Stranger in a Strange Land - FloridaStateGrad's Blog - Bakersfield.com

FSG Thanks All Who Serve Our Country

Wed, 11 Nov 2009 07:59:23 PST

On this Veterans day, I would like to extent my deepest thanks and praise to all those who have served our country in the armed forces. We might not always agree on everything, we might sometimes get at each other's throats, but that will never diminish my appreciation for the sacrifices you and others have made.

Words From a True Patriot

Sat, 07 Nov 2009 13:03:34 PST

For those of you not familiar with Congressman Patrick Murphy, he was the first veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom to be elected to Capital Hill. He served valiantly in Iraq as the leader of the first legal team that helped Iraqi citizens with the complications of a U.S. occupation, and his team was also responsible for the first arrests of insurgents, made jointly with Iraqi police. My best friend served under Murphy, and is even mentioned on numerous occasions in Patrick's autobiography Taking the Hill: From Philly to Baghdad to the United States Congress.

Here is a man who willingly put his life before others, serving our country proudly in the Army, and now he serves his hometown as their representative to the U.S. Congress. I value his opinions highly, and as it pertains to Healthcare legislation, I respect his views. If you're unwilling to buy what Pelosi or Reid is trying to sell, at least listen to someone who has no reason to lie to the American people.

His article can be seen below:

www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-patrick-murphy/why-we-cant-afford-to-fai_b_349592.html

Multiple Gunmen shoot and kill at least 7, wound potential dozens at Fort Hood

Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:47:30 PST

www.cnn.com/2009/US/11/05/texas.fort.hood.shootings/index.html

I came home for lunch and saw this unfold on TV. Now the question is, were these individuals Americans or not..

Louisiana Judge Refuses Interracial Couple a Marriage License

Thu, 15 Oct 2009 15:51:19 PDT

Talk about true ignorance... "I'm not a racist" my patoot!

NEW ORLEANS — A Louisiana justice of the peace said he refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple out of concern for any children the couple might have. Keith Bardwell, justice of the peace in Tangipahoa Parish, says it is his experience that most interracial marriages do not last long.

"I'm not a racist. I just don't believe in mixing the races that way," Bardwell told the Associated Press on Thursday. "I have piles and piles of black friends. They come to my home, I marry them, they use my bathroom. I treat them just like everyone else."

Friday Morning Shocker - Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize

Fri, 09 Oct 2009 07:58:43 PDT

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/10/09/nobel.peace.prize/index.html

There's a reason why we have a shortage of Doctors...

Wed, 16 Sep 2009 07:40:17 PDT

It's called a cap on admissions to Med School - even if there are qualified candidates who don't get in.

One Reason Why I'm Proud to be a Christian

Tue, 08 Sep 2009 13:53:54 PDT

With his permission, I've posted this past Sunday's Sermon from The Rev. Tim Vivian, Vicar of Grace Episcopal Church of Bakersfield (and also a Professor at CSUB):

In her opening address to General Convention this past July, our Presiding Bishop spoke of the "great Western heresy" of individualism.¹

Those fightin’ words sparked a firestorm of outrage and protest. So much so that in this month’s Episcopal Life Bishop Katharine jumps on the fire engine and rushes out the water hoses.²

In our Epistle for today, James also sharply critiques individualism. So does Paul in his letters. So Bishop Katharine is standing on solid biblical ground. Maybe we should nuance things a bit, however, and say that Paul and James and Bishop Katharine are criticizing hyper-individualism.

Each of us is an individual. So perhaps the question really is: What kind of individual will we be?

We can be like the Borg in Star Trek. In that terrifying collective there are no individuals, only assimilated units.

Or, think of George Orwell’s 1984.

Or, we can use that quintessential American invention, the automobile, and think of ourselves as bumper cars at the county fair: each of us an isolate entity trying to crash and bam others out of our way.

I saw a terrifying example of this the other day. A woman confined to a wheel chair at a town hall meeting was desperately trying to explain that her insurance company wouldn’t cover treatment for two progressive and debilitating diseases. A man in the back kept trying to shout her down. Afterwards he spat out these chilling words: “So now a person in a wheel chair has more rights than me?”

Some of you may remember the film version of Charlotte’s Web. The mantra of the rat in that film, memorably voiced by Paul Lynde, is “What’s in it for me?”

Unlike that rat, however, and the man at the town hall meeting, we can be individuals looking out for others, caring about one another, caring for each other: in church each Sunday, on the Bishop’s Committee, helping to build a house for Habitat, visiting the sick, preparing or serving at the altar, working at the homeless shelter, doing prison ministry, and much more.

I’m no fan of the doctrine of original sin as articulated by St. Augustine, John Calvin, and others. But maybe hyper-individualism is our original sin.

In Genesis 3, after Adam and Eve have fallen, God thunders

     Cursed is the ground because of you;
       through painful toil you will eat of it
       all the days of your life.

It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.

That’s an agricultural curse for an agricultural people. Since most of us in the West no longer till the soil, maybe we should—with apologies to God—rephrase the LORD’s imprecation:

Cursed is your society because of you;

your whole desire your whole life

will be to grasp and horde, ignoring others.

Your motto, oath, and code of conduct shall be

“I’ve got mine. To hell with you.”

I don’t know if it’s comforting, or terrifying, to realize that the first Christians were no different from us with regard to fundamental human behavior.

It takes real courage to rappel into the darkness and scattered sanctuaries of light that make up our interior being. Descending into the depths, how daunting it is for us to see on a subterranean cliff face a painting of the first Christians, our founding mothers and fathers in the faith.

But they’re so small. As close as they were to Jesus, shouldn’t they somehow be larger than life, superhuman?

There they are, a mere thirty years after the death and resurrection of Christ, an event that has shaken and reshaped the world, there they are—exactly like us.

And there’s James, speaking to them:

My brothers and sisters, do you with your acts of favoritism really believe in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ? Someone with gold rings on his fingers and wearing fine clothes comes into your assembly. Big deal. But you immediately give him all your attention and obsequiously say, “Please, sir, have a seat here.”

But if a poor person in dirty clothes also comes in, you dismissively order, “Stand there” or, even worse, “Sit at my feet.” Have you not made distinctions among yourselves? Are you not with evil thoughts passing judgement on others?

Passages like this haunt my dreams and waking footsteps; they give the lie to my somnolent fantasies that my supine conscience needs no repair. My Christian soul is purring along quite nicely, thank you, a sleek new Hummer in a television ad, motoring happily through a verdant and edenic countryside.

But when I turn off the TV and open my eyes to the Gospel, I know there’s a snake somewhere in that bucolic landscape—maybe it’s even me—and I know that my car belches smoke, runs over people, and lays waste the environment.

I’m pretty used to dealing with the heartache I cause myself. When I realize that I’ve just swallowed a self-made stupid pill, or a whole handful of stupid pills, a little recollection—or a kick in the butt—will usually help me to see my mistake and hurry to the medicine cabinet for an antidote.

But I just can’t get used to the heartache at Grace.

I hope I never get used to it. If I do, all I’ll have done is exchange fire for ice.

So, what’s the solution when our innate individualism and the hyper-individualism of American culture join unholy forces, even at church, and we become the rich man of Jesus’ parable?

Starving Lazarus lies in rags and filth, asking only for a crust of bread that falls on the floor from the prosperous man’s table. The rich man, dressed in purple and fine linen, who feasts sumptuously every day, gives Lazarus nothing.³

Yes, this parable does teach us the importance of responsible wealth. It also, in absentia, teaches about the importance of compassion: the haute cuisine glutton stuffing himself apparently has none.

But I think the parable teaches even more about the sin of individualism, the gross sin of hyper-individualism that bloats itself while starving others.

What’s the solution?

You know, forty years after Woodstock it’s easy to mock—and it’s even easier to sentimentalize—the hippie-speak of the Beatles’ message “All You Need is Love.”⁴

But isn’t that precisely what James says today?

You do well if you really fulfill the royal law according to the scripture: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

Jesus says it, too. It’s right up there with loving God with everything you have. Love everyone else like that, too.

Love is all you need.

Actually, it isn’t.

James goes on to say:

What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if you say you have [love] but do not have works? Can [love] save you? If a brother or sister is naked and lacks daily food, and one of you says, "Go in peace; keep warm and eat your fill," and yet you do not supply that person’s bodily needs, what is the good of that? So [love] by itself, if it has no works, is dead.⁵

So, we have our work cut out for us.

Yes, we need to clothe and feed the poor—and get them decent health care. But, to paraphrase what James says elsewhere, we first need to bridle our individualism.⁶

Despite what some—even, horribly, some Christians—like to bleat and bellow, poverty is much more the result of our unbridled individualism than it is the poor’s laziness.

While we’re looking for bridles in the attic or basement, let’s also get out the saddles. Let’s throw them on our hyper-individualism, and cinch them securely. Let’s tame that unruly beast—rather than letting it ride roughshod over us.

Amen.

We Need a Henry Clay

Sat, 05 Sep 2009 13:57:26 PDT

As the past number of weeks have dragged by, it has become apparent that our country is becoming more and more polarized. From the economy to the health care debate, it seems that most Americans have formulated an "us versus them" attitude. I obviously have my own personal opinions regarding each major issue currently plaguing our nations leadership, however I really have been trying my best to keep my own discourse civilized and intelligent. I have not been perfect in these efforts, but in dealing with such anguish, I've realized that Americans really have forgotten some of their roots.

On April 12, 1777, during the American Revolution, the beginnings of our American identity, a baby boy by the name of Henry Clay was born in Virgina. He was the son of a Baptist minister who unfortunately died when Henry was only four. Raised by his mother and step father, Henry would become a successful lawyer, and later, become one of the most influential politicians to grace our nation's young Capital, where he would be hailed as "The Great Compromiser."

Throughout his service as both a Senator and member of the House of Representatives, Clay would be known for his common sensibilities which gave him the ability to bring opposing viewpoints together into union. It was Henry who bartered such deals as the Missouri compromise - allowing for Maine to become a free state and Missouri a slave state. Though he was constantly in disagreement with many of his peers and even superiors (the Andrew Jackson Administration is a prime example), Clay seemed to always keep his composure, and was hailed by many as a man of great character and intellect. Even today, Henry is hailed as a man whose arguments in court some 200 years ago set precedent after precedent, many of which are still upheld today by our Supreme Court.

Where is our Henry Clay? Where is someone that despite his own preconceived notions and beliefs, can still look for common ground? Then again, why should we only look to one person to pick up the banner of negotiation that Clay once proudly held? Why can't we look for some Henry Clay within ourselves?

We need a Henry Clay.

Tensions continue to mount upon our country as people from all political perspectives either agree or disagree with what our current and even past administrations have done or are doing.

Instead of looking for common ground, we yell and scream at each other, spreading rumors, lies and misdirection.

We need a Henry Clay.

Instead of listening to alternative points of view with an open mind before we come to a conclusive opinion, we berate our opponents and stick our fingers in our ears.

We need a Henry Clay.

Instead of working together to make our country a better place to live and work, we hope for failure and support actions which derail our opponents.

We need a Henry Clay.

Let us look not to a continuance of tension, but instead to a new beginning whereas we can honestly come together in an attempt to actually listen and learn. We will all have our strong opinions, however, as Henry Clay once said:

Of all the properties which belong to honorable men, not one is so highly prized as that of character.

Do You Want to Help America? Boycott Walmart

Fri, 21 Aug 2009 12:51:10 PDT

First and foremost, I'll be honest - I've been known to occasionally walk into Walmart - usually when I've been scrapped for cash and needed something cheap on the fly, or when I was in college and needed a plunger at 2 a.m. and knew Walmart was the only store open at the time.

Be that as it may, for a number of years now, I've made a conscious effort to avoid Walmart at all costs, for numerous reasons. Most importantly, though, as reported by the AFL-CIO, Walmart is the largest importer of foreign-made goods in the United States. Through it's trade deficit with China, Walmart has been directly responsible for the loss of almost 200,000 American jobs from 2001-2006: www.epi.org/publications/entry/ib235/, and I've read that many believe this to be a very conservative estimate. Estimates also suggest that 70% of products that Walmart sells are made in China.

Obviously, Walmart alone is not responsible for these issues, as the U.S. government has allowed much of this to happen with low tariffs on Chinese goods, not to mention the massive purchase of US debt in past years to deinflate their own currency. However, I pick on Walmart because the vast majority of Americans shop at the merchandise giant.

I'm not crying that we should always "buy American," as there are plenty of reputable companies outside of the United States, but let's be honest, the vast majority of products we get from China are cheap, yet we Americans seem to love cheap stuff. I was in Las Vegas 2 weeks ago for a business meeting and had some free time, but not very much spending money, so I decided to walk into the "largest souveneir store in America" for kicks and giggles. Not only was virtually everything in the store tacky & cheap - it was all made in China.

So, for those of you complaining that our economy is in shambles, do us all a favor - boycott cheap stuff, boycott Walmart & most importantly, boycott CHINA.

You get what you pay for.

Sarah Palin Just Announced That She Will Be Stepping Down As Governor of Alaska

Fri, 03 Jul 2009 12:52:48 PDT

Say what?

Edit: Here's a link:

www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31726640/ns/politics-more_politics/

Re-edit: added a Youtube video.

Getting to Know You: Part II

Fri, 03 Jul 2009 06:57:38 PDT

Since my first batch of questions were such a success, here are the next set - a bit more in depth, but nothing over-the-top or too personal:

1) Are you spiritual? Do you follow a specific religion? If so, what sect/denomination?

2) Who is someone you would consider a hero of yours, and why?

3) What are the top five most important political or social issues to you?

4) If you had to recommend one movie to watch, which would it be, and why?

5) Here's a serious one: Dogs, or cats?

6) .. Rounding out this "round" of questions: Define an influential moment in your life that has shaped you into the person you are.

Getting to Know You

Thu, 02 Jul 2009 12:50:04 PDT

In having dialogue with rwestfall today, I've come to the realization that many of us on here don't really know who we are, what we do, or what we do well. Maybe it's time, for a few moments at least, for us to put aside our political, religious and social differences to learn a bit about each blogger on here. At the very least, this might give us all a bit more insight into who it is we're all debating with.

Here are some questions that I'd like to see all bloggers respond to on here (come on, it'll be fun!).

1) What occupations and/or jobs have you worked in?

2) Have you always lived in Kern County? If not, where have you lived or do you currently reside?

3) If you've had formal education beyond High School, what were your primary areas of study?

4) Where have you traveled? What is the favorite place you've ever been?

5) What kinds of books do you find yourself reading the most?

6) What are your hobbies , what are you good at, what are your talents?

7) If you had to pick up to 5 subjects/areas/issues that you feel the most well versed in, what are they?

So.. who's first?

Why I believe Ann Coulter Is Evil

Thu, 02 Jul 2009 07:07:51 PDT

It's one thing to be satirical, it's completely different when virtually every topic one talks about garners quotes and/or sound bites like these:

I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East and sending liberals to Guantanamo.

-12.21.05

Not all Muslims may be terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims.

-9.28.01

Being nice to people is, in fact, one of the incidental tenets of Christianity (as opposed to other religions whose tenets are more along the lines of 'kill everyone who doesn't smell bad and doesn't answer to the name Mohammed')

-3.04.04

We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war

-9.01

In the history of the nation, there has never been a political party so ridiculous as today's Democrats. It's as if all the brain-damaged people in America got together and formed a voting bloc.

-1.12.06

The ethic of conservation is the explicit abnegation of man's dominion over the Earth. The lower species are here for our use. God said so: Go forth, be fruitful, multiply, and rape the planet — it's yours. That's our job: drilling, mining and stripping. Sweaters are the anti-Biblical view. Big gas-guzzling cars with phones and CD players and wet bars — that's the Biblical view.

-10.12.00

God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, 'Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It's yours.'

-6.20.01

When we were fighting communism, OK, they had mass murderers and gulags, but they were white men and they were sane. Now we're up against absolutely insane savages.

-8.16.04

Bumper sticker idea for liberals: News magazines don't kill people, Muslims do.

-5.18.05

I think our motto should be, post-9-11, 'raghead talks tough, raghead faces consequences.'

-2.10.06

You know, ok. I made a few jokes — and they killed 3000 Americans. Fair trade.

-2.10.06 - Coulter's justification for using the term "raghead"

I think [women] should be armed but should not vote...women have no capacity to understand how money is earned. They have a lot of ideas on how to spend it...it's always more money on education, more money on child care, more money on day care.

-2.26.01

That was the theme of the Million Mom March: I don't need a brain -- I've got a womb.

-5.16.00

I have a feeling God is thankful that this woman never spawned any children.

Further Argument Against CIA Involvement In Current Iran Crisis

Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:34:22 PDT

Being that Iran was one of the countries I spent some time studying (but I'll admit, not as much as others) whilst obtaining my degree, I have a fairly good overview of the history and political makeup of the country. However, being we often forget some of what we read over time, I decided to do some re-research (and some new research). I not only dusted off some of my old books, but also did some additional research on the current affairs of Iran.

First and foremost, I'd like to bring you to the attention of a paragraph inside one of the books I read for my Iran-Iraq course, The History of Iran, Elton L. Daniel.

In regards to the coup of 1953:

Most important, it was ultimately Iranians who brought Mosaddeq down, not a few American secret agents with a suitcase of cash. There is abundant evidence that in 1953 many Iranians, probably a large majority, were sympathetic to the shah or relieved, either because of the financial crisis or the continuing public disorder, to see Mosaddeq over-thrown. Although Mosaddeq claimed to represent the "nation" and the "people," the National Front had less than 10 percent of the seats in the Sixteenth Majles and could not even command a clear majority in the blatantly manipulated Seventeenth Majles. The ease of the coup should have made it obvious just how small and culturally isolated the liberal, secular, and intelledctual nationalist elite around Mosaddeq really was, and how exaggerated its belief in its social influence had become (and would continue to be).

The author goes on to speak of how the traditional and religious classes were of key importance to the coup.

Why is that paragraph so important? First of all, it brings into focus the reality that the political climate in Iran was already suited for a coup - the CIA might have pushed things along a bit more, but the system in place was not 100% rock solid, and cracks were forming prior to US involvement. At most, we sped up the process. This is not to say that I support CIA involvement - it is merely to suggest that US involvement oftentimes comes as a compliment to an already chaotic situation.

Second, let's pay attention to the information regarding Mosaddeq's political party and it's lack of control within the country. First and foremost, we must recognize that unlike the United States, which has a dual-party system, Iran has multiple parties that hold great influence within the political framework of the nation. Ahmadenijad is a member of one of the newest political parties in Iran - the Abadgaran. The Abadgaran is an alliance of conservative older men *usually above age 50* who are normally non-clerics. Overall, the conservatives in general, regardless of political party garner about 25% of the voting population.

The Abadgaran is a smaller party, concentrated mostly in Tehran, but they did hold well in the 2004 Majlis election. However, the 2006 Iranian Councils Election (city councils throughout the country) & the Assembly of Experts Election were a major blow to the Abadgaran, as Ahmadenijad-backed candidates lost most of the elections. Let us be clear - the Assembly of Experts are the Islamic Scholars who can remove Ayatollah Khamenei as Supreme Leader and replace him with someone else. Iranian political analysts believed that these elections were a litmus test for the country - proving that the people wished to move towards a more moderate government.

For people to assume that Ahmadenijad would have enough support within the rural areas fails to take into account the reality that he has not been as popular in his country since he took office - people are upset over his handling of the national economy, major conflicts between himself and parliament, the nuclear issue, and general international affairs (among others). Protesters on the streets in Iran are of all ages and backgrounds (though you'll obviously see more young people, being 70% of Iranians are under age 30). Clerics are beginning to outwardly become involved - some even being seen leading groups of protesters.

I think there is plenty of information out there to show that the country has not been unified under Ahmadenijad, and considering there are many clerics in Qom sitting on the Assembly of Experts, we might see some interesting events transpire which have nothing to do with the United States, but instead, have everything to do with normal socio-political splits within the country.

Why The Iranian Government is Guilty of Election Fraud

Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:17:28 PDT

Unlike some on these blogs, I'll provide intelligent commentation on this situation (as I always try to do).

1) Iran has been kicking out and/or kidnapping journalists. Why?

2) Why was there no international monitoring of the election?

3) Why are Iranians being killed by other Iranians? Most Iranians agree that such an act is reprehensible in their religion and culture.

4) The is verified proof that election fraud did occur. The question is whether or not the Iranian Government is being honest regarding the extent of the fraud.

5) If this was only a "student" uprising, why are many non-students and highly influential political leaders also involved?

6) Why is the Iranian Government doing everything it can to repress communication with the outside world? Most recent news I've received via Iran is that blockades are set up in parts of Tehran tonight, and cameras are being confiscated.

7) Why were hellicopters being used to drop suspicious chemicals on protesters?

8) How could election results be verified within 2 hours from the close of the polls? Let's remember that these are paper ballots.. and many of the polling places were in rural areas.

9) Why are the Religious Clerics in Qom considering getting rid of both Khamenei and Ahmadenijad if they didn't have suspicions about the election?

10) I've read unconfirmed reports that Mousavi was in Qom earlier today meeting with said Clerics. If they believed as the Ayatollah does that he's responsible for the current unrest, wouldn't they have him arrested?

11) If police aren't allowed to use lethal force, why are the Basij allowed?

12) The home is a very private place in Iranian culture - why are private residences being raided in the night by Basij?

12) Why are Iranian families not able to see the loved ones currently jailed for protesting?

I'm sure that there are many other questions wandering around in my mind.. but these are the ones that, to me, point to major issues within Iran, and I don't think the CIA is involved.

Iranian clerics seek supreme leader alternative

Sun, 21 Jun 2009 18:28:15 PDT

www.alarabiya.net/articles/2009/06/21/76567.html

Obama Releases Press Statement on Current Violence in Iran

Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:17:27 PDT

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary
_______________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release June 20, 2009

Statement from the President on Iran

The Iranian government must understand that the world is watching. We mourn each and every innocent life that is lost. We call on the Iranian government to stop all violent and unjust actions against its own people. The universal rights to assembly and free speech must be respected, and the United States stands with all who seek to exercise those rights.

As I said in Cairo, suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away. The Iranian people will ultimately judge the actions of their own government. If the Iranian government seeks the respect of the international community, it must respect the dignity of its own people and govern through consent, not coercion.

Martin Luther King once said - "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." I believe that. The international community believes that. And right now, we are bearing witness to the Iranian peoples’ belief in that truth, and we will continue to bear witness.

www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Statement-from-the-President-on-Iran/

A Look Into Gay Behavior in Nature..

Fri, 19 Jun 2009 21:31:23 PDT

I found this to be an interesting read...

www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1905237,00.html

Why Our Relations With Iran Must Change

Thu, 18 Jun 2009 07:06:42 PDT

For a number of weeks, I've been noticing a couple of commercials, most notably being aired on CNN from "United Against Nuclear Iran," in which there is a call for further economic sanctions against the country. I feel that not only are these ads misleading because they do not admit how our government's involvement in Iran led up to the '79 revolution (and the harsh treatment thereafter has had no real affect on positive relations), but they are also airing in a completely inappropriate time.

I predicted a year ago that Ahmadenijad would not be re-elected in 2009 based upon a number of factors - most notably his sinking popularity among many groups of people - most notably those under the age of 30 (who happen to make up about 70% of the population). Up until a few months ago, my prediction held steadfast - especially when Khatami entered the race. Unfortunately, Khatami soon bowed out and put his support behind Mousavi, which ultimately changed Ayatollah Khamenei's support towards Ahmadenijad, which makes no real sense, considering Khamenei has not supported Ahmadenijad's extremely radical stances on both internal and external affairs.

Being that we have limited information to what is going on currently, it is difficult to verify if there was indeed electoral fraud, but based upon my earlier research and litmus tests, I'll go with my gut and agree that fraud most likely did take place. For example, with the current "results" taken into account, if the voting population is an accurate representation of the country as a whole, 70% of all ballots cast would have been by young people. This means that those under the age of 30 would have supported Ahmadenijad over Mousavi more tha 2 to 1. Based upon all available information, I'd say this is highly unlikely.

So - what's my point in all of this? The current demonstrations show many similarities with those that led to the '79 revolution, and they also show similarities to revolts 10 years ago, in which the protestors (mostly college-age) chanted "death to the dictator (Khamenei)." However, there are some key differences. I'll spare everyone and focus on one major difference which was brought to my attention whilst watching CNN a while ago - 10 years ago, you wouldn't have seen middle or older aged citizens protesting, and you definitely wouldn't see major political figures involved either. This, combined with evidence that the Iranian regime isn't as cohesive as it once was, indicates to me that there is the potential for a revolution within the country. Even if such an event doesn't occur soon, the impact on the current situation will have long-lasting implications that just might aid in a shift on current policy.

Therefore, for the United States to pressure Iran during this time period would be un-wise, as we are seeing the seeds of more coherent thought - as more Iranians support a less theocratic and more secular Iran, the more they support the ability to come to the diplomatic table with the West. Let us not forget that we have had a major part to play in Iranian policy for the past 6+ decades. Obama's call towards better relations can and will have a positive impact on our relationship with our foe, and might even lead to a more stable and friendly Iran. Khamenei's response to Obama is a crucial piece of the puzzle:

"We are observing, watching and judging. If you change, we will also change our behavior. If you do not change, we will be the same nation as 30 years ago."

Regardless of what happens in Iran - whether Ahmadenijad retains control of the Presidency or not, whether Khamenei's rule as Supreme Leader will be challenged or not, the reality is that our treatment of Iran in previous years has not given them the confidence that we are willing to work together to solve our differences. If we want positive results, we must approach the issues with open eyes and ears, instead of ill demands and unwillingness to listen. If we're lucky, the government of Iran will soon be changing to help meet our common interests and goals.

CNN's Rick Sanchez Delivers a Smackdown to Bill O'Reilly

Fri, 05 Jun 2009 15:08:36 PDT