Who Was Wrong: Senate Vote on Iraq War

Republicans constantly remind Democrats that the Senate voted to approve HR 114, which authorized the war on Iraq. This will continue thru the current election year. So far, it's all true.

But there is a difference. The vote was:

• 77 affirmative votes: 48 Republican senators, 29 Democrats
• 23 negative votes: 1 Republican, 1 independent, 21 Democrats

By my accounting:

• Republicans got it 98% wrong...almost a perfect score.
• Democrats were only 58% wrong.

Obama Speech

On Tuesday, March 18, Senator Obama gave his anticipated speech on race and religion. I heard most of it in a replay on NPR the next day.

It's hard for me to describe my reactions, but here are some:

• Finally, someone in America talks honestly and candidly about race, and his personal feelings about it. The obvious now occurs to me: at some level, white persons, and I include myself, simply can not know what it means to be black in America.
  
• I am delighted that Obama did not "disown" his pastor. What I am delighted about is that he is unwilling to sacrifice a close friend for his own political gain. He is unwilling to sacrifice someone whose overall life has had a major positive impact because of some mistakes.
  
• Obama is running at a level which is simply higher than any politician Americans have seen since (probably) Bobby Kennedy. I don't know if he will get the Democratic nomination. I don't know if he will win vs McCain in the general election. But I do know that I now have someone to support.

A Snippet of Another's Life

Last Saturday morning, I was talking my usual morning walk, when I passed a teenage girl talking on a cell phone. Her tone was irritated. I only caught one sentence, and I'm not sure which it was, if either, but it sounded like:

"Just for once, can we talk about something other than Shabbas?"

OR

"Just for once, can we talk about something other than shopping?"

Whom to Trust? Who to be in Charge?

Wednesday night, March 19, 2007, on the PBS News Hour; Judy Woodruff interviewed a cross-section of 10 Americans on their views on the Iraq War. The group seemed to be about equally divided: Republicans, independents and Democrats.

One of the group was Henry Lujan, a Nevada Republican, and a disabled vet from Iraq. I have tried to capture his first participation in the discussion, as follows. My apologies to Mr Lujan in advance if I did not transcribe his remarks fully or correctly:

"It's easy for people who have never been over there to criticize what goes on over there. The people who want us there.....my unit is right there now, boots on the ground. My 72nd, the unit that opened Abu Ghraib in 2003, they're back over there again and they're saying the people are shopping, they're out in the parks, they want us there. The thing is that, like I said before, it's easy for everyone back here to criticize what goes on over there when they actually have no clue because they're getting all their feedback from the TV or papers. The feedback I am getting from my guys over there is that the infrastructure it being built, they working on getting the military situated so that we can pull out, but I think we'll pull out when the military leaders state, not because of politicians are being pressured by the citizens because of a vote or an election or something like that."

(Mr Luhan also made more extensive remarks later in the broadcast piece.)

My reactions to this:

• I sense a distrust in the media....TV and newspapers. This alone I could sympathize if not agree with, but it goes on to express trust in the very U.S. persons who are executing the issue in question...some troops, and friends of his. I have some distrust of the media, but my distrust of our administration, from the President on down to the field commanders, is much greater. As we learned in Vietnam, when we are loosing a war, the last persons to trust to give us the full story are those in the chain of command, from bottom to top.
  
• Who should make the decisions? According to Mr Luhan, it should not be political leaders, especially those influenced by votes or an election. No, it should be the military leaders...the ones whose reputation depends on the outcome. This is "democracy" turned up side down. But George Bush would probably agree...he seems to have surrendered the decisions to General Petraeus.
  
• Thus, the war becomes self-perpetuating. Once we have gone to war, regardless how foolish or duplicitous the reasons given, we must stay in until the military decides we, the nation, have either won or had enough.
  
• In the upcoming election, the Republicans will want to focus on "going forward from here". They will avoid looking back or reviewing the run-up to the war, or the poor planning and execution since before the shooting began. We must insist that we revisit the who and the what that got us here in the first place, and who wil be in power to make the decisions going forward.
  
• My final thought for now: I am afraid that Mr Luhan's thinking about this war is representative of a large portion of the American populace. These persons will probably vote overwhelmingly for John McCain.