[Editor's Note: What follows is a contribution from Marvin Sussman, an Elmhurst resident, like me, and a WWII veteran. Marvin is concerned that Democrat's will try to run this fall by simply trying to hang Iraq on Repblicans without offering a realistic alternative solution. He thinks that strategy will fail and I think he may be right. Here Marvin offers an alternative with the hope of inspiring a constructive discussion. He says his efforts to present his ideas to Jill Morgenthaler's campaign have, so far, not been met with a response. We think she might just see them here. Thanks, Marvin, for reading and contributing.] [Update 3/6/2008 - Please read Jill Morgenthaler's response following Marvin's post.]

It is absolutely certain that Iraq will be the determining issue facing Obama and McCain.

To win in November, Obama must be absolutely right on this issue.  It is not enough to hang McCain’s record around his neck.  Obama must present a realistic view of Iraq’s future.  He must show how he would leave Iraq with a semblance of long-term stability.

“If elected, I will do my best to bring complete independence to Kurdistan and to guarantee its security as a sovereign nation!  And I will do my best to separate the Sunnis from the Shi’ites and end their perpetual warfare!  I will ask the UN to hold independence plebiscites for each group.  When everyone has their own nation and their own government, the fighting will stop.  I will get all of our troops out of Iraq!”

That’s the kind of promise that will elect Obama.  But no important Democrat has yet seen complete partition as the only realistic and permanent solution to the Iraq crisis.  No, not Senator Biden’s “weak central government” that controls “only” the army and oil revenue!  Complete partition into totally independent nations!

[Read more →]

This weekend finds our Congressman, Peter Roskam, on a junket to Colombia. There he has been meeting with the Colombian President, Alvaro Uribe, in an effort to smooth the way for a free-trade agreement with Columbia by downplaying the persisent violence against trade unionists, human rights activists and journalists by rightwing para-military groups with connections to both the Uribe administration and the Colombian military. 40 union leaders were killed in the past year alone. And there has been violence directed also at poor people who pose inconveniences to projects by large multunational corporations, a trend that may increase if Roskam and his allies are able to push a free-trade agreement through.

Like his predecessor, Henry Hyde, Roskam has little problem with this kind of terrorism if it supports the rightwing government’s hold on power and thus U.S. corporate interests.

Roskam’s comment from Columbia on the situation there:

“This is a market of 44 million people,” he said. “There are great export opportunities. This is a country that buys a tremendous amount of agricultural equipment.” The best argument for approving the agreement, he said, is geo-political: “We have a lot at stake to see this place flourish and do well.”

So much for human rights.

(Aside to Peter: I apologize, Peter, if I haven’t been paying as much attention to you lately as I should. Hanging on to my own job has been keeping me busy day and night and I just haven’t had much time for politics. But rest assured I’m going to keep doing my part to help send you back to your cushy personal injury attorney gig and leave this governing business to the ungrateful hoi polloi. BTW, thanks for the robo calls. Nice to know you care enough to have your machine call me.)

This past week, Democrats in the House passed a measure designed to give a boost to efforts to develop new sources of clean, renewable energy and promote increased energy independence while protecting the environment.

Peter Roskam, our Representative in the 6th Congressional district, was not on board.

The bill, Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2008, H.R. 5351, would, if enacted, extend a number of tax credits, now set to expire, to support alternative technologies such as solar energy, fuel cells, and alternative-fueled vehicles, and to support making commercial and residential properties more energy-efficient. New tax credits would also be created for investment in clean renewable energy and energy conservation bonds.

The bill would fund these tax credits by fiscally sound means - repealing certain tax breaks given to Big Oil companies by the Bush Adminisistration, the same companies now making record profits selling us high-priced gasoline, natural gas, and heating-oil. Gasoline prices at the pump have more than doubled since George W. Bush took office. (The G.O.P. really isthe “Gas and Oil Party”). Looking out my window as I write I see the lowest price at the BP near me to be $3.23. That was probably a buck-fifty at the end of the Clinon administration.

When he voted on this bill, Peter Roskam had the opportunity to do take a bite out of the high costs of energy for his constituents while promoting new jobs for them in them green technologies industries, helping them upgrade to energy-conserving technologies, and enhancing their security by reducing our dependence on foreign sources of energy. At the same time, Roskam, who occasionally like to portray himself as an environmentalist, could have taken a small step toward promoting a cleaner environment and reducing the impact of global climate change.

Roskam chose not to do so.

Instead, he chose to protect the huge profits being earned by Big Oil and lend yet another “rubber stamp” of approval to the Bush administration’s project of promoting rule by corporations over rule by the people.

Roskam doesn’t explain his vote on his web site. (He doesn’t even list energy in the “Issues” section). But, like Bush, I don’t think he believes he has to be accountable to the voters. He believes he is in a safe Republican district. But I think we’ll show him this fall just how unsafe his district can be for a Representative who ignores the interests of the voters.