go from Bethlehem to Jerusalem. Palestinians from Bethlehem need a permit to travel to Jerusalem, and even with a permit, going through the checkpoint can easily take 3 hours. Because of the checkpoints and the hassle and indignity involved, many families have stopped traveling causing extended families to lose contact with one another. It is one of the ways that life is made more difficult for many Palestinians as they go about trying to conduct a normal life.
So If I remember the words of Janette, when I remember my three hour delay on the trip to Goshen I should remember the plight of the Palestinians, which I will do, but also hoping the next trip to Goshen goes much better.
marcus
Sunday, August 26, 2007
A question of hope
revised
Marcus Miller
“Hope that is not risking is not hope. Hope that is not promising is not hope.” Zoughbi Zoughbie
Three weeks ago I arrived in
Our delegation consisted of 15 members including 2 leaders. The group ranged in age from 18 to over 65. There were 7 men and 8 women, 2 Quakers, 3 Catholics, 2-3 Methodists, a Unitarian, a Pentecostal, 4 Mennonites, and 3 pastors.
From Tuesday through Saturday we met with a variety of people including Israeli’s and Palestinians. In 
the Israeli government. In places it is 20 ft high, accompanied by guard towers, razor wire and security cameras. We toured the Deheisheh Refugee Camp where Palestinians who fled from their homes in 1948-49 continue to live.
That evening we heard the story of Nihal Boqai who had grown up in the camp and whose extended family still lived in the camp. We heard about his brother, a Palestinian police officer who was killed when an Israeli missile hit the car in which he was riding and his younger brother who was exiled to the Gaza strip at the age of 18 and where he has been for the last 6 years separated from his family with little chance of seeing them anytime in the near future. Several of us slept on the roof that night hoping it would be cooler than staying inside.
I found it interesting that in their home was a grape vine, which we were told was planted over 30 years ago when the tents were replaced with cement block buildings, and I wondered, why would you plant a vine in a refugee camp?
Later that week we traveled to the
Back in
By this point I was finding all the information we were hearing to be rather depressing. On the one hand I was impressed by the many expressions of hope for a better future we heard from the Israeli’s, the Palestinians and the Bedouins we had met.
but frankly I found the expressions of hope I was hearing to be totally unrealistic based on what I saw happening on the ground. It was much easier to see signs of evil. The separation or 
apartheid wall being built, the remains of home demolitions, the checkpoints, the settlements, the celebratory pictures of young men who had died for their cause posted in various places, the many IDF soldiers with their M16’s everywhere and the new highway built through lush Palestinian farmland on which only Israeli’s could drive. They all seemed to me, large barriers to peace which would ultimately squash whatever hope we heard expressed. I like to think of myself as a relatively optimistic person but I found the hope the Palestinians were expressing about a better future to be totally unrealistic and naïve. Many of the groups we heard from were doing good work but frankly much of it seemed pointless.
Then came Sunday. We were encouraged to attend a local worship service. Though we were only a short walk from the church of the nativity I didn’t feel much like visiting there and participating in what one of our group members described as competing church services in the same building.
We were staying in a facility called “House of Bread” which I learned is what the word “
The service started with some singing. A young Palestinian, Grace Zoughby led us in “King of Kings and lord of Lords, “first in Arabic, then English, followed by another round of Arabic. Singing "king of Kings,... Jesus Prince of Peace" took on a whole new meaning for me when singing it in occupied
A young man, Fadi, then shared his sermon. For scripture he used II Kings 6:1-7 and Hebrews 11:1 Fadi described the story of Elisha and the axe head and the description of faith in the book of Hebrews. He talked of belief in a God who was bigger than any separation wall that could be built, and of Jesus, born nearby, who challenged us to love our enemies and those who persecute us, and then he came around to that word hope again.
It felt like he was talking to me when he went on to say that when we give up hope is when we try to do things ourselves. When we give up hope is when we become tired and frustrated. When we give up hope is when we are tempted to resort to violence because it seems to be the most efficient solution. When we give up hope is when we look inward, surrounding ourselves with possessions while we ignore the situation of those around us. When we have hope is when the impossible can be done.
As we left for
As we begin this school year we hope for a good year, we hope our classes go well, we hope our students learn and mature and I think we have a strong chance of achieving these hopes. But we do not face restrictions on travel, don’t have Jewish settlers throwing stones or otherwise harassing our students on the way to school, we don’t deal with soldiers demolishing our students homes, or in the case of the Bedouin village, the threat of our school building be destroyed after a demolition order was placed on their new school 
building.
As I was putting this together I kept thinking about what images I should use at the end to either symbolize my lack of hope or to acknowledge some sense of hope. I couldn’t resist including the pictures of the boys soccer team formed in
I would like us to think about what is the basis of our hope, is it sufficient to take us through hard times, what do we hope for, and to use the phrase of Zoughbi, “Is our hope risking? Is our hope promising?”
I would like to finish with this picture. It is an ancient tomb just outside the old city gates of
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Back home
I have been back home for a week after my trip to the West Bank with a Christian Peacemaker Team delegation. I had hoped to post to this as I traveled around the West Bank but that obviously didn't happen. Part of it was due to limited internet access, though if I had been carrying a laptop there were many wireless connections. Part of it was a decision to talk with people or to walk around and experience as much as I could rather than to sit in front of a computer when one was available. Since many people are asking about my trip I think what I will do is to use some notes I kept and to share about the trip as time and inspiration allow. In the meantime, my body continues to adjust to the time difference, school has started and life is getting back into the normal school year routine. Next weekend I take Dirk to Goshen for his third year of college.
marcus
marcus
Sunday, July 29, 2007
I think I'm ready
Tomorrow I leave for my two week trip to the middle east. The suitcase is packed and there are only one or two stops I need to make before heading to the airport. A number of people seem worried but either I am too dense or too stupid to be anxious. I am trying this for the first time so I am mostly doing this to see how it works.
mm
mm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)