Eat it Barack

I like Barack Obama. I am excited that we are finally going to have a thoughtful and intelligent person leading our nation. Often when I listen to Obama speak I am genuinely surprised and impressed. His insight and eloquence allow him to speak frankly about issues that a lot of national politicians won't address.

Obama does have some very bad policies though. Here are a few that are so bad, we think he should eat them.


The War in Afghanistan

Afghanistan may be an easy target for a politician who needs to prove that he is tough. It was easy to justify invading Afghanistan in the wake of September 11th. But easily justified is not just. Every dead Afghani, like every dead Iraqi, is a grim reminder of America's failed foreign policy.

Obama spends a fair amount of energy reminding us that he was right about Iraq and that we need to focus on Afghanistan. Bravo on being right about Iraq. I was 18 and knew it was a bad idea, as did millions of people worldwide.
Obama could show real political courage and moral authority by shutting down our military industrial complex and standing up for justice and diplomacy. September 11th was tragic but our response was disproportionate and shameful. Three thousand American lives are not worth any more than three thousand Iraqi lives or three thousand Afghani lives. The Bush Administration's response to Sept. 11th and Obama's willingness to continue those policies in Afghanistan are vengeful and dangerous. We need a leader willing to work for our safety, not just pull the trigger.

The most beautiful thing to come from the September 11th attacks was the brief display of international unity and support. Obviously, Bush squandered that at home and abroad. It would be lovely if Obama used his eloquence to remind us that building bridges is more constructive than bombing them. Ridding the world of aggressive military policies and predatory financial policies (IMF/World Bank/Free Market Capitalism) will do a lot more to make America and the world safe than any war ever could.

The Death Penalty
Capital punishment has horrified me for as long as I can remember. In the last eight years we have seen horrifying videos from abroad of people being beheaded, while at home our highest court debates whether or not the way we execute people is humane.

Pushing aside expert evidence that the way we execute people is not humane (Vets have said they would not kill animals the way the United States executes its prisoners), even overlooking our blatantly racist and intentionally punitive "justice" system, the death penalty is wrong. No country has the right to consistently fail its citizens and then turn around and execute them when they do wrong. Individuals are capable of horrifying things. It'd be nice if our society rose above its basest instinct for revenge and stopped executing people.
Sticking a needle in a person's arm and pumping them with paralytics so that we are spared the displeasure of watching a person's painful death is cowardly. At least when a country beheads a person they are forced to digest the truly horrific action they are taking. Obama's support of the death penalty confuses me. It does not deter crime. It is final but not fool proof. There is no need for such barbaric practices to be part of our criminal justice system (I'm sure I'll do another blog one day about how our entire criminal justice system is barbaric. Fun!).



Clean Coal
Coal is dirty. Enough said.

Obama needs to demonstrate leadership by reminding us that any attempt to avoid environmental catastrophe is going to be really hard. Ride a bike. Stop eating beef. Stand up and fight for all those pretty spots we like to go on vacation (New Orleans used to be one of them).









The Bailout

Free market economics and market deregulation has been failing for as long as its been practiced, from South America to Asian and now Wall Street. The irresponsible policies and lack of regulation have down nothing to benefit 99% of the world's people. The bailout is a continuation of those policies. I don't know enough about economics to elaborate farther, but perhaps this will be helpful.

Torture

Ken Silverstein, via Scott Horton recently called attention to an unaired (until now) PBS documentary about torture (http://www.harpers.org/archive/2008/10/hbc-90003683). Thus far, I have not seen the entire thing, but I am working on it. There is plenty in the first part to make any moral person outraged, shocked and ashamed.
It is very hard to look back in history and not view everything through the cynical lens that the Bush Administration rightly deserves. Watching Cheney hear about 9/11, it was hard to imagine what he was thinking. Marcia and I settled on, “Oh fuck,” and decided not to elaborate for fear of being labeled conspiracy theorists. However, beyond allusions to any administration involvement in 9/11, all other accusations seem safely beyond conspiracy, given the blatant illegality and impunity that characterizes the Bush Administration.
I believe that any actions taken by the Bush Administration vis a vis “harsh interrogation techniques” or torture, have nothing to do with protecting America from future terrorist attacks. There are two reasons for this:

1. It is a scientific fact that torture is not an effective interrogation method. Any action designed to break a person and deny them of their voice and their humanity can not be counted on as reliable source of information. Though the United States has signed the Geneva Conventions Article 3 prohibiting cruel and inhuman treatment, various tools—from signing statements to manipulative amendments to hazy laws—assure that the CIA and top officials are able to act with impunity. Torture produces unreliable evidence. There is ample evidence of this, but it’s also common sense. If you are going to physically or mentally break a person, it stands to reason that they will say anything to make the pain stop. That provides tainted evidence and does nothing to keep America safe.
2. Part one of the PBS documentary (available at: torturingdemocracy.org) features the United States dropping pamphlets in Afghanistan promising vast sums of money to people who turn in terrorists or members of Al Qaeda. Needless to say, many impoverished Afghans or simply people with grudges, turned in their neighbors, their enemies, etc., without regard for whether or not these people had any tie to terrorism. See Taxi to the Dark Side (www.taxitothedarkside), a terrifying documentary about the fate of a man named Dilawar, handed over to the United States. Unfortunately, Dilawar is not the only innocent person subjected to the United State’s Draconian methods. Rather than working to track down terrorists, the United States took the easy way out at the expense of hundreds of innocent people whose lives will never be the same. It is abhorrent for a moral nation to torture anybody, but their ought to be a special level of disgust and reprimand reserved for the Bush Administration’s casual torture of innocent foreign civilians. If the Bush Administration was really interested in protecting America, they would have done the work to track down terrorists themselves. Instead, they acted in a reckless and shameful way that does nothing to promote peace at home or democracy abroad.

Thankfully, the Bush Administration’s time is running out. It is now important that we look at the candidate’s stance on torture. In the final presidential debate, Senator Obama said the following of Senator McCain, “Now, you've shown independence -- commendable independence, on some key issues like torture, for example, and I give you enormous credit for that..”
It is well known that Senator McCain was tortured in Vietnam. Both he and Senator Obama voted for the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, which stated that all prisoners and detainees must be interrogated within the guidelines of the Army Field Manual, which does prohibit torture. However, the DTA 2005 only applies to the military. Critics of this act rightly point out that in order to effectively prevent torture, the Act would have to apply to the CIA and private contractors. There was an act that would have applied Army Field Manual standards to all detainees, regardless of who was interrogating them, H..R. 2082 (sec. 327: Mandates that no person in the custody or within the control of an element of the intelligence community, regardless of that individual's physical location or nationality, shall be "subject to any treatment or technique of interrogation not authorized by the United States Army Field Manual on Human Intelligence Collector Operations").
John McCain voted against this act, and issued a statement that said that H.R. 2082 would extinguish “the ability of that agency (CIA) to employ any interrogation technique beyond those publicly listed and formulated for military use. I cannot support such a step because I have not been convinced that the Congress erred by deliberately excluding the CIA.” (http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_detail.php?cs_id=17107&can_id=53270)
Barack Obama did not vote on H.R. 2082. Both men, in this regard, display a worrying lack of judgment and unwillingness to stand up for what is right. Torture should not be a debatable policy issue. It is undeniably wrong and also undeniably ineffective. It is time to throw away arguments of “ticking time bomb scenarios” or any other justification used and stand up for what is right. Neither John McCain, a victim of torture, nor Barack Obama, the candidate of change, have taken a firm enough stand against torture. It is time to put aside rhetoric and do away with the Bush administration’s manipulative, evil policies and take the first step on the long road to make America a responsible and moral global citizen.

One of the most poignant moments in Torturing Democracy (again, it’s http://www.torturingdemocracy.org/) comes when Moazzam Begg, detainee #558 said, “If the Americans are doing it and they are not accountable then who is going to come to your rescue?”
That statement is heartbreaking. The current administration is actively fighting to deprive people of their (God given, UN decreed, morally deserved—whatever you want) human rights. It is impossible for any person, in the comfort of their living room, to comprehend the effects torture has on a person. They are incomprehensible—part of what makes tortures so terrible is that the pain and anguish are so extreme that the victim is stripped of his humanity. Lucky are we who can not imagine what this is like; however, we can imagine and see the real effects that torture has on our country’s image and moral standing. Throughout our history, America has had the worldwide (if somewhat disputable) honor of being known as a “the good guys.” That reputation has been irreparably damaged over the past eight years. Standing up against torture in a pragmatic way, a way that will provide actual relief to the people who have suffered under the Bush Administration’s policies, ought to be an easy moral stand for both presidential candidates. The people of this world deserve it, the people in this country deserve it and it is high time for our officials to stop paying lipservice to human rights and start acting on behalf of them.

<3alice>