Radical Islam? How About Radical Christianity?

Too often in this country, I hear the far right decry the threat to the United States that is "radical Islam." The murder of Dr. George Tiller proves quite concretely that the threat is not merely from radical Islam but also from radical Christianity.

It's a view that I've held for a long time.

This post isn't about the legality or morality of abortion. At the moment abortion is legal in the United States of America. The first amendment protects the right of organizations such as Operation Rescue and even the Army Of God to speak against the practise. It is legal for them to voice their opinion, lobby for the prohibition of abortion and, yes, even picket clinics that perform abortions. Under the Constitution they are afforded a great number of rights. The Constitution does not, however, afford them the right to murder those with whom they disagree.

Under any circumstances.

To be frank, I have had enough of the Christian right trying to set the social agenda of the United States of America. I am tired of their opposition to abortion while at the same time generally finding no moral objection to capital punishment. I am sick of their endless pontificating against gay rights and gay marriage. I am disgusted by their vitriolic rhetoric and their mouthpieces such as Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh. I am mystified by how frequently their voices of moral authority such as Jerry Falwell, Jimmy Swaggart, Jim Bakker and Ted Haggarty manage to be caught in the very behaviour that they claim to be least moral.

Mostly, I am horrified that they claim to love and follow the word of Jesus while typically basing their positions on the old Testament.

You would think that the murder of a man in a house of worship would cause the leadership of the anti-abortion movement to take a step back. You'd be wrong. Randall Terry, the founder of Operation Rescue had this to say, "George Tiller was a mass-murderer. We grieve for him that he did not have time to properly prepare his soul to face God. I am more concerned that the Obama Administration will use Tiller's killing to intimidate pro-lifers into surrendering our most effective rhetoric and actions." And he's the moderate. Take a look at the Army of God website: http://www.armyofgod.com/deadAbortionists.html

Let me be clear. I am pro-choice, but I am not particularly a fan of abortion as birth control. I would prefer that people make good birth control choices. I am a fan of adoption. But, I draw the line at violence. It's time for those who oppose this form of radicalism to speak out, particularly those who are Christians of the non-radical variety.

Perhaps it's also time to turn the spotlight on the radicalism that is festering within the borders of the United States.

If Mr. Cheney Wants To Be In The Spotlight . . .

Lately it seems that it's impossible to turn on the news without hearing former Vice President Dick Cheney lamenting the mistakes of the Obama Administration. He's accused the administration of "raising the risk of attack," called the releasing of memos related to sanctioned torture, disturbing," and even took issue with the fact that the President shook hands with Venezuelan president, Hugo Chavez. It seems that Mr. Cheney is not content to simply ride off into the sunset and reap the financial benefits that he undoubtedly accrued from raiding the Treasury over the past eight years.

Exactly how many government contracts did Halliburton obtain?

Yes, it seems that our cranky ex-Vice-President wants to remain on the center stage as the defender of torture, imprisonment without basic legal rights and an isolationist. And I hope he does. Because every time, Mr. Cheney opens his mouth, he reminds us of the stark differences between his approaches and those of the current administration. He underscores that his politics are those of "security at all costs and human rights be damned." He brings to the forefront debate about what the United States really stands for.

Bravo, Sir. Bravo.

It is good and necessary to have these discussions. It is important to examine our founding principles and cultural values and it is equally important to examine our mistakes. I am grateful to Mr. Cheney for helping to keep these issues in the spotlight. He has reminded us that our fundamental concern as a nation is not just the economic woes of the moment, but rather, examining whether we have lived up to what and who we say we are as a nation.

Go forth examiners!

I encourage and advocate for investigation into things such as allegations of torture, the existence of secret prisons, suppression of legal representation for prisoners, and the legality of domestic wiretapping practices. I applaud the release of memos relating to these practices over the past eight years and frankly, would equally support the release of historical practises in this area. I desire accountability for violations of the law whether it be domestic or the Geneva Conventions. And I hope for one other thing . . .

I hope that when all is said and done, Mr. Cheney considers a colonoscopy the least thorough examination he has ever had.

Right Wingers Teabag Across America

It's tax day in American and in an effort to invoke images of the Boston tea party, protesters led by right wing commentators and complete with stages, sound systems and in one case, Ted Nugent, spontaneously gathered to protest "excessive taxation," bailouts and recent stimulus spending.

There are just a few small problems with the scenario.

First Problem: The protests lack authenticity.

While it is certainly valid to protest the size of the stimulus, or the fact that there have been corporate bailouts, it would ring more authentic had these same folks been protesting when President Bush did the same thing in September of 2008. Where was the outrage when former Goldman Sachs CEO and then current Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson, directed billions of dollars to his former company? Where was the outrage when the cash was shelled out without oversight?

Perhaps they were teabagging in private that day.

Second Problem: The stimulus seems to be working.

Contrary to what teabaggers might have you believe, there are some positive signs in the economy. We're not completely out of the woods yet, but there are some good indicators. These include: profitable quarters at two key banks (Goldman Sachs and Wells Fargo); stabilization of the dow which after dropping at the change of administrations is back around January 20th levels, in fact it's been trending back up; and the fact that several stimulus projects are not only done, but under budget and ahead of schedule.

What's a teabagger to do?

Third Problem: Most of the protesters will actually benefit from the President's tax policies.

That's right. As promised in the campaign, President Obama, has announced $120,000,000 in tax cuts, $2,500 in breaks for college and an $8,000 cut for first time home buyers. Hmmmm . . . I don't remember that last one when I bought my first house two years ago.

Sadly, some decided to augment their public teabagging activities with signs that proclaimed things such as: "Hang 'Em High," "Obama = Hitler," "We Are A Christian Nation," "Hey Big Brother Show Us Your Birth Certificate," "Stand Idly By While Some Kenyan Tries To Destroy America . . . Homey Don't Play Dat," and my personal favourite, "The American Tax Payers Are The Jews For Obama's Ovens."

It's tax day in America and, in every sense of the phrase, the right wing is revolting.

Note To George W. Bush: Game Over Dude

It's just seven days into the Obama administration and apparently George W. Bush doesn't realise that he's no longer President of the United States.

You may recall that in May of 2008, former Bush adviser Karl Rove was subpoenaed by the House Judiciary Committee to testify on the firing of U.S. attorneys as well as, the prosecution of former Alabama governor Don Siegelman. Mr. Rove's response was to decline, asserting that he was exempt under executive privilege. On July 30, 2008, a US Congressional panel voted 20-14 to hold Rove in contempt of Congress.

Arrest, try, convict, right?

Not so fast. While Congress can hold someone in contempt, it's up to the Attorney General to go forward with the prosecution. As you might imagine, the Bush Justice Department declined. And so Rove went on to become another tool in the Fox News tool box.

Fast forward to 2009.

On January 26, Chair of the House Judiciary Committee, John Conyers, again issued a subpoena requiring that Mr. Rove testify before his committee. Sounds like a slam dunk, right? Well not according to Rove, who is now asserting that executive privilege applies even though Mr. Bush has left office. It's a ridiculous claim when one considers that the Supreme Court has rendered opinions on the matter before. Most notable is that of Chief Justice Burger who stated that "executive privilege would most effectively apply when the oversight of the executive would impair that branch's national security concerns."

So how exactly does Mr. Rove testifying on the firing of U.S. Attorneys constitute a national security concern?

Answer, it doesn't. But then the rule of law was never a strong suit of President Bush who can count among his executive privilege gems:

• preventing the disclosure of details about Vice President Dick Cheney's secret meetings with energy executives.

• stopping the release of document to Congress relating to Pat Tillman's friendly fire shooting death.

• preventing the investigation of whether the the firing of U.S. Attorneys was politically motivated.

Hmmmm . . .

Now executive privilege has a place in government. To be fair, lots of Presidents have used it before, including George Washington. A President needs to be able to receive the unfettered counsel of his or her advisers. But the Supreme Court has been clear that when claimed, its use should be narrow in scope. In other words, it should be the exception rather than the rule. And there's one other thing . . . No President has ever tried to use it after they were out of office. Perhaps no one told W. that his game is over.

Repeat after me. Arrest, try, convict, repeat. Arrest, try, convict, repeat.

Our Long National Nightmare Is Over, Now OUR Work Begins

I'm 41, I'm the first wave of Gen X, and you bet your ass I'm pissed.

With these words I inaugurated Wide Awake In Hoserland in June of 2006. I knew back then that the United States were in a mess, but I'm not sure that I realised how much damage was still to be done. It'll likely take a decade if not a generation to undo that damage. How history will judge George W. Bush remains to be seen. Whatever the judgment let the record of the time show that these were not our best days.

We can do better. We must do better.

I'm 44 now and today I stood in a room with over 1,000 people who cheered, cried and expressed hope for a new direction. It was a moment that I will never forget, and I suspect that this is true for many of us around the country if not the world. It's as though a large weight was lifted from our collective shoulders. The sense of history was palpable.

Now the work begins.

That first Hoserland post addressed many ills of our time; rising energy prices, human rights violations, accounts of treasonous activities, and the disintegration of constitutionally afforded rights. Some of these things President Obama can address. He can close Guantanamo Bay and ensure that the detainees receive fair trials with legal representation. He can issue executive orders against using practises that are classified as torture by the Geneva Conventions as interrogation techniques. He can attempt to make peace with our enemies. He can prohibit spying on fellow citizens without a court issued warrant.

But President Obama is not Superman or Jesus.

Our economic woes, energy dependence and degrading environment are not something that one man can address. Neither are the issues of gender based pay inequality, civil rights for the LGBT community, a strained health care system, or an eroding manufacturing base. This work we must all do. And believe me, it's going to take all of us.

Now more than ever, it is critical that we stay engaged.

• Write your congressional leaders as key issue come before Congress. Let them know where you stand.

• Do not let the environment of politics as usual continue.

• Engage in service based activities in your local community.

• Live a less wasteful life.

• Share.

I'm 44, I'm the first wave of Gen X, and you bet your ass, I'm hopeful.

There are times in history when we are given a unique opportunity. This feels like one of them. It's our opportunity.

So what are we going to do with it, America?

The Three Ring Circus That Is The 111th U.S. Senate

It's a show that would make P.T. Barnum proud.

The 111th Congress officially started on Saturday, January 3 and the three ring circus has landed squarely on Capital Hill. Currently, the United States Senate appears to occupy the center ring. As we prepare to engage in one of the hallmarks of our democracy, the orderly transition of power, in an historical year no less, three senate seats remain unfilled.

In ring number one: Minnesota.

The Minnesota seat remains unsettled due to a razor close election that, after a labourious recount, appears to have resolved in favour of Democrat, Al Franken. But, because a lawsuit is pending by the possibly outgoing Senator, Norm Coleman, the Republican Minnesota governor will not certify the election. Fair enough, the lawsuit revolves around making sure that all votes are counted. Not exactly the way you want to start a new Congress, but if the last eight years of the Bush Administration have taught us anything it's that every vote counts. Right, Florida?

In ring number two: Illinois.

The vacant Illinois seat can be summed up as a giant pissing match between Senate leaders and the the indicted Illinois governor, Rod Blagojevich. Mr. Blagojevich is currently under indictment for allegedly trying to sell the seat, but he is reticent to resign his office and the Illinois legislature has been snail snot slow about convening impeachment proceedings. End result, the governor made an appointment in the form of Roland Burris. By all accounts, Mr. Burris has been an honourable public servant and uninvolved in the scandal that Mr. Blagojevich finds himself in. The Senate, however, refuses to seat, Mr. Burris on the grounds that the Illinois Secretary of State has not certified the appointment. The Secretary refuses to do so and thus we have the first Congressional quagmire of the year. The thing is, the Secretary of State doesn't legally have the right to refuse to certify the appointment and Mr. Blagojevich, while clearly ethically challenged, is still the sitting governor. In other words, like it or not, he still legally has the right to make the appointment. So, denying Mr. Burris his seat appears to not only be wrong, but it also appears to be illegal. Seat the man and get about the business of the people.

And in the center ring . . . New York!

As ridiculous as the Minnesota and Illinois disputes are, it's my own state that appears ready to take the prize for Senatorial idiocy. Why? Because Governor David Patterson is apparently incapable of making a decision. When Senator Hillary Clinton was tapped to be Secretary of State in the Obama administration, Paterson announced that he would take his time in making a decision. It appeared to be a prudent approach given the high profile nature of the seat. As we wound into the holiday season, rumours started to spread that Caroline Kennedy, daughter of President Kennedy would be appointed. While moderately controversial, and discussed for about a week, the governor remained relatively mum on the subject. Christmas came and went. So did Hanukkah. And then New Year's Eve. And still there was no appointment. There still isn't. Why? No one appears to know. I don't know what the issue is, but I do know this. The game has started and New York deserves to have full representation. There's no recount issue here, no indictment or scandal of any kind. So let me put it plainly. Governor Paterson, get off your ass and make the call.

Not exactly an auspicious start to the 111th.

Cheney Confesses (And No Waterboarding Was Necessary)

Waterboarding: the practise of restraining a prisoner and either dunking him/her or pouring water over him/her to simulate the experience of drowning.

Although the Bush Administration has steadfastly refused to acknowledge that any prisoners in the "war on terror" have been tortured, the past few years have uncovered a mountain of evidence to suggest otherwise. No matter that the opinion of a cadre of college law professors, international bodies and military experts, believe it to be a violation of the Geneva Conventions and thus a war crime, the administration won't budge.

Unfortunately, their assertion that waterboarding is not torture rings as true as Bill Clinton's claim that fellatio isn't sex.

The arrogance appears to have reached a new level when Vice President Dick Cheney acknowledged playing a central role in authorizing the technique. Said Cheney to ABC news, "I was aware of the program, certainly, and involved in helping get the process cleared."

Here's where it gets interesting.

While Mr. Cheney may not consider waterboarding to be torture, he appears not to know the history of his own country. In 1947, the United States prosecuted a Japanese military officer, Yukio Asano, for carrying out this very act on a U.S. civilian during World War II. Mr. Asano received a sentence of 15 years of hard labor. During the Vietnam war, a U.S. soldier was court marshaled for using the technique as was a soldier in the Spanish-American war. That's right, over 100 years ago the United States considered the practise to be torture.

So here's the rub. If historically the United States has punished it's own soldiers for using the technique and prosecuted a foreign fighter who used it for war crimes, it would seem that the U.S. has been definitive about whether or not waterboarding is torture. And since the answer is in the affirmative and others have been punished for using it, logically, we can conclude that by facilitating it, Mr. Cheney has authorized torture. Since torture constitutes a war crime, there is only one reasonable conclusion to be drawn.

Mr. Cheney must be prosecuted as a war criminal. And with him, anyone else who was involved.