The Underground is an independent media source for news and opinion in and around Wyoming. Founded in July 2009, The Underground features contributions from residents in Wyoming and discussion of national events beyond our four borders.

Letters to the editor are welcome and can be sent to meglanker@gmail.com. Please limit to 500 words. Letters may be edited for length or content - name and phone number are required for submission. No anonymous letters will be published. All opinions expressed here are those of the author and are not those of The Underground unless explicit endorsement is given. Publication does not equal endorsement.

News contributions should be limited to a maximum of 800 words and may also be edited. Press releases are also welcome. Please provide a name and phone number for verification.

The Underground encourages free speech and discussion on news and opinion, but please keep the discourse civil. The Underground reserves the right to remove any comments deemed abusive, threatening or spam.

Thought for the day

“The First Amendment was designed to protect offensive speech, because nobody ever tries to ban the other kind”

- Mike Godwin, American attorney & author, creator of Godwin's Law

UW professor found dead outside home

Photo: UW Associate Professor Margaret Zamudio, from Department of Sociology website, University of Wyoming

UW professor found dead outside home
Meg Lanker
Monday, December 28, 2009 1:21 PM MDT


A popular professor at the University of Wyoming has died.

Laramie resident Margaret "Margie" Zamudio, 45, was found dead outside her home Saturday after a concerned resident called police shortly after noon after seeing boots outside of a snowdrift. Authorities discovered Zamudio's body outside her home at approximately 12:30 p.m.

According to Commander Mitchell Cushman of the Laramie Police Department, authorities do not believe any foul play was involved and Zamudio's death appears to be accidental. "We believe she stepped outside at some point, slipped and became unconscious. Due to the weather conditions, she most likely froze to death," he said.

On Friday and Saturday, temperatures in Laramie dipped into the single digits with wind chills as low as -20°F. Cushman said extreme winter weather conditions of this type can quickly take a toll on an individual.

Cushman said the investigation is ongoing and toxicology results could take six to eight weeks.

University of Wyoming President Tom Buchanan released a statement Monday. "I know I speak for the University of Wyoming community when I say we’re all saddened by Margaret’s death; we will all miss her and her contributions to UW very much," he said.

Zamudio was an associate professor at UW and taught several classes, specializing in Chicano studies and social inequality. According to the UW Department of Sociology's website, she was beginning research "examining the political economy of pre-1960's gendered migration to the U.S. with an emphasis on Salvadoran women."

She received her doctorate from the University of California in 1996 and focused her research on issues of immigration and labor, on race, class, and gender, and on critical race studies in education.

On life support: Reforming the healthcare industry

Photo: A sign at the 9/12 project's march on Washington D.C./Andrew Aliferis, used under Creative Commons license

On life support: Reforming the healthcare industry

Meg Lanker
Monday, November 30, 2009 9:22 PM MDT

No one could have predicted the peculiar turns the healthcare debate took.

One of the most jarring sprung from the plethora of town-hall meetings in August. Gun-rights advocates claimed that the healthcare debate is bizarrely and inextricably tied to an imaginary push to deprive Americans of the right to bear arms, illustrated by a man who carried an AR-15 assault rifle strapped to his back outside a town hall meeting with the president in Phoenix, Ariz.

This followed national coverage of a New Hampshire man openly carrying a gun in a thigh holster at another Obama town hall meeting while holding a sign stating, “It’s time to water the tree of liberty,” – a partial quote from Thomas Jefferson, who said, “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

Another claim about gun rights fired up the masses again when Gun Owners of America began circulating the claim that the Baucus health care bill would ban guns used for self defense. The group derived this from provisions in the bill allowing for higher premiums for tobacco users – this provision is then extrapolated by the group and right-wingers to include other “risky” behaviors like gun ownership. Non-partisan group PolitiFact.com rated the claim as “false” and said, “Every behavioral factor explicitly cited in the bill concerns pure medical issues, such as a lowered cholesterol level, maintenance of a certain body mass index, quitting smoking or losing a specified amount of weight.”

Gun owners continue to show up and pack heat at what should be peaceful town hall gatherings and rallies but have become free-for-all melees of shouts about socialism and racism and fascism and every fear-mongering “ism” in the book. The consequence of the town hall debacles in August have led to a serious reluctance to even consider speaking to constituents on anything related to health care reform.

Thankfully, these self-styled guerillas of freedom haven’t killed anyone – indeed, there were no arrests for gun violence, but police have arrested a few for unlawful possession of a firearm. But, as one Phoenix police officer explained to the Associated Press the simple presence of a man with a large rifle “sparked a lot of emotions.”

Perhaps those Americans who were angry, or distressed, or sickened by the sight of a man with an assault rifle at a presidential event recalled what happened when another man brought a rifle to a presidential parade in Texas. Or when a man brought a rifle to hear a Baptist preacher speak about civil rights in Tennessee. Or possibly the sight evokes the unmerciful memory of hearing a heart-lurching knock at the door in the early morning hours after being identified as the next-of-kin.

And the pundits and politicians. The cries of socialism and marches to communism and the figurative beating of breasts deserve an Oscar or ridicule, depending on which side Americans take. Glenn Beck weeps as he speaks of rationing and whether or not citizens will be considered valuable enough to keep alive. Sarah Palin warns us of the death panels that would have decreed her son, born with Down Syndrome, not important enough to birth. Representative Michele Bachmann warns of schools allowing 13-year-olds to receive abortions and then be put back on the bus to go home, with mom and dad none the wiser. Americans were warned by health insurance companies that a shadowy government entity would come between them and their doctors – warned by the very industry of bloodsuckers spawned by coming between patients and doctors.

The most outrageous lies are the ones most readily believed by the right-wing desperate to get the government out of their Medicare – forget the ridiculousness of that statement because the fear, to them, is real.

Thanks in part to the scare tactics, and in part to the powerful health insurance lobby, the U.S. House passed a watered down bill Nov. 7 with a weakened public option and insurance mandates. The bill also included sweeping abortion restrictions under the Stupak amendment, added at the last minute to appease Blue Dog Democrats, several of which voted for the amendment and not the final bill. The new legislation has little cost controls and opens a market previously unavailable to the health insurance industry of impoverished Americans. The lone Republican who voted for the bill, Rep. Joseph Cao of Louisiana is now targeted as a traitor by his own party.

The House bill is an insurance company’s wet dream.

How did it get to this point?

Way back in 2008, in a campaign that seems hazy from the almost-euphoric high generated by the possibility of change, the Republican Party painted Barack Obama with the pinko tint of socialism or communism, depending on the crowd. John McCain and Sarah Palin fervently assured us that Obama wanted to take away our freedoms to worship, to choose our doctors, to stroll around in a public place with an assault rifle. He was not one of us, and probably a terrorist, dontcha ya know? He pals around with bad dudes and they probably even have a book club led by that Saul guy.

After the election, the Republican Party was eager to prove it was not in the death throes of a movement long past its era or usefulness. It jumped on the opportunity to become the party of Americans who want things to stay the way they were, back when credit was plentiful and so was the cheap plastic crap at Wal-Mart. Back then, the free market throbbed with excitement as houses were erected one right after another and purchased with no down payment and credit terms arranged.

But that was way, way back in 2005, when everyone wanted flip houses and flipped for house they couldn’t afford, either through enticement into sub-prime mortgages or pure unencumbered desire. Americans didn’t notice the spiraling cost of health care as much because they all had jobs and money, and besides, the emergency room treats anyone who walks in. U.S. citizens didn’t really need all those silly civil rights and those inane leftists had themselves in a tizzy over Gitmo. Remember, kids, it’s the first and second amendment rights that really get things done.

It’s this last principle that sees America in its present predicament. It’s my first amendment right to shout the loudest at the nearest town hall, to warn my fellow citizens of impending socialism and I’ve got the second amendment to back that one up should some peacenik think otherwise. The right-wingers have transformed the blissfully ignorant into the fearfully ignorant and unleashed the Tea Party people, the birthers, the conspiracy theorists, and the garden-variety lunatics upon the issue of “socialized medicine,” leading disgruntled seniors to scream about the government keeping their hands out of their goddamned Medicare and Sarah Palin to write on Facebook about evil Obama’s plan for “death panels.”

Their scare tactics bordered on the barely factual to the absurd. In the barely factual column, the right-wing continues to warn of rationing, which already happens when insurance companies decide to cover treatment or not, which treatment is appropriate, and how long patients need treatment. Dismiss the silly rationing idea based on rich versus poor since all the poor have to do is go to the ER or ask their church for help. In the absurd column, there’s the reviewed and revised summary of HR 3200, “adapted on July 29, 2009, by the Liberty Counsel from the original authored by Peter Fleckenstein and posted on FreeRepublic.com.”

These claims, embraced and distributed by conservative groups like the national 9/12 Project, include this gem: “Sec. 2511, Pg. 992 – Government will establish school-based ‘health’ clinics. Your children will be indoctrinated and your grandchildren may be aborted!”

I highly doubt this – typical school health clinics include first-hand education on not putting rocks in your nose versus putting tab A into slot B; plus, an abortion is fairly time-consuming procedure requiring a physician and not many students can get out of class long enough to surreptitiously smoke cigarettes, much less abort their unborn.

These claims, which seem to have originated with Mr. Fleckenstein, continue to appear in chain emails supposedly authored by this or that constitutional scholar urging people to call their congressman and tell them to vote no on reform.

These are also the alarmist assertions parroted by Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn. She insists that creationism is valid science and claims swine flu originated with Democratic administrations, and yet, people still take her seriously. She also said she will run for president in 2012 if God tells her she should. Let’s hope God doesn’t get the hint.

Bachmann also spurred a large “press conference” (read: protest rally) Nov. 5 on the steps of the Capitol Building – a rally which featured signs depicting Obama as Hitler and Mao. Among the most distasteful was a large banner depicting naked concentration camp victims piled in a mass grave with a caption reading “"National Socialist Health Care, Dachau, Germany 1945." Several of her fellow Republicans stood grinning behind the podium. This is apparently the new base for the GOP.

These incongruous declarations do not seem to be based in any kind of reality. Instead, they surface from a deep, dark alternate universe – a place fixed in the psyche of many white, working class, older Americans. It’s the persistent fear of the other, of change, of deviation from the norm. These are the folks that lost their jobs at the plant after they went overseas to kill little yellow people to bring them freedom. Their children and grandchildren are going into the desert to bring freedom to more ungrateful foreigners. These folks come home from a hard day’s work and see this smooth-talking black president on television telling them that he’s going to make him pay for the health care for other people’s children and grandchildren with their hard-earned paycheck.

That guy, with all the opportunities their children should have had but didn’t, is now telling Joe Schmoe and Jane Doe to give their money willingly to support people that they think have never known an honest day’s work. And it makes them angry. America is the land of bootstrap opportunity, not government-based handholding. And they’ll be damned if it will become a nanny welfare state.

So when they’re told to shout at their congressmen at the nearest town hall, or to rally on Sept. 12 or Nov. 5 in Washington D.C., then, by God, they’ll do what it takes to stop the socialists, the welfare cheats and the academic elitists in their tracks. They heard the horror stories about rationing in Canada and the months spent waiting for bypass surgery. Joe Schmoe can’t bear to think of his granddaughters going to kindergarten and learning how to slide on condoms instead of learning the alphabet. Jane Doe agonizes over the thought that her aged mother might have to face one of those death panels that Sarah Palin talks about in her folksy manner. So they’ll stop this day of reckoning from coming to fruition.

This is irrational, and yet, this stroking of panic over a long, strange summer was effective. The public option appeared to be headed for an unceremonious death several times. Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo. even felt comfortable enough to assure the people of this state that if it wasn’t for him, Wyomingites would have national health care. Perhaps the good senator may want to consider Health Care for America Now’s report on the health insurance industry currently bankrupting this country and Wyoming residents.

Health Care for America Now (HCAN) is comprised of more than 1,000 organizations in 46 states “representing 30 million people dedicated to winning quality, affordable health care.” According to their report released in June, the average combined cost of health insurance premiums paid by employers and workers climbed to $16,771 in 2009 for a family of four. This represents nearly one-third of a U.S. family’s median income.

How is this sustainable? HCAN points out that in Wyoming, insurance premiums rose 129 percent from 2000 to 2007, 4.6 times faster than median earnings rose in Wyoming. This is the fastest and highest rate of premium increase in the nation. For family health coverage in Wyoming during that time, the average annual combined premium for employers and employees rose from $5,605 to $12,824 - 26 percent of the median family's income and projected to reach 47 percent by 2016.

In Wyoming, 72,821 of 520,500 residents are uninsured. These are Sen. Enzi’s constituents, the people to which he proudly announced his blocking of national health care.

Of course, all this is under normal circumstances. When a family member becomes ill, the problem of underinsured policy holders becomes clear. In 2007, 62 percent of Americans filing for bankruptcy said inability to pay medical bills was the key reason. Three-quarters of those filing had health insurance. In no universe does it make sense for working class people to oppose this reform.

But fear will make a person do peculiar things.

In August, Missouri resident Kenneth Gladney was allegedly involved in a fight at a town hall with members of the Service Employees International Union and later went to the ER claiming to have sustained multiple injuries. He was shown on a video of the incident quickly springing to his feet after appearing to trip on a curb. After jumping up from the ground, Gladney continued to shout at the SEIU representatives. He appeared later at another town hall to plead for donations to cover his mounting medical bills in a wheelchair, supposedly unable to speak – until he emerged on Fox News the next day. His appeal came at a protest against health care reform that would provide him with insurance, despite the fact he was recently laid off from his job. The irony was completely lost on the conservatives and rally attendees.

Hopefully the Republicans, the pundits, the tea partiers, and the right-wing, volatile fringe movement are pleased with what they hath wrought. Americans now know they’ve been spared the awful, horrible, inhumane health care the residents of Britain receive and would never trade for our current boondoggle of a system bankrupting citizens.

This health care “debate” is no longer a debate. It represents a strange and possibly dangerous turn in politics. This is potential mob rule via the ignorant and the U.S. Congressmen stirring this populist frenzy are playing with fire. The Democrats do not understand the fury either. They cannot comprehend the trepidation felt by many Americans because the liberal mentality does not deal in individual morality – it boasts the common good of society as its goal and the individual morality is intertwined with the benefit to society. It is no challenge to the GOP to paint “collectivism” to the uninformed as a horrible step toward communism.

At Bachmann’s health care rally, attendees held signs advocating violent revolution, compared the U.S. Congress to Nazi Party members, and several hanging effigies of various congressmen were the norm and not the exception. When did any of this become the desired political discourse? All this, as Congress debates health care reform that will surely benefit many of these people. They are patsies in a terrible corporate lie, as it has always been. The GOP must continue to count on populist dread since its remake as the party of big business or risk complete dissolution.

Greg Sargent wrote of a telling conference call in August where a Tea Party organizer stated: “The purpose of Tea Parties is not to find a solution to the health care crisis — it is to stop what is not the solution: ObamaCare.” The tea parties, for all the talk about “astroturf” and “faux populism,” do attract Americans who are worried about what the reforms will bring and who are angered over the bailouts, rising health care costs, unemployment, etc. However, simply blocking reform of any kind benefits no one but the health insurance industry.

Their rage is understandable and familiar. We liberals felt it for eight years under the Bush regime. But these folks are directing at the wrong people. Direct the anger at the insurance companies, the corporations who were "too big to fail," Ronald Reagan and his beginning of the end with the institution of neoliberal economic reforms. But do not throw it at the people trying to institute beneficial improvements to health care successfully for the first time in our nation’s history.

The real tragedy in the health care debate is that due to these horrendous bailouts coupled with two unwinnable wars running rampant over the national deficit, it is doubtful the U.S. can afford massive reforms of any kind. But we cannot afford to continue the way we have. A classic Catch-22 and too little, too late. The time for reform was with Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, Nixon, even Clinton. Ted Kennedy must be weeping in the afterlife over this mess.

The U.S. Congress is not completely altruistic. Nearly every member is bought and paid for, courtesy of lobbyists sashaying through the aisles guaranteeing cushy campaign contributions. Are watered down bills and wrath-fueled tea parties the solution? Absolutely not. But no one seems to have an unambiguous solution and the 9/12 Glenn Beck acolytes are promised that what they’re being told to do is the solution.

Storming Nancy Pelosi's office and being arrested.

Holding signs about "Kenyan Obama", socialism, fascism, and Nazism.

Chanting "Kill the Bill" at the top of their lungs after Michele Bachmann told them on Sean Hannity’s show to come to D.C. and “scare” their congressmen into not voting for the bill.

The thought of the chaos possibly inherent in the 2010 elections is chilling. The U.S. Senate is beginning their debate on their own version of the bill today. Already, Beck and Hannity are calling for more marches in tirades laced with violent, revolutionary metaphors and absolutes.

There is no denying this is getting frightening.

Click here and here to view photos from Tea Party protests across the nation

Docs 4 Patient Care rally in Casper Nov. 21st

This is a slideshow from the Docs 4 Patient Care rally in Casper, Wyo. last Saturday. The Underground was there to interview rally-goers and counter-protesters alike. A recap will follow Friday. A common thread running through the comments of rally attendees was fear. Fear of socialism, fear of government takeovers, fear of out of control spending, or fear for their own families. Stay tuned for The Underground's recap...

Stay tuned...

Photo: Multi-exposure photos of mountains near Jackson Lake in Jackson, Wyo. Meg Lanker

The Underground has been rather quiet lately, but that doesn't mean there's nothing going on. Stay tuned for a piece on Saturday's Docs 4 patient care rally in Casper, Fort Hood, the University of Wyoming, and health care in general.

I am the editor of The Underground, but I am also a full time student. Now that school is beginning to wind down, expect brand new articles and opinions. Want to submit? Submissions are always welcome and are a key piece of this site. See the description above for instructions.

Thanks to the readers who have made this possible. As Thanksgiving approaches, I remember and am thankful for those who have encouraged me, kept reading, and will read in the future.

-Meg Lanker

Health care panels scheduled for tonight

Health care panels scheduled for tonight
Wyoming health care professionals and students will debate reform
Meg Lanker

Tuesday, October 20, 2009 2:21 PM MDT

Southeast Wyoming residents will get two chances today to find out how health care reform could affect them.

According to a news release from the Wyoming Democratic Party, local health care professionals will discuss health care reform at a panel at Laramie County Community College Center for Conferences and Institutes.

The panel is scheduled for 7 p.m. and will include Wyoming Department of Health Director Dr. Brent Sherard; Lorraine Saulino-Klein, RN; and Mary Forrester, FNP. Other healthcare professionals will also attend and discuss what reform will mean for Wyoming residents and how it can impact Wyoming.

“No one knows more about the urgent need for health insurance reform than those who work within the health care system every day,” said Wyoming Democratic Party Executive Director Bill Luckett in the release. “It is important that we have the opportunity to hear their perspective.”

Wyoming Democratic Party Vice Chair Mike Bell will moderate the discussion and a short question and answer period following the panel’s comments.

Elsewhere in the state, the University of Wyoming College Democrats and College Republicans will hold a debate regarding health care reform and the issues surrounding various proposed bills.

The debate is scheduled for 6 p.m. at the Wyoming Union West Ballroom and will also feature a question and answer session afterwards. The College Democrats invited the College Republicans to debate in the interest of having a bipartisan view on health care presented.

Both clubs are aiming to educate Wyoming residents and UW students about the concerns surrounding health care reform. In pre-debate meetings, College Republicans president Caitlin Wallace and College Democrats president Dana Walton both said they wished to see a civil, enlightening debate.

Laramie resident and activist Matt Stannard will blog live during the debate at theunderview.blogspot.com and will follow with commentary on the debate during his nightly “Shared Sacrifice” podcast from 8-9 p.m., accessible to the public at blogtalkradio.com/shared_sacrifice.

Stannard is looking forward to liveblogging the debate. “The liveblogging serves two purposes: In addition to the important global exposure it provides for UW and the health care debate, it also serves as an opportunity for anyone and everyone to fact-check the debate,” he said. “I hope people will look over the notes I post during the debate, research the facts, and post their findings on the blog.”

According to Shared Sacrifice’s website, the daily podcast is also co-hosted by Iraq veteran Gary Barkley. The website describes the show as “progressive in nature” but emphasizes “all Americans have the right to be heard.”

Listeners are invited to call in during the podcast with their questions and comments. Stannard said the entire hour will be used to discuss the debate and health care reform. "We'll continue the conversation on tomorrow night's podcast too, if there's interest," said Stannard.

SUFP dedicates peace pole

Photos: (top) Local peace activists Paul Turley and Mike Oxley in 2004. (bottom) The Laramie peace pole in Optimist Park. Courtesy of Will Welch.

Stand Up For Peace Wyoming dedicates peace pole in Laramie

Pole honors two Laramie activists
Will Welch
Wednesday, September 30, 2009 12:56 PM MDT

The next time Laramie residents find themselves venturing down Laramie’s Greenbelt in Optimist Park, they will notice a new addition.

Close to the corner of Spruce and W. Park streets, riverside to the path, is planted a four sided wooden post with the message “May Peace Prevail on Earth,” engraved in eight different languages, including English, Mandarin, Japanese, Vietnamese, Arapaho, Shoshoni, Arabic and American Sign Language.

A small plaque with the dedication, “In Memory of our Dear Friends Paul Z. Turley, and J. Michael Oxley Stand Up For Peace Wyoming 2008” is affixed to the side of the pole facing the shore of the Laramie River.

The dedication of the peace pole was held this Saturday on a beautiful sunny afternoon at the site of the pole in Optimist Park.

This new addition to the Laramie community is a known as a peace pole and it is one of approximately 200,000 standing in different places all over the world, according to the website peacepoles.com. The peace pole is part of a continuing project that was started in Japan in 1955 in response to the nuclear bombings on Hiroshima.

Laramie’s peace pole, which was donated to the community the organization Stand Up For Peace Wyoming (SUFP), was approved by the Trees, Parks and Recreation board in the summer of 2008 after a request was sent by letter, according to SUFP member Nancy Sindelar.

Members of the community may wonder just who Paul Z. Turley and J. Michael Oxley were and how they came to such an honor. Paul Zeno Turley passed away from an aneurism in 2008 and John Michael Oxley died unexpectedly, at 40, from a brain complication.

“[Stand Up For Peace] had been discussing the purchase of the peace pole for a number of years,” said Leslie Wischmann, a member of SUFP. “When Mike died, and then Paul, we all became very committed. We wanted the community to remember them, to remember Stand Up For Peace, and to remember peace.”

At the dedication ceremony and the following potluck, attendees shared stories and offered insight about the two activists.

Paul Turley was a World War II veteran, student, gymnast, husband, father and peace activist. Conversations with the attendees revealed that he and his point of view were very well respected amongst members of the local peace crowd, especially since Turley was a veteran.

“He reminded us to respect the soldiers. He made a point to remind us that the war is not their fault.” said Wischmann. “It was because of him that Stand Up For Peace sent care packages to the troops in Iraq on three separate occasions.”

Turley was a committed demonstrator, almost never missing a week to sit on the corner of 3rd Street and Grand Avenue on Friday afternoons where SUFP still demonstrates weekly.

He also took one class per semester from the University of Wyoming and at 82, was the oldest person ever on the UW gymnastics team. “I just looked over and saw this old man standing on his head in the grass,” said Skye Swoboa-Colberg of Laramie at Laramie’s annual Freedom has a Birthday celebrations where Turley was known show the crowd a full backflip.

Leona Turley, Paul's widow, said, “He really loved his gymnastics.”

J. Michael (Mike) Oxley, was remembered as an incredibly avid activist, and a political aficionado whose sense of humor and wit were enjoyed by all who knew him.

“He was driven by curiosity,” said Wischmann. “If you asked him a question he didn’t know the answer to, it would drive him nuts and he would know the next time you saw him.”

“Mike was a real trickster,” said Sarah Egolf, his fiancée at the time of his death.

Oxley, a known progressive, ran as a Republican to challenge Barbara Cubin for her seat in the U.S. House of Representatives in the Republican primary of 2004 – reportedly, just to have the chance to debate her about issues he was sure she wouldn’t know about. Oxley was unable to stay in the race to due to family complications.

Egolf said he did succeed at becoming the elected Republican precinct committeeman for his precinct in Laramie when he wrote himself in for the position in the 2006 election. He, along with close friend John Hanks, were known for distributing tiny pictures of then-President Bush pasted to toothpicks and planting them in dog feces in public parks during Bush’s second term. They encouraged others to do the same.

Oxley also started the Laramie chapter of Drinking Liberally.

He passed away peacefully in his sleep while at his favorite music festival, NedFest, where he was tabling for the Biodiversity Conservation Alliance. He was found curled up in his booth with his flashlight and a book by the Sierra Club about grassroots organizing.

At the dedication of the peace pole, members of Stand Up For Peace and family members of the honorees told stories, shared memories, expressed dedication to peace and spoke of the good feelings and reminders of goodwill that the peace pole will bring to passersby in the community.

Paul Taylor, a Laramie resident originally from Australia, told, and sang, an Aborigine legend from South Australia that reminded others of the necessity of resolving conflicts peacefully and the need for members of communities to spend time with each other. He followed his tale by a piece on didgeridoo.

At the end of the ceremony, Sally Palmer, a Laramie minister, led the group in the chorus, written by Fred Small: “Peace is the bread we break; Love is the river rolling; Life is the chance we take; when we make this Earth our home.”

The pole can be visited by Laramie residents in Optimist Park, located on the west side of Laramie.

Photo slideshow of the dedication, photos courtesy Larry Jansen of Laramie:

Me and Mr. Cheney: A history

Photo: Protesters assemble on Dick and Lynne Cheney Plaza before the dedication. Credit- Meg Lanker, The Underground

Me and Mr. Cheney: A history
Meg Lanker
Monday, September 28, 2009 2:56 PM MDT

It may have been excitement, but I want to believe it was solidarity. The two little boys raised their fists as I marched with the protesters past the University of Wyoming Lab School students on recess. One gap-toothed boy cheered wildly as Nancy Sindelar, a Laramie peace activist, shouted, “These are your rights, kids! It’s the First Amendment at work!”

I watched their eyes light up and the wheels begin to turn. We were more alive than any history book, any documentary, any slideshow. The enthusiasm and unease electrified the air as they pushed forward, crossing Prexy’s Pasture on their way to protest former Vice President Dick Cheney and his dreadfully, ironically-named Cheney International Center.

I marched in solidarity with them Sept. 10. I have marched in solidarity with them since 2003, as the crazy 48-hour deadline for the bombs to drop ticked away and the news anchors waited with baited breath. I knew this invasion was wrong in my inner core. I scrawled furiously in a notebook as the airstrike began on the Iraqi Presidential Palace March 19, 2003. The night vision with white puffs of smoke sanitized the carnage on the ground.

I remembered seeing similar images when the U.S. went into Iraq in 1990. I was in first grade at a small Catholic school in Ohio. My class wrote letters beginning with “Dear Soldier.” I still remembering wishing an unnamed soldier Merry Christmas and not quite understanding why.

Dick Cheney was around for Desert Storm as well – in fact, then-Secretary of Defense Cheney and General Norman Schwarzkopf oversaw the engineering and planning of Desert Storm. In 1990, Cheney said, "I do not believe the President requires any additional authorization from the Congress before committing US forces to achieve our objectives in the Gulf." An unnerving statement, considering what happened nearly 12 years later.

PBS’ Frontline oral history website devoted a section to the former vice president called “Cheney In His Own Words.” In 1991, Cheney gave his perspective on U.S. involvement in the Persian Gulf: “We're always going to have to be involved [in the Middle East]. Maybe it's part of our national character, you know we like to have these problems nice and neatly wrapped up, put a ribbon around it. You deploy a force, you win the war and the problem goes away and it doesn't work that way in the Middle East – it never has and isn't likely to in my lifetime.”

Even then, Cheney knew. He knew this would never end – only go quiet for a period.

A friend of mine from my stint in the Navy was deployed to a ship running support operations for the 2003 invasion. He said they were told on the ship that they would “just know” if they were going to war. Later that night, as most prepared to sleep, the ship’s PA system erupted with AC/DC’s “Hell’s Bells” and the sounds of pilots firing up the engines of their jets. It was time, he said. He began singing the lyrics to “Hells Bells” on the phone with me – “I’m a rolling thunder, a pouring rain/I’m comin’ on like a hurricane/My lightning’s flashing across the sky/You’re only young but you’re gonna die!”

He called it the “most patriotic time of his life.” This was a year after the invasion began and they finally pulled back into port.

I felt sick.

I watched President George W. Bush land on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln May 1, a ship that had been out to sea for nearly a year and was now forced to sit off the coast of San Diego because of security concerns. The sailors were mocked by the sight of their home for several days. I saw the “Mission Accomplished” banner, the beaming sailors, and a flight-suit clad Bush as pure political theater and nothing else.

Where was Cheney?

As Bush stood on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln and said, “Major combat operations in Iraq have ended,” Cheney was nowhere in sight.

On July 2, 2003, when Bush famously said of the insurgency, “Bring ‘em on,” Cheney was still nowhere in sight.

Yet he took those messages to heart – even when the administration backed off both statements, claiming the notorious banner was “unclear” and letting the “bring ‘em on” blow over.

It also seems that Cheney was at his undisclosed location when Bush spoke of torture. On March 23, 2003, Bush said Iraqi soldiers were “welcoming” American troops, and were “surrendering gleefully, happily.” He emphasized to a cache of White House reporters, “They'll be treated well.”

Andrew Sullivan wrote in the Oct. 2009 edition of The Atlantic of Bush’s resounding condemnation of torture on June 26, 2003 on the UN International Day in Support of Victims of Torture. This was roughly one year before the news broke of torture at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. In his speech, Bush said, “I call on all governments to join with the United States and the community of law-abiding nations in prohibiting, investigating, and prosecuting all acts of torture and in undertaking to prevent other cruel and unusual punishment. I call on all nations to speak out against torture in all its forms and to make ending torture an essential part of their diplomacy.”

There was no mincing of words. According to the Bush administration – or at least Bush – Americans don’t torture.

But anyone who watched news coverage of the Abu Ghraib prison photos, the de-classification of CIA and internal memos urging Bush to declare Taliban and Iraqi insurgents as exempt from the Geneva Conventions, and finally, de-classification of internal documents detailing methods ranging from sexual abuse and threats to the use of power drills and loaded weapons in the “approved” interrogation methods – anyone who watched any coverage of these stories knows better, knows America has tortured.

And it was with this in mind, I watched Cheney transform over the years from a faintly sinister-looking boorish uncle to a chilling criminal organizer of torture at worst and a nefarious bully at best. He was a chief architect in a pre-emptive invasion to find weapons of mass destruction with faulty intelligence, to spread democracy like so much syphilis, and, as many of Cheney’s detractors allege, to secure a significant slice of the Iraqi oil reserves for U.S. corporate profit.

Cheney insisted in a landmark interview March 16, 2003 with the late Tim Russert that the Iraqi oil reserves “obviously, belong to the Iraqi people, need to be put to use by the Iraqi people for the Iraqi people and that will be one of our major objectives.”

In this interview, Cheney made statements that are tragically laughable in hindsight and disastrous in their lack of foresight. He claimed, “My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators.”

Russert pushed him on this statement and asked, “If your analysis is not correct, and we’re not treated as liberators, but as conquerors, and the Iraqis begin to resist, particularly in Baghdad, do you think the American people are prepared for a long, costly, and bloody battle with significant American casualties?”

Cheney replied, “Well, I don’t think it’s likely to unfold that way, Tim, because I really do believe that we will be greeted as liberators… The read we get on the people of Iraq is there is no question that they want to the get rid of Saddam Hussein and they will welcome as liberators the United States when we come to do that.”

Russert asked about costs of the proposed conflict, which analysts placed at $80 billion then, with a cost of $10 billion for each year of occupation. Cheney declined to elaborate on projected costs in the interview, only acknowledging “there are estimates out there.”

As of Sept. 23, 2009, the cost of the Iraq War was over $165 billion – nearly three times the cost of the war in Afghanistan. Since 2001, the U.S. has spent over $912 billion on these two wars. Much of that money has gone to civilian firms contracted to rebuild Iraq. A principle firm is Cheney’s old haunt, Halliburton, and its subsidiaries.

Cheney headed up the energy development company Halliburton, which bills itself on its website as “one of the world’s largest providers of products and services to the energy industry.”

I wonder if Cheney remembers the speech he gave to the libertarian-leaning-conservative Cato Institute in 1998. The think-tank sponsors numerous symposiums and invited then-Halliburton CEO Dick Cheney to speak at a conference entitled “Collateral Damage: The Economic Cost of U.S. Foreign Policy.”

He delivered a speech on the topic of Defending Liberty in a Global Economy, expounding on the challenges of delivering adequate energy services to a war zone.

Cheney remarked, “The good Lord didn't see fit to put oil and gas only where there are democratically elected regimes friendly to the United States. Occasionally we have to operate in places where one would not normally choose to go. But, we go where the business is.”

And, in 2003, the U.S. went where the business is – the second-largest oil reserve in the world, under the sands of Iraq. Also, in 2003, Halliburton was awarded billions of dollars of no-bid government contracts to rebuild the infrastructure of Iraq’s oil industry. Halliburton is also entangled with Blackwater USA, a private security firm under investigation for smuggling weapons into Iraq concealed in dog food bags and, in more serious allegations, of murdering Iraqi civilians for sport.

Since Halliburton held millions in government contracts even before the Iraq war, Cheney sold his Halliburton stock to avoid a conflict of interest as vice president, but retains a severance package and retirements benefits worth millions. These stock sales paid for most of the Cheney International Center.

Cheney and the black gold he holds so dear both share a common characteristic: Both can take the form of crude or refined. Whether it’s screaming, “Go fuck yourself!” at a fellow legislator on the House floor, to smirking “So?” at a reporter who, in 2008, points out two-thirds of Americans no longer think the fight in Iraq is worth it, Dick Cheney held the monopoly on evil in the Bush administration – so much so that I began to regard Bush as a puppet, a faux-martinet standing in as a mouthpiece for what Cheney had planned for America and Iraq.

And here we are. Two, then four, then six years crawled by as the body count on both sides rose and “Mission Accomplished” tasted not of victory but ashes. The war in Iraq appears to stagnate more and more as troops prepare to withdraw, and the forgotten conflict, Afghanistan, transforms into one step forward, two steps back.

As Cheney continually defended the actions of CIA interrogators who “may have” crossed the line on Fox News every time whispers of prosecution of the previous administration began, the University of Wyoming quietly prepared to dedicate the Cheney International Center.

A clichéd little birdie told me the dedication was prepared for Sept. 10 at 10:30 a.m. in front of the center on Dick and Lynne Cheney plaza. I confirmed the dedication with UW spokeswoman Jessica Lowell Aug. 30 and published the news on The Underground.

I knew I had to be there.

I wanted Cheney welcomed with the reminder that he sanctioned torture in the name of every American citizen. I wanted him to know that he could not buy honor. And I wanted him to know that not every Wyoming citizen claims him as a native son – never mind that he was actually born in Nebraska. A petty point, but Wyoming does have a tendency to disown those that dare move here from “back East” or, God forbid, California. Wyoming only claims a select few as its own.

I was also torn about protesting his visit. As the editor of The Underground, it is my job to remain objective when I report the news. I reported on his visit along with the opposition and planned protest to it, which thanks to several Laramie community members tipping off Mead Gruver of the Wyoming Tribune Eagle, garnered national attention via the AP wire story “Protests brew over Cheney International Center.”

As the enthusiasm over the protest brewed, I began to suspect I could no longer be objective. This was cemented by UW President Tom Buchanan’s opinion piece in the Casper Star-Tribune Sept. 6 “Tolerance, diversity cut many ways.” Buchanan said he had reviewed a list of those protesting the decision to name the center after Cheney and recognized many friends and colleagues on this list.

Buchanan wrote: “The list includes some good friends and colleagues who have previously admonished the UW administration to support greater diversity and increased tolerance for all views. So it is ironic that they show so little of it when confronted by a situation that challenges their own comfort zone.”

The lack of understanding by the UW administration and Buchanan was incomprehensible and wholly offensive. I immediately fired off a letter in response.

In my letter, published in the Tribune Sept. 9, I wrote: “The protest to this decision has nothing to do with intolerance of Cheney's views or of narrow-mindedness. This has everything to do with naming the center after a man who is suspected of sanctioning torture internationally and numerous violations of U.S. citizens' civil rights.”

It was in that moment any ideas of objectivity fell away. I believe every journalist will one day face a crisis of conscience on whether or not to remain objective manifested by a breakthrough of passion. Mine came that day.

The day of the event, I scrawled the number for the Wyoming ACLU in black Sharpie marker on the arms and hands of nearly 50 people. I marched with the protesters. I created the music mix they blared from a small stereo as we marched from 22nd and Willett Streets to Prexy’s Pasture. I gave comments to the media as a facilitator. I counted nearly double the AP’s estimate of 100 protesters.

And then I stood in the media area, signed in and filmed the event, recorded the speeches and took comments for this feature from protesters, Cheney supporters, Tom Buchanan, and Jessica Lowell.

When Cheney walked out, the protesters booed, supporters cheered, but I remained silent.

When Former U.S. Senator Al Simpson commented on Cheney’s patriotism, how easy it was to protest and how anyone can be a “bitcher,” I continued to remain silent so as to not compromise my recording.

And when Cheney began to speak, not more than 20 feet from where I stood, all of the epithets and all of the curses I wanted shout at him about eight years of lies, sanctioning torture, buying honor, and sending my friends to die in an unjust war strained against my lips. I remained silent.

I remained silent because there were so many others hoisting signs and yelling what I have wanted to say to the man since I watched the bombs drop in 2003. The throng of protesters remained, for the most part, polite during the speeches – although Simpson’s comments certainly rankled a few.

The colorful signs elevated above the crowd spoke volumes. Some referenced the donation and torture: “We don’t want your blood money!” “UW: High priced whore” and “My USA doesn’t torture.” There were also references to Buchanan’s opinion piece: “Tom Buchanan tolerates torture” and “If thinking torture is wrong makes me intolerant, then I’m gladly intolerant.”

There were signs from supporters as well, both thanking Cheney for his donation and encouraging him to run for president in 2012 – although protester Will Welch dressed as a grim reaper-esque Darth Vader from Star Wars and carried a sign encouraging Cheney to add Vader to the 2012 ticket.

The demonstrators protested the naming for varied reasons, but many referenced the idea that Cheney was buying a mark of distinction at UW’s expense.

Chip Rawlins, a UW graduate student and Wyoming native, felt Cheney was receiving an undeserved tribute. “I think it’s wrong to honor someone like this who has done such severe damage to the United States and its reputation,” he said.

Protester and UW student Tim Earl said, “I don’t think that the university should allow Dick Cheney to clean up his legacy at this campus with this money with that building.”

Another UW student, Ruth Briggs, came out in support of Cheney and was dressed in a T-shirt with the message “Nobody likes a liberal.” She said she came out to show Cheney that there are “youth who aren’t influenced by the young liberal mindset, and that there are young conservatives who support Mr. Cheney.”

Briggs added she feels liberals outnumber conservatives on the UW campus. Later, she was able to have her picture taken with Cheney and he mentioned that he liked her T-shirt.

UW graduate student Dan DePeyer echoed many of his fellow protester’s sentiments. DePeyer helped organize the protest, sending a bulletin out to the members of the Facebook group, “UW Students Against the Naming of the Cheney International Center” and helped create signs for the rally.

DePeyer said, “I believe Cheney is guilty of war crimes, particularly torture, and he’s responsible for many international crimes.”

UW alumnus Mara Sobotka also helped organize people to rally at the dedication and led the march to campus. She said, “I am here to demonstrate that we do not support what Dick Cheney stands for."

Not everyone at the protest was a UW student or Laramie resident. Mark and Renee Sandefer of Colorado drove up to protest the dedication. Mark said he wants to see both the war in Iraq and Afghanistan ended and called for Cheney’s prosecution on charges of murder and crimes against humanity.

Renee said that the UW administration had committed “an atrocity” by allowing a “war criminal and a war profiteer to come in here and buy himself this honor.” She called the dedication of the center a “disgrace to this university and to this nation.”

Other supporters of the former vice president were just as vocal in their defense of Cheney’s actions and policies as his detractors. UW students Dillon Kinney and Dustin Stallings came out to support Cheney.

“I strongly believe that what he did was the best thing for our country,” said Kinney. “I think it’s great that the university can dedicate this in his honor and recognize what he’s done for us.”

Buchanan did not address the demonstrators in his speech but afterwards called the crowd “well-behaved” and “civil the way we hoped it would be on a university campus.” He said, “Considering the emotions here, Wyoming did itself proud. I’m sure there are folks who feel strongly on both sides.”

UW spokeswoman Jessica Lowell said of the crowd, “You know, in America, we have the First Amendment which entitles everyone to free speech and they certainly got their opportunity to use their First Amendments rights.”

In the end, I decided to wait a few weeks before writing about this event. Buchanan was correct in his assessment of the emotions running through the crowd that day. When Cheney began his speech, the cheers and jeers threatened to reach a fever pitch. Even though I decided to wait, the memories I carried away from the event remain fresh.

I carried away the memory of those kids, staring frozen in astonishment or applauding and shouting as we marched by their recess time.

I also carried away the memory forever burned into my mind’s eye of Cheney striding out of the international center and thinking to myself with a bizarre jolt, “But he’s just small, stooped old man with a cane…”

And I carried away the memory of being within a few feet of Cheney and feeling an unearthly coldness crawling across my skin on an unseasonably warm day as I heard him laugh. His laugh was humorless and bitter, his face blank as I looked him in the eyes.

Making eye contact with Cheney, I understood the arrogance needed to explain away five draft deferments, courtesy of the University of Wyoming and Casper College, with the statement, “I had other priorities in the 60's than military service,” and then later calling Vietnam “a noble cause” in which “had I been drafted, I would have been happy to serve.”

I understood the dispassionate indifference needed to look at reporters and the American people and insist the intelligence was never faulty, the CIA interrogators never crossed the line and that Iraq is still the noble cause he believed Vietnam to be so many years ago.

I understood and was dismayed – I know he will never answer any questions truthfully in any kind of investigation. Cheney creates his own acerbic reality, in which he is the star and the rest of the proletariat purely bit players.

Never mind the U.S. soldiers sent to die in the desert.

Never mind the lives battered and broken by the detention of innocents.

Never mind the legacy of national debt he helped create.

Never mind the quagmire enveloping the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.

Never mind the authorization of heinous threats and abuse as “enhanced” interrogation methods.

Never mind any of this because he gave the university so many millions made the good ol’ capitalist way – war profiteering. Perhaps the business school should have been named after him, with lessons in no-bid contracts and off-shore accounts. After all, Cheney was a rather successful capitalist.

Furthermore, none of this will ever fit into Cheney’s version of events. The protesters and the media were simply part of his routine. Sen. Simpson’s annoyance at the demonstrators provided a back-handed acknowledgment of the dissent. Cheney made no mention of the protesters in his speech, only smirking in their general direction a few times beforehand.

I tried to ask him a question afterwards and was pushed out of the way. My entire generation was pushed out of the way with the assistance of this man, so I should not be taken aback by his impassiveness.

Several of the protesters saw Cheney’s plane off at the airport here in Laramie. Accompanying them was a long, heavy list of names – names of soldiers killed in action since these disastrous wars began. They displayed the names prominently and flipped him the bird as the plane took off.

I know he saw.

But I doubt he cared.

Photo slideshow: Cheney International Center dedication



The University of Wyoming dedicated the brand-new Cheney International Center on Sept. 10. The center houses the programs for International Studies and a lounge for international students.

Around 120-200 people gathered to protest the dedication, which generated nationwide recognition and controversy.

Photos: Meg Lanker

All photos remain copyright The Underground and Meg Lanker

Letter to the Editor: Parents angry over Obama speech set bad example

Editor:

I'm disheartened by the devolution and polarization of American politics we've seen in recent years--particularly as seen in the public outcry over a message from President Obama to our school children about the importance of their education that was both harmless and important. I challenge those parents who feared that his message would transfer a message of socialism to their children to watch the President's speech online or read the transcript. Incidentally, I find it quite telling that when Ronald Reagan did the same in 1986 or George H.W. Bush did the same in 1991, there was no such public outcry.

As both a parent and an educator, I'm truly disappointed at the lack of courage shown by school officials in caving to a vocal minority of parents. Sometimes, choosing the right and doing what is right means doing what is unpopular without respect toward the political consequences and being a vocal advocate for our democracy. Part of the duties of citizenship mean that we pass a healthy respect for the outcomes of elections and our democratic institutions to our children, especially when we don't agree with those outcomes. It's what distinguishes us as a democracy and makes this nation great.

Evelyn Beatrice Hall, Voltaire's biographer, said in 1906 in a quote widely misattributed to Voltaire, "I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Isn't the freedom we have to engage in difficult and controversial dialogue over political issues precisely what distinguishes our republic from other countries where citizens are denied this basic civil liberty? How far we've come from a point where we could vigorously disagree with each other and engage in snappy emotional repartee but still retain respect for our fellow citizens with whom we've disagreed. We could yet share a mutual pride, love, and respect in that great nation that gave us the freedom to do so...

Shame on you parents! Shame on you school officials for caving to them! How do your actions teach our children healthy respect for our democratic process and elections? How soon might our children within generations take up arms instead of the ballot or the pen or speak their minds when they disagree with each other?

Respectfully,
A Wyoming teacher
Green River, Wyo.

Letter to the Editor: An open letter to President Tom Buchanan

Editor:

An open letter to President Thomas Buchanan-

I am very disturbed about the fact that the University has chosen to name the new International Center after former Vice President Richard Cheney. I find this decision to be so inappropriate. I understand that money talks, but putting his name on such a place smacks of hypocrisy. He was not born here and he rarely lives here. I believe that he took up residency again only so that he could run with George Bush in that ill-fated election. A presidential and vice presidential candidate cannot be from the same state.

Doesn’t he already have enough places named after him? Why are so many people in Wyoming so proud of a person who has lied to us, has encouraged us to live in fear and has condoned the use of torture? He certainly has helped to bring down the reputation of the United States in the eyes of the world. He just doesn’t seem like a good role model for students.

I believe this to be one more smudge on the reputation of Wyoming; a reputation that is already quite sullied by past events. I am tired of defending Wyoming when I encounter people from “out there in the world.” Cheney, Matthew Shepard's death, the disparity in women and men’s income, to name but a few.

I am all for tolerance and diversity. But I don’t think that naming the building after him really speaks to tolerance and diversity. He appears to value neither.

I graduated from the University of Wyoming in the 1960s. There were certainly a lot of issues at that time. I thought we had come quite a way since. But when a situation such as this arises, I really have to wonder.

I hope that this decision will be rethought and that the Center will be named for someone really deserving of the honor; someone who has been successful in dealing in international matters and has enhanced our position in the world. We don’t have to be first or best but we do have to be principled. We haven’t been that for some time now. Dick Cheney certainly does not merit that honor.

Thank you for your attention to this letter.

Joan S. Borst
Sheridan, Wyo.

Tea Parties and unity: Where were they?

Photo: Protesters at the 9/12 Rally in Washington D.C., organized by FreedomWorks Foundation, a conservative organization led by former House Majority Leader Dick Armey. Credit - www.huffingtonpost.com and the AP

Tea Parties and unity: Where were they?
Robert Roten
Sunday, September 13, 2009 12:46 PM MDT

Where were they?

The Wyoming 912 Coalition rally at Conwell Park in Casper yesterday was supposed to be about uniting the country and remembering the way it was united on 9/12/01, but it was really about divisiveness and about forgetting what happened on 9/12/01.

The rally was supposed to be about freedom, but it really wasn't about freedom at all. It was about giving up freedom and power, including the right to choose our health care, and giving that power instead to soulless corporations.

People carried signs that read, “Who gave unelected czars authority over us?” and “Freedom did not need change,” according to an article in the Casper Star-Tribune. The article quoted Casper resident Nancy Rinn as saying: “I think the people in Washington are stomping on the Constitution; they're trying to pass laws that are unconstitutional.”

Where were they, these tea party protesters, when George Bush and Dick Cheney were tearing up the constitution? Where were they when the government was listening in to their phone conversations with illegal wiretaps? Where were they when the government was reading their emails? Where were they when the government suspended habeas corpus and threw people into prison, “disappearing” them in the same way Josef Stalin used to make people vanish without a trace? Where were they when the United States government illegally tortured and killed prisoners of war?

Dave Kellett of Powell, president of the Wyoming 912 Coalition, reportedly said at the rally, “We were all Americans.” Kellett added, “There were no Republicans or Democrats, whites, blacks, Hispanics or Arabs,” on that day. The Arabs disagree with that, like the poor guy who was mistaken for an Arab (he was actually an Indian Sikh) and murdered by Americans in that spirit of unity that prevailed after 9/11. The Arabs were immediate suspects in the 9/11 attacks and anyone of Arab descent, or anybody with dark skin who looked like an Arab, was in for a tough time after the attacks. Arabs in America are still not above suspicion.

Just ask Cat Stevens about that supposed post-9/11 unity of Americans. They wouldn't even let the “Peace Train” singer back in the country. Judging by what I saw on TV of the crowd in Casper yesterday, there weren't a lot of blacks, Hispanics or Arabs among the tea-party people there, or at the big march in Washington, either. It is pretty much a pure white, far right, Fox News-watching bunch. Dave Kellet's idea of national unity is not what I'd call “fair and balanced.”

That's not the only thing about the post-9/11 climate the tea party people seem to have forgotten. They forgot the nation was united behind their president, George Bush, despite the fact that 9/11 happened on his watch. They must have been watching Fox News back then when wingnuts like Bill O'Reilly were saying that anybody who criticized President Bush was a traitor, or words to that effect. Fox News and the rest of the right-leaning news establishment bullied anyone who dared criticize our beloved President George Bush, and they said he did nothing wrong. They still claim he was damned near perfect to this very day.

Where were these Tea Party people when the Bush Administration let the country down and failed to prevent the 9/11 attacks? After all, it was pretty spectacular failure that would seem impossible to top, but Bush managed to do just that, with Katrina and the Iraq War. Through all those disasters, all those deficits, all those illegal acts, all the loss of all those personal freedoms, the Tea Party people kept silent. Where were they?

So why all those anti-Obama signs at the Wyoming 912 Coalition rally? Where is that old spirit of unity? What happened to that unity where everybody stood behind the president and you were a called a traitor if you did not? Obama has only been in power a few months and has yet to initiate any disasters like the ones that Bush did on an almost monthly basis. On the basis of protecting the country alone, he's already 100 percent better than Bush was. How could they forget the unity of 912 on this occasion? How could they keep quiet when this nation was literally falling apart and only now, when the country is starting to get back on track, they suddenly want to protest their very own president?

Why? What has gotten them stirred up? Health care reform? They actually like the fact that their insurance company can drop them from coverage when they get sick? They like the fact that they have to stick with a job they don't like, or face losing their coverage or paying sky-high COBRA payments? Do they enjoy being jerked around by insurance companies that are not held accountable by anyone, including their own government? They ought to be protesting outside insurance companies, not protesting the guy who is trying to fix this mess. The Tea Party people act as if they are being directly paid by the health insurance industry to put a stop to health care reform.

The Wyoming 912 Coalition people are also very concerned about the federal budget deficit. They are afraid they will have to pay for health care reform with higher taxes, and that might be true, but where were they when the Reagan Administration and two Bush Administrations ran up deficits in the trillions? Where were they when the Bush Administration cut trillions of dollars of taxes on the wealthy, and started two wars at the same time? Where were they when the Bush Administration started a war in Iraq that would end up costing trillions of dollars, and paid for it with deficit spending?

The Tea Party people cheered when Rep. Joe Wilson yelled “You lie!” at President Obama, and they put that proudly on their signs, even though Wilson, not Obama, is the liar here. Where were they when President Bush lied about the reasons for going to war with Iraq? None of them had the courage to stand up and call President Bush a liar, even though he was. Fox News, the rest of the media and most of the American people just went along for the ride. Now they stand up, but what do they really stand for?

Now, after more than 4,000 soldiers were killed and trillions of dollars have been wasted in the Iraq war, now, they finally stand up for principles they completely abandoned for the past 20 years. Now, they stand up to avoid paying for the health care of poor people. That's not what you'd call noble, or Christian, or Muslim. They are willing to finance the death of hundreds of thousands of people and spend trillions of dollars for war without complaint, but they don't want to spend a nickel to pay for the health care of needy citizens of the United States of America, including those wounded fighting for this nation. Shame on them.

The tea party people weren't concerned when our soldiers died for nothing. They weren't concerned about a war that made this nation less secure, rather than more secure. They weren't concerned with the mounting deficits caused by deeply irresponsible government fiscal policies. They weren't concerned when the government did little to avert the Hurricane Katrina disaster and did less to alleviate the suffering of Americans afterward. The tea party people were silent then.

Now that the nation has been brought back from the brink of another Great Depression, thanks to government fiscal intervention, now that the United States is once again gaining some respect in the world for more rational foreign policies, after being a laughing stock and a pariah for the past eight years, now, the tea party people are protesting. They want to get rid of Obama and all he stands for. They want to return to the good old days of George W. Bush, the good old days of letting insurance companies decide who will live and who will die.

God help us all if they get what they are wishing for.

Robert Roten is a journalist with over 25 years of newspaper experience, including 20 years as a reporter, editor, photographer, columnist and editorialist at the Laramie Daily Boomerang. Since retiring from the Boomerang in 2000, Roten has been president of the Laramie Film Society and the Laramie Astronomical Society and Space Observers (LASSO). He has operated his own movie journalism web site, Laramie Movie Scope, for the past 13 years. He also has a weekly movie show, Laramie Movie Scope News, on KOCA radio in Laramie. He is also a member of the Online Film Critics Society and contributes frequent movie reviews to rottentomatoes.com. He is a former member of the Society of Professional Journalists and the Society of Environmental Journalists.
Roten is a resident of Laramie, Wyo.

Video of Dick Cheney's speech

Stay tuned for a news feature on the event, a behind the scenes look at the protest, and an opinion feature on the former vice president. For now, here's my filming of Dick and Lynne Cheney, plus the ribbon cutting.

Letter to the Editor: In defense of UW protest

Editor:

At the dedication of the Cheney International Center, former U.S. Senator Alan Simpson seemed to casually dismiss the 100 or so protesters present by saying, “It is easy to second-guess. It is easy to protest, takes no brains.”

I would like to remind Simpson that protest is what this great country is founded upon. Would he have said the same about those old white men who believed it was their “inalienable right” to speak their mind (with no brains) and oppose a tyrannical government? Was it easy for Martin Luther King to march on Washington or students at Kent State in Ohio to protest the Vietnam War?

I respectfully disagree with Simpson’s assessment. Every time someone stands up for what they believe in to those in power, they take a risk. Many of us who protested the Cheney International Center ceremony felt protesting was worth the possible risk of arrest or expulsion from UW.

It was incredible that someone who opposed Dick Cheney and his policies could stand next to someone who supported him without any violence or bloodshed. Sure, maybe today it is easier to protest in the United States, but in so many other countries this right is denied and severely suppressed by the government - we have only to look at recent events in China and Iran as examples.

What is “easy,” Senator Simpson, is for those in power to start unilateral wars, circumvent the Geneva Conventions, subvert the constitution, and authorize torture tactics that violate human rights treaties without any consequences. This is what takes “no brains.”

Dan DePeyer
University of Wyoming
Laramie, Wyo.

Editor's note: DePeyer is a University of Wyoming graduate student in the international studies program. He began the "UW Students Against the Cheney International Center" Facebook group and was instrumental in organizing the protest against the dedication Sept. 10.

Letter to the Editor: An open letter to Obama

An open letter to President Barack Obama –

Mr. President, your goal of health care reform is in jeopardy and a change of strategy is required if that goal is to be saved. You have tried to work with Congress and that strategy has run its course.

If any health care legislation comes out of Congress, public option or not, it will simply add more people to the broken health care system we have now and increase the profits of the insurance industry without providing better care or cutting costs. I see nothing coming out of Congress that would start reducing health care costs, and that is key.

As you know, we have the most expensive health care system in the world, even though our national life expectancy is relatively low and our high infant mortality rate is a crime. Far too many people die because of hospital-acquired infections and malpractice. Large segments of our population receive little or no health care, primarily because of cost. Far too many families sink into bankruptcy because of health care debt.

Instead of letting health care policy be dictated by the insurance industry, the pharmaceutical industry and other players in the medical-Congressional-complex, pick a plan and stick with it. The Wyden-Bennett bill is an example of the kind of legislation that would address the fundamental problems in our health care system, namely incentives that drive up costs and drive down quality of care. Find a bill you can get behind, or create one of your own.

Once you find a bill, get the Democrats behind it and push it through. I know it’s like herding cats, but at least it is easier than herding Republicans. You ought to know by now Republicans won't accept any plan that actually addresses the fundamental problems with our health care system. Republicans refuse to be part of the solution.

I don't know if Democrats will unite behind you, but you have to try. If you succeed, health care will be on the right track, thousands of lives will be saved, and the Republicans will deservedly be out of power for at least 20 years. If you fail, you just might lose your next election and the country will sink deeper into the black hole of health care debt.

Robert Roten
Laramie, Wyo.

Letter to the Editor: Republicans scurry in the darkness

Editor:

When I was a kid we used to chase rats in an old barn down the street. We took rubber hoses and tried to hit them as they scurried though the dimly lit barn. Lousy visibility made it a fairly equal contest. All you could see was a flash of movement and perhaps an eye or black tail as they scurried to safety. Occasionally we got one, but that was rare. It was the thrill of the chase and not the dead rat that mattered.

In many ways, our American institutions are like old barns that makes perfect hiding places for rats. In the corporate darkness, where there is plenty of grain, anything can be stolen and tucked away. Republicans lie and steal because they can and the rewards are great. Greed is important of course, but the real Republican thrill lies in beating someone else to the punch and accumulating enough power for the next scam. Many Republicans are sociopaths without a conscience, so the Republican Party makes a perfect barn. Liars, bullies, and crooks are the norm and even an ideal.

The Republicans are barn rats, while the Democrats are white lab rats. The difference between a Rahm Emmanuel and a Dick Cheney is minimal. Both are paranoid megalomaniacs and sociopaths. You can always hear them scurrying in the darkness.

John Hanks
Laramie, Wyo.

Letter to the Editor: No ethics lesson in Buchanan's words

Dear Editor:

UW President Tom Buchanan’s perspective in the Laramie Boomerang (9/5) and the Casper Star-Tribune (9/6) about the naming of the Cheney International Center sought to provide a lesson in ethics. Quite the contrary. By defending the privileges of the wealthy and powerful while admonishing those who question the fairness and legitimacy of naming an international center after former Vice-president Dick Cheney, Buchanan’s perspective conveyed much more about his own political savvy than about ethics.

So that in the future the university's position on such matters will be clear, would it be possible to set the bar high enough so a prospective donor couldn't slither over it to have his or her name honored? Or are we left with the message that there is no lower limit – that UW would institutionalize the name of the devil if the donation and political payoff were sufficient?

Fred Vanden Heede
Laramie, Wyo.

Letter to the Editor: Faculty should not keep silent on Cheney donation

Editor -

I am disappointed at the tone of Dr. Tom Buchanan's perspective piece on the Cheney International Center (CIC) (Casper Star-Tribune, Sept. 6). The suggestion that people objecting to the CIC lack tolerance is a cheap shot. The fact is, campus employees almost always acquiesce when the university recognizes controversial people and institutions. We've all sat through graduation ceremonies and watched as the university lent its credibility to doubtful characters in exchange for cold hard cash. We think: "It sucks. Hopefully students will benefit. Best stay silent."

Taking money from Dick Cheney is in another league. Mr. Cheney sanctioned the kidnapping, torture and murder of political prisoners. The university is promoting the legacy of someone who, more than any other in the recent past, damaged our country's reputation abroad. Now Mr. Cheney gets to damage that of the university.

Accepting donations from the powerful is a balancing act. Most times, benefits to the institution outweigh the disadvantages of associating with people or companies with a checkered past. But sometimes the disadvantages are too big. This was one of those times. It would have resulted in heat for Dr. Buchanan. Maybe he'd have lost his job. Then again, being a university president involves more than driving a desk. It is not unreasonable to expect the odd bit of moral courage from the university's administrators.

If the university is indeed extremely grateful to the Cheney family for its philanthropy, it is peculiar it has done little to promote the dedication of the center. The rumor is that it will be on Sept. 10th at 10:30 AM on Cheney Plaza. I invite students, faculty and staff to legally and peacefully protest this decision by the university.

Donal O'Toole
Professor, Dept. of Veterinary Science
University of Wyoming
Laramie, Wyo.

UW to dedicate Cheney International Center

UW to dedicate Cheney International Center
Meg Lanker
Sunday, August 30, 2009 10:24 PM MDT
Update: Monday September 7, 1:21 AM MDT

Dick and Lynne Cheney will return to Laramie next month to dedicate the newly-constructed Cheney International Center at the University of Wyoming.

The dedication is scheduled for Sept. 10 at 10:30 a.m. according to University of Wyoming Director of Institutional Communications Jessica Lowell.

The naming of the building generated nationwide controversy but Lowell said the university followed an “identified policy and process” for the naming the building. “That process was followed in this instance,” said Lowell.

According to the "University of Wyoming Named Gift Criteria," approved by the UW Board of Trustees in 2006, the criteria for approving the naming of a pre-existing building is the amount of the monetary gift.

The reports states: "Previously constructed facilities, which are unnamed, can be named by a donor or a donor's representative through a substantial contribution of 50 percent or more of the renovation cost of the facility."

The Cheney family's gift “created for UW the largest single-university endowment dedicated to study abroad support,” said UW President Tom Buchanan in a news release Sept. 7, 2007. The total endowment of $1.8 million was matched by state funds.

According to the UW Foundation's annual report, much of the initial donation went to fund the renovation of the Student Health building and the necessary renovations to add the Cheney International Center.

In November 2008, UW Board of Trustees President Chuck Brown and President Buchanan issued a joint statement to Fred Vanden Heede and Suzy Pelican, both of Laramie, which ran in The Casper-Star Tribune as part of a letter to the editor. In the statement, Brown and Buchanan explained the rationale behind the naming of the building.

“In 2006, UW President Tom Buchanan, Vice President for Institutional Advancement Ben Blalock and former U.S. Senator Alan Simpson visited with the Cheney family at the White House to discuss the intended purpose(s) of the gift. At that meeting, the Cheney family emphasized its desire to focus the gift on students and on international programs at UW,” said Brown and Buchanan.

They also said UW responded with a plan for international scholarships and a “bricks-and-mortar” proposal for the center.

In a September 2008 letter which appeared in UW’s student-run paper, The Branding Iron, Heede and Pelican said, “UW and its international programs cannot avoid being identified with the ideology behind and approach to U.S. global politics championed by the Bush-Cheney administration.”

The controversy is expected to re-ignite with the dedication.

Sunday's Casper Star-Tribune featured an editorial authored by Buchanan in which he cited a list of people opposed to the Cheney International Center and said, "It came as no surprise that, having lived in Wyoming for more than 30 years, I know many of those objecting to UW's decision."

"The list includes some good friends and colleagues who have previously admonished the UW administration to support greater diversity and increased tolerance for all views," said Buchanan. "So it is ironic that they show so little of it when confronted by a situation that challenges their own comfort zone."

Buchanan did not mention the planned dedication.

A group of Laramie students and community members dismayed by the center's naming are planning to protest the dedication with a march to campus and signs with various messages for Cheney and the UW administration. Organizers of the demonstration are emphasizing the need for peaceful assembly.

The “UW Students Against the Cheney International Center” Facebook group was created by Daniel DePeyer, a graduate student in the international studies program. The group allows students to post their thoughts on the naming of the center and to get information on its construction and eventual dedication.

"I recently helped to organize a conference at UW which focused on the subject of human rights. The conference chair made it adamantly clear that he did not want 'Cheney International Center' to appear as a sponsor on any of the program material," DePeyer said in a statement to The Underground Monday.

DePeyer said the Cheney family's endowment was "laudable" and acknowledged that many students have benefited from the opportunities presented by the scholarships. He also said the benefit was not without its risks.

"I went to Tunisia for six weeks as part of a UW sponsored cultural exchange program," said DePeyer. "I do not know if any Cheney money was used to help fund the program, however, I do know that if the Tunisian government or even some of the Tunisian students we interacted with had found out that we were funded by 'blood' money, our lives could have been at risk."

DePeyer said although the program will benefit future students, the "future implications will undoubtedly hurt the University of Wyoming's credibility and ability to attract world renowned scholars for faculty positions, conferences, speeches, and panels."

Other Laramie residents echoed DePeyer's concerns. “I feel sorry for the University of Wyoming and the state of Wyoming when they have to change the name after he’s indicted,” said Nancy Sindelar, a Laramie peace activist helping to organize the demonstration. Sindelar referenced the ongoing investigations into what the previous administration called “enhanced interrogation methods.”

Recently released and declassified White House documents detail actions that may have been authorized by or known to Cheney in interrogations conducted by CIA members, including mock executions of prisoners and threats of rape directed at the family members of detainees.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder authorized investigations into alleged abuses this week. In an interview with Fox News’ Chris Wallace Aug. 30, Cheney said Holder’s investigation “offends the hell out of me” and called Holder’s actions “an outrageous political act.”

Cheney also questioned President Barack Obama’s ability to lead the nation in difficult times. “I have serious doubts about his policies, especially, about the extent to which he understands and is prepared to do what needs to be done to defend the nation,” he said.

UW previously faced criticism from within the state when the decision to name the building after Cheney was announced. Numerous editorials have appeared in Wyoming newspapers since the naming was announced – both for and against the decision.

In the Casper Star-Tribune Sept. 24, 2008, Donal O’Toole of Laramie suggested the university look into “other initiatives from hitherto untapped sources,” including, “[T]he Beelzebub's College of Theology, Enron's Institute of Business Ethics, the Tom Ridge Observation Center, the Michael Vick Dog Shelter, and the Kim Jong Il School of Hairstyling.”

In a letter to the Tribune Sept. 14, 2008 Lowell defended the decision and said, “The university has a procedure in place, and university officials followed that procedure and accordingly recognized this very generous gift for a laudable educational purpose.”

According to Lowell, the event is open to the public. She did not say whether or not the administration is aware of any planned demonstrations. The dedication will take place in front of the new Cheney International Center on Dick and Lynne Cheney plaza.

The UW Police Department will coordinate with the Secret Service to provide security for the event.

Contact Us

Interested in sponsoring an independent media source? Email Meg at meglanker@gmail.com