Netlets for Tuesday, March 25

That President Bush declares the U.S. invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq a success shows a terrifying detachment from reality. Yet the Star Tribune's March 19 article "What's true cost of Iraq?" betrays a common trend in the media which shows equal detachment from reality.

The article speculates on the monetary costs of the war for the United States and goes on to cite the figure of U.S. soldiers killed and wounded in the context of health care cost, while the number of Iraqi casualties is both many times higher and sadly uncounted. Estimates are currently around 1 million Iraqis dead and 4 million more made refugees.

The U.S. media often discuss our responsibility for "staying the course" to keep Iraq from breeding anti-U.S. terror, yet rarely undertake a rational discussion of the actual responsibility of an invading army, which is to listen to the wishes of its victims. As sad as the U.S. death toll is, it pales in scope and moral weight to the cost paid by the Iraqi people, the victims of U.S. aggression. Any discussion of our responsibilities in Iraq which does not begin with Iraqi public opinion, which has been strongly in favor of U.S. withdrawal, is meaningless.

ELLIOTT LOCKE, MINNEAPOLIS

A March 21 letter writer is rightly disturbed that a contract in Iraq was awarded to a Turkish rather than an Iraqi company and that Bangladeshi workers, rather than Iraqis, were to be hired, thus providing nothing toward Iraq's eventual economic recovery.

While very important, it's small potatoes compared to the U.S. plan for new oil drilling in Iraq. It was laid beginning in February and March 2001, when the Bush/Cheney Energy Task Force created "a list of 'Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts'" ("Slick Connections: US Influence on Iraqi Oil," by Erik Leaver and Greg Muttitt, www.fpif.org, July 17, 2007).

The oil law that supposedly covers only revenue sharing also contains this giveaway. It is now a benchmark the Iraqi government is supposed to accept, but so far has been strong enough not to. It gives all new drilling to U.S. and British oil companies for lease periods of 20 to 25 years. The companies get most of the profits, do not have to use Iraqi vendors/service providers, do not have to hire Iraqi employees (especially oil union members).

BERNICE VETSCH, ST. PAUL

According to our elected officials the governor's plan is unworkable because the areas he chose have already had budgets slashed in 2003. I have a budget of around $40,000. If we use the government's logic, I have also had "budget cuts" as the cost of living increases outstrip any raises I get. Add to that the rising costs of fuel, food and basically everything else, I can't afford more budget cuts (tax raises). Time for our elected officials to start exercising a little leadership and start making the hard choices as to where to cut the budget!

SCOTT SKEESICK, WHITE BEAR LAKE

I feel compelled to highlight the hypocrisy from the religious right and the Republican Party on the subject of Sen. Barack Obama's membership in the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's church. Persons attacking Obama for his minister's opinions fail to attack Republican Party candidates' support of speakers and preachers of hate on the other side.

If you want to see a stunning example of this hypocrisy, watch the YouTube video of a choir singing, "Why Should God Should Bless America" at last year's Value Voters' Debate. The clip is introduced by Rachel Maddow, a talk show host from Air America, and shows the debate that was attended by seven Republican candidates. You can watch it on www.airamerica.com/maddow/blog/340595 by scrolling down to one of the YouTube images.

PAULA BRUMMEL, MINNEAPOLIS

The "crisis" in the issue of race in American politics as shown by the recent speech by Barack Obama and the response from Rush Limbaugh, is the first sign that our country is finally willing to be honest about race. There are old misconceptions that still live.

Obama is of mixed race (as all of us are), but because he has a recent genealogical connection to Africa he is identified as "black." Limbaugh says he "doesn't consider his genetic history" and therefore is free from prejudice, and in this way is different from Obama. This argument is the ultimate political shell game. Limbaugh knows his audience is white, and harbors the same kind racial resentments that Obama suggests are still simmering in the black community. But Limbaugh insists that whites have moved beyond this, and if you believe that, I have some bridges for sale cheap.

Both Wright and other black clergy (I have attended a "black" church in St. Paul on occasion where I was welcomed) and Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson (I have also attended several "white" wealthy suburban churches where I was not welcome -- and I'm white) get the material for their sermons from the same source, the Christian Bible, and they believe it is the word of God. It's time for the community of Christians to put patriotism on an equal par with their religion. Pastors and ministers are not above prejudice. They aren't above criticism. They are members of the community who were raised with the same biases as the rest of us. If we give them more power than that, we make a big mistake.

Obama painfully described this. Limbaugh exploited it in order to fan the flames of intolerance, and of course to focus attention on himself. I think the Obama approach is more courageous, more honest and probably ends his presidential hopes.

When is this country going to live up to the Constitution and the Bible?

C.M. THOMES, TWO HARBORS, MINN.