Doug's Views – Page 106 – Ocassional Thoughts of an Independent Progressive Atheistic Humanist

November 14, 2009April 18, 2020

We need to leave Afghanistan now

With the debris of the collapsed World Trade Center towers fresh in my mind back in October 2001, I was very happy when the United States and allies helped remove the Taliban from governing Afghanistan. One reason was they refused to turn over Osama bin Laden and the others responsible for planning the attacks on the towers on 9/11. The Taliban also had been very nasty to the women of Afghanistan and I was getting tired of hearing all the other horror stories from there. But common of the bad thinking of the former Bush administration, the war in Afghanistan went left of center and needs to be ended.

The blatant jingoism of the neo-cons blinded them to the fact that Afghanistan had historically chewed up the British and Soviets, they didn’t capture bin Laden and his gang, and then thought they could impose “democracy” on the country.

Bush and company sent too few resources then cut back more as they fought a stupid war in Iraq that was only about settling past scores and for oil.

Once out of power the Taliban melted into the mountains and into Pakistan. Was there any doubt it would happen because they never fought a set piece battle back 2001. They withdrew from each city as the Northern Alliance and the US drew near.

Until recently Pakistan had been a supporter of the Taliban. That changed when it the Taliban started putting the Pakistan government in danger as it built strongholds in the Swat valley. But the support was there and didn’t help the US in capturing bin Laden in 2001.

The Karzai government, put into place by the US, is corrupt and after the last election, seen now as fraudulent, will never bring Afghanistan into a modern democracy. Once US troops leave Karzai will not be around for long. The Taliban have infiltrated the police and army and with the war lords still around, nothing really has changed.

It seems to me that Afghanistan is a lost cause and the US should leave as soon as possible.

November 10, 2009April 18, 2020

Return of Fairness Doctrine would be good

I‘ve made no secret that I support a return of the old FCC rule called the “Fairness Doctrine” that was removed in 1987. I feel that the obscene conservative bias in talk radio is hurting the country more than the Fairness Doctrine would “hurt” people like Rush Limbaugh. Steve Almond had a good op-ed about it today in the Boston Globe.

Predictably, the abolishment of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987 spurred a talk radio revolution. Why? Because talk radio’s business model is predicated on silencing all opposing viewpoints. If Rush Limbaugh and his ilk were forced to engage in a reasonable debate, rather than ad hominems, they would forfeit the moral surety – and the seductive rage – that is the central appeal of all demagogues.
Would talk radio’s bullies freak out? Absolutely. They know the Fairness Doctrine would spell the end to their ongoing cultural flim-flam. Besides, there’s nothing so intoxicating to a fraudulent moralist as the perfume of fraudulent martyrdom.
The real shock is that journalists haven’t supported the Fairness Doctrine. Then again, consider the state of “mainstream media” outlets. Increasingly, they dine on the same fears and ginned-up wrath as talk radio. Rather than wondering, “Does this story serve the public good?” they ask, “Will it get ratings?”
Who’s afraid of the big, bad Fairness Doctrine?

I agree. Real journalism should be asking “Does this story serve the public good?” and we might see that if talk radio were forced to have other voices on their shows as well.

November 8, 2009April 18, 2020

Health care reform passes House but it’s bittersweet

The massive overhaul of our broken health care insurance system started late Saturday night when the US House of Representatives passed H R 3962 by a vote of 220 to 215. While this was a historic day, the victory was bittersweet as an unneeded amendment banning paying for abortion for anyone who buys insurance from the public option or the exchange was added at the last minute. Some believe that amendment will be removed when the House and Senate meet to combine their bills but one never knows.

The “Stupak of Michigan Amendment” showed up in the last few weeks of debate on the bill and, at least to me, was being seriously considered late Friday night when the frame work of debate was agreed on by the House leadership. The fear was the overall bill would fail unless Rep Stupak had his amendment voted on.

64 Democrats, including some women, like Rep. Marcy Kaptur (Ohio 9th District), voted to restrict paying for abortion – effectively restricting a legal right women enjoy at this time.

What is ironic is the current bill includes allowing insurance to pay for “pray healing”.

So freaky religious people who believe praying can heal were more important than women’s rights.

And funny, in a WTF? way, 26 of those Democrats who voted to restrict paying for abortion voted NO on the final bill.

Here is the list of 26 Democrats who voted “Aye” on Stupak but “Nay” on the final bill:
Altmire, Barrow, Boccieri, Boren, Bright, Chandler, Childers, Davis (AL), Davis (TN), Gordon (TN), Griffith, Holden, Marshall, Matheson, McIntyre, Melancon, Peterson, Ross, Shuler, Skelton, Tanner, Taylor, Teague
64 Democrats on the Wrong Side of Stupak-Pitts

There is still work to be done as the reform debate moves to the Senate. Hopefully a final bill can be introduced and voted on before the end of the year.

November 6, 2009April 18, 2020

How does Rep. Jim Jordan sleep at night?

An article written by Findlay Courier reporter Joy Brown about Rep Jim Jordan’s (R-Urbana) concern about the economy and jobs during the current health care reform debate is typical of the out of touch Republican party. Not only does it show Jordan’s misplaced priorites but the article also lacked any balance to the untrue GOP talking points included.

During a conference call, Jordan, R-Urbana, said legislators are too fixated on “a government takeover of health care when the focus should be on growing the economy and creating jobs.
“I think the one thing that’s hurting our ability to come out of this recession is that business owners are very nervous about what may be coming next in Washington,” said Jordan. Potential legislation could “make it tougher, more costly to do business. So instead of bringing back (laid off) workers, they’re holding off with that. That’s what’s contributing to the lack of growth that we would like to see in this economy,” he said.
Also on Thursday, representatives were debating a provision in the revised bill to restrict federal funding to pay for abortions.
“Of great concern to me is the idea of federal dollars being used to take the life of unborn children,” said Jordan.
Jordan says focus should be on economy

As one commenter on the newspaper website said

Republicans should be as concerned for the living as they are for the unborn.

I was disappointed that this article lacked any comments or information about the actual reform bill before congress now instead of the usual Republican talking points. Where was the balance?

It just amazes me that in the 21st century someone like Mr. Jordan would politicize health care and show a lack of respect for basic human dignity. I don’t seem to recall a concern for the budget or taxes when spending obscene sums on the military or bailing out the banks who made bad decisions.

How a member of Congress would say there is going to be “government run” health care when that isn’t even true and even if true we already have some programs like Medicare and Veterans health care that are, so any additional programs would NOT be a totally foreign concept. Nothing in the current plan says people have to give up their private insurance.

Why is it that we seem to be the ONLY country which hasn’t solved this issue? Why is it that with a private “for profit” system that spends the most per person and costs the most per person we don’t have the top health care system – we rank 37th – lower than Costa Rica. When will people be outraged because approximately 40,000 people die each year because they either don’t have insurance or can’t afford medical care to begin with.

Health care is one of THE biggest expenses for businesses today and true reform as noted in the current reform package is a long time in coming and will lead to those businesses finally seeing a lowering of their health care expenses for the first time ever. That would lead to more opportunities to grow their businesses which could in fact lead to more jobs.

Doing nothing to reform the health care system is a ticking time bomb that WILL be worse than a terrorist attack.

November 3, 2009April 18, 2020

A very special Little House

While on break from work, I was flipping through the channels and came up on one of my favorite episodes of the TV show “Little House on the Prairie”. In a special 2 part episode, first shown in 1981, Albert falls in love with a girl named Sylvia. I do have to admit that the reason I loved the episode is that at the time I had a crush on the girl playing Sylvia so it is a bit creepy because of the plot of the episode is about a pretty girl who triggers the hormones of the local boys and gets undue attention from an older man who ends up raping her.

Here is a 30 sec recap of the entire episode for those who need a reminder:

The 30-Second Little House: Sylvia

A quick text recap is Sylvia is a pretty girl who has “developed” a bit more than the other girls in Walnut Grove. That sets off the hormones of the local boys and also an older man who attacks the girl while she walks home from school. We then find out that Sylvia is with child from the attack and Albert tries to “save” her by saying he was the father. The girl’s over protective father forbids the kids from being together so they decide to run away. At an old barn the attacker returns and tries to attack Sylvia again. It is then his identity is revealed which is a shock plot twist. Albert then shows up to fight the guy. Sylvia falls off a broken ladder and the girl’s father with Mr. Ingalls in tow, shoots the bad guy with a shot gun. Sylvia doesn’t survive her injuries leaving Albert devastated. Sylvia played by Olivia Barash

It was one of the best episodes of the show because it had a memorable actress playing Sylvia, the plot was not something the show usually had on, and if I remember right there was some controversy about it because of the theme of the rape of a child on a usually family show. It did introduce the topic for families to talk about it.