IowaGlobal

Jim Leach for UN Ambassador--Indeed!

2006-11-17T08:21:00.000-06:00

I don't care who said it first, or when or where. "Leach for UN Ambassador" is absolutely the best idea in American politics today. My Nov. 8 call for drafting him for University of Iowa President included this caveat: "Of course, if I had my way, Jim would become our next US ambassador to the UN." Well, now that movement is off and running, and I still don't think it will happen, but I'm very pleased by all the talk - it's everywhere! - and I'm going to track it here. Go Jim go! - Dan Clark

Des Moines Register editorial: "Keep Leach working for Iowa, the nation: In academia or at U.N., he'd represent us well"
Jim Leach is too valuable to retire. President Bush or the state of Iowa should find a way to make use of his experience, intellect and talents. [...] If it comes to pass, sending Leach to the United Nations could be one of President Bush's best appointments. If it doesn't happen, Iowa should explore how best to continue Leach's service to his home state.

Muscatine Journal editorial: "Jim Leach as Mr. Ambassador? A worthy calling"
Within hours of the election defeat, Leach, 64, was suggested by Dan Clark of Muscatine and others across the state as a candidate for the vacant University of Iowa president’s position. [...] If Mr. Leach is willing, we encourage the Iowa congressional delegation to support him for the U.N. job. We expect the nation would be ably represented by his talents and dedication during this time of turbulent world affairs.

The Washington Note: "Jim Leach for UN Ambassador"
Actually, my pal Keith Porter wrote the suggestion to me -- and though I was already thinking it -- I need to give him credit for the nudge.

Bolton Watch: "Jim Leach - An Alternative to Bolton"
Amidst the chorus of calls for Bolton’s reappointment on the basis of the failsafe “If not him, then who?” argument, Congressman Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) and Congressman Jim Walsh (R-NY) have stepped forward to advocate a new nominee: former Congressman Jim Leech (R-IA).

The Washington Note: "Jim Leach Could be 'Confirmed Unanimously' by the Senate"
So far, after a jog along the mall today, Congressman Blumenauer ran into both Representatives Chris Shays (R-CT) and Jim Marshall (D-GA) who agreed on the spot to be the first co-signatories after Blumenauer and Walsh.
It's a good start.

"Dear Colleague" letter by Reps. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) and Jim Walsh (R-NY):
"In the event that Ambassador Bolton's term is not extended, the United States cannot afford a gap in our representation and desperately needs a strong and positive direction in our multilateral diplomacy. [...] I urge you to join me in signing the attached letter to President Bush recommending his consideration of our friend and colleague Jim Leach as the next U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations."

USA Today: "House lawmakers promote colleague for U.N. post"
"He clearly is flattered to be considered" as U.N. ambassador, said his chief of staff, Gregory Wierzynski. "As a former foreign service officer, it would be something of intense interest to him."

AP via Fox News: "Rep. Leach's Name Offered for U.N. Ambassador Post"
"I can't think of any American better qualified to represent our interests before the United Nations," said Rep. Jim Walsh, R-N.Y., who on Tuesday joined Blumenauer in circulating a letter in the House seeking support for Leach if the acting U.N. ambassador, John Bolton, is forced to resign.

Des Moines Register: "Leach mentioned as possible U.N. ambassador"
A push is on by some members of Congress to see Rep. Jim Leach, R-Ia., named as the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. [...] The current ambassador is John Bolton, who has been fiercely opposed by Democrats. Bolton is now serving in a recess appointment, which means his term expires when the new Congress convenes in January.

Leach: "He's already got the sweater!"

2006-11-10T23:51:00.000-06:00

Now in print: "Snatching victory from defeat: A bit of a movement is afoot to put defeated Congressman Jim Leach in the president's seat at the University of Iowa."

Bryon Houlgrave's story in tomorrow's Muscatine Journal says, "Clark has since gotten a response that brushes Leach off..." (apparently a reference to a couple e-mails I mentioned), but I'm actually getting thumbs-up encouragement from almost everyone who answers me. I won't post any of those comments without permission, but I welcome comments here.

See my previous "Leach for UI prexy" e-mail messages at http://iowaglobal.blogspot.com/2006/11/why-not-jim-leach-for-ui-prexy.html. - Dan Clark

Why not Jim Leach for UI prexy?

2006-11-10T18:26:00.000-06:00

Why not? He's already got the sweater!

More to follow.

PigMobile arrives in Muscatine County

2006-09-28T02:04:00.000-05:00

Here's an e-mail message I sent to some friends and neighbors on Wednesday evening, September 27:

Friends,

They arrived this afternoon, and already people are stopping and asking, "What's the deal with the Pigs?"

"That's our federal budget," I say. "Might as well have some fun with it."

If you haven't seen "the piggies" yet, you probably will soon. Described as a "rolling work of art from the mind of Ben Cohen" (of Ben & Jerry's ice cream), you can see me posing with 'em at http://www.truemajority.org/pigmobileblog/?p=198#more-198.

Learn what it's all about at http://www.sensibleiowans.org/fun/ and related pages.*

We've got the PigMobile in Muscatine County until October 5. "We" are a loose group of volunteers; we applied to host the Pigs for a few days, and got accepted. We picked 'em up at Iowa City, and they'll go to Davenport next.

Got an idea for showing 'em off? Wanna help? Let me know.

Dan

* "Iowans For Sensible Priorities is a non-profit, non-partisan 501(c)3 organization in Iowa dedicated to educating the public about the inequities of our current federal budget. We aim to redirect 15% of the Pentagon’s discretionary budget away from obsolete Cold War weapons towards education, healthcare, job training, alternative energy development, world hunger, deficit reduction. This 15% cut, or $60 billion dollars, on obsolete weapons systems and the further proliferation of nuclear weapons does not include the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and in no way impacts homeland security or our defense. We have the money; let’s spend it on sensible priorities!"

Long Overdue Attention for Alexander G. Clark!

2006-08-25T03:48:00.000-05:00

My friend Kent Sissel restored and lives in the house Alexander G. Clark built in 1878.

Iowa and the nation are rediscovering the Clark story, especially the part about the 1868 lawsuit that established his daughter's right to attend the community school. After long obscurity, there's much more coming to light.

Last year, I helped Kent start alexanderclark.org. The site makes available a growing collection of biographical and historical information and tracks news about the spreading recognition of Clark's significance.

Soon after launching the site, we told the Des Moines Register about it and nominated Clark for the Register's "Famous Iowan" feature, produced by Tom Longden. In February 2006, Longden's nice article appeared in the Sunday paper and online.

Muscatine was home to the largest black community in Iowa in the 1850s, and Clark was their leader in many ways. He lived in our Mississippi River town for almost 50 years before President Benjamin Harrison appointed him US minister to Liberia in 1890.

Known as the Colored Orator of the West, he was a human-rights champion active in church, freemasonry, and the Republican party. A barber much of his life (he also sold wood to river boats and invested in real estate), he became one of the most influential men of his day.

Among many accomplishments, Clark was publisher of The Conservator newspaper in Chicago in the 1880s (preceding the famous Ida Wells Barnett). He completed a law degree, following his son's footsteps to become the second African American to do so in Iowa.

In June 2006, a high school student from Marshalltown, Stephen J. Frese, was awarded the top prize in the National History Day contest for his paper: "From Emancipation to Equality: Alexander Clark's Stand for Civil Rights in Iowa."

Stephen told me he was looking for an essay subject for the national contest, something for the theme "Taking a Stand in History: People, Ideas, Events." He said he read the Longden article and knew he'd found it.

On Sunday, September 10, he will read the paper and receive a governor's award at the Muscatine Community School District Administration Center (2900 Mulberry Avenue). The 3:30 event is free and open to the public. A reception for Stephen will follow at the Muscatine Art Center (5:00-6:30 p.m., 1314 Mulberry Avenue). A special exhibition of original papers and documents belonging and relating to Alexander Clark will be on view.

For Kent and others of us, it's been an exciting year as we've met Stephen and other researchers who've been finding documents and organizing the growing body of information.

Our latest web posting is the 1892 "Oration on the Life of Hon. Alexander Clark, Delivered by Rev. J.W. Laws of Keokuk, Iowa" (courtesy of Musser Public Library special collections).

Laws offered this suggestion for studying the man he eulogized: "As a leader for the right, for liberty and for freedom, he can better be understood when you study him as one of the underground railroad engineers and conductors, whose field was the South, whose depot was the North, and whose freight was human souls."

Along with the considerable recognition, the History Day prize won Stephen Frese a four-year, full-tuition scholarship to Case Western Reserve University, valued at more than $100,000.

But the really big winner is the Alexander Clark legacy itself, largely forgotten for a century. There's so much more to be told!

Dan Clark
Webmaster
alexanderclark.org
The Alexander G. Clark House
Muscatine, Iowa USA

North Corridor Roadblock

2006-08-22T17:54:00.001-05:00

Dad and Mom predicted in the 1960s: "Iowa City and Cedar Rapids will grow together someday."

Once secluded and miles out of town, our family's rural land is today at dead center of the so-called North Corridor, Johnson County's top priority target zone for new housing. Our environmentally sensitive woodland has become valuable real estate.

Several years before Mom died in 1999, our parents established a family trust for preserving the "natural habitats and scenery" of their "Gilead" as long as possible into the future. Dad is 94, and we four kids agree we're not interested in speculating on subdivisions or dreaming of selling out.

Our big news this summer is the Scanlon/Southgate announcement about seeking Coralville annexation for a 130-acre parcel lying along our western border. Big as this looks to us, however, it's a footnote to their larger scheme which envisions some 500 houses planned for 250-plus acres south across Dubuque Street. That's got the whole neighborhood aroused, and it will make news again when dozens (hundreds?) of us show up at the JCCOG meeting next week. (Citizens for Sensible Development http://www.citizenssensibledevelopment.org).

By contrast, developer Dean Oakes' plan for developing a "landlocked" 24-acre property he's acquired north of our place is a minor sideshow.

The Oakes land features ridges and ravines, bounded by the reservoir on the north and creeks and wetland on east and west. To gain the "access" Iowa law entitles him, he proposes to build a private road north from the end of 275th Street NE, along inside the very rugged east border of our 39 acres plus the east border of the adjacent 10-acre Scanlon parcel. (Scanlon land surrounds us except on the east.)

We've agreed in principle to accommodate him while sparing the biggest trees and avoiding the steepest slopes, but we are unwilling to let him come in farther, dividing our land, to angle across on the higher ground where a road, if any, "should" go. And we are unwilling to grant a permanent easement outright without seeing detailed plans and hearing affirmations from the various public regulators that this road really can and must happen. It's really a terrible place for a road, and everyone says so, including the developer himself.

Folks seemingly "in the know" have said a Johnson County Sensitive Areas Ordinance could protect those slopes--if it ever comes to see the light of day. Evidently there's no chance politically. If wishes were horses... (http://www.johnson-county.com/zoning/reports/sensitive_areas/index.shtml)

Our Woodfield Lane neighbors do not want the Oakes development at all, but nobody sees any way to stop it, short of somebody buying him out and guaranteeing conservation. And nobody is coming forward to do that. Some neighbors brought in the US Army Corps of Engineers, so now a federally protected wetland is part of the mix, but nobody believes it can stop the road (http://gileadpress.com/wetland/).

The quest for any other "magic bullet" has been pursued for over a year.

Of course our family would make the issue go away if we could, but we can't. I've worked with Mr. Oakes and his lawyer as our designated negotiator. (I don't dislike either one.) I've consulted and involved neighbors, county officials, and various others. Several of us have done our best to learn the rules and the players; we've tracked zoning decisions and plat plans and steeped ourselves in the county's land-use planning culture.

Well, not surprisingly, Mr. Oakes finally tired of our endless study and consensus process, so last month he got a judge to order that we're headed toward the Eminent Domain fight we all say we don't want. A Compensation Commission is scheduled to walk the route at 9:30 a.m. on September 20, unless we reach a private agreement about route and design and price before then.

Whatever community consensus or land-stewardship argument might favor our side, the Code of Iowa is unambiguous: "The right to take private property for public use is hereby conferred ... [u]pon the owner or lessee of lands, which have no public or private way to the lands, for the purpose of providing a public way, not exceeding forty feet in width, which will connect with an existing public road. The condemned public way shall be located on a division, subdivision or 'forty' line, or immediately adjacent thereto, and along the line which is the nearest feasible route to an existing public road...." (http://www.legis.state.ia.us/IACODE/1999/6A/4.html)

Mr. Oakes is pursuing the shortest line to 275th Street NE. No argument. Is it feasible? What's feasible? That's a matter for experts.

Our slightly longer, curving, family-consensus route--only if the road is unstoppable--might qualify as "nearest feasible," but the 40-foot width limit could prove impossible given the terrain. Another matter for experts. And more likely with voluntary agreement. (http://gileadpress.com/oakesrd-80.jpg)

Our east border is the shortest way, but not the only one. I've pointed out half a dozen. (http://gileadpress.com/oakesrd-alternatives.html)

To be continued.

Dan Clark

"Legal justification is not moral justification."
(Nicholas Johnson, August 22, 2006)

Don't Jeopardize Your Future! (By Mentioning the War)

2006-08-21T09:40:00.000-05:00

[I wrote this April 13, 2003, for an online forum in Muscatine where I live now. --Dan]

In Spring 1968, I was a senior at Mid-Prairie High School [Wellman, Iowa]. As part of a class project, we interviewed fellow graduating seniors for a several-week feature on a local radio station. Mainly we asked about future plans. Some said college; some said work; some said the service.

"The service" was the acceptable euphemism for the main option pumped at us by our guidance counselor.

"Not sure what you want to do? Why not enlist and see the world a bit, then let Uncle Sam pay for college once you've got a better idea? That's what I did." Thus counseled our jovial between-wars "veteran" who'd never seen much of anything himself and certainly never faced danger.

That was the acceptable official message of our school, day in and day out. Our small school had already lost one recent grad killed in Vietnam, so we were encouraged to support the troops and hate the godless communists.

It was the spring of the Tet offensive, and Eugene McCarthy and Bobby Kennedy were running against their party's war president, but it was not acceptable at MPHS to question the war. We studied long-ago wars but didn't get past WWII. One little section on "contemporary problems" for a few of us college-bound types taught how dangerous and mistaken communism was. Otherwise, the real war all around us was scarcely in the curriculum.

When a few of us got acquainted with some of the "protesters" at the nearby University of Iowa and then talked about it, our teachers and principal warned that none of that stuff would be tolerated at MPHS.

When Martin Luther King was murdered, some of us made a show of praising his life and mourning his death. A few fellow students (few but loud) made a show of calling us "nigger lovers" and went out of their way to "bump" us in the hallway--slam us into locker doors, that is. The adult response was boys will be boys--you should know better than to provoke these toughs anyway.

So, to the radio interviews. I was a "good" student and did my share or more of the project. Late in the project it was my turn to talk about my future. I said I planned to go to college and study art. I liked writing and politics, too. That's the part that aired.

I had also said I cared deeply about injustice in the world, and I was proud of my nation when we were leaders for justice and peace but ashamed when we supported dictators and used guns and bombs instead of sending food and constructive help to people in need. Something like that. And I said I didn't know if I would register for the draft, and I didn't want to hide out from the war under a student deferment. And if I did register, maybe I would seek recognition as a conscientious objector. And so I didn't know if I'd really graduate from college very soon.

The main part of the interview got cut without my knowledge, on orders of the speech teacher. When I heard the broadcast, I was angry and demanded to know why my bit came out so short and bland. The sympathetic student interviewer had drawn me out on my by-then vocal and visible protest and had seemed pleased with my answers.

The teacher explained kindly that she had saved me from myself. It was understandable, she said, that I might not have realized I would have upset the listeners who would have blamed the school for letting me believe such things and actually say them. She did me a special favor, she said, by excising the part about conscientious objection. That would have become part of my "record" and would follow and haunt me the rest of my life. What if I ever wanted to work for the government? What if I wanted a job or career at all? Maybe I thought artists could get away with expressing dissenting views, but she knew I wasn't really that sort. She said I was a bright student with so much potential; I would need a clean record so I could go as far as I should. She said I should thank her.

I don't remember her saying I was comforting the communists and prolonging the war, but she may have said that, too. Plenty did.

Heading toward our 35th anniversary this summer, I don't have near all the answers I'm looking for, but I've learned one thing for sure: "War is STILL not the answer."

How about a Peace Leadership School?

2006-05-10T12:30:00.000-05:00

I worked at the Stanley Foundation when I addressed this "think piece" to the education director at the Iowa Peace Institute on March 7, 1991--during the first Gulf War. Nothing came of it, but I still like it whenever I reread it. This is an an EXCERPT. You can read the full text at http://friendlywork.com/peace-school.html.

The Persian Gulf War and its aftermath present a "teachable moment" for peace educators. Iowans should take advantage of the current interest, however fleeting it may be, to originate an ongoing program of peacemaker education and training for our citizens--a program which in time could become, without apology, a direct alternative to military training. [...]

From the outset, the Peace Leadership School should be an intentional alternative to military-type training. This alternative character, however, should not be posed in a reactionary, confrontational, or oppositional mode. That is, the means should should be consistent with the desired ends. Thus, the Peace Leadership School should humbly seek answers to universal questions: What can societies do instead of going to war? How can nonviolent conflict-resolution methods gain adoption? Or, as Gene Sharp puts it, how can we "transarm" to "nonviolent struggle" and "nonviolent defense"? How can the acceptability of war be reduced and its practice curtailed? These are questions that soldiers and veterans and military theoreticians all profess to care about. Supporters of war often claim to be realists who are just doing what must be done until the pacifists can figure out what to do instead. Those who would teach peace should acknowledge this challenge and find in it a compelling mandate. [...]

Local involvement in the military effort is highly visible, even in small towns, even in peacetime. Even in Iowa, which ranks very low among the states receiving "defense" dollars, National Guard armories and reserve facilities dot the landscape, and local economies are grateful for infusions of payroll. Reservists and Guard members train for war outside of their regular work or school hours (earning the label "weekend warriors"), and they undergo periodic intensive training, usually at a "summer camp." During natural disasters and civil emergencies, units are mobilized and members serve at state expense. Their contributions are local, concrete, and understandable.

All over Iowa there are many opportunities for citizens to experience this kind of training and service. Because of its high visibility, easy entry, and a tradition of respectability--and because many incentives and inducements are offered to potential recruits--training for warfare is well established and well accepted in our state.

Training for peacemaking, in contrast, enjoys relatively very little public understanding and support. What few opportunities exist for peace training must be sought out and paid for by the participants. Rarely does this activity benefit from public or private subsidy. And, however acceptably it may be viewed, peace training is considered a volunteer pastime. And what's the point, really? Where's the demand for this service?

While grassroots military training is commonly viewed as a laudable form of service to society, it is also widely viewed as an acceptable means of income supplement and education opportunity for the poor and disadvantaged. For any who would make a comparison, the message is clear: "You get paid to train for war (and there are other benefits), but you have to pay if you want to study peace." On an evaluation form from our recent Justice & Peace Studies conference--which got very high ratings from participants--someone wrote: "Make the conference less expensive for students (say $10) $25 is too much!"

But what if we did have peace troops--unarmed conflict-interveners, dispute-resolution specialists, disaster-responders, community-developers, and justice-builders? What if they got paid for their service, both at home and across the globe? What if they earned education benefits or advanced career opportunities? What if peace preparations generated local income? What if communities had local training facilities? Would we be so quick to support war if our neighbors and relatives were serving in a peace force that would have failed if war began?

If any place has the resources and inclination to start finding out, it should be Iowa--The Peace State.

Re: Kerry, Mighty Hunter

2004-10-21T21:05:00.000-05:00

REPLY TO BUSTER IN "THE MUSCATINE CONVERSATION"*
(Oct. 21, 2004)

There's nothing trivial about the manhood of U.S. presidents, so it's a sad but true fact that Dems feel the need to communicate to gun owners on NRA's terms. Why, here in Muscatine just this morning, John Edwards made a point of praising hunting and fishing and "Second Amendment rights" (whatever that is). GW Bush has no need to prove his manhood 'cause everbody knows he's all about blue jeans and swagger and chainsaw and ranch. (Edwards suggested "outsourcing" him back to the ranch.) The phenomenon reminds me of the flap in Russia about Yeltsin bagging a bear. I don't remember if it was tied up or just conveniently cornered or stunned or what. Who cares? (Some of my relatives and good friends, just for starters. That's who.) --Dan

http://www.english.uiuc.edu/maps/vietnam/causes.htm
Along with the larger structural and ideological causes of the war in Vietnam, the experience, personality, and temperament of each president played a role in deepening the U.S. commitment. Dwight Eisenhower restrained U.S. involvement because, having commanded troops in battle, he doubted the United States could fight a land war in Southeast Asia. The youthful John Kennedy, on the other hand, felt he had to prove his resolve to the American people and his Communist adversaries, especially in the aftermath of several foreign policy blunders early in his administration. Lyndon Johnson saw the Vietnam War as a test of his mettle, as a Southerner and as a man. He exhorted his soldiers to "nail the coonskin to the wall" in Vietnam, likening victory to a successful hunting expedition.

At 7:25 PM -0500 10/21/04, Buster Blocker wrote:
Why lie over something so blessed trivial?

* THE MUSCATINE CONVERSATION is an unmoderated discussion of topics related to Muscatine, Iowa USA. Info at http://www.topica.com/lists/muscatine/.

We are not terrorists!

2004-10-15T22:32:00.000-05:00

MY POST IN "THE MUSCATINE CONVERSATION"*
(Feb. 8, 2004)

[I was answering messages supporting a grand jury investigation of some Iowa peace activists. The probe was dropped later amid nationwide publicity and protests.]

Scoff away, friends.

Your jokes are not funny. They are threats--probably more than you realize. The distance from intolerant "jokes" to vigilante terrorism is shorter than you might think.

We "peaceniks" are not terrorists or anything like, and you should know it. You may not like us or the things we say and do, but you should know we operate nonviolently and in the open. If you don't believe this, it's because you don't know us and believe misinformation.

So, why were the organizers of the Des Moines anti-war conference called before a grand jury, if not to punish them and warn others who might consider taking public stands like theirs? This is not about "taking a look"--it's about intimidation, pure and simple.

Have you ever had your life threatened because you were labeled unpatriotic? You'd take your free speech rights very seriously if you had.

In the scariest instance [in my experience], someone fired rifle bullets through my office window, through my own desk and chair. One month later, my colleagues and I evacuated that Des Moines office after a never-explained bombing caused considerable damage but--miraculously--no deaths or injuries. The official investigations never got to the bottom of it--supposedly. If the perps were not on some government payroll, there's every reason to think they were right-wing terrorists operating with some sort of immunity.

It happens. Believe it. For me, it ruined Christmas 1975 and affected my perspective ever after. The experience led directly to creation of the Iowa Peace Network in 1976. You may not know I was the first IPN staff member.

One of those ordered before the grand jury next Tuesday is Patti McKee, my successor as IPN coordinator.

The following e-mail was widely distributed before the November conference. [I appended an e-mail invitation including text announcing the "Saturday Nov 15th State Wide Anti War and Occupation Conference and a Sunday Nov 16th legal demonstration and direct action at the STARC Armory in Johnston IA".] Recipients surely included all Ashcroft's spooks and spies who cared to pay attention. Whenever I have been involved in such an effort, I have assumed I was being watched, and behaved accordingly. I know these folks well enough to believe they did, too.

Go ahead and laugh. But answer this: If it's okay to deny civil liberties to those who "protest a war against terrorists and terrorism," who else is it okay to violate? And then how many steps is it from there to losing YOUR rights, O Smug Ones?

Dan

* THE MUSCATINE CONVERSATION is an unmoderated discussion of topics related to Muscatine, Iowa USA. Info at http://www.topica.com/lists/muscatine/.

Who can stop a war?

2004-10-15T02:15:00.000-05:00

QUESTIONS I ASKED IN "THE MUSCATINE CONVERSATION"*
(Sept. 14, 2004)

[We were debating charges against John Kerry by the so-called Swift Boat Vets. Someone had just mentioned William Calley.]

1. Is it possible for any particular war to be wrong in its entirety?

2. If so, who may say so? Who should say so?

3. When is killing human beings "a job" and when is it a "war crime"? Who decides?

4. Can any war characterized by war crimes be a good or just war?

5. How much "war crime" is allowed before an entire war is wrong in its entirety?

6. Does an "indiscretion" in war become a "war crime" before someone condemns it as such?

7. Who may allege a war crime? How and where should the allegation be raised?

8.Is it possible to declare an entire war wrong without making a "blanket"condemnation of all those loyal warriors who obeyed orders and did their jobs in that war?

9. If not, which is worse: not opposing the war or risking the anger of all who equate opposing the war with not supporting the warrior "troops"?

10. Who can stop a war after it has started? Who should stop it?

* THE MUSCATINE CONVERSATION is an unmoderated discussion of topics related to Muscatine, Iowa USA. Info at http://www.topica.com/lists/muscatine/.

Bogger is a real word.

2004-10-15T00:20:00.000-05:00

Turns out it's about driving in mud.

As in bogs, I guess. Huh...

After using it for my first test blog, I did a Web search. Altavista found it 19,500 times.

I'd used it because it came out of my fingers, because it sounded good--I don't know.

I have googled sometimes, but I usually altavista. Habit, I guess. Different, too.

So, Google owns Blogger? Huh.

In the Beginning

2004-10-14T17:33:00.000-05:00

Blogger.

Bogger.

Never too old to try something new?