Op-Ed

AUSTIN, Texas -- The state of the union is that money talks and public policy is sold to the highest bidder. Those who give money in political contributions -- less than one-tenth of one percent of the U.S. population gave 83 percent of all campaign contributions in the 2002 elections -- get back billions in tax breaks, subsidies and the right to exploit public land at ridiculously low prices.

This system in turn costs ordinary Americans billions of dollars, not to mention the costs to health, safety and the environment, and the cost of not having enough money for good schools.

Public Campaign, the group working for public financing of political campaigns, has put together some of the salient information in the form of a poster, available at www.publiccampaign.org -- and perhaps the most depressing thing about it is the size of the payoffs for relatively small investments in political campaigns.

Freep Hero: Nancy Talanian and the Bill of Rights Defense Committee

Just before Christmas, Oakland, CA became the 20th municipality in the U.S. to pass a resolution prohibiting its employees from cooperating with federal officials who are utilizing the so-called Patriot Act to spy on city residents. Talanian runs the Bill of Rights Defense Committee. The organization website includes a “How To” manual for communities to pass anti-Patriot Act resolutions. Some other cities adopting the resolution are Denver, Santa Fe and Santa Cruz. Talanian’s heroic defense of the U.S. Constitution makes her a Freep hero, but also calls us to action. We need to make Columbus, Ohio a Bills of Rights “Safety Zone.” Let’s rein in Big Brother in the New Year.

The Free Press Salutes:

Christian Peacemaker Teams

How words are used can be crucial to understanding and misunder standing the world around us. The media lexicon is saturated with certain buzz phrases. They’re popular — but what do they mean? “The use of words is to express ideas,” James Madison wrote. “Perspicuity, therefore, requires not only that the ideas should be distinctly formed, but that they should be expressed by words distinctly and exclusively appropriate to them.” More than two centuries later, surveying the wreckage of public language in political spheres, you might be tempted to murmur: “Dream on, Jim.”

With 2002 nearing its end in the midst of great international tension, here’s a sampling of some top U.S. media jargon:

“Pre-emptive”
This adjective represents a kind of inversion of the Golden Rule: “Do violence onto others just in case they might otherwise do violence onto you.” Brandished by Uncle Sam, we’re led to believe that’s a noble concept.

“Weapons of mass destruction”

The Columbus Free Press is launching its own Office of Total Counter-Information Awareness. In the last few months, we’ve accumulated enough information to warrant the impeachment of President George Bush.

First, let’s recall Bush’s strange relationship with that bizarre little company in Lansing, Michigan, known as Bioport. The company, despite failing various FDA inspections and being accused of bad record-keeping, holds the only federal contract for producing the anthrax vaccine. Bush has rewarded Bioport with favors such as ongoing military protection, and within weeks of 9/11 granted them a contract that tripled the price per vaccine. Now, add into the mix that the Strangelovian CIA-connected Battelle and Britain’s top secret Porton Down labs are partners with Bioport.

As we go to press, the Bush administration ordered its predictable post-Christmas call-up of U.S. troops. President George W. Bush is busy resurrecting the discredited doctrine of “preventative” war to justify an attack on Iraq. “Preventative” war was last invoked by Nazi party leaders as a defense of their actions during the Nuremberg trials. The U.S. government is engaging in an unprecedented propaganda campaign to justify its invasion and occupation of Iraq. Our government’s plans to seize 119-billion barrels of known Iraqi oil reserves are conveniently ignored. Still, the reality of selling the Iraq war is proving difficult, especially since Iraq has no nuclear weapons, and its only known link to biochemical weapons were those supplied by the U.S. and its allies during the 1980s.

While the U.S. points fingers at Iraq, the press routinely reports that the Bush’s chief Islamic ally in the region, Pakistan, provided the nuclear technology to North Korea. So, Pakistan, a major nuclear power, with direct ties to Al Qaeda and the North Korean nuclear weapons program, is not a threat according to Bush.

AUSTIN, Texas -- Did you hear the Bush administration finally found a connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda? They both have the letter Q. The evil, evil Q. (Not original with me, making the rounds.)

Some days, I'd just as soon whack myself in the head with the newspaper as read it. Remember the time the stock market tanked, lost $6.65 trillion, 38 percent of its total value? That would be the last two years.

Silly us, we thought the Bushies were actually going to do something -- not much, but something -- about why it happened. Congress stepped nobly to the plate in the summer of aught-two -- as Enron, WorldCom, Tyco, etc. came crashing down around us -- and passed a Reform Bill. Yes, they did. Not a dissenting vote against it, even in the Republican House.

To: Washington's most powerful people

OK, let's review the main points.

A basic PR problem remains. While you're in a hurry to launch an all-out war on Iraq, the main obstacle is that a large majority of Americans don't feel the rush. Uncle Sam's usual carrots and sticks have a long way to go at the U.N. Security Council. The big disappointment of January is that some key allies haven't caved yet.

No need to belabor the recent polling numbers. Newsweek did a national sampling of opinion midway through the month, and you went into a funk when you read the Associated Press summary: "Most Americans want the United States to take more time seeking a peaceful solution in Iraq rather than moving quickly into a military confrontation."

The next sentence was even more cautionary: "By 60 percent to 35 percent, people in the Newsweek poll ... said they would prefer that the Bush administration allow more time to find an alternative to war." And, what's more, "a majority would be opposed should this country act without the support of the United Nations and had no more than one or two allies."

AUSTIN, Texas -- Bet you if I had a nickel for every time someone has started an article or a speech in past five years by saying, "The nation's health care system is facing a crisis," or, "Our health care system is falling apart," I would be a rich woman today.

I suppose I could come up with some dramatic metaphor for the crumbling, tottering, greed-rotted structure, but hey, why don't you check out your health insurance premiums and see how you're doing? Up by 12 percent, 22 percent, 40 percent?

Larger premiums, higher deductibles, increased payments for prescription drugs? Employer dropping your coverage? Are we having fun yet?

AUSTIN, Texas -- "Peace is not merely a distant goal that we seek, but a means by which we arrive at that goal." -- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Normally, making the case for peace over war requires the brain of a gnat. "Jaw, jaw," said Winston Churchill, "is better than war, war." There's not much historical evidence that war does anyone any good: some rare cases of "just war" under St. Augustine's definition. Mostly war (A) kills a lot of people, causing hard feelings; (B) doesn't solve anything; (C) has hideous unintended consequences that often lead to more war. Avoid war if at all possible is the first rule of statesmanship.

Conservatives are fond of pointing out there are problems in this world can't be solved by throwing money at them. There are even more that can't be solved by dropping bombs on them.

AUSTIN, Texas -- Whee, here we go, the Ledge is back in session! And many a village is missing its idiot. The 78th biennial disaster is upon us, and what glorious fodder to feast upon.

Our peerless leaders are faced with a $9.9 billion deficit, almost twice as high as previously estimated, and billions in mandatory increased spending, so the new Republican majority is busily planning to solve this crisis by: (A) outlawing same-sex marriage, (B) giving more legal protection to fetuses and (C) knocking gay Texans out from under coverage by the Hate Crimes Act. This is tremendously useful of them.