I’ve just finished reading “The War Within” by Bob Woodward and I need to comment while the thoughts are fresh in my mind. This book is a very interesting expose’ of the decision to “surge” the troops in Iraq in the face of a national election that repudiated the “Bush Doctrine” of wars of choice to further our “national interest.” I was one of many who were shocked that the new democratic congress, freshly installed by voters across the country, would allow this to happen. Bush’s actions didn’t surprise me as much as their inaction and lack of courage. I fully understand why they “caved;” they had their eye on the prize which was the 2008 election which will happen in two weeks (actually it’s happening all over the country as I write this post with early voting – a topic for another day). I, therefore, consider them at least partly culpible for the over 1000 troops who have died since the “surge” was announced. However, the process Bush went through to make this decision was very interesting, and I’m sure if Bush had it to do over again, he would have done things quite differently prior to the surge.

I need to start this by saying that I believe the motivation behind the decision was his legacy – although you’ll never hear that coming from his lips or anyone close to him. The reality is that he is willing to sacrifice as many people as it takes to achieve something called “victory.” And it is my belief that whenever they figure out the definition of victory, it will be something that would have been “defeat” before this whole fiasco started. I will explain that statement in more detail shortly.

According to the many accounts of this invasion that I have read from sources on “both sides of the isle” the invasion of Iraq was poorly planned and the occupation was, in essence, not planned at all. The chain of command has been blurry at best, the key people in key places were not in tune with each other and they had little knowledge of what they were getting into. I say that with one exception. I believe that Colin Powell knew what was going to happen – he used analogies like “if you break it, you own it.” I don’t believe that Bush, Cheney, or anyone else directly involved in the decision gave Powell any credibility. In fact, they used him for their own purposes in an unseemly manner (which is why Powell has clearly been angry for the last 4 years) and they eventually said to Powell the equivalent of “don’t let the door hit you in the butt on the way out.” I’m saying all this to point out what most people know, that the planning and execution of this war was an exercize in incompetence.

Prior to the 2006 mid-term election Bush finally began to figure out that things weren’t going very well. The rate of casualties of Americans was setting new records each month and Bush was measuring our success by how many Iraqi’s (bad guys) we were killing as opposed to how many Americans (good guys) we were losing. All anyone needs to do to understand the level of incompetence is to replay some of the public speaking appearances Bush gave during this time. His assault on the syntax of the English language will probably be legend long after he’s out of office. I often wondered how we could elect someone so inept (of course then here comes McCain – but I digress :o). During this time he responded to questions about his decision making (“I’m the decider”) by saying he used his “gut” to make decisions. In an earlier book Woodward asked him if he consulted his father, former President Bush “the first”, and he responded that he consults a different father, a higher father. This approach had understandably made millions of Americans very uneasy and opposed to his policy in Iraq.

As the election approached Bush began to consult with a retired general, Jack Keane, who was as determined to “win” as Bush. He was the source, along with a general who was teaching at West Point during the early years of the war, with the idea of the so-called surge. And I do have to give Bush credit in the sense that this decision was not of the “hair-brained” caliber which would describe most of the earlier ones. It took several months and a lot of brainstorming and disagreeing between various members of Bush’s inner circle to come up with the plan. However, as I read the book my impression was that the two people who drove the decision were Keane and Bush’s National Security advisor – the replacement for Condi Rice who replaced Powell as Secretary of State – Stephen Hadley. They convinced Bush that this “strategy” was the only chance to “win” in Iraq. Of course, at the time it really wasn’t a strategy in the real sense. Their plan was to put David Patreas in charge in Iraq, give him 5 additional brigades and try to get control of Bagdad. As I read the book, much of what Keane said was possible to Bush has evidently happened. The violence has subsided, and the amount of American casualties has dropped significantly.

While Keane was debating positions offered up by others, he said things like – in response to the argument that our forces were stretched thin and to do this surge would require tours in Iraq to be extended to 15 months – “that is what happens in time of war.” “That is what the troops signed up for.” “We can’t afford to lose another war, we have to do whatever it takes to win.” I found his thought process and his determination to be quite admirable. But he’s looking at it from the point of view that no matter how many lives we lose, it’s worth it to win. And I would have to say that if the war was legitimate, and if there really was a “victory” out there, I would probably agree with him. I believe that if he had been in charge from the beginning things would have turned out differently. But in my opinion, by the time we “surged” the troops, victory was finding a way to get out of Iraq without “losing face” similar to what happened in Viet Nam. Most of the generals in Iraq were veterans of Viet Nam – and most disagreed with both Bush and Keane. And while there are some positives about this, I don’t think there’s any way we willl ever be able to claim victory in a situation where another two or three years of sanctions (maybe less) would have brought down Saddam Hussein without the huge price paid by both countries and without enabling Iran to become a major “player” in the region.

One thing that has happened that Bush wanted was for Prime Minister Maliki to gain strength as the leader of Iraq. I believe that has happened and he is showing signs of being in a semblance of control, but there are many problems inherint with this that nobody’s talking about. First, I fully believe that if Maliki does get a firm hold on Iraq, it is just a matter of time before the alliance with Iran becomes stronger. To me, the biggest potential nightmare as the result of this misadventure will be a united Iraq and Iran. I know that many people think the Iraqi’s hate the Iranians, but keep in mind that Moqtada al Sadr is in Iran right now studying to be the “Grand Ayatollah” of Iraq – and he has a huge following in Iraq that is not going away just because our government wants them to. I believe al Sadr is “laying in the weeds” so to speak for a triumphant return. Also, the “hatred” of Iran was generated by Hussein’s Sunni government and the Shia will be in control for the forseeable future. Considering the makeup of the region, from an Iraqi perspective and alliance with Iran will ultimately strengthen both countries

When the US essentially hired the Sunni insurgents who had been killing our troops to fight Al Qaeda in Iraq instead, the so-called Sunni Awakening, the reduction in violence began. McCain and everyone else associated with the republican party want to blame the surge for the reduction in violence, and it did help, but without the Sunni’s taking the fight to Al Qaeda in places no American wanted to go the violence would still be at alarming levels. Once the US started paying and arming the Sunni’s (keep in mind, these were essentially the same Iraqi’s who were in Saddam’s army that the US disbanded after the original invasion), al Sadr – he’s a very shrewd, intelligent, and dangerous man – told his followers to back off. With the exception of a short battle in Basra (southern Iraq, a Shia stronghold) where Maliki tried to send a message that he was willing to challenge Shia extremists as well as Sunni extremists – and Maliki was forced to call a truce before his troops were embarassingly defeated by al Sadr’s followers, Moqtada al Sadr’s devotees have been laying low; in my opinion biding their time until he returns in about three years – according to most of the reports I have read.

My point is that as I read “The War Within” I couldn’t help but be impressed with the process that Keane and his associates came up with to attempt to “win” this war. Bush didn’t seem so inept as I went from page to page. And I believe that Woodward did a good job of just reporting what happened. I’m happy that someone was allowed into the White House so there is a believable history of this decision. I certainly think it will prove valuable at some point in the future. However, I still think their thinking about winning is flawed. Both Bush and Condoleeza Rice are obviously, as you read, concerned about their legacy and are betting that history will bail them out of one of the poorest decisions ever made by one of our presidents. From Keane’s perspective, I believe he is a true patriot – he’s not looking backward, only looking forward. It didn’t matter how we got there, the fact was we are there and we have to find a way out that doesn’t include the word “losing.” The problem I have with that thinking is that in the long run I see losing written all over Iraq. There is still no reconciliation between Sunni’s, Shia, and Kurds. We have armed the Sunni tribesmen to the teeth. They could continue fighting us or the Shia at any time. I see no way they just lay down their arms and accept Shia rule – I hope I’m wrong about this, but it just doesn’t seem plausible to me. And finally, Moqtada al Sadr will be back and I believe he has every intention of controlling Iraq in an alliance with Iran. Ughh!!! He has a huge following of people who will gladly give up their lives for the “cause.” These are the people (religious fanatics) who were brutalized under Saddam Hussein – which is ironic that we toppled his government ostensibly to free al Sadr and his followers from the tyranny of Saddam, and now they are our “enemies” trying to free themselves from our tyranny.

Just like how Bush/Cheney would never admit that Iraq’s oil was the main objective of this invasion, Bush will never admit that the surge was about protecting his legacy. I’m sure that Bush believes history will clear him of any mistakes because Iraq will ultimately end up a free democratic county and will initiate a wave of freedom that will transform the middle east. All of this, of course is pure speculation, although I have to say again – to me 1100 of our finest along with untold numbers of Iraqis – giving their lives – just since the beginning of the “surge” – can’t be justified to save the “face” of America and the legacy of George W. Bush. The more I thought about this as I read Woodward’s book the more I felt that I’ve just got to throw in my “2 cents” on the Bush legacy.

I’ve been writing too much lately, and last night I was thinking it’s time for a bit of a break. However, today as I drove around I couldn’t help but think that this election should be the blowout of all time. We have a very intelligent candidate on the one side who can give a speech that sends chills up millions of people’s spines, is calm and collected under pressure, and has demonstrated extraordinary leadership skills, while on the other side there is a candidate that has made gaffe after gaffe, has shown poor leadership skills, and is too old to reasonably be considered for the toughest job in the world, especially under the circumstances the next president will inherit on January 20th. This “other” candidate is also proving to be the king of the “flip flop,” grumpy in his good moments, a poor judge of character (VP choice), and a liar extrordinaire. So why is this election even close – in any state?

As I pondered all this I kept coming back to the reality that news has become entertainment and the so-called “news” channels are fighting for the “bottom line” and the potential (and reality) of advertising dollars obviously has to be driving back room decisions of the media moguls. The closer this election is the more viewers will be watching various events and the more money they will haul in. That is why I’m sure the TV networks were very excited about John McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin for Vice President. While the republican insiders were probably shuddering, knowing the inevitability of the public vetting process, the networks must have been all smiles at the level of controversy – and along with that the interest from both sides of the isle. The size of John McCain’s crowds has grown considerably since the Palin appointment. Which brings me to the source of my thoughts as I drove around today.

First, John McCain himself, he’s getting a free pass on a lot of issues. For some reason no one wants to talk about the real John McCain. How could the party of “family values” pick this guy as the nominee, a man who cheated on and dumped his first wife for a young rich heiress. The only thing I can think of is that he has a stark resemblence to GW Bush when you look at his history. He owes anything he has as far as position to being the son of Two well respected Admirals in the US Navy and his education was the result of “daddy” – alarmingly similar to Bush. McCain would never have been chosen to enroll at Annapolis without his father being one of the top Admirals in the Navy. And he wouldn’t have made it through either. The stories of his drinking, carousing, and gambling as a young man are undeniable, considering the multiple sources of information. He was not an accomplished pilot in the Navy. Everyone seems to want to portray him as a war hero because he spent 5 years in a POW camp. Well, the way he got there was by being a lousy pilot and being arrogant toward the chain of command due to his “name.” And others who were there with him have little respect for him due to his caving in to his captors. How many pilots destroyed 5 planes and were still flying? I don’t know the answer to that, but it seems to me that it should be part of the discussion in this election cycle.

Additionally, McCain wants to pin some kind of lable on Obama because Obama served on the board of a school initiative sponsored by the Annenberg foundation (very pro republican) which also had William Ayers, an admitted 1960’s Anti-war radical who was never prosecuted for deeds that Obama called “deplorable,” on its board. Ayers is now a professor of education at Chicago University where Obama was a Constitutional Law professor for 12 years. OK, Obama doesn’t deny being on this board and that Ayers was on it too, although that is about as far as the relationship goes – aside from the fact they live in the same general neighborhood and their paths cross inadvertently on occasion. If that is fair game, why isn’t the media making a big deal out of some of McCain’s acquaintances. I suppose republicans don’t call G Gordon Libby a terrorist, despite four years in prison from the Watergate affair and numerous threats since then, because his targets are always democrats. But Libby has apparently been a fund raiser for McCain, and actually had a fund raiser activity with McCain present right in Libby’s home. Shouldn’t that be investigated and discussed as relevant? And the Keating five scandal, considering the state of the banks in this country and the widespread belief from every economist I have listened to or read that the problem is deregulation, shouldn’t that be extremely relevent – especially at this time in history. The story is on the fringe media – blogs, U-tube, ect. – but shouldn’t it be fully investigated and either debunked or proven relevant by the mainstream media. I don’t think voters should go to the polls unaware of McCain’s involvement in that disaster, and also this one.

Then there’s Sarah Palin, the darling of the republican base. I’ve even seen bumper stickers that read “Palin for Vice President,” with no mention of McCain. I fully believe that millions of right-wing republicans will hold their noses while they vote for McCain simply because Palin is on the ticket. Should they pull off a miracle comeback and win, I believe these voters will immediately start praying for McCain to have health problems. They actually think she is qualified to be the President of the United States! Ughh! Ultimately, I believe two decisions on McCain’s part will be considered the “nails in the coffin” as far as his campaign is concerned. One will be his vote for the “bailout” and the other will be picking Sarah Palin. Her faithful are already “poo-pooing” the decision by the special prosecutor in Alaska that she violated state-ethics law. They say it was a political “witch-hunt” despite the fact that the inquiry began prior to her selection for VP(you have to wonder about John McCain’s vetting process) and that the committee voting for the inquiry had 10 republicans and only 4 democrats on it – and the vote was unanimous. Worse than that to me was her husband’s membership in, and her speaking at, the Alaska Independence Party which wants Alaska to succeed from the Union. This group has ties with southern successionists in the lower “48” in addition to the John Birch Society. Why isn’t this headline news?

Can you imagine if Barack Obama was part of some kind of successionist movement. The other day Rick Santorum, former Pennsylvania Senator, brought up the “no flag on the lapel” argument again after the debate against Obama, and “upon further review” at all three debates – Obama was wearing his flag on the lapel and McCain was wearing his in none of the debates. Now, I have to say that McCain not wearing a flag on his lapel would have nothing to do with whether or not I would vote for him, it just shows how scurilous this campaign has become, and how the media will give air time to the most curious of assertions – with little or no fact checking – and let some pretty serious foopahs go unmentioned.

And, finally, the other night I watched the third debate with some friends and left right after it was over, but stayed long enough to see that the republican “pundit” was Bill Bennett, infamous for preaching morality, while secretly running up huge gambling debts. But what really bothered me about CNN’s choice of Bennett to apparently give his opinion as to who won (I didn’t stay long enough to hear him, but I’ll bet he was one of the minority of Americans who thought it was McCain) was the fact that I can still remember him saying at one point in time that the way to lower the crime rate in the United States was to abort all the African American babies. I really don’t get how he still has any credibility (well, I guess the fact that he does speaks volumes). This is the part that I’ve just got to get off of my chest, people like Bennett pretend that racism doesn’t influence them, but when you look closely at the choices – McCain and Obama – and you consider comments these republicans have made in the past (I use Bennett as an example – but the republican party is full of leaders who have proven themselves to be bigots – this is what originally pushed me away from them) The writing is clearly on the wall. A close election makes them piles of money and many of them could stomach McCain/Palin because the idea of a black president “scares them to death.”

I feel like I have to write about the bailout. I’m not even sure of my thoughts and I’m assuming they will become more concrete as I write this. First of all, both John McCain and Barack Obama pushed for the bailout, I suppose with the thought that they would like to minimize the magnitude of the impending crisis that those of us on “Main Street” are about to feel – probably for at least the next 2-3 years. It was no surprise to me that Henry Paulson, George Bush, Dick Cheney, and those in their administration would panic at the thought that the entire economic fabric was unwinding. It has been clear to me that Bush has spent the last couple of years trying to manage his place in history. His “surge” strategy in Iraq – which I will focus a complete post in the near future on, once I complete reading Bob Woodward’s “The War Within,” an interesting inside view of the process leading to the decision to “surge” in Iraq – was clearly a huge gamble trying to protect his image from being a president who “lost” a war, especially a war of choice that de-stabalized the entire world. Now he’s being mentioned in the same breath as Herbert Hoover and the republican blame machine is trying its best to guide history toward the “real culprits” of this disaster. It was also no surprise to me that the Bush administration used the “fear card” to get this bailout through Congress. This tactic worked on Iraq (several times), it worked on torture, habeas corpus, FISA, and the Patriot Act.

What was surprising to me was the willingness for Obama to join the “bandwagon.” I fully realize why he did it. He can’t be the president if he doesn’t get most of the votes on election day. The fact that he and McCain both supported the bailout took the risk out of the situation for each of them. Obama’s lead in the polls was “swelling” at that point and he understood the weakness John McCain was facing due to the ill advised comments he made about the “strength” of our economy only hours before the meltdown kicked into high gear. This was the safe move for Obama, he attempted to get some “populist” language into the bill and attempted, but failed, to get relief for the homeowners who are finding themselves “upside down” in their mortgages and facing bankruptcy and foreclosure.

It was equally surprising to me for McCain to just go along with whatever transpired. Published reports indicated that he was pretty much a non-factor in all the meetings that preceeded the final bill that was enacted – despite his proclamation that he was “suspending” his campaign to go to Washington to lead the republicans in devising a plan. When you think of the size of the gamble McCain took in selecting Sarah Palin as his VP running mate – with at least an awareness of some of the baggage she was carrying – it’s hard for me to understand why the “maverick” went along with this bailout proposal. I firmly believe had he opposed the bailout, the polls would have instantaneously swung back toward his campaign, and while it probably wouldn’t have been enough to put him over the top, it certainly would have closed the gap to the point that this election would be a close one. These next 19 days would be much more critical as the effects of the bailout take hold, and I certainly think the Bush administration would have had at least some temptation to manipulate the results with at least an attempt to stall any positive results until after the election. Despite George Bush’s focus on his “legacy” he has a significant self-interest in McCain winning. The possibility of investigations of numerous potential crimes looms much more prominent with an Obama presidency (in fact my lobbying effort will commence upon the conclusion of an Obama victory on November 4th).

Back to the bailout. So no matter who wins in November, the next president has a certain amount of culpibility in the proposal that is now unfolding. I realize that the bill will be significantly changed if Obama wins, especially if it’s a landslide victory and he brings  a democratic majority into the senate of at least 58 seats, which is a real possibility. But this idea of Wall Street (Paulson, Bush, et al) bailing out Wall Street just isn’t sitting well with me. Every economic expert that I’m reading, have read, and probably will read have said this economic crisis won’t end until the housing crisis is stabalized and housing prices start to rise again. They all say that sooner is better than later. The damage being caused by the one asset of significance for most working Americans spiraling downward is beginning to mushroom. It still doesn’t feel to me like the politicians “get it.” This is probably because they are so insulated from the realities of every day Americans. And of course I can just imagine those Wall Streeters that are getting this government aid licking their chops at the thought of cleaning up the mess by purchasing the homes of the distressed “Joe Sixpacks” as Sarah Palin put it. I heard one “pundit” pointing out that many of the people who are still working on Wall Street are experiencing huge drops in their income – like as much as from two million per year to one million per year. He actually said that they will just have to figure out how to “make it.” After reading that I presumed that I just have no idea what it costs to live the lifestyle they live, but my thought was hey, tough it out!

As I ponder this situation my thoughts keep coming back to the place that if the real problem is in the falling housing prices, the 700 billion would have been better spent bailing out the homeowners who are losing their homes. Based on the so-called economic stimulus package of last spring which was one of the earlier “band-aids” used by the Bush administration in trying to postpone the inevitable with the economy, 700 Billion dollars would amount to almost $4000 for each working American. I know I could have used a bailout like that. And I wonder, “Where does this money come from?” Certainly no investor in his right mind would loan money to the US government at this point in time. I’m presuming the printing presses are working overtime. I believe this leads me to my point. I feel fairly certain that the propping up of these Wall Street banks is just a bigger band-aid (and I was really amazed when I read that Henry Paulson called a meeting of the 9 largest banks – of course including Goldman Sachs with whom he has a significant interest – and essentially forced them to accept the government as preferred stockholders – not letting them leave the room until they had signed a pre-arranged agreement. That is a really major RED FLAG to me. Free market economy???) and this band-aid is not going to stop the hemoraging. Ultimately, I believe Barack Obama is correct when he says the solution to our economic problems will come from the bottom up. I would have felt better if he had demanded that type of approach when this bill was being debated instead of agreeing to this “top down” fiasco.

The sooner those in Washington figure out that the backbone of this country is the people who are at the bottom and not those at the top, the better off we all will be. As I watch the stock market fluctuate wildly every day, I’m more certain than ever that government making policies based on where the stock market is at any particular point in time is a sure recipe for disaster. You don’t solve a crisis created by bad debt, by creating more debt, as least that is the way I see it. Sooner or later the government is going to have to find a way to keep the people who are losing their homes – in their homes. They are going to have to find a way to stop the slide in housing prices. Ultimately, in my opinion, I can see a scenario where this present plan leads the banks to own a bunch of empty houses which they will utlimately sell back or rent to the people who are losing them – selling them at reduced prices. Our leaders should be able to find a way to bypass this scenario and save people the expenses of moving twice.

People in distressed mortgages should be able to renegotiate their mortgages in a way that keeps them in their homes and starts funneling money back into the banks from the bottom. Any government intervention should be to buy down the mortgages for the people. And for those people who have managed to stay above the fray, so to speak, make low interest loans available to them so that they could raise capital for things like home improvements or large purchases such as autos, etc. which are coming to a standstill. There could be a 6 month or 1 year “window” when these loans (like maybe 2 or 3% loans) would be available – only for creditworthy homeowners with incomes less than a pre-determined amount. Low interest loans should be available to small businesses who hire workers and tax incentives could be instituted for companies that move their operations back to the US. I’m just throwing out ideas, but my main point is that for any “bailout” to work, I believe it has to start at the bottom! When you think about it, the mortgage crisis started at the bottom, and it became “toxic” as it “trickled up.” So there you have it, my trickle up theory!

I still remember when Rush Limbaugh came on the scene. I can’t remember the exact year, I think it was in the mid to late 80’s possibly the early 90’s. I, like many other dupes, started listening to him as I drove around in my car until I realized how vile he was and how the people that called his show were the kind of people who go out of their way to tell you what they think you want to hear and are eager to believe someone who caters to their weeknesses. Limbaugh was a good enough liar to suck millions of Americans in. It took me until the so-called “Contract for America” and the republican “revolution” of 1994 which brought people like Newt Gingrich, Dick Armey, and Tom Delay into the forefront of the US house of representatives, to realize that Limbaugh and as time passed people like Sean Hannity and others were part of a conspiracy to take a stranglehold on all facets of the US Government. Our founding fathers had designed the constitution in a way that purposely made it almost impossible for one party to control all aspects of the government. The fear was tyranny of the majority – the exact reason we have a representative democracy and not a pure democracy. The republican plan was brilliant and they came very close to pulling it off.

The first part of the plan was a very subtle “merger” of the airwaves. They started with Limbaugh, who had virtually no competition when his tenure began, and their presence expanded on the radio, then slowly on television as the cable networks emerged during the 90’s. Bill Clinton went along with media consolidation that has led to the supposed “liberal media” that is almost completely controlled by corporate interests with close ties to the republican party. Once they had the house in 1994 they were on their way with phase two of the plan to take over congress (I call this phase two, because I’m not including the White House in these plans. I firmly believe they felt having control of the White House would be a “given” once the entire plan was put into place). They created a strong majority in the house, but found it more difficult in the senate where the necessity to have 60 votes to cut off debate on issues was still a roadblock. However, they still, by the time Clinton was out of office and GW Bush was in the White House, were close to achieving their goal of a perpetual republican “majority.”

The republicans had control of both houses of congress, and they were one vote away from having control of the Supreme Court (they still are if you’re thinking that Obama has this election won and you don’t need to vote) for at least a generation. With people like Karl Rove, Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Dick Cheney, and David Addington alongside GW at the helm they managed to turn the Justice department into a partisan advocate of whatever position they chose to take. It looked like a done deal, I’m sure from their perspective, in the early years of the Bush II administration. After 9/11, which in reality was a horrible failure on the part of Bush and his surrogates, the president’s popularity soared. I believe his approval rating jumped up close to 90% after the invasion of Afganistan. I’m sure he thought that he wasn’t going to “blow it” like his father, but that is where everything started to unravel.

As the old saying goes “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutey.” Well, the result of all this power and the temptation that goes along with huge sums of money exchanging hands with buddies involved in the “war business” was a flood of corruption uncovered by a few people who put honor above party. The undoing of Duke Cunningham, Rep. Foley and the page scandal, Delay and his involvement (with others) in the Abramoff scandal along with an indictment for laundering money in Texas politics, leaders of the republican anti-gay movement having encounters suggesting they weren’t “practicing what they preached,” and the bumbling war in Iraq brought many Americans to take a second look at the republican party. People stopped talking about Clinton lying about sex and started talking about the consequences of lying us into war.

Bush/Cheney et al miscalculated the American willingness to give up our prized liberties for their fixation on the “war on terror.” Americans are appalled that our leaders have sanctioned the type of torture that led us to put people before war crimes tribunals after World War II and other wars. They felt the sense of hypocracy that our leaders were saying one thing out of their mouths and doing exactly the opposite in their actions. The American public is still on the side of Franklin Roosevelt who chastised people like George Bush’s grandfather for profiting from the second World War. The idea that companies like Halliburton, Bechtel, and others, all with direct connections to the White House would not only be profiting off of huge no-bid contracts in Iraq but that they would be unable to account for billions of dollars while we couldn’t even afford health care for America’s children eventually got the attention of enough people to threaten the whole plan.

And finally, George Bush’s stubborness to admit a mistake (actually, I believe he finally has admitted it, at least to himself) with people like John McCain standing firmly at his side as over 1000 American troops have given their lives for the “surge” which may in the long run lead to a short-term stability in Iraq at the expense of our standing in the world and our economy has led to a mobilization that is on the verge of turning the republican “revolution” upside down. I almost felt a sense of pity watching John McCain in the final debate with Senator Obama trying to defend an empty policy with an hour and a half of empty rhetoric. I imagine that as time goes by and people watch the debate with “instant replay” and dissect some of the absurd comments McCain made, his performance will become progressively less impressive. I listened to a couple republican “pundits” right after the debate and they were uplifted because McCain was “aggressive.” The problem was with what he was saying which is very hard to “fathom” immediately following something like this. At one point I remember McCain saying that American troops should be able to go right into the classrooms of America’s public schools upon completing their service to the country as teachers without the burden of going back to school to obtain proper credentials. As a public school teacher, I can’t tell you how ridiculous that comment was. It showed an amazing lack of knowledge about what is involved in teaching children.

So the great plan of the republicans that have been in the background since the days of Ronald Reagan to hijack the American political process almost made it to fruition. I personally believe their mistake was thinking that the White House wasn’t the key. They put Reagan in and he was a better actor in the White House than he was on the “silver screen.” He gave a great speech and either he was in the beginning stages of Alzheimers or he was just willing to look the other way while his surrogates (who have been Bush I’s and Bush II’s surrogates) ran rampant in South and Central America and elsewhere in the world with little regard for congress or the constitution – their only regard is profit. I believe they think of both the congress and the constitution as annoying impediments to their agenda. Clinton was willing to go along with enough of their plan to make his eight years constructive to their ultimate goal, and George W Bush had the right personality to be a good “front man.” The problem was that just as he had done on almost every endeavor he had attempted prior to his stint in the White House Bush had bungled pretty much everything he had done. He continued this phenomenom with the war, with his lack of diplomatic ability, his misuse of the English language in press congerences and public appearances, and finally and fatally his lack of knowledge and poor choice of surrogates regarding the economy. This will be a terrible recession or depression to recover from as a nation, but the severity of the crisis should force us to “retool” our thinking and change our personal behavior and demand, finally, a change of behavior in Washington. Whatever lies ahead will be a darn sight better than if the republicans had succeeded in their plan – a plan that would have worked had Bush been at all competent- a plan that McCain/Palin continue to push for almost as if they really believe they are the “change agents” we need. I never thought I would ever say this, but it is becoming clear in my mind that it is time for all Americans to say “Thank you president Bush.”

Today was another interesting day to say the least. Last weekend I came close to a big mistake. Trying to outthink the greedy Wall Streeters and “jump in” while the market was at the bottom, I almost switched a significant portion of my non-significant retirement funds out of the savings account I was once ridiculed for having into a couple market accounts thinking that a big jump would happen. I did this on Saturday. The account where my money is stored (hopefully) wouldn’t process the transaction until Tuesday – I discovered this after completing the transaction. A night of sleeping on that thought brought me to my senses. Monday was going to be the big jump, the market is open on Monday (Columbus day – a topic for another day’s discussion) despite the banks and the post office being closed, and Tuesday would likely be a reaction to whatever happened on Monday. Well, the big reaction didn’t happen until today (Wednesday) but I’m very thankful that I chose to cancel the transfer of funds because I would have lost almost 10 percent of what I had invested in one day – as today the market dropped over 700 points. These wild swings up and down are very reminiscent of the 29 crash, and gives me a very uneasy feeling about the next few years. All this makes the election, and made tonight’s presidential debate that much more important to me.

I watched this debate, the first of the three that I was able to see in its entirety while it was happening, very intently with some fellow teachers. I purposely put myself in an environment that was friendly to my own political persuasion because this election atmosphere has become so intense. I wanted to be able to react naturally to whatever might be said. And I did think John McCain gave his best performance to date, although the grumpy old man comments of the previous two debates which I was unable to watch until long after they happened and my mind had been “polluted” by the pundtis were still relevent this evening. I think the difference in the three debates was the performance of the moderator. He asked some excellent questions that forced both candidates to be more specific than ususal and to talk to each other about their own vision and also what their campaigns had been actually saying. This forced the Ayers issues out in the open along with the so-called ACORN issue (although McCain’s involvement with ACORN was not discussed due to Senator Obama’s continued reluctance to do a complete “tit for tat” with McCain and his surrogates). It forced Obama to talk about the tone of McCain’s ads (although McCain unbelievably continues to imply that Obama is the one running a negative campaign), and it gave Obama a chance to bring up the toxic nature of the audiences at McCain rallies where the rhetoric has been so “suggestive,” the “battle cries” of members of the audience have been so divisive, and therefore it was implicitly suggested that McCain will have to “own” anything untoward that might happen, as Obama framed in the phrase “God forbid” when each candidate talked about their VP selection’s qualifications to be president.

It was precisely at this point in the debate (the talk about VP selections) that I felt Obama was much too nice and missed a golden opportunity. It is my opinion that the selection of Sarah Palin was as reckless a selection as McCain could have made. SHE IS CLEARLY FAR FROM QUALIFIED TO BE PRESIDENT! Although with each passing day it is apparent to me that president is exactly where her ambition lies. McCain is 72, he has had multiple battles with skin cancer, including a section of skin from his face that was removed during the campaign a month or so ago for a biopsy, of which I have not heard the results – thus making Palin’s qualifications more a pertinent issue than would otherwise be so. In response to the moderators invitation to comment on Palin’s qualification Obama very politely said something like “that is up to the voters to decide.” I really felt he missed an important opportunity. I realize the tight rope he would be walking over any “honest” assessment of Palin’s qualifications, but I felt Obama could have said something like “John, regarding Sarah Palin, there have been many news accounts that she spoke at the Alaskan Indepedence party’s convention earlier in the year and that her husband either is or has been a member of this organization which desires Alaska’s succession from the Union and is affiliated with organizations such as the John Birch society, a white supremist organization. I know that you, John, would not tolerate someone associated with such a fringe organization, so I would like to give you this opportunity to put all those rumors to bed right here, right now.” It certainly would have been interesting to hear McCain’s response.

McCain also opened the door for Senator Obama to bring up McCain’s campaign manager’s ties to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac after McCain continued the phony republican argument that those two companies caused this economic meltdown and implied that the democratic party was therefore somewhat culpible. Obama could have given McCain an opportunity to refute the (irrefutalbe) contention that because McCain’s campaign chairman has collected approximately 2.5 million dollars from Freddie Mac and Fannie May (Mostly Freddie Mac, I believe) in lobbyist fees for a “connection to Senator McCain” in the fight to reduce regulation, that if the derugulation of these two companies are to blame for the economic meltdown then McCain shares a good portion of the blame, just as he did in the last round of bank failures (remember the Keating five?). However, Obama chose to pass up these and other opportunities by continuing his calm, patient, and respectful demeanor, which I believe is one of the main reasons he has surged in the polls during the previous few weeks.

Most people are rejecting the almost aimless and seemingly tireless, but always scurilous, nature of John McCain’s meandering message. They are being more turned off the more they find out about Sarah Palin. McCain is trying to hide his philosophy (and hers), and its parallels to the Bush regime, in a maize of one liners using cutezy catch words and phrases such as “maverick” or “agent of change” or “country first.” Slowly but surely the country is seeing through the McCain/Palin fasad. The economic crisis is real and every day more people realize that everything they have worked for over the previous few decades is at risk. Retirement accounts are slowly disappearing. Jobs are disappearing and the rate at which they are disappearing is accelerating. McCain/Palin are trying futily to separate themselves from the republican party that is not going to be able to lie it’s way out of this one. I often times remember a group put together by my brother in law who lives on the other side of this great country from me, shortly after the misadventure in Iraq had begun. They were going to sell bumper stickers which showed the faces of Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld under the words “No More Lies.” Well, I believe the American people are finally figuring out, in numbers sufficient to change the direction of this country, that the republican platform is based on lies and they’ve had enough. There are still people out there who buy into the “Limbaugh syndrome” and they are the ones who refer to Obama as “Hussein,” call him a terrorist, yell out “kill him” at rallies, all the while believing what these republicans are saying without double checking anything. In my sixth grade classroom these people would have a hard time succeeding, because we teach even 11 year olds to fact check the information they get from multiple sources. It is easy to hear what you want to hear, and I understand that for someone who supported Bush there must be a sense of guilt that prevents them from facing the truth as to what he has led us into.

McCain mentioned Herber Hoover tonight, in a way that even implied that the faulty party of the thirties, the years of the great depression was the administration who followed – which was of course Roosevelt and the “New Deal.” My first though upon hearing that was “Oh boy, they’re (the republicans) going to blame what is about to follow on Barack Obama.” It sounds to me like they are going to “hibernate” into a state of denial until such time that they can reinvent themselves and attempt to bring their “trickle down” theories which have made so many of them filthy rich back onto the main stage. I really do hope and pray that the American people are not dumb enough to fall for this nonsense a third time. Barack Obama said tonight that he will institute a policy of “pay as you go.” I don’t think that will be possible at first seeing as how he will inherit a deficit approaching one trillion dollars due to this bailout (which is what I really wanted to talk about tonight). However, I along with millions of other Americans – I believe – will be expecting a fiscally responsible approach to restoring our economy with a “bottom up” approach. McCain, tonight, did a great job of exposing the republican party for what it is, the party of empty rhetoric.

Well, we’re about to enter week 2 of the post “bailout” era (although I suppose a case could be made as to which “bailout” I’m referring to). Prior to Congress acting on this, I (along with millions of other Americans) said NO BAILOUT!!! Coming from an administration that pressured Congress into approving an invasion of Iraq that, while there is room for debate as to how we get out, has few left who think it was a good idea to destabilize the Middle East in order to either take care of a grudge – or get Iraq’s oil – whichever it was (hopefully, we’ll find out the truth someday – if the democrats can grow some courage and demand investigations once this election is over). This is the same administration which scared Congress into sacrificing principles that millions of Americans have died for over the last 200 years for a “Patriot” act. They scared and shamed Congress into legitimizing torture and eliminating habeus corpus (for crying out loud, the Jews wouldn’t kill Jesus until after he had a chance to face his accusers over 2000 years ago) – even John McCain voted to enable “enhanced interrogation” despite his being tortured during Viet Nam. They’ve had one “Yellow alert” after another at strategic times during their tenure in office designed not to keep us safe, but to keep them in power. After all that, it didn’t take much for them to scare the Congress into “bailing out” the very people who have led to what may be the destruction of our economy, saying without their plan the market would tank.

Well, they got their plan, AND THE MARKET TANKED. They have screwed up every thing they have touched. They are greedy beyond imagination. Secretary Paulson was the CEO of Goldman Sachs – he stepped in to stop the downward spiral right before Goldman Sachs became the next “victim.” So far, I haven’t heard any “commentary” as to how much of a conflict of interest he had in deciding to take decisive action when he did. Had he been the CEO of Lehman Brothers do you think he might have stepped in a week or so sooner? I’m sure that he has several million reasons why Goldman Sachs needs to keep afloat. And did anyone but me notice the flurry of companies who led us into this “crisis” wanting to take part in “managing” the distribution of the 700 billion dollars. Kind of like the drug addict, they see the opportunity to possibly grab onto some more “easy money” and it’s like the excitable kid in school waving his hand in the air and jumping up and down because he thinks he’s got a good answer to a question. It’s like OK there’s a crisis, it’s been caused because I’m greedy and dishonest and without conscience, but that was yesterday and here’s another opportunity to be greedy and dishonest so – Pick me Henry, Pick me!!!

We are all in for a terrible ride because, whether we like it or not, the president is the president for all of us. And for those of us who have been disgusted, disillusioned, disbelieving, and I could go on – about George W. Bush and his cronies for the last 8 years we get to try to suffer through this just like his supporters. It has been very difficult for me because, as a Christian, I have been openly ridiculed by members of my Church and even in my own house for being unabashedly against Bush. I have been, at a minimum, actively observing politics since I was very young. My degree is in Political Science. I have always considered myself a conservative fiscally and a moderate to progressive socially. I’m disgusted by racism and I believe unions are what made this country great. I’m saying this because there are so many things that seem like “no brainers” to me. I have watched the republican party hijack millions of good Americans by “stealing” the abortion issue. I almost got sucked into that – but I’ll never forget listening to the republican icon Ronald Reagan say that abortion would not be an issue during his second campaign for president because it wasn’t “politically expedient” or something of that sort. I realized at that point republicans were using this “wedge” issue to dishonestly court working class people who were so passionately against abortion while knowing that they were going to do nothing about it (I have come to believe that creating an environment where a minimal number of abortions are even desired – by helping women in untenable circumstances should be our pro-life policy). These voters seem to look the other way while the republicans have been ripping us off for trillions of dollars monetarily, in addition to unmeasurable expenses – which would include the lives lost and ruined by the decision to invade Iraq and the sacrifice of our standing in the world due to multiple corrupt policies.

The upcoming election is an opportunity for the American people to acknowledge that they have finally had enough. Elections do matter. It does matter who the president is. George Bush has proven beyond doubt how much damage an incompetent person in the White House can inflict on America and the rest of the world. It may take twenty or more years to recover from his blunders – that is if we chart a course that attempts to restore our moral authority in the world and addresses the pressing needs at home. It is imperative, in my view, that ALL of the misdeeds of the past 8 years be investigated and anyone, including Bush, who are found to be in violation of laws be held accountable. If somebody who might read this thinks its OK for Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Douglas Feith (along with many others) to have profited off of the Iraq war to the tune of more than 100 million dollars each (and counting), while our best young men and women are dying and suffering debilitating wounds, I would really appreciate a response to this post. Were George Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzalez, et al within their rights to order inhumane treatment of thousands of individuals simply because they declared them “enemy combatants?” Do we want future administrations listening into our phone conversations and hijacking our emails without probable cause? Is it OK to commit treason by “outing” a CIA agent in order to get “even” with someone if you’re the President or the Vice President? Are we really willing to give away “rights” such as habeous corpus? Are our leaders above the law?

When I listen to John McCain and Sarah Palin claiming they are right about Iraq, they will “create more jobs in Ohio,” and all the while throwing out coded racial rhetoric I have to hope that people reject their “message” en masse. There were millions of us who went through Viet Nam who knew invading Iraq was a mistake before it happened, but no one listened (well, no one in a position to do anything about it). When we complained about the ballooning deficit, republicans shot back that our economy could withstand twice as much debt as we have incurred to this point. When we complained about torture, they said torture is important for our national security – and no one could investigate what they’re doing due to national security. When I took all my money (what little I have) out of the stock market over a year ago and told anyone who would listen “get ready for a recession that will be severe, possibly rivalling the Great Depression” many people said, let’s talk about something else. When I, along with millions of other people said don’t bail out Wall Street, figure out how to bail out Main Street, Congress passed a 700 billion dollar bailout package (that in my own self- interest I hope somehow is at least somewhat effective). I fully realize that I’m far from an expert and I write this so-called “blog” as a release of my frustration, but watching Sarah Palin running for the Vice Presidency makes me feel a bit more intellectual, and it does feel good to make a correct assumption once in a while. However, under the present circumstances saying “I told you so” doesn’t feel that good.

Tonight, if I ponder the phrase “Is this really happening?” at least a couple substantial thoughts pass through my mind, and by the time I’m finished with this post probably there will be more. First, back to my disbelief as I drove home from the doctor’s office last week and I was pretty sure I thought I heard John McCain refer to Barack Obama as “that one” while listening to debate #2 on my car radio. I mentioned that if I was correct (and since then I have actually seen footage of him doing it, and I was correct) that was maybe the precursor of McCain referring to Obama in the next debate as “boy.” My shock that he actually said this, remembering that McCain led the fight against declaring a national holiday for Martin Luther King Jr. and since learning that he has been on the board of at least one anti-semitic and racist organization, has only been surpassed by my shock that I have seen virtually no commentary on this on our so-called mainstream media. At first, I thought maybe they just didn’t get it – maybe they haven’t paid attention to all the ways white racists code their comments – maybe they’ve already forgotten the Paris Hilton, Brittney Spears add, and maybe they never “got” that one either. However, events of the past few days should take any doubt about where McCain stands on the issue of race away from any impartial viewer’s mind.

I have heard several instances in the last couple of days where McCain surrogates have referred to Obama as “Barrack Hussein Obama” right before they accuse him of “hanging out with terrorists.” Obviously, they are trying to plant the idea in people’s minds that Obama is in cahoots with Arab terrorists. John McCain and Sarah Palin are inciting crowds with hateful rhetoric that is bound to leave scars that will be difficult to heal once this election is over. On several occasions Palin has accused Obama of flat out hanging out with terrorists. The result has been some very inappropriate responses from members of the crowd she’s talking to including one person shouting out “Kill him.” What is worse, there has been nothing coming from the McCain campaign denouncing those kinds of “blurts” that are received with shouts of approval from others. I wondered today if McCain wants to put himself in the position of leading the fight in the senate against a holiday for Barack Obama. Keep in mind that it is no secret that Palin has been directly associated with an Alaskan successionist organization which is connected directly with successionist groups in the south who would like to rekindle the confederacy and also connected to the John Birch society in addition to some fringe militias. We hear little about this in the mainstream media – can you imagine the uproar if Obama was connected to some kind of fringe group such as this?

McCain/Palin are throwing more than the kitchen sink at Obama in a desperate attempt to invigorate the racist fringes of this country, somehow thinking that this strategy will lead them to victory. As a school teacher it appears to me that they believe a majority of Americans are uneducated and will look the other way as the policies of the republican party, supported by McCain 90% of the time are destroying both our military and our economy. Talk about a national security crisis! McCain is much more culpable in this meltdown of the financial sector of our nation than is being discussed publicly. Finally, Obama and/or his supporters are bringing the Keating Five scandal into the debate. McCain demonstrated, during that fiasco, that his mantra of “putting country first” is nothing but a bunch of hot air. He chose money in return for him pressuring authorities to look the other way as Charles Keating was stealing hundreds of millions through his Savings and Loan, leading to the previous government bailout of the banking industry less than 20 years ago. McCain’s participation in the deregulating of our banking industry is undeniable if one looks at the facts and his chief economic advisor, Phil Gramm – who called us a nation of whiners as both he and McCain stressed that our economy was “sound, led the charge that allowed for the greed of the banking system to overpower the ability of the Fed and the Bush administration to funnel “good money after bad.” We are all now in for a “ride” that looks as if it may be very unpleasant to say the least.

The good news is that I firmly believe the American public is not as stupid as McCain and Palin are counting on. Their insistence on one lying smear after another is going to backfire. They are trying to switch the topic from the issues on which they have no place to stand. The country is going bankrupt and their ideas and policy decisions have led us there (their economic ideas are bankrupt). There is no guarantee that Obama is the statesman that can pull us out of this downward spiral, but it is certain that McCain/Palin have no clue as to what needs to be done. The scary part of this is that the fringe base they are appealing to with this subtle racist rhetoric may be very dangerous. Remember that the Bush administration has pretty much thumbed their noses as to the idea that this is a nation of laws and they have set terrible precedents by refusing to answer supeonas and to cooperate with oversight investigations. Remember also, the republicans were in control of congress for the first six years of Bush’s administration and there were virtually no investigations of things like illegal wiretapping (wiretapping that we find every day was much more wide spread than initially feared), torture, treason (outing a CIA agent), and lying us into a war (among other things). Additionally, they have their own private army that is heavily armed (Blackwater). Losing this election may only slow them down and they have proven over the previous 8 years that there are no parameters as to what they might do to keep power.

This inciting of extremists on the right with racist rhetoric should be of concern to all law abiding (and God fearing) Americans. We are a nation that rose to a leadership position in the free world by projecting an image of “moral authority” that has been privately abused by republicans for the last 30 years. A large majority of Americans have no idea what these people have been up to. However, the rest of the world has caught on and they are about to classify us as a rogue nation. Should McCain prevail on November 4th, the crisis of confidence in this country will only accelerate from the standpoint of our supposed allies not to mention on both Wall Street and Main Street here at home. Europeans have one foot off the ship and they will complete the jump should we prove that our voting public is as stupid as McCain/Palin are hoping. Should Obama prevail, as I believe he will, the secret service and whoever else is given the job of protecting our leaders need to be working overtime. The republican faithful have been spewing hate with such intensity you have to believe there are a few sickos out there that may try to become infamous.

I have been voting for over 40 years and paying attention to politics since I was a kid and my Mom was for Stevenson and my Dad was for Eisenhower. I still remember Dwight D. Eisenhower warning the American public of the consequences of letting the “Military Industrial Complex” get out of control. In the first debate with Obama, McCain suggested a freeze on all parts of the economy except either military spending or the defense department, I can’t remember exactly how he stated it, but the message is clear – he is beholding to the military industrial complex. That would make sense because I have heard him referred to many times as a “war monger” and that is a hard generalization to refute based on his rhetoric. In a McCain administration, while everything else goes in the tank, the large defense contractors would flourish. The McCain/Palin message has become very focused of late. So, there are a couple things which seem to be “under the radar” and are somewhat incredible that have happened in the last few days. McCain/Palin are trying to imply that Obama is a Muslim by having surrogates repeatedly refer to him as “Barrack Hussein Obama,” and their racist attitudes are becoming more and more apparent (although not yet part of the mainstream debate) as they use coded language to remind the racists in this country that a N*%#@$ is about to win the White House. 40 years ago this kind of stuff wouldn’t have been so surprising to me – although just as disgusting then as now – it’s just that as I ponder the supposed gains we have made in my lifetime I keep thinking – Is this really happening?

Another night when my best intentions were to just go to bed and “let the sleeping dog lie.” Boy that saying brings alot of thoughts instantaneously to my mind. I listened to debate #2 in the car (well, part of it anyway) and I just have a few comments. First of all, I totally realize that Obama will have his hands full, almost beyond the imaginable, should he prevail on November 4th. Things are getting so bad that I can almost envision the scenario where he might want to lose, because the next president will inherit an unbelievable mess. I almost get the feeling that McCain would just go on acting as if nothing was wrong. There is no guarantee that Obama is going to be able to turn things around. I believe that one thing Bush has accomplished is to put America in a position where whatever lies ahead, it will be drastically different than what we’re used to. I’m just wondering if the republican attack dogs will blame the next four years on Obama or Clinton. And I’m wondering if we are really ready for “real change” because I believe “real change” is on the way whether we like it or not.

I just had to mention a couple of things regarding to debate #2 that I heard tonight (when I got home I watched a couple minutes of punditry, and of course the republican pundit thought McCain had won and the democratic pundit naturally thought Obama had won. That being said (of course in the 40 minutes I listened to, Obama seemed easily the winner – I was saying things like I can’t believe he said that to some of McCain’s comments), one thing McCain said that was unbelievable to me – and I’ll be very curious as to how it is picked up, if at all, during the post debate days by the so-called national media. I’m sure I heard McCain refer to Obama as “that one.” In the first debate he wouldn’t even look at Obama, and there are reports that in the senate he refuses to shake Obama’s hand. This is coming from a man who voted multiple times against a holiday for Martin Luther King Jr. It’s almost to me like McCain is saying “I can’t believe I’m losing this election to a N#@%*$! “That one” – if I heard him right, well if the American people don’t get the message from that – I don’t know what it will take. Maybe if McCain calls Obama “boy” during the next debate people will understand where this man is coming from. Ughhhh!!!!!!

Additionally, McCain has this condescending laugh and giggle when he responds to challenges from Obama that is even worse on the radio when you can’t see him. I can’t remember the exact topic, but there was a point in the debate where Obama clearly “stretched” the rules to respond to charges about Obama’s tax proposals by McCain (charges that have been debunked multiple times, but McCain continues to make them) and McCain responded something like “(giggle, giggle)I’ll answer your question (clearly trying to “slam” Obama for using an unrelated question to rebut McCain) and then he goes off on a Palin like tangent where he talks about something that is not germane to anything – if I remember correctly he had a canned response that interjected Ronald Reagan’s name into the debate – and his response was so ridiculous that I spent about 5 minutes shouting to no one, because I was alone in the car, “I can’t believe he said that.”

I have to believe that even those people who don’t understand why they “don’t trust Obama” are thinking they’re going to have to give trusting him a shot, because McCain is so bad. I honestly thought I’d never live long enough to see a politician that was worse than Bush/Cheney (take your pick) – but McCain makes Bush look like a statesman. If McCain wins even one state in November, the people of that state need to have their heads examined. As I’ve said before in other posts, we need the republican party. But Bush/Cheney in cohoots with Limbaugh, Gingrich, Hannity, et al were enough to threaten extinction for republicans (and really, for all of us too) – and McCain is like the icing on the cake. It could take them a couple of generations to recover from this. I’ve listened to some republicans from the bloc in the house who voted against the “bail out” bill and some of them sound like true conservatives and I admire them for “bucking” their leadership – so there is hope to keep a two party system where there are legitimate checks and balances. But the Bush/Cheney/McCain/Limbaugh/Hannity crew are one bad, selfish idea after another. I keep trying to listen to their point of view, and I’m really getting tired of saying over and over again, “I can’t believe he said that!”

I have so many thoughts going through my head I don’t know what to write about. I just know that I need to write or it’ll be another sleepless night. I want to start by saying in my last post I wrote about the vice presidential debate from the perspective of only listening to it on my car radio while I was heading home from the doctor’s office. Also, I only heard about half of the debate. Since then I have had the chance to see almost all of it on video and it was almost more than I could stomach. Especially after listening to John McCain at a rally shouting out something like, “Did you see Sarah Palin last night?” and as the republican crowd cheered, “How about that Sarah Palin!” and then one of those hideous giggles from McCain that would even put GW Bush to shame almost made me gag. And the republican audience he was speaking to just sucked it right up. We have big problems in this country! As one of McCain’s advisors said early on, “We’re going to make this campaign about personalities and not about issues.” As stupid as that statement seems, that is exactly what they’re doing and the republicans, starving for someone to cheer for, are doing the same thing they did in 2000 with GW. The fact that their candidates are incompetent seems to be irrelevent. You would think, considering the state of our country both economically and in its world standing, their own self-interests would lead them to want someone with a brain in the White House.

As I watched Palin winking at me as she answered something other than the question which had been posed, and doing so quite confidently (and repeatedly,I might add), I realized that she had been coached to just say anything and pretend like it’s meaningful no matter what was asked of her. And she had a quiver full of one liners that she shot out at random – like, “Say is aint so, Joe!” When I heard the references to “Joe six-pack,” “Hockey moms,” and other folksy bull s@#$ all the while with this unbelievable painted on smile, I realized that she was the perfect candidate to run with McCain. She might be new to the ticket, but she’s an expert at looking you in the eye and shamelessly lying, in a way that should make GW proud. Also, she definitely draws a crowd. The so-called republican base who got energized because she is definitely anti-abortion are coming out in droves and the democrats and independents are looking on, I think, just to see if what they’ve been hearing about someone completely incompetent running for vice president could possibly be true. Well, it is true and it is a bit scary thinking that the republicans have stolen two elections and knowing that if they pulled it off twice, they could do it again. That is why, to me, this election has to be anti-republican. We need two parties, but the only republicans I would consider voting for would be the ones who reject the Bush doctrine – both internationally and domestically.

The good news in that regard is that there seems to be a solid group of “conservative” republicans in the house that are willing to reject Bush and hopefully McCain/Palin. At least on the Wall Street bailout bill there were over 100 who voted against Bush/Paulson/Cheney/McCain (and I’m sorry to say Obama) along with about 60 democrats. With the economy in the shape its in, I can’t imagine why anyone would consider voting for McCain/Palin. Neither one has a clue about what is going on and we would end up with the likes of Phil Gramm and associates running the economy should McCain succeed in stealing this election. This bailout bill is just one more example of how low McCain will go. First he “suspended” his campaign so that he could return to Washington and “solve” the crisis. The result of that was the first plan (which he hadn’t read) falling apart. He even took credit for getting the republicans “onboard” before the original vote when they banded together to defeat Paulson’s initial proposal. He then supported the modified version that passed only because a bunch of “pork,” you know the earmarks he so detests, was added to the bill to “persuade” enough of the no votes to change their mind. I haven’t heard any commentary on the irony of that.

On top of his self-centered and disengenuous claims about his role in the economic crisis (that he helped create along with a plethora of republicans who believe that the government is the enemy) he continues to claim responsibility for the so-called surge in Iraq, which he says is leading us to “victory” in that occupation. Of course, he had nothing to do with the surge, other than the role of cheerleader because the thought of accepting that we made a huge mistake, like we ultimately had to do in Viet Nam, is unacceptable to him no matter if Iraq bankrupts our country and no matter how many more troops have to die for Bush’s blunder. Due to our economy being in meltdown the Iraq “war” has made it to the back pages of any newspaper that is still paying attention. Therefore, the public is pretty much unaware of anything that is going on over there. The thought of a hot head like McCain (he is really showing what a grumpy, tempermental “dude” he is as the campaign unfolds) and an air head like Palin (I appoligize to all my female friends for that last characterization, but I’m calling it as I see it) in charge of this war and the destabilized world that Bush has created should scare even the most rabid of republicans, let alone the rest of us.

The reduction of violence in Iraq, as far as I can tell, is the result of two distinct things, neither one of them related to the surge. First, in around August of 2006 (approximately one year prior to the surge troops being deployed) the Americans started arming and paying Iraqi Sunni’s to take the fight to Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia. These were insurgents who had been killing American troops and now their attention was diverted to Al Qaeda. Secondly, somewhere around the end of 2006 Moqtada al Sadr ordered his Mehdi army to cease fire. The Iraqi government temporarily went after Sadr’s forces in Southern Iraq after the surge troops were in place, only to be soundly defeated, causing them to initiate a “cease fire” to a conflict that they had started. Whether the US, along with the Maliki government, like it or not, Moqtada al Sadr has a following of somewhere close to 2 million Iraqi’s or more. This lull in violence is very likely temporary.

As I’ve written previously, I believe it is a bit naive to expect these Sunni tribes to lay down their arms and accept a government ruled by Shia who are bitter enemies and want nothing more than revenge against those who supported Saddam Hussein for all those years and have so much Shia blood on their hands. If the US stops paying these “Awakening” Iraqis – again, they were killing Americans before we bought them off – I find it hard to believe they are going to just lay down the arms we gave them and go away. To me, it’s kind of like Bush’s management of our economy, just hoping that over time some miracle happens and they all live peacefully “ever after.” Additionally, Sadr is in Iran and within three years, by the accounts I’ve read, will attain the designation (I’m not sure if that’s the correct word) of Grand Ayatolla. I have no doubt that his intention is to return to Iraq after the US leaves (or before if McCain should somehow win the election) with the ultimate goal to institute a Shia led theocracy similar to Iran. Of course, when this happens, if the “battle” with the Sunni’s that we have armed to the teeth hasn’t happened yet, it will probably happen then. The ultimate result of Bush’s misadventure into Iraq will be a Iraq/Iran coalition that will totally tip the balance of power in the middle east away from the US’s interests.

We can’t afford “more of the same.” We can’t afford McCain/Palin in the White House. Even republicans should be able to see this. There are so many other reasons why, but trying to fix the problem in Iraq/Afganistan/Pakistan will require a completely different approach to our foreign policy. There is hope if Obama is elected, but he is going to have to be willing to make some tough decisions and he is going to have to act like a statesman. Returning the moral authority of our nation needs to be a top priority. He will have to be doing this while, at the same time, taking extreme steps to restore the fundamentals of our economy. He is going to have to be willing to challenge the American people to sacrifice. This idea that we just keep “cutting taxes” has to be debunked. The trickle down economists have brought us to the brink of bankruptcy as a nation and on top of that, Bush has nearly destroyed our military along with our standing in the world.

As I listened and watched Palin the other night, I thought maybe these people don’t “get” how bad things are. How could they possibly think that Sarah Palin has any idea how to solve these major problems. She couldn’t even connect the script she was given with the right questions. When she answered the question about what the McCain/Palin administration would cut due to the money spent on the Wall Street bailout with an answer about how she was an expert on energy and how Alaska had a lot of oil, or something of that sort, I actually shuddered. I hoestly can’t even believe that I’m having this discussion. The republican party, starting with Reagan and then with the two Bushes, along with a little help from Clinton (he went along with a lot of deregulating) have driven this country to the verge of bankruptcy. And the nomination of McCain/Palin in the face of all these crises has proved that the Republican Party is bankrupt.

Tonight I was at one of my many doctor’s appointments which was pretty typical. The appointment was for 4:45 and the doctor entered the room almost an hour later. Now, I don’t want to leave the wrong impression. This doctor has been a godsend to me. I gladly wait, because the reason you wait is because he genuinely cares about his patients and he takes the time necessary to treat them. As I wait for him I know that somebody else is getting everything they need without regard for what time it is. I also know that I will get his full attention when he is in the room with me and I greatly admire him for that. Additionally, I know that when he “fixes” something he does it expertly and just as I try to treat each student in my class according to their needs, he does the same thing. Considering I have had situations where a doctor was casual and careless, this is more re-assuring to me than I can put into words. I only bring this up because the result of my leaving his office after 6:00 tonight was that I listened to the vice-presidential debate in my car instead of watching it.

Listening to the debate really made it more interesting, I believe. I could only imagine the body language of the participants based on the tone of their answers. Prior to the debate, I had read in several sources that it would be a mistake for the democrats to underestimate Sarah Palin. As I think back to what I heard, several thoughts come to mind. First, it really sounded as if the moderator was a bit frustrated by the debators unwillingness to directly address the questions. Also, it seemed like the debators must have had some idea of what the questions would be because almost all of the answers from both of them seemed a bit too “canned.” Finally, my sense was that the republicans would be shouting for joy because Palin did not seem to make obvious blunders, as have been evident in the couple of interviews she’s submitted to prior to this evening’s event. What will be interesting will be how the answers are debunked post debate and whether or not a vice presidential debate actually means anything anyway.

I have heard reports, again from multiple sources, that McCain has exhibited stroke like symptoms on at least one and maybe more occasions of late. Of course, it that is true then it makes Palin’s responses that much more important. One thing I noticed was that she seemed to want to answer most of the questions posed to her while I was driving with answers relating to energy. She seems to be portraying herself as an expert on energy, doing this while expousing McCain’s energy policy that he put forth in the Saddleback interview; drill, drill, drill! I find it interesting that the public must have fallen for that one because the dems have pretty much caved on the issue – tonight Biden said something like, “of course, drilling is important.” Following that up with what I’ve found to be the consensus folly of that argument that any drilling will produce results in a minimum of ten years and the amount of oil will go onto the world market and hardly make a dent in what we are paying at the pump. Of course, if we fall for the drill, drill, drill approach that will just put off our transition to “clean” energy that much more. It would be refreshing to me to hear someone say Bull S#@* to that approach without worrying how many votes it will cost. Just call it what it is.

I really wasn’t that impressed with Biden’s debating prowess when he was running for president in the early primary season, and he did nothing tonight to make me feel any different. He had the opportunity to look into the cameras and say to the American people that McCain has supported Bush 90% of the time and look at where that has gotten us. Depite their rhetoric of being “change agents” their election to the White House will guarantee more of the same irresponsible economic policy and virtually isolate us from the rest of the world – which is watching this election closely. There is a plethora of evidence that if McCain wins this election our economic standing in the world is in serious danger. That is not to say that significant change must be made should Obama win, but he will get a period of grace that the European countries, the Asian countries, and the Middle Eastern countries won’t give to McCain. The dollar is in jeopardy as the world’s exchange currency. Now, I don’t profess to be an economist, but the things I’ve read about what will be the result of the Euro taking the place of the dollar is a bit sobering.

One way or the other, we are in for change. The idea that we can just go on borrowing our way out of every crisis has finally reached the dead end road. Palin continued the republican mantra of tax breaks for the upper echelon of Americans as “vital” to our economy and therefore to our national security, and I was totally disappointed that Biden had no significant rebuttal to that ridiculous claim. If we can’t convince Americans that the “trickle down” philosophy is empty at this point, then we aren’t very good debators. Recently, I’ve even talked to several republicans who are fed up and are going to vote for Obama. It was almost like Biden didn’t want to offend anyone. We not only need to offend some people, we need to hold them accountable.

Also, so far in the the campaign and also in this debate, I’m not hearing much as to the importance of restoring our constitution and holding those who have violated it responsible for their actions. Now, I didn’t hear the entire debate tonight, but it would have been refreshing to hear the two candidates positions on torture and whether or not Bush administration officials should be investigated for violating the Genevea conventions, I didn’t hear anything about the violations of the FISA bill. Would Palin support criminal prosecution of anyone found violating American’s right of privacy under that law. Should the politicization of the justice department be investigated and should members of the executive branch be allowed to ignore supeonas? I would have liked to hear why Palin encouraged members of her own staff, including her husband, to ignore supeonas in Alaska. It would be interesting to hear her legal justification for such actions – she would probably answer by going into a diatribe about how she is an expert on energy.

After listening to this debate I have to say that I hope neither of these two politicians ever become president. The stark reality is that Palin would be the most likely to be put in that spot should McCain prevail in November. I hope Americans think their vote through clearly prior to casting it. Tonight, probably the main thrust of Palin’s performance was a continual kind of dumbing down of her rhetoric, I suppose with the idea to appeal to the people she referred to as “Joe Sixpack.” She sounded about as far from “Presidential” as I can imagine someone in that position could sound. The thought of Sarah Palin as MY PRESIDENT makes my stomach quiver. It’s not really her fault – even though she is obviously overly-ambitious – McCain picked her. McCain is gambling that the American public and especially American women are stupid. I sincerely hope that John McCain loses his gamble!