  Let's start with a history lesson. On September 11, 2001 I woke up before Aidan, then an 8-month-old baby, which was rare.
If I got up, I'd wake him up, so I decided to hit the remote and watch the morning show from bed for a few minutes before the day's crazy schedule began. I turned on the TV to see Matt Lauer discussing the smoke plume coming out of one of the World Trade Center building. I watched live as a plane flew into the other, and then as the two buildings crashed to the ground.
I remember the phrase that kept pounding into my mind as I watched: people are dying right now. I'm watching hundreds, if not thousands of people die. Right now . Since that day, I've had the same thought going through my head non-stop. Hundreds and thousands of people are dying. Right now. Last month saw the death toll for innocent men, women, and children in Iraq pass the ten thousand mark.
That doesn't include soldiers who died defending that country, it's just bystanders. Similarly, bystanders killed by the predominantly American military forces in Afghanistan are more difficult to compute because of the country's nebulous government and terrain, but the number is easily twice that. So I think it's a safe estimate to say that the innocent bystanders killed in these two military actions now number over thirty thousand people. That's a ten to one ratio for the number of people killed in America on September 11. And whether or not it's merited, most Americans believe we're in Iraq as a response to that horrific day.
When will it be enough for our government's leaders? If we were practicing an eye for an eye, that standard long ago passed. If we're enforcing some measure of justice, why don't we open our judicial system or at least the World Court's to examine the process? If there is yet another measure for defeat we're working toward, an exit-strategy, if you will, in military terms, then what is it?
Back in June of 2002, Howard Dean stepped forward as the first person to say I want to beat George Bush in the 2004 election, and as president, my first act will be to clean up this mess of a war with effectively the entire Middle East. Howard Dean was the first political candidate to oppose the administration's increasingly clear plan to attack Iraq. So, in short, I began supporting Howard Dean because I knew he wasn't in it to tow the line for the Bush administration agenda, an agenda I felt then, and continue to feel, indiscriminately kills people purely for financial gain.
I have no interest in John Kerry because before Howard Dean made having a spine popular again in D.C., Kerry was a Bush yes man. He voted for the military actions against both Afghanistand and Iraq. One interesting little occurrence might change my position. This past weekend, New Mexico's beloved Bill Richardson emerged as a possible VP candidate for Kerry. Like Dean, Bill was never a Bush yes man. In fact, as Clinton's Secretary of Energy, Bill knows the politics of the Middle East intimately, and still found staying out of war in our national security and energy interests.
Because he's a Latino, I feel secure that he's a competent, critical thinker. One doesn't often grow up a minority by never questioning the dominant paradigm. As Kerry's VP, Bill could position himself as a strong frontrunner for eventual presidency. He would be an amazing president. And so I might just find myself supporting an administration for nine long years again, for the sake of the VP.
None of this, of course, motivated me to go to the polls today. I smirked this morning as I listened to the radio and realized this was even election Tuesday. The last time there was a presidential primary, I voted for a Republican! I voted for John McCain because I thought he was a better candidate for the already sinched Gore to go up against. I wonder how many voters voted this way for Kerry this time around. 
