Those damn Republicans instead of decreasing funding from the Department of Defense, the Wars in Iraq & Afghanistan, the pork within the Highway Bill, and incentives to Oil companies found in the Energy Bill are cutting Billions from Education.
There is a myth that the United States Government spends to much money on Social Programs like Welfare, and Food Stamps. This is outright false.
Let me break this Down for You:
Spending on Defense & Security = $533 Billion Dollars
Spending on Health, Education, Labor = $141 Billion
Spending for Veterans, Housing & Urban Development = $90 Billion
And to fund efforts to rebuild regions affected by Hurricane Katrina the Republicans don’t look to cutting from Defense but plan on spending more money that we do not have. Call this fiscally responsible? Hell no! It’s Reckless.
The needs of American soldieries, American Veterans, American children & families, American workers are being neglected. Politicians are elected to serve.A specific example of their dereliction of their duty to the People: Republicans are proposing cutting $15 Billion from Education, leaving Veteran Hospitals $1 Billion in the red, and $50 Billion from Social Programs needed for victims of Hurricane Katrina. Money that should have already been in place.
The Dept. of Homeland Security which is funded Billions of your Tax Dollars was created by Bush under his watch but I failed to prepare the nation for a natural disaster.
On Labor, American jobs are being taking by illegal aliens and outsourced to India while at the same time the United States is falling behind other nations in the education & training of its work force.
On Education President Bush said we need to send more people to school and that we would “leave no child behind”. However these budgets cuts seek to do just that in decreasing financial assistance, therefore many poor but bright young people will not even have the opportunity to go to school.
Republicans are even turning their back on funding social programs for Churches which provide vital support to local communities.
I am tired of hearing those of you that blindly support President Bush. Common sense should tell even the strongest Conservative (whom claim to be fiscally responsible) that policies and priorities of the current Administration need to change.
White House Budget:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/tables.html
Churches Oppose Cuts:
http://www.ncccusa.org/news/051020BudgetCutPlans.html
News Report:
http://www.independent-media.tv/item.cfm?f...%20and%20Policy
Wednesday, November 16, 2005
Monday, November 14, 2005
A Lack of Leadership

I have spent much time on Checks & Balances condemning Republican policy and promoting Democrats. Now in November 2005 the United States finds itself at a moment where we must shed our political affiliations and have a frank discussion on certain matters.
I also ask you this: is your political interest and your side winning so crucial that Integrity, Character and Truthfulness are no longer important, and God forbid, necessary?
Issues where there is a lack of leadership within the United States:
- The economy
- Profiteering by Corporations and Politicians
- Corruption
- Poor approval of the Government
- An economically stretched population
- Uncommon natural disasters raising the issue of global warming
- Energy Independence, and alternative energy technologies
- Poverty
- The Voting System
- The Patriot Acts
- The War in Iraq
- Monetary & tax policies regarding corporations, & the wealthy versus the worker & Consumer
- Education
- Health Care
- Work Force Training
- Trade
Where is the leadership on these matters?
The Budget: Damn Republicans!
Those damn Republicans instead of cutting funding from the Department of Defense, the Wars in Iraq & Afghanistan, the pork within the Highway Bill, and incentives to Oil companies found in the Energy Bill are cutting Billions from Education.
And to fund efforts to rebuild regions affected by Hurricane Katrina they don’t look to cutting from any of the mentioned above but plan on spending more money that we do not have. Call this fiscally responsible? Hell no! It’s Reckless.
And to fund efforts to rebuild regions affected by Hurricane Katrina they don’t look to cutting from any of the mentioned above but plan on spending more money that we do not have. Call this fiscally responsible? Hell no! It’s Reckless.
"Mr. Danger"
One world leader calls G.W. Bush “Mr. Danger”. 9/11, the War on Terror, the Iraq War, the Afghanistan War, NASA Space Shuttle Blowing Up, Asian Tsunami, Hurricane Katrina, Abused Prisoners, Secret Laws, Secret Police, Secret Courts, Secret Prisons, Bird Flu, and Weapons of Mass Destruction.
The South American President calling Bush “Mr. Danger” however is referring to his economic policies.
Is this Karma, coincidence or all Bush’s fault?In the entire Presidency’s of Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr. and Clinton did the U.S. endure so many negative occurrences? Maybe this title of “Mr. Danger” is warranted.
Links:
http://www.newshounds.us/2005/11/03/venezu...h_mr_danger.php
http://www.cbc.ca/cp/world/050506/w050658.html
The South American President calling Bush “Mr. Danger” however is referring to his economic policies.
Is this Karma, coincidence or all Bush’s fault?In the entire Presidency’s of Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr. and Clinton did the U.S. endure so many negative occurrences? Maybe this title of “Mr. Danger” is warranted.
Links:
http://www.newshounds.us/2005/11/03/venezu...h_mr_danger.php
http://www.cbc.ca/cp/world/050506/w050658.html
Friday, November 11, 2005
Great Britain Rejects "Patriot Acts"
Blair Suffers Major Defeat on Terror Bill By Ed Johnson
The Associated Press
Wednesday 09 November 2005
London - In a political blow to Prime Minister Tony Blair, British lawmakers on Wednesday rejected tough anti-terrorism legislation that would have allowed suspects to be detained for 90 days without charge.
The House of Commons vote was the first major defeat of Blair's premiership and raises serious questions about his grip on power. Blair had staked his authority on the measure and doggedly refused to compromise.
Lawmakers, including 49 members of Blair's Labour Party, opted instead for a maximum detention period for terror suspects of 28 days without charge.
Michael Howard, leader of the opposition Conservative Party, said Blair's authority had "diminished almost to vanishing point" and said he should consider resigning.
"This vote shows he is no longer able to carry his own party with him. He must now consider his position," said Howard.
But Blair was defiant. He ruled out resignation and insisted lawmakers had been wrong to put the civil liberties of a small number of terrorists ahead of the "fundamental civil liberty of this country to protection from terrorism."
"The country will think that Parliament has behaved in a deeply irresponsible way today," he added.
Lawmakers voted 322 to 291 against 90-day detentions and backed the 28-day period by 323-290 votes.
The result is a humiliating blow to Blair. For eight years, his Labour government commanded an unassailable lead in the Commons and easily swatted aside opposition to its legislation.
But Blair's popularity has slumped in the wake of the divisive Iraq war, and his party was punished in national elections earlier this year. Labour's huge 161-seat advantage in the Commons shrunk to just 66, making the government vulnerable.
In the immediate aftermath of the July attacks on London's transit system, Blair had considerable cross-party support for new anti-terror legislation.
He drafted the Terrorism Bill, which aims to tackle Muslim extremism by outlawing training in terrorist camps as well encouraging acts of violence and glorifying terrorism.
But the political consensus broke down over the plan to extend the period terror suspects can be held without change from the current 14-day maximum to three months. Authorities argued more time was needed in complex cases where suspects have multiple aliases or where the help of foreign intelligence agencies is needed. But critics countered that extending it to 90 days would erode civil rights.
Blair took a considerable political gamble in refusing to back down and had called in every supporter to shore up numbers. Treasury chief Gordon Brown was called back from an official visit to Israel only two hours after arriving there. Foreign Secretary Jack Straw cut short an official EU visit to Russia, while Labour Party chairman Ian McCartney, who is recuperating from heart surgery, volunteered to return for the vote.
The defeat comes at a difficult time for the prime minister. His party, and even his Cabinet, is split over his plans to encourage greater private sector investment in public services such as health care and education. Earlier this month, Blair's strongest ally, Work and Pensions Secretary David Blunkett, was forced to resign due to a scandal over his business dealings.
The prime minister has said he will not seek a fourth term in office. He could serve until 2010, but pressure for him to quit sooner may intensify following Wednesday's vote.
Bookmakers Ladbrokes cut the odds on Blair stepping down next year from 11 to 4, to 5 to 2 in the wake of the defeat.
"The prime minister has just fallen off the high wire," said Scottish Nationalist Party leader Alex Salmond. "He is a victim of his own arrogance. He may well be on the way out of office."
The Associated Press
Wednesday 09 November 2005
London - In a political blow to Prime Minister Tony Blair, British lawmakers on Wednesday rejected tough anti-terrorism legislation that would have allowed suspects to be detained for 90 days without charge.
The House of Commons vote was the first major defeat of Blair's premiership and raises serious questions about his grip on power. Blair had staked his authority on the measure and doggedly refused to compromise.
Lawmakers, including 49 members of Blair's Labour Party, opted instead for a maximum detention period for terror suspects of 28 days without charge.
Michael Howard, leader of the opposition Conservative Party, said Blair's authority had "diminished almost to vanishing point" and said he should consider resigning.
"This vote shows he is no longer able to carry his own party with him. He must now consider his position," said Howard.
But Blair was defiant. He ruled out resignation and insisted lawmakers had been wrong to put the civil liberties of a small number of terrorists ahead of the "fundamental civil liberty of this country to protection from terrorism."
"The country will think that Parliament has behaved in a deeply irresponsible way today," he added.
Lawmakers voted 322 to 291 against 90-day detentions and backed the 28-day period by 323-290 votes.
The result is a humiliating blow to Blair. For eight years, his Labour government commanded an unassailable lead in the Commons and easily swatted aside opposition to its legislation.
But Blair's popularity has slumped in the wake of the divisive Iraq war, and his party was punished in national elections earlier this year. Labour's huge 161-seat advantage in the Commons shrunk to just 66, making the government vulnerable.
In the immediate aftermath of the July attacks on London's transit system, Blair had considerable cross-party support for new anti-terror legislation.
He drafted the Terrorism Bill, which aims to tackle Muslim extremism by outlawing training in terrorist camps as well encouraging acts of violence and glorifying terrorism.
But the political consensus broke down over the plan to extend the period terror suspects can be held without change from the current 14-day maximum to three months. Authorities argued more time was needed in complex cases where suspects have multiple aliases or where the help of foreign intelligence agencies is needed. But critics countered that extending it to 90 days would erode civil rights.
Blair took a considerable political gamble in refusing to back down and had called in every supporter to shore up numbers. Treasury chief Gordon Brown was called back from an official visit to Israel only two hours after arriving there. Foreign Secretary Jack Straw cut short an official EU visit to Russia, while Labour Party chairman Ian McCartney, who is recuperating from heart surgery, volunteered to return for the vote.
The defeat comes at a difficult time for the prime minister. His party, and even his Cabinet, is split over his plans to encourage greater private sector investment in public services such as health care and education. Earlier this month, Blair's strongest ally, Work and Pensions Secretary David Blunkett, was forced to resign due to a scandal over his business dealings.
The prime minister has said he will not seek a fourth term in office. He could serve until 2010, but pressure for him to quit sooner may intensify following Wednesday's vote.
Bookmakers Ladbrokes cut the odds on Blair stepping down next year from 11 to 4, to 5 to 2 in the wake of the defeat.
"The prime minister has just fallen off the high wire," said Scottish Nationalist Party leader Alex Salmond. "He is a victim of his own arrogance. He may well be on the way out of office."
Sunday, November 06, 2005
“Regrettable Unfortunate Phenomenon”
Because of the extremely polarized political climate within the United States intensified by the Wars in Iraq & on Terror, liberals and conservatives have both been accusing each other of literally being Nazis. I am not Jewish but I do write out of respect to this community. I write this as an opinion, not fact and welcome discussion on my remarks.
Adolf Hitler referred to the “ethnic cleansing” resulting in the death of Jews and other “classes” of people as Regrettable Unfortunate Phenomenon. Some said the Holocaust was in the name of God. I viewed an interview from a survivor, they said a thought they focused on was to “wait a while.” “wait a while”.
As an American citizens no matter your political or religious affiliations you must be aware of the direction our nation is being led. The alarms being raised no longer equate to partisan politics. The International community, President Jimmy Carter, and President Bill Clinton are attempting to raise public awareness. When you hear these former guardians of our democracy speak, what they are saying is practical.
The comparison of specific activities of the G.W. Bush Administration to that of Adolf Hitler possesses merit.
The United States operates under a system of Checks & Balances, however under G.W. Bush’s watch this system has been corrupted threatening our very institution of Democracy. Systematic and Legal changes that are gradually chipping away at freedoms and increasing the tangible powers of the Executive Branch, Law Enforcement and the Military.
These measures were achieved by taking advantage of national disasters such as 9/11 (resulting in the Patriot Acts & Iraq War) Hurricane Katrina (policy of using the Military for Domestic/ Civilian responsibility instead of fixing FEMA), Bird Flu ( a plan to use the Military to quarantine cities instead of utilizing our Health Care Infrastructure). These plans came directly from the G.W. Bush Administration
Adolf Hitler took control of Germany in part by altering laws, usurping existing Ministries/Departments, and through ambiguous laws exactly like the Patriot Acts.
Specifically there are 3 Items that must be done dealt with:
I: Provisions of the Patriotic Act, which permit for sneak and peak searches. Our Constitution guards against unlawful searches and seizures. There should be no exceptions. Provisions which allow for law enforcement to have surveillance on citizens or seek information on a citizens without first going through judge. These provisions overrides the People’s power of Oversight.
II. Detaining Prisoners, the U.S. now under G.W. Bush’s watch has a policies that are in the “spirit of the Geneva Convention” towards detainees. In my opinion this is crime. I strongly believe we should follow the Geneva Convention and other humanitarian standards with no exceptions.
II. Voting: the situation with voting machines must be corrected immediately. There should not be any voting district that cannot be accurately audited. Furthermore citizens being given a receipt after they vote is entirely reasonable.
“Divide & Rule” was Hitler’s policy. It is to the advantage of politicians for our nation to be divided. But let me tell you, there is no reason why America cannot pursue policy that benefits all of its citizens and that adheres completely to its Constitution, with no exceptions and no ambiguous interpretations.
Also, with all do respect to President George W. Bush and advocates for the present Wars, what do you call the civilians and children dying in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unfortunate Phenomenon? How much longer must these people live in such conditions? And how much longer will the American people continue to permit & tolerate bad leaders to take our country in the wrong direction?
President Jimmy Carter Speaks on Secret Prisons:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9903864/
Adolf Hitler referred to the “ethnic cleansing” resulting in the death of Jews and other “classes” of people as Regrettable Unfortunate Phenomenon. Some said the Holocaust was in the name of God. I viewed an interview from a survivor, they said a thought they focused on was to “wait a while.” “wait a while”.
As an American citizens no matter your political or religious affiliations you must be aware of the direction our nation is being led. The alarms being raised no longer equate to partisan politics. The International community, President Jimmy Carter, and President Bill Clinton are attempting to raise public awareness. When you hear these former guardians of our democracy speak, what they are saying is practical.
The comparison of specific activities of the G.W. Bush Administration to that of Adolf Hitler possesses merit.
The United States operates under a system of Checks & Balances, however under G.W. Bush’s watch this system has been corrupted threatening our very institution of Democracy. Systematic and Legal changes that are gradually chipping away at freedoms and increasing the tangible powers of the Executive Branch, Law Enforcement and the Military.
These measures were achieved by taking advantage of national disasters such as 9/11 (resulting in the Patriot Acts & Iraq War) Hurricane Katrina (policy of using the Military for Domestic/ Civilian responsibility instead of fixing FEMA), Bird Flu ( a plan to use the Military to quarantine cities instead of utilizing our Health Care Infrastructure). These plans came directly from the G.W. Bush Administration
Adolf Hitler took control of Germany in part by altering laws, usurping existing Ministries/Departments, and through ambiguous laws exactly like the Patriot Acts.
Specifically there are 3 Items that must be done dealt with:
I: Provisions of the Patriotic Act, which permit for sneak and peak searches. Our Constitution guards against unlawful searches and seizures. There should be no exceptions. Provisions which allow for law enforcement to have surveillance on citizens or seek information on a citizens without first going through judge. These provisions overrides the People’s power of Oversight.
II. Detaining Prisoners, the U.S. now under G.W. Bush’s watch has a policies that are in the “spirit of the Geneva Convention” towards detainees. In my opinion this is crime. I strongly believe we should follow the Geneva Convention and other humanitarian standards with no exceptions.
II. Voting: the situation with voting machines must be corrected immediately. There should not be any voting district that cannot be accurately audited. Furthermore citizens being given a receipt after they vote is entirely reasonable.
“Divide & Rule” was Hitler’s policy. It is to the advantage of politicians for our nation to be divided. But let me tell you, there is no reason why America cannot pursue policy that benefits all of its citizens and that adheres completely to its Constitution, with no exceptions and no ambiguous interpretations.
Also, with all do respect to President George W. Bush and advocates for the present Wars, what do you call the civilians and children dying in Iraq and Afghanistan. Unfortunate Phenomenon? How much longer must these people live in such conditions? And how much longer will the American people continue to permit & tolerate bad leaders to take our country in the wrong direction?
President Jimmy Carter Speaks on Secret Prisons:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9903864/
Tuesday, November 01, 2005
Senate Debates Iraq War
Democrats force Senate into unusual closed session"
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Democrats forced the Republican-controlled Senate into an unusual closed session Tuesday, questioning intelligence that led to the Iraq war and deriding a lack of congressional inquiry."I demand on behalf of the America people that we understand why these investigations aren't being conducted," Democratic leader Harry Reid said.Taken by surprise, Republicans derided the move as a political stunt."The United States Senate has been hijacked by the Democratic leadership," said Majority Leader Bill Frist. "They have no convictions, they have no principles, they have no ideas," the Republican leader said.Reid demanded the Senate go into closed session. The public was ordered out of the chamber, the lights were dimmed, and the doors were closed. No vote is required in such circumstances.Pre-war intelligence at issueReid's move shone a spotlight on the continuing controversy over intelligence that President Bush cited in the run-up to the war in Iraq. Despite prewar claims, no weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq, and some Democrats have accused the administration of manipulating the information that was in their possession.Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, was indicted last Friday in an investigation that touched on the war, the leak of the identity of a CIA official married to a critic of the administration's Iraq policy. (Full story)"The Libby indictment provides a window into what this is really all about, how this administration manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq and attempted to destroy those who dared to challenge its actions," Reid said before invoking Senate rules that led to the closed session.Libby resigned from his White House post after being indicted on charges of obstruction of justice, making false statements and perjury.Democrats contend that the unmasking of Valerie Plame was retribution for her husband, Joseph Wilson, publicly challenging the Bush administration's contention that Iraq was seeking to purchase uranium from Africa. That claim was part of the White House's justification for going to war.A rare moveSen. Trent Lott, R-Mississippi, said Reid was making "some sort of stink about Scooter Libby and the CIA leak."A former majority leader, Lott said a closed session was appropriate for such overarching matters as impeachment and chemical weapons -- the two topics that last sent the senators into such sessions.In addition, Lott said, Reid's move violated the Senate's tradition of courtesy and consent. But there was nothing in Senate rules enabling Republicans to thwart Reid's effort.As Reid spoke, Frist met in the back of the chamber with a half-dozen senior GOP senators, including Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, who bore the brunt of Reid's criticism. Reid said Roberts reneged on a promise to fully investigate whether the administration exaggerated and manipulated intelligence leading up to the war."
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Democrats forced the Republican-controlled Senate into an unusual closed session Tuesday, questioning intelligence that led to the Iraq war and deriding a lack of congressional inquiry."I demand on behalf of the America people that we understand why these investigations aren't being conducted," Democratic leader Harry Reid said.Taken by surprise, Republicans derided the move as a political stunt."The United States Senate has been hijacked by the Democratic leadership," said Majority Leader Bill Frist. "They have no convictions, they have no principles, they have no ideas," the Republican leader said.Reid demanded the Senate go into closed session. The public was ordered out of the chamber, the lights were dimmed, and the doors were closed. No vote is required in such circumstances.Pre-war intelligence at issueReid's move shone a spotlight on the continuing controversy over intelligence that President Bush cited in the run-up to the war in Iraq. Despite prewar claims, no weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq, and some Democrats have accused the administration of manipulating the information that was in their possession.Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, was indicted last Friday in an investigation that touched on the war, the leak of the identity of a CIA official married to a critic of the administration's Iraq policy. (Full story)"The Libby indictment provides a window into what this is really all about, how this administration manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq and attempted to destroy those who dared to challenge its actions," Reid said before invoking Senate rules that led to the closed session.Libby resigned from his White House post after being indicted on charges of obstruction of justice, making false statements and perjury.Democrats contend that the unmasking of Valerie Plame was retribution for her husband, Joseph Wilson, publicly challenging the Bush administration's contention that Iraq was seeking to purchase uranium from Africa. That claim was part of the White House's justification for going to war.A rare moveSen. Trent Lott, R-Mississippi, said Reid was making "some sort of stink about Scooter Libby and the CIA leak."A former majority leader, Lott said a closed session was appropriate for such overarching matters as impeachment and chemical weapons -- the two topics that last sent the senators into such sessions.In addition, Lott said, Reid's move violated the Senate's tradition of courtesy and consent. But there was nothing in Senate rules enabling Republicans to thwart Reid's effort.As Reid spoke, Frist met in the back of the chamber with a half-dozen senior GOP senators, including Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, who bore the brunt of Reid's criticism. Reid said Roberts reneged on a promise to fully investigate whether the administration exaggerated and manipulated intelligence leading up to the war."
Monday, October 31, 2005
Mission Accomplished
President Bush has recently said “'best way to honor' the Iraq war dead is to complete mission.”
We went into Iraq to find WMD’s and to protect the United State’s Homeland and there were none. We have Saddam in custody. Mission Accomplished?
I see no more reason for United States troops to be in Iraq.
What is the Mission?
How can an unjustified War have a mission? Following this premise, how can the death of these soldiers be honored?
How do we define a completed Mission in Iraq?
CNN Reports:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/29/bus...o.ap/index.html
We went into Iraq to find WMD’s and to protect the United State’s Homeland and there were none. We have Saddam in custody. Mission Accomplished?
I see no more reason for United States troops to be in Iraq.
What is the Mission?
How can an unjustified War have a mission? Following this premise, how can the death of these soldiers be honored?
How do we define a completed Mission in Iraq?
CNN Reports:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/29/bus...o.ap/index.html
United Methodist Church Calls For Withdrawal
It's one thing when former high-ranking members of your own Administration come out against your war. It's another thing when two-thirds of the country calls the invasion and occupation a mistake. It's really something when your own church issues a statement urging you to pull out the troops now.
Last week, the United Methodist Church Board of Church and Society--the social action committee of the church that both President Bush and Vice President Cheney belong to--resoundingly passed a resolution calling for withdrawal with only two 'no' votes and one abstention.
"As people of faith, we raise our voice in protest against the tragedy of the unjust war in Iraq," the statement read. "Thousands of lives have been lost and hundreds of billions of dollars wasted in a war the United States initiated and should never have fought.... We grieve for all those whose lives have been lost or destroyed in this needless and avoidable tragedy. Military families have suffered undue hardship from prolonged troop rotations in Iraq and loss of loved ones. It is time to bring them home."
The board also issued a strong statement against torture, urging Congress to create an independent, bipartisan commission to investigate detention and interrogation practices at Guantanamo, Iraq and Afghanistan.
"It is my hope and prayer that our statement against the war in Iraq will be heard loud and clear by our fellow United Methodists, President Bush and Vice President Cheney," said Jim Winkler, General Secretary of the UMC's Board of Church and Society. "Conservative and liberal board members worked together to craft a strong statement calling for the troops to come home and for those responsible for leading us into this disastrous war to be held accountable."
With its bold stands against the Administration, the UMC is fulfilling the words of Martin Luther King Jr., who called for the church to be "not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion" but "a thermostat that transformed the mores of society."
Bush has asserted that he entered Iraq on a direct order from God. Now, he has a direct order from his own church to leave. Is he listening?
We also want to hear from you. Please let us know if you have a sweet victory you think we should cover by e-mailing nationvictories@gmail.com.
Co-written by Sam Graham-Felsen, a freelance journalist, documentary filmmaker and blogger (www.boldprint.net) living in Brooklyn.
Last week, the United Methodist Church Board of Church and Society--the social action committee of the church that both President Bush and Vice President Cheney belong to--resoundingly passed a resolution calling for withdrawal with only two 'no' votes and one abstention.
"As people of faith, we raise our voice in protest against the tragedy of the unjust war in Iraq," the statement read. "Thousands of lives have been lost and hundreds of billions of dollars wasted in a war the United States initiated and should never have fought.... We grieve for all those whose lives have been lost or destroyed in this needless and avoidable tragedy. Military families have suffered undue hardship from prolonged troop rotations in Iraq and loss of loved ones. It is time to bring them home."
The board also issued a strong statement against torture, urging Congress to create an independent, bipartisan commission to investigate detention and interrogation practices at Guantanamo, Iraq and Afghanistan.
"It is my hope and prayer that our statement against the war in Iraq will be heard loud and clear by our fellow United Methodists, President Bush and Vice President Cheney," said Jim Winkler, General Secretary of the UMC's Board of Church and Society. "Conservative and liberal board members worked together to craft a strong statement calling for the troops to come home and for those responsible for leading us into this disastrous war to be held accountable."
With its bold stands against the Administration, the UMC is fulfilling the words of Martin Luther King Jr., who called for the church to be "not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion" but "a thermostat that transformed the mores of society."
Bush has asserted that he entered Iraq on a direct order from God. Now, he has a direct order from his own church to leave. Is he listening?
We also want to hear from you. Please let us know if you have a sweet victory you think we should cover by e-mailing nationvictories@gmail.com.
Co-written by Sam Graham-Felsen, a freelance journalist, documentary filmmaker and blogger (www.boldprint.net) living in Brooklyn.
Wednesday, October 26, 2005
Discussion of Alternative Energy is Rising
People across economic spectrums are discussing a shift from an Oil based economy to one of more energy diversification. The Alternative Energy Methods that could become realties within the next decade include Hybrid Cars and Solar/Bio Homes. Such energy efficient technologies are already in limited use and are becoming ever more affordable. In the long run these Technologies will save you money.
Recent Polls show a drop in consumer support of Oil Companies to approximately 20%. This drop in support will result in changes in behavior of energy use and spending by consumers.
U.S. Dept. of Energy:
http://www.eere.energy.gov/
Energy Efficient Homes:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/10/26/solar.cooking.reut/index.html
http://www.icfconsulting.com/Markets/Community_Development/cd-expertise-3.asp
http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=new_homes.hm_faq&layout=print
Fuel Efficient Cars:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/AUTOS/10/12/most_efficient_cars/
My Opinion: In my opinion the ultimate goal for where at least the United States should move in regards in regards to Energy must focus on energy efficiency in addition to saving money for the America Government, the Private Sector, and the Consumer. But most important the implementation of such changes and uses of available technologies should be aimed at creating energy independence for families. More specifically every family should live in a home partially powered by some form of alternative energy (Solar) and own a more gas efficient (“hybrid”) automobile. In light of current government policy neglected to take care of its citizens as seen in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and Oil Companies attempting to rip off the average citizens through artificially inflated gasoline prices it would only be practical for America to move towards these more efficient and individually independent energy sources. It would be a great benefit if those in the Industries of Building Solar Panels and Energy Efficient Homes would make their products more affordable to the consumer. If this occurs these technologies could become the standard.
Recent Polls show a drop in consumer support of Oil Companies to approximately 20%. This drop in support will result in changes in behavior of energy use and spending by consumers.
U.S. Dept. of Energy:
http://www.eere.energy.gov/
Energy Efficient Homes:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/10/26/solar.cooking.reut/index.html
http://www.icfconsulting.com/Markets/Community_Development/cd-expertise-3.asp
http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=new_homes.hm_faq&layout=print
Fuel Efficient Cars:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/AUTOS/10/12/most_efficient_cars/
My Opinion: In my opinion the ultimate goal for where at least the United States should move in regards in regards to Energy must focus on energy efficiency in addition to saving money for the America Government, the Private Sector, and the Consumer. But most important the implementation of such changes and uses of available technologies should be aimed at creating energy independence for families. More specifically every family should live in a home partially powered by some form of alternative energy (Solar) and own a more gas efficient (“hybrid”) automobile. In light of current government policy neglected to take care of its citizens as seen in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and Oil Companies attempting to rip off the average citizens through artificially inflated gasoline prices it would only be practical for America to move towards these more efficient and individually independent energy sources. It would be a great benefit if those in the Industries of Building Solar Panels and Energy Efficient Homes would make their products more affordable to the consumer. If this occurs these technologies could become the standard.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)