Liberal and Loving It

What to do in Iraq

Ok, this may be a dumb idea (if so it would not be my first). But I figured put it out there and see if it is good, or leads to something good.

What drove me to this was thinking about how almost every "solution" to Iraq is one of two basic ideas - either leave, be it slowly, quickly, or with work as we do so. Or stay, trying different approaches or ideas, but stay. And there are bad repercussions to both.

So what about this. We cut a deal with Iran, Syria, and Turkey for them to take over our role in Iraq. With conditions.

Iran must give up their efforts to develop a nuclear bomb, including closing down and destroying the facilities used to do so. And accepting intrusive checks of their facilities.

Syria must sign a peace treaty with Israel and forever renounce any claim to Lebanon.

Turkey must commit to supporting democracy and to treating the Kurds well. There is no onerous condition on Turkey because they are a democracy and have earned the right to be treated as one that will handle this job responsibly.

The three countries must agree to handle Iraq collectively and to renounce any claims to any of the territory of Iraq. All three also must commit to establishing a Democratic government in Iraq. On the ground Iran would handle the Shia areas, Syria the Sunni areas, and Turkey the Kurdish areas.

I think it would be impossible for any of those countries to say no to such a proposition. But the result would be that Iran and Syria would go from cooperation to competing with each other on the ground. And the morass in Iraq would swallow them up instead of the U.S.

Iran and Syria are also probably the only countries that have a chance of "fixing" Iraq. First they are the cause of some of the fighting, although by now I think a lot has spun out of their control. Second, they know the various groups better than anyone else and have more leverage over them.

How good a job would they do? Who knows. But we're not doing great right now.

Would they stick to their word and not try to annex parts of Iraq? Who knows but if they did it would cause them no end of problems with the rest of the Arab world.

Would they keep their commitment to establish a Democracy? Who knows but the Iraqis have had a taste of Democracy and I think that any efforts to end that would cause an even worse insurrection.

So, what do you think? Please comment.

trackbacks: DailyKOS, Mudville Gazette

The Boulder Ballot

Here are my suggestions for those voting in Boulder - and for all of Colorado on the state-wide items. I have not listed anything where there is just 1 person running.

And get an absentee ballot. Speaking as a computer programmer (my job for the last 25 years) - the electronic voting machines could so easily change or lose your vote. More likely through incompetence than intent - but lost is lost.

U.S. Congress - District 2
Mark Udall has done a very good job and by any measure deserves our votes.

Governor
Bill Ritter has shown himself to be a strong candidate with a good record and clearly will be a moderate liberal. The most important reason to vote for him is he understands that we do need adequate funding in the state and reducing the state budget to $1.50/year would not be a good thing.

Secretary of State
They are both very good candidates and either one is deserving of winning and would do a good job for the state. My vote is going to Ken Gordon mainly because his ads have been so clever.

State Treasurer
Once again both are good candidates. Keep in mind that the winner here could be our next Governor and for that reason I am voting for Kennedy (D).

Attorney General
Everyone, I repeat everyone, has assumed Suthers will win. And he almost certainly will. But I think that O'Brien is the one to vote for both because she choose to run when she knew she would get creamed and to encourage the Democratic party to put up someone with a chance next time. Vote O'Brien so we get two contenders next time. That said, I think Suthers is doing a good job.

C.U. Regent at Large
It doesn't matter. Whoever is elected they will spend their time wasting money on the football team while ignoring academics. Vote for any of the 3rd party candidates.

Amendment 38 - make initiatives easier.
Apparently the 14 statewide amendments & referenda this election are not enough for some people. This amendment will drown us in initiatives. Vote no because 14 initiatives already about 4 times what it should be.

Amendment 39 - 65% of school funds used in the classroom
Referendum J
I really really sympathize with the intent of these two initiatives. And I also am frustrated with the disaster that is our public schools and how they are destroying the economic future for so many of their students. But this is not the answer. Even worse, it applies a band-aid that may make people think we have "fixed" the problem. Vote no on both and then work to get quality school board members elected.

Amendment 40 - politicize the judiciary
No! This measure was placed because some conservative legislators were upset that judges ruled impartially on some cases where they wanted a specific result. This will politicize our judiciary. No, no, NFW!

Amendment 41 - eliminate gifts
This is a bad solution to a problem that does not exist. First off, the amendment as written may disallow things like state scholarships for children of state employees. Second, what problem is it fixing? Yes we had two legislators who did things that were clearly wrong. The Democrat resigned and the Republican lost his leadership post and won't ever get re-elected to anything - not even dogcatcher. The system worked and worked well. Vote no.

Amendment 42 - minimum wage
Now this is what the initiative process was designed for - a basic question about our core public policy as a state. Yes this amendment is not perfect (is there ever a perfect one?). But it is well written and it lets us vote to give all who choose to work a better wage. Still not a livable wage, but a better one. Vote yes. And tell your friends to vote yes. This is the vote where we do the right thing for those less fortunate. And to whoever wrote the arguments against this - you said that a) This would reduce jobs as pay went up and b) That almost no jobs are presently at minimum wage. Do you realize that only one of those arguments can be true?

Amendment 43 - no gay marriage
Like amendment 42, this also is what the initiative process was designed for. However in this case it would enshrine discrimination and religious bigotry in our constitution. Vote no. Even if you are against gay marriage, please don't put this in the constitution - leave the small minded discrimination in the law.

Amendment 44 - legalize marijuana
Gee, the war on drugs has been going so well, I hate to see this hurt our efforts. With all of the problems we face, with all of the various issues our legal system needs to address, putting even 1 second into marijuana is a total waste of resources. Vote yes and lets take the next tiny step toward trying something a bit more sensible in our drug policy. And this is a very tiny change.

Referendum E - tax exemption for disabled vets
What is this even doing on the ballot? This is one of those feel good items that should never be here. And what does this do? It helps the best off vets as it is of no use if you rent, only if you own a home. Helping the vets is a good thing to do, but have the legislature come up with a way to target it usefully. Vote no.

Referendum F - recall changes
Another solution for a problem that does not exist. This overall seems sensible but what is it doing on the ballot? And have we had any problems? Vote either way on this but my vote is no just to discourage stuff like this from cluttering up the ballot.

Referendum G - eliminate obsolete provisions
Can't they just do this once every 20 years? These are for provisions from 1903 and they just now figured out they're obsolete. Who cares.

Referendum H - tax wages paid to illegal aliens
What moron came up with this? It's unlikely any business will ever meet the criteria of this initiative. And something like this should be in the legislature (where they hopefully would kill it as beyond stupid). Vote no. And the next time you hire an illegal alien, tip them better. Also, if one of the people that supports this is up for election on your ballot - vote for their opponent. You don't want someone this stupid representing you.

Referendum I - domestic partnerships
Another one of the few that belongs on the ballot. This gives gay couples a lot of the same rights as married couples. This is so the right thing to do - vote yes.

Referendum J - 65% of school budget in the classroom
See above - vote No.

Referendum K - sue the U.S. to enforce immigration law
What is going on here? This is the dumbest of the dumb initiatives on the ballot. Out of all the issues and problems at the federal level, this would waste money on a symbolic action on this one issue. Strike a blow for sanity and the intelligence of a 10 year old and vote no.

State Representative - District 13
There is no Republican in this race but there is a Libertarian. Like Fern O'Brien he has no chance, but a vote for him encourages giving us a choice. Of course if it was close, then I would back Claire Levy 100%.

Retain Judges
Have you heard anything bad about any of them? I haven't. Yes to all.

County Commissioner - all
I am really tired of the County Commissioners basically having a guaranteed job until term limits hit (and they tried to get that lifted too). These bozos get more out of touch and arrogant with each election. The new group has been better, but the system does not serve us well. Vote for any candidate other than the Democrat. And if one of the three positions is won by a challenger, we will see an improvement in our county government.

County Sheriff
Joe Pelle has done a good job - retain him.

County Coroner
Neither is perfect but Faure is the incumbent and he has done a crappy job. Vote for Lisa Jo Floyd and give her a chance to show she can do better. It shouldn't be hard.

County Issue 1A - taxes earmarks
Ballot Issue 201 - more taxes earmarks
Ballot Issue 202 - even more taxes earmarks
What happened to the system where we pay taxes into the city and county's general funds and the city council/county commissioners then set a budget from that fund based on what services are most critical. All three of these issues should be defeated, not because they are bad ideas, but because earmarks (i.e. pork) is not the way to fund government services. If issues like this pass, and we have 3/year (and it will increase if these pass), in 10 years we will have 30 special taxes each going to their own sacrosanct bureaucracy, outside of the general budget. And our tax rate will be shooting toward 25%.

Ballot Question 2A - Annexation
We haven't made it hard enough already to annex land? This is a bunch of over-entitled trust fund babies who have already forgotten the lesson of Crossroads mall dying over 10 years. They want to freeze Boulder as it is because it gives them what they want and the idea that we might need to provide more housing, jobs, or stores is not something they want. No culture can stay in stasis, it either grows and adapts to changes or it stagnates. Vote no on 2A - and vote for a Boulder that still may be able to adapt to what the future requires.

Ballot Question 2B - Fluoride
The preponderance of research says fluoridating drinking water is a very good thing. However, one big change since fluoridation started is that almost all toothpaste now has fluoride in it and that may make fluoridating unnecessary. I think we should vote for 2B and be a test case for the country. Measure changes in tooth decay over the next 10 years and then decide if we need to bring it back, or if it is no longer necessary. We have so many advantages in Boulder, lets use this as an opportunity to give something back to society and learn if fluoridation is necessary. Vote yes.

Ballot Issue 3A - BVSD 300 million bond
Yes BVSD has broken promises in the past. Yes the BVSD administration is inefficient and spends too much outside the classroom. Yes George Garcia is a mediocre superintendent. (He is resigning, but the board that is thrilled with him is the board that will pick a replacement.) The thing is, I don't think waiting for a better school system will work. It's imperfect and could be better - but this is what we have. And the place to fix that is to encourage better candidates to run for the board and to elect them. In the meantime the schools desperately need the repairs and the money will be well used and is needed today. Vote for the bond. And then encourage someone good to run for the board.

Lists of endorsements across the state
Colorado Confidential - very useful site.

Hawaii - U.S. Senate
Cynthia Thielen (my mom)

Cynthia Thielen for U.S. Senate

Why do I, a very active Democrat, support a Republican, Cynthia Thielen, for the Senate? Well first of all she's my mom and mom trumps family. But that is a small part of it. Here's the main reasons.

First there is her opponent Daniel Akaka. A very nice person and an incredibly reliable Democratic vote. But he hasn't done anything in his 12 years in Washington. He was listed in Time Magazine as one of the 5 worst Senators in Washington. With all of the problems we face today, we need people working on solutions - not just relaxing. And Hawaii needs someone who will actively help the state. Doing nothing should not be rewarded.

Second there is the political situation in Hawaii. The Democratic party owns the state. And with the entire party baking Akaka against Ed Case, it sent a message loud and clear that there will be no new blood, there will be no new ideas. Advancement will remain slow and steady given to those that toe the line, replacing people when they die of old age.

This is a prescription for disaster for the Hawaii Democratic party. Not today, not next year, but within 10 years. Just as the Republican party is imploding on the national scene due to it's over-reaching, the Hawaii Democratic party will suffer the same result soon. The Ed Case loss shows that change will not come from within.

But a Republican elected to the Senate seat would do a lot to force change on the Democratic party from without. With two of the three major elected offices held by Republicans, the Democratic party would have to face the reality that if they don't put the best candidate forward, they don't keep the seat. And that will force the party to start putting the best candidate forward rather than the one who has been around the longest.

The Hawaii Democratic party needs Cynthia Thielen to win for their future. The people of Hawaii need her to win for the good of the state. Not just to have a Senator who is active (and effective), but also to force the Democratic party to start delivering.

Third there is our national political situation. It's horrible right now, divided more than any other time in our history since the Civil War. To continue as a country we do need to heal this breach - from both sides.

The Republican party has a long and honorable tradition as a party of liberalism, moderation, and encompassing the best of this country. This tradition stretches from Lincoln to Teddy Roosevelt to Eisenhower to G.H.W. Bush (look at his record, not his speeches). It still exists today in politicians from Christine Todd Whitman to Colin Powell.

My mom comes from that same strain of the Republican party. Yes that strain is not presently in control. But they are fighting to regain control of the party. And this country desperately needs them to be successful in their fight.

If they lose, if the wing-nuts maintain full control of the Republican party, then we will remain either a very divided country. Or the Republicans will become a permanent minority and the Democratic party nationwide will become like the party in Hawaii - corrupt, ineffective, and sclerotic.

For the sake of the country both sides most get past the poisonous present and that requires electing Republican moderates like my mom.

Fourth, we face a myriad of serious problems from Iraq to energy/oil/environment to health care. We need to find solutions to these problems and that requires that we elect Senators who will work on these problems, who will bring various perspectives, and who will work across the aisle to find effective solutions.

After 16 years in the minority party, my mom's first, second, and third instinct is to craft bi-partisan solutions. To work with others so that together they use all of their ideas and perspectives to create solutions much better than any would come up with on their own.

In a sense she's the anti-Bush in that she looks for other perspectives rather than refusing to listen to them. We, everyone in the country, needs Republicans in the Senate that are working for compromise rather than partisan divide. We want voices in the Republican caucuses demanding that they reach across to the Democrats.

Fifth there is her platform. Her position on Iraq is, I think, very thoughtful and logical. It toes no party line. And true to the type of legislator she is, and Senator she will be, she talked to me (and many others) and then wrote what she thinks is the right thing to do there. As she said, Iraq is too important to let political considerations affect her position.

On energy she will be one of the most active and effective people in Washington fighting to end our use of foreign oil and to introduce widespread use of alternative energy. She has been fighting for this for the last 16 years in the Hawaii legislature. With her in office I have no doubt that we will see extraordinary reductions in oil use over the next 10 years. I think she can make a significant difference on this issue.

On education she understands that this is the future. That without a good education people are stuck economically for the rest of their lives. And that the government has to drastically increase the quality of our schools.

On issue after issue, she will bring an incredible level of effort. At the state house she read every bill. Every single one - in full. I know because I would get calls at night as I would have to help her understand what was going on with bills that were on high tech issues. And she would not let me go until she understood it. She will improve the quality of the bills coming out of the Senate across the board.

That leaves the question of control of the Senate. But this is where time zones are our friend. The last competitive Senate election on the mainland is in the central time zone (Montana and Washington are going Democratic). So Missouri's polls close when it is only 2:00 in Hawaii. People voting at 5:00 will know if Hawaii decides control of the Senate. If it doesn't, then they can vote for Cynthia Thielen without it changing control of the Senate.

If it does decide control, then it's an easy decision for Democrats outside Hawaii. However the vote is by the people in the state of Hawaii and that is a more difficult one. Balancing what is best for the people of Hawaii and the Democratic party of Hawaii (vote Thielen) vs. what is best for the country as a whole (Democratic control of the Senate).

If you live in Hawaii that is not an easy choice. But as I said, you can wait until after work and you will then know if it's even an issue.

No you won't like her position on every single issue. But do you like every position of any candidate? Yes she will vote with the party when voting for the leadership of the Senate - she is no Joe Lieberman. Yes she is a Republican, a party presently controlled by an incompetent, corrupt, amoral leadership.

But Cynthia Thielen is a critical part of fixing what is wrong with our political system. She will help bring the Republican party back to a party of moderation, competence, and integrity.

She will help find solutions to the big problems we are facing. And that is better than the alternative - a backbencher who has contributed nothing for the last 12 years.

If I was a Democratic Representative

If I ran the zoo...

First, I wish every Democrat would stress the fact that there is no House investigation. There is a motion that was tabled (motion by Boehner) and that may at some future date be voted on that would then lead to an investigation. So anytime you see any news report about how there is a house investigation, please call or email them and set them straight. So far the Republicans have not approved an investigation.

Second, I think every House candidate running against an incumbent Republican should make the following press announcement:

My opponent apparently thinks campaigning for office is more important than returning to Washington to approve an investigation and protect our children. I think protecting our children comes first. Therefore, if my opponent will return to Washington to do his job, I will refrain from campaigning during that period. Because I would rather insure the safety of our children than get elected.

And if they go back, show your principals by refusing to campaign and only talk to the pres and public about how important it is that the House is in session right now so they can start working on discovering how deep the Republican cover-up went. That leaves you not campaigning and leaves the story right on the Republican leadership and what they allowed to happen.

And it would make one hell of a story. How does a Republican candidate address an offer like that. If they don't go to Washington they are left looking like they are putting getting elected over protecting children.

And if the Republican's don't go for it, this might work (or it might be a dumb idea). Every Democratic candidate could fly to Washington to show that in the last month of campaigning, this is more important. That would be the lead video in every hometown news broadcast.

And wouldn't that be just desserts?

Nancy Pelosi Rocks

When Nancy Pelosi first got the minority leadership post, I though it was a bad move for us Democrats. I thought she was a lightweight and too liberal for the position.

Since then I was slowly changing my mind, based mainly on the fact that she seemed to be doing ok and had made no major mis-steps. But I was thinking she was ok. Then...

• One the pork laden transportation bill, she offered to give up the earmarks in her district as an example. That definitely was a brave move, and it shook things up a bit.
• Then when it became clear how corrupt Rep Jefferson is, she asked for his resignation and removed him from his leadership positions. And did this with almost no complaints from other Democrats. The fact that she made that look so easy & painless is testament to her skill - because accomplishing that is close to impossible. And by doing this, she kept the corruption issue a Republican-only problem.
• Then her speech and actions the other day on scumbag Foley. I watched the speech a couple of times. How she handled the house rules, what she said, how she said it - all a thing of beauty.

So Representative Pelosi, I was wrong in my initial impression - you absolutely rock as minority leader. And I know you will rock as Speaker of the House this January. And you have so earned that.