A junior hockey player in Quebec has been canned for not signing a Canadian flag that was sent to soldiers in Afghanistan.

Now, don’t get them wrong:

[Saint Johns Sea Dogs coach Jacques] Beaulieu said he believes in freedom of expression but added that any player who refused to sign would have been kicked off the team.

In other words: You’re free to express yourself, just not on my team.

Reading the news, I was struck by the bald-faced denial evident in our president’s words. “I am not going to pull our troops off the battlefield before the mission is complete,” said Bush. “We can accept nothing less than victory for our children and our grandchildren.”

Any thinking person has to ask, “What is the mission? How do you define victory? Just yesterday, I was reading Juan Cole’s excellent blog, and he was hammering this point.

What is the military mission? I can’t see a practical one. And if there is not a military mission that can reasonably be accomplished in a specified period of time, then keeping US troops in al-Anbar is a sort of murder. Because you know when they go out on patrol, a few of them each week are going to get blown up or shot down. Reliably. Each week. Steadily. It is monstrous to force them to play Russian roulette every day unless there is a clear mission that could thereby be accomplished. There is not.

Bush seems to be further distancing himself from reality every day. Even the centrist-by-design Iraq Study Group may be too radical for him. The strange thing to me is that he is supposedly trying to rescue his legacy in his final two years. How can he think digging in his heels like this will help in that regard?

Many Thursday Thirteen regulars may have the impression of me that I’m just one of those Demon-cratic, Bush-hating Lie-berals, just waiting for my party to come back so we can push our agenda of gay marriage, gun control and high taxes. Well, it may come as a surprise, then, to discover that I can be as critical of the Democrats as I am of Republicans. So in the spirit of fairness, here are Thirteen Things the Democrats Should Remember (But Will Probably Forget):

1. It’s the economy, stupid. Thirty years of neoliberal rule has skewed the distribution of wealth dramatically to the richest 2% in this country. The middle class is shrinking, the working class is now the working poor, everybody’s in debt up to their eyeballs or beyond, and everybody’s working longer hours for less pay (when adjusted for inflation) than three decades ago. We’re at a point now, for the first time in American history, where we can’t realistically expect our children to be more prosperous than us. Raising the minimum wage is a nice gesture, but it doesn’t address the fundamentals of neoliberal fiscal policy championed by every president since Carter and “free trade” championed by every president since Bush I. Being in hock to China is more a threat to our fundamental security than “terrorists”.

2. We won’t solve our health care crisis without a single payer system. But don’t expect Democrats to push for single payer. It’s anathema to the insurance lobby. (Remember Hillary’s debacle? She took single payer off the table before she even got started.)

3. We can’t have a stable Middle East without a solution to the Palestinian crisis. Bush’s refusal to deal with the Palestinian Authority has been shameful, but can we expect the Democrats to defy the Israel lobby? History says “NO!”

4. War is not an energy policy. Don’t look now, but history tells us the Democrats were bombing the fuck out of Iraq before the Republican’s invaded (with the explicit support of the Democrats).

5. War is not an anti-terror strategy. See #4. Which Democrats opposed bombing Afghanistan? That’s right, none. And boy, that policy sure has helped reduce terrorism (not!). A country reduced to rubble. Osama bin Laden still at large. Mullah Omar still at large. The Taliban resurgent. Women still oppressed. Apostates sentenced to death. Hey, I’ve got an idea, why don’t we go bomb Somalia next?

6. There is no war on terror. Quit repeating Republican talking points and dumping money down the military-industrial rathole. Shine a light on the real security issue: the economy.

7. Ceding issues to the opposition is not a winning strategy in the long term. Sure, you took the house by running a bunch of conservatives in Democratic clothing. But when the party becomes (became?) nothing but a weak echo of the Republican party, or even the “true” conservative party (vs. the neoconservative Bush Republicans), where does that leave liberals and progressives? Isn’t this akin to destroying a village in order to save it?

8. Hillary can’t win the presidency. Neither can Obama. Get over it.

9. At some point, you won’t have George W. Bush handing you elections. You better come up with a winning strategy, and fast. See #7.

10. You voted for war in Iraq. You knew as well as me that the intelligence was bunk. You voted for it anyway. You can’t pretend now that you had nothing to do with that mess. Own it.

11. We won’t have real democracy until we take corporate money out of our elections. Put that in your K Street pipe and smoke it.

12. One midterm victory does not spell the end of the Rovian one-party state. Don’t think for a minute that the Karl Rove and his gang have given up on their vision of total control. Those traditionally Republican house seats you just won? They will just as likely tip back the other way in two years.

13. You can’t turn your back on progressives. Remember us? The ones who believe in health care as a right, living wages and civil rights? We’re not going away. In fact, the economic policy of the last three decades is swelling our ranks. Your shift to the center-right makes us more likely to vote for third-party spoilers. Don’t blame Ralph Nader when he’s the only one talking about the issues we care about. Look in the mirror. Steal his thunder and you’ll get our attention back.

It sure is tempting to gloat this morning about a Democratic victory at the polls. I haven’t been registered as a Democrat since ’84, and I’ve been very critical of the party’s rightward drift in the neoliberal era. Sure, I’m happy that maybe we’ll get some opposition in Congress.

But look more closely, and you’ll see not so much a Democratic victory as a Republican defeat. The Democrats are united only in opposition to Bush. On social, foreign and economic policy, they are perhaps more divided than ever. It is worth celebrating the Republican defeat, but don’t get too excited about Democratic victory. Their grip on Congress hinges on holding seats in traditional Republican districts, and on not doing anything to piss off the red staters therein. So expect a very moderate, tentative Congress, with an eye on holding on to the red states for the ’08 presidential elections. Don’t forget, Bush war cheerleader Joe Lieberman won against a war critic. This was not a tidal wave, this was a little slap on the wrist for Bush and his arrogance. It might signal an end to Rovian red meat politics, or it might be a brief interlude in the GOP master plan for total control.

It will be nice to see some oversight, though, if only for two years.

Here in Oregon, our do-nothing Dem governor, Ted Kulongoski, was handily reelected, our senate has stayed Democratic, and it looks like the house is swinging Democratic, too. Wow. It’s going to take a while for that to sink in. Now let’s see if they’ll address the 800 pound gorilla in the room: revenue. Our tax base was severely eroded by two property tax limitation ballot measures in the 90s, and nobody’s had the political will to even talk about it since. Our schools have had to grovel for band-aid funding every couple of years (a local bond measure passed yesterday after our 3 year local income tax expired), and my daughter’s first and second grade classes have both had close to 30 students. Music, Art and PE are luxuries at the discretion of principals (we’re lucky to have a grant-funded half-time music teacher and a full-time PE teacher — but no art). Will the fully in-control Dems address this? They’re making noise about reducing class size, but I have yet to hear anything about revenue.

Speaking of Dems moving to the center, I watched some of ABC’s election coverage last night with Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos. The conversations turned to implications for ’08, and Stephanopoulos held forth with the common DLC line that “Democrats win when they run from the Center”. He noted Carter, Clinton…. And his voice trailed off. He neglected to mention Gore and Kerry for some reason. So I guess you could just as easily say they lose when they run from the center. Anyway, bottom line, it was a nice little romp for the Dems, handed to them on a platter by an inept, arrogant George W. Bush and a bumbling, ethically challenged Republican Congress. But it’s looking ugly for ’08. Left to their own devices, without any favors from the other side, I expect the Dems to blow it.

It’s been a while since I’ve done a Thursday Thirteen list, and even longer since I’ve written about anything but hockey here. (And there’s been some damn good hockey so far this season!) But this being election season, I am bound to get into politics again sooner or later. So why not start with Thirteen Failures of Geo. W. Bush ?

1. Iraq. Wrong target, wrong reason, wrong plan. Now we find ourselves backing a Shi’a regime (which also enjoys the backing of our fundamentalist extremist friends in Iran). We are fully engaged in a civil war, with our troops used to prop up an Islamist regime with direct ties to unlawful militias and death squads. We’re on track to lose around 100 US service men and women this month. Nice. Way to support the troops. Thanks, George.

2. Afghanistan. We went in there to… get bin Laden? Bzzt! Failure. To defeat the Taliban? Bzzt! They’re coming back with a vengeance. Liberate women from the Burqa? Bzzt! Didn’t happen (To quote Arundhati Roy, “It’s being made out that the whole point of the war was to topple the Taliban regime and liberate Afghan women from their burqas, we are being asked to believe that the U.S. marines are actually on a feminist mission. If so, will their next stop be America’s military ally Saudi Arabia?”)

3. North Korea. This will probably go down in history as his greatest failure, even bigger than Iraq. Why? Because when Bush took office, the US had a working policy, the Agreed Framework, that had successfully contained North Korea’s nuclear ambitions. This Framewok had been in place since 1994, and under it North Korea had halted all nuclear development. Bush promptly discarded the Framework, and North Korea promptly went back to the nuclear drawing board and—surprise!—produced a nuke. And Bush has the chutzpah to suggest that dialog with North Korea had failed. Wrong George! Withdrawing from the Framework is what failed!

4. Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. Another brilliant example of the complete lack of realpolitik in Bush’s foreign policy. In the Bush world view, we don’t talk to our enemies, and—surprise!—they don’t do what we want them to do. Because of the Bush policy of freezing out the relatively moderate Fatah government, Fatah became completely ineffective. And they were voted out in favor of the religious fundamentalist Hamas party. Had we worked with Fatah, this could have been avoided. Really.

5. Lebanon. Again, Bush’s failure to talk to non-allies (in this case Syria and Iran) and his green light to Israel led to the near destruction of Lebanon and it’s fragile coalition government. For all its talk of promoting democracy in the Middle East, the Bush administration has all but destroyed the only two democratically elected Arab governments in the region.

6. Iran. Another case where not talking to our enemies has emboldened them.

7. Privatizing Social Security. For this failure, I am glad. Bush’s only significant domestic policy push wildly misjudged the popularity of one of the last vestiges of New Deal Social Democracy in this country.

8. 9/11. First, in not taking the specific threat seriously. Second, for completely freezing in the face of the attack. Third, for running away like a scared child instead of going back to Washington to take charge.

9. The Patriot Act. His first giant swipe at the constitution. (This is more properly thought of as a Bush success that is a failure for democracy and human rights.)

10. The Military Commissions Act of 2006. This suspends the Writ of Habeas Corpus for anybody Bush arbitrarily determines to be an “enemy combatant”. One little problem: “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.” (US Constitution, Article 1, Section 9) I don’t see no Rebellion or Invasion here, so this law is clearly unconstitutional. This is Bush’s most flagrant power grab, and, again, a Bush success at the expense of liberty.

9. Enron, Halliburton and the culture of corporate corruption.

10. No Child Left Behind. Better to call it “No Child Left a Dime.”

11. The tumors on my dog’s ass. I don’t know how, but somehow Wacky Mommy thinks we should be able to blame Bush.

12. Global Warming. Bush refuses to submit the Kyoto protocols for ratification. The US stands alone with Australia in its refusal to ratify this treaty.

13. The loss of Congress in the ’06 mid-term elections. I’m calling this one in advance.

My favorite bumper sticker of late has a very simple, very encouraging message: “January 20, 2009”.

Last spring I wrote about Alex Charns and his seminal role in the hockey protest movement. At that time, Alex mentioned a joining-up of Canes and Oilers fans outside the RBC Center during the Stanley Cup Final, and now I’ve got the proof:

It’s heartening to see rival hockey fans from two different countries coming together with a message of peace.

I told Alex I have to root for the Sabres against the Canes in their season opener next Wednesday, since Portland hero Paul Gaustad is playing for Buffalo. He understands.

Alex wrote a great book about picking up recreational hockey during the NHL lockout, and his belief that a magic puck would save us all from the wrath of Dubya. It’s a great read. I keep meaning to review it here, and maybe I will someday. Or maybe I just did. Here: Buy this book!

 
It can be a lonely feeling being a lefty hockey fan in the US. It’s lonely enough being a hockey fan south of the 49th parallel. But add a dose of socialism to the mix, and people just think you’re a freak of nature. (Witness the common response to my “More Hockey Less War” bumper sticker: “Aren’t they the same thing? Ha ha ha.” Why no, I feel obligated to point out, civillians aren’t typically killed, impoverished and driven from their homes by hockey games. But I digress.)

Of course, our neighbors to the north don’t find it ironic to be hockey fans and progressive-minded. And I skate with some pretty leftish guys, many of whom are from the Northeastern US and Canada. So maybe it’s just that people on US left coast just don’t get it.

Anyway, I was pleasantly surprised to find another lefty blog out there written by a guy with legit hockey cred. Michael Bérubé is a leftist right winger, whose off-ice life involves some kind of hoity-toity academic nonsense. No, seriously, he teaches lit and cultural studies at Penn State, and has a great sense of humor in his blog.

Today’s entry, “Who’s out to get you?” is about Bill O’Reilly’s new enemies list, er, I mean “book”. Michael saves us the pain of reading O’Reilly’s pap by publishing the full enemies list, which, I was pleased to discover, contained not only the Hanson brothers, but also Sideshow Bob and Julie Andrews. I went ahead and added a few of my own (I can’t believe he left of Reggie Dunlop and Joe McGrath).

Anyway, see, I’m not crazy.

By the way, I finally got to see “Les Chiefs”. What a trip. I’ll try to write a review of it this week.

I know I say this too much, but you really should read Juan Cole every day if you have any interest in what’s going on in the Middle East. Here’s his take on the Israel-Hezbollah war:

It was such a stupid war. It was thick-as-two-blocks-of-wood strategy on all sides. It was moronic for the Israelis to plan it out last year. It was idiotic for Hizbullah to cross over into Israel, kill soldiers, and take two captive. It was brain dead for the Israeli officer corps and politicians to think they could get anything positive out of bombing Lebanon back to the stone age and making a million people homeless. It was dim-witted for Hasan Nasrallah to threaten Israelis with releasing poison gases from Haifa chemical plants on them. It was obtuse for the Israelis to confront a dug-in guerrilla movement with green conventional troops marching in straight lines. It was dull of Hizbullah to fire thousands of katyushas into open fields where they mainly damaged wild grass. The few times when the rockets managed to kill someone, it was often an Arab Israeli civilian. Stupid.

It’s been a long offseason, in which war has flared up in a most grotesque way in Lebanon. Israel has the obvious edge in civilian kills, but there is no clear military advantage coming into the first intermission:

non-combatants killed:
Israel: approximately 1,000 Lebanese civilians.
Hezbollah: 43 Israeli civilians.
combantants killed:
Israel: unknown number of Hezbollah fighters.
Hezbollah: 114 IDF troops.
source: BBC

A sickening first period, and that’s just the dead. Are the Lebanese dead are better off, considering the literal and figurative rubble the nearly million displaced living Lebanese are coming home to? How many more children and old people will die horrid deaths in Lebanon due to destroyed infrastructure and leftover ordnance? No matter who “wins”, it is Lebanese civil society that is the biggest loser. In many ways, this has been a war on democracy and pluralism, to the extent that that’s what Lebanon represents in the region.
(See more pictures here) Politically, the war criminal Hassan Nasrallah has won a huge victory in the Muslim world. Hezbollah has stood up to the previously invincible Israeli millitary machine like no Arab army before. The IDF was unable to take and hold small villages a short distance from their own border, much less destroy Hezbollah. The war criminal Ehud Olmert, with the blood of 1000 unarmed men, women and children on his hands, is facing a gathering political storm in his own country. Armed with the most modern millitary technology available, in overwhelming quantities, Olmert was unable to stomp out a small militia, armed with WWII era anti-personnel rockets, anti-tank weapons and small arms. Instead, he has emboldened Hezbollah as a mass popular movement and left its military wing intact.

As thousands of dirt poor, rural Lebanese make there way to pick through the shattered remains of their lives, the truce looks highly questionable. I fear the potential for a gruesome second period, with peasants killed by bombs from 30,000 feet as they dig up and re-bury their dead, and Hezbollah launching more Katyushas on Israel. The US is already saying the French-led UN force will not disarm Hezbollah. The Lebanese army is politically and militarily incapable of doing so. Will Israel be willing to walk away with Hezbollah intact? What will Israel have accomplished, other than inflaming its enemies and destroying Lebanon’s infrastructure?

Meanwhile, did anybody notice that 3,400 civilians died in Iraq in July? I am really, truly ready for More Hockey and Less War. Bring it on! Drop the puck!

It’s being made out that the whole point of the war was to topple the Taliban regime and liberate Afghan women from their burqas, we are being asked to believe that the U.S. marines are actually on a feminist mission. (If so, will their next stop be America’s military ally Saudi Arabia?) Think of it this way: in India there are some pretty reprehensible social practices against “untouchables”, against Christians and Muslims, against women. Pakistan and Bangladesh have even worse ways of dealing with minority communities and women. Should they be bombed? Should Delhi, Islamabad and Dhaka be destroyed? Is it possible to bomb bigotry out of India? Can we bomb our way to a feminist paradise? Is that how women won the vote in the U.S? Or how slavery was abolished? Can we win redress for the genocide of the millions of Native Americans upon whose corpses the United States was founded by bombing Santa Fe?

—Arundhati Roy, Come September (speech), Santa Fe, New Mexico, September 2002