Author Archives: deanwebb

Cory Booker: The Kind of Leadership We Need

The Mayor of Newark made a headline for himself by rescuing a neighbor from a fire. When I heard it, I wasn’t surprised. I feel good inside, knowing that Mr. Booker is still keeping true to his principles.

I first saw Cory Booker in the film “Street Fight” – one of the best political documentaries, ever – which documented his failed bid to become mayor. Cory took on an old crony politician and nearly won, in spite of his opponent lying, intimidating, and using police state tactics to keep his hold on power. The sadness of that loss didn’t stop Booker. He came back and won his next election.

Booker resolved to live in the poorest part of town so that, as mayor, he would fix the problems of his people. When I saw this story, I knew he had kept to his principles for these last six years.

This is what we need: men and women, regardless of party, that use leadership to help their neighbors and to make sure that their neighbors are the ones most in need of a powerful friend. We don’t need a crew that feathers its own beds. We don’t need people beholden to rich men and their special interests.

I’m not saying Cory Booker needs to run for president: I’m saying the people running for president need to emulate Cory Booker. Senators, Congressmen, heads of agencies, all of them: live among the poor, put your kids in public schools, ride the buses, eat what we eat and do what we do.

That way, you’ll all start solving the problems *we* have and not all the problems of the richest 0.01% of Americans. Whenever a nation forgets its poor, its end is not long in coming. When a nation remembers its poor and exalts them, its greatness can be sustained.

Thank you, Cory Booker, for showing the way. I’m a fan, and I’m proud of what you’re doing. Thank you for keeping true and fighting that best of fights.

Freedom of Belief

In the USA, we have a freedom of belief. We’re not alone in the world in that respect, but that’s not what I’m writing about. I’m writing about what to do with that freedom.

I used to hold a view that the universe was entirely deterministic. No God guided anything along in the view I held then. I looked at other religions and saw the man-made alterations and inventions in them and felt no sense of the divine. I heard preachers on the television – years before their public downfalls in stories of corruption and lies – and heard the hypocrisy in their voices. I could not believe that which was built upon vain imaginings and crass manipulation.

To me, if a faith was worth having, it would have to be based upon something pure and honest. It would have to be self-consistent enough to provide a framework that would allow belief to cover the yet-unexplained gaps. I never wanted perfect proof for a faith. The very definition of faith means it cannot be based upon perfect proof. But it still had to answer my questions in a manner both consistent and…

And what?

I didn’t know at the time what else was needed, but I knew it needed to be more than a Geometry proof or a Physics experiment. Science had no answers for me for things beyond its reach, that of the senses and their extensions. Death stood before me as a grand, dark gate, blacker than the blackest hole of the cosmos, to which we could send no instruments to gather data, let alone have them return. Science draws up at the gate of death and confesses defeat. In a world with only explanations for the world, that which lies beyond can never be known.

And that left me as cold as a hypocrite’s plea for gold in the guise of a gospel.

Rene Descartes said, “Cogito, ergo sum.” Translated, “I think, therefore I am.” In that Cartesian summation, the inner awareness is supreme. Even if it is in error, it is supreme. This is the point from which we all begin – the self – and it is where every journey of life begins. We determine in our own conscience what we are willing to accept, what we are willing to believe in, and what we are willing to allow to change our lives. We have that will, that freedom, and one of the great wars of humanity is in the question of allowing individuals to exercise that free will.

At its most base expression, one holds a freedom of belief to be in effect only for the self, that all others must then conform to the belief one has chosen. This is the cardinal mistake of fundamentalism, for it denies others the opportunity to express their own dictates of their own consciences. As much as I would desire everyone to believe and to be acted upon by that belief as I am, to impose the decisions of my conscience upon others is to assault the souls of others with the intent of murdering them.

Sadly, I used to be that way to some extent. In my own realization of a thing worth believing in, I sought to replicate that experience in the lives and minds of others. Not something like it, but the very experience itself. I wanted, as in the words of Stanislav Lem, to create mirrors in that which faced me. I never was entirely comfortable with that, as it smacked too much of the hypocrisy which revulsed me.

Defending my faith with loud arguments and aggressive proofs was a step up from that, I suppose, but it was still not satisfactory in that it still did not respect the views others were free to form. While I realize that acquiring my faith was a massive turning-point in my life, I realize that an equally massive turning point was in learning that I had no right to impose or force my views. Each time I have learned about that, and those lessons stretch all the way to this day, I have felt my own faith strengthen and grow.

Even today, I just had the realization that I was as right when I believed there was no God as now, when I very much do believe that there is a God. At each step of the way, I was – and am – convinced that I was – and am – right in my thinking. The person I was thirty years ago is not the person I am right now, but he was still competent and capable of figuring things out for himself. I mean, after all, he is the person that got me to where I am today.

What helped that young man to get here was the guidance of others that had already walked long paths of life with dignity and humility. Many of those men and women were of my own faith, but not all. Thankfully, I do hold to a religion that, while it proclaims to be the only true one on the earth, does not claim to have a monopoly on truth. It also teaches that, in order to live in the most harmonious way possible, we need to tolerate others. It specifically warns against forcing others to do or act in ways contrary to their conscience. Yes, there are exceptions for self-defense and other extreme cases, but those are the extremes. In everyday life, we have to let other people do things that we think are wrong because they think they are right in doing them.

We must forgive and allow them to do those things. We must be tolerant and respect their ways if we wish to have any claim on a right to be respected in our own ways. We must avoid the sin of fundamentalism and embrace the virtue of greater wisdom.

This is why I choose to emphasize that people should never stop seeking the truth. I know there is a grand, unifying truth that binds the universe in its loving eternity. While there may be one truth, I know that I do not yet know the whole of it: I only know enough to know where to keep looking to find more of it. But I do know that anyone who creates rules in his or her own life to seek after truth and then, upon discovery, to allow it to change his or her life will eventually find the same truth I have found and it will change their lives in the ways they need to be changed. Not to make them mirrors of me, but to make them the best that they can be, which is what I seek for myself.

Religion is nothing more than a vehicle for truth. I mentioned that great gate of death before: religion claims to have the answers for what lies beyond that gate. These claims, however, must be subjected to different tests than claims about what the physical world around us is like. The experiments one performs on faith are personal and strictly so. My experiences are my own. I think and therefore I am. You think and therefore you are. What the I experiences is available to the you, the he, and the she, but only on terms acceptable to the you, he, or she. What is in my mind, I cannot re-create in the mind of another. All I can do is hope to expose that grand, universal truth to another and hope that it is something the other will see value in. If not, so be it. If so, happy day!

I have read much of other faiths and I have tried my very best to comprehend them all. I do this not to point out where they are wrong, but to realize where they are right. In so doing, I have realized that, over time, men have encountered personal proofs of what lies beyond that gate of death. They take their personal accounts, many of them bewildering and strange on first examination, and commit them to paper or legend for others to learn by them. In so doing, there are core, resonating ideas that show to me how there is that one, grand truth. Peoples separated by time and space have independently verified, so to speak, that their encounters with the other side of death have given them certain conclusions which I think are safe to say are universal.

Now, anyone who rubbishes that idea of mine is right. The nay-sayer is free to say nay. In his mind, he’s right and in my mind, I’m right. Both of us will be amazed when we come face to face with absolute truth in its entirety – when we realize how wrong we were to think we were so right before. But I do see a danger in absolute rejection of the idea that there is more to life than what we see and experience with our senses and their extensions, the lab equipment of the scientific world. In a sense, it is another form of fundamentalism. It is another form of refusing to seek after truth.

The hypocrites that demanded gold for gospels refused truth: they saw the search for knowledge, peace, and harmony, as an opportunity to enrich themselves. The fundamentalists that killed those that did not believe as they did refused truth: they did not know that, blind as we are, we are bound to think different things as we are individually exposed to different aspects of the grand truth of the universe. The strident arch-defenders of a particular religion refused truth: they presumed they had already learned all there was worth learning and that no one else could offer a view that would add to their wisdom.

I have a freedom of belief. So do you. We can do whatever we want with it, even nothing. I have chosen to seek after truth, wherever I can find it, and to encourage others to do the same, with the faith that those who are honest in their search – who never abandon it, even when it means they must confront the sin in their own life and repent of it – will make a journey worth all the sacrifice. I have faith that I will be standing in the same place eventually as all other honest and earnest seekers of truth.

A Convoluted Scam

I had a dream. No, that’s not some figurative statement. I had a dream, and it was insane. It started with investigative reporter Greg Palast talking about government boondoggle programs being run by no-bid contractors like Halliburton and Bechtel. No-bid means just that: no bid, and the contractor could be charging very uncompetitive rates. That was bad enough. Then it got more convoluted.

The contractors would employ desperate people from abroad in key positions. Why? Those desperate people needed their employment visas to stay in the USA. Without them, they would face immediate deportation to places like Greece and Spain where the economy was in the toilet and they would face unemployment with no end in sight. These were family people, but their families had to stay back in the home country – to keep them more desperate and dependent upon anything handed to them here, I presumed.

These desperate work visa holders were in charge of keeping secrets. If they talked, they could always be discredited by pointing to how they were aliens, they had bad performance reviews, they drank heavily on the job, and so on. The secrets involved the true nature of the boondoggle programs. They were either true boondoggles, which was bad enough, or they were cover operations for black bag operations – top secret activities of the US Government that ranged from being barely legal on out to flagrant violations of the Constitution and the law.

I was investigating these unfinished buildings, hospitals getting irregular lawn care, and sidewalk contracts enduring massive cost overruns and everywhere there was a scared foreigner, desperately smiling and lying to explain away any inconsistencies. The beauty of that part was that if the guy couldn’t talk straight, he could always fall back on his difficulties with the language as an excuse: “No no no no no… what I to meant to say the was we to not the being of isn’t a the to wasting of the moneys.”

The foreigners would defend the boondoggles tooth and nail because that’s what the contractors wanted them to do. Either they were lining their pockets with the proceeds of the do-nothing project, or they were even more profitable fronts for illegal operations running guns, drugs, or worse on a scale far beyond Iran-Contra.

I woke up from that and shook my head about it. It seemed crazy. When I went back to sleep, the dream continued where it left off and I saw more and more of those things, like in some kind of Biblical vision. Maybe it was. There’s only one way to find out.

And if I did uncover a scam like I dreamed, that would be amazing. But what could we do about it? The much less convoluted vision of a nation being run by interest groups already exists. This added complication would only be possible in such a government and the only way to get rid of it is to get rid of the interest groups’ ability to lobby Congress. The only way to do that, in all truth, is to only elect honest Congressmen that aren’t afraid of death. That last requirement is very important, because these interest groups include those that aren’t above a few “accidents” to keep their gravy train making regular stops.

So that’s my dream and my reflection upon it. Make of it what you will: I know what it means to me.

Grand Canyon Dawn


Click for full size.

I should take some inventory in my life at this time. There are so many wonderful things I’ve been able to see and experience. The greatness of life is not in the fame we have for our works, nor in fortunes amassed. True greatness is being able to look back on what we have done and to know, in spite of obstacles and mistakes, that we have indeed fought the good fight. True hope is in the realization that even if we haven’t fought the good fight in our past, that the resolve to fight the good fight in the future can make our lives great from this point forward.

So what does this have to do with the Grand Canyon at dawn?

Well, one day at the Grand Canyon, I decided to wake up before dawn so I could be in position to take photos of the “first sunrise.” While my choice wasn’t fraught with danger, it was still an act of will to get up, get ready, head out, and hike over a difficult path to Bright Angel Point. I fought the good fight that day… and, what do you know, my life was great that day.

A Very Bad Law

The Trayvon Martin shooting is, without a question in my mind, a terrible tragedy. It should never have happened. It is all the more tragic because of a very bad law. The “stand your ground” statute in Florida actually permits someone to provoke a violent reaction but, if the reaction is life threatening, to respond with deadly force. That means if two gunslingers meet in the middle of a Florida street, whoever kills first wins the justified homicide race. For proof that his life was in danger, he can point to his slain foe with a gun in his hand.

Yes, Mr. Martin was unarmed, but one eyewitness says he saw Mr. Martin beating Mr. Zimmerman, the shooter. Another eyewitness saw the opposite happening, so all we have left is Mr. Zimmerman’s testimony, and he did have injuries to his face and head consistent with his account of Mr. Martin attacking him. So why did Mr. Martin attack, if that’s what he did?

Maybe it was the same stupid law. The law allows for people to stand their ground, instead of requiring a duty to retreat. A duty to retreat means a person needs to get away from a confrontation and let police handle the situation. In a stand your ground law, one can stand and engage an opponent based upon one’s judgment.

In this case, imagine what has to be going through the mind of a 17-year old walking home in the dark on a rainy night when some strange guy in a truck pulls up beside you and demands that you come talk to him. That’s a terrifying situation, and I can understand why Mr. Martin would not want to give any information to or comply with Mr. Zimmerman’s commands. We tell our children that strangers could kill them – and that is exactly what happened here.

Had Mr. Martin killed Mr. Zimmerman, the same law would have justified the homicide. Without a duty to retreat and let potentially cooler heads prevail, or at least heads that can be identified as policemen – and I’m leaving the racial controversy with the local force aside – the Florida law as written allows any pair of individuals that doesn’t understand each other completely to open fire, rather than try to understand what’s really going on.

Bad laws make for bad situations. Not only has this law contributed to the Martin shooting case, it’s also used by criminals to justify murders of rivals. Is that really what Florida wants on its hands?

Individual Mandates and Constitutionality

Short version of the problem: Come 2014, I’m supposed to get insurance for my whole family. Looking at the government charts, I’ll have to spend at least $500 per month on a policy. Last policy I had didn’t pay for the square root of jack squat. Whatever policy I’ll have to get in 2014 probably will have the same huge deductible and no real benefits.

When a person in my family gets a major illness, I’ll have to cover that out of pocket. I make too much money to get free clinic stuff, but not enough to buy a policy that actually pays for hospital care. Being forced to buy insurance by the government does nothing for me, but everything for the insurance company whose lobbyist helped to write that part of the health care act.

Should I choose to do without, I can pay just shy of $2100 in a fine to some government agency. It won’t be a tax, technically, but it will go in to the USG’s coffers. So, come 2014, I can either pay $6200 per year for nothing or pay $2100 per year for nothing. Yeah… thanks for nothing, US Government!

This provision shows just how much control the lobbyists have over the President and Congress. They wrote a bill that doesn’t help poor or middle class people, it helps the interest groups that are already rich. I do hope the Supreme Court strikes down the individual mandate as unconstitutional. Congress should not have the power to require people to engage in acts of commerce, particularly when such acts are of no benefit to the purchaser.

By the way, this isn’t something that the Republicans are alone in hollering about. The liberal media is livid, as well. Michael Moore and Ralph Nader have both pooh-poohed this provision. While the left and the right may not agree on the solution for our health care problem, they can both agree that this ain’t it.

An Open Letter to Leon Panetta

Dear Mr. Panetta,
How are you? I am fine. I see there is a problem in Afghanistan right now. A soldier killed 16 civilians, including children. This is a terrible tragedy, and I’m sure you feel bad about that. I heard on the news that the soldier may have been drinking, which will contribute to bad decisions. But the soldier was also supposed to be home in the USA after three tours in Iraq and instead got sent to Afghanistan. That’s got to be what really messed him up.

The soldiers in the US military have been getting poor treatment on all accounts since 2001. They had to buy their own body armor, National Guardsmen would be denied VA benefits if their injuries could be reclassified, psychological health care was minimal at best, and they were put into situations they could not find any good way out of. This soldier has his own sins to bear, but the US armed forces have their hand in this situation, and that needs to be fixed.

The US Army can keep soldiers in combat, indefinitely, with the way they’ve written their regulations. While the regulations make everything legal, they don’t make it all right. The treatment our front-line soldiers has received has been abysmal, both “over there” and at home. These are the men and women that put their lives at risk for their nation, but who have been hired out to do the dirty, wet work for the big oil companies. And, like any other worker for corporate America, when they’re used up, they’re tossed aside. That is not right.

I hold that the wars should not have happened in the first place: I don’t care to win converts to that point of view, as I’d rather have agreement on a more basic issue. That soldier, and thousands others like him, don’t belong in war zones after multiple combat tours. Fix the rules so that what is done is also the right thing.

Thanks for your time, Mr. Panetta. While I have your attention, could you also make sure that we don’t use the US Army for political purposes? I don’t see any partisan political gain to be worth even one life of an American soldier. I have friends over there. Don’t use them like pawns in a game in which only the richest of the rich will win.

Sincerely,

Dean Webb

Milquetoast Fascism

Caspar Milquetoast was a cartoon character that lacked fortitude, assertiveness, and gumption. In short, he was a gutless, spineless, pliable person that bent to the wills around him. He’s the inspiration for the word “milquetoast.” He’s also the inspiration for the figureheads of the Republican Party.

The Democrats still elect leaders that can stand up for what they believe in. The last Republican that had a spine of his own was Richard Nixon, and he nearly wrecked the nation. Nixon was such a terrible president, Jimmy Carter was able to win the election after Nixon’s disastrous second term. Now, I like Carter, but Republicans hate him. So that goes to show just how bad the GOP had gotten with a willful leadership.

So who won the 1980 election? Ronald Reagan. Him? A milquetoast? Sure. His toughness was all scripted and Hollywood by-product. The guy rolled over on his fellow actors when he fingered anyone he suspected of Communist sympathies during the Red Scare of the 1950s. The guy was a mouthpiece. Remember Iran-Contra? Reagan was spineless enough that we could actually say he was dishonest if he knew and stupid if he didn’t. The secret bombing of Cambodia and Watergate, those we could lay right at Nixon’s feet. With Reagan, we could reasonably suspect someone was pulling his strings.

Since 1980, the GOP hasn’t campaigned on issues. It’s campaigned on buzzwords. God, guns, and gays. Family and prayer. Hard on crime. Liberal media. These strike a primal chord with anyone that hears them. The manipulation in GOP advertising and speechcrafting is powerful and undeniable. Find yourself weeping after Ollie North gives a stirring speech about how, in an effort to save American lives, he made some mistakes? Thank the speechwriter, not the mouthpiece. In reality, North was part of a murderous operation that fueled terrorism in the Mideast and Central America – and that also brought in a flood of cocaine to the USA. Mistakes? No. They were deliberate violations of the law, on the same level as organized criminals.

Dubya Bush was another Milquetoast Fascist. Everyone knew that Dick Cheney was working Bush like a sock puppet. When 9/11 happened, Cheney was rushed to safety. Bush was left in a pre-announced location where any terrorist with an RPG could brew up. Bush had been the target of an assassination attempt the night before from a team that used the same method that killed the leader of the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, but somehow, was left out there vulnerable while the vice-president got rushed to safety? The man was expendable.

Now there are three Milquetoast Fascists running for the GOP nomination along with Ron Paul. Paul is constantly sidelined by the media because they’re connected to those that are pulling the strings for the other three, and Paul has a spine. I don’t agree with everything the guy says, but he’s a breath of fresh air. Why doesn’t he have more popularity? It’s because he’s making the same mistake the Democrats make: he’s talking about the issues. Herman Cain made huge progress in the polls just by repeating the number “NINE!” Maybe Paul should start chanting, “GOLD!”

By the way, NINE is a homophone for the German word for no, “nein.” “Nein! Nein! Nein!” makes for an interesting tax percentage of zero…

But none of the GOP guys on his own is going to win the nomination. All three are sock puppets. To me, Romney is the biggest disappointment because he could have been so much different from the panderer he’s become. Santorum is an old hand at saying whatever he needs to say in order to get elected. In 1993, Santorum voted with the Democrats on labor issues and NAFTA. Why? His home congressional district had a 3:1 Democrat:Republican ratio. The man wanted to stay in power, so he said what people wanted to hear. Santorum also tried to make the National Weather Service not release information if it would be in competition with a pay service. That’s criminally stupid, and obviously a ploy by commercial weather forecasters to make more cash with a little help from a Santorum sock puppet.

Gingrich is a crusty old man and most likely to grow a spine suddenly. That’s why he’s at the bottom of the three Milquetoast Fascists in the political running. His job is to win just enough votes to force a brokered convention that could allow a different Milquetoast Fascist to emerge as a compromise candidate. Then, unbesmirched by the tars and feathers of the primary season, this new GOP Boy Wonder could charge to the top and grab the brass ring… and then bring the USA that much closer to a republican fascism, smiling all the way.