A Can Story

This morning, my husband and I walked down our driveway in the frosty pre-dawn to deposit the trash can for its weekly pickup. In the spirit of the season, we taped a Christmas card to it. Inside the card was a little $ for the driver and the picker-upper. They'd been conscientious about returning the empty can to a sensible place, in an upright position, with lid locked, throughout the year. It felt good to say thank you.

I happened to be home when the trash truck came by. I peeked out the window to see them look at the card, look at each other, and pocket it. They left the can and lid strewn in the middle of the street. The duct tape that was holding the card was lying on the sidewalk. Merry Christmas.

Compassionate Conservative

Don't go to Google and type in failure, miserable, miserable failure or other combination.^{1, 2} It could bias your objectivity.

________
¹ Via Biomes Blog.
² "Google bombing" was added to the New Oxford American Dictionary in May 2005.

What To Do With $100

The cost of home heating is set to increase 30% to 70% this winter - closer to the high side if natural gas is used for heating, and you live in a colder state. Both pertain in my case.

That's $100/month more if I apply a middle-ground 50% to a $200/month bill. That's a hefty chunk.

No wonder the stores have been eager this Holiday season to rev-up the blood in our consumer veins. They want first dibs at that $100.

A Sovereign Iraq

With all this wrangling over what to do with our troops in Iraq ... do we "increase troop strength", "withdraw", "redeploy" ... I think we're forgetting that Iraq is a sovereign country. It's entirely their decision what to allow American troops to do in their country, and when to ask them to leave.

Last week, when Bush was asked about a timetable for troop withdraw, he replied, "When our commanders on the ground tell me that Iraqi forces can defend their freedom, our troops will come home."

Am I the only one who thinks that this decision doesn't lie with our commanders, but with the Iraqi people? How would we feel if China decided to deploy troops in the US to control our human rights abuses? Would we just let them patrol our streets until their commanders deemed it an appropriate time to leave? Just what does it mean to be sovereign anyway?

Speaking of our troops leaving, The Ostroy Report raises a trenchant question in his post:
Is Bush Set to Do an About-Face on His Misguided "Stay the Course" Policy By Withdrawing Troops In Time For '06 Midterms?

Boy, would it be suspicious if the Iraqi government asked our troops to leave in time for our midterm elections. The war hawks would have their out.

Congress Never Voted to Declare War

I'm a bit put off by the misconceptions surrounding "the vote to go to war". And it's not just the White House saying a majority voted for the war¹, it's Democrats themselves.

This just isn't the case.

And again:
In his "War on Terror" speech on Veteran's Day in PA, Bush said "more than a hundred Democrats in the House and the Senate - who had access to the same intelligence - voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power."

This is not true.

No one voted for a war. No one voted to remove Saddam Hussein from power.

Here's what was voted for:

"The President is authorized to use all means that he determines to be appropriate, including force, in order to enforce the United Nations Security Council Resolutions referenced above, defend the national security interests of the United States against the threat posed by Iraq, and restore international peace and security in the region."

- The culminating statement of Congress' Joint Resolution, SJ Res 45, Authorization For Use of US Armed Forces, September 30, 2002

Since, according to our Constitution, only Congress has the authority to declare war, the president had to seek their approval. Even then, Bush did not seek a formal declaration of war from Congress. Bush sought, and received, authority to use US military force to back UN Resolutions which would counter any threat posed by Iraq, defending our national security.

It is legally the UN Security Council, backed by a unanimous vote of its 15 member states, that can use military force against a country deemed a threat. Bush knew this, so he lobbied the Security Council for a Resolution that, if voted upon, would authorize the use of force if Iraq didn't comply. Bush got close to this on November 8, 2002 with the infamous UN Resolution 1441. It required Iraq to reveal all its WMD to UN inspectors or face "serious consequences".

Bush didn't believe the findings of the UN inspectors. So he called for a Resolution authorizing military action. No UN Resolution authorizing force against Iraq was brought to a vote - since at least France, Germany, Russia, and China were against this - and you needed unanimous approval for military action.



So, On March 20, 2003², in an illegitimate move, without UN approval, without a declaration of war from Congress, Bush struck Iraq. It was his decision, not the UN's, not Congress'.

That is my understanding.
________
¹ "The war" here is referring to the conflict in Iraq. This is distinct from the "war on terror", although how you wage war on an indeterminate act, and not a person or a state, is beyond me.

² AP Photo shown. Caption: "An explosion is seen in Baghdad early this morning as the U.S. launches a war on Iraq with an air assault on the capital in a surgical strike intended to kill Saddam Hussein and top Iraqi leaders."

Go, Michael!

'Go-getter,' 18, Ousts Mayor in Michigan

Criminalizing Abortion

If the Supreme Court becomes an entity with the power to criminalize abortion, then abortion will go underground. I don't see women just pushing it off the table as an option.

Sadly, it's the marginalized groups already - those living in poverty, those without education, without medical and contraceptive resources - who will suffer. Poor, single, disenfranchised women who find themselves pregnant and opt for (a medically risky) abortion would then have to add criminal to their list of attributes. And what will society do then, incarcerate them?

I just don't understand this reasoning. Why don't we use all the money and resources it would take to prosecute abortions and spend it on the root causes? It seems to me there are better ways to reduce the number of abortions in this country than to hang all those "bad women" who seek them.

________
Painting by Haitian artist Raymond Cadet, from Jane's Addictions.

Vote Smart

For all the whining people are doing about all things government right now ... the indictments, the mishandled conflict in Iraq, the mishandled hurricane relief, the mishandled judge nominations ... you'd think they'd be chomping at the bit to vote next Tuesday. But ask people, ask them if they even know who's running in their district, ask them if they know what the ballot questions are, and, sadly, if they even re-registered after a move.

I can't say I'm up on all my local issues. But I'm eager to vote next week. I can't wait to punch my ballot (we still use cards, we still deal with pregnant and hanging chads, yep) and reshape my government from the bottom up.

Two excellent non-partisan sites for anyone looking to become informed about their local issues before next Tuesday are (or just click their icons above):

Project Vote Smart
League of Women Voters

Fall

I'll be back in 2.5 minutes. I have to rake the leaves.

Click for larger.
________
Photo by AAA Member John Wernette.

Fallout

No matter how you look at it, Libby's indictment doesn't reflect well on Bush. If he didn't know what his VP and Chiefs of Staff were doing, he lacks their loyalty and could be viewed as not in charge. If he knew what they were up to, then he's complicit, and cannot be taken at his word.

Another way of saying that...

He's either politically weak, or a teller of tall tales.

________
Sketch by David Mamet.