Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Is Dinesh D'Souza a Real Academic?

I came across this blog by Dinesh D'Souza attacking Presidential candidate Ron Paul for not being a real Libertarian by claiming a real Libertarian would support "freedom by force".  This is surprising being that this guy is employed by Stanford University.  To work for an institution that prides itself on having high academic standards, I found it surprisingly easy to tear into his argument.  


Please read my response to this blog below:  


"Your argument MAKES NO SENSE.  Comparing a largely peaceful Civil Rights movement that had the laws changed through courts and government legislation is a far cry from the guns, missiles, and IEDs that are going off in Iraq.  

And what you fail to mention is that all the groups you mentioned who took their "freedom by force", the keywords are THEY TOOK IT.  Americans fought for their own freedom with the assistance of the French.  The French didn't win American freedom for us.  African Americans fought for their freedom with the assistance of compassionate Whites, compassionate Whites didn't didn't win it for them.  

So how is the United States going to win an Iraqi Civil War?  The outcome of the American Revolution isn't regarded as a French Victory.  It's regarded as a American victory with French support.  In Iraq, we're not there in support, we are the opposition.  The question is "Who are we really opposing?"

I wish Conservatives would stop trying to invoke World War II to justify the Iraq War.  #1, you look stupid by going back 60 years and overlooking another war in which we tried to win a nation's freedom only a little over 30 years ago, Vietnam.  If you completely ignore and dismiss our failure in Vietnam by solely invoking World War II, your argument starts off with a net loss of credibility.  #2, you dismiss the fact that Germany and Japan were already stable nations with a peaceful society prior to World War II.  Both countries were hijacked by rogue and incompetent leaders that led them into World War II.  Naturally they would be accepting of American assistance in returning to more peaceful times.  Iraq on the other hand was NEVER a stable nation.  The conflict between the Sunnis and Shiites goes back over a thousand years.  In fact, it's not even a natural nation.  It was drawn together to encompass three different groups by a British General in 1932.  

Bush used that ignorant "good vs. evil" argument trying to make Saddam out to be Hitler, and Iraq to be another Germany.  The reality is that, whether you loved it or hated it, Saddam was the cap that kept the angry killer bees in the bottle.  We took the cap off and now we have chaos.

Please, stop invoking World War II to justify a failed policy and a losing effort.  You can't want freedom and stability for another nation, especially if that nation never truly existed.  As recent history has shown, even if you do want it for another nation, it is up to the nation to fight and die for it.  Bleeding the lives of your own people, and the funds of your own treasure, for the freedom of another people is not self-sustainable if they can't/won't do the same for themselves.  

The absolute irony in this entire situation is that the United States, Iran, and Al-Qaeda were all sworn enemies of Saddam Hussein.  Now these same three groups, along with the Sunnis, are engaging one another in a war that has cost the United States over a half-Trillion dollars, over 3,600 lives, and over five years so far.  If the Iraqis were so desperate for freedom, why couldn't they use their sheer will and low-tech weapons to forcibly remove him without any direct action from the United States?  I always thought that the biggest unanswered question (outside of "Would a stable, Shiite dominated Iraq actually be friendly to the U.S.?") is, "Why didn't these three groups (Al-Qaeda, Shiites, Iran) use all of this "sheer will" and low-tech weaponry to dispose of Saddam Hussein and his supporters as they have demonstrated against the United States?  

Those are questions you really need to be asking Mr. D'Souza.  The Iraq War isn't a continued battle from World War II.  The Iraq War isn't some exercise between Good vs. Evil.  The Iraq War isn't a exercise between Pro-Freedom vs. Anti-Freedom.  The War in Iraq is a VERY complex issue with each new answer uncovering a even harder question.  If the ultimate question is, "Do you believe the Iraq War was worth it?"  My answer is a resounding "HELL NO!!!"    

Thursday, July 5, 2007

A Serving of Pork

Like the U.S. Congress, the for-profit media has become a four-star chef in serving PORK.  

To bring you up to speed, to get quality bills passed, members of Congress may be bribed by other members of Congress (to include the Senate) to vote for a bill they may be against by offering funding for "pork barrel projects" (also called earmarks) to their respective districts. That's how you get bills passed that include the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere".  In a perfect government, every politician would vote their conscious and/or principles.  They would vote with the "common good" of the people they were elected to represent in mind.  But America is not known for principled politicians, therefore we don't have a perfect government.  

Likewise, we don't have a perfect press.  You can argue that when the Constitution of the United States established the "Freedom of Press", it created the unofficial Fourth Branch of Government.  This branch of government would act as the eyes and ears of the American people.  It was capable of prosecuting politicians in the court of public opinion.  Now that the media is expected to turn a profit, they have to serve the viewing public some pork so we will tune into their programs and boost their ratings. 


That's why Anna Nicole Smith and Paris Hilton may receive an inordinate amount of attention, including front page headlines and/or leading off a newscast ahead of lessor issues such as the Iraq War.  That's why Ann Coulter can be given a full hour (which is typically reserved for Breaking News and Presidential Candidates) on Hardball with Chris Matthews.  That's why it "seems" like Hillary's current relationship with her husband Bill Clinton gets twice the coverage as the platform of every other candidate combined.  Ultimately, that's why special guests and important figures do not receive follow-up questions or are called out on their factual errors.


The corporate parents of these for-profit media outlets will always claim they only deliver what the people want.  I believe that argument is reckless and irresponsible.  The American public has the attention span of a 5 year-old.  Like a 5 year-old, if you serve us nothing by fats and sugars, we'll happily eat them.  We'll gladly take the short term happiness we receive from eating the crap that tastes good, even though long term it isn't good for us.  Like a responsible parent, the media cannot always serve us what we want, but they have to give us a larger portion of what we need.  They have to serve us the quality food that is boring and doesn't taste so good, but will keep us healthier and happier in the long run.  But McDonald's will always have a billion more customers than Subway, and quantity over quality is what is most important in the news business.  

And this blog won't be any different.  Except I won't serve you pork with the main course, but just as a little dessert as a "reward" for the amount of effort you're taking to stimulate your brain.  Your brain is like a muscle, if you don't exercise it then it becomes weak.  My pork postings will be your little reward.
 

Sunday, July 1, 2007

What Do We Celebrate This Year?

The Fourth of July is coming up and I'm wondering how we will celebrate?  Or should we even be celebrating at all?

It is immoral for the United States government AND the U.S. citizens to stand back and allow American soldiers to needlessly die until September.  That is the time frame General Petraeus has to make his "surge report" and Congress intends to force the President into any necessary adjustments at that time.  This entire "Democracy By Force" policy was doomed from the start as the entire war was based on misinformation, miscalculations, ignorance, and lies.  This "surge" tactic hasn't shown one inch of progress and many military experts believe upwards of 500,000 troops would have to be on the ground for it to even have a remote possibility of working.  

Between now and September, how many hundreds of troops will needlessly die?  What will we be forced to conclude in September that we cannot conclude now, or even back in December when this was first proposed? The media allowed itself to be exploited by Ann Coulter this week so she can publicly state how the U.S. won't be successful in Iraq until we blindly carpet bomb millions of Arab citizens with the insane idea that only this will break the will of the insurgency/terrorists.  Meanwhile the American people distract ourselves from everything but the reality that we allow innocent men, women and children to die because we're too lazy and complacent to put pressure on our political leaders to find a resolution NOW. 

Congress will be taking a 10-day break for the Fourth of July and eat hot dogs, hamburgers, and watch firework shows, while we shake our fists at the job they'™re doing thus far.  Well I'™m sorry, we should be kicking their asses back to Washington and make them stay there until they actually accomplish something of value.  For example, saving valuable American lives by allowing the Iraqis stabilize their nation.  It's impossible to win another country's civil war, especially when the two major opposing sides (Shiites and Sunnis) will ultimately be enemies of the United States.  I don'™t care if the Democratic majority doesn'€™t have enough votes to get their bills through.  It is their duty to at least send the same bills up to the White House OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER and OVER again.  The odds are that one of them will slip through because President Bush and the Republicans can only deny world opinion and REALITY for only so long.  The Democrats have to remind President Bush and what's left of his base that the real issues facing this nation will need real results, and those results MUST come sooner than later.

While you're celebrating your day off from work with friends and family, please remember that a micro contingent of the American population fights them over there to allow us to be immoral, greedy, hypocrites over here.

Happy Fourth of July America!