The Inner Dialogue

The Overreaction of America

2010-11-02T11:17:00.005-04:00

This blog entry was written as a commentary to an op-ed piece written in the Baltimore Sun by Ivan Sascha Sheehan entitled Don't overreact to this threat. This was a well-written piece and I agree with his theory on the goals of the terrorists. It is very evident that Al-Qaida and it’s affiliates will never have the means to bring a country with resources of the United States to her knees, but they can be pesty enough to cause an overreaction by the American public and her politicians. We should recognize that perhaps the goal of the terrorists is not to destroy America themselves, but instead to have us do it for them. On September 20, 2001, President George Bush addressed a joint session of Congress in which he stated, “They hate our freedoms -- our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote …” What President Bush neglected to add was that, we the American people are the only ones with means to take those freedoms away, not the terrorists.

When we allow our government to pass laws such as the Patriot Act, which infringes on our rights as citizens we hurt ourselves not the terrorists; when we sit idly by an allow the government colludes with telephone companies to intercept our communications without warrants we trample the fourth amendment not the terrorist; when so many of us can be against a Muslim group building near ground zero and a Christian pastor feels that it would be acceptable to burn the holy book of Muslims we are the ones who are going against the spirit of the first amendment not the terrorists; when so few of us don’t take the time to do our civic duty as citizens and vote for people who are truly there to defend the constitution and not advance their own political agenda we take away from our greatness not the terrorists. Benjamin Franklin once said “they that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Our government should do its very best to keep us safe, but it should not tear at the edges of the constitution in order to do so. And it is unpatriotic for us the American people to allow for any tearing of the constitution to occur in order to feel a little safer. No one ever said that the cost for our freedom would be cheap, but if we allow the actions of the terrorists to cause us to behave un-American then what are we fighting for?

The Dream of America

2010-10-01T16:54:00.002-04:00

Last week ABC News/Yahoo News put out a poll that showed that only 50% of Americans thought the American dream still existed, while 43% said the dream was no longer achievable. The pollsters defined the American dream as "if you work hard you'll get ahead." In a recent article titled The American dream: Is it slipping away?, Gregory Rodriguez wrote that:

“the dream is the glue that keeps us all together. It's the vague promise that our lot will get better over time that gives us the patience to endure whatever indignities we suffer at the moment. It's the belief that our kids will have a better chance in life than we do that keeps the many elements of this diverse, highly competitive society from ultimately tearing each other apart. More than anything else, it's the fabled dream that fuses hundreds of millions of separate, even competing individual dreams into one national collective enterprise.”

As the gap between rich and poor grows larger everyday and the middle class shrinks, what happens to the “glue that keeps us all together?” What happens to us as a nation if the poll numbers drop below 50%? Do we lose our social cohesion? Do riots break out in our city streets? Do we “ultimately tear each other apart?” These things are possible if we continue to define the American dream in such materialistic terms. If ABC and Yahoo had given a follow up question asking “Do you want to leave America because the American dream is no longer achievable?,” I would assume the numbers would have been drastically different. This is because I believe at our core, we are more than a nation who measures it’s worth by our material gains. When you peel back the many layers of America you find at its center the true glue that keeps us all together is the dream of America. The dream of America is what lead to Revolutionary war, gave Abraham Lincoln the strength to fight to preserve the Union, inspired women to demand the right to vote, brought a nation together to fight fascism, and offered blacks the dream of equality. Using the definition of the pollsters none of those things would have been possible.

At a time when kings and queens still ruled the world, patriots dared to dream an impossible dream, a dream that would become the beacon of hope in a fog of despair, a dream that would be the foundation of our nation. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” (Jefferson, 1776) These words have shaped the American consciousness from the beginning; they are the seed from which the bill of rights have grown, the magnet that has drawn thousands of immigrants each year to our shores, the foundation of our society, and the glue that binds us. Perhaps the numbers from the ABC News/Yahoo News poll is more of a reflection on how much we have lost focus on the true dream rather than our inability to achieve the “fabled” American dream. The American dream should not be defined by the desire of millions of individuals to get ahead; it should be defined by our ability to live in a free society. A society in which all it’s citizens remain equal and have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That is the true American dream.

Tea Party

2010-04-14T17:34:00.000-04:00

I attended the Tea Party rally today and I think the media needs to point out that there were a fair amount of people at the rally that were not there in support of the Tea Party or Sarah Palin. In addition, I would place the number of attendees closer to 3,000 and maybe a third of that number was Obama supporters.

On a different note I think the rally was a good example of democracy being alive and well in America. This idea that we are living in a fascist country and that Obama is a communist (heard that at rally from one of the speakers) is far from the truth. If this government were a fascist government there would be no Tea Party rally, instead of having the police there to keep us safe, they would have been there arresting people with anti-government signs. I saw none of that.

Let me tell you what I did see, I saw groups of people from both sides of the divide debating each other on policy issues and not calling each other names such as socialist or crazy right-winger. I saw a woman giving a hug to a man that she had just finished debating on health care policy. I saw some of what makes America great. If we really want to move America forward we need to talk to each and listen, not yell and call each other names. We cannot go back to the way things were in the 50’s those days are gone. We should look toward the future and continue the work of making this country into a more perfect union.

Personal Practice—Feb. 15, 2010

2010-02-19T16:28:00.000-05:00

Personal Practice—Feb. 15, 2010

The Flag and Me ...

2009-07-08T19:50:00.004-04:00

The 4th of July, an American holiday. To many of Americans, it’s a time for families and friends to together in the backyard, standing around a grill drinking a nice cold beer eating hotdogs and hamburgers. The kids are running around having fun asking when the fireworks will start; after all it’s not the 4th of July without fireworks lighting up the sky in red, white, and blue. The red, white, and blue the colors of our flag. I wonder how many people think about the flag and what it represents on the 4th of July. I wonder how many people think about the flag on any given day.

“I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America,” is a line burnt into the brains of most Americans. It is a pledge of loyalty to the United States that has been recited almost everyday by school-aged children for the last 70 years. A pledge recited at most public events and at the opening session of the US Congress. It is a pledge meant to tie all Americans to each other and to the country. How many of us truly understand what those words mean? I find myself pondering that question this 4th of July.

As a school-aged child I also recited the pledge, but at some point in my life I stopped. I stopped because I realized that I was pledging loyalty to a country that I thought did not pledge loyalty to me and the people that looked liked me. As a black man in America how could I pledge allegiance to a country that enslaved and treated black people no better than farm animals? How could I pledge allegiance to a country that freed its slaves but still continued to treat them as second-class citizens? How could I pledge allegiance to a country that denied black people the chance to live the America dream, even when they were trying to pull themselves up by their bootstraps? How could I pledge allegiance to a country that allowed racism to continue to fester over a 100 years after slavery was abolished? A racism that forced my father to tell me not to run in the white neighborhood we lived in because he did not want anyone thinking that I had stolen something. This was my America, an America that had not pledged allegiance to me, so I was not going to pledge allegiance to her.

Then September 11 happened, and like most Americans I felt wounded. Because of that wound I felt more American then I ever had in my 29 years of life. The attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon felt like attacks on me and not just my country. In an instant I realized that I loved my country and felt proud to be an American. I also felt a need to understand these feelings. I needed to fit these feelings into the story of blacks in America so that they could coexist within me. I started on a journey to reexamine American history. I began reshaping my understanding of that history, not just through the eyes of an oppressed people, but through the eyes of an American who saw the history of his country as being complex. A complexity that forced blacks to ride in the back of the bus, to attend unequal schools, and to drink out of separate water fountains. It is that same complexity that brought about Brown vs. the Board of Education, the Civil Rights act of 1968, the Emancipation Proclamation, and the first black president.

America is a generous nation with a complicated history. She is a country that gave my parents a new life when they emigrated here from Haiti. She gave me the chance to go to college and law school. She is a country that has allowed all her people to be more than what they are today, but she has never promised the journey would be easy. She has never promised to right all the wrongs and end all bigotry over night, but what she did promise was to set out guiding principles and ideals that she would try to live up to. Even though there are times when we feel as if she has not lived up to those principles and ideals, I say look back at where we came from and see where we are today.

The 4th of July should not just be about backyard grilling and fireworks, it should be a time where we are sharing the history of America with our children, the good and the bad. After all, the true measure of a country’s strength is not measured in the stories it creates about itself and celebrates those stories. It is measured in how her people acknowledge her history and becomes better for it. The journey of America is an ongoing journey. It is a journey that we should all want to play an active role in. It is a journey that we should all feel the need to play a role in, in order to give back what her what she has given to us, and to help her live up to those principles and ideals laid out in the Declaration of Independence.

Russia, Cuba agree to renew joint nuclear research

2009-05-28T11:30:00.000-04:00

Russia, Cuba agree to renew joint nuclear research

17:46 27/05/2009 Russia and Cuba have agreed to renew their cooperation in nuclear research with Cuba's Nuclear Energy Agency, head of Rosatom Sergei Kiriyenko said on Wednesday.>>

Other news of the day

The Adopted Children of Israel

2009-05-20T15:42:00.001-04:00

Binyamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel, met President Barack Obama earlier this week. The reports indicated that they met and spoke for four hours. The reports also went on to say that the length of their meeting and the fact that they met without advisors demonstrated the level of comfort that both men had with each other. Apparently being comfortable wasn’t enough to bring Netanyahu over the two state solution that Obama and former President Bush have called for.
Before Prime Minister Netanyahu won the Israel elections earlier this year, candidate Netanyahu stated that peace talks were a waste of time and did not support a two state solution in resolving the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. On Tuesday Mr. Netanyahu stated that he wants to begin immediate peace talks with the Palestinians, and that talks should focus on self-government. To date, Netanyahu has not endorsed the two state solution. So how does Netanyahu envision an end to the conflict?
Prime Minister Netanyahu would like to see a self-governing Palestinian state without a handful of powers. Basically Netanyahu is calling for a solution that will continue to have the future of the Palestinian people controlled by Israel. Netanyahu’s solution is meant to look like statehood but it nothing more than a de facto occupation. In the eyes of Netanyahu, a Palestinian state would be nothing more than a government allowed to schedule garbage pick ups and appoint dog catchers. Under Netanyahu’s plan, the Palestinian state would have no control over its boarders, no control over its air space, not allowed to have a military, would have no control over water and this is just naming a few restrictions under the Netanyahu plan. However, as Bibi said yesterday “there'll have to be compromises by Israelis and Palestinians alike.” I guess he forgot to mention what compromises Israel would be making. Netanyahu’s vision for a Palestinian state is no state at all. It’s the continued oppression and occupation of the Palestinian people.
The Palestine desire for a state of their own is no different than the desire that Jews had 60 years ago. It is a desire for dignity, respect, security, and recognition. It’s the desire to belong and the right to create their own destiny. Netanyahu’s plan would treat the Palestinian people like children; Old enough to play in the backyard on their own, but not old enough to go out on their own. This approach would do nothing but continue the cycle of violence. If Prime Minister Netanyahu wishes to treat the Palestinian people like children who are unable to govern themselves. Then he must understand like children with controlling parents, the Palestinian people will rebel and fight against that control.
A two state solution is the only way to bring peace to the Palestinian and Israeli people. Anything less will do nothing but continue the violence. If history has taught us anything, it’s that people denied life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness will fight, die, and kill until they are achieve these god given rights. So Mr. Prime Minister, do not treat the Palestinian people as if they are children. Allow them to govern themselves as Israel is allowed to govern herself. They are not your children.

“We’re the United States of America, and we don’t do that kind of thing!”

2009-05-04T14:10:00.020-04:00

For those of you who are loyal followers of my blog (all 9 of you), sorry for being gone so long. I was basking in the sunshine of Florida and, to be honest, I was having far too much fun to blog. Now I’m back and I’ve been listening and reading about the United States and the topic of torture. The way I see it, this topic could be divided into three issues. Issue one: Is torture an effective way of getting information? Issue two: Did members of the Bush administration or career government officials break any laws by engaging in enhanced techniques? Issue three: (better summed up in a quote that I read in a Newsweek’s article) “We’re the United States of America, and we don’t do that kind of thing!”

Issue three contains words that stood out for me because I believe in the sentiments of the text, yet I understand that our country has not always lived up to them. A majority of Americans often see our country through rose colored glasses. They are unable or unwilling to see the dark side of American history and only see her as that “shining city on a hill.” This sterilized view of our country has retarded our ability to live up to the image and the ideals set forth in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. We cannot claim to be leader of the free world, the bringer of freedom and democracy, and the protector of human rights without acknowledging our own sins.

Torture, as defined by the United Nations Convention Against Torture, is “an act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person, for a purpose such as obtaining information or a confession, punishment, intimidation or coercion, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind.” The enslavement of African people in the colonies that would later become the United States started in 1670. Slaves were often whipped and brutalized as a means of punishment and intimidation. Within 30 years all 13 colonies would have Slave Codes, which gave physical, psychological, and legal control over black slaves to their masters. The Codes sanctioned barbaric methods of punishment; methods that would be considered torture.

These acts and laws were still common practice when the slave owner and author of the Declaration of Independence penned the famous words
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
What made this statement so profound in 1776 and up until today is that Jefferson and the founding fathers signed a document that declared that there are certain rights given to us by God that cannot be challenged by any man, king, vice-president (sorry Dick), or president. The responsibility of our government and of we, citizens of the United States, is to protect and live up to the ideals of those words. Our history is full of examples of us taking two steps forward, only to take one step back.

In the 1860’s our country tried to correct the wrongs of the past by creating the 13th and 14th Amendments. The words of the 14th Amendment were akin to those written by Jefferson 92 years earlier; it called for the protection of life and liberty and that the government should not abridge those rights. But like a human being, the United State is not perfect. She strives to be better but sometimes falls short.

In the mid-19th and20th centuries the lynching of blacks was commonplace in the United States and although lynching was not legal it was accepted behavior. American citizens would gather to watch the mutilation, suffering, and murder of mostly black Americans for trumped up charges such as rape. Lynching often circumvented the legal system. The people who participated in lynching often justified the act as protecting white women from menacing black men. Even if this justification were accurate, how much of our lives and our country do we give up for this protection? At some point do we not stop being Americans and become the evil we claim to fight against.
At which point do we stop being Americans and start being the evils we fight against? We are a country founded on the rule of law and cannot bend and break those laws when it suits us. We cannot write memorandums that may not violate the law itself, but violates the spirit of that law. The brutalization of a human being is never worth the soul of an individual or a nation.

The history of torture in America is not just found in the ill treatment of black America. Police brutality against the citizens of the United States has also been common place in our history, often justified as being necessary for the protection of the whole. “The third degree” was a phrase coined in the 1930’s that stood for the use of physical brutality, or other forms of cruelty, to obtain involuntary confessions or admissions of guilt. In the 1960’s there were numerous incidents of police brutality against civilians who participated in the Civil Rights movement. Media coverage of the brutality sparked national outrage similar to the outrage brought about by the Abu Ghraib pictures.

“We’re the United States of America, and we don’t do that kind of thing,” clearly was not an accurate statement. A more accurate statement would have been “We’re the United States of America, and we should do better than that kind of thing.” We should do better than waterboarding; we should do better than subjec people to extreme temperatures, stress positions, sleep depravation, and taunt them with their phobias. We cannot be a beacon for liberty and justice, only to dim that light during our darkest hours. We cannot move into the shadows or operate on the dark side and expect to maintain a moral high ground. Even more importantly is the affect torture has on us the American people and how we see our country. We cannot afford to tear the Constitution and trample the spirit of the Declaration of Independence and expect to maintain the essence of those documents which we hold sacred. We must remember that we declared our independence in order to be free of the behavior Dick Cheney and others claim are necessary.

As I stated earlier, our nation is not perfect and will not always be on the right side of justice, freedom, and liberty. But that does not mean we forsake these principals or merely see them as window-dressing. We must endeavor to live up to these values and if we do falter or move from the light into the shadows, we must acknowledge our mistakes and correct them. What is the point of selling our soul to the devil to protect American lives, if at the end of the day we are unable to recognize the things that make us Americans? We must protect the idea of America if we truly wish to win the War on terror.

2009-04-16T14:17:00.000-04:00

Technorati Profile

Part 2: Read Genesis 22 Mr. President: The True Issue Behind the Israeli/Palestine Conflict

2009-04-15T15:55:00.004-04:00

Action is needed, President Obama, not just words. Muslims are watching to see if you have the courage of Abraham to make that big sacrifice. People will differ with what the sacrifice should be, some may even say a sacrifice is not necessary. In my opinion a sacrifice is needed, but it need not be difficult. As I stated in my April 13 blog, the Obama administration need only be fair and balanced in it’s dealing with the Israeli/Palestine conflict for the Muslim world to see his sincerity and to begin to have faith in the words of the American president. The real challenge comes with trying to resolve conflict and bring peace and stability to the Middle East. Many have tried, some have come close, but all have failed. If President Obama is serious about resolving the conflict and doesn’t want to be added to the list of world leaders who failed to bring peace, then he and his team must recognize that the conflict is an identity based conflict; therefore it will need a different approach from the one that had been used in the past.

Now, I’m no conflict expert, but I have given this topic some thought and just in case President Obama is following my blog I thought I would share my ideas with the blogosphere. In order to understand this conflict we should briefly look at the history. For more than fifty years, Israelis and Palestinians have been engaged in a violent conflict, a conflict that has impacted countless lives that seems to have no end. However, in the early 90’s these two warring parties took the first steps to transform this conflict. The Oslo Peace Accords were meant to be the vehicle that would bring the Israeli/Palestinian conflict to an end. However, sixteen years later there is no peace, and in fact, one could argue that the two parties have moved further apart. What went wrong? How could a clearly laid out mediated agreement not bring peace to the people of Israel and Palestine?

On the surface the conflict appears to be about land and resources; tangible interests, and therefore should be negotiated by determining and aligning shared interests. On the other hand, if the conflict is more complex than land and resources; if it is fundamentally about reassuring each side that their identity as a people is safe and will be respected; then it could be argued that the conventional approach to dealing with the Israeli/Palestinian conflict has only prolonged the conflict.

The birth of modern day Israel was a result of the yearning and commitment of the Jewish people to return to the land that is sacred to their history and religion. It was the land that shaped their identity and gave their lives meaning after the Holocaust. However, the inception of the State of Israel led to the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians who had been living on the land that became Israel. For Palestinians, their claim to the land is the cornerstone of their identity as well. It is bound up in their yearning for international recognition of a separate Palestinian national identity, which they assert is based, in part, on their residence in Palestine before the establishment of the State of Israel.

Identity gives an individual, a community, a nation, a people a sense of self. Our identities tell us where we come from and where we are going. It gives us a sense of pride, a sense of continuity, a sense of uniqueness, and a sense of affiliation. The American Heritage dictionary defines identity as:

1. The set of behavioral or personal characteristics by which an individual is recognizable as a member of a group.

2. The distinct personality of an individual regarded as a persisting entity; individuality.

So, I pose this question to you. How far would you go to protect your identity and that of your people? Would you fight for it? Would you kill for it? Would you die for it? How do you resolve a conflict based on identity?

To be continued ….

Read Genesis 22 Mr. President ….

2009-04-13T20:18:00.007-04:00

If President Obama truly wants to show the Muslim world that the United States is taking a new approach toward understanding their interests, then he is going to need to do more then send out videos, give speeches, and have town hall meetings with Turkish students. The Obama administration is going to have to offer up something more tangible if it wants the Muslim world to believe it is serious. For the last eight years the United States policy toward the Muslim world has been “talk nicely and hit with a big stick.” For an even longer period of time, through both democratic and republican administration, the policy has been “who cares what happens in the Arab world as long as the oil keeps flowing.” So it should be no surprise to the Obama administration if the Muslim world takes the president’s words with a grain of salt and the honeymoon is short-lived. Muslims across the world will need more from the Obama administration, just like God needed more from Abraham.

Bare with me as I take us back to Bible study class to make this point:

"…. Some time later God tested Abraham. … God said, "Take your son, your only son, Isaac, whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about." … Early the next morning Abraham got up and saddled his donkey. He took with him … his son Isaac. … Isaac spoke up and said to his father Abraham, "Father?" "Yes, my son?" Abraham replied. "The fire and wood are here," Isaac said, "but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?" … Abraham answered, "God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son." And the two of them went on together. When they reached the place God had told him about, Abraham built an altar there and arranged the wood on it. He bound his son Isaac and laid him on the altar, on top of the wood. 10 Then he reached out his hand and took the knife to slay his son. But the angel of the LORD called out to him from heaven, "Abraham! Abraham!" … "Do not lay a hand on the boy," he said. "Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son."(Genesis 22 1-12)

Ok, for those of you who haven’t studied the Bible, or religion for that matter, let me first start by telling you that this story is shared by Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The only difference is that in the Islamic faith the sacrificial son is Ishmael, who was Abraham’s first son, but this is a long story, and Bible class is over, so you will have to get the juicy details on your own. The point of the excerpt is to show that even God asked for more. Up until that point, Abraham had done everything that God had asked of him; however, God still felt it was necessary to test Abraham. So why should we in the West believe that Obama’s words alone will make everything ok, and that the Muslim world will accept the United States has turned over a new leaf? If Abraham, who up until that point had shown himself to be a man of God was tested, why should the United Stated and other Western power expect any less?

In order to truly start mending relations, the Obama administration needs to start taking actions that the Muslim people, and not their governments, see as positive. Focus on the people and governments will follow. So the question becomes, how does President Obama satisfy 1.3 billion Muslims spread out all over the world? He needs only to look toward the Middle East, specifically Israel/Palestine, to answer that question. The Israeli/Palestinian conflict is one of the few things Muslims are looking to the United States to deal with.

Action is needed, President Obama, not just words. Muslims are watching to see if you have the courage of Abraham to make that big sacrifice. Unlike Abraham, President Obama doesn’t have to sacrifice any of his kids as burnt offering, he just needs to be a fair and balanced (sorry for taking your line Fox news) mediator of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict; because at the end of the day simply being fair and balanced in this conflict will take us a further than any speech, video, or town hall meeting.

To Be Continued …..

To Cuba or Bust ...

2009-04-10T17:56:00.006-04:00

A new bill, and I am using the word “new” loosely in this case because the bill has been proposed for the last two years, but died each time in Committee under the threat of veto from President Bush. The bill calls for the removal of legal barriers to all travel to Cuba (not just family-related visits). It was unveiled on Tuesday March 31 in the Senate, with a host of supporters rallying behind it. This time, both Democratic and Republican leading Senators are backing the bill.
On April 3, Representative Barbara Lee of California headed a Congressional delegation that went to Havana, Cuba to discuss tourism and trade, as well as other U.S.-Cuba exchanges. She expressed before departing: “America’s harsh approach toward our nearest Caribbean neighbor divides families, closes an important market to struggling U.S. farmers, harasses our allies, and is based on antiquated Cold War-era thinking.”(AP)
Yet the argument against lifting the travel ban and trade embargo continues. Forty-seven years later critics of the Castro regime are still clinging to the idea that the only way to overthrow regime is through the trade embargo. They claim that allowing U.S. tourism could strengthen the Castro regime while contributing to widening income gaps in the Cuban population. Question, why doesn’t this logic apply to China or Vietnam? Both are communist countries, both have poor human rights records, both oppress political views that differ from that of government, but yet I never hear the Castro critics applying their Cuba arguments to these countries. Perhaps that has something to do with the fact that the pro-embargo arguments are ill conceived and anchored in emotion instead of practical foreign policy.
It is time for the United States to change its Cuban policy and take a position of engagement. If the U.S. truly wants to bring freedom and democracy to the Cuban people then they will need to allow the American people to go to Cuba and bring the ideas, dreams, hopes, and ideals of America to the Cuban people.

Is It Really About The Jobs Stupid?

2009-04-07T11:28:00.010-04:00

Should the DOD budget be used to create and maintain American jobs? Or should the budget be about what's best for defending the country? Defense Secretary Robert Gates seems to think it’s the latter, while some lawmakers seem to think it’s about jobs. "It's a loss of jobs," said Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-GA) "its 90,000 jobs across 49 states." Sorry to tell you Senator Isakson- the Department of Defense was not created in order for the American people to have jobs, it was created to keep us safe from foreign enemies.

Now, I understand the economy is in the tank and the president is all about job creation but do we really want to be playing politics with our countries safety? If Secretary Gates thinks a reduction in the budget is needed and that perhaps we should not be spending money on weapon systems that we don't need or don’t work, why not listen? After all, isn't that why we pay him? For the first time a long time we have a defense secretary who is saying we should be thoughtful and prudent with the American tax dollar yet members of congress and big business is pushing back against this idea. We should be asking ourselves why this is.

In 1961, a speech was given that addressed the Military-Industrial Complex warning future generations about the relationship between government, military, and industry: "We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together." President Eisenhower, as his farewell address, gave this speech 48 years ago and it would appear as if we did not heed his words.

The iron triangle he warned us about will become very evident in the next coming days, weeks, and months as defense contractors such as Lockheed Martin Corp., Boeing Co., Northrop Grumman Corp., General Dynamics Corp., BAE Systems and Raytheon Co. line the pockets of members of congress with their 30 pieces of sliver. Those same members of congress will start talking about how important these different weapon systems are to our defense and how they help to create jobs. Ask yourselves why is the F-22 fighter built in 49 different states? Are you telling me that it takes 49 different states to build one fighter jet? Or does it have more to do with the fact that if they spread the building of the jet over 49 states there is less of a chance that congress will vote against the jet?

So America, when our lawmakers say these defense contracts will create jobs we must ask to see the fine print because what we give up may be worth a lot more than jobs.

My first blog ...

2009-04-07T10:16:00.002-04:00

I just signed up for Twitter about a month ago and had no clue on how to use it. I have a couple of friends who are on there but all I get from them is "I went to the market today," or "I'm heading to dinner with my wife." The best one is "I just got out of the shower." Needless to say I was not impressed with whole Twitter thing. Seriously, are we all that self absorbed that we think people really want to know we just got out of the bathroom? Or are we that voyeuristic that we need to know? Reality TV would lead me to believe it’s a little bit of both.
Anyway, as someone who lives and breathes for international affairs and foreign policy I thought it would best if I used my Twitter account to share my thoughts about events happening around the world instead of what I eat for lunch that day. I quickly found out that I had more to say then what I could fit into 140 characters or less, so that led me here, to blogging. Yes, I know I'm late in the game, but what can I say? I'm a late bloomer.
I'm interested in dialogue; I wanted to know what people think, for us to share ideas, and provoke each other to think. It is through dialogue we can make progress. So I look forward to interacting with people and sharing my views on the world.