Duty to Warn

Remember the hullabaloo about The End of History? There were many of us who scoffed then at its hubris, the sheer arrogance of thinking we were “it.” Now, of course, even the adherents of such triumphalism are back in the trenches, forecasting their own gloom-and-obscene-profit version of Permanent War. It’s as if the Cold War never ended—and just in the nick of time for them, too. This gives the right the opportunity to revive that most heinous of Cold War anachronisms, the Loyal Opposition. Now the LO can be permanently kept toothless by the ever-present threat of the New Cold War (remember: they have actually used these words). Some have even promised World War IV.

Strong critics of U.S. foreign policy often encounter charges of “anti-Americanism.” Even though vast numbers of people in the United States disagree with Washington’s assumptions and military actions, some pundits can’t resist grabbing onto a timeworn handle of pseudo-patriotic demagoguery.

In a typical outburst before the war on Iraq last spring, Rush Limbaugh told his radio audience: “I want to say something about these anti-war demonstrators. No, let’s not mince words, let’s call them what they are -- anti-American demonstrators.”

Weeks later, former Congressman Joe Scarborough, a Republican now rising through the ranks of talking heads, said on MSNBC: “These leftist stooges for anti-American causes are always given a free pass. Isn’t it time to make them stand up and be counted for their views, which could hurt American troop morale?”

The ad in the airline magazine shows a young boy on a swing, the backdrop for an interactive pager being held by a man's hands. "Maybe you don't have to send an e-mail right now," says BellSouth's ad for their interactive paging service. "But isn't it cool that you can?" The ad, with its headline of work@lifespeed, celebrates a world where our jobs engulf our every waking moment.

It's not just our workplaces. Our lives in general seem faster, more complicated, more at the mercy of distant powers and principalities. We have less time for our families, and less room to ask where we want to go as a society and as a planet. The very pace of environmental crises, global economic shifts and the threats of war and terrorism make it harder to address them. If we're to act effectively as engaged citizens, we're going to have to slow down our lives, our culture, and a world that seems to be careening out of control.

NEW YORK, N.Y. -- For Democrats only: I think our field is shaping up quite nicely. Several of our candidates are starting to look promising indeed. Of course, only a political junkie would have sat through the entire two-hour debate, and the fact that there are 10 of them works against any one standing out. If the field isn't winnowed down soon, they might want to consider dividing themselves into two groups for a debate so we get more than these unsatisfactory soundbites.

            I think they ought to keep Al Sharpton in just for the entertainment value. Carol Moseley Braun is obviously the weakest link. But you know, guys, she wouldn't stand out so painfully as the only one who ever brings up women's issues if some of the rest of you did so occasionally, too. I really like Bob Graham, but for some reason he doesn't come across well. He voted against the Iraq war resolution, against the tax cuts and against confirming John Ashcroft -- a much higher profile in courage than several others in office. But even with all his electoral experience, he doesn't sound sharp.

Here’s the real-life plot: A famous documentary filmmaker puts out a letter to a retired four-star general urging him to run for president. The essay quickly zooms through cyberspace and causes a big stir.

     For Michael Moore, the reaction is gratifying. Three days later, he thanks readers “for the astounding response to the Wesley Clark letter” and “for your kind comments to me.” But some of the reactions are more apoplectic than kind.

     Quite a few progressive activists are stunned, even infuriated, perhaps most of all by four words in Moore’s open letter to Gen. Clark: “And you oppose war.”

     The next sentence tries to back up the assertion: “You have said that war should always be the ‘last resort’ and that it is military men such as yourself who are the most for peace because it is YOU and your soldiers who have to do the dying.”

SEATTLE -- Life rolls on in George W. Bush's America, forcing us to invent a new word -- greeed, with three E's in the middle -- to cover cases like that of Richard A. Grasso, who recently resigned as chairman and CEO of the New York Stock Exchange.

            Grasso has been doing such a swell job of policing any corporate irregularities -- surely you've noticed -- that his board members felt he should be rewarded with a pay package worth $139.5 million. But, hey, he was willing to kick back $8 mill. What a guy.

            Now, those sophisticated folks at The Wall Street Journal keep pointing out that Grasso did nothing wrong -- he merely accepted a pay package that was foisted upon him by a board of directors who happened to be handpicked by Grasso, who were close friends of his and who kept their decisions secret. How could there be anything wrong with that? What a splendid example of open, transparent corporate governance and independent directors.

AUSTIN, Texas -- Among the more amusing cluckings from the right lately is their appalled discovery that quite a few Americans actually think George W. Bush is a terrible president.

Robert Novak is quoted as saying in all his 44 years of covering politics, he has never seen anything like the detestation of Bush. Charles Krauthammer managed to write an entire essay on the topic of "Bush haters" in Time magazine, as though he had never before come across such a phenomenon.

Oh, I stretch memory way back, so far back, all the way back to -- our last president. Almost lost in the mists of time though it is, I not only remember eight years of relentless attacks from Clinton-haters, I also notice they haven't let up yet. Clinton-haters accused the man of murder, rape, drug-running, sexual harassment, financial chicanery and official misconduct, and his wife of even worse.

What questionable military program did both former President Clinton and current resident President W. Bush support wholeheartedly?  The National Missile Defense (NMD) program.   This program is a highly suspicious use of our tax dollars and should be immediately scrapped. The technology will continue to be extremely expensive to produce and may never work, and allegations of scientific dishonesty in this program have been made and merit close examination.  Finally, this project is not worth its social and monetary costs.    Any Republican (or Democrat, even) member of Congress who is actually not a hypocrite should be screaming bloody murder over the taxes being siphoned down the drain by this program.

On Aug. 6, Duante Miller, 20, was shot to death by two police officers as he ran from them through a housing project in Columbus Ohio. How has the mainstream media covered it?

Victim Gave Police Reason To Shoot Him,” the Columbus Dispatch boldly proclaimed in a page one Metro section headline Friday, August 29. Reporter Bruce adwallader’s lead reads as follows: “Duante Miller is to blame for his death, a private investigator working with Miller’s family said yesterday.” Cadwallader played up investigator Cornell McCleary’s conclusions in the third paragraph, a single sentence: “Miller was a ‘menace to society and clearly destined for jail or the graveyard,’ McCleary said in his report.”

Cadwallader’s 4th paragraph is key to understanding the Dispatch’s coverage of the Miller affair. It reads in its entirety: “‘The facts suggest that Miller chose to outrun the police but ended up running out of time. His decision to run cost him his life,’ wrote McCleary, who runs PRO-Private Police Agency, a private investigative firm that is not associated with the police division. He is also a local radio talk show host.”

Presidential candidates have become fond of asking whether Americans are better off now than they were four years ago. Looking back at a sensational Time magazine story that appeared in late September 1999, we might want to ask a similar question: “Are media values better than they were four years ago?”

     The enthralling title of Time’s 20-page cover story -- “GetRich.com” -- heralded scenarios for wondrously swift elevation into the ranks of the wealthy. The spread had its share of wry digs and sardonic asides, but reverence for the magnitude of quick money in dotcomland seemed to dwarf any misgivings.

     Although the magazine explained that “it’s not all about the money,” the punch line arrived a few dozen words later: “But mostly, it’s the money.” And back in 1999, there was plenty of it moving into new digital enterprises. “In the second quarter of this year, venture-capital funding in the U.S. increased 77 percent, to a record $7.6 billion. More than half went to Internet start-ups.”