Two nights in a row, I’m going to try to keep it short. I got home tonight in time to watch President Obama’s news conference apparently celebrating his first 100 days in office. And I have to say, this was the first time in my adult life that I felt reassured after listening to our President at a news conference. Maybe it’s just the stark difference from the previous President who would have had a difficult time gaining a top grade in my 6th grade English class based on how he butchered the language on a regular basis (especially when he had to “ad-lib”). Obama took all questions, his answers were very thoughtful, and he demonstrated clearly that HE IS IN CHARGE. All reassuring! That all being said, as the late Paul Harvey would have added, “now, for the rest of the story.”

A couple thoughts about what President Obama did (or didn’t) say, while I was listening – forgive me if he talked about this before I turned on the tube. He was concluding what was apparently a barrage of questions about torture and explaining why the United States will not torture in the future and why we shouldn’t have done so in the previous 8 years (I believe the dirty little secret that no one is talking about is that our CIA has been involved in this type of stuff since the 70’s – at least according to Naomi Klein in “The Shock Doctrine”). What President Obama didn’t do was address the question (at least directly) that many have about the accountability “factor” that seems to be missing from much of his innuendo. That is probably by design, and probably wise, but I believe that Obama knows full well there’s going to be accountability for the use of torture and more importantly for the authorization of it right from the President’s desk, whether he wants this or not. If our own Justice department doesn’t take up the “torch” so to speak, some other Justice department will. According to the Geneva Conventions, any country that is a signatore to the Conventions is obligated to seek prosecution in any case where there is clear evidence that torture has been committed. So, while I believe that is going to happen, I just – at this point, as I stated a couple months ago on this site – hope we intend to show the entire world that we will hold our own accountable without help from the Spanish, or anyone else.

There was another interesting “tidbit.” No one asked President Obama about the reality that he is continuing the warrantless wiretapping policy of the Bush administration and that he has stealthily let it be known that he “doesn’t want to give up that power.” Again, as I’ve stated before, THAT IS A POWER THAT HE DOESN’T HAVE!!! The question posed asked Obama about the use of the “State Secrets” defense regarding impending lawsuits, a couple of which involved the Bush use of illegal wiretapping. President Obama neatly sidestepped the issue by saying that Attorney General Eric Holder and his White House Counsel were reworking the State Secrets policy (I’m not sure if that’s the appropriate word) so that it can be less of a hindrance to legitimate lawsuits. Unfortunately, the subject of the FISA law that President Obama promised to “redo” or “fix” once in office never came up, and he now has the defense of “There’s a lot on my plate” to allow him to inconspicuously keep this terrible intrusion on our right to privacy in effect.

Please don’t get me wrong – for the most part I believe Obama is doing a wonderful job as President – maybe I just got used to complaining when President Bush was in office. But, I believe with all my heart that because Bush was so wrong about so many things, and we have a group of Republicans who are running around essentially claiming we should still be doing those things, that we need to make sure we CLARIFY THIS IS A COUNTRY “RULED BY LAWS AND NOT MEN!” The idea we have publicized what happened and have promised it won’t happen again means NOTHING to these people. If you don’t believe me, just take a moment or two to listen to Dick Cheney as he runs from one Fox “news” show to another defending all that was wrong with the Bush administration. And you’ve got the Hannity’s, the Limbaugh’s, the Boehner’s, and a bunch more falling in line (like Republicans have a tendency of doing). If the lawbreakers of the Bush administration are not punished – through legal prosecutions where appropriate – THESE GUYS WILL BE BACK! (each time this group comes back it is worse than the previous time) President Obama himself warned about “writing off” the Republican party – which some are doing now that Arlen Specter has given the Democrats an imaginary 60 vote majority in the Senate. I totally agree with him which leads me to my thought of the day: President Obama’s doing a great job, but we can’t move forward without looking backward!

I wasn’t going to write tonight, but I got home from school and I saw on the TV that Arlen Specter had “jumped” from the Republican party to the Democratic party – thereby bringing joy to the Democrats in anticipation of having the so-called filibuster proof majority in Congress. I just had to comment on this before all the giddiness settles down. And, before I do, I need to remind anyone who might happen by this way that I’m no “fan” of the Republicans. In fact, I’ve been suggesting for several months now that maybe it’s time for another “party” to emerge as the challengers to the Democrats – because I fully believe that we need two parties to make this system work. It’s just that the Republicans have backed themselves into such a “marginalized” corner that I’m not sure they are anything more than a bunch of whiners anymore. Getting back to Spector’s move “to the left.”

Ha, Ha! If there’s anyone out there reading this who’s following politics lately you fully realize that Arlen Specter didn’t move anywhere. He just made a calculated political decision based on the realities of his position in his own party. This guy is no “principalled” politician who’s had enough of the garbage of the right wing. It is true that he’s always been more on the moderate side of things, but the guy has proven over and over, at least while I’ve been watching, that his rhetoric will sometimes make sense, but in the end he votes with the whackos on the right. He did this over torture, wiretapping, and many other issues of importance that came before the judicial committee of the Senate – when you could tell that he didn’t agree with his party – but voted with them anyway. However, the Republicans expect you to walk in “lockstep” 100% of the time, and when Spector voted for President Obama’s stimulus package – that was it for their “right wing” (which, if you’ve been paying attention is in control and is destroying the party as I used to know it). It was kind of funny to hear Michael Steele criticize Specter for his “liberal voting record,” as he was trying to put a good face on this from the Republican point of view (this Steele dude is a real “piece of work”).

Steele’s comments were as absurd as Specter’s as he tried to explain what he was doing. And the joy among Democrats, I’m predicting here and now, will be shortlived. I believe Specter will be a good Democrat on the lines of one Joe Lieberman. For once, I find myself in agreement with the bulk of the Republicans in Congress. Specter’s decision was TOTALLY A PENNSYLVANIA decision! And, personally, I hope it backfires on him. He wants to be re-elected to a 7th term in the Senate and HAS NO CHANCE TO WIN THE PRIMARY AS A REPUBLICAN! Now the Democrats have welcomed him with open arms and are making all kinds of promises to “campaign for him.” This makes me a bit sick to my stomach. Pennsylvania is a large and good state. Somehow, I believe they can come up with a better candidate on the “left” than Arlen Specter. Talk about your political gamesmanship. The guy sees that he’s going to face an uphill battle in the Republican primary (because he voted for the stimulus package – which he must not have too much confidence in or he would be willing to run on that vote as a vote that helped Pennsylvania out of the recession) and he makes the switch – trading his principals (if he had any) for having Democrats promise to campaign for him in the Pennsylvania primary in 2010.

And, I have to say that – while I understand what a dirty “game” politics is – I was disappointed that President Obama was leading the charge about saying he would campaign for Specter. This is the kind of “crap” that goes on in Washington DC that keeps these guys in office until they need walkers to get from their apartments to work. Specter’s got to be in his mid to late 70’s AND IT’S TIME FOR “NEW BLOOD.” I really hope the Democrats rethink their “joy” here. Don’t expect this guy to fall in line and get you that 60th vote everytime you need it. He is going to do whatever he thinks is best for Arlen Specter at the time he makes his decisions – that is his “track record” and I don’t see any reason for it to change. I realize that Democrats feel that some of the “landmark” legislation needs to get passed THIS YEAR if it’s going to be passed at all, but I believe that is faulty thinking. And, I hope all the hub bub over this doesn’t get the national attention off of what it should be on which is making things right regarding the illegal activities (not only torture, but wiretapping, outing a CIA agent, politicizing the justice department, refusing congressional subpoenas, and lying in front of Congress – to name some of them) of the Bush administration. Arlen Specter aside, this nation will not be whole again until there’s accountability for Bush/Cheney et al! And that will not happen if Democrats get side-tracked!

This past weekend I started to think that 125 posts was plenty and that I should just start listening to a mellow music station when I’m driving around in my car and stop watching and reading the news in order to stop being so upset by what our leaders are doing. Then, it was like a strike from heaven, I remembered my granddaughter, thought about my grandson who’s invitro, thought about my beautiful daughters and my son who is soon to graduate from Marine boot camp, and I remembered that is what I did from about 1970 until my first granddaughter was born. I just looked the other way as one US administration after another was purging this nation of the very values that most of us had come to take for granted. And they’ve been doing it in such a way as to make it almost unnoticeable. Kind of like as winter comes on each day gets a degree or so colder until when the dead of winter finally hits, it’s not pleasant, but you’ve been prepared and you don’t notice the cold as much. You’re kind of used to it. As you can see, I’m going to continue writing!

The one thing that is very clear to me is that the government problems have been created in a bipartisan manner. I am no fan of Bill Clinton, I often think that if it was my daughter that was an intern and ………… well, I won’t go there, but let me just say that I don’t appreciate the guy. The last President that I have any respect for was Jimmy Carter, and if you’re like some of the people I know who get their information from Rush Limbaugh and those of his ilk, you probably think Carter was a terrible President. I believe he was a good President among a bunch of terribly greedy self-serving people. And Washington hasn’t changed much since then. Carter was followed by Reagan and I could go on and on about Reagan, but the point for tonight is that, in my view, the tremendous “stripping” of government regulation began under Reagan. And, don’t forget, Reagan needed a lot of Democratic votes to get his agenda passed. I don’t believe he was the staunch “conservative” today’s Republicans would like to remember him as, but he instituted the philososphy that “government is the problem.” George HW Bush followed him and didn’t change much – at least in the sense that he pushed us farther into debt and participated in the deregulation of government “movement” albeit, at least as I remember it, to a lesser degree.

Then came Clinton, and while I was happy to see the federal government reach a place of surplus during his years, the stripping of government regulation accelerated during his term in the 1990’s. This included the incredibly stupid move of reversing the Glass-Stegall act of 1933. The result of the Clinton years – in conjunction with the height of Alan Greenspan’s term as head of the Federal Reserve – was a nation that was finding creative ways to lead its people into debt, both publically and privately. Many of the credit schemes that brought us down during the past couple of years were spawned during the late 90’s and early 2000’s. You couple that with a government that was cutting taxes while sending American troops into “harms way” in multiple places and the table was “set” for what could still become the worst financial disaster in our history. I know that many people think we’ve hit the “bottom,” and I surely hope they are correct, but I have grave concerns about this. And, if we go into another tailspin on Wall Street, it could be like someone not taking enough anti-biotics to cure a virus. When it comes back the second time it comes back much fiercer than the original “version.”

On top of all that George W Bush put one person after another into leadership roles of government agencies with the clear agenda to undermine the very agency they were heading. The result was one disaster piled on top of another, one failure after another, until the system essentially was coming apart at the seems when President Obama stepped in. I, for one, have great hope that President Obama succeeds and ends up one of our great Presidents. When he took office I felt fairly confident that he would. It was apparent that the opportunity was (is) there and he has the intellectual capacity to do so. And I’m still hoping and I still believe it may happen. However, (OK, I know what you’re thinking – here comes more whining) – I can’t think of a better way to say this but, here comes more whining! I’m very concerned for President Obama and I don’t see his first 100 days as such a success as his staunchest supporters. I believe it is important that we don’t fall into the same trap that Republicans did under GW Bush and just rubber stamp everything – in an attempt to make it look like they didn’t make any mistakes. At least with Obama, I’ve already heard him say that he makes mistakes – refreshing – but there are some directions he’s leading the government that look too much like “deja vu all over again” to me, that is of major concern.

Let me take the economy, for example. I’m VERY CONCERNED that we’re going back to “business as usual” already. First of all, I’m very skeptical that the same banks that led us into this financial “meltdown” are now reporting record profits – in the face of an economy that is still clearly in the “tank.” These financial institutions have been allowed to get way too big, way too powerful, and WAY TOO “IMPORTANT” for the good of all of us. And to think that the executives of these corporations are worth multi-million dollar salaries on top of multi-million dollar bonuses is just clear evidence of what the deregulation of the past 25 years has done to our economy and our nation. I fully realize that some Republicans think that anyone who doesn’t believe these guys should get “whatever they can” are “socialists.” In fact, a couple posts ago, I mentioned that I have a good friend who I can’t even talk to anymore who listens to Limbaugh everyday, is a true “blue collar” guy, and who will defend these excessive, greedy, salaries at the expense of a friendship – because he’s “sick of the liberals who believe in class warfare!” The Republicans have brainwashed the very people who are damaged by this agenda of greed to support it – passionately.

When I listen to these Republicans who believe that people like me are socialists (I might be, haven’t thought about it that much) two things strike me as very interesting. First, they HATE Barrack Obama (I suspect because he’s Black, but I can’t prove that) and second, they don’t see his policies as anything resembling those of George W Bush. Well, in some ways I guess that’s obvious, but in regards to Wall Street and the financial markets, I’m not sure I’m seeing that much difference. Timothy Geithner, as I understand it, was right in the middle of the Wall Street collapse as the head of the New York Fed during the last five years of GW Bush’s administration. And Larry Summers, Obama’s “economic advisor” was right in the middle of the Clinton deregulation policy and has some serious “baggage” regarding the very financial markets that they’re trying to return to “health.” What I’m trying to get to here is that I don’t feel too good about the Obama economic policies vis-a’-vis the Wall Street institutions which have led us to the brink of national bankruptcy. My fear is that the government “bailouts” will prop up Wall Street allowing the very people who created this crisis to continue as if nothing happened (I understand that the bailouts were originated via Bush/Paulsen, but I don’t see much difference with Obama/Geithner).

It has been reported that many of the banks are raising the salaries of their executives already. These are people who produce one scheme after another as to how to make money by gambling with other people’s money. They figure out how to take borrowed money and use it to borrow more money, and it gets into a cycle that has produced one “bubble” after another for the bulk of my adult life – basically the past 25-30 years. I can tell you that when I was a young man in the 60’s and 70’s it was not uncommon for the President of the local bank to live on the same street as the guy who worked at the Paper Mill. Banks loaned money to people for the purpose of running a business, buying a car, or buying a home – among other things. People actually paid off their homes and put money in the bank when they got paid. I don’t remember credit cards. Now, I’m kind of backward, but the credit card phenomenom seems to me to have “mushroomed” in the past 10-15 years. I got my first credit card when I was 45 years old and now I have several cards that I haven’t even called the number which is required to activate them because I’ve figured out that I got “sucked in” to the 0% scams of the past 8 or 10 years which has left me with at least a half a dozen credit card accounts (this is a bit embarrassing, but fortunately I can say that they all have zero balances) which I have no intention of using. My point is that these banks have used the deregulated markets to “push” their products into many places where they don’t belong. I’m very fortunate to have paid off all of the cards I got before this crisis hit, but I know people who had balances which went to 30% interest at the whim of the credit card company. And with the blessing of the government.

Credit Card companies make about a third of their profits from late fees and penalties and the federal government, during the Bush years and with the blessing of Democrats, passed a bankruptcy bill that prevents consumers from being able to “zero out” their debts when declaring bankruptcy. Now, I’m not supporting the idea that people should be able to run up huge credit card debt and then just declare bankruptcy and it is all wiped away – but I can tell you, if they could, you’d see a lot more discipline on the part of the credit card companies when they issue the cards. I’M STRAYING FROM MY POINT – so I’ll try to gather myself. What I’m trying to say is that I fear that Obama is leading us right back to where we were. Like maybe trying to relive the “Clinton years” – from an economic perspective. I, FOR ONE, DON’T WANT TO GO BACK THERE! I would much prefer that we “buck up” and work our way out of this mess without allowing these Wall Street firms to escape accountability for their excesses and without trying to return to the “Clinton economy.”

Keep in mind, Robert Rubin was Clinton’s treasury secretary – he led CitiCorp right into the tank – Geithner, as mentioned above, was right in the middle of the Wall Street meltdown, as was Summers. Hiring these guys to “fix” Wall Street’s problems is like hiring the Fox to fix the henhouse or hiring a druglord to keep watch over the evidence room at the police station. It’s looking like people are starting down the “slippery slope” of measuring our economy’s health by the Dow Jones Industrial average AGAIN – and, we’re not hearing nearly enough about the travails of the middle class working families which are the true backbone of this nation. I have stated in previous posts my disagreement with President Obama regarding his continuance of Bush’s warrantless wiretapping, his reluctance to prosecute clear violations of our laws by members of the Bush administration, his hesitancy in bringing troops home from Iraq (it’s 100 days and I haven’t heard of one troop reduction yet), his apparent continuation of the Bush policies in Afganistan, and now, I’m disagreeing with his continued “propping up” of the Wall Street banks (while apparently leading Chrysler and General Motors into bankruptcy). As I said earlier, I believe President Obama has the opportunity to be a great president, but at the same time, if a lot of this stuff “blows up in his face” the opposite could be true. Make no mistake, Osama bin Laden is not hoping for Obama’s success. If he see’s an opportunity to further destroy America he will jump on it. We have responded to him for seven years in the stupidest way possible and it will take courageous leadership to get us going on what all the polls I’m asked to give my opinion to call “the right track.” I don’t believe we are yet on the “right track” and I believe this country is EXTREMELY fragile and vulnerable at this point in time. Our best interest will not be served by continuing the policies that got us to this place. I don’t know how President Obama can change course at this point, but it feels like to me that “Business as usual” on Wall Street, would be a HUGE mistake!

First off tonight, I have to say once again that I’m really hoping President Obama succeeds. And the more I listen to Republicans, the more I think he’ll succeed, if for no other reason, these Republicans are getting scarier and scarier. Tonight, for example, as he was defending the torture pracitces of the United States, I saw a clip of Rush Limbaugh actually slapping himself in the face and saying something like, “There, I’m torturing myself.” As if the torture techniques that have been in the news lately amount to a little slap in the face. These Republicans would be laughable, if it wasn’t so disgusting what we all, as a nation, are going through because of them. They had the opportunity to blame this stuff on Bush/Cheney and take the “high road,” but they’ve chosen to “fight” no matter how absurd their position is. I mean, these guys (meaning the remaining Republicans in “power”) are pathetic!

That all being said, I’m still feeling the urge to give President Obama some advice. Now, I know how presumptuous that is and I know that there is no chance that he’s going to even hear my advice let alone listen to it. However, I’m expecting it to make me feel better just giving it to him, and basically, that’s my purpose for writing in the first place. My previous couple of posts were essentially aimed at the reported decision by the Obama administration to “look forward and not back,” thus allowing the torturers of the Bush administration to “scate” and avoid anykind of accountability for clear violations of international law. The worse part of that plan, to me, was the fact that these are laws that state right in them that choosing not to prosecute isn’t an option. That is to say, if and when a country is aware of illegal torturing they are obligated to prosecute the offenders. That is why the judge in Spain was preparing to indict several of the Americans who were responsible for authorizing this heinous program. Oh yes, and by the way, if you think – as Limbaugh apparently does – that the “enhanced interrogation techniques” in question amounted to a slap in the face, then you haven’t read any part of the available information that has come out.

If you’ve seen the pictures that surfaced from Abu Ghraib in Iraq during the early part of the Iraq occupation, you have a better idea of what we’re talking about (and I’m still curious why these Republicans seem to be OK with a small number of Army “grunts” sitting in military brigs for Abu Ghraib, while the men who ordered them to do it are walking free). As disgusting as those pictures were, much of what is in the news now is far worse from the point of view of the “health” of the victim (I hate to call some of these people victims because some of them are genuinely criminals of the worse kind – but our CIA and those in the Bush administration that perpetrated this horrible scheme have effectively turned them into victims). There have been reports that some of the people “interrogated” have died, which turn the interrogators into murderers – should all this end up in an impartial courtroom. I believe what the Republicans are trying to do at this point is make sure that there is no possibility of an impartial courtroom as one way to get people like Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, John Yoo, Judge Bybee, George Tenet, and others (possibly including President Bush himself) off. So, essentially what I’m saying here is that President Obama doesn’t have the legal “right” to “excuse” these international crimes, in fact just the opposite – he’s compelled to seek justice for the people who have been tortured.

Evidently, President Obama is beginning to come to his senses. Yesterday, I heard reports – and listened to comments from the President – that implied he’s going to “allow” his Attorney General, Eric Holder, to decide where this investigation should go. Of course, that is where this should have been right from the start. Obama should have stayed completely out of this, at least publicly, while in private urging Holder to do the right thing. And, at this point, I don’t believe our government has any option but to have a thorough investigation of all the allegations which I believe will ultimately end up with some members of the Bush administration facing prosecution. Additionally, I understand why President Obama went to the CIA and assured them that anyone who “followed these orders” will not be prosecuted, but I totally disagree with what he did. As I stated in an earlier post that is a VERY SLIPPERY SLOPE! Were the Germans who “just followed orders” at Auschwitz innocent? Was the Japanese soldier that was prosecuted after WW II for waterboarding Americans innocent because he was “just following orders?” I could go on with the examples of why this is a totally wrong position for Obama to take. WHAT HE NEEDS TO DO IS GET OUT OF THE WAY AND LET THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM TAKE CARE OF THE PROBLEM NO MATTER HOW IT TURNS OUT!

If I was talking to President Obama right now I would say to him almost exactly what he said at the CIA – something like “It’s alright to acknowledge mistakes, that’s how we learn.” OK, Mr. Obama, you’ve made some pretty egregious mistakes here, especially for a constitutional law expert. Please stop worrying about whether everyone’s happy or not. With every decision you make someone’s going to be unhappy. What we need to see from you is CONSISTENCY! AND YOU WERE ELECTED AS A PROGRESSIVE – YOU NEED TO ACT LIKE A PROGRESSIVE! It is obvious you’re trying to take a “pragmatic” approach to everything – and there’s some instance where that is appropriate – but not with our constitution and our legal system. THAT IS WHAT REALLY BROUGHT DOWN THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION! Don’t continue to do this, or you will be having similar problems. Get away from all of this stuff publicly, and privately encourage your AG to regain the confidence of the American people in the Justice Department by demonstrating that – as you have said – IN AMERICA, NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW! That would be change that we could all (well, except Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly, Cheney, etc.) believe in!

THIS CHANGE (letting AG Holder investigate the wrongdoing) NEEDS TO HAPPEN FORTHWITH! Mr. President, trust me on this one – there is a whole bunch of more “stuff” that is going to be coming out about the Bush administration. Ultimately, we are going to be hearing the truth about Cheney “outing” Valerie Plame Wilson – now, you might not think that’s so important – but if you want to help the CIA out, that would be a good place to start. THAT IS AN UNBELIEVABLE AND UNACCEPTABLE PRECEDENT. We don’t hear much of an “uproar” over that anymore, but that, as you know Mr. Obama, was a treasonous act. CIA agents feeling like politicians will disclose their identities if they don’t “agree” with them is a far more dangerous precedent than a few agents being prosecuted because they committed war crimes that they clearly understood were illegal – to the point that they actually requested the phony legal documents “justifying” their actions. Also, I’ve mentioned my dissatisfaction many times with the continuation of the warrantless wiretapping policies. THIS NEEDS TO BE STOPPED! It is only a matter of time until this becomes a major issue, possibly on the same magnitude of the torturing. When sufficient numbers of Americans realize that you, President Obama, are allowing their phone calls to be monitered – THEY ARE GOING TO BE VERY UNHAPPY. And this is a potential issue that the Republicans could turn right around in your face after prosecutions for the torturing. PRESIDENT OBAMA, GET AWAY FROM THE WARRANTLESS WIRETAPPING AS WELL.

There is a lot more that we’re going to find out besides the stuff I’ve mentioned tonight and have been talking about for a couple months now (if that sounds like me patting myself on the back, well, I believe it is – now that I give it a smidgeon of thought). However, the news in this realm isn’t all bad. There hasn’t been much discussion about the FBI in all this, but they could come out of this “saga” as the “bright spot” regarding our government. If you don’t remember who Robert Meuller is, he was the FBI director during the “reign of Bush.” He was the man who went with Assistant Attorney General Comey to the hospital bed of John Ashcroft when Alberto Gonzales and Bush’s chief of staff (his name escapes me at the moment – more evidence that I should keep my day job :o) tried to get Ashcroft to sign a document giving legal justification to the illegal wiretapping that the Bush administration was doing. He showed then that he was (is) a man of courage and conviction and he did the same regarding the torture issue. Some of his agents questioned the “tactics” being used early on by the CIA and Pentagon interrogators – and he orderred them to leave the room, basically, while this stuff was going on. ESSENTIALLY, HE REFUSED TO PARTICIPATE OR ALLOW HIS AGENTS TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS ILLEGAL ACTIVITY. He set the example of why the “I’m just following orders” excuse is a bunch of “bull.” These guys all knew what they were doing was against international law – and they did it anyway. So, getting back to my advice to President Obama: Just run the government, work to pass the historic legislation that’s “on the table,” and let Eric Holder and the Justice department investigate the Bush administration with no preconceived agenda. And, let the investigations of the torturing, illegal wiretapping, and the other actions of the Bush administration which were in violation of the law be guided by a strict adherance to our legal principles. Prove once and for all that “In America, no one, not even the President, is above the law!”

If you’ve read any of my recent posts you’ll know that I’m not too happy with President Obama, despite the fact I sent him money periodically during the 2008 election campaign. This is making me very uneasy, because I don’t like adding to the criticism – which includes an unending supply of ridiculous criticism from the Republicans who so much are disgusting to me. And, it’s not that I don’t think a vibrant Republican party is important, it’s just that until they totally repudiate the “platform” they’ve been operating under for the past 30 years, I am hoping they go the way of the dinosaurs. However, we need a strong party to stand in opposition to the Democrats and I’d be OK with it being called the Republican party if people like Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, and Sarah Palin weren’t the national face of it. There used to be Republicans, at least this is how I remember it, who stood for (REALLY) family values, balanced budgets, law and order, and a peaceful foreign policy (ie Dwight D Eisenhower to name one). Richard Nixon “muddied” the waters with his organized crime attitude, and it hasn’t changed much since. The part that really bugs me about the Republican party is how they started a calculated propaganda campaign during the Reagan years and haven’t let up since.

This has created a (thank God) shrinking base who listen to the likes of Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and others who I can’t name because I got sick of listening to Limbaugh long, long ago and once I realized they were part of the Republican caucus and operating on the priciple that if they say the lie over and over enough with enough different mouths saying it, a sufficient number of people will believe what they are saying is true and they will then develop what they envisioned as the “Permanent Republican majority.” And they would have pulled it off had they come up with someone other than George W Bush as their “color bearer” in 2000. I’m sure, at this point, that they feel they picked the wrong Bush and I’m just as sure that they’ve got Jeb Bush sitting in the “wings” ready to go as soon as the collective memory of the American people has forgotten GW. Personally, I hope that day never comes, but I believe it is the most likely scenario of a Republican return to the White House – and then a continuation of their original plan. I recently had lunch with a friend (probably former friend at this point) who has been listening to Limbaugh for years. This guy’s a professed Christian, yet he has fallen hook, line, and sinker for the Limbaugh view of things. I can no longer even stand to talk to him, because our conversations always stray onto politics, and the garbage they’re spewing just makes me sick to my stomach.

I started writing on this blog because I was so frustrated with things the Bush administration was doing – and time and time again, much to my dismay, being justified by Limbaugh, Hannity, and the paid mouthpieces of the Republican party – and according to their plan further justified by people like my friend who believe they are informed by listening to this crap. I guess what bothers me almost as much is that when you have people who are on the public airwaves spewing propaganda that comes right out of the caucus of a political party, you are endangering the republic itself. And the people listening to it don’t get it and you can’t even talk to them. I have another friend who I teach with who watches Fox “News” and listens to Limbaugh, this guy is a teacher for God’s sake, and he is so sucked in that he can’t see the problem with what they’re doing. When I was much younger, it was my impression that you couldn’t put partisan rhetoric on the public airwaves if it was affiliated with a political candidate or party in any way. What these guys will say is that “There’s ‘liberal’ pundits on the airwaves as well, which is true – but, as far as I know, none of the ones I listen to are participating in the Democratic caucuses. If they are, they are just as wrong as Limbaugh and the other “right wing talkers.”

The progressive “talkers” I’ve listened to are up front about their bias, they don’t claim to be “news” reporters, and they don’t follow the “company line” of the Democratic party. It should be a bit disconcerting to every American when Republican politicians are cowering down to Limbaugh when they let something slip about how vile he is, and then when he attacks them on the air, you see them running to his show to apologize like a dog running with its tail between its legs. How did the Republican party, the party of Eisenhower, Dirksen, Goldwater, Hatfield, and Gerald Ford – among others – get to the point that they are answering to a radio talk show host who has been openly racist, who illegally used drugs, who has had numerous failed marriages (between him, Gingrich, and Guiliani they’re approaching double figures)? And I’m not trying to stand in judgement of any of these men as individuals (although I’m sure it sounds that way) – but think of the criticism these guys have put out about Bill Clinton and others about their personal “habits.” I just feel the Republican party is hurting if these are their leaders – and I know that they are going to criticize President Obama for EVERYTHING he does NO MATTER WHAT! They are trying to undermine his presidency because if he succeeds, they are going to be the minority party, AT BEST (I still think there is a chance, with the irrational behavior they are putting forth, for another party to emerge) for the next generation, and possibly longer. The Republican party needs A COMPLETE SLATE OF NEW LEADERSHIP and they need to repudiate the actions of the Bush “regime,” and people like Limbaugh, Hannity, and the others. These people have made a fortune as the Republican “water carriers” for the past 25 years or so, and the result is a nation that is near bankruptcy, mired in two unwinnable occupations, and despised by almost the entire rest of the world. And these guys could care less, because they believe that our nuclear arsenal is enough to keep us in power indefinitely, ughhhh!

Ok, why am I saying all this? Well, despite the fact that these Republicans are, and are going to be, in President Obama’s face – I believe we still have an obligation to avoid doing the same thing they did in reverse. Republicans allowed President Bush to do whatever Dick Cheney wanted, carte blanche, during the six years they held the majority in both houses of Congress – while he cut taxes during wartime (a first in American history), initiated war with a country which had not attacked us (another first in American history), threw away billions of taxpayer dollars on no-bid contracts in Iraq to companies that Cheney and Rumsfeld were CEO’s of prior to their terms in the Bush administration, outed a covert CIA agent, attempted to destroy one federal bureau after another, and – among other things – warrantlessly wiretapped US citizens and practiced heinous torture techniques in the NAME OF ALL OF US! I just can’t see taking the same approach with President Obama – and I don’t think others are either. I’ve already seen one “Special Comment” from Keith Olberman aimed directly at President Obama, and I’ve heard other Democrats criticizing him – in fact, some of President Obama’s loftiest aims could get derailed by Democrats in Congress. However, President Obama is so much of an improvement over GW Bush that I just feel awkward criticizing him and, in one post, suggesting that he is showing weakness in dealing with Republicans (I even used the word cowardice).

The reality is that my frustration was with the political process in this nation – one that is top-heavy in lobbyists for large corporations and politicians who have taken what amounts, in my mind, to bribes from one corporation after another – disguised as campaign “donations.” (and, believe me, I fully understand that this “bribery” is one thing in our system that is bi-partisan) My disagreement with my friend was spurred when he essentially called me a socialist (which really wouldn’t bother me if it wasn’t framed in the Limbaugh rhetoric) because I believe that corporate heads taking salaries in the range of $50 million/year is absurd – and worse than that, paying multi-million dollar bonuses to bankers who have caused Billions in losses which not only affect the solvency of their banks, but threatens the financial health of our nation is just plain wrong in my view (and these guys get really worked up when they use the word “liberal” to criticize someone like me – again, buying into the Limbaugh et al hate message). I just don’t think these people (the CEO’s and other execs) are worth it, and I don’t believe the “trickle down” theory that my friend and millions of other “ditto heads” have bought into has done anything more than literally ruin our economy while putting us, as a nation, into incredible debt. And he’s a “blue collar” guy – yet so gullible as to believe that our economy works best with a very few earning a disproportionate amount of the “pie.”

So, while the Republicans criticize President Obama for shaking hands with Hugo Chavez, for trying to “fix” the economy that was virtually ruined by George W Bush (and boy, in talking to my friend, I can see that these Republicans are really struggling with taking ownership of this economic collapse – I saw the writing on the wall when they were blaming the recession on Obama a couple months before he took office – they always can find someone besides themselves to blame for the disastrous state we find ourselves in – no matter how absurd their claims are – I believe they continue to do this because they know they have a significant number of their “base” who will believe anything they say without seeking corroboration) I will continue to criticize President Obama as long as he continues the Bush policies I expected him to change when I supported him. The continuation of the warrantless wiretapping should be, in my mind, an area where peole like my friend and I could come to agreement. As I stated in a previous post, the Republicans will stop at nothing to support the NRA position that American families should have the right to have an arsenal of assault weapons at their disposal while looking the other way while we give up our right to privacy clearly guaranteed by the fourth amendment to the constitution. It is very frustrating for me to feel that both the Republican party and sufficient numbers of the Democratic party woiuld stand by and watch this guarantee undermined.

And then there is the torture issue. I can tell you that I just won’t be able to support President Obama again if he stands by his decision that torture is legal in the United States. It is beyond my belief that he would say we’re not going to hold those accountable who practiced it (keep in mind that today it was announced that the CIA waterboarded two “enemy combatants” a total of 266 times in the period of a month – for one of them it was like 6 times per day – AND THIS IS OK, BECAUSE “THE CIA IS KEEPING US SAFE!” ARE YOU KIDDING ME? Everyone in the whole wide world knows what we have done – and believe me, it’s not helping to keep us safe. There are a whole bunch of people who REALLY HATE US because of the actions of our CIA (and, of course, the Bush administration which authorized and encouraged this behavior). My son is a member of the US Marines and is likely to be put into harms way during his term of duty. Should he get captured and tortured, can you imagine the international reaction when President Obama demands justice for someone committing a war crime? Despite my sincere hope that Obama succeeds, I just can’t go along with this decision. As far as I’m concerned, the fact that we know what these people did (remember the pictures from Abu Ghraib? Do you really think that was an isolated incident? If you do, I’ve got a bridge I’d like to sell you!), the fact that we know it violated our own laws as well as international laws, and the worst part is that President Obama is a constitutional law scholar – this makes President Obama an accesory as far as I’m concerned. I don’t believe he has the legal right to just say “We’re not going to prosecute these atrocities – we’re just not going to do ithem anymore.” He is a very intelligent man, but that is short sighted thinking to the absurd level. By tackling this problem as he has, what he is really saying is that we DO TORTURE! We’re just not going to do it for the next four or eight years while I’m President. The next President will have the option to do it, because in essence President Obama has set the precedent that keeping the CIA happy is more important than the legal system that has held this nation together for over 200 years. So, as much as I hate to be criticizing President Obama, regarding torture and warrantless wiretapping, he deserves it!

Tonight I’m hoping to write the shortest post of the (in my mind amazing number of) 120+ previous posts. As I’ve mentioned a few times, when I started to write, I expected a few – at the most. I didn’t expect anyone to find this place in the “web universe” and have been amazed that there’s usually about 20 of you reading this each night (listen to me, all personal and such, as if I have any clue as to who you are – maybe some day someone will register and make a comment! :o). Please, if you read this post and haven’t read the previous one, read it. I was really charged up as I wrote it, and I believe we (assuming you’re of the progressive – didn’t we use to call it liberal? – mindset that is apparently mine) somehow need to get through to President Obama before it’s too late. Tonight I had a horrible thought. I’ve always pictured the idea of Sarah Palin as President as ludicrous. However, if Obama turns off enough progressives – and it could happen, quickly I might add, despite his seemingly high poll numbers (remember, Bush was close to 90% after 9/11) the alternative is scary. Can’t you just imagine Sarah Palin representing us all trying to “fix” our economy, or dialoguing with world leaders at places like the G-20 Summit? I can tell you, the thought of that makes me feel like I’m going to ……. well, I’ll let you figure that out on your own.

Here’s what’s bothering me tonight. I’m a school teacher and have been for several years. I teach 6th grade in a small city’s version of an “inner city” school. Now, if you’ve never been in a small room with 25-30 11 year old kids, many of whom are running things at home and could care less about an education, you’ll just have to try to imagine what it’s like. I won’t go into a lot of details, but I think there’s one important point I’ve learned that would serve President Obama well as he’s trying to “deal” with Republicans. The NUMBER ONE MISTAKE that I’ve seen teachers make, over and over, during my years in the classroom, is trying to be “friends” with the students. IT IS A SURE RECIPE FOR DISASTER! When my students say things like “you’re mean” or “you give too much homework” or “that’s not fair” I think, “hmmmm, maybe I’m doing something right.” I’ve learned that when I make the hard choices, I’m clear and honest with them, and I “stick to my guns” with my decisionmaking – not worrying about whether they like my decisions or not – the end result is that I gain their respect. Gaining their respect is NECESSARY FOR SUCCESS in the classroom!

This is the best analogy that I can come up with for what I believe is wrong with what President Obama is doing in his “first 100 days.” He seems to be trying to please the Republicans. In the process he’s going to alienate his own base and he will lose any chance he had of gaining the respect of these Republicans. They really remind me of the sixth graders I deal with on a daily basis. CONSTANTLY PUSHING BOUNDARIES – TRYING TO GET WHAT THEY WANT WITHOUT REGARD TO ANYONE ELSE! President Obama, in my view, is making huge blunder after huge blunder (I wrote him about this, and, not surprising, have not received a response – I don’t think he wants to hear his “own” criticizing him). He has really brought this to a head in his decision to announce that torture is not against the law in America (even though he’s promised that we won’t do it anymore). What he’s failing to realize is that he’s only going to be President for 4 or 8 years (looking more like 4 to me every day) – and if he allows the Republicans to reserect themselves due to his weak kneed decisionmaking – these guys will be torturing again as soon as they are able. By not prosecuting the guilty parties, I REALLY DON’T UNDERSTAND THE THINKING BEHIND THAT DECISION FROM A CONSTITUTIONAL LAW TEACHER, he’s allowing a precedent that will surely be repeated sometime in the future. The end result is that our CIA will have the stigma from the rest of the world that the KGB had from the old Soviet Union. In fact, our country stands in shame in front of the rest of the world because, by not prosecuting war crimes, we are condoning them – THERE IS NO OTHER WAY TO LOOK AT THIS.

So, I hope there are others who will try to talk some sense into our 44th President. I was very excited the night he was inaugurated, and I really was filled with hope. I was very thankful that the “reign of Bush” had come to an end (his term was the longest, most painful years of my life as an American citizen – because, despite the fact these memos were supposedly “secret” everyone in the world knew what had happened – there was actually no new information on them – just confirmation and individual identification of who did what) and I trusted Obama that he would make it “right.” Unfortunately, in my view, there is no way it can be “right” if the perpetrators of all the lawbreaking are allowed “off the hook” because we don’t want to “lay blame by looking back” on what happened. This is frustrating, absurd, and DOWNRIGHT DISAPPOINTING! Please help me (I’m writing letters to him) convince President Obama that the only way to gain the respect of these Republicans is to do what is right, whether they like it or not. President Obama, being friends with Republicans won’t gain you their respect!

Much to talk about. There’s a bunch of wierdo’s running around throwing tea bags at things because they evidently just figured out that in America we all have to pay taxes for the services we take for granted. There’s two wars (that’s the term I keep hearing in the news – to me they should be called occupations because I don’t think we have a clue as to the enemy in either place), the economy’s in the tank, and I could go on – but, in my mind, the big news is that the President that I helped to elect (OK, my couple hundred dollars over the course of the campaign didn’t really do much, I just like to think it did because I’ve never sent money before) doesn’t have the guts to face the Right Wing Republicans head on when it comes to all the MISERABLE DEEDS they did in the NAME OF ALL OF US during the administration of one George W Bush! This isn’t pragmatism, as far as I’m concerned, this is cowardice!

OK, some may argue that we actually should “Look forward instead of backward” and that it would not serve a purpose to lay blame for the misdeeds done IN OUR NAME while Bush was President. Well, I would tell you that it DOES serve a major purpose to “Look forward instead of backward” and that would UNFORTUNATELY be to almost guarantee we will be having this conversation again – PROBABLY SOONER RATHER THAN LATER! If not us, then our children or our grandchildren. This, in my view, is EXTREMELY shallow thinking on the part of Obama. You might think I’m being a bit extreme myself when I use the word “cowardice” in my description. However, I honestly can’t put my finger (or, I guess, more appropriately, my mind) on a better word. President Obama has been courting Republicans, who are acting like complete whackos since he took office, almost more than he’s courting his own “base,” that is the people responsible for getting him elected. And believe me, I’m one who wants him to succeed – MAJORLY! But this seeming bent to appease Republicans has been very annoying, and then today President Obama came out with some decisions – attributed directly to him – that as far as I’m concerned are disgusting.

If you’ve been reading any of my posts you know that I have been first predicting, and now deriding, President Obama’s continuance of the Bush illegal wiretapping program and, worse than that, his unwillingness to allow the legal system to rule on the program – continuing (and actually expanding on) Bush’s ridiculous claim of “States Secrets” as the reason the courts can’t decide whether or not the government is intruding into our privacy by wiretapping without warrants. This in itself is over the edge to me. If “We the People” can’t get this unacceptable decision overturned we are virtually guaranteeing our children and grandchildren of the reality of “Big Brother” listening to their conversations and reading their emails in the future. Should there ever come a time when they really need their privacy from the government they will have us to thank for standing by while this guarantee was wiped away from our constitution. Now, It’s getting worse – AND FAST!

Supposedly, we elected Barrack Obama for “Change we can believe in.” He has said, during the campaign, that he would “fix” the FISA legislation once in office – an apparent lie – he has said that “No one is above the law in this country” and yet he’s allowing the illegal wiretapping to continue and now, today, said that there will be no prosecution of those responsible for the reprehensible torturing that took place under George W Bush’s regime – so, apparently another lie. And, as you can see, I’m going to call it what it is. I’m sick and tired of making excuses for people in public office when what they are doing is lying. And this one is as egregious, if not more so, than the warrantless wiretapping lie. If you didn’t see or hear the news today, another four “memos” from the Bush White House were released (thanks to the ACLU – for all you ACLU haters out there) that comfirm the worse fears of all of us who have been disgusted with the idea that the United States government would not only condone torture, but would authorize it – and by “it” I mean torture in the worse sense of my imagination.

Tonight, as I was listening to the published details of the memos, I tried to picture myself being put into a box the size of a coffin and I started to get clostrophobic just thinking about it. Now, I know what it feels like to be clostrophobic because I’ve had a couple of MRI’s, and even though both ends of the machine were open, I was unable to breathe until they gave me a sedative before going in. To picture being in the coffin size box and then having them put insects in there – all I can say is WHAT IN THE NAME OF GOD IS WRONG WITH THESE PEOPLE? (keep in mind that EVERY expert on gaining information from detainees says that torture doesn’t work) There was much more on the list that was distributed, and thinking back to John Yoo’s reluctance to say that burying someone alive is torture (his caveat was that as long as you dig them up before they die, well, then he’s not sure that would be considered torture – UGHHHHHHH!) These people are SICKOS! And then, Barrack Obama does the unthinkable, after the release of the memos(I guess we can be thankful, at least, that he did that), and says that those who participated in this CLEARLY ILLEGAL BEHAVIOR would not be prosecuted because they were “Just following orders!”

Based on that enabling excuse ALL THE GERMANS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE GERMAN INTERNMENT CAMPS JUST BECAME INNOCENT! You’ve got to be kidding me Barrack Obama! Where did you get your law degree – from the same university as John Yoo? What are you thinking? Let me give you a bit more advice (OK, I know that Barrack Obama is not going to read this post – he didn’t read the 3500 word “letter” I wrote him expressing my disgust with his continuance of the warrantless wiretapping) – the people who committed these ILLEGAL ACTS were holdovers, to a large extent, from the people who perpetrated the last great infringement on the American people – THE WATERGATE BREAKINS OF THE NIXON ADMINISTRATION – and of course, Gerald Ford chose to “look forward instead of laying blame” as you put it – and then 30 years later people like Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, and Donald Rumsfeld resurface and “Here we go again.” Mr. President – do you really think that your generosity to these criminal thugs will be the last we hear of this kind of garbage? Let me tell you, if “We the People” can’t get through to you, and fast, and cause you to fix the error of your thinking – someone involved in this will resurface and we’ll see a repeat, and – like this compared to Watergate – it will probably be worse.

And the idea that this will be too divisive, to me, is pure cowardice. WE HAVE LAWS IN THIS NATION THAT HAVE SERVED US WELL FOR OVER 200 YEARS. The idea that you can selectively enforce them, as the head enforcer, and expect me as a sixth grade teacher to be effective in teaching 11 year old kids that they must follow the rules, IS LUDICROUS! What on earth are you thinking??? In fact, with all respect Mr. President, ARE YOU THINKING AT ALL? Or are you so afraid of the wrath of these Republicans that you think they will ultimately be thankful that you “let them off” and then, miraculously, start becoming rational patriots? GIVE ME A BREAK Mr. President! This is a VERY BAD SIGN! I actually thought that this nation was on the road to recovery. What I’m beginning to think is that you believe if we can just prop up Wall Street – people will be happy because the economic news is brighter and we can just go on believing we are the World’s only “Supre Power.” I can tell you that I’m disgusted with what I’m seeing – and the problem is there’s no place for people like me to go. There’s no way I will fall in line with the Right Wing Whackos who are going to be in your face no matter what (the sad reality is that when enough of your supporters get disgusted like me and decide not to vote at all, we will end up with more whacko Republicans in office and the cycle will repeat itself, ughhhhh! again!). It appears that the only recourse is back to that place of apathy, thinking that it doesn’t matter who gets elected in this country, you can’t trust them to “DO WHAT’S RIGHT!” And, in the case of our leaders condoning these horrific forms of torture, EVERYONE IN THE WORLD KNOWS THIS WAS NOT RIGHT! Here’s the hypocritical truth about this – we (the United States of America) had Japanese soldiers “who were just following orders” prosecuted after World War II for doing what you are looking the other way from! THIS IS DISGUSTING BEYOND MY BELIEF!

Here’s what really bugs me (well, actually, it all really bugs me) – thinking about “supporting our troops.” Lindy England and about 6 or seven other “grunts” who were “just following orders” at Abu Ghraib are sitting in some military prison somewhere as the only indication that “the United States does not torture” – as you say Mr. Obama. Now, how disgusting is that? Lindy England, if I remember correctly was a private first class, and possibly a member of some Army reserve unit that was woefully undertrained for the mission she, and her compatriots, were given. THIS MAKES ME SICK TO MY STOMACH JUST THINKING ABOUT IT! And Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and George Bush are all going to spend the rest of their lives enjoying the wealth they gained from putting private England and the others in that spot – and believe me, they have not the slightest bit of remorse for this! THESE PEOPLE ARE CRIMINALS and they should be standing in a court of law defending themselves for their actions. If a jury says they are innocent, then that is the end of the problem – THAT IS HOW WE DO IT IN THIS COUNTRY! If you, President Obama, allow these thugs to bypass that process you are doing every decent law abiding American citizen a disservice. You are saying loud and clear exactly what President Nixon got wrong prior to his impeachment that “If the President does it, it must be legal.” Let me tell you this President Obama, just because someone is elected President, that doesn’t mean they are not a criminal! My disgust is turning to anger as I’m writing this post, so I will draw it to a close – please if you read this and you agree with what I’m saying, email it to others in the hope that more people will express their disgust with our President openly refusing to enforce our laws – this should be a BIPARTISAN concern!

OK, my last post was a bit on the LENGTHY side, but the truth is that I’m still grieving that our nation is mired in Iraq and I believe that this false sense of “relief” that appears to be the national mindset, based on the lack of media coverage, is a disservice to our troops and is “lulling” us into a place that is going to allow this travesty to continue for years to come. Today, the Iraq war surpassed the Viet Nam War as the second most costly “War” in our nation’s history, behind only World War II (Remember, the “War to end all Wars”). And President Obama has recently requested almost another $100 Billion to continue this misadventure. I probably won’t be around twenty years from now when the US will, evidently, finally claim “victory” in Iraq – after the present day Iraqi’s are either all dead or have somehow forgotten Abu Ghraib – and have somehow managed to figure out how to live and work together. We will then be able to truly claim that the “Surge” worked! Ughhh!!

However, that is not what’s on my mind tonight – and I really am going to attempt to keep this rather short. This morning I read a very interesting column in the NY Times by Bob Herbert about the recent flurry of violent deaths in the US via “gun violence.” The total, actually, is staggering – including more than one instance where Police Officers have been murdered in the course of their duties. Herbert pointed out that since the attacks of 9/11 there have been in the neighborhood of 120,000 deaths (murders) in this country from the use of firearms. This is approximately 25 times the total of deaths suffered by our military in the so-called “War on Terror” – fighting (or being targets) in Iraq and Afganistan. He also pointed out that the assault rifle ban has expired and Congress has evidently failed to act to renew it.

Of course, the NRA (National Rifle Association for anyone who’s had their head in the sand for the past 20 years) is totally against this ban and virtually every Republican and several of the Democrats in Congress are evidently running scared from the NRA. These guys have frightened a large segment of our population into thinking that President Obama is going to take their guns away from them (I have a wonderful neighbor – I could write an entire post on the ideal “good neighbor” about this guy – and it grieves me when I talk to him because he watches Fox “News” and they have convinced him that he’s going to lose his guns) to the point that there is a “run” on weapons in this country which I can only assume means lots of people are stockpiling them – or these secret militias are more of a problem than those of us who live without guns realize. Let me get to my point.

For some reason the NRA has succeeded in making millions of Americans believe that if the government regulates who can own weapons and what kind of weapons they can own it’s a violation of our 2nd amendment rights to “bear arms.” Now, I’m not a constitutional lawyer (or expert) – even though I did study the constitution 40+ years ago in my first attempt at college, I don’t believe the “right to bear” arms means that the ownership of deadly firearms can’t be regulated and limited regarding the type of weapons we can own. It just doesn’t make sense to me that a hunter, for example, needs an AK 47 to bag their elk or deer. An assault weapons ban makes total sense if we want to continue to have some sort of orderly peaceful society. The question I have with some of the “right wingers” who are backing the NRA is “do they want to have an orderly, peaceful society? After listening to Chuck Norris essentially “predict” that there is going to be some sort of armed insurrection (I’m not sure why – evidently they don’t like the idea of the government “reeling in” some of these out of control multinational corporations who are destroying our economy – or maybe they don’t like the thought of propping up the working people of this nation – or maybe (this is what I really think) they just don’t like the idea of a black President occupying the “White House.”

What is really curious to me. They seem so worried about the second amendment to the constitution – like they’re really worried about the document – but the news that President Obama is continuing the warrantless wiretapping policies of the Bush administration doesn’t even get so much as a whimper from these whackos. I’m kind of glad about that because I’d feel really awkward walking arm in arm with these guys protesting a REAL assault on our constitution. They are worried about rights that don’t exist. THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT GUARANTEE ASSAULT WEAPONS FOR EVERY FAMILY! And while the constitution is a “living” document that has to evolve over time the protection against unreasonable searches – which would clearly include the government listening to phone conversations or intercepting email messages or monitering credit card transactions without a warrant (which requires probable cause) – IS CLEARLY PROHIBITED! Where are these guys when there’s a real intrusion on our rights?

Now, if we allow President Obama to continue this outrage then, down the road, the gun whackos might actually have something to worry about. There is no doubt in my mind that there is a lot of room where the government could regulate the use and sale of deadly weapons without violating our “right to bear arms” as it is put forth in the constitution. However, if we start allowing that document to be undermined in one place – in my view it’s only a matter of time until someone attempts to do the same in another place. And, in the case of the wiretapping, if we say it’s OK because the President says so – due to some unfortunate event that makes him feel like he has to take extreme measures to “keep us safe” – then we are on a road that will eventually lead to the demise of our country as we now know it.

There is not doubt in my mind that we don’t need to sacrifice any of our freedoms to protect this nation from any possible attack that might happen in the future. Of course, President Bush – by allowing Osama bin Laden to walk away unchallenged after 9/11 – sent the absolute wrong message to any potential adversaries around the world. I understand that on the surface President Obama is trying to “right” that wrong by “going after bin Laden” – after the fact – but I believe he is just getting drawn into the trap that was set originally for President Bush. Bin Laden should have been taken out as soon as possible – originally Bush said the right things – any country that “harbors” him will be subject to whatever “collateral damage” occurs as we pursue him in order to bring him to justice. The fact that it’s almost 8 years hence makes that much more complicated – but bin Laden is being “harbored” by Pakistan, not Afganistan. I will have more to say on this later – but getting back to my main point – this failed attempt to bring bin Laden to justice has only brought destruction to our constitution while he has totally reconstituted his forces.

And, in the mean time, the killing continues in the Untited States at an alarming rate. When I stop and think about this (like I did after reading Herbert’s column) I just come to the conclusion that this country is so messed up it might be “past the point of no return.” And these whackos who want more guns (and tomorrow will evidently be dumping tea into rivers and lakes around the country because they don’t want rich people to pay an additional 3% in taxes) are going to do everything they can to insure that President Obama fails. I have come to the conclusion that we are truly in a war. However the war is not in Iraq (that’s an illegal occupation) the war is an internal one in this nation. The war is between a progressive majority of Americans who want to revitalize the middle class, who want to revitalize our environment, and who want this to be a nation that actually lives up to its lofty ideals. These “progressives” want this nation to reclaim the moral authority it had in the world prior to George W Bush squandering it after 9/11. They are being battled and will be battled every step of the way by the very vocal minority of Americans who listen to people like Rush Limbaugh on the radio and who watch Fox “News” on TV – for their information. It appears to me that Republicans won’t be happy until our government is completely destroyed!

Tonight I want to begin my discussion of the Iraq “occupation” as of the sixth year of occupation and post-surge. Despite the fact it has been withdrawn from the headlines, in my view it is still the behemoth of a problem which it has been since the day it was begun. Before I get started, please check out my previous two posts regarding the Obama administration’s continuance of the illegal warrantless wiretapping of the previous President, and if you’re as outraged as me over this, please send the address to my site to others who might join in the “battle” to get this outrageous government intrusion into our lives STOPPED! Back to tonight’s topic: Post-surge Iraq. I will start by recommending Thomas Ricks’ book “The Gamble” which came out a month or two ago. This book gives the inside story of the “surge” and how it was initiated and the book ends with a discussion that you could title: so what.

There are many reasons why people are referring to the surge as being a success – especially Republicans, and more specifically members of the Bush administration who are doing everything in their power to influence the writers of history to give them a little slack after the pounding they’ve been taking since it became common knowledge that the Iraq invasion was an exercize in incompetence. There are two books that I’ve read detailing the “surge.” The first was called “The War Within” by Bob Woodward and it detailed the process Bush and company went through in devising the surge. The second book, “The Gamble” gives the perspective of the military leaders involved in implementing the “new” strategy. After reading both books and making inferences from the other available information on the occupation I believe that most of the claims of success regarding the surge are disengenuous at best and dishonest (surprise, surprise!) at worst.

First of all, my take is that the idea of the surge came about out of pure desperation after some military people – especially a retired Army General named Jack Keane – finally convinced George Bush that we were “losing” and we were going to “lose” if we didn’t change our strategy. The first thing that had to happen was for Donald Rumsfeld to be fired as the Secretary of Defense. The more I read about the Iraq invasion and occupation, the more I feel that Rumsfeld should get some kind of accountability for all the death and suffering he is directly responsible for. I believe that Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney were largely responsible for much of the thinking that proved to be absurd – and the fact that they both profited handsomely from this adventure – well, in my view, it will be a travesty of justice if they are not investigated for this – and held legally accountable where appropriate. Both of these men – it seems obvious to me – were right at the head of the class when it comes to who was authorizing the torture that so has destroyed the image of America around the world and so recklessly ruined the lives of many innocent Muslims who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Both of these men were clearly willing to sacrifice the principals that this nation was founded on for their own political whims – not to mention that both gained over $100 million dollars according to a book I read because of the increase in their stock holdings from companies they previously headed and gave lucrative no-bid contracts to during this fiasco.

I believe George Bush realized after the repudiation by the voters in 2006 how poorly he had been served by Vice President Cheney and therefore by Rumsfeld who was essentially put in place by Cheney as the Sec. of Defense. Probably the best decision Bush made, in my opinion, during his Presidency was choosing Robert Gates to replace Rumsfeld. About the time this was happening Keane and a small group of Army officers were lobbying for a complete change in “strategy” in Iraq and the result – much to the dismay of millions of Americans – was the surge. At the time it seemed like such an arrogant move by Bush – to increase the level of troops in the face of an election which clearly was determined by the American people wanting the troops to come home. In addition to the increase in troops General David Patraeus was put in charge of the overal military operation in Iraq. He had just completed a study on counterinsurgency which led to a totally different approach to how our troops would operate in the “field.”

Now, I’m going to explain why I believe the surge didn’t work. But, I have to point out right from the start of my explanation that I also believe if the United States had taken this approach from the beginning, there is a much better chance that they could have been successful. Of course, one of the things that I haven’t even heard discussed at all is what success would mean. For the first four years of the occupation the Bush administration threw the word “Victory” around as if that was enough for the American people to grasp. Even though they, themselves, couldn’t explain what “Victory” was. The implication, if you listened to the pro-neocon pundits, was that victory would be a stable, democratic Iraq which was independent of its neighbors (and the inference I got – giving us their oil! – of course that was never publicly admitted). The reality of the situation is that even the Iraqi’s say (several references to this in Ricks’ book) that democracy in Iraq is virtually impossible and our toppling of Saddam Hussein has enabled Iran to become a major “player” in the region – ultimately, Iran and Iraq are going to be “joined at the hip” and whether or not that leads to stability in the region remains to be seen (for those who think it’s a mistake for President Obama to be negotiating with Iran I believe they should take a realistic look at the impending Iran/Iraq alliance and how important that will be to our own interests in the region). During the surge the Generals redefined “success” as reducing the level of violence and providing real security for the Iraqi citizens who were living in a virtual Hell.

You can’t read Rick’s book (at least this is my take) without having high regard for the people in our military. While the debate rages on at home, these people have been doing a fantastic job, especially post-Rumsfeld. Personally, I blame the problems of the first four years almost entirely on the Bush administration and their incredible incompetence in directing the effort. And, I don’t think they suddenly became “competent” after Patraeus took over, I believe General Patraeus and General Odierno (the two “main men”) started to make decisions first and report to the Pentagon and the White House later. Also, I believe that Gates brought an entirely different attitude to the Department of Defense – I believe he will go down in history as a great Defense Secretary. The problem for all of these men is that George W Bush, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Don Rumsfeld, and others put them in a NO WIN situation. What they accomplished during the surge was to reduce the level of violence and change the attitude of the Iraqi people toward our troops. The Abu Ghraib scandal and much of what happened in the first four years of the invasion and occupation will probably never be overcome – but I was inspired as I read what they accomplished during the two years of this troop increase. And, I have to add that as one who has given money to Move-on.org – I really wish they would print an add apologizing for their “General Betray-us” add put out right before Patraeus testified before Congress in September of 2006. Patraeus kind of asked for that when he agreed to take the political lead on this, but the guy is so dedicated and honorable that I believe he deserves a public apology.

That being said, in my view, the “surge” has only put off the inevitable. Remember, the stated objective of the surge was to give a “breather” (my word) to the violence allowing the Iraqi government to negotiate with the insurgents in an attempt to solve the lingering political problems which still exist today (and might actually be worse because of the actions taken during the surge). Also, the Bush administration was still attempting to get the Iraqi’s to give us first “dibs” on their oil – remember, the architects of the original invasion were all “oil men” – and as far as I’m concerned it takes a person who is just willing to ignore the obvious to fail to understand the “real” motivation of Bush/Cheney et al. The success of the surge has been quantified by the reduction of American and Iraqi casualties. This is true, but remember, had the surge not been implemented, and had Congress withdrawn funds for the occupation (as I believe they should have) we would not have lost the 1000+ troops who have died since then and the 20,000+ who have been injured (and, of course, that figure doesn’t include all the PTSD cases and other traumatic mental disorders that may never be fully known). Additionally, this country would have saved almost half a trillion dollars which would be very handy right now (although they might just give that money to the Wall Street bankers ughhh). Based on the media coverage of the occupation you would think that it is over and we did “win.”

If you believe that, I hate to be the one to spoil your celebration (although, I am thankful that I haven’t seen any celebrating yet). Let me point out the falacy in thinking that we have achieved “victory” in Iraq. First of all, there has been no “coming together” of the different factions which threatens to tear Iraq apart at the seems. The Sunni’s and the Shia’s still hate each other, don’t trust each other, and want revenge against each other. The only thing that has changed there is that Patraeus and Odierno put our troops in between the two factions – actually moved them into the neighborhoods with the idea that we should be protecting the population (obviously what we should have been doing from day one). Prior to Patraeus stepping in as “number one” the Americans were stationed on their bases and they would clear insurgents out of neighbor hoods and then return to their bases – thus, allowing the insurgents back into the places they had just been forced out of. With the new strategy, the troops went in, cleared out what they called the “bad guys” and then stayed there. Actually living amongst the Iraqi population. This led to a change in how the Iraqi’s viewed our troops and it allowed them to hold the gains that they fought to achieve. Also, the “mission” changed from killing Iraqi’s to protecting them – as you can imagine, this was a welcome change from the perspective of the Iraqi population who were tired of Americans raiding their homes and neighborhoods, and then retreating to their bases in the desert. Prior to the surge there was little or no cooperation from the “good guys” because anyone seen to be helping Americans was likely to end up dead. This change in approach was one of the factors leading to a reduction in violence.

Probalby more important were two other factors, both of which have had a lot less publicity, but both being factors why I believe the surge benefits are only temporary. The so-called “Awakening” was (and is) a strategy where the Americans are paying Sunni Sheiks and former insurgents (many who were killing American troops) to take the fight to AQI (Al Qaeda in Iraq). As of the time I’m writing this, there are 103,000 former Sunni insurgents on the American payroll, costing us between $20 and $30 million per month. These guys are the ones who have brought AQI seemingly under control. They know who Al Qaeda is, where they are, and they don’t like foreigners in their country killing Iraqi’s – I guess the difference they see between them and us is that we can afford to pay each on of the “Sons of Iraq” – which is what they call themselves – $300 per month to not kill Americans anymore and to take the fight to AQI. There is not much discussion about this, but I believe it probably has more of an affect on the reduction in violence than the “surge.” The problem with this strategy – for the long haul – is that we have heavily armed these former insurgents and they still hate the Shia and the Shia still hate them – whether there can be reconciliation between the two groups is a BIG question – and according to Ricks’ book, HIGHLY DOUBTFUL.

The other factor leading to the reduction in violence was the “cease fire” ordered by Moqtada al Sadr – the Shia cleric who is now in Iran studying (or whatever they do) to become a “Grand Ayotollah.” From what I’ve read this is supposed to happen in about another year or two and I fully expect Sadr to return to Iraq and to make a push for power somewhat allong the lines of what Ayotollah Khomeini did in Iran 30 years ago. I believe the result of this will be an Iraq/Iran unification under the same type of Shia religious law that today exists in Iran. The end result will be Bush’s power play designed to get the oil of Iraq will enable one part of his “Axis of evil” to become a major power on the world scene. And, of course, how that turns out will depend on others besides Bush – he’s just managed to pass this HUGE problem on to his successor, President Obama and whoever might follow him. I believe this is a likely major problem facing the US for the forseeable future. The point here is that the “Awakening” and Sadr’s cease fire were probably more responsible for the reduction in violence than the surge. OK, if you’re wondering why I believe the gains of the surge are temporary, I’ll try to explain.

The Sunni’s in the “Awakening” have been armed by us to the point where they can cause a lot of damage if they decide to return to their insurgent ways. And, once we reduce our forces, if they don’t get what they consider to be fair representation in the Iraqi government, I believe the violence will be ramped up. Keep in mind, there are still over 2 million Iraqi’s displaced by this occupation and insurgency (many of them Sunni and former Saddam loyalists), and when these people start returning there is likely to be a lot of tension. Why, you might ask? Well, consider this – say there was a problem in our country where you felt for the safety of your family you needed to go to Canada for a year or two. For arguments sake let’s pretend it was a Christian vs non-Christian conflict. You come back home after peace is restored and the other side is occupying your house and tells you it’s no longer your house and says “Beat it!” I believe there are enough people who would be really angry if that happened that an increase in instability could be the result – in fact, in my mind it is likely.

And Moqtada al Sadr. If you’re not familiar with this guy there’s a book out with his name as the title, I can’t remember the author and I gave it to friends to read, and this book gives you a good idea of how the Iraqi’s “interact.” These guys are, for the most part, not very nice. And the idea of Democracy and cooperating amongst themselves and compromising with their opponents isn’t something they do well. If Sadr disagrees with you he is more likely to have you killed than to try to work it out. I believe the reason he had his militia “Stand down” was purely strategic on his part. He expects the Americans to be out of Iraq by the time he returns with the status which will allow him to take the role as the spiritual leader of the country – and when you read the book I mentioned earlier, he has a lot of revenge on his mind relating to the Sunni minority which ruled Iraq for many years under Saddam. His father and grandfather were murdered by the Hussein regime and I believe he is planning to exact revenge once he has power. For those who don’t think he is going to have power all I can say is that he’s got a following in the millions and he is very smart – he’s not planning to topple the Americans, but he fully expects them to be gone in two years or so (I believe this is why the American Generals want to remain with a large force in Iraq indefinitely).

Which brings me to my final, and painful, point of the evenings rant. General Patraeus, General Odierno, and others involved in the surge have gained a lot of credibility for their successes of the previous two years (and deservedly so, as far as I’m concerned). However, understandably they see things in the political realm from a purely militaristic point of view. The idea of giving up the gains they’ve made in Iraq, I’m sure, makes them feel like a lot of men and women would have died in vain. I believe they fully understand what will happen when the United States withdraws from the country (and I might add – for the sake of brevity [I realize this post has been anything but brief] – I haven’t even mentioned the Kurds tonight – who are sitting on the largest part of the Iraqi oil reserves and have a whole different batch of problems to pose for the situation) – the Iraqi’s are likely to fall back into a state of violence that very easily could turn into an all-out civil war and could totally destablize the middle east region more than it already is. It could cause Israel to do something totally stupid as far as our interests are concerned and it could totally disrupt the “precious” oil supply which motivated this invasion in the first place. The only thing that’s holding Iraq together (kind of like a bandaid) right now is that our troops are lodged between the Sunni and Shia. When this changes, all hell might break loose.

The aforementioned Generals are hoping that the politicians can find a way to solve the political problems before the American people demand our troops come home once and for all – in fact, according to Ricks, these Generals believe our significant presence is needed in Iraq for the next 10 maybe 20 years to have any kind of a realistic chance to allow for a political solution that is binding and lasting. This won’t go over well with all the people who are expecting President Obama to get our troops out of Iraq within the 16 months he promised during the campaign. He’s already “reneged” on that promise and changed it to “19 months” with the caveat that there is somehow 50,000 troops who can stay because they are “non-combat.” I’m wondering if that means that they are just going to stand by if the violence increases. And if Moqtada al Sadr becomes sufficiently upset at the idea of a long term American presence – will we just leave these “non-combat” forces in place if they’re being attacked on a regular basis? And knowing that Osama bin Laden’s dream is the United States mired in Iraq indefinitely (actually his dream was us mired in Afganistan, but George Bush essentially “put icing on the cake” by including Iraq in the countries we are “mired” of “bogged down” in) does anyone really think he’s not going to do everything he can to keep the insurgency going in order to keep us there? And, will we continue to withdraw as the violence returns?

Unfortunately, I believe Ricks is “right on” as he’s been with most of the reporting I’ve seen from him. He’s predicting the United States will have a significant presence in Iraq in 2015. Him, and the Generals he interviewed, think the only way for any chance of a stable Iraq is the continued occupation by the United States. These Generals will prove to be very persuasive and it will be interesting to see how President Obama presents this to his “followers.” As I mentioned last in last night’s post, I’ve already asked for my money back. Obama is continuing (much to my dismay, disbelief, discouragement, and outrage) the illegal wiretapping policies of the Bush administration. He’s sending more troops into Afganistan – remember, this is the country which virtually bankrupted the Soviet Union (hint, hint) – and he has already extended the date for American troops to be out of Iraq by about 18 months. I’m afraid he will not have the courage to stand up to these Generals and the Iraq occupation will be an issue in the 2012 Presidential election – I REALLY HOPE I’M WRONG! – Ultimately, the Iraqi’s will have to solve their own problems and I truly hope that we will start looking after our own problems and realize what this HUGE MISTAKE by George W Bush is (and has been) costing us in lives and resources. If Barrack Obama follows the advice of the Generals this will become his occupation – he is already close to having to take partial ownership of the fiasco. I believe the time to let the Iraqi’s solve their problems on their own is SOONER RATHER THAN LATER!

I’m not feeling too good tonight, but I have to make a short post for anyone who might have visited this site in the past couple of nights. Last night I wrote about President Obama’s support of the Bush warrantless wiretapping policy. I have been warning people of this for the previous almost three months, since I first heard “inklings” that led me to believe this was going to happen. I heard one person, I can’t remember who it was- but they were part of his “team,” saying that President Obama didn’t want to give up this “power.” WHAT “IRKS” ME THE MOST ABOUT THAT IS THAT HE DOESN’T HAVE THE POWER. And the worst part is that we are depending on a spineless Congress to “call” him on this. Maybe some of the people like Keith Olberman will stay on it, but if history is any guide, the “furor” will die down quickly and we, as Americans, will have effectively given up one of our basic rights (that is that the government MUST HAVE PROBABLE CAUSE AND A WARRANT to monitor our phone calls or to invade our privacy). It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to imagine where this kind of abuse of our constitution could eventually lead.

For anyone who has been reading my posts – TONIGHT I DID EMAIL THE WHITEHOUSE AND ASK FOR MY MONEY BACK. Now, I pointed out that I didn’t realistically expect them to do it, or even for Obama to read my letter – some flunkee will read the post and delete it – probably after about the first couple of hundred words (if I’m lucky – I wrote about 3,500 words!). This action on their part is just further confirmation that there will be no investigations and prosecutions of the Bush administration – even in the areas where my sixth grade students know they were violating the law. Which brings up a good point – as a teacher, I can’t tell you how difficult it makes it for me to teach students about the importance of honesty and integrity along with “following the rules” when the leaders of our country are arrogantly breaking the rules, lying pathologically, and getting away with it. Do the people in Congress and the White House, for example, think that parents all across this nation weren’t talking about the routine lying that was going on while Bush was President? If they think that, they need to come talk to my students. These kids are going to grow up thinking this kind of garbage is OK!

Well, I’m going to cut this one short, but I just finished a book by Thomas Ricks called “The Gamble.” He wrote the great book, “Fiasco,” which spelled out in detail the incompetence of the Bush administration in the first few years of the Iraq occupation. “The Gamble” is focused on the so-called “Surge,” from the perspective of the military officers who carried it out. I had read “The War Within” by Bob Woodward which looked at the planning of the “Surge” from inside the White House. There were some contradictions in the two books, but between the two of them, I believe I gained a lot of insight into the Iraq occupation as of today, and what is going to happen in the future. I’ve already mentioned on this site that President Obama has already begun the “doubletalk” that was and has been a part of the executive branch of our government for as long as I can remember. He’s saying “I never said I was going to remove ‘all the troops'” – well, I took him to say the the troops would be coming home within 16 months of him moving into the White House. That time frame has already been “tweeked” by about 3 months – plus he’s claiming he’s going to leave 50,000 “non-combat” troops in Iraq for an additional year and a half from when the troops were supposed to come home.

Let me tell you, first of all there are not non-combat troops in Iraq. How much combat pretty much depends on the Iraqi’s – but that is an absurd claim and I wish he wouldn’t stoop to those disengenuous levels. I will have a lot more to write about Iraq soon – I believe the economy has drowned Iraq out of the news, and I suppose from a politician’s point of view that will allow for some “cheating.” I have felt for a couple months now that Obama is not going to live up to his promises regarding Iraq and the evidence is beginning to become overwhelming – SO FAR I HAVE NOT HEARD OF ANY TROOPS COMING HOME! But Obama is ramping up troops to go to Afganistan, presumably to be bogged down there for the next few years so we can be mired in two illegal wars! ugghh – based on Ricks’ reporting and the imperical evidence – the US isn’t coming home from Iraq anytime soon! Ricks believes that we will still have a major force (at least 50,000 troops) there in 2015. I HOPE HE’S WRONG AND I HOPE I’M WRONG. As an Obama supporter, I believe this wiretapping policy and the potential of remaining in Iraq has the potential to make President Obama a one term President. And maybe, after seeing the daunting task in front of him once he assumed the job, that is just fine with him. All I can tell you is that if we can’t trust President Obama to keep his promises on Iraq and wiretapping this progressive “revolution” will be all for naught. I will have more later on Iraq and “The Gamble.”