I have recently started using Flock. I am trying to stay up to date on the new forms of communication. I signed up for Facebook. Unfortunately, you have to have university e-mail to join the university networks. I don't have one. There isn't even a network for City College. So it seems the only network I can be a member of is San Diego. So, I am not really sure if it useful for anything or not.
Blogged with Flock
Sphere: Related ContentI cant tell you how happy I am to write for L'étendard Sanglant. I always wanted to write for a publication like that and to be going with the kind of radical babe who would publish such site. Anyway I wake up every morning excited about writing for it. You can see some of my articles on the site, I also write for the blog-Bloody Flag.
But writing there will change the nature of this blog. I will no longer write political commentary here. You will be able to find that at either Bloody Flag or at my political blog Militant Leftist.
This blog will be more reserved for family matters and for discussion of the things I am learning. So, if you want to see what Lee is up to, but don't want the heavy political stuff, this is the place to be.
I have recently discovered Debate.com. So far the arguments I have read have been better than the average for the web. I am really looking forward to some good debates. I challenged the group to a debate on whether religion provides an a priori objective system of morality. Someone has accepted but not sent their argument yet.
Sphere: Related ContentMichael Gerson's recent column in the Washington Post is a regular potpourri Republican misinformation. As such it provides an excellent opportunity to take on the canards du jour.
He starts out with the Republican line that things are improving because casualties are down in Iraq and their are portions of the nation that are relatively more calm. This is somewhat true as it goes. But that does not mean that we are making great strides in Iraq. On the contrary, this reduction in casualties has been accomplished in the same manner that all reductions in casualties have been accomplished by Republican presidents since Eisenhower, namely virtual unconditional surrender to the enemy.
It has become clear that the reduction in casualties has been effected through the novel counterinsurgency plan of surrendering to the insurgency. Rather than creating a monopoly of military force in the central government or even in regional governments the United States has gone from tribe to village paying off all and sundry with cash and weapons not to attack U. S. troops. They are also asked to fight the Al Queda. One assumes that the military will bring in O. J. Simpson to lecture on the techniques he has been using in tracking down the real killers. Al Queda was never in Iraq although the brand was appropriated by a small group of fighters. Since most of their goals are actually being put into place by the United States it would seem odd that they would even bother to put forth any effort at all.
The reality is that Iraq is ruled by a Shiite government that seems to differ from Saddam Husein only in that they only control a small portion of Iraq and that they are much more willing to work with our enemies to degrade our strategic position in the region. The Iraq war has already spread into Turkey and threatens to spread throughout the region. Iraq is still leaking tens of thousands of refugees who themselves have the potential of destabilizing neighboring regimes.
Meanwhile the cost of the war is growing as measured in loss of strategic power by the United States. Korea, which actually had nuclear weapons, which they didn't even need given their ability to destroy Soul with conventional weapons, has extracted meaningful concessions from the United States and already broken its promises again. But what are we going to do about it? Our Army is busy surrendering in Iraq.
The Bush administration may have denied the reality of global warming though almost every orifice, but strangely the military prepared for the predicted water wars by strengthening its position in Africa. Unfortunately, China our likely adversary in Africa has also been preparing the ground for future conflict in Africa. With an unencumbered army and economy that hasn't been wrecked with irrational tax cuts China has been buying friends fast.
Then there is Iran. Bush has rushed headlong into conflict with Iran as if he had an extra army to engage in a second war. But, perhaps uniquely in the history of warfare, the Bush administration prepared for the war they had planned in Iraq from before his election by trying to reduce the size of our military. Initial victories can be achieved by air power. But, occupation requires boots on the ground. We used pretend we were prepared to fight two and a half wars. The reality is we can barely fight a half war.
Not only do we not have the military resources to effect regime change in in Iran, but our troops are also effectively hostages in Iraq. If Bush attacks Iran or if Israel attacks Iran you can be sure that Iran will attack US troops in Iraq. It is only logical to assume that Iran learned the lesson of the outcomes of Iraq and Korea and understood its much better if your weapons of mass destruction aren't imaginary. Who knows what form the attack on US troops would take but devastating losses in Iraq would truly hurt the strategic position of the United States. New troops take time to train and we have in effect no reserves.
On the tax issue I am always amazed by the Mari Antoinette quality of Republican rhetoric on the issue. They point to an economy that has expanded but who has not benefited the vast majority of the population. And now almost everyone predicts a recession. The reality is that democracy simply can not continue in a country were all the economic benefit accrues to a small minority. Worse the huge deficits caused by the tax cuts have severely weakened our economic clout with the rest of the world. especially vis a vis China. As mentioned above China is winning the war in Africa before the first shots are fired.
Finally the Republican message on No Child Left Behind is perhaps the most disingenuous of all. No Child Left behind was designed to destroy our public school system. At its core is merely a system of defunding schools. It requires universal competence which is almost by definition unattainable. Republicans make little effort to hide their desire to destroy the public school system which they oppose both on principal and because it is a source of union power.
Republicans often speak of the need to get rid of bad teachers. But, bad teachers simply aren't the problem. Teaching is a high stress low paying job that has enormous turnover. The problem is not getting rid of bad teachers it is keeping any teachers at all. Of course Republicans oppose increasing the amount spent on teacher pay but they would like to increase the pay of the best performing teachers at the expense of less well performing teachers. The result would be those with poorly performing teachers would be left with no teachers at all.
There is a reality problem but it is with Republicans.
