Censored Whig Letters

U.S. Policy Failures in the Post 9-11 World

It is finally becoming publicly acceptable to speak some self-evident truths about terrorism, national security, limits of military power and Constitutional freedoms in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The entire approach to dealing with the threat of Bin Laden’s small band of radical Islamic terrorists on the part of the Bush Administration has been one of failure and incompetence, disguised from the American public by an unrelenting campaign of Republican propaganda.

The first step to policy recovery is to debunk some basic propaganda about Bin Laden and terrorism. Here are some of the most important points: (1) the terrorists hate us because of the policies of our government and corporations and not because of who we are, (2) the terrorists are not going to be stopped by military means exclusively (or even largely by military means) because they are not primarily a military threat nor do they control any nation or government, (3) spending huge sums of money is not going to produce significant reductions in the limited threat posed by Bin Laden’s terrorists and weakens our nation by undermining our national finances, (4) undermining our Constitutional freedoms does not produce a more secure nation when it comes to terrorism to any significant degree and (5) outside terrorist attacks cannot destroy America even if 9-11 style attacks were common but we can destroy America by over-reacting.

The 9-11 terrorist attacks did not happen in a vacuum. The Bin Laden terrorists had political objectives. They were seeking specific changes in American foreign policy. The most widely publicized goal was the removal of American troops from Saudi Arabia. The Bush White House did remove the troops from Saudi Arabia in the aftermath of 9-11. In foreign policy terms, the terrorists achieved one of their main goals.

It was a mistake for the first Bush White House to permanently station American combat troops in the Moslem holy lands after the first Gulf War. Like the Iraq invasion by the current Bush Administration, Arab and Islamic public opinion was not given sufficient consideration in developing American foreign policy. The limits of military power were ignored in both cases. Military power is no substitute for a well-designed, intelligent and logical foreign policy.

Military power is good in stopping military attacks. It does not lend itself well to dealing with politically or religiously inspired terrorism. Terrorists, who are not created by governments, really cannot be defeated by military means alone especially if they have widespread public support. The policies of the Bush White House have created more public support for Islamic terrorists instead of lessening that support. The long-term occupation of Iraq has been a public opinion disaster in the Arab world and greatly strengthened the appeal of radical Islamic terrorists.

One of the main goals of Bin Laden has been to bankrupt the American government. The 9-11 attacks were funded with less than a million dollars. The American government reaction including the Iraq disaster will cost the United States trillions of dollars. The financial resources expended are a serious over-reaction that undermines the health of the American economy. We are handing Bin Laden a major victory once again!

The great universal appeal of America in the world has been our democratic institutions, our tradition of individual freedom and religious tolerance. The Bin Laden terrorists do not have the ability to undermine these institutions and traditions. We do. They cannot reduce this moral appeal and example to the world community but we can. Unfortunately, the Bush White House and the Bush Republicans have actively been undermining our Constitutional freedoms in the name of national security.

There is no bigger threat to America than the internal one posed by this trend toward unrestrained state power. Detention without trial, governmental spying on citizens, arbitrary power of officeholders to deny Constitutional protections to individual citizens or groups and similar abuses have no rightful place in American politics. These things are the first and important steps towards destroying American freedom. They are much bigger threats to the American nation that the small band of terrorists controlled by Bin Laden and company. Our Constitutional checks and balances system has been under serious assault by the Bush political machine using the terrorist threat as an excuse.

We should immediately start a public debate about the role of American foreign in the Middle East and the larger Islamic world. We should be able to construct a foreign policy that both meets our national needs and does not create hatred of the United States in the Arab street. We are not natural enemies.

We should stop relying on military means and undermining American personal freedoms to combat Bin Laden’s terrorists. We should withdraw from Iraq as quickly as possible. Our current course is a disaster. The only approach which could be worse would be following Senators McCain and Lieberman advice to increase troop levels. That approach would be simply irresponsible. The damage would be permanent. Neither Senator should ever be given the position of Commander-in-Chief.

We should stop overstating the power and importance of Bin Laden and organization. They are not significant powers in the world community. The importance they do have in the world community is their ability to manipulate the Bush Administration into over-reaction. The American public has already begun to reject the political fear-mongering by Bush Republicans to hang onto power. We now need specific changes in public policy to reverse the damage.

Written by Stephen Crockett (host of Democratic Talk Radio http://www.DemocraticTalkRadio.com ). Mail: P.O. Box 283, Earleville, Maryland 21919. Email: midsouthcm@aol.com . Phone: 443-907-2367.

Feel free to publish without prior approval at no financial charge as an OpEd, Democratic Voices column, Letter to the Editor or Guest Editorial.

Democratic Presidential Candidates Look Good

Any look at potential 2008 Democratic Presidential candidates shows the depth of talent currently available in the Democratic Party. The potential candidates most frequently mentioned include Senator Kerry (MA), Senator Clinton (NY), Senator Obama (IL), Senator Biden (DE), Senator Bayh (IN), Governor Richardson (NM), Governor Vilsack (IA), former Senator Edwards (NC), former Vice President Gore (TN), and DNC Chairman Dean (VT). Many others are possible.

This pool of national talent is impressive. This writer would certainly support any of these candidates over the most likely Republican nominees. I believe that candidates from the South or West usually improve Democratic chances in Presidential races greatly.

If Gore had chosen former Texas Governor Ann Richards as his running mate in 2000, the nation would have been spared all the outrageous policies and incompetence of the Bush Administration. The Bush campaign would have been forced to spend huge amounts of resources holding states like Texas and had fewer resources to allocate in battleground states. Personalities certainly matter along with geography. Richards as a campaigner would certainly have been far superior to Liebermann because of her passion for justice and justice.

Former Senator John Edwards would be an excellent candidate based on geography and personality. Former Vice President Gore shares both of these qualities. Any ticket combining these two candidates would likely carry some Southern states like Florida, Tennessee, North Carolina, Virginia or Arkansas. The activist base of the Democratic Party would love this ticket regardless of which candidate ran for President or Vice President. It would run very strongly among working class and middle class males would have recently been tilting Republican.

Senator Evan Bayh would run very strongly in the Mid-West. Indiana would certainly not go Republican with Bayh on the ticket. Without Indiana in the Republican column, Bush would not have been installed in the White House in the 2000 election. Potentially losing Bayh’s Senate seat would be a serious downside to consider by Democrats. Our Democratic Senate majority is very slim and Indiana is not a strongly Democratic state.

New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson comes from a key battleground state and would greatly help Democrats among Hispanic voters. His main downsides seem to be a lack of current national name recognition and the small population base of New Mexico.

Delaware Senator Joe Biden has the same population base problem. Delaware usually is safe for Democratic Presidential candidates. Biden’s experience in the Senate would surely be missed by Democrats.

Iowa Governor Vilsack does not have strong current name recognition. He does come from a key battleground state. Democratic Presidential races have a history of producing exciting new leaders and often nominees out of the early primaries and caucuses. Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, John Kerry and Howard Dean are all living proof of this historical fact. Vilsack might be the surprise candidate of 2008.

Senators Kerry and Clinton are usually seen as top-tier candidates. Both have strong bases in the Democratic Party but high negatives among Republican voters. Neither candidate would run strongly in the South or West, compared to other potential candidates. Both might be more useful in the Senate. Even without 2008 Presidential bids, both Kerry and Clinton would remain giants in the Democratic Party and national politics.

Senator Barak Obama would certainly increase the African-American turn-out for Democrats. Senator Obama is still very young and eventually will be on a Democratic Presidential ticket at some point in the future. The question for Obama is timing. Should he run in 2008, 2012 or 2016?

DNC Chairman Howard Dean is often mentioned as a potential Presidential candidate. This writer is a very strong Dean supporter. I filed as a Dean delegate in the 2004 Tennessee Democratic Presidential Primary. I believe Howard Dean is the best Democratic National Committee Chairman in the history of the Democratic Party. My sincere hope is that Dean will continue serving as our national Democratic Party leader for as long as possible.

The reforms and growth plans being implemented by Dean at the Democratic National Committee will help change the direction of American politics for generations. The Democrats will gain ground from the county and city levels to the White House in election after election because of the leadership of Howard Dean. I hope he will run for President in the future but the Democratic Party and the nation needs Dean as DNC Chair for at least the next couple o election cycles.

The 2008 Democratic Presidential Primaries are going to be exciting. We will have many excellent choices. The Republicans should be so lucky, but they are not as blessed with top quality candidates!

Written by Stephen Crockett (Democratic Talk Radio host http://www.DemocraticTalkRadio.com .) Mail: P.O. Box 283, Earleville, Maryland 21919. Email: midsouthcm@aol.com . Phone: 443-907-2367.

Feel free to publish as a Democratic Voices column, Letter to the Editor, Guest Editorial or Op-Ed. There is no need to seek prior permission and no financial charge.

Election Won, Election System Broken

American voters should not think that our election system is working fine just because control of Congress changed hands in 2006. The election system nationally, and likely in your local community, is broken!

We do not have reliable, standard voting procedures and equipment in every community. Many voting machines are still not reliable and can be easily corrupted. Vote counting is still in private hands and controlled by a small number of “for profit” corporations. Voting rights are still being manipulated, and often denied, by partisan officeholders. Elections are still hugely expensive and more advertising exercises than public discussions of issues and policies. The right to have your vote counted honestly and correctly is still not Constitutionally guaranteed.

We have an election crisis. The system must be fixed. Both national and state Constitutions should be amended to guarantee uniform equipment in all voting jurisdictions, that all votes be honestly and correctly counted and that all citizens residing in a jurisdiction should have the right to vote.

No government, at any level, should be allowed to restrict voting rights by any group of citizens except those currently institutionalized in mental facilities or jails. Of course, non-citizens residing in the community should not be permitted to vote. ID laws should not be used to restrict voting rights of the poor. All citizens should automatically be registered when drivers’ licenses are applied for, school enrollments registered or Social Security cards issued. All citizens should be able to enroll by using postcards mailed to all addresses in the nation. Any type of ID should be accepted.

Penalties for double voting or voting by non-citizens should be severe. Strong felony charges and long sentences should be imposed on anyone attempting to rig elections. The strongest penalties should be faced officeholders who systematically deny the voting rights of large groups of citizens or who corrupt honest vote counts.

Personally, as a death penalty advocate, I would favor the death penalty for fraud by the top election officers in any state involving either large numbers of voters or that potentially alter election outcomes (although life without parole would be acceptable as an alternative to the death penalty.) The penalty should be as severe as treason during wartime. The crimes are comparable in my opinion. Both attack our existence as a free nation.

Equality of votes should be a guiding standard strictly applied in law. Differences in voting equipment can result in votes being lost in voting jurisdictions with sub-standard equipment. Federal money should be used to buy the same safe equipment for every community. The equipment should provide a paper trail that cannot be manipulated and can be audited. The entire process should be open and public.

Campaign finance laws should be passed everywhere to reduce the cost of running for office. If required to prevent court interference, constitutions should be changed to specifically state that spending unlimited amounts of money to influence election outcomes is not guaranteed by free speech rights. Reasonable restrictions should be permitted by law.

This election crisis is critical to preserving American freedom. The entire future of our nation is at stake. This crisis is more important than any other issue facing our nation. We must act, now!

Written by Stephen Crockett (co-host of Democratic Talk Radio http://www.DemocraticTalkRadio.com .) Mail: P.O. Box 283, Earleville, Maryland 21919. Phone: 443-907-2367. Email: midsouthcm@aol.com .

Feel free to publish without prior approval at no charge.