Eternal Vigilance | By Dan Trimble

When the $789 billion stimulus bill was passed, Congress rammed it through the legislative process as fast as they possibly could. No one in Congress had time to read the bill. The American public–bearing the burdens that come with the single largest government spending legislation in the history of man–had no time to become familiar with it, let alone let their congressional representatives know how they felt about it.

In other words, there was no fair or open public debate. There was no transparency into the process. We were expected to take at face value everything they were telling us. Irrespective of whether or not you feel that piece of legislation is or will be effective, a process that eliminates the public debate is fundamentally corrosive to the very foundations of democracy, and a dangerous way of governing a nation.

This goes far beyond the stimulus bill. The list of force-fed legislation is long, and constantly growing.

The Sunlight Foundation–a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization improving access to government information–has been working with members of Congress to propose legislation mandating that all new bills be posted publicly no less than 72 hours prior to the start of congressional debates. It is long overdue, but has bi-partisan support.

You can help make sure it passes.

Generations

A picture truly is worth a thousand words. This great shot comes from Mel Evans / Associated Press, published in Time this morning:

“Pearl Harbor survivor James J. Hewitt watches as hundreds of New Jersey National Guard soldiers march in Trenton, NJ to celebrate their return from Iraq.”

Iran / Karimkhan ST / protest TODAY #iranelection on Twitpic

According to Matthew Weaver at the Guardian, in one Iranian protest alone, more than half a million people are marching from Haft-e-Tir Square to Vali Asr Square.

Meanwhile, Robert Tait of the Guardian also reports election turnout numbers that we can only dream about: 100% in 30 different Iranian towns, and more than 200 polling stations across the country showing turnouts above 95%.

I have no doubt that the revolt taking place in Iran will remain as one of the country’s defining moments of this generation. It is a uniquely influential generation, with more than 70% of all Iranians under the age of 30, and an ever-increasing accessibility to technologies that Iran’s leadership dictators would rather they not have access to (e.g. cell phones and Twitter). Never the less, Iran is a complicated mess, and like Tom Friedman, I believe only time will tell how this shapes out.

What excites me is where this is all originating from. To this point, Andrew Sullivan has made several wise observations about the revolt:

“…it has not been imposed or instigated from outside, and has been launched ostensibly to restore the hopes of the original revolution, rather than destroy it.”

He’s dead-on about the power of this revolt coming from within, not from meddling outside interests. We’ll see how it escalates, but in the mean it would seem only the Revolutionary Guard could be used to reign in the mass protests. And that would mount a whole separate problem for an Iranian regime that has deeply clouded the separation of military and politics for years.

Revolutionary Guard or not, the seeds have been sown for this generation and future Iranians to recognize this revolt as a pivotal turning point. The massive, wide-scale discontent with Iran’s regime isn’t limited to frustrated Westerners fearful of a nuclear theocracy. The discontent is deeply rooted in–and collapsing at–Iran’s own clerical foundation. The cries for legitimate democracy and new elections aren’t being spoken by just the Twittering twentysomethings that make up a notable number of Iranian citizens. They are being spoken by a former Iranian prime minister of eight years, a former president, a former speaker of parliament, and numerous other ranking officials. In other words, it is no longer a movement of youthful dreams, but of serious and wide-spread civil disobedience.

It’s a beautiful thing, protests. In places where they are very common they may not seem like much. But their ability to unify or advance an idea with grace and diplomacy and a vocal outcry invariably leaves an indelible mark on those who govern. It’s hard to ignore thousands of people and keep your credibility intact. Never mind that such outcries are so strongly unified into a single voice by technologies that truly live in the moment–the Twittering of updates as protests run rampant; the text messages to friends and family anywhere they may be; the emailed updates from hospitals overrun with incoming dead bodies then confiscated by the regime without so much as an identification of who they were.

Rasht. Orumiyeh. Zanjan. Zahedan. Tabriz. Mashhad. The voices are spreading to numerous cities and are heard around the world. Say what you will about Mousavi and Ahmadinejad, and how their foreign policies would be different. In point of fact, a change of regime may or may not even moderate Iran’s policies. But that’s not the point. This is bigger than just Mousavi. The suppression of discontent is failing and voices are being heard. The cries for legitimacy and change seem to be at a crescendo. Irrespective of how this revolt ends, the pillars propping up Iran’s intense grip have cracked and are splitting at the seams–largely driven by the people.

General Orders No. 11 of the Grand Army of the Republic:

I. The 30th day of May, 1868, is designated for the purpose of strewing with flowers, or otherwise decorating the graves of comrades who died in defense of their country during the late rebellion, and whose bodies now lie in almost every city, village, and hamlet churchyard in the land. In this observance no form or ceremony is prescribed, but Posts and comrades will, in their own way, arrange such fitting services and testimonials of respect as circumstances may permit.

We are here to play, Comrades, as our regulations tell us, for the purpose among other things, “of preserving and strengthening those kind and fraternal feelings which have bound together the soldiers sailors and Marines, who united to suppress the late rebellion.” What can aid more to assure this result than by cherishing tenderly the memory of our heroic dead? We should guard their graves with sacred vigilance. All that the consecrated wealth and taste of the nation can add to their adornment and security, is but a fitting tribute to the memory of her slain defenders. Let pleasant paths invite the coming and going of reverent visitors and fond mourners. Let no neglect, no ravages of time, testify to the present or to the coming generations that we have forgotten as a people the cost of a free and undivided republic.

If other eyes grow dull and other hands slack, and other hearts cold in the solemn trust, ours shall keep it well as long as the light and warmth of life remain in us.

Let us, then, at the time appointed, gather around their sacred remains, and garland the passionless mounds above them with choicest flowers of springtime; let us raise above them the dear old flag they saved; let us in this solemn presence renew our pledge to aid and assist those whom they have left among us a sacred charge upon the Nation’s gratitude–the soldiers and sailors widow and orphan.

II. It is the purpose of the Commander in Chief to inaugurate this observance with the hope that it will be kept up from year to year, while a survivor of the war remains to honor the memory of his departed comrades. He earnestly desires the public press to call attention to this Order, and lend its friendly aid in bringing it to the notice of comrades in all parts of the country in time for simultaneous compliance therewith.

III. Department commanders will use every effort to make this Order effective.

General John Logan
Commander-in-Chief
Grand Army of the Republic

In proclamation of “Decoration Day”, now known as Memorial Day and observed this last Monday of every May.

Surely, there are many ways to interpret war statistics, and no definitive total number can exist of those who have fallen. Personally, I have arrived at a number inclusive of all deaths related to service in a particular war; not just combat/battle deaths. Whatever numbers you conclude with, no one can dispute the staggering toll freedom and democracy have imposed and the importance of passing the torch to our future generations.

Today, at 3:00pm your local time, Memorial Day 2009, please pause for a minute of silence or a prayer to remember and pay homage to America’s fallen. There are approximately 1,195,065 counted among America’s war dead; the heroes who have given every last measure of devotion and sacrificed their lives in defense of freedom since the American Revolution began. Today is a day for more than barbecues and picnics and community gatherings. I don’t ask people to only mourn the fallen on this day. By all means, enjoy the weekend break and community festivities of this holiday. But please do so in remembrance that it is the deaths of those who have served in war who have given our society it’s irrevocable meaning; who give us reason to celebrate and enjoy an extended weekend.

Memorial Day, by the numbers:

American Revolution (1775 – 1783)
Total Servicemembers: 217,000
Battle Deaths: 4,435
Non-mortal Woundings: 6,188

War of 1812 (1812 – 1815)
Total Servicemembers: 286,730
Battle Deaths: 2,260
Non-mortal Woundings: 4,505

Indian Wars (1817 – 1898)
Total Servicemembers: 106,000
Battle Deaths: 1,000

Mexican War (1846 – 1848)
Total Servicemembers: 78,718
Battle Deaths: 1,733
Other Deaths in Service (non-theater): 11,550
Non-mortal Woundings: 4,152

Civil War (1861 – 1865)
Union
Total Servicemembers: 2,213,363
Battle Deaths: 140,414
Other Deaths in Service (non-theater): 224,097
Non-mortal Woundings: 281,881

Confederate
Total Servicemembers: 1,050,000 (see note 2)
Battle Deaths: 74,524 (see note 3)
Other Deaths in Service (non-theater): 59,297 (see notes 3, 4)
Non-mortal Woundings: Unknown

Spanish-American War (1898 – 1902)
Total Servicemembers (worldwide): 306,760
Battle Deaths: 385
Other Deaths in Service (non-theater): 2,061
Non-mortal Woundings: 1,662

World War I (1917 – 1918)
Total Servicemembers: 4,732,991
Battle Deaths: 53,402
Other Deaths in Service (non-theater): 63,114
Non-mortal Woundings: 204,002
Living veterans: fewer than 25

World War II (1940 – 1945)
Total Servicemembers: 16,112,566
Battle Deaths: 291,557
Other Deaths in Service (non-theater): 113,842
Non-mortal Woundings: 671,846
Living Veterans: 3,242,000 (see note 5)

Korean War (1950 – 1953)
Total Servicemembers: 5,720,000
Total Servicemembers (in-theater): 1,789,000
Battle Deaths: 33,741
Other Deaths in Service (in-theater): 2,833
Other Deaths in Service (non-theater): 17,672
Non-mortal Woundings: 103,284
Living Veterans: 3,086,400

Vietnam War (1964 – 1975)
Total Servicemembers (worldwide): 8,744,000   see note 6
Total Servicemembers (in-theater): 3,403,000   see note 7
Battle Deaths: 47,424   see note 8
Other Deaths in Service (in-theater): 10,785   see note 8
Other Deaths in Service (non-theater) 32,000   see note 8
Non-mortal Woundings: 153,303   see note 9
Living Veterans: 7,125,000   see notes 5, 10

Gulf War (1990 – 1991)
Total Servicemembers (worldwide): 2,322,000
Total Servicemembers (in-theater): 694,550
Battle Deaths: 147
Other Deaths in Service (in-theater): 235
Other Deaths in Service (non-theater): 1,590
Non-mortal Woundings: 467
Living Veterans: 2,269,000 (see notes 5, 10)

Global War on Terror (2001 – Present)
Total Servicemembers (worldwide): 1,384,968
Total Servicemembers (in-theater): 165,000
Battle Deaths: 3,890

Other Deaths in Service: 1,077
Non-mortal Woundings: 34,128
Living Veterans: 588,923 (see note 10)

America’s War Totals (Revolution – Present)
U.S. Military Service During War: 43,275,096
Battle Deaths: 654,912
Other Deaths (in-theater): 14,930
Other Deaths in Service (non-theater): 525,223
Non-mortal Woundings: 1,465,418
Living War Veterans: 16,311,348
Living Veterans (War & Peacetime): 23,442,000

(Sources: Pentagon; Department of Veterans Affairs)

FOOTNOTES

1. Exact number is unknown. Posted figure is the median of estimated range from 184,000 – 250,000.
2. Exact number is unknown. Posted figure is median of estimated range from 600,000 – 1,500,000.
3. Death figures are based on incomplete returns.
4. Does not include 26,000 to 31,000 who died in Union prisons.
5. Estimate based upon new population projection methodology.
6. Covers the period 05 August 1964 – 27 January 1973 (date of cease fire)
7. Department of Defense estimate
8. Covers 01 November 1955 – 15 May 1975
9. Excludes 150,332 not requiring hospital care
10. Department of Veterans Affairs estimates, as of May 2008; does not include those still in active service and may also include veterans who served in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

In a lengthy but excellent article a few days ago, Lon Wagner of Pilot Online documents an amazing rescue in a Virginian bay:

But 10 minutes out of the marina, they already were in trouble. The January wind tore in from the northwest, whipping up seas that pounded their 18-foot outboard.

“We’re taking on too much water!” someone shouted.

…

Gathering the man’s jacket collars in his fist, Dazzo towed him 60 feet through waves and rotor wash and pushed his 300-pound frame into a basket dangling from the helicopter.

…

The Coast Guard helicopter dropped Dazzo in the Bay at 9:29.

Thirteen minutes later, all six fishermen were out of the water

Wagner does a far more eloquent job than I could dream of doing in describing the tenacity, skill, and raw heroism of several Search and Rescue professionals from the US Coast Guard and a couple other agencies. He doesn’t do it directly, instead simply documenting the minute-by-minute gripping account of this rescue. But he doesn’t have to: Wagner’s descriptions speak for themselves to highlight the rescuers’ actions, their thoughts, their selfless courage.

I have often been asked what it was like to stand the Search and Rescue watch for the US Coast Guard–something I did for my first three years in the service. Typically at a loss for words to describe how I felt being a part of the world’s greatest search and rescue organization, I usually try to sum it up as being the most rewarding job I’ve ever had. And yet I was only in the background: a “SAR Controller” working in a district command center. Even there, sitting twelve to fifteeen hour shifts inside a steel box with no windows far removed from the scene, I grew a profoundly deep respect for the profession, and its professionals–especially those in the field that Wagner does such a wonderful job of documenting.

I’ve had my share of heart-stopping, gut-wrenching SAR cases from young children falling into frigid waters to airplane crashes in the ocean. Edge-of-your seat cases with such intensity and urgency that the entire rest of the world seems to stand still while you await that one radio call from the helicopter to say it’s over. All told, across nearly 2,000 cases in three years, I had the pleasure of working with some of the finest men and women ever to walk the Earth–people who risk everything to save an absolute stranger. For all the rewarding feelings of helping affect the rescue of others, even if tangentially, I find myself at a loss for words as I think about the great work of those in the field.

My hat is off to the Aviation Survival Technicians, the pilots and co-pilots, the crew members and Air Force Parajumpers, the members of search and rescue teams everywhere who risk so much and do their jobs so superbly well.

ENS Danny Llanes, PO Drew Dazzo, your helicopter crew members and pilot, Auxiliarist Torry Rogers, Tim Barco, Reed Sutherland, Matt Bailey, and Billy Burket: bravo zulu to each of you.

At a press conference this morning, Speaker Pelosi quite eloquently made clear that words in Washington mean a great deal:

“You have to see the language…Around here language means a lot. Words weigh a ton and one person’s understanding of a spoken description might vary from another’s.”

The Speaker is absolutely right. After all the fuss over a “stimulus”, how many of us can actually say what that means? We’re told it is a combination of tax cuts and spending. We’re told it will jump start the economy. And yet important details such as why it will take up to two years before much of the spending kicks in goes summarily ignored. Or that somehow the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has calculated that spending is more than $100 billion higher than Democrats have claimed (1/3 of the total package).

Do we need a stimulus? Absolutely–and urgently. Is this the package we need? In my mind, no way. This package represents 819 billion ways to saddle us all with so much irresponsible debt that we won’t even be able to dream of a better future for years to come.

Speaker Pelosi should realize that words mean a lot outside of Washington as well. We want real reform and substantive economic policy — not just hot air, empty promises, and doublespeak words that mean little more in substance than another sound byte to encourage another election win for you. For starters, cut the hundreds of billion in pork and inconclusively vague descriptions of how funds will be spent. Then, we can all begin to have a public debate about “stimulus”.

The Washington Post has published an excellent visual that shows exactly how the “stimulus” package will be spent:

Andrew Sullivan makes an extremely salient point about the inconsistencies of some Republicans’ convictions:

There is something striking about how rigorously theocons apply Vatican teaching to questions of private individuals’ sexual and emotional relationships and how loosely they apply it when it comes to tempering right-wing governments from embracing torture, economic inequality, the death penalty and pre-emptive war.

Though I agree unequivocally on Sullivan’s views of torture and some of his points on the fiasco of the Iraqi war (a deviation from the real War on Terror), the point he makes above actually raises a much broader question in my mind. The platform of a party is the ballast that holds it together; the foundation that forms its public image, reputation, the candidates it pursues, and the campaigns it executes. A party is nothing without a platform. It is, after all, a party’s way of saying ‘this is what we believe Americans want and why you should therefore vote for us’. If so, developing a platform for the twenty-first century that (among many other critical issues) recognizes individual rights and liberties and the refrain of government in matters that are a private or religious matter would be a welcome signal that the GOP is serious about modernizing and returning to actual Republican values.

Here in California, 85% of registered Republicans self-identify as “moderate”. 15% of theocons does not constitute a base. Do you believe a nationwide change of course among Republican parties at the county and state level is percolating to the surface? Are we going to see a modernization of GOP platforms in the coming couple years, or will it be reruns of failed ideas and abandoned campaigns? The writing is on the wall to suggest this is a wide-spread problem–even in the considerably more conservative state of Texas.

Erick Erickson at RedState.com gets it:

That a person can run a blog, has a Twitter account, edits and posts video to YouTube, has 1000 friends on Facebook, or can install a Joomla/Drupal/WordPress/MovableType/etc. site and customize the CSS does not make that person a technologist.

The great irony of this past campaign season is that several of the entrepreneurs who created the technologies Barack Obama’s campaign so famously and successfully used are, in fact, Republicans or at least by philosophy if not registration. The challenge that seems to have plagued the GOP for quite some time is understanding how to use technology, not how to deploy it. Many a campaign have launched with blogs, videos, SMS/text messaging, websites, Facebook groups, LinkedIn profiles, and dozens of features. Few have integrated them successfully. Even fewer have realized that the old saying “if you build it, they will come” does not apply. Perhaps it may at first, but it does not keep people returning, much less engaged. The GOP has treated technology as a way to broadcast information or make a statement, not a way to conduct transactions, build coalitions, and encourage active political engagement.

This will change soon. Not only must it change soon (lest the GOP continue to lose its grasp on an entire generation of Americans), but for the first time I am hearing campaigns ask for help from Silicon Valley.