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.

October 28, 2005

"Libby submitted his resignation and left the White House."

Iraq is not Vietnam

I was a kid during the Vietnam War. I wasn't paying attention then to combat casualties. I couldn't have told you that just over 1800 Americans soldiers lost their lives in the first 4 years (1961-1965) of US combat there. Or that just over 1600 were killed in the last 2 years (1971-1972).¹

Now that I know that, I'm finally understanding what politicians mean when they say "Iraq is not Vietnam." With 2000 American soldiers killed in Iraq in the last 2 years, our rate of death has surpassed that of Vietnam's ... by a chilling factor of 2.

________
¹ Soldiers Lost in Iraq Top Those Lost in First Four Years in Vietnam; Expert on the '60s Reflects on Similarities, Differences

Aging

Gouda wishes her special cheese a Happy 17th.

Plame Leak

The jubilation over possible indictments of (from what I can tell) mostly Republican members of the administration, by (from what I can tell) mostly Democrats is strangely partisan and, well, just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It's not as if Democrats are saints.

I like to see people who commit crime or engage in slimy backroom deals meet justice - regardless of their party. But people are treating this like a game, another "gotcha!".

That's sad, because the story that should be making headlines is the repercussions that ensue from disclosing the undercover status of a CIA operative. That agent, by nature of their work, has to build and maintain covert relationships with people, informers, all over the globe - some in levels of power, some just ordinary citizens. Those people's lives are immediately threatened when an agent is exposed. Outing doesn't just destroy people's careers, it places lives in danger. It also deconstructs an intricate network of years-in-the-making, on-the-ground, intelligence gathering. It is precisely this lack of intelligence that led to terrorists' successful bombing of the World Trade Center.

I hope Fitzgerald gets to the bottom of the Plame leak, not to discredit Republicans, but to root out those government officials who care more about their career than about thwarting another terrorist attack, who care more about smearing the reputation of someone who disagrees with them, than about the sanctity of human life. (And who have the gall to label themselves as pro-life.)

I Love This Time of Year

Pro-life is not the Opposite of Pro-choice

There's a term floating around that I have a feeling was invented as a "God-sanctioned" argument against people who support a pro-choice stance for women facing an unwanted pregnancy.

The term is pro-life. What does this term mean? It's certainly not the opposite of pro-choice.

I would like to see our society lessen the number of abortions now taking place. Contraception, education, and a lessening of poverty are some means to that end. But I am also pro-choice. Expressing my belief that life is sacred does not reveal my concurrent belief that a woman should possess a legal right to make choices about her body, including having an abortion.

In framing Harriet Miers' views as pro-life, the White House seems to want to send a message to their conservative Republican base that she will vote to overturn the freedoms set forth in Roe Vs. Wade, while maintaining enough ambiguity so as not to alienate someone like me ... who thinks life is precious, but is also against any legislation that governs how a woman may treat her body.

Harriet Miers can be labeled pro-life until the cows come home. But this doesn't make a statement on how she would vote on issues of privacy, under which abortion falls.

I think a better line of questioning for her in the hearings is not whether or not she believes in the sanctity of life, but whether she would rule to protect a woman's privacy.

Liberation

I feel happy that people who live in Iraq can vote.

I feel sad that 2.5 years after their unrequested liberation, they bear a 25% inflation rate, a 30% unemployment rate, and generate for their entire country, which is about the size of California, the amount of electricity that one US college campus uses in a year.

Iraq Constitution Out-democratizes US Constitution

The new Iraqi Constitution does a better job of serving democracy than our own, in at least one area, its provision for the representation of women.

You can read an English translation of Iraq's draft constitution here (pdf) or here.

I want to draw attention to one Article:

"Article (151): A proportion of no less than 25 percent of the seats in the Council of Representatives is specified for the participation of women."

Is there a reason that the US Constitution can't also stipulate a minimum requirement? If not, I'd like see an amendment that would guarantee a more equitable representation for women in this country.

Currently, 50% of the US population between 15 and 64 is female.

Yet, in the 108th US Congress (2003-2004), only 14 of 100 Senators (14%), and 60 of 435 Representatives (14%) were women. Only 2 women¹ have ever served on the US Supreme Court, a mere 2% of the 108 justices that ever served! And regrettably, no woman has ever served as President or Vice President.

It's not as if the US doesn't have a pool of educated and qualified women to draw from. If Iraq, where only 24% of the women can read and write, can guarantee their representation, why can't the US where 97% of women are literate?
________
¹ Sandra Day O'Connor (1981) and Ruth Bader Ginsberg (1993).