Artists are not exploring "The cutting edge" but staying in the "Safe Zone"

Please click on link above to read number 26 that I posted on 31 Jan 07 Thanks!

Huber Center Sounds too Comfy

Temporary unable to post this one. Please follow the link above.

Call For Troops is Cause for comment in Madison Circles

Call For Troops Is Cause For Comment In Madison Circles The Capital Times :: FRONT :: A4 Wednesday, January 10, 2007 By Kate Raiford The Capital Times/Medill News Service (NOTE: I did not write this, just interviewed for my comments. Please see about 10 paragraphs below- Bill) For many scholars and activists in Madison, President Bush's expected call to deploy 20,000 more troops only reinforces doubts over the Iraq war. Others, though, see it as fulfilling a moral obligation to see the war through. The increase would raise the number of U.S. troops in Iraq to more than 160,000 in an attempt to stabilize Baghdad and end violence against civilians. In a recent Washington Post-ABC news poll, just 17 percent of Americans supported a troop increase. For the American people, "any surge in the troop levels in Iraq will mean more of the same types of losses, more men and women will be put in the line of fire, and many more will be killed or injured," said Middle East scholar Samer Alatout in an e-mail exchange. He is an assistant professor of rural sociology and at the Institute for Environmental Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Alatout argued that neoconservatives and corporations like Halliburton and Bechtel won the war as soon as it began because they profited regardless of the outcome. In military terms, sending in troops won't have much impact on the war, said Jon Pevehouse, a UW-Madison associate professor of political science who researches the Middle East. "I don't think sending more troops will hurt, but it's not likely to help," he said. Some of those interviewed just want the war to end. "For the good of the world, the troops should come home," said Buzz Davis, a member of Madison chapter of Veterans for Peace and chairman of the Impeachment/Bring Our Troops Home coalition. He served in the Vietnam War. "Iraq has turned into a civil war that is encouraging more terrorism," he said. "If we don't pull out now, it will end up with more Americans and Iraqis dead." He saw the "surge" as a possible early example of the "incrementalism" of troop deployment used in Vietnam. First it's 20,000 troops, next it's 40,000, he suggested. Pevehouse disagrees. Unlike past requests, he argued, this one would not leave the door open for more troops. He said he sees the troop increase as a last-ditch effort. Stay and fight: Bill Richardson, treasurer of the organization Vote NO to Cut and Run and former warrant officer in the Army National Guard, said that sending more troops to Iraq is a "terrific idea." "Americans don't leave until it is absolutely stable," he said. "We've made a moral choice, and we need to finish it." By sending the 20,000 troops, Americans would begin to stabilize Baghdad neighborhood by neighborhood, Richardson said. If troops leave, he added, the terrorists will know that America is weak. For some, supporting the troop increase depends on the situation. Mike Gourlie, a retired National Guard lieutenant colonel, said he would support an increase if Bush offered a plan with a specific timeline and guidelines. Gourlie served in Vietnam and in Afghanistan. "If we have a policy that doesn't have an endgame, how are we going to win?" he asked. He said Bush has an open checkbook and an open calendar, adding that the troops should be there to train, build an army and provide equipment. Pay up and impeach: Davis said more than just pulling out the troops, Americans should be taxed for the cleanup effort, especially the wealthiest 4 to 5 percent. They have profited the most from the president's tax cuts, he said. The president and vice president should be impeached as well, he said. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., "should have the political courage to call a spade and spade and must move for impeachment to remedy the abuses of this administration," he said. "It's her constitutional duty."

Fuzzy thinking snags 'bring the troops home' backers

Fuzzy Thinking Snags Bring Troops Home' Backers The Capital Times Guest Editorial A9 Saturday, March 4, 2006 by WILLIAM RICHARDSON First, we have to admit that being taken apart by John Nichols, an editor and writer of national stature, while not an honor, is at least a tribute to the fact that we must have been doing something right to be flogged by a famous editor! We have been working on the VOTENOToCutandRun.com Web site for the last three weeks and just put it up officially a few days ago. We agree with him on at least one thing: We think the site is "slick" too. Thanks! Expensive? No. Hard work? Yes. New appreciation for what a writer must do? Yep. The three founding members of Vote No to Cut and Run, Wendy Fjelstad, Sam Johnson and I, are newly minted Republicans, joining the party in the last two years and elected a year ago to serve as Assembly district chairs for the Republican Party of Dane County. But the source of our funding was strictly grass-roots -- it started in our own pocketbooks. Republicans, independents and Democrats (so far no one from Progressive Dane, but we are hopeful) have donated $10, $15, $25 amounts mostly, with one individual stepping up to help fund some of the start-up costs. No money has come from the Republican Party at any level. How about a follow-up story on all the Bring the Troops Home Now referendum supporters and their funding? We are not "so-called" -- we are called VOTE NO to Cut and Run. (Wouldn't that be called an editorial "cheap shot"?) Nichols calls it "peddling armchair slogans." We call it trying to get reasonable people with common sense regardless of their political orientation to look at the referendum -- which is: "Resolved: The U.S. should bring all military personnel home from Iraq now" -- and say, "Now?" We ask them to imagine what would happen in Iraq, the Middle East, the United States and the world if we withdrew all our troops now! We grant we are amateurs at writing and persuasion and Nichols is a master at his craft. However, he did not mention, quote or discuss the actual referendum in his column or what would happen if we did remove all our troops now. Why? Will he now? We believe the important thing now is to address not how we got there -- the historians will handle that -- but what do we do now: finish the job of stabilizing a struggling, proudly purple-fingered democratic state or cut and run now as the referendum dictates. Also agreed: We did not address several issues Nichols raised; we need to do so and will. Freeing 27 million people from Saddam and sons was already known, we thought. Shouldn't reporting the good news in Iraq be your job, too? However, the Web site does allow our soldiers, the Iraqi people, our governor and prominent Democrats to speak about the wisdom of an immediate withdrawal. The site shows how this referendum is a direct attack on the morale of our troops in Iraq, how our Wisconsin troops are reacting to being undermined by their hometowns and how this is, in fact, more about an anti-military referendum than it is about peace and justice and "just let the people decide" foreign policy in each city across the state. The fact that 41 Wisconsin soldiers re-enlisted recently while serving in Kuwait/Iraq speaks to how high their morale is. Not every soldier who has, or is serving, likely agrees with every reason why they are there, but they are serving and deserve our support, not our criticism, or second-guessing their mission. The Green Party, Wisconsin Network for Peace and Justice, Code Pink, World Can't Wait, Not in Our Name, Answer and many other anti-military left groups have made this a partisan issue by placing it on the ballot in nearly 30 communities in Wisconsin, using tactics that included lawsuits to force it on each city, and make them pay for it, too. Check the minutes in most of the cities. They did not want to join Madison and pay local tax money to pretend they set national foreign policy. We are reacting to those tactics. On our Web site, we define the background of the referendum groups and show how their literature and historical stance have been anti-military for many years and this pose of "caring for the troops" now is just that, a cynical pose. Nichols mentioned that voting is a way for citizens to provide a "check and balance" on their elected leaders at all times. This referendum does not address our elected leaders; it is a local referendum in April. Voters had the choice of an anti-war candidate during the national Democratic primary for the 2004 presidential election and will again in coming elections. What is the real reason this referendum is being pushed? Finally, to call the Bring the Troops Home Now referendum rammers (hiding behind multilayered, well-funded, far-left front groups) "true" patriots (look at their history and anti-American literature) who are acting in an "American tradition" is beyond the pale, unless you are referring to their own old, worn-out playbook from the early '70s as a "tradition." William Richardson is a retired UW-Madison professor, retired member of the Wisconsin Army National Guard and treasurer of the anti-referendum group VOTE NO To Cut and Run.

Simple Solution to educating 'on the cheap'

Simple Solution To Educating 'on The Cheap' Wisconsin State Journal :: OPINION :: A8 Wednesday, December 27, 2006 For all those in the state who agree with the writer of the letter to the editor in the Dec. 22 State Journal who said she is paying less tax to the school district now than she was in 1994, there is very simple and cost-effective method to provide more money to our state's public schools. Include an extra $1,000 in your December property-tax payment earmarked "for the public schools" and throw in another grand with your state income tax return that you will file for 2006 earmarked "for state aid to education." If all the teachers, administrators and parents who believe we are, as she stated, educating our kids "on the cheap" at $11,000 plus per student (in Madison) will make this extra $2,000 deductible contribution, the schools will be overflowing with cash. -- Bill Richardson, Madison.