Why Colorado should legalize assisted suicide

Why Colorado should legalize assisted suicide

Published in The Catalyst 

Slowly but surely, countries around the world are coming to their senses. From Belgium to France, a half-dozen countries have legalized the controversial practice of physician-assisted suicide. Unfortunately, the United States is not one of these countries. Unless you live in Montana, Oregon, or Washington, it is a criminal offense to assist a patient in his or her death.

Understanding what assisted suicide really is typically changes the way one feels about its legality. Even the term “assisted suicide” has been called into question by many of its leading advocates. In the state of Washington, the movement to legalize assisted suicide labeled it “Death with Dignity.”

Nancy Niedzielski is one of America’s leading advocates for Death With Dignity. She watched her husband Jim scream in unrelenting agony as a growing brain tumor pushed his eyes out of their sockets from within. Jim aged what looked like 40 years over the course of just one year with brain cancer. He died a painful death despite many requests for assisted suicide. Nancy was a leading figure in the 2008 HBO Documentary “How to Die in Oregon.” Before becoming the most powerful leader of Washington’s movement, Nancy promised her husband she would do whatever it took to make a dignified death an option for Washingtonians. She campaigned for what she believes is not suicide. Suicide, she argues, is for people who escape life because they feel they cannot win a battle with depression. Death with Dignity, on the other hand, is an escape from existence, not life. People who are given the right to Assisted Suicide in Washington, Oregon and Montana are not living real lives with any hope – they simply exist despite relentless, eventually deadly suffering.

Whatever one calls it, assisted suicide is not given out to any old person who can’t stand their quality of life. Patients in Oregon, for instance, must be given a life span of six months or less. The person must be a resident of the state where it is legal and must be determined by the prescribing doctor to be in an immense amount of physical pain.

To gain a better understanding of the importance of assisted suicide’s legality, the films “How to Die in Oregon” and “You Don’t Know Jack” do the job perfectly. The stories told by these films convey the same urgency as does Nancy’s. Similar stories are told in books, journals, editorials and testimonials. The more time that passes in which assisted suicide remains illegal, the more people will die unfairly excruciating deaths. The loved ones who watch these deaths unfold will continue to remember there loved one’s final moments as scary and often traumatic.

Derek Humphry wrote the Euthanasia Research and Guidance Organization's (ERGO) manifesto concerning an individual’s right to die. The manifesto states that “the degree to which physical pain and psychological distress can be tolerated is different in all humans. Quality of life judgments are private and personal, thus only the sufferer can make relevant decisions.” If the ERGO manifesto had been made into law, Nancy’s husband would have died in peace and Nancy would not have had to undergo the experience of watching him suffer.

Here in Colorado, we have a statute in place that explicitly criminalizes assisted suicide. Thirty-three other states, from Florida to Alaska, have statutes that do the same. Nine more states, from Vermont to Idaho, criminalize assisted suicide through common law. The other eight states, from North Carolina to Utah, have not criminalized nor legalized assisted suicide.

The fact of the matter is that even if you are against assisted suicide on a religious or moral ground, it should not be up to you what people do with their lives and deaths. People should be able to control their own lives—it’s that simple. Just like abortion is legal and regarded as a matter of choice, assisted suicide should be legal and regarded as a matter of choice.

Some terminally ill patients are allowed to end their lives by refusing medical treatments; in all fairness, the terminally ill who don’t have that option should be allowed to choose death.

The Time for Gun Control has come

Published in The Catalyst 

The Time for Gun Control has come

If you’ve been paying attention to national news lately, you’ve probably noticed that every day it seems another terrible incident is reported because somebody used a gun to kill innocent people. While the national homicide rate is undoubtedly rising, this sort of stuff isn’t new to the United States. In fact, the U.S. has a homicide rate, especially related to gun violence, that is wildly incomparable to any other nation in the developed world.

Just in the past couple days and weeks, the news has been inundated with horrific tragedy after horrific tragedy. On Monday, three people were shot and killed at an in-home day care in a suburb northwest of Minneapolis. On Sunday morning, four New York City police officers were shot outside of a Brooklyn apartment building. One of them was shot in the face. On Saturday, five people were shot in the north side of Tulsa, Oklahoma. Three of them died. Last Tuesday, seven people were gunned to death at a Christian University in Oakland. Three more were badly injured by the bullets. And of course, just over three weeks ago, Treyvon Martin was shot by George Zimmerman in Sanford, Florida, in what has become the most covered news story of 2012.

As people continue to protest nationwide for justice in the Tryevon Martin case, we can look back at these tragedies and unfortunately, keep expecting them to come.

Isolating each case and blaming each gunman for the killings won’t solve the epidemic of gun violence that is destroying this country. We must understand that angry and crazy people will always exist, as they do in every country. The problem here in America is that we allow these people to get guns more easily than they can in any other developed nation.

Surely, there is no need to oversimplify the problem. Gun control may be the bulk of the issue but ignoring violence in media, poverty and gangs won’t get us anywhere. Still, these problems exist in other countries that have a tiny fraction of the gun-related death rate we have here in the United States.

The time for gun control is now.

As Patrica Weller wrote in The New York Times on Sunday, these violent rampages force us, once again "to consider whether to have a productive dialogue about gun control in this country to squander the opportunity, as has happened before."

This productive dialogue, if it is ever had, must put in place gun control laws, particularly in the inner-cities, that dramatically reduce American’s ability to acquire gun licenses and firearms. 

President Obama, whose party, no different than the Republicans, has done little to nothing to reduce so-called “gun ownership rights” since 2008. Still, an irrational fear that the democrats are chipping away at the right to bear arms has motivated a steep rise in the purchasing of guns- a sign that our gun violence problem is set to worsen.

We need to stop people from buying guns and limit certain people from the right to own guns. Bill Cosby, who made news last week when he made the argument that neighborhood watch volunteers should not be armed, is right. Sure, police officers should carry a gun to protect and serve their community. Police officers who misuse their authority should be brought to justice, as is often not the case. But everyone else should be barred from owning a gun. We need to do away with the second amendment as it stands.

Everyday Americans, crazy or not, should not be given the innate right to own a deadly weapon. The fact of the matter is that those who own guns are not safer than those who do not. Statistics prove time and time again that those who own guns are actually in greater danger than those who do not. They are far more likely to accidentally kill themselves or someone else than they are to injure a intruder.

Moreover, those who own guns are far more likely to successfully act on suicidal intentions than those who don’t have an “easy way out”. The argument against gun ownership can be made from dozens of angles. The fact is, our weak gun ownership laws are responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans every year. It’s about time we got serious about gun control.

Yahoo News, The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal served as sources for this article. 

A Tragedy in Miami: Sympathy deserved on both sides of the Ozzie Guillen Scandal

Published in The Catalyst 

A Tragedy in Miami: Sympathy deserved on both sides of the Ozzie Guillen Scandal

Watch the Article Narrated by Sam:

“This is the worst mistake I’ve made in my whole life,” said an emotional Ozzie Guillen Tuesday morning in Miami.
Just a week into the baseball season, the top story should be the unstoppable Mets, the red-hot Diamondbacks or the unique new ballpark in Miami. Instead, the media frenzy surrounding the Marlins manager’s comments about ex-dictator Fidel Castro have dominated Sports Center and the blogosphere. 

In the now infamous interview with TIME magazine just a day before the Miami Marlins announced Guillen’s five-game suspension, Ozzie uttered four words that will forever be remembered. “I love Fidel Castro.”

No four words could serve as a more painful insult to Cuban Americans. Nobody could have been in a worse position to say it.

The Marlin’s brand new stadium is smack in the middle of Little Havana and Guillen, who is from Venezuela, was originally brought in to help appeal to Cuban Americans, who have always represented a staple of the fan base.

Looking to avoid a potentially dangerous and unavoidably furious encounter with fans, the Marlins suspended Ozzie for five games to help him achieve reconciliation and forgiveness with the Cuban community.

“I know I caused a lot of people pain. I know I hurt a lot of people” Ozzie said on Tuesday. “I had imagined that the moment with this many reporters in one room looking at me would be with a World Series trophy beside me. But it’s this instead.”

Wisely, Guillen provided no reminder of the dictator’s name in his apology. Cuban Americans need no lesson on Fidel Castro. If they did not escape his communist regime, it’s likely there parents or grandparents did.

With a per capita income of $9,900 in 2011, Cuba remains one of the poorest nations in the Western Hemisphere. Under Fidel Castro food shortages, horrific health care and a brainwashing, anti-American education system are only the half of it. Castro’s Cuba has isolated itself on the world stage as one of the most brutally repressive and authoritarian governments on the globe. Historically strict censorship and a complete lack of press freedom put Cuba on par with North Korea and Iran. While political prisoners are supposedly sentenced 14-17 years for any anti-Castro remarks or affiliations, many prisoners are held far longer.

Cuban Americans live very different lives. They are the most privileged immigrant group in the United States, with a greater abundance of wealth per capita than average Americans. Cuban Americans are 25% more likely to have a college degree than Caucasian Americans. According to the U.S Census, Cubans comprise less than 4% of the U.S. Hispanic population, whereas Mexicans, for instance comprise 65%. Yet of the top 100 richest Hispanics in the U.S., more than 50% are of Cuban descent- a figure ten times what it would be if all wealth were even.

Cuban Americans also widely known as the most patriotic and conservative immigrant group in the United States. And there is no mistaking their political views. An overwhelming majority of Cuban Americans openly express their disdain of Fidel Castro. In Cuba, Cubans are mandated to attend all staged pro-Castro rallies. If they do not attend, they face prison time. Doctors in Cuba are paid just $15 a month are mandated to keep political records of their patients. There is no right to doctor-patient privacy, patient's informed consent, or right to protest for malpractice. The patient has no right to refuse treatment, even based on a religious or ethical ground.

The humanitarian Crisis that continues to exist in Cuba under Fidel Castro’s brother Raul is a topic constantly on the news in Miami, reminding Cuban Americans there why they came to America. Guillen’s comments served as a crude slap in the face to these people.

To give one an idea of how serious the situation is, NBC News has reported that several investigations are underway concerning death threats Ozzie Guillen has received in the past couple days.

What’s done is done. Ozzie Guillen, well known for homophobic and racially insensitive comments, has made the mistake of opening his mouth on yet another political issue. Yet this mistake is far bigger and far uglier than any mistake he’s made in the past. It will likely stick around and be debated and discussed for years to come.

Guillen’s apology Tuesday morning was indisputably sincere. No matter where you stand, the overwhelming guilt, if not fear that he is enduring, is unimaginable. I cannot help but feel sympathy for him. While the Cuban American community is united in their disappointment and anger at Ozzie, he is alone in his sorrow. I cannot help but feel sympathy for both sides.

All that said, it is hard to imagine the calls for Ozzie Guillen’s firing won’t grow. Miami’s Cuban Americans are likely to use this opportunity, as they have used many others in the past, to make a strong political statement. They do not wish to forgive someone who claimed they “love” Fidel Castro. Their hatred of Castro will continue to fuel the fire. It is hard to imagine they won’t get what they want. I say, Ozzie will be fired by the end of the season.    

Linsanity Breaking Borders and Building New Fan Base

Linsanity Breaking Borders and Building New Fan Base
From February, 2012

            By this point, it’s hard to imagine you’ve missed it. After breaking several point-scoring records in his first seven plus games with the New York Knicks, Jeremy Lin, the first Chinese-American and first Taiwanese-American NBA player, has risen to an unprecedented and undeniably legendary level of fame. He’s not only been on back-to-back Sports Illustrated covers, but been featured on the cover of two consecutive issues of TIME magazine and two consecutive front-pages of The New York Times. He has become the #1 trending topic on Twitter for the month of February, the most talked about person on ESPN, and despite the fact that half of New York can’t watch Knicks games due to a dispute with Time Warner Cable, the games with Lin starting have nearly doubled their highest ratings since they started covering the Knicks in 1989 (Keep in mind that the Knicks have had many legendary teams and dominant seasons between 1989 and 2012). Moreover, Lin’s jersey has become the #1 best selling jersey in the NBA. His road jersey has become the #2 best selling jersey in the NBA. The list of indicators proving the immensity of his fame could fill a book.

            What’s clear now that he Lin the real deal. The sustainability of his sensational statistics as the Knicks point guard are, however worth questioning. In his most recent game he got his first bad performance out of the way, proving he’s no superman by going just 1 for 11 in the Knicks loss to Miami. Still, Lin’s legendary point-scoring statistics have permanently marked him in the record books and in an international ESPN poll of over 50,000 sports fans in every country and every state, respondents were nearly five times more likely to claim Jeremy Lin's recent emergence as more impressive than Tim Tebows’. 83% chose Lin over Tebow, with all 50 states in agreement (even Colorado picking Lin over Tebow).

            The biggest story within this story has been Jeremy Lin’s fame in Chinese and Taiwanese communities worldwide. While Lin was born in Los Angeles and is the first Harvard graduate to play in the NBA in over half a century, both his parents were born in Taiwan. With jumbo-TVs and mega-screens set up in major population centers throughout Taiwan and China, millions of people, many disappointed by Yao Ming’s short tenure in the NBA and many more never before invested in American basketball, were all of a sudden plugged in. Newspapers throughout China and Taiwan have featured Jeremy Lin on the cover day after day after day. In America’s Chinatowns, New York City’s in particular of course, restaurants have been transformed into bars and huge groups of Chinese and Taiwanese-Americans have come together to root for Lin. At Knicks games, a suddenly huge Asian-American fan base is evident. Adults and kids of all races have made and brought creative signs to games and ESPN has had specials breaking down the best nicknames and slogans.

            Unfortunately, with every social breakthrough in the world, a dark side of stereotyping and racism is exposed. Jason Whitlock, a Fox Sports columnist was guilty of the worst of it. While he wrote a lengthy apology after the backlash, his tweet was beyond insensitive. After Lin scored 38-points, out dueling Kobe Bryant in-front of a sell out crowd at Madison Square Garden, Whitlock tweeted  “Some lucky lady in NYC is gonna feel a couple inches of pain tonight.” Other offensive remarks came from names as big as boxer Floyd Mayweather, Jr., who wrote on his Twitter page that, "Jeremy Lin is a good player but all the hype is because he's Asian. Black players do what he does every night and don't get the same praise." Of course, nobody of any skin color in the history of basketball has done in their first three, four, five, six or seven starts what Lin pulled off for the Knicks. On February 17, ESPN used a racial slur on its mobile website in the headline "Chink in the Armor" after Lin had nine turnovers in New York’s loss to the Hornets. The headline writer was fired but the damage was done. While the vast majority of the media and the public have dealt with Lin’s rise to stardom responsibly and respectfully, many have taken the low road. After Lin’s buzzer-beating victory in Toronto, the god-awful New York Post, for instance, printed on the cover of their back-page sports section the word “AMASIAN”. While this might not be considered racist, it sure is distasteful.

            The racism brought to light by Lin’s success pinpoints a historical issue in the NBA. For years, only whites were allowed to play. When blacks were finally allowed to play professional American sports like baseball and basketball, they faced racism incomparable to what Lin has faced- from death threats to boycotts to claims from fellow players that they would not play if blacks were allowed to play. Still, Lin’s emergence into a sport now dominated by African-Americans proves that racial bigotry and intolerance knows no limits. No matter the time period, when a member of a racial group enters an unfamiliar spotlight, the scumbags of society are going to be heard whether we like it or not.

            If there is any upside to the stereotyping and prejudice-pushing, it’s that it will only embolden and impassion the Asian and Asian-American communities rallying behind Lin. Much like bigotry aimed at Jackie Robinson gave African Americans in Brooklyn and nationwide greater reason to root for him, fans of Jeremy Lin will feel that there is something to prove by having a Taiwanese-American in the NBA.

As a Chinatown native wrote on a sign he brought to a Knicks game in New York last week, Lin is proving “Asians can drive” with his brilliant moves to the basket. Even if Asian-American communities are not empowered by the racism Lin’s stardom exposes, they can at least fight bad humor with good humor and work to bust stereotypes with clever signs like that.

            While the racially insensitivity in the media and blogosphere will continue to rear its ugly head as Lin play’s on, the hysteria inside and outside Asian and Asian-American communities will ride on one thing only: how well Lin plays from here on out. In Miami, he was double-teamed, prevented from driving to the basket and forced to turn the ball over again and again. Other teams will take the Heat’s approach. The question will be whether or not Lin is ready. Can he handle the pressure? Will his legend grow? He’s good. He’s damn good for that matter. But the most important question soon to be answered as opponents start to figure out his game is how good is he really?

            Yahoo Sports and The New York Times served as sources for this article’s information. 

Looking back at the “Ground Zero Mosque” Debate

Looking back at the “Ground Zero Mosque” Debate

As a resident of Manhattan who watched smoke rise from Ground Zero on September 11^th, 2001, I remember the atmosphere in New York after the attacks pretty well. Sure, millions came together, but many took out their fear and anger on Muslims. Hate crimes against Arab New Yorkers soared in the wake of 9/11. Americans who wore turbans, spoke Arabic or looked Middle Eastern all-of-a-sudden feared for their safety.

I remember cringing at the sound of an airplane, imagining my school as a target and struggling to sleep at night, worried about more nightmares of collapsing buildings. But my fears never materialized. Terrorism never claimed the life of anyone I knew. For Muslim-Americans in New York and around the nation after the September 11^th attacks, fears did materialize. According to The Council on American Islamic Relations, there have been over 3,000 cases of Islamaphobic hate crime in the United States since 9/11/01. And these attacks have not just been in southern red states. The largest percentage of any state (20%) occurred in California. 10% in New York. 7% in Florida. 5% each in Maryland, New Jersey and Ohio.  As for college campuses, some of the most visceral attacks and hate crimes have taken place at academic institutions ranging from Yale University, where Muslims students and teachers received violent and personalized death threats to San Jose State University where graffiti in bathrooms claimed all Muslims on campus would be shot dead.

When the so-called “Ground Zero mosque" (ironic because it is not just a mosque nor very close to Ground Zero) debate came about in early 2011, another outlet was established for Americans to voice their Islamaphobia. My own grandfather had the nerve to call the construction of the Islamic center 3 blocks from Ground Zero “insensitive”. And his words were light compared to those of many.

While there are porn shops closer to Ground Zero in the claustrophobic streets of Lower Manhattan, the creation of an Islamic Center presented another opportunity for an expression of Islamaphobia in the Western world. Dozens of 9/11 victims were Muslims and the community center would not even be visible from the World Trade Center sight. Yet the majority of Americans and New York City residents have been persuaded to oppose building the mosque.

Did people really understand what exactly was being proposed? Do they still not really understand what is being built? The center is intended to serve as a platform for multi-faith dialogue, even to provide refuge to 9/11 victim’s families of all faiths, many of who are still suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (as 64,000 New Yorkers were diagnosed). The Islamic center has always had plans to include a memorial to 9/11 victims! Not to mention, a 500-seat auditorium, an art studio, a childcare area, a performing arts center, a bookstore, a culinary school, a fitness center, and a food court.

An Islamic center built in a community that would use it (Lower Manhattan is home to thousands of Muslim-Americans) replacing a Burlington Coat Factory damaged by the 9/11 attacks, in no way threatens Americans or as many have had the balls to argue, celebrates the September 11^th attacks. It provides an architecturally unique structure to a Lower Manhattan stuffed with far too many ugly, grey buildings. It creates a center for something other than 9 to 5 shifts of cubicle-structured-stress. As one of the many residents of the beautiful city of New York, I’ve never been much of a fan of lower Manhattan. When the twin towers stood as a marvel to my childhood eyes, there was a terrific outdoor area outside at their base that provided my mother a great place to take my brother and I. Since 9/11, we have had little reason to visit the area. While an Islamic center will likely fail to change this reality, putting a uniquely designed building in the neighborhood with a basketball court, swimming pool and beautiful 9/11 memorial, all inside and open to the public, it can’t hurt the neighborhoods appeal.

If you ask me, there is simply no concrete reason to oppose the center. When Mayor Bloomberg was approached by a Marine wanting to talk to him about the Islamic center in a Manhattan restaurant earlier this year, he thought he was going to be told why it shouldn’t be built. Instead, the Marine said what he was fighting in Iraq for was freedom, not fear. He told the mayor that the center should be built because it can stand as a symbol of our constitution and what we believe in as a nation.

Colleen Kelley, who lost her brother William on 9/11, says, the "irony in the debate over the section of the building that would house a mosque is that one might assume that God (the same God to Jews-Christians-Muslims) would be pleased with any type of effort that involves prayer and service to others." Orlando Rodriguez and Phyllis Schaefer Rodriguez, whose son died in the attack, say they "support the building of the Islamic community center in lower Manhattan" and "feel that it would honor our son and other victims". Herb Ouida, whose son Todd died, said: "To say that we're going to condemn a religion and castigate a billion people in the world because they're Muslims, to say that they shouldn't have the ability to pray near the World Trade Center—I don't think that's going to bring people together and cross the divide." Herb Ouida, whose son Todd died, said: "To say that we're going to condemn a religion and castigate a billion people in the world because they're Muslims, to say that they shouldn't have the ability to pray near the World Trade Center—I don't think that's going to bring people together and cross the divide. Donna O'Connor, whose pregnant daughter died on 9/11, expressed the opinion that "This building will serve as an emblem for the rest of the world that Americans ... recognize that the evil acts of a few must never damn the innocent."[235Donna O'Connor, whose pregnant daughter died on 9/11, expressed the opinion that "This building will serve as an emblem for the rest of the world that Americans ... recognize that the evil acts of a few must never damn the innocent."

Just like our President, I am glad the Islamic Center is being built. Americans need to put Islamaphobia behind them, and once the community begins to embrace this seemingly wonderful Islamic center, perhaps many can finally do so.

WikiPedia, CityLimits.org, The Richmond Times Dispatch, The New York Post and The New York Times all served as sources for this article. 

The Two Party Agenda

The Two Party Agenda
Published in The Catalyst 

         The most recent GOP Presidential Debate gathered a record 9 million TV viewers. Herman Cain, a presidential frontrunner, was applauded fiercely  by Republicans for comments he made about 'Occupy' protesters during the debate. He claimed protesters were wrong to blame unregulated banks and a government-financed Wall Street for our economic mess. "If you are unemployed, don't blame Wall Street, blame yourself" he said.

         Blame yourself...Of course it's not enough that the Republican party wants to put you on the chopping block when it comes to local and federal budget cuts- slicing into your social security, your education and your health care while both parties continue to protect the top 1%. No, according to Cain it's time you started blaming yourself for being poor!

         Republican policy, no matter how it is phrased in these messy, nasty and ultimately distracting debates, is as clear as day. Blame the poor and make them pay.

How about cutting spending where it is wasted the most? As I wrote in the Catalyst on September 9^th, the bipartisan Commission on Wartime Contracting has found tens of billions of taxpayer dollars have gone to corruption and lax oversight of contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention the trillions spent on killing, according to the most conservative estimates 600,000 women and Children in our wars of aggression in the Middle East. Cutting spending here? No contender for the Republican nomination has interest in this.

How about we stop, as Warren Buffet put it, “coddling the super rich” and cut the budget by raising taxes on billionaires? The CBO says that would save over a trillion dollars. But of course not! Who will fund Herman Cain or Mitt Romney’s campaign if not the corporate CEOs and big bank executives? Finally, the President has stood firmly for raising taxes on the wealthiest 1%, a stance the majority of American recognize he should have taken long ago. Our president backed down on this stance when he had a Democratic majority in Congress, claiming that despite pledging not to renew the Bush-era tax cuts during the campaign, he had been convinced not to raise takes on the wealthy during a recession. Now that the recession is technically over, Obama is pushing to raise taxes on the rich. But, like the rest of the country, he knows it cannot pass the now Republican House of Representatives.

Just like he knows his promises to reign in Wall Street, hold the banks accountable and regulate the market is rhetoric of the past- all promises he has long ago abandoned. His economic advisors- nearly all of them corporate heads and corrupt bankers who have spent lifetimes championing trickle-down, anti-regulation policy, have even managed to persuade many on Wall Street to donate large sums of money to Obama’s re-election campaign, a group of businesspeople largely Republican. When running for president, Obama claimed he wanted to put an end to letting Wall Street run wild and hold the banks accountable. Eight years of this policy under Bush taught all of us that trickle-down economics of this sort does not work. Campaigning for bottom-up economics won over voters but his trickle-down policies in office have won Obama lobbyists. This principal lie of Obama’s presidency was the subject of last year’s Best Documentary Winner at the Oscars, Inside Job, a film Time Magazine and I believe is the most important movie of the century.

The reality of the 2012 election, the very sad reality, is that no matter how much worse the Republican agenda is, and it is appalling across the board, the Democrats in power also do not want not real change on the issues that matter most to Americans. They too want war. It was Obama who put 30,000 additional troops in Afghanistan and pushed his withdrawal date three years back. It was Obama that defended America remaining the only developed nation without a national curriculum in Education, instituting polices that punished struggling schools desperate for help while ramming through unpopular test-based, worse-than-Bush programs like Race to The Top and Pay-per-Performance. It was Obama who cut environmental protections and authorized further aid to Israel. It was Obama that issued silent raids on companies hiring illegal immigrants. And, most importantly, it was Obama and his Administration that has bailed out Wall Street and sold out his base. The list goes on- it cannot be denied, that as bad as the GOP is, Barack Obama is no superman. His policies have been painful for most Americans- 76% of whom believe our country is headed in the wrong direction.

Realizing our president has failed us on issue after issue while at the same time noticing the credibility his party has lost is essential in understanding the failures of our two-party system. When Bush was elected in 2004 with an approval rating of 48% he was the least popular president in history ever to be re-elected. Obama’s approval rating stood at an all-time low of 37% according to Gallup’s report on October 18^th.  The best end result this New York bred, now global ‘Occupy’ movement can have is the creation of a viable third party that really stands for the working class and unemployed.

Sure, the wise among us will vote for Obama out of a fear of the alternative. But we can at least hope that instead of being forced to make that decision, a viable third party can come out of all this ‘Occupy’ business. If not now, when? Refusing to demand a third party is not worth more status quo liars in the White House fighting only for the 1%. I’d rather take votes away from Obama for the sake of America having a populist third party down the road than vote for the so-called “lesser of two evils” and watch America continue to get flushed down the toilet. We need real change in 2012, not more two-party bull. 

Syria 2012: Our Own National Disgrace

Syria 2012: Our Own National Disgrace

            While many of us don’t know about the 500,000 women and children (and over 1 million people) killed by the U.S. Military in Iraq, far less of us know about the United States very recent involvement with the conflict in Syria.

            As the Syrian government, under Bashar Hafez al-Assad, continues to slaughter hundreds of defenseless civilians every day, hundreds of thousands of people are now displaced within Syria. The humanitarian situation may not be as rapidly deteriorating it once was, but the group United to End Genocide has boldly made it their mission to go after the source that can be targeted most successfully: the United States. The fact is that the United States is doing business with the same company supplying weapons to this brutal regime responsible for the deaths of up to 12,000 Syrians. As the United to End Genocide emails read, "While the United States calls on the world to sanction Syria's government, our own Department of Defense is signing contracts with a company that has provided $4 billion dollars' worth of weapons to the Syrian regime. This is unconscionable. " They continue, "Condemning Syria's regime is not enough. We must also condemn those who are engaging in business with the regime — and especially those that provide the means to enable the continued slaughter."

The United States- guilty of blatant acts of terror throughout it’s past and present from Iraq to Vietnam, from Central America to Syria, should be held accountable. We don’t need radical and baseless conspiracy theories to prove that the U.S acts as a force of terrorism. It’s really quite undeniable.

While there is no international criminal law definition, the most widely accepted and easily understood definition of terrorism, used by the U.S government, the UN and The New York Times, comes form the Parliament of Australia. According to the Parliament, terrorism is the systematic use of terror through violet acts which are intended to create fear and are "perpetrated for a religious, political or ideological goal." As philosopher Noam Chomsky points out, the United States defines the textbook definition of a terrorist state- constantly using terrorism by the means of achieving a political goal. Whether the political goal in Iraq was overthrowing Saddam or obtaining oil, killing over a million innocent people, with no official declaration of war or approval from the United Nations, was a way of achieving this goal. It’s just as “textbook” in Syria, as the United States is helping to perpetuate violent acts carried out by Assad’s regime to incite fear.  Quite simply, by cutting deals with an arms supplier that kills civilians, the United States is achieving a political goal by the means of violent acts.

While the U.S is very publicly supplying humanitarian aide to Syria’s rebel groups victimized by Assad’s reign of terror, they are just as publicly refusing to supply weapons to these desperate rebel groups in fear that the weapons could end up in the hands of al Queda. Publicly, America provides minimal assistance to the good guys in Syria, but connects them to Al Queda so there will be no qualms about not helping enough. And of course privately, we have not hesitated to get in bed with the Syrian government- supplying their arms dealers with loads of cash- an act of far greater assistance considering the lopsided military conflict in Syria could easily be looked at by historians years from now as the government’s genocide of dissenters. Moreover, as the U.S remains the leading weapons supplier to Saudi Arabia, there is no way around the possibility that weapons we give to Saudi Arabia could end up in the hands of Syria.

So, what can be done? Well, United to End Genocide thinks the pressure should be put on the Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta. He has the power to suspend all contracts with the Russian state-owned arms dealer that supplies the Assad regime with weapons it has been using to viciously kill it's own people.

United to End Genocide is not alone. Allied organizations from around the world have launched identical campaigns demanding that Secretary Panetta use his unique power to immediately cut ties with the Russian firm. According to now confirmed research done by the organization Human Rights First, the firm, known as Rosoboronexport, signed a $375 million contract with the Pentagon earlier this year. According to the research, this U.S. contract comes with “an option for $550 million in additional purchases, raising the total value of the contract to nearly $1 billion.” Isn’t it nice to know that pubic money is being used to cut deals with weapons firms that supply brutal regimes with the tools to kill innocent people.

As many Catalyst writers have written about in detail, America lost 3,000 people on September 11^th as a result of terrorism. Over 422,000 New Yorkers were diagnosed with PTSD as a result of the attacks. Yet, pretending to have learned a valuable lesson about the ugly impacts of terrorism, the U.S government, under Bush and then Obama have engaged in terrorism that has had the same effects on people (loss of life, PTSD and all) as the 9/11 attacks and it’s time we start providing detail to these stories too. Millions of people in Iraq and a growing toll in the tens of thousands in Syria (not to mention other countries and conflicts) have fallen victim to terrorism made possible by the United States. As a wealthy, charitable and at least somewhat democratic society, should we really be engaging in such blatant terrorist activity? Surely the media has failed to alert the American public of this crisis. Organizations like United to End Genocide can only do so much to raise awareness and put pressure on the government to do the right thing.

But just like Osama Bin Laden was brought to justice, we need to see American war criminals brought to justice too. Instead of pressuring Russia to end its support for terrorist crimes against humanity in Syria, the America is expected to hand over a billion dollars to very same arms dealers that are enabling the atrocities. This is criminal, and if we wish to be a nation that seeks justice over acts of terrorism, we must prosecute to the fullest extent, all those involved in this business. Until then, lets put enough pressure on Leon Panetta and hope this crisis can finally end. 

Understanding the failed attempts to Discredit Invisible Children

Understanding the failed attempts to Discredit Invisible Children

            As “Kony 2012” has just about wrapped up its shattering of internet video records, we can look back at the video that inspired millions of dollars in donations and an overwhelming call to action from leading celebrities and politicians worldwide. We can also look back on the small and ignorant group of bloggers and vloggers that still think they’ve figured out some conspiracy- that Invisible Children is actually running a scam. The bat-shit crazy snippet of the far-left is claiming that just because the president is evangelical, the mission of Invisible Children is actually to convert Ugandans to Christianity. Meanwhile, the bat-shit crazy snippet of the far-right, notably Rush Limbaugh, has claimed that Invisible Children is an anti-Christian organization dedicated to stopping the in-fact Christian and humanitarian Lord’s Resistance Army. I’m not making this stuff up, folks. Amidst a firestorm of worldwide activism, there are plenty of loons trying to distract us. 

            As Rachel Maddow pointed out on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, “conspiracy is easier to understand than complexity.” There is reality and then there is the quick, scary, sensationalistic, attention-commanding garbage. People are more attracted, naturally, to the dramatic over the accurate.

            Let’s stick to the facts facts. Why not go for a responsible debate over Invisible Children’s budgeting or inability to expose the Ugandan government for using tactics many respectable critics have compared to the LRA? These criticisms are too often overshadowed by radical claims made to draw attention, the most popular for instance, that Invisible Children is acting on behalf of the Obama administration’s interest in obtaining Uganda’s oil- a claim that could not possibly be more not be more baseless or fabricated. 

            Many of those who have investigated Invisible Children’s budgeting have been surprised to learn not only that there is no NGO in Northern Uganda that has done more to employ and educated locals, but that well over 80% of the money donated to the organization goes to rehabilitating child soldiers, building schools and utilizing whatever tools necessary to prevent the abduction of children. The bulk of the remaining 20% goes towards raising awareness- the money that made “Kony 2012” such an Internet blockbuster.

            Invisible Children may not be a perfect organization, but ballooning the problems with “Kony 2012” serves to undermine a very forward thinking movement. Sure, the video appeals to white westerners by heavily including a cute and white little boy. But let’s not pretend we don’t live in a world where little white boys attract more attention and sympathy than struggling African children. Invisible Children’s goal is to disarm the fast-moving LRA and bring Joseph Kony to Justice. Whatever way works best for going about this goal, they will utilize. “Kony 2012” proves they are well aware of the best ways to get the western world to wake up to the crisis. The more power to them!

            The failed attempts to discredit “Kony 2012” may have hurt the message and derailed the narrative, but anyone interested in helping Invisible Children achieve it’s goal should not be discouraged. The Kony 2012 International Day of Action is still scheduled for April 20^th and the more support for it the better.

By using the “Kony 2012” slogan, Invisible Children is sending a clear message that instead of simply choosing to rally behind a presidential candidate in the year 2012, Americans should rally behind a message of peace and justice abroad. Instead of dedicating all of our political thought, analysis and energy on a popular American political figure that seeks to be the most powerful man in America, we should use at least some of our political drive to help Central Africa rid itself of a child-abducting war criminal. Instead of simply choosing between a Wall Street sell-out like Barack Obama or a Wall Street insider like Mitt Romney, Americans should choose to rally around Invisible Children. Trust me, it will be a hell of a lot more rewarding. 

Obama: A President of Many Legacies

Five different, often competing legacies of President Obama

1. Wall Street's President:

Very early on in his presidency, Barack Obama made it very clear who it was he would be fighting for from the White House. Despite promising to reign in Wall Street and regulate the banks, Obama appointed big shot bankers, trickle-down-endorsing CEOs, corrupt tax-cheats and recession-creating ultra-conservative billionaires to his economic advisory team. Instead of fighting for the middle class, the president passed up an opportunity to raise taxes on the wealthy when he had a democratic majority in congress. Rating agencies, lobbyists and executives, all at least somewhat regulated in Europe, continue to operate as they please in the United States. The Unemployment rate, as well as the percentage of Americans who have given up looking for work remains far higher now than when the president took office over three years ago. With both parties in bed with the super-wealthy, Obama has, for political reasons desperately refused to accept who he has become- a Wall Street president.

2. A leader in the economic turnaround

23 consecutive months of private sector job growth don’t lie. When President Obama took office in early 2009, the private sector was losing an unprecedented 900,000 jobs a month. Just four months later, it was losing 350,000 a month. Six months after that, we were back to gaining jobs. The president has made it clear that he will not rest until all those who lost jobs during the recession regain employment, but his policies of stimulating private sector job growth and rescuing major global industries have saved the economy as we know it. He passed the tightest regulations Wall Street has ever seen and refuses to let America return to the policies that created

3. A man of compromise:

Clinton commanded the narrative of his presidency. Obama has been weak, even pitiful as a leader- choosing compromise over principal. His largest legislative accomplishment remains an unpopular health care reform bill designed to please the insurance companies with an unconstitutional mandate. Obama backed down on what most Americans wanted- a public option, compromising with lobbyists and conservatives in congress. On immigration, Obama's policies have been far to the right of Bush's, pandering to Republicans with a strict quota of 400,000 deportations a year. On education, Obama has abandoned teachers unions and instead pushed for what many consider to be No Child Left Behind on steroids. Incentive -based, test-based and performance-based education is priority, with funding being cut to suffering inner-city schools. Environmental policy is perhaps the greatest example of the Obama administration's inability to stand up for values long upheld by liberals. Pandering to oil companies instead of his base, Obama has flushed major environmental protections down the toilet and committed that the U.S will continue to rely on foreign oil, particularly from Brazil. Time and time again, the president has turned his back on the American people and sold out his base. Most recently, he became the first president in American history to overturn a decision by the FDA. The decision was to allow the all-too-commonly-pregnant under-18 demographic of American girls to have access to birth control. Again, Obama pandered- this time to radical evangelicals and Catholics- instead of his base. And arguably most disturbingly, Obama signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act on New Years. As critics have charged, the bill in-effect repeals the constitution; giving the military power to skip due process and right-to-a-lawyer and detain any American citizen they deem a threat, for as long as they want. If that’s not president Obama shamelessly bowing to the ultra-conservative patriot-act loving, pro-authoritarianism Republicans, I don’t know what is.

4. A war president

When president Obama was running for president in 2008, he pledged to get the United States military out of Afghanistan by 2011. Now military generals and the president himself are claiming American troops may be in Afghanistan as late as 2015 or 2016. As president, Obama has deployed 30,000 troops to Afghanistan and his military budget has exceeded George Bush’s. Under Bush, 575 troops were killed in Afghanistan. As AntiWar.com states “the death toll in less than three years under President Obama more than doubled the number of US soldiers slain during President Bush’s seven plus years in the nation.” Under Obama, nearly 1,400 American troops have lost their lives in Afghanistan. While no nation or empire has ever succeeded in Afghanistan and the battle with the Taliban shows no end in sight, the administration continues to insist that the war is going well and taxpayer dollars are being used wisely. Yet, according to the congress-created Commission on Wartime Contracting, approximately 60 Billion Dollars of taxpayer dollars has been wasted in the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, with nearly half of the waste coming in the last 3 years. According to their findings, this waste includes, but is not limited to “corruption” and “lax oversight of contractors”. Moreover, the majority of Americans oppose the war in Afghanistan. Yet, we are still there, fighting a war that continues to tarnish our image in the world, kill innocent civilians and rack up our debt. President Obama defends our role of killing off as many Taliban leaders as we can while we let Al Queda roam free in Pakistan, where we killed Osama Bin Laden.

5. A corrupt man

While the image of the Obama administration as one riddled with corrupt cronies is largely an over-hyped and overly propagated creation of right-wingers, there is no denying that President Obama’s role in the Solyndra scandal has left a large stain on his trustworthiness. President Obama's authorization of a $535 million loan guarantee to Solyndra Corporation in 2009 as part of a program to spur alternative energy growth was designed to boost his image as a pro-green-energy president. Instead, it backfired in every way imaginable. The company filed for bankruptcy and shut down entirely, laying off thousands. And as it turns out, the Obama administration knew that’s where it was headed. Solyndra was manufacturing solar panels, spending about 6 dollars on every panel but selling them for only three. Therefore, government staffers warned it was headed for bankruptcy dozens of times. It was as clear as day, but the money was given away anyway. Critics have argued that because Solyndra was one of the top donors to Obama’s campaign for president, they were rewarded with the $535 million after being elected. What is clear is that Solyndra was upheld by Obama as the centerpiece to his platform of creating green jobs. He toured their facilities and met with their CEO. He claimed it was the perfect symbol of job creation during a speech at Solyndra headquarters. Joe Biden claimed that the jobs created as a result of the loan would be “permanent jobs”.  As Jon Stewart put it after the scandal broke out, “That custom-tailed Obama scandal you ordered is finally here.” Of course, Mitt Romney and the Republicans will use the Solyndra scandal as much as they can during the 2012 campaign. A company gives money to the president’s campaign. That company is given taxpayer money in return and lays off all its employees anyway. They have tried milking the Timothy Geithner tax scandal. They have tried milking the Tony Rezko and Steve Ayres scandals. They have even tried to link the president to the Blagojevich scandal.  But they days of desperation are over. There could be no better poster-child for corruption in the Obama administration than Solyndra. Say what you want about what Barack Obama isn’t. He isn’t Muslim. He isn’t someone born outside America. He isn’t a socialist or communist. But you really can’t say he isn’t corrupt. At least not anymore.  

The legacy of President Obama can only be speculated on, as I do in this article. If he is a one-term president, however, I imagine most of these legacies will carry. If he is a two-term president, than I’ll be pleased to provide commentary four years from now on what the legacies of his 8-year presidency. 

The Downside of Feminism

Published in The Catalyst 

Feminism, historically and internationally, is beyond wonderful. It has shattered oppressive traditions and achieved human rights for females worldwide. It cannot be denied that it has played both a pivotal and a gigantic role in human history. Furthermore, the majority of feminists living today are well informed, hard-working and powerful people fighting the good fight and making the world a better place. Feminism, in its best form, is the simple notion that women are people.

All that said, I believe it is fair to admit that a. Feminist movements have worked, perhaps without realizing, against the rights or needs of men and b. Feminist movements have worked, perhaps without realizing, to perpetuate inequality and gender roles.

Before you assume that these statements mean I have a contrived view of feminism, re-read my first paragraph. Not only do most feminists believe in equality, but most feminists who are perpetuating inequality at least think they are promoting equality.

For me, the fact of the matter is that while it used to be true that being in a woman in America meant that in nearly every single way, you were at an overarching disadvantage, it now seems to be far from clear-cut. While I don’t feel the need to generalize or suggest being a man is harder than being a woman, I think it’s important that we recognize undeniable and institutionalized disadvantages of being an American man. 

If you are a male in America, the expectations of your life are often non-existent. According to multiple studies of elementary-level classrooms, including one conducted by Diane Halpern, you receive far more blame and punishment by teachers if you are male. According to an Ohio State University study, females get better grades for the same quality work in all levels of education and are still provided with an overwhelming amount of more incentives, thus outpace men in college enrollment and degrees. So, your grades are likely to be worse and you are far less likely to graduate high school, less likely to graduate college, and thus far less likely to have a job.

 In fact, in the United States, men are twice as likely to be unemployed and four times more likely to have been let go during the recession than women. This is all so much more disturbing when race is factored in. Black men are targeted by the police far more than black women and are overwhelmingly more likely to end up uneducated and unemployed. It is just as wrong to attribute all this to an inherent stupidity or laziness men hold, as it is to attribute the fact that despite all this women still make less money than men because they are underachieving and incompetent. The reality is that being a man in America encompasses massive challenges often overlooked by feminists.

These challenges include the dare-we-speak-of double standards. Because men are expected to be strong and dominant, males claiming they were sexually harassed or raped by women are taken far less seriously. Moreover, Men have no laws such as the Violence Against Women Act that afford them equal protection under the law when they are victimized by violence. This is even more disturbing when one considers that The U.S. Center for Disease Control and the American Psychiatric Association found of heterosexual relationships involving violence, 50.3% involve non-reciprocal violence, and of that 50.3%, women were the instigators 70.7% of the time. Unsurprisingly, a U.S. survey of thousands of adults regarding intimate partner violence, participants were more accepting of women hitting men, and were consistently more likely to tolerate the violence if they were first asked about women hitting men rather than the reverse. The expectation of men to be both emotionally and physically strong figures has led us to create a world where male victims are intolerable and must shut up. This goes way too far. There are dozens of Rape crisis centers that refuse to help male rape victims and zero rape crisis centers that cater only to men. Again, while there are hundreds of women-only rape crisis centers in the United States, there is not a single rape crisis center than cares only for men.

So what role has feminism played? Not always a bad one. Many feminists push to tear down all society-led expectations of both genders. Unfortunately, this does not appear to be the norm. Far too many feminists see America as a place where women can’t get what men can. They claim that women make 50 cents for every dollar a man makes. They claim that women are not in positions of power and they claim that women are discriminated upon in the workplace. While these claims are true in many regards, they remain generalizations and have led us down a path that is making sure this nation is unfairly difficult for men.

Yes, women make less than men today, 80 cents for every dollar to be exact. Part of the reason this is true is because the vast majority of the wealthiest Americans are men. If you look at the typical middle class man and the typical middle class woman, they almost always earn the same wage. The general-public stat is thrown way off because the average salary of the uber-wealthy men is so incredibly high. Still, studies show that female CEOs are paid more than male CEOs and the vast majority of the unemployed, imprisoned or homeless are men. The stats, incontestable and undisputed, don’t stop there. The vast majority of suicide victims are also men. Because men are expected to be void of feelings like sadness, shame, self-consciousness and despair, they are far more likely to commit suicide as a result of keeping those emotions bottled up. Men are also more likely to be violent in a society that expects them to work under more stress with later hours than women and in a society that forbids females to serve in combat.

American Feminism has lost its way if you ask me. There are simply too many examples of the disadvantages of being a man for me to declare myself a feminist. So, I have come to identify as a humanist, one who believes in equality of the genders and is willing to fight against discrimination that goes both ways.

Libertarianism: Our Common Enemy

Published in The Catalyst 

There is no denying it: Colorado Springs stands boldly as the epicenter of American Libertarianism. It’s more than just a red city in a blue state. The Springs represents a unique breed of conservatism. Libertarianism means small government- a city based on community solutions. At the “Occupy Wall Street” forum in Palmer a couple weeks back, many students stood up and asked questions from libertarian perspectives, advocating trademarks of the movement like repealing the Federal Reserve and abolishing publicly funded agencies like the Department of Education and the EPA. 

So, what’s the deal with Libertarianism? And more importantly, what are it’s deepest flaws? Well, look no further than the Springs itself. The trouble with limited government is once you take away government’s ability to look after the poor based on the votes of the rich is that necessities they have depended on for decades disappear. And what does this look like? Less street lights in lower class neighborhoods, no trashcans downtown and expensive and very inadequate public transportation. And that’s just now- just the begging. The more government you rid, the less access the poor and general community have to better safety (street lights), more convenience (trashcans) and more environmentally friendly options (city buses). Take it further and you are playing with fire. Colorado Springs has been forced by budget cuts pushed by it’s libertarian movement to make big cuts to it’s police force and public libraries. That means an even bigger threat to public safety and a smack in the face to parents who want their kids to have the access to books that they did. The problem with libertarians, is when you give the power to the public on matters of safety, accessibility and public rights, the poor get the short end of the stick even more than they already do. Look no further than the classrooms of the children in Colorado Springs. Take an education class at Colorado College that goes out into the schools of the community and you will see a dramatic difference between classrooms in communities living below the poverty line and schools where student’s parents’ come from the shrinking Middle and Upper Income brackets. The higher education taxes the district’s residents are willing to pay, the better the school. The less they can afford, the more their school suffers: larger classrooms, outdated textbooks, and as a result of Obama policy, less assistance from Washington D.C. A system that does not discriminate against underprivileged districts would have city or statewide taxes go to all schools, with the rich among us paying more so that poor kids are not doomed by underperforming and under funded schools. Libertarianism does not allow for this. It insists that the community has the “right to pay what it wishes to pay without the government dictating the tax system. Essentially, fuck the poor. Just let them look after themselves.

Libertarian and tea party policies nationwide have furthered one of the biggest problems we face in the United States- When it comes to looking after the elderly, the poor and the homeless, we rank at the bottom of developed nations, often on par with undeveloped countries in South America. We have a frightening lack of safety nets and systems of assistance for children and their impoverished families, especially compared to European nations like The United Kingdom and Sweden that have an abundance of safety nets for their poor, with higher taxes and a healthier, wealthier general population.

If you want a model of libertarian, tea party policy, a nation with no government involvement, visit East Africa. Somalia, with less government than any country on earth, is plagued by AIDS, war and historic levels of starvation nationwide. Sure, limited government and no government are very different things and state rights have their appeal. But, how far can we afford to go? When does limited government become dangerous? Surly, Colorado Springs has gone far enough.

Libertarianism plays its role nationwide, far from just Colorado Springs. Wall Street  is benefiting greatly  from a limited-government-involvement-agenda displayed by the Bush and Obama administrations. A lack of regulations and oversight allows banks and corporations to run wild, exploiting consumers left and right, maximizing profits in a free market gone wrong. Libertarian leaders like Ron Paul are advocating for an abolishment of the Federal Reserve and an economy based on regulations ensured by consumers instead of the government. Libertarian ideals of no big brother are, believe it or not, incredibly upheld within the Obama administration, with former CEOs and big bankers calling the shots at the top of our president’s economic team. They want trickle-down policy rounded out by small government and no regulation. In last year’s Oscar winning documentary “Inside Job”, the Obama administration was boldly exposed for supporting Wall Street and the banks, against campaign promises of regulation and accountability. These policies have led to more fraud and more exploitation, with more people giving up looking for work every month than getting jobs. In all, the libertarian policies of those in power have resulted in a widening of the gap between the rich and the poor and a dramatic growth of the lower class. Look at Wall Street’s home itself. Manhattan has the largest separation of wealth of any urban country in America and the Bronx is the poorest urban country in America. There’s no coincidence there in a city and a state dominated by a pro-Wall Street government.

So, next time you hear a Ron Paul supported advocating for state rights and limited government, call them out. Libertarianism is hurting America from sea to shining sea. No regulation and no safety nets equals no middle class. We need policies that look after the  non-rich now more than ever. Sure, lets reign in wasteful spending on wars and earmarks. But, cutting assistance to the lower class and making them foot the bill for our economic crisis will not bring us out of our slump. It will only worsen our poverty crisis and doom or children’s future.

Libertarianism is not the answer. It is no more than part of the problem. 

Mr. President, End This War

Mr President, End this War

Published in The Catalyst 

A bipartisan panel created by Congress in 2008, best known as the Commission on Wartime Contracting, recently reported to D.C that approximately 60 Billion Dollars, only a small amount of Bush’s and an even smaller amount of the Obama’s administration’s record-setting military budget, has been wasted in the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, with nearly half of the waste coming in the last 3 years. According to their findings, this waste includes, but is not limited to “corruption” and “lax oversight of contractors”.

In other words, taxpayer dollars are being used to fill the pockets of corrupt military contractors. To be more specific, the panel found that up to 30 percent of the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on contracts and grants to support U.S operations in Iraq and Afghanistan goes towards fraud and waste. Since no inspector general monitors contracting and government agencies have long refused to overhaul the way they award and manage contracts in war zones, the waste is likely to grow beyond the panel’s conservative estimate of $207 billion by the end of 2011.

The U.S is spending more money on contractor’s salaries, oil digging, corruption and fraud than it is on the long-term maintenance of Afghanistan’s schools, medical clinics, barracks, roads and power plants already built with American money. The panel expressed its concern that if nothing is done to shift spending, the responsibility will be put on the terribly ineffective and deeply corrupt governments of Iraq and Afghanistan to manage and bear the long-term costs of operating these public services.

So, as we approach the 10 year anniversary of a war that has left more innocent civilians dead than the 9/11 attacks that supposedly inspired it, one cannot help but wonder, why exactly we are still there, fighting a losing battle against the Taliban. Experts like Senior Frontline Director and Correspondent, Martin Smith, who has been to Afghanistan both imbedded with the troops and with the people of Afghanistan dozens of times over the last 20 years, says “the Obama administration’s central objective is to leave behind a safe and stable Afghanistan”. Although a pullout of all combat troops was set during his campaign for president in 2011, the Obama administration determined that this goal could not be met until 2014, meaning that if a Republican is elected president, a pullout date would vanish and we could be in the region for another decade.

What we know is this- our war in Afghanistan is the longest in our history. It is flirting with being the most expensive too. Why we continue to go after the Taliban while Al-Qaeda, perhaps stronger now than under Osama bin Laden, roams free in Pakistan beats me. Our government survived September 11^th, 2001, the deadliest day in our history, only to become distracted with foreign enemies who pose little threat to our national security and the national security of our closest allies. Since 9/11, Al-Qaeda has attempted terrorist attacks in New York City 13 times. And those are just the ones New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand knows about. According to the Democratic senator “al-Qaeda’s deep and abiding interest in attacking US rail and transit systems” comes from the remaining members of al-Qaeda and its allied groups “surely looking to avenge bin Laden’s death”.

If you underestimate the “allied groups” Gillibrand is talking about, just look at southeast Africa, where a close ally of al-Qaeda is quarantining a population of millions and letting this group, mostly women and children starve to death under their control.

Letting al-Queda extend it’s interests worldwide while we lose thousands of lives and billions of taxpayer dollars on the War in Afghanistan is despicable to say the least and suspicious to many.

If the Obama administration truly prioritized the safety of America and it’s allies above long term economic interests, than military contracting would not be this expensive. According to BBC findings, “given the increasing importance of finding and exploiting new sources of fossil fuel, governments like those of the US and the UK are enormously keen to gain influence in the Central Asian region in order to secure those supplies for the WestIn order to achieve that, and get those energy supplies moving out of Central Asia, they need to set up a pro-western government in Afghanistan.” So, if this is truly a war for oil, the more important question becomes- can we trust our president?

Thus far, Obama’s policies of tax cuts for the rich, bailouts for the corporations, cuts to education and entitlement programs and record levels of pork-barrel spending mirror, in large part, those of his predecessor. If his interests in Afghanistan are also like that of his predecessors interest in Iraq, we have another situation were taxpayer money and American lives are being wasted away on a situation that has little, even nothing to do with the safety of the American public.

Like many, I have reached a point beyond frustration with the Obama administration. Sending them a letter telling them to end this war so reporters like my father don’t have to risk their lives informing an increasingly disinterested public on the horrors of warfare, is beyond useless. They have their interests. Unfortunately, so does the American public. Professionals expect youth turnout, largely a liberal constituency, will be historically low in 2012. Why vote if both sides are corrupt and in bed with the wealthy. Well, the GOP is having sex with the wealthy while the Dems are just taking them out to dinner. So, I say, vote for the lesser of two evils, like they do in third world nations. My biggest concern is, with a rapidly increasing total of Americans giving up looking for work, a shrinking middle class, more and more people unable to afford college, a growing debt and a continuation of our status as the only developed nation on earth with no national curriculum in education and no universal health care system, I wonder how much longer we can get away with not calling ourselves a third world nation.

Still, as meaningless as it is to say this, I will- The least we can do is end this war, Mr. President.

Barack Obama: A Promise-Breaker Up For Re-Election

Published in The Catalyst 

When evaluating President Obama’s dismally unpopular first term in office, historians and political scientists alike will undoubtedly cite the same issues. We have heard it all before. Time after time, Obama has failed America with a far more aggressive than promised, Bush-esk military budget and a seemingly endless inability to close America’s detention camp in Guantanamo Bay. Many will continue to bring up his Post-Katrina-like, historically delayed and vacation-filled removal from the catastrophic BP oil spill. The right will continue to shell the president with charges of wasteful spending and never-ending mentions that Obama has out-spent Bush with earmark and pork-laden bailouts and ineffective stimulus bills.

Still our debts, our wars and of course, our lack of Universal Health Care, will not be the issues most likely to hurt Obama in his re-election attempts. For the U.S.A, as it has been for half a decade now it’s jobs, jobs and jobs. People will bring this mindset with them to the ballot box.

The unemployment rate, while disturbingly high is deeply misleading. It does not account for those who have given up looking for work, a total that, every month, far exceeds the amount of people who gain jobs. It also does not include the homeless or those who have been without a job for more than 27 months- a number now over 7 million.

So, with Gallup’s “real” unemployment rate of 19.3% as of June 2011, we must ask ourselves the big question- why such a dramatic spike? America's jobless rate has been soaring for the last 3 years. 

Well, liberal economists will tell you it's because the stimulus packages were too small and job creation has yet to be prioritized in practice as it has been in rhetoric. Conservatives will argues that taxes are still too high on small businesses and corporations that remain America's central job engines. Moderates have argued that the enormous bank and auto bailouts devalued the dollar so dramatically that the American public simply can't afford to live on their minimum wages with the price for gas and groceries on the rise. Most economists advocate for greater regulation of the financial institutions that created our recession. 

Well, there may be truth to each one of these arguments. I'm no expert and certainly no Harvard economist. But, lets look at the facts here. Grades are improving and a college degree is more necessary than ever to get a job. There is no greater key to employment than education. This simply cannot be denied. The year I was born 46% of Americans graduated college. The number in 2011 is 27%. This figure continues to decline rapidly.

So, excuse me for having a theory, but it appears that if college is not made cheaper by way of a federal mandate, jobless rates will continue to spike dramatically.

Well, minor tax credits and lots of fancy speeches on the matter have solved nothing. The president won’t step up and deliver on the price of college. At this point, there is no surprise to this.

Barack Obama’s record of disappointment, or as Jon Stewart likes to call it, “lack of audacity”, is defined by his curiously dull inability to step up and support ‘morally righteous’ policy. He does not have Clinton-like fire, Carter-like compassion or Reagan-like popularity. He is a great speaker. But when actions speak louder than words, can rhetoric win a re-election campaign built around a record of broken promises?

Obama’s lack of support of ‘morally righteous’ policies extends far beyond the price of college issue. The president has yet to show the support he promised for the construction of emission-reducing and job-creating high-speed rail, leaving America dependent on cars and planes as the rest of the developed world zips across borders with public transit. The president promised corporate accountability, big-time finance reform, a repeal of the Patriot Act and an end to illegal wiretapping and domestic spying. The president promised gays would not be treated like second-class citizens by a federal government that continue to deny them employment or marriage equality. The president  promised to allow workers to claim more in unpaid wages and benefits in bankruptcy court. The president promised to form international group to help Iraqi refugees. The president promised to change federal rules so small businesses owned by people with disabilities could get preferential treatment for federal contracts. The president promised to direct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct a comprehensive study of federal cancer initiatives. The president promised to mandate insurance coverage of autism treatment. The president promised to sign the Employee Free Choice Act, making it easier for workers to unionize. The president has broken too many promises to count.

Maybe it’s about time we stopped asking the president to fulfill his promises and started demanding he stop making so many promises in the first place.

Thanks to the President’s wretched economic policies that continue to prioritize Wall Street bonuses and tax cuts for millionaires, our country’s scarily tanking economy continues to produce more and more jobless Americans While its hard to fathom a way the GOP would ever do a better job running the country, it seems we are faced with a problem typical of nations throughout the world- the lesser of two evils. An article as small and meaningless as this simply cannot inspire a strong third party. It just can’t.

Hopelessness has taken over.