I’m still following the investigation and public commentary relating to the shooting at Fort Hood last week.  The shooter survived and is recovering in a hospital bed (I’m guessing much to his chagrine) and the accusations being thrown around are pretty wild, although they seem to be calming down the more that comes out.  As mentioned in my last posting, Rush Limbaugh was quick to attempt putting the blame on President Obama, as he does for everything he sees as a possible negative – and he even tried to bring the good Reverend Wright back into the picture.  Joe Lieberman immediately wanted to imply that there had been a terrorist attack on “Obama’s watch,” presumably to make himself and all the other neo-cons out there feel better about the FACT that the WORST attack in the history of America happened on Bush/Cheney’s watch.  What’s interesting, and what might be behind these people quieting down a bit, is that as the information grows it becomes more apparent that if this was “terrorist related,” it was the Bush administration who should have removed this guy who was promoted to Major – under their watch – from the active military.

And, all this information just goes to show that the illegal wiretapping that has become common place in America isn’t so effective – considering that one branch of our intelligence service doesn’t know what the other branches are doing – THE SAME THING THAT ARGUABLY ALLOWED 9/11 TO HAPPEN!  When Limbaugh and Lieberman and Hannity and the rest of the right wing whackos point out that the shooter was communicating via email with the Imam of the very Mosque where the 9/11 highjackers met, they are virtually making the point I’ve  been harping on for almost a year.  The 9/11 highjackers had their phones tapped well before the attacks, but our different agencies like the NSA and the FBI don’t communicate with each other.  THEY, UNBELIEVABLY, DON’T SHARE INFORMATION!  They didn’t do this  before 9/11, and OBVIOUSLY they didn’t learn anything because now we’re hearing they had enough info on Major Hasan for several people involved to call him an “extremist” that “you wouldn’t want to be caught in a foxhole with.”  And, the guy was about to be deployed to either Iraq or Afganistan.  This information came to light during the last year of the Bush administration and the only thing that is obvious from all this is that they hadn’t fixed the problem which led to 9/11 six years after the fact.

Whether the problem still exists 10 months into Obama’s Presidency is somewhat a moot point as far as this incident is concerned.  The reality is that if Lieberman, Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly, Savage, and the rest of them want to call this a terrorist attack and find blame, they’re going to have to go back to all the information which was overlooked on this man which CLEARLY happened on Bush’s “watch.”  So, if the Commander in Chief is responsible for all the actions of his/her (I’m presuming that at some point a woman might become President – boy wouldn’t that set these haters off, especially if it was a Democrat) surrogates, then THIS IS BUSH’S FAULT!  Personally, I in no way want to blame Bush for this attack, I just want to point out how ridiculous people like Limbaugh and Lieberman are.  I wish they’d just go away.  I’m seeing Lieberman as someone who has, presumably, desires to make a lot of money outside of politics because he’ll never get re-elected, so I wish he’d just resign from the Senate and let the voters of Connecticuit correct the mistake they made when they voted him in over Ned Lamont.  This nation would be in a lot less turmoil with Lamont in the Senate right now – and the people in Connecticuit would be a lot better off also, unless they all work for insurance companies.

With a little leadership maybe something good will come from this tragedy.  Like getting the FBI, the NSA (as long as they’re going to keep data mining our emails), the CIA, the military intelligence people, and the homeland security people to combine their data bases and work together on information regarding people considered possible extremists such as Major Hasan.  What we don’t need is the stereotypical attack – this time on Muslims (again: re – 9/11) – based on fear as America has become famous for.  We definitely need to protect our borders and our people as best we can, but we can’t allow ourselves to succumb to fear whenever something like this happens.  It does seem a bit ridiculous to me that the flaws in the system haven’t been addressed since 9/11, but that’s just me – I would want the various agencies talking to one another if it was up to me.

My wife gets many of the right wing emails going around that are part of the anti-Obama conspiracy fueled by overt racists who hate the idea of a Black man as President.  Yesterday I got two “anti-Muslim” emails forwarded to me because two “devout Muslims” were appointed to positions in Obama’s administration by Janet Napolitano who is the head of Homeland security – and the right wing racist whackos jumped on that as an attempt to scare the unsuspecting into thinking Obama’s “not keeping us safe.”  The implication was that “the fox is in charge of the henhouse.”  One of the emails quoted an anti-Michelle Obama article from “The Canada Free Press” and the final caption said something like “even the Canadians can see what’s wrong in our White House.”  Well, a little research (WHICH NONE OF THESE PEOPLE WHO PERPETUATE AND/OR RECEIVE THESE HATE EMAILS EVER DO) showed that the “Canada Free Press” was nothing more than an Obama hate site which isn’t even – evidently – from Canada. 

The first thing I saw when accessing the site was the Obama countdown clock to the end of his Presidency.  I, personally, don’t have a problem with the clock – I remember many of them for Bush from the “other side of the isle,” what bothers me is the PERPETUAL dishonesty of everyone who seems willing to see America go down, as long as Obama “fails,” as Limbaugh so succinctly put it.  The two men referenced in the other email turned out to be quite distinguished – and quite loyal Americans, one of them recently a senior advisor to the Attorney General in the Bush administration – a much more significant position to the one he has now in Obama’s administration (Obama has appointed many Republicans to his administration contrary to the Republican loyalty oath required of the Bush White House) – the originator of the email was implying that no Muslim should be allowed to work for our government.  Of course the email didn’t point that out – it was simply trying to get people who look no further than the heading or the dishonest comment to believe that President Obama is employing devout Muslims at a time when another Muslim just murdered 13 of our troops and that this is dangerous.  This kind of crap is getting out of hand.  The people writing all these emails are empowered and enabled by the neo-cons who are out front spreading the lies like Limbaugh and Lieberman were before anything about the shooter was known after this horrible trajedy at Fort Hood.  If the American people are smart, Rush Limbaugh’s and Joe Lieberman’s attempts to undermine Barack Obama will only lead to further decline in the Republican party!

I’ve read with horror for the past few days about the 13 soldiers killed and the 38 wounded at Fort Hood in Texas, presumably the Army’s last bastion before sending our troops off to Afganistan or Iraq for the umpteenth tour of duty while the rest of America argues about health care. There is much to learn about the shooter, but some of the comentary since the shooting is UNFORTUNATELY predictable. Of course, Joe Lieberman couldn’t stay out of the fray – he’s trying to really prove that he’s a neo-con Republican who’s pulled off the coup of coups by holding down a committee chairmanship in the “good ole boys Senate” which has a near 60 vote Democratic caucus. When he was not held to account for his backstabbing of President Obama during the campaign and his support of the Republican duo of McCain/Palin – I mean, can you even imagine where we’d be with John McCain at the helm (he would have thought the economy was on sound footing as he took the oath of office) – I knew RIGHT THEN we were in trouble and that President Obama wasn’t what a lot of us thought him to be. Just on general principles the Democrats should have run Lieberman out of the party – but, of course, no one in Washington (with the exception of Bernie Sanders and Dennis Kuchinich and maybe Alan Grayson) has “general principles.” The shooter in Texas was still in a coma with authorities trying to piece together a motive, and yet, it didn’t take Lieberman more than a day or two to start crowing that “the second worst terrorist attack” on American soil had happened (which was absurd for more than one reason) and to begin the Muslim extremist rhetoric designed to rile up all the right wing neo-facists in our country who hate the President (and hate Muslims).

And, of course, the first one in line – AS ALWAYS – was the liar of liars, Rush Limbaugh who blamed the attacks on President Obama. Limbaugh is so obsessed with blaming every possible thing he can come up with on Obama that he tied the shooter into the Reverend Wright controversy of the Presidencial campaign. This guy is worst than a blowhard because he actually has managed to get a bunch of “ditto heads” out there to believe what he says is true. He’s part of the propoganda campaign that’s been part of the Republican mantra since the late seventies or early eighties where they’ve been playing against vulnerable people’s fears to scare them into thinking Republicans actually are the party which would “keep us safe.” All the while these people are trampling on personal freedoms as if the Constitution is just a worthless piece of paper. Obama deserves fair criticism, but how can you give it to him in the present atmosphere in Washington? In fact, just last week, I watched in amazement as John Boehner, the minority (Republican) leader of the House of Representatives, stood on the Capital steps in front of a bussed in crowd of racist Obama haters (about 4000 strong that the right wing of the Republican party pulled out of the backwoods somewhere), held up what he called his pocket version of the Constitution as if to read from it, and then quoted the Declaration of Independence. I immediately thought, this confirms my suspicions, THESE RIGHT WING REPUBLICANS ARE IDIOTS!

These people can’t even give a little space to the relatives of all the victims of this horrible shooting while the Army “Brass” sorts out the details and deals with the perpetrator. They are going to take every opportunity to create division in America so that they won’t be looking at a generation of being in the minority of American politics. It’s clear they’ve decided that the only way for themselves to have a chance is by playing the fear card. I’m sure they’re frothing at the mouth to try to place a terrorist attack on “Obama’s watch.” What you won’t get from these thugs as they try to convince you that they support our troops is any kind of compassionate look into what our troops are enduring. They would like everyone to think that life is hunky dory in America’s military. Well, if you believe that I’ve got the perverbial bridge to sell you. You don’t have to look very hard to see past their nonsense.

First of all, most of our regular Army (and reserves) has had multiple tours of duty in Iraq and/or Afganistan. This isn’t like a year in Hawaii. Combat duty in Iraq or Afganistan has to be like Hell on earth. Every moment of every day you must have to wonder if your time is coming. And, it’s unimaginable to me what these troops are being asked to endure as far as the killing of Iraqi’s and of their own comrades. Something like one in four is coming home with PTSD – and that’s only because the military is, JUST AS THEY DID AFTER TROOPS RETURNED HOME FROM VIET NAM, doing everything in their power to discourage soldiers from seeking medical assistance. The stories of medical treatment for our troops if and when they return home is deplorable. For a time, the conditions at Walter Reed were made public, but the outcry was no more than a whimper because the Bush administration, at the time, had a stranglehold on the media’s coverage. I’m still hearing stories of soldiers waiting nearly a year to get medical treatment when they return, and by the time they get the treatment, they’re soon to be redeployed. I’ve personally heard of soldiers serving five or six tours of duty in either Iraq or Afganistan. THAT’S IN SEVEN (PLUS) YEARS! Aside from how inhumane that is, there’s barely time for some of them to get any downtime.

Is it any wonder that the suicide rate among Iraq/Afganistan vets is skyrocketing – DO WE HEAR NEWS STORIES ABOUT THAT? And, what about the divorce rate? Or the violence committed by returning vets? Or the homeless vets? I’ve heard of reserves going for 15 month tours and coming home to a job that doesn’t exist anymore and they’re then facing unemployment. There’s no way I’m going to justify in ANY WAY what the shooter did at Fort Hood, but the more information that comes out should alert people that we have a HUGE problem with our military. We’ve been warned by EXPERTS for years now that our troops are STRETCHED THIN, but – between our politicians (who have no guts) and our Generals (who expect every soldier to fight to the death, even if the civilian leaders have blundered us into a mess – like Iraq via Bush/Cheney) – we seem to be willing to keep pushing until something breaks. And, if these wars were worth it you would have the general population WILLINGLY supporting every effort these brave troops are making.

But, it’s obvious that the population is not supporting these wars – except for their double speak – ESPECIALLY THE REPUBLICANS. I mean, when do you cut taxes and then send America’s finest to battle with less than what they need? The answer to that question SHOULD BE NEVER, but as we all know, that is the scenario of the Iraq fiasco. President Bush was once asked how the American people could sacrifice for the troops (I saw this interview with my own unbelieving eyes) and he answered, “KEEP SHOPPING.” I almost fell off my chair when I heard him do this. And, the worse thing was that there was hardly a whimper from the media. I honestly don’t know to this day how many Americans actually know he said that. It was well known that our troops were hitting IED’s (Improvised Explosive devices) with their vehicles and getting killed because the vehicles were not properly armored! This was part of the news, but the people still voted Bush/Cheney back into office (well, that is according to the rigged voting machines in Ohio).

I just finished reading “American Fascists” by Chris Hedges which documents the “Christian Right’s” attempt to take over the Republican party and create a totalitarian “Theocracy” in America. As a member of what I guess I’ll have to call the Christian Left, I’ll have a lot more to say about that book and that movement later – it’s a real eye-opener if you’re looking for an interesting read. Essentially these people, and the present Republican party is filled with them – people who think tolerance is intolerable. Some of the most famous of the national Christian leaders, unbeknownst to most people I know, have ties to the Ku Klux Klan, the John Birch Society and other radical racist right wing movements. Of course, that shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone who’s been researching the recent past of our leaders associated with the Bush/Cheney White House. These people were/are planning on a “permanent Republican ‘majority,'” which would remain in power ad infinitum through a stranglehold of the media, the Congress, the Courts, and the White House (which is why they are so desperate to “help” President Obama fail – his success would totally ruin any chance of them fulfilling this plan). They are a combination of Corporate heads, Right Wing fundamentalist Mega Church leaders, and politicians with ABSOLUTELY no scruples – and they have a long line of groups of people they hate (Blacks, homosexuals, and Muslims are at the top of the hate list – oh yes, Democrats!) Their goal is power at all costs, and when they tell you something, usually the opposite is true (I could go on and on about that, but – again – a story for another night). What you need to understand tonight is when they tell you they’re supporting our troops – well, you know what I’m going to say about that.

While those at the head of the line in the Republican party are profiting off of our troops instead of supporting them, unfortunately the Democratic party is pretty much living up to the definition given them by these Republicans: WEAK! They are living up to this “slam” by writing a health care bill that will provide a huge influx of new customers to the health insurance companies who are gleaning BILLIONS from the system and who are the problem by making excuses that their 80 vote majority in the House isn’t enough to pass a bill that would be what the people actually want – while at the same time continuing “Bush’s” wars. The voters voted in the Democrats in 2006 to actually “do what’s best for our troops” then – and they’re still in Iraq, at almost the levels “pre-surge.” Total withdrawal will leave somewhere between 50,000 and 75,000 “non-combat” troops in Iraq while we ramp up Afganistan so that we can keep deploying our brave soldiers endlessly. We really don’t have politicians in Washington who have the guts to “do what’s best for our troops.” Everyone knows that Iraq was a TOTAL FIASCO, but – just as in Viet Nam – we MUST continue losing soldiers and ruining the lives of the ones who survive SO THAT OUR POLITICIANS CAN SAVE “FACE.” Well, I’ve got news for anyone who reads this post, it’s too late to save face. Through our invasion of a soveriegn nation which had nothing to do with 9/11, torture, and alliances with the worst regimes in the Middle East and Central Asia, we have demonstrated to the rest of the world that we’ve become a rogue nation. At some point our leaders need to decide if Iraq and Afganistan are more important than our own military (not to mention our economy – bin Laden couldn’t have planned this any better himself). Fort Hood should cause us to ask: Are we supporting our troops or destroying our troops?

The past few days I’ve been listening and/or watching many “pundits” analyze the recent elections with, seemingly, always an attempt to connect the results, one way or the other, to President Obama.  This just seems to be the way in America anymore.  Instead of focusing on getting it “right” regarding solutions to all of the problems President Obama inherited from the utterly incompetent Republicans before him, it seems everyone – including the members of Congress who are screwing things up so badly – already have an eye on the midterm elections of 2010 and the Presidential election in 2012.  I keep wondering, “When will we allow (and expect) our leaders to perform without always having an eye on the next election?”

It doesn’t take a lot of thought or research to see the folly in the present way of “doing business.”  I’m not wanting my thoughts tonight to drift into an extensive discussion of the health care debate presently “raging.” but just the thought that the insurance industry is spending over one million dollars PER DAY to defeat reform, should be the main topic of discussion regarding this legislation, in my view.  This is open BRIBERY of our elected officials – and we, the voters, seem all too willing to accept it as “business as usual.”  This is disgusting to me.  Where do people think all this money is going?  And, why isn’t there more discussion as to the FACT that if the health care industry can spend a half a BILLION dollars to prevent reform – THEY’RE MAKING TOO MUCH MONEY?  In all of this: the health care debate, the virtual ignoring of two occupations costing the US billions EACH WEEK, Congressional leaders standing on the Capital steps with “birthers” and “deathers” carrying racist signs regarding our President calling for “revolution,” and a media that seems totally focused on creating as much division in our country as possible (creates ratings I guess) I’ve listened in the past few days to one “report card” after another on our President’s performance in his first TEN MONTHS in office.

So, I’ve decided to give my own “report card” on our President (the first President I’ve enthusiastically voted for in my adult lifetime – I’ve been following politics since the days of JFK – and voting since the first term of Richard Nixon).  I’m a sixth grade school teacher and in our school district progress reports give the teachers the following options for mid-term grades: doing excellent work, doing good work, doing adequate work, needs to improve, may fail, is likely to fail.  I’m going to use the same criterion in weighing in on Obama’s performance thus far in his Presidency.  For most teachers these categories align sequentially with the A,B,C,D,F grades that are given at the end of the term.  For me, however, the category “needs to improve” can apply to any student who I feel isn’t working up to their ability level.  In other words a student could end the term with an “A” in my classroom and still get a “needs to improve” as a progress report “grade.”  That being said, it might be fairly obvious that my grade for President Obama up to this point would be “needs to improve.”

I’ve consciously tried, of late, to focus my criticisms on this site as much toward Republicans as I can, although I’ve been clear since before Obama took office that I would not be a “rubber stamp” as the Republicans were – to all our detriment – during the Bush/Cheney administration.  There is no doubt in my mind that Obama was the FAR BETTER CHOICE during the previous election – can you even imagine Sarah Palin as Vice President, a heart beat from the Oval office (with a President having a history of cancer and being in his mid-seventies)? – and I, for one, am adamant that I want our President to succeed (in all honesty, I wanted Bush to succeed – simply put, HE DIDN’T).  Additionally, most of what Obama says and much of what he’s trying to do I heartily endorse.  However, so far, President Obama seems far more the “consummate politician” as opposed to the courageous statesman that I was hoping for when I voted for him.  I don’t in any way want to be “piling on” with Republicans who are opposed to EVERYTHING Obama does, I just feel there are some things that should be “going down” differently.

I “get” him trying to be the President of “all Americans” as he put it on the evening of his election.  I just think he’s trying too hard to appeal to the moderates out there (often times, I put myself in that category).  From a political point of view that may be the less risky path if getting re-elected is your main goal, and the reality is that the Republican party is imploding right before our eyes – possibly allowing Obama to feel more comfortable in looking away from those of us in his “base” who were expecting a clean break from the “atrocities” of the Bush/Cheney vendetta on America, but I expected our President to fulfill his promises – even though, in America, we’ve come to expect politicians not to fulfill their promises – this was part of the “change” I thought I could believe in.  In my humble opinion, that’s not necessarily happening, which is why I give him a very cautious grade.

I’ve already pointed out on this site that Obama’s refusal to allow investigations of the criminal behavior of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Gonzales/Rove/Addington and others is a “deal breaker” for me.  That is, I’ve stopped sending money to Obama and I’m not intending to vote for him (although I continue to strongly “root” for his success).  I believe this is a MONSTROUS mistake which will have lasting NEGATIVE effect on this nation in the years ahead.  In essence, President Obama has – by “looking ahead” – endorsed the position Nixon took after the Watergate breakins that “if the President does it, it must be legal.”  I have no idea how a constitutional scholar could come to that conclusion, but he’s even managed to stave off investigations in the Senate from Leahy’s judicial committee and in the House from John Conyers judicial committee.  The end result is that our former President and his VP both ADMITTED TO AUTHORIZING TORTURE on national TV and have been essentially “enabled” by Obama’s decision.  Just writing about this makes me sick to my stomach.  The last time I was solicited for money I wrote a handwritten 3 page letter to the President pointing out my frustration with this action on his part and, of course, I’ll get no response and they will continue with the attitude that “who else would he vote for, a Republican? I don’t think so.

Well, they’re correct that I won’t vote for a Republican under the present and forseeable future of that party, but I believe they are taking a calculated risk that enough Democratic leaning independents (like myself) won’t “abandon ship” to cause them to lose in 2012.  As I stated earlier, TOTAL POLITICS! The RIGHT thing to do would be to honor our legal system, our constitution, his pledge to uphold the constitution when taking the oath of office, the supposed FACT this is a nation of laws and not men, and his PLEDGE in the campaign that if there is evidence of lawbreaking there would be justice and that “NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW” in America.  I’ve stated this before several times on this site, but if Obama’s “looking forward and not backward” precedent was applied to all Americans there would never be a person convicted of a crime again in this nation.  YOU HAVE TO LOOK BACK – because the investigation HAS TO TAKE PLACE AFTER the crime has been committed.  And, President Obama’s reluctance to do this makes me wonder what is HE authorizing?  I’ve heard that “rendition” is still an accepted part of his administration.  Well, all that means is “enemy combatants” are being tortured in other countries and by non-Americans.  The result is the same.  And, what about the wiretapping policy of Bush?  President Obama’s Justice Department is defending the Bush position in Court.  Is it possible that he’s continuing the data mining of our phone calls and emails that was going on during the Bush years?  He voted for the FISA legislation which allowed the Telecoms to get away with enabling the FISA abuses of the Bush administration and we haven’t seen his promised action to “fix” that bill yet, either.

There’s another area that I believe is a vulnerability for Obama.  Concerning the famous saying “it’s the economy, stupid” in regard to what wins and loses elections I’m very concerned about some of the direction I’ve seen from the Obama administration regarding the economy.  As I stated at the time, I felt the “stimulus bill” was flawed from the beginning because it was too small (considering the gravity of the situation when Obama took office) and there were unnecessary tax cuts for those of us who still had jobs with not nearly enough money designated for infrastructure rebuilding – ie job creation.  And, members of Obama’s administration are talking about the lagging job market in the “SAME OLD” terms I’ve been listening to for the past 50 years – every time there’s a recession.  This leads me to believe that we are getting more of the same as far as the economy is concerned.  To me, Timothy Geithner and Larry Summers don’t represent the “change we can believe in.”  I realize the TARP bailout program for the banks was initiated under Bush and the problem was totally exacerbated by Bush’s economic nightmare which was imposed on us for eight years, but I’ve seen little to make me believe there’s going to be actual reeling in of Wall Street with tight regulations of the financial institutions who threatened our economy and very likely will do so again.  The bankers on Wall Street, from what I’ve observed, have put an exclamation point on the FACT that their bonuses and exhorbitant salaries are far more important to them than the economic health of this nation.

I honestly expected President Obama to have the courage to revoke the RIDICULOUS Bush tax cuts for the wealthy in this nation which fueled the huge deficits of the previous 8 years, upon taking the reins of the government.  Instead, it appears he’s going to allow them to expire – TAKING THE EASY, NON CONTROVERSIAL WAY OUT!  To me, that’s a symptom of the problem.  And, everyone knows that the corporations of America are shielding TRILLIONS of dollars from taxes in places like the Cayman Islands where bankers conspire with rich Americans to cheat our tax system out of BILLIONS UPON BILLIONS of dollars – for pure greed!  These corporations are making obscene profits, they are benefitting the MOST from our government’s services – in some instances receiving millions or billions in government subsidies, yet they do everything in their power to avoid paying their “FAIR SHARE” in taxes.  Of course, most of these corporations are heavily indebting the Republicans in Congress who continue to rail against taxes as their main source of support in continuing this reverse Robin Hood policy, but I’ve seen little from Obama’s administration aimed at correcting this HUGE problem!  (remember, the deficit was 1.4 TRILLION dollars that Obama inherited – if that doesn’t give him the grounds to go after these “tax havens” it will never happen)  Unless something changes drastically, the stranglehold on our government by the “multi-national” corporations won’t end any time soon.

Finally, the occupations of Iraq and Afganistan.  Recently, I’ve written several posts regarding Obama’s impending decision on the “course of action” for Afganistan.  There can be no doubt that Afganistan/Pakistan is the BIGGEST problem left for Obama to solve by the Bush administration.  Essentially, Bush/Cheney combined ignorance with ignoring to leave Afganistan as a borderline “failed state” with a population who are sick of Americans occupying their country and a government that is corrupt and dependent on the drug trade for survival.  On top of that, both the Taliban and al Qaeda are “alive and well” operating out of Pakistan and reconstituted, to a significant degree, from the funds Bush/Cheney sent to Pakistan propping up Pervez Musharraf, the Pakistani dictator who was a known supporter of both the Taliban and al Qaeda prior to (and after) 9/11.  While I believe we would be better off getting ALL our troops out of both Afganistan and Iraq, I’m not even hopeful at this point.  I believe President Obama will accede to the wishes of the Generals who want an additional 40,000 troops in Afganistan (at least partially) and, by the time Obama’s most ardent supporters get their focus back on Iraq, I believe he could lose a lot of support from both fiascos.

Not only are our troops still in Iraq, at essentially the pre “surge” levels, but Obama has taken the same approach to Iraq that he took to the tax cuts.  He’s simply letting Bush’s policies “play out.”  With the exception that Obama’s planning on a force of upwards of 75,000 “non-combat” troops in Iraq INDEFINITELY!  This is close to as much of a deal breaker as the “looking forward” policy is for me.  One of the main reasons I voted for President Obama was that he assured me he would bring ALL THE TROOPS home from Iraq within 16 months of taking office.  Now, he’s conveniently “honoring” the troop removal agreement Bush/Cheney made with the Iraqi’s which will get the troops out by, supposedly, the end of August of 2010.  Well, first of all, that will be 20 months – which, I suppose, would be grudgingly acceptable, IF ALL THE TROOPS WERE COMING HOME.  But, they’re not.  In fact, less than half of them are coming home.  If you read Thomas Rick’s Book “The Gamble” you will understand that our Generals feel it will take a generation to appease the “rift” between the Shia and Sunni which will “explode” if we remove all our troops – so, Obama is planning to label about 75,000 of our troops as “non-combat” so that he can claim “all of our combat troops have been removed.”  This disgusts me, and I truly hope that I have this one wrong – but, everything I can find tells me this is the best we can hope for.  This is disengenuous at best.   Obama is risking his relationship with a large number of his base on his Iraq/Afganistan continuance of the Bush policies.  He acts like he doesn’t want confrontation with the people who we voted him into office to confront!

In summary, President Obama has attempted to avoid conflict by enabling the criminal activity of the Bush administration to go without investigation, he’s supporting Bush/Cheney policies (wiretapping, state’s secrets) in court, he watered down the stimulus package for three Republican votes at the expense of millions of infrastructure jobs, he chose to allow the Bush tax cuts to expire instead of the courageous stand of repealing them, he hasn’t shown much “backbone” in holding multi-national corporations accountable for their tax-cheating and there hasn’t been much in the form of Wall Street regulation, he’s continuing the Bush policy in Iraq and he’s probably going to succumb to the wishes of his Generals in Afganistan who want an Iraq-like “surge.”  For me, despite his attempts to get a watered down health care bill through Congress (like with the stimulus bill, seemingly more interest in one Republican vote than focusing on the ideals of his own party) and some other promising decisions he’s made which put him WAY ABOVE Bush or any alternative the Republicans might offer, the best grade I can give Obama is “Needs to improve.”  At some point I’m hoping Obama will make courageous stands on progressive principles instead of continuing the “EASY WAY OUT” approach he’s taken in his first 10 months.  In my view, his rhetoric far exceeds his actions!

I’ve been watching with interest as the White House has “nudged” Fox “news” in a way that has stimulated a bit of dialogue on what their (Fox “news”) REAL purpose is. Of course, few “out there” will take the “bait” and we will continue to lack for actual news coverage as the cable networks focus on ratings and entertaining. Even when I try watching the local stations or the national news on the main broadcast networks, NBC, CBS, and ABC I come away shaking my head. I suppose I need to discipline myself to watch the CSPAN networks and make my own interpretation of what’s going on, but – of course – like most of the rest of America I DON’T HAVE THE TIME. And, I would be OK with what’s happening right now if I thought for a minute that the news broadcasters were “investigative” reporters who would be putting the pressure on our government as the fourth “leg.” I’m old enough to remember the Viet Nam War and the Watergate breakin and the reporters who were reporting what was actually going on.

For example, in the 1968 Presidential Convention – right in the middle of the Viet Nam conflict – there were riots all over America and they were reported as they happened and there was no “hiding” of pictures. I’m someone who voted for President Obama, but I’m aghast that he’s chosen to be “bullied” by the military and the CIA in, not only hiding pictures of what our troops and representatives have done in our name, but in supporting legislation which makes it easier to do that in the future. We voted for change AND I’M NOT SURE THAT THE CHANGE WE’RE GETTING IS THE “CHANGE WE NEED.” Make no mistake, President Obama is a darn site different and, in my view, better than the previous administration. BUT THAT’S NOT SAYING MUCH! So what we have today is a President who recognizes the problem with “fixed” news, yet who signs a bill that insures a lack of information being available to the public going forward. But, I digress……

I don’t see how anyone could not be better than Bush/Cheney – well, now that you mentioned it, McCain/Palin would have been more than most of us could take! So, the fact there is a President which I feel is more in tune to the will of the working public, doesn’t excuse this continuance of secrecy in our government which is furthered by “news” organizations who participate in the partisan “rancor” which permeates America at this point in time. In the sixties and seventies we had a news media that was willing to expose corruption and abuse NO MATTER WHO WAS DOING IT. If you remember – well, even if you don’t you can take my word for it – the Watergate hearings were FAR LESS divisive (especially when it became evident that Nixon had obstructed justice) than what you have in Congress today. Even though Republicans didn’t like it, they didn’t spend all their time trying to impede the investigation more than a lawyer who is defending his/her client in court. Justice was always going to happen (or at least that was the way I saw it at the time) Senators back then realized that what one President gets away with “today” is potentially what another President will feel empowered to do “tomorrow.”

That is to say that Republicans today might not be so excited about GW Bush’s illegal wiretapping policies if they find out that Barack Obama is following suit – only aiming the “satellite” in a different direction. It was reported that the “target” of much of Bush’s illegal wiretapping was the press. Of course, all the while as it was happening I remember Sean Hannity – for one – on Fox “news” saying how important those privileges were – TO PREVENT TERRORISM. Well, what do you think Mr. Hannity would think today if he found out that he was the “target” of government eavesdropping. I’m sure that would just confirm in his mind that President Obama is a Communist, Socialist, Fascist, or some such other term which actually implies the type of authoritarian powers which appeal to Republicans. Guess what, the next time a Republican’s in office, he’d (Hannity) be singing a differnet tune again. Which kind of gets me back to my original thought for the evening – Fox “news,” as EVERYONE KNOWS, is just a “wing” of the Republican party. They are an integral part of the propoganda scheme that’s been shoved down the throats of unsuspecting Americans since the early days of the Ronald Reagan Presidency. Control of the media was a key component of the “Permanent Republican majority” strategy of Lee Atwater and inherited by Karl Rove. On the one hand I see the President challenging their credibility, but as mentioned above, on the other hand I see him hiding things from the American people (including the crimes of Bush/Cheney) – BOTH ARE WRONG!

That is why I’m glad to see someone taking on Fox “news” besides Keith Olberman – but it should be someone other than the President. Politicians from BOTH SIDES OF THE ISLE should be able to see the danger of a “news” outlet participating in the caucus of a political party. Now, I’m not so naive to miss Olberman’s bias or Rachel Maddow’s bias or the bias of just about any “commentator” these days. I don’t consider these people news journalists, but they are journalists and, while there’s no way to expect them to have no biases, it is absurd to have a group who are using the EXACT SAME keywords being “thrown out” by the Republican caucus and then claiming they’re “FAIR AND BALANCED.” I remember noticing this years ago – one “pundit” after another would come onto the cable “news” broadcasts and spew the “company” line while pretending to be giving actual facts (I believe the Democrats practice a crude form of this by necessity, but they’re no match for the Republicans). THIS IS WRONG. As soon as I believe Keith Olberman, for example, is regurgitating the “message” handed out in the Democratic caucus, that will be the last day I watch his show on MSNBC. I once heard GW Bush make the comment that to get people to believe the “propoganda” (he actually used that word, I’m sure there were some people behind the scenes unhappy he did it, but most people missed it) you’ve got to “say it over and over until it sinks in.” THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE REPUBLICANS HAVE BEEN DOING FOR OVER TWENTY YEARS.

And EVERYONE KNOWS their main outlet is Fox. It’s owned by Rupert Murdoch, who’s not even an American (I have no idea why that doesn’t set in on more people), and run by Roger Ailes who’s an avid Republican supporter and part of the “inside” of the Republican party. THAT’S JUST NOT RIGHT. It’s not that they shouldn’t be able to do business, it’s that they shouldn’t be able to call what they do “news.” There are too many Americans who actually believe what the people on Fox say is “fair and balanced.” The other day I wrote a piece about an article I read in the Washington Post by Charles Krauthammer – a regular on Fox. I couldn’t believe he could pass off his venom on the Post, but putting him on TV as some kind of “expert” is ridiculous. What he is, as are most of the rest of them, is someone who’ll sit in front of a camera and say what he’s told by the “powers that be.” I talk to one person after another who are dismayed at the shape of our “liberal media,” and it always comes back to the fact we have a spineless Congress who are pretty much (with a few exceptions like Dennis Kuchinich, Alan Grayson, Ron Paul, and some of the new ones) bought and sold by the multi-national corporations who control this nation.

Murdoch and Fox were the beneficiaries of the Telecommunications act which was signed by Bill Clinton and allowed the consolidation of media outlets resulting in a constantly contracting number of options for those of us seeking information. In fact, THANK YOU AL GORE for inventing the internet! :o) OK, I’m kidding, but without the internet we would be TOTALLY SCREWED. And, I guarantee, the forces behind Fox and other right wing “water carriers” are frantically trying to figure out how to increase their “footprint” on the internet. I don’t follow Sarah Palin, but I keep hearing reports of her Facebook postings. I also don’t participate in Facebook, but it seems to be an effective form of communication for her, and I expect the Republicans to be more active on the web as time moves forward. I believe they understand they got their “clocks cleaned” on the web in the last two elections and they have the money to fight back. So, it behooves any American who cherishes the idea of a truly free press and investigative reporting to support the anti-Fox movement. THEY ARE NOT FAIR AND BALANCED and anyone with half a brain can easily figure that out. Just yesterday I accidentally logged into a program that had Glenn Beck on it. I’m sure the guy is laughing all the way to the bank, but the reality is that people like him who are willing to say or do anything for money ARE DANGEROUS! I could only handle about one or two minutes of his diatribe, but he was equating our President with Communists or Fascists or something of that nature. And, the way he was going about it was so ridiculous and irrational that I had to wonder what mentality would someone have who would actually listen to that and believe it’s true? It sounded overtly racist to me and it was a far cry from the criticisms I heard about GW Bush for the eight years he was in office (Beck was trying to equate Bush’s lies to something Obama said as an equivalent lie – his diatribe was a lie in itself, but the logic TOTALLY ESCAPED ME – it went something like if Beck disagrees with Obama, Obama must be lying – as opposed to with Bush – his lies about Iraq were PROVEN) but what was evident was that Fox “news” is NOT FAIR AND BALANCED, they are trying to undermine the Presidency of Barack Obama! Democrats weren’t trying to undermine President Bush, they were just trying to get him to bring the troops home and to tell the truth about the war efforts – which didn’t happen in either Iraq or Afganistan. The differences were policy differences that were debated, but they never openly tried to undermine his Presidency – there’s a big difference from trying to change someone’s policies to insuring their (and therefore America’s) failure.

I’m just a school teacher and I’m getting tired of writing all these posts, because I really do have some issues with President Obama – however, I don’t want to join in with the Republicans who are such liars and almost, to me, traitors as they attempt to undermine our country while trying to insure that it will be a long time until we have another President that’s not part of their “Country Club” social statosphere. That (the Republicans) is why I have to continue speaking my mind as I see fit. If that statement wasn’t too clear, I don’t want to pile on the President until we remove these OBSTRUCTIONIST Republicans from the scene (any objection I have to Obama would fall in the “constructive criticism” category in hopes that he would SUCCEED). Of course, I understand that my audience, which ranges from the twenties to sometimes around two hundred per day (I have no idea where any of “you” come from), won’t make much of a dent in the American political process – but, if enough people continue to speak out, maybe REAL CHANGE will actually happen DESPITE the politicians and the PUNDITS in Washington who are ALL fattening their own purses at the expense of the rest of us.

I used the word “pundits” in all caps because that is where my motivation comes from today. Recently I signed on to get the daily news from the Washington Post via email. I’ve spent a fair amount of time over the past few years with the NY Times, the Wall Street Journal, and various other local and national news outlets, but never the Washington Post. I thought I’d give it a try. Well, today I read a post from a guy named Charles Krauthammer who was lambasting President Obama for essentially “blaming everything” on George W Bush. Essentially, I have a good idea who this guy is, I just didn’t know he was a columnist for the Post. A couple years ago I canceled my satelite TV service, but they left a few channels on to keep me “connected” and one of them was Fox “news.” I remember seeing this guy on their channel a few times and wondering how could someone call themselves a journalist while CLEARLY being a Republican Party “water carrier.” I’m not saying a Republican (while I’m sure he is) – he was spewing the so-called “talking points” that come right out of the Republican caucus with the same “catch words” as the rest of them – the Limbaugh’s, the Hannity’s, the Colter’s, the Beck’s, and all the politicians who are in the same propoganda conspiracy that’s been ruining this country since the days of Ronald Reagan.

I read this guy’s column and two things came immediately to mind. First, he needs to do a little actual research before he does his writing, and second who the hell is the editor of this newspaper to allow CRAP like what Krauthammer wrote today to be published. WHEN ARE PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY GOING TO AT LEAST STAND UP TO THE PRINCIPLE THAT PURPOSELY (AND DISHONESTLY) TRYING TO UNDERMINE OUR PRESIDENT IS ANTI-AMERICAN. (I’m sure he’d say the same things about some of what I’ve written about George W Bush/Dick Cheney – the difference: EVERYTHING I’ve written has been proven true by subsequent events or clear EVIDENCE). His column today went from complaining that Obama is blaming “everything” on Bush to attacking his thoughtfulness in making a decision regarding Afganistan. I’m not a professional journalist, but I’ll attempt to “undress” his comments one by one.

First Krauthammer begins with the normal Republican communist reference (unless it’s socialist or fascist) by making a stupid non-essential statement about Nikita Kruschev – these guys on the right are really idiots when it comes to their understanding of political philosophies. Based on classical definitions, Obama is far less in every regard to all those references than Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Paulson (remember it was Bush/Paulson who came up with the 700 Billion “giveaway” to the banks – of course, people like Krauthammer can’t remember back that far). Krauthammer then says, ” Is there anything he (Obama) hasn’t blamed George W. Bush for? The economy, global warming, the credit crisis, Middle East stalemate, the deficit, anti-Americanism abroad — everything but swine flu.” Well, let me point something out to Krauthammer. Bush/Cheney RUINED the economy, they denied global warming to the point where it is much more of a crisis than it should be, their invasion of Iraq TOTALLY destabilized the middle east and they did nothing except fuel the fire of discontent regarding Israel and the Palestinians, they inherited a $250 Billion surplus and turned it into a MULTI TRILLION dollar deficit – essentially in a matter of months once the Supreme Court had overturned the will of the people and put them in office, and they turned America from the moral leaders of the free world into the hated TORTURERS who think only about their own self interests and to hell with everyone else. So, if Obama is blaming Bush for all of that – IT’S WELL DESERVED.

That’s just for starters! Then Krauthammer – as if he knows what he’s talking about – says, “he (Obama) referred to “long years of drift” in Afghanistan in order to, I suppose, explain away his own, well, yearlong drift on Afghanistan.” OK, if you’re not one of those people who listen to Limbaugh or watch Fox “news” and believe what you hear, then you probably recognize the absurdity of that criticism on it’s face. However, if you’re not sure let me explain this to you – using the term “long years of drift” is a compliment to what the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld “team” did in Afganistan. Actually, it was far worse than that. Not only was there “drift,” there was an incompetency about EVERYTHING done in the 7 years the Bush administration was mired in Afganistan which should make most Americans (if they just knew what actually happened) cringe. That is, people who are not like Krauthammer and apparently willing to say anything to make the “wigs” of the Republican party happy. If Mr. Krauthammer would actually read about what took place because of American decisions (try “Descent into Chaos” by Ahmed Rashid, Charles) in Afganistan he’d also realize if all we did was drift we’d be a lot better off.

In FACT, what Americans did in Afganistan under the leadership of George W Bush was allow the man who orchestrated the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon (not to mention the plane going down in Pennsylvania which was supposedly headed toward the White House) to get away SCOTT FREE. They also allowed the Taliban to escape into Pakistan and then spent SEVEN YEARS giving money to Pervez Musharraf who in turn was supporting the very Taliban and al Qaeda organizations we were supposedly fighting. That’s right – the American President was providing aid to the Pakistan President who was then funneling some of that aid to the people who were killing our troops! To me, THAT’S FAR WORSE THAN “DRIFT.” But wait, there’s more. Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and others under their authority authorized NATO and American troops to “look the other way” as the drug trade in Afganistan multiplied EXPONENTIALLY during the “Bush years.” By the time Bush was out of office Afgan farmers were producing in excess of 8000 tons of opium per year which translates into roughly 80 – 90% of the herion which ends up on the streets of America. Is that “drift,” or what Mr. Krauthammer?

And, how about putting Hamad Karzai in office and then funding all the individual war lords in Afganistan while failing to provide the promised aid to Karzai leading him to look elsewhere for survival. Sure, at this point in time the man is knee deep in corruption and a part of the drug market, but what other choice did the Bush administration give him. They totally destabilized the country and, while the Afgans were HOPING that America would help them establish a central government that could protect the population – WE ARE OFF TO IRAQ and to hell with them! Speaking of the increased drug trade which the Bush administration was TOTALLY AWARE OF and CONSCIOUSLY looked the “other way” from, it has also been a large component of the funding of the Taliban resurgence (over and above the money they’ve received from Bush via Musharraf and the other “allies” of the US, such as Saudi Arabia, etc.) Actually, I wouldn’t say the Bush administration was “drifting” in Afganistan, I’d say they were “drowning” and hopefully Obama can do something to save the situation.

The one thing I can agree with Krauthammer on is that Obama faces a similar decision to Bush’s when Bush decided on the “surge” in early 2007. Now, we could argue the value of the “surge” for days (well, I could) – I realize that American deaths and violence in general has declined markedly in the past year to year and a half, but – in my mind – the surge just put off the inevitable, which is Iraq taking care of Iraq. I’m not convinced that this “lull” in violence will be considered worth the 1500 or so American lives lost during the ensuing time period. People like Krauthammer don’t seem too concerned with all the flag draped coffins coming home from Iraq and Afganistan, but I can tell you for sure, I am and the “surge” didn’t solve the Sunni/Shia problem which has just been put on “simmer.” Even David Patreaus thinks we need to stay in Iraq for another 10 -20 years to have any chance of stabilizing the country Moqtada al Sadr is just waiting in the wings for the Americans to leave before making his return from Iran – the inevitable conclusion to this “war” will be the continued strengthening of Iran – and, of course, people like Krauthammer and the other Republican liars will CERTAINLY blame that on Obama as well. In fact, this becomes kind of a “blame game,” and I just have to tell you the Republicans HAVE NO CREDIBILITY in the game. Their only hope is that the American people have a short attention span and they forget who CAUSED ALL of the troubles we’re presently struggling through. (and, they’re making the struggle worse because the only thing that’s important to them is that Obama “fails” – figuring out Afganistan is a legit struggle, because al Qaeda and the Taliban are alive and well due to the generosity of the “drifting” Bush administration)

I’ll leave you for tonight with one more absurdity from this Krauthammer guy: “In each war, quick initial low-casualty campaigns toppled enemy governments. In the subsequent occupation stage, two policy choices presented themselves: the light or heavy “footprint.”

In both Iraq and Afghanistan, we initially chose the light footprint. For obvious reasons: less risk and fewer losses for our troops, while reducing the intrusiveness of the occupation and thus the chances of creating an anti-foreigner backlash that would fan an insurgency.”

If you’ve been following Iraq and Afganistan you see the absurdity of those statements on their merits. However, if you’re not clear let me try to help you out. In Afganistan, we had worse than a “quick initial low-casualty campaign,” we went in on the “cheap,” and thus let bin Laden escape. And to suggest we were worried about “an anti-foreigner backlash that would fan an insurgency” presupposes the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld crew was thinking about anything. In fact, the more I read about Afganistan the less I’m sure that we ever had any intent of actually capturing or killing bin Laden. The Bush administration CLEARLY had their eyes fixed on Saddam Hussein before the World Trade center had fallen to the ground. WHY IS THIS SO HARD FOR PUNDITS LIKE KRAUTHAMMER TO “GET?” Let’s call that a rhetorical question and I’ll tell you why – because he and the likes of him are just saying what they’re told by whoever is in charge of the “right (wrong) wing.” America was warned by the leading Generals to mobilize at least 400 – 500,000 troops before entering Iraq and they went in with 25% of that – not because of Krauthammer’s “obvious” reasons “less risk and fewer losses for our troops,” but because Cheney/Bush/Rumsfeld/McCain and the rest of them ACTUALLY BELIEVEED that the Iraqi people would “greet us as liberators” and the war might not last “6 days, 6 weeks, or certainly 6 months.” (remember, they “fired” the General who suggested more troops) They claimed that the invasion would be paid for by Iraqi oil which they evidently assumed the Iraqi’s would be glad to hand over in return for our getting rid of Saddam.

Nothing they did was for the purpose of “less risk and fewer losses for our troops,” and Krauthammer (and a bunch more of them on the Republican side) are TOTALLY DISENGENOUS, DISHONEST, and just plain LYING when they tell people otherwise. How does the Washington Post (Isn’t Eugene Robinson one of the editors?) allow propoganda – and that’s all it is – like this article of Krauthammer’s to be published? This just feeds into the “birthers” and the “deathers” as they obstruct everything that is being done to bring us out of the nightmare that was eight years of GW Bush. Today, it was reported that the Senate (with 40 Republicans plus Joe (Benedict) Lieberman leading the “charge.” couldn’t manage to get an extension of unemployment benefits through for about 150,000 workers who can’t find a job in the economy that Krauthammer thinks Obama shouldn’t be complaining about regarding Bush’s policies. Well, it’s the Bush supporters who don’t want these workers to have these basic benefits as they attempt to endure this near depression (I’m sure to the workers it IS A DEPRESSION) caused by Bush’s incompetency, these Bush supporters (including Krauthammer) don’t want the uninsured in this country to have health care, and MOST IMPORTANTLY TO THEM they don’t want President Obama to succeed. All of that doesn’t change the FACT that Obama is being too nice to President Bush, not only in how he puts proper blame on him for his incompetent policies, but in the way he has refused to allow investigations of the Bush administration. There not only should be more blame (as the result of investigations), but people in the Bush administration who commtted crimes should have to answer for them in a court of law. Earth to Charles Krauthammer: not only did George W Bush ruin the economy, exacerbate global warming, fuel the credit crisis, contribute to a Middle East stalemate, baloon the deficit, promote anti-Americanism abroad – he failed miserably in Afganistan and it will take a miracle for President Obama to fix the problem.

I’m so disgusted with the constant attacks on President Obama from the “party of no” – the Republicans, that I hate the idea of criticizing the President.  However, then I think back to the “rubber stamping” of Bush/Cheney by these same Republicans and I realize that when it’s appropriate, I’ve got to speak my mind.  I just don’t want to EVER be considered in the “same boat” as the Beck’s, the Limbaugh’s, the McConnell’s, the Savage’s, and others who are criticizing Obama – in my view – because they can’t accept the idea of a Black President.  To them, it would be worse for a Black President to succeed than for the country to fail.  Most of the leaders of the Republican party are financially secure, I’m sure in their minds -secure no matter what happens – I’ve heard Limbaugh is the $400 million dollar man – so if the rest of us “go down” it works in their favor, at least in their own minds.  Any criticism I have for President Obama is because I WANT HIM TO SUCCEED!

 I hope the American people have matured past the point where they judge their leaders by the news headlines and the Dow Jones Industrial average.  For example, in watching this present health care debate I hope the vast majority of Americans who want real reform are prepared to hold the Republicans accountable for their obstinence if a bill with true choice doesn’t pass (although, the reality is that the Democrats should be able to get something through without the Republicans – so I hope there’s some accountability for them as well if this doesn’t work out).  And, I’m really not that certain that it’s going to “work out” no matter what the Congress comes up with.  I mean, it seems to me that they have set their “target” way below what is best for the American people right from the start – AND THEY’RE WORKING THEIR WAY DOWN FROM THERE!

As the Democrats in Congress are presently talking, even if there is a “robust public option” in the final bill, it will not be an option for people like me who have employer funded health insurance as a benefit of employment.  In fact, if Max Baucus gets his way, I will be paying a tax on the benefits I receive in order to help pay for the insurance for those who are presently uninsured.  I suppose if my premiums went down correspondingly, that would be a “push,” but I can guarantee you that it will be marketed by Republicans as a tax on the middle class which President Obama PROMISED not to do (and, I’d be totally surprised if the premiums went down – EVER).  Also, unless Senator Wyden is successful in getting his “healthy choice” amendment passed – which seems highly unlikely at this point – only about 5 – 10% of Americans will actually get the choice of the public option.  I’m really feeling like the final bill will end up being a “boon” to the insurance companies who have invested half a BILLION dollars to sidetrack reform.  This whole process shows how pathetic our government has become.  The corporations REMAIN IN CONTROL of our government!

 If the President and the Congress REALLY had the best interests of the American people in mind the debate would be over a “Medicare for all” single payer health system – which would be less expensive (by a lot) than the present system and theoretically MUCH MORE EFFICIENT!  I honestly don’t understand how anyone can make an argument that having “middle men” (insurers) who are beholding to shareholders can be a good idea for a way to run a health system.  The only ones a system like that is good for are the “middle men” and the shareholders.  The losers are the people paying the premiums.  I just can’t see how it makes sense to take 30% right off the top for administrative costs and shareholder value and then, on top of that, come up with a system that forces doctors to spend an additional 20 -25% of their income on office workers to manage the billing issues raised by the insurance companies’ policies (my doctor doesn’t determine if I can have a procedure – he has to get permission from the insurance company first!).  For all those people who are saying “I don’t want the government between me and my doctor” I don’t think they’ve experienced an insurance company between “me and my doctor.”

Also, the insurance companies (in most states) have a virtual monopoly on services.  In my state there are basically two options.  THAT’S NOT WHAT WYDEN WOULD CALL “HEALTHY CHOICE.”  A single payer system would streamline costs, record keeping, and procedures in a way that would greatly reduce the expenditure of health care dollars, yet provide service that would be at least as good and probably much better than what we presently have.  You would put the medical decisions back where they belong – between the doctor and the patient.  I was once denied coverage on a procedure that was recommended by my doctor on the resurfacing of one of my hips.  The resulting hip replacement surgery which was my only option (other than disability from work) ended up a failure and the result was two surgeries plus the insurance company ended up paying twice what they should have for me to be able to walk again.  This kind of story is commonplace.

So, where does my criticism of Obama come in on this issue?  Well, I believe President Obama is too willing to get ANY legislation passed.  I believe he has taken a huge risk in pushing this through at this time (yes, it’s really needed – but they MUST get it right) and, if the bill that ends up on his desk doesn’t do what is intended, we could end up with a Republican in the White House in 2012.  Now, as I stated above, I’m really hoping the American people have gotten past that type of reaction to our government – I hope they’re as sick of these Republicans as I am.  However, Obama is walking a “tightrope” in my view with his “non-progressive” decisions that many who voted for him aren’t even thinking about.  There will be enough unhappiness with President Obama from his own party if this doesn’t end up well that it could set back the progressive movement significantly.

 I’ve said on this site many times that maybe it’s time for a third party.  I’m feeling like the extreme right wingers of the Republican party are probably already thinking along those lines – but they could have a lot of company from disaffected Democrats if this 60 vote caucus which so many people worked so hard to provide for the Democrats – doesn’t provide “fruit.”  Especially, if all the union workers in America end up paying for the health care reform with a tax on their benefits and Obama continues to refuse repeal of the Bush tax cuts on the top 1% of earners – especially in a severe recession – well, all I can say is his approval ratings will be heading toward Bush territory!

And, the fact that President Obama has chosen to allow EVERYONE from the Bush administration to walk away from their egregious lawbreaking SCOTT FREE is going to come back to haunt him.  Let’s take a quick look at that: Karl Rove – refusing subpoenas to Congress and politicizing the justice department, Alberto Gonzales – lying AD NAUSEUM to Congress (among other crimes), George Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld AUTHORIZING TORTURE, Bush/Cheney authorizing illegal wiretapping, Cheney – outing a CIA agent (treason), Bush/Cheney LYING US INTO ENDLESS WAR, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Feith et al – war profiteering, and I could go on and on.  People like me won’t let that stuff die, and if the tide turns at all against President Obama, he’s going to have to answer to his own constituency at some point for his decisions.

I really do think President Obama is a good man, and I believe it’s too bad that his Presidency has to follow that of George W Bush – because there was an unbelievable MESS when he took office.  I truly believe that had Bush been President for even another month or two, we would now be in the second coming of the Great Depression.  Actually, I personally don’t believe we’re “out of the woods” just yet, but obviously things are better than they would have been had Bush stayed in office or had McCain/Palin won the election (can you imagine that?).  But, I still expected a more assertive statesmenlike President than what we’ve ended up with.  I’m thankful for the “progressive” caucus in the House of Representatives who, in my mind, are the reason there may end up being a health care reform bill that is a step forward.  I honestly believe that President Obama is willing to sign whatever the Congress sends his way and I TRULY HOPE THAT those House progressives will BLOCK anything that doesn’t make sense.  I don’t believe a coalition of Max Baucus and Barack Obama is what the President’s supporters were imagining when they voted him into office!

My last couple of posts have related to the impending decision President Obama HAS to make regarding our involvement in Afganistan. This is going to be a very difficult decision and, of course, the only thing we can count on as Americans is that FROM THE START the Republicans will be deriding the decision – no matter what it is. That is the part in all this that BUGS me the most. The Republicans should SHUT THEIR MOUTHS and get behind whatever Obama, Gates, and the military generals come up with as a solution to the problem CREATED BY INCOMPETENT REPUBLICAN DECISIONS! And the worst offender in the 7 years we were in Afganistan during the Bush years was none other than the leading critic of whatever President Obama is going to decide (criticism aimed before the decision is even made) – we’re talking about the one and only (thank heaven) DICK CHENEY!

This man is unbelievable. First off, he continues to travel around to any venue which will listen to him proclaiming that the Bush administration “kept us safe,” and that the Obama administration is “weak” and endangering the safety of America. I’ve stated many times what I believe is the just solution to the Dick Cheney problem – and I’ll revisit that proposal before I finish this post, but first lets have a discussion of the REAL issue here. The truth is that Bush/Cheney DID NOT KEEP US SAFE! The evidence is OVERWHELMING that they should have stopped the 9/11 attacks before they happened. So his claims that they “kept us safe,” despite the worst attack on American soil in our history happening on BUSH/CHENEY’S “watch,” shows the lack of integrity and/or ability to own up to mistakes from this war profiteering thug. This is bad enough, but it gets worse!

As I’ve mentioned in the previous few posts on this site, I’m reading “Descent into Chaos” by Ahmed Rashid – a distinguished Pakistani journalist who’s been right in the middle of the Afganistan fiasco – which lays out in painstaking detail the FAILURES of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld RIGHT FROM THE OUTSET of the Afganistan invasion. These people had NO IDEA what they were doing/getting into and, after viewing the past 8 years, one has to wonder what their original intentions were. Supposedly, we went into Afganistan to “get” Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda network – toppling the Taliban “government” of Afganistan in the process. Neither the Taliban nor al Qaeda were able to put up much of a fight, and the capturing or killing of bin Laden should have happened. Clearly, at the point in time of our invasion of Afganistan, the US – under the direction of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld had their eye on Iraq – actually planning this from the time the World Trade Center was crumbling into a pile of bodies and whatever the building had been constructed from. Capturing bin Laden WAS NOT A PRIORITY for the Bush administration. These “neocons” had been conspiring on how to topple Saddam Hussein for years before Bush was voted into the White House by a 5 to 4 decision of our Supreme Court (a decision which will go down in history as a MAJOR BLACK MARK against our highest court) and the 9/11 attacks were just the “trigger” they needed – although they had to make it look as if Afganistan was a priority first.

I could write for seemingly endless pages about the incompetence of Bush/Cheney, but the arrogance of Cheney to go around the country CONTINUING HIS EFFORT TO UNDERMINE OBAMA is unbelievable to me. HE’S EVEN ENLISTED HIS DAUGHTER TO THE “CAUSE.” Personally, I don’t understand why the so-called “liberal media” even gives these people a platform anymore. No one in the media seems to have the energy to RESEARCH Afganistan so that these lies can be called out for what they are. I have no idea what Obama’s going to do (I’m feeling he’ll follow General Mcchrystal’s advice) and whether or not I will agree with his choice. However, this decision is going to be REALLY IMPORTANT to us as a nation, and just as all of us who didn’t support Bush in 2000 got behind him in the effort to capture or kill bin Laden, so should EVERYONE get behind Obama in his attempt to regain control in Afganistan from the Taliban and ultimately FINISH THE JOB of capturing or killing bin Laden and neutralizing Al Qaeda that Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld abandoned.

Let me just point out a FEW reasons why Cheney has NO CREDIBILITY in this decision or fight AT ALL: for one, he led the “charge” to pull our “assets” out of Afganistan and into Iraq WHEN WE COULD HAVE FINISHED OFF BOTH THE TALIBAN AND BIN LADEN! There were at least two occasions that I’ve read about (in more than one publication) where bin Laden was “cornered” and the American military – through the incompetent leadership of Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld (Secretary of Defense), and Tommy Franks the “General in Charge – refused to put American troops into Afganistan to FINISH THE JOB! According to Rashid, the Taliban were ready to surrender and Franks refused to send in the necessary troops while Rumsfeld gave the Pakistani’s permission to airlift out their ISI (Pakistan’s answer to the CIA and well known supporters of the Taliban and al Qaeda) – and, of course, in the process they took the leaders of the Taliban along with the leaders of Al Qaeda and thousands of their fighters. Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld BLEW IT! And that’s just for starters. They essentially ceded leadership in Afganistan to the CIA, who in turn undermined the Afgan government that we helped set up by throwing millions upon millions of dollars at the warlords in Afganistan who were a big part of the problem – thus insuring there would be no effective central government.

Yes, it continues to get worse. For some strange reason the Bush/Cheney administration “threw” over 10 BILLION dollars to Pervez Musharraf, the Pakistani dictator who had been, and continued supporting both the Taliban and al Qaeda. Musharraf played Bush for such a “sucker” that it reminds me, as a sixth grade school teacher, of 11 year old students manipulating adults and getting away with it. The more they get away with, the more they “push their luck.” And, the Pakistani’s came to wonder “how stupid” are these Americans? Bush/Cheney kept giving the Pakistani’s money, the Pakistani’s kept funneling a percentage of that money to the very people we were fighting, and Bush continued to compliment Musharraf as a “trustworthy partner.” When you read Rashid’s book you almost feel embarrassment to be an American and have leaders who are so gullible. Here’s the rub for me, despite their failures, despite the utter stupidity of their actions, despite the obvious resurgence of both the Taliban and Al Qaeda under their watch, you’ve got the architect of this failure going around criticizing the person who’s trying valiantly to correct the many blunders.

You’ve also got people in the media who refuse to take the time to understand what the situation REALLY IS, and they give the Cheney’s and others a platform to continue their attempt at undermining Obama without the slightest challenge. It’s almost as if ignorance is truly “bliss” in America. Of course, part of the Cheney’s agenda is to somehow create the misconception that the Republicans really were effective in their SEVEN years prosecuting the war in Afganistan – which is a JOKE. (unfortunately a very bad joke) To top all of the military malfeasance off is the fact that during the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld invasion of Afganistan they also allowed the opium problem to escalate. In fact, they virtually nurtured it to the point where opium production today is exponentially greater than it was prior to 9/11 and well over 3/4 of the world’s heroin comes from the poppy fields of Afganistan. Both Cheney and Rumsfeld participated in decisions which essentially allowed this to happen, not only resulting in a dramatic increase in the world drug trade, but helping the Taliban to regain strength as they used drug profits to finance their insurgency. UNBELIEVABLE when you really think about it.

And Cheney was right at the front in supporting the dictator of Uzbekistan, Islam Karimov, who was – just like Musharraf in Pakistan – gleaning as much money from the American administration as possible while governing in a way that would turn the stomach of most Amercians if they even had a clue. In supporting Karimov – so that we could maintain a base in his country and so that we could “render” captured “combatants” to a “black hole” prison in his country where they would be tortured out of the sight of civilized people – we were giving money and aid to a dictator who was as adroit at killing his own people as the dictator we “threw out” of Iraq, Saddam Hussein. In one instance, it was reported that as many as 1500 Uzbeks were slaughtered during a demonstration against Karimov’s policies. Additionally, much of the drug smuggling from Afganistan went through Uzbekistan and Karimov also allowed both the Taliban and al Qaeda to train their fighters on “underground” bases inside his country.

As I read this book on the disaster which was the Bush/Cheney policy in Afganistan (I’m getting close to 30 books now on the folly of the Bush administration in Iraq, Afganistan, and at home in America) I just get more disgusted. They not only allowed al Qaeda to get away, initially, to reconstitute itself – partially with our funds which were originally intended for Pakistan, but the US also allowed their incompetent decisionmaking to undermine the prospects for democracy in Afganistan and Central Asia. If you’re interested in this topic, please read Rashid’s book – it’s an eye opener! Since President Obama moved into the White House I have stated on many occasions that my one MAJOR area of disagreement with him is his policy of “looking forward and not backward” regarding the Bush/Cheney administration. He says he doesn’t “want the distraction” while there is so much to do. Well, with the likes of Dick Cheney running around trying to undermine one decision he makes after another, the distraction is there whether he likes it or not.

And, worse than that, as I’ve stated many times – we are now considered around the world as a nation which tortures. We are considered to be a nation that is OK with our leaders committing war crimes (and, believe me, the more I read about what was done in our name, the worse it gets). By looking the other way, President Obama is potentially leaving this mark as a permanent mark against the United States. We were once considered the world leaders in the fight for human rights. As I read more and more about the Bush/Cheney administration, I’m seeing that they had a basic disregard for human rights (accept their own and the people in their inner circle). They supported countries who were beyond abusive in human rights violations and committed NUMEROUS violations which amounted to WAR CRIMES themselves as long as those countries would pretend to be our allies in EXCHANGE FOR OUR MONEY. And, now we have the main architect of the WAR CRIMES strutting around this nation as if he’s some kind of foriegn policy expert – when his decisions have been FAILURE UPON FAILURE. Dick Cheney should be in jail, not on TV criticizing President Obama’s attempt to fix his FOLLY in Afganistan!

As I’ve mentioned in my last couple of posts I’ve been reading “Descent into Chaos” by Ahmed Rashid which, I believe, is must reading for anyone who wants to better understand what President Obama is “up against” as he decides on how to extricate our forces from Afganistan while ACTUALLY finding and bringing to justice Osama bin Laden. Everytime I start thinking about this I start getting angry. Not only did the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld administration SCREW THIS UP MAJORLY, but the Republicans of today would have you believe they are innocent bystanders as they criticize WHATEVER President Obama chooses to do regarding this mess.

I heard an announcement today that Obama will send no more troops to Afganistan unless the US feels that the Afgan government is worth defending (or words to that effect). And that’s legitimate. The government of Hamid Karzai is corrupt, it’s knee deep in the drug trade from Afganistan which “feeds” the herion addicts in America, and Karzai is full of distrust and contempt for Americans. Obviously, none of that is good. But, looking closer at what has happened since 9/11 gives a much better picture of why the situation is as it exists today – and it’s close to an IMPOSSIBLE SITUATION!

The truth is that the Bush administration had no idea what they were doing when they invaded Afganistan. As everyone now knows, Bush and his fellow “neocons” had their sights set on Iraq from the moment the World Trade Center was falling to the ground. In fact, they had their sights set on Iraq several years prior to that – the terrorist attack on our soil just gave them the excuse they were looking for. In the process of getting us entrenched into Iraq and totally destabilizing the middle east, Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld got us entrenched in Afganistan and totally destabilized Central Asia. It’s almost as if they were trying to do this. However, I don’t for a minute think they were trying to do this on purpose – at least I hope not – although nothing surprises me anymore, I just think they were a bunch of political fanatics who managed to scam their way into the most powerful position in the world and they unleashed their ignorance on all the rest of us. (which really should give all Americans pause regarding listening to the likes of Limbaugh, Beck, and the other people who are attempting to undermine our present President due to the color of his skin)

Karzai was actually a true patriot when it was time to overthrow the Taliban from Afganistan and he actually put his life on the line, according to Rashid (who knows him personally), during the American attack which was coordinated with the Afganistan Northern Alliance through the American CIA – the Northern Alliance were the Afgans who were opposed to the Taliban at the time of our invasion. True to form for Rumsfeld, the Defense Secretary at the time – and maybe the worst Defense Secretary in our history – he virtually refused to commit enough American troops to “do the job,” which supposedly was to capture or kill bin Laden and destroy Al Qaeda. UNQUESTIONABLY the opportunity was there for success, but the Americans failed to provide the necessary troop strength and, even though he should have been captured, bin Laden was allowed to escape (twice).

Worse than that, not only did bin Laden (and most of the Taliban) escape, but when a government was set up in Afganistan to replace the fallen Taliban, the United States not only failed to support it but even undermined it. Instead of supplying Karzai the money and support he needed to set up a centralized government (which, in reading this book, I believe he would have done had we supported him), the United States funneled it’s support money – or at least most of it – to the warlords in the countryside which virtually insured the continued fragmentation of the country and diminished support for Karzai. The result of this policy was that – and here I’m inferring, because so far in the book I’m reading it doesn’t talk about Karzai’s corruption – Karzai had to find ways to keep himself in power without the full support of the US, which included raising money through the drug trade. We became just the latest country to abandon the Afgan people. In fact, we were essentially abandoning them for the second time, because after the Soviets were pushed out in 1988, we abandoned them at that time as well.

The makeup of Afganistan is quite complex as I’m finding from reading this book, and true to form the Bush administration attempted to carry out this “invasion” with virtually no knowledge of the people they were dealing with (just like Iraq). Bush/Cheney relied on the CIA which was following a policy of buying off the warlords – always thinking in the short term. Additionally, both Al Qaeda and the Taliban had found refuge in Pakistan in what’s called the “Federally administered Tribal Areas,” or, essentially, no man’s land. These areas were without any formal government and since 9/11 Pakistan’s government on several occasions has decided to make “treaties” with Al Qaeda and the Taliban in an attempt to keep them from creating problems “at home,” which NEVER WORKS. From the days they escaped the American invasion Al Qaeda has been regrouping to the point where today they are probably stronger and more of a threat than they were on 9/11.

What irks me the most in this, is that the Bush administration continued to support Pervez Musharraf, the Pakistani dictator, thinking it was “convenient.” From 9/11 until he left office President Bush funneled approximately TEN BILLION DOLLARS to Musharraf because he felt it was keeping Pakistan as an ally to America. What was really happening was that Musharraf and the Pakistan ISI (their version of our CIA) continued to support the Taliban and ignore Al Qaeda. As the saying goes they played Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld FOR ALL THEY WERE WORTH. Just the stupidity of the American government undermined our position as much as anything. Of course, while all this is going on – the Taliban is moving back into Afganistan, Al Qaeda is rebuilding itself – Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld SCREWED UP IRAQ just as bad. It’s like Osama bin Laden couldn’t have orchestrated his wishes any better. Our leaders fell for EVERY ONE OF HIS TRICKS. And, we’re still falling for them – because one of bin Laden’s stated goals is to keep the US fighting in Iraq and Afganistan until we have bankrupted our nation just as the Russians did in the eighties. The ironies in Afganistan go on and on, and they started with the Reagan administration; essentially, we’ve been supporting and arming our own enemies – through Musharraf and other so-called “allies” since the 1980’s in a land which we totally DON’T understand.

Which gets me back to the point where I’m really getting sick of Republicans who created this MESS acting like it’s all Obama’s fault. I have no idea what decision President Obama will make regarding Afganistan, but I can tell you that THIS IS VERY SERIOUS. For anyone who believes that Al Qaeda is no longer a threat, in my mind they are kidding themselves. And, anyone who thinks Bush/Cheney “kept us safe” is kidding themselves even more. But to listen to them (Republicans and neocons), it’s almost as if they are rooting for another attack, because they are so set on the “failure” of the Obama administration. Can you imagine what the reaction from the Republicans would have been when Bush was contemplating the response to 9/11 if the Democrats would have been rooting for his failure? If they had blamed Bush for the terrorist attacks? (which, as it turns out, they could legitimately have done) President Obama needs to have the support of the American people as he goes forward in determining how to proceed in Afganistan.

I will be the first to say that we should be out of Iraq “sooner rather than later.” But Afganistan, I’m not so sure. It may be too late to gain the confidence of the Afgan people who were ready in 2001 for America to “nation build.” However, the reality is that the Taliban are moving back in and if we leave they will regain control within probably a year from when we pull out. Additionally, Al Qaeda is right across the border in Pakistan and attempting to destabilize the Pakistani government, apparently in an attempt to get their hands on Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal (which is significant due mostly to Republican – Reagan and GW Bush – negligence as well, but that’s another story for another day), and due to the Bush policies the people of Central Asia are pretty much just shaking their heads at the stupidity and lack of will from America. As much as I wish we weren’t in Afganistan, I’m not too sure that we should pull out. In fact, I believe if I was in Obama’s shoes, I would be figuring out how to get to bin Laden and I’d be letting the Pakistani government know that WE ARE COMING AFTER HIM AND HIS “NETWORK.” The more I look at and try to understand this situation I just have to shake my head at how stupid the Americans under Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld (all three of these people are pretty much a joke to the Afgans and Pakistanis) acted as they prosecuted their “war on terror.” It really makes me wonder: Was Bush/Cheney’s real motive in the war on terror endless profits for their private contractor buddies? It seems like it’s either that or the guys are REALLY DUMB. Unfortunately, we’re all paying for their stupidity or greed, whatever it was, and it’s time to get behind Obama as he tries to solve this terrible problem!

My thoughts tonight are centered on Barack Obama’s pending decision regarding Afganistan. This will be a very difficult decision and a crucial one regarding his Presidency. It is just one more “thing” that George W Bush TOTALLY SCREWED UP and left for Obama to “clean up,” just like Iraq, the economy, the Justice Department, the environment, and our position as leader of the “free” world. To listen to Republicans you would think that Obama is the one who created this mess and that when they left office everything was A-OK and we were all “safe.”

In fact, just the other day I happened upon Fox “News” (I’m sure if you’re reading this you understand the quotes are because Fox is nothing more than the major propoganda wing of the Republican party – NO WAY a news outlet) and Liz Cheney and Bill Kristol were announcing the “startup” of an organization called “Keeping America Safe.” As astonishing as it might seem, their first “add” or spot was centered on how Barack Obama is not keeping America safe and it implied that the neocons under GW Bush and Liz Cheney’s DEPLORABLE father did keep us safe. This is typical Republican dihonesty, denial, and disillusionment! Kristol was one of the major proponents along with Cheney’s father DICK for invading Iraq and, therefore, allowing Osama bin Laden TO GO FREE! For some reason they would STILL HAVE US BELIEVE that it was Sadam Hussein who attacked America on 9/11 – and, unfortunately there are enough Americans who are either uninformed enough or STUPID enough to believe them and keep the Repubicans as part of the national discussion, and Fox on the air. As one person the other day put it, if you watch Fox “news” you wouldn’t believe that the gravest danger to the United States is al Qaeda in Pakistan along with Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal, but instead it would be Acorn! THESE PEOPLE ARE UNBELIEVABLE!

Another example of how they just REFUSE TO OWN UP TO REALITY relates to my last posting regarding Rush Limbaugh, the de-facto head of the Republican party and a “water carrier” on the public airwaves for the neocons. It was recently announced that Limbaugh, along with the owner of the St. Louis Blues hockey team – Dave Checketts – was involved in a bid to purchase the St Louis Rams of the National Football league. Now, if you have any idea about professional sports in America, that is one place where race does not play a factor in who’s on the teams (with the exception possibly of the coaching staffs and owners, although even that – well the coaching staffs – appears to be changing). In fact, in the NFL approximately 70% of the players are African Americans. Limbaugh, of course, has a long history of racist rheotric on his talk radio show and, at one time, he had the opportunity to be a part of the ESPN Sunday night broadcast but lasted only one week because neither the players nor the audience could tolerate his racist remarks. By one account, it took less than 10 minutes for him to make a comment that caused him to be fired after the first night on the job. His comment related to Donavan McNabb and implied that McNabb got special treatment as a quarterback due to the fact he was Black (not the exact quote, but my summation of it). The truth, of course – as with many of Limbaugh’s ridiculous comments when he’s on the air – was almost the opposite. The road to stardom for McNabb and other Black quarterbacks was much more difficult specifically because of the racial stereotypes that existed in this country for many many years – stereotypes similar to Limbaugh’s, which, when he said it, were being overcome and were no longer passe`.

The good news: today it was announced that Rush Limbaugh was dropped from the team of investors attempting to purchase the Rams due to the fact that National Football league owners were making it clear they would not accept a proposal from any group which he was a part of. Both the commisioner of the league and the players association along with an increasing number of owners (some very conservative people in their own rights) came out saying that someone with the history of divisiveness along racial lines (or any othe lines as well) such as Limbaugh has no place in professional sports because profesional sports are all about bringing different peoples together. Of course Limbaugh reacted in the typical fashion you would expect from him and almost paralleling the reaction of the Republicans who were voted out of office in 2008.

IT WAS NOT HIS FAULT! RUSH LIMBAUGH IS THE VICTIM OF THE “VAST LIBERAL CONSPIRACY.” Honestly, he reminds me of the sixth grade student that I have who lies about what school he went to in the fifth grade while I’m holding the records in my hand. Nothing is ever his fault, everyone’s out to get him (if you’re confused whether or not that last statement is about Limbaugh or the student, the reality is that it could be about either one). Limbaugh actually said, “This is not about me, this is about the Liberals trying to end conservatism in America. This is about the future of America.” Talk about your self serving, arrogant statement shrouded in TOTAL DENIAL! I’m sure you could talk face to face with Limbaugh and he’d vigorously defend that he’s not a racist. He’s a wonderful example of the guy who can’t see the forest for the trees.

The irony of Limbaugh’s statements today are that he was a part of the concerted Republican propoganda campaign which began about the time his talk radio show started up to end liberalism in America. And, they almost succeeded. In fact, today anyone in national politics who’s a liberal refers to themselves as a progressive. They’ve virtually abandoned the term liberal because of Limbaugh and Republicans like him. Remember, their goal was the PERMANENT REPUBLICAN MAJORITY. They were attempting to gain control of the media, the congress, the White House, the Surpreme Court, the Justice Department and therefore control of every facet of our government. AND THEY ALMOST SUCCEEDED. Only the folly of George W Bush/Dick Cheney stopped them. They only needed one more term in the White House to have a strangle hold on the Supreme Court that would have lasted through most of my daughter’s lifetime and a large part of my granddaughter (this is still possible due to the ages of the “conservative” judges on the court – which is one reason I keep writing – America can’t fall for these thugs again or disaster is still possible). Remember, these guys had developed voting machines that could be easily hacked and which have been proven to change the vote from Democrat to Republican in more than one election. There’s ample evidence that I’ve seen showing the possibility that neither of GW Bush’s terms were legitimate because of the voting machine irregularity which never became common knowledge or was fully investigated.

This gets me to President Obama’s agonizing decision regarding Afganistan (if you truly want to understand why this is such a difficult and important decision read “Descent into Chaos” by Ahmed Rashid, a noteworthy Pakistani reporter and expert on both Pakistan and Afganistan). The invasion of Afganistan should have been over in less than a year. Our purpose for going in there was to capture or kill Osama bin Laden, the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks on America and to remove the Taliban from power in Afganistan because they were complicit in al Qaeda’s everyday existence. Al Qaeda had their training camps in the rugged mountains of Afganisan and with the support of the Taliban and the Pakistani’s they were training and equipping “terrorists” who were causing havoc all over the world. To make a long story short, we (America and it’s allies) had bin Laden trapped more than once and let him get away. In fact, that we let him get away is suspicious enough to me that I’ve often wondered why there’s never been a formal investigation into the why. However, that’s a story for another day.

The United States essentially destabilized Afganistan by routing the Taliban and then abandoned any semblence of responsibility (that had any chance for success) as they diverted their assets and their military focus into Iraq (of course, they later did essentially the same thing in Iraq). We all know what a disaster Iraq has been, and I’m anxiously looking forward to the day when President Obama actually brings our troops home and allows the Iraqi’s to solve their own problems in their own way. I can vitually guarantee you that the way they go about this will not be something that we in America would approve of. But, if anything has been learned in the 6+ years we’ve been sacrificing our troops in Iraq (for what at some point in time will be regarded as a mistake of MONUMENTAL proportions – possibly worse than we can imagine – and, I really hope on wrong on this) is that we DO NOT UNDERSTAND THEM, and our leaders were ignorant about the ethnic divisions in that country which still exist to this day. (many people claim the “surge” was successful in Iraq, but I believe it’s just putting off the inevitable – with a cost of almost 1500 American lives to this point)

With our troops and our focus in Iraq we put Hamad Karzai into power in Afganistan and then gave him NO SUPPORT. In fact, the CIA actually funded the warlords who were in control of the various ethnic regions of the countryside making it impossible for Karzai to set up an effective central government. The United States offered far too little in the form of economic aid, and didn’t come through on what was offered – as did virtually every other country which promised to help Karzai set up an effective government. Everything the Untited States, under Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld did led to the resurgence of the Taliban and al Qaeda. In fact, the way the Bush administration was going about this “war” led the Pakistani’s and the Afgans to view the Americans as the terrorists. If you try to view this from the standpoint of villagers in the middle of nowhere who are illiterate and poor and easily victimized by organizations like the Taliban who are armed to the teeth and ruthless, a drone strike that kills 15 of your family and/or neighbors looks little different than a suicide bomber who does the same thing. The Pakistani’s were taking money by the billions from the Bush administration and funneling portions of it to the Taliban and just observing how stupid the American government was and how easily they were decieved as they were doing this. What a TERRIBLE IRONY – The Taliban were/are funded mainly by the Pakistani’s (and U.S. dollars).

The end result of this is that the Taliban are back in Afganistan in force, the Karzai government is still in office but basically hamstrung and relying on things like the drug trade to provide the income they need to function (because we wouldn’t provide it). Al Qaeda is alive and well in Pakistan with the support of the government we’ve been unsuccessfully trying to buy off with our money (they take the money, but they allow al Qaeda virtual freedom in the Northwest Provinces). Pakistan still has something like 100 nuclear warheads and this is the most dangerous challenge to America in the world. Al Qaeda is being supported not only by Pakistan, but by Saudi Arabia and other countries that we’ve continued to do business with because of our reliance on oil and at some point in time we have to face up to the reality of the situation or face some terrible consequences. THERE ARE NO EASY ANSWERS HERE.

The point is that the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Krisol et al neocons got us in this place and now they are busily trying to take advantage of the ignorance of the American people regarding what’s going on over there to continue their CONSTANT EFFORT TO UNDERMINE THE PRESIDENCY OF BARACK OBAMA! Can you imagine what they’d be saying if the Democrats were doing this when they were in power? I would welcome a legitimate discusion of the issues involved. There actually are Republicans who could contribute to whatever decision Obama ultimately makes and it would be great to have a sense of unity as we, as Americans, try to extricate ourselves from this HORRIBLY PRECARIOUS position we were left in by Bush/Cheney. It is worst than ironic in my mind that the very people who created this fiasco are the ones starting a “Keep America Safe” organization – WHEN THEY’VE PROVEN THAT, GIVEN POWER, THEY DO EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE. We are as unsafe as we’ve been in my lifetime (and I was born in the late fourties)! Most Americans believe Iraq was Bush/Cheney’s major blunder, but history will prove that it was Afganistan/Pakistan!

Tonight I had the misfortune of turning the TV on to a station that was playing an interview that someone (I never figured out who – although the station was NBC) had with Rush Limbaugh. I forced myself to listen to this, and the person giving the interview gave Limbaugh the opportunity to respond to some of the more direct criticisms of him. The guy is such a liar, he doesn’t think twice about lying. In fact, while I listened to him, I was reminded of the school counselor who told me that students who lie all the time must “figure this out” by the time they’re 14 years old or lying becomes part of their character. Some of Limbaugh’s lies tonight were obvious to me without going to any lengths of research – and I wouldn’t do that anyway. But, he tried to give the persona of someone who welcomed all the criticism – kind of like Bush’s “bring it on” when he was encouraging the insurgency in Iraq. As Bush should have respected the phrase “Be careful what you wish for,” I believe so should Limbaugh.

Now, it’s true, the man is filthy rich. So, he is probably immune from anything other than the criticism he gets. although his place in history is not one that I would envy – no matter how much money he has. One of the topics the interviewer brought up was the recent “stirrings” in the Republican party that Limbaugh is destroying the party. When you watch the guy, you see someone who’s trying as hard as he can to remain calm, while his body language is spewing anger at the thought that anyone could deem him in a negative light should they be a Republican. And, his demeanor while responding to the “charges” is quite childish. He was making facial expressions that I would expect from my sixth grade students when they are caught doing something wrong and choose to try lying their way out of trouble. On the one hand Limbaugh disdains the idea that he’s the leader of the Republican party and then, in almost the very next breath, he points out that if the party wants to return to “power” they will listen to him.

He calls anyone in the party who would disagree with him a moderate or liberal Republican and says that there is no hope for people with that “bent.” One of his comments was that the only way for the Republican party to regain power was through “conservative” policies. Of course, his “conservative” philosophy is just as elusive to understand as “victory” was in Iraq all those years when he was a water carrier for George W Bush. There appears, at least to me, to be no doubt that the fascist tendencies of the Bush administration were the connecting points to Limbaugh. I’m only guessing here, but I believe his favorite politician in America would be Dick Cheney – there was nothing in the part of the interview that I saw which would confirm this directly, but it’s just my intuition after watching the two of them for the past many years.

And, both tonight and in another recent “blurb” that I saw of Limbaugh, he continues to make references to God. As if he’s a Christian. Tonight, he said, “Thankyou Lord for my enemies.” It appeared this was his way of impressing people that it doesn’t bother him to have enemies. Also, I’m guessing he’s implying that his enemies are helping to make him even richer financially. And, it’s not my place to judge him spiritually, just suffice it to say that he must go to a far different church than I do. Last Sunday, for example, I listened to a sermon on how Christians are called to be compassionate toward the poor, the sick, and the weak. Based on what I’ve seen from Limbaugh, he’s almost the opposite. Regarding the sick, I recently heard him say that Americans should have the same health care as dogs – if they can pay for it, fine, otherwise forget it – as far as medical treatment of any kind. That didn’t seem like a compassionate statement to me. However, as a member of the “Christian Left,” his lack of compassion actually does qualify him to be the leader of the Republican party as it’s presently constituted, in my view.

There was no extended discussion of how Republican politicians seem to feel like they have to run their thoughts by Rush before making them public, but the hint of that seemed to bring a smug look of pride from Limbaugh. The really dicey part of the interview, at least from my point of view, was the discussion of President Obama. This was where Limbaugh was very liberal with his “fish stories.” For one thing, he said he thought it was a great thing that an African American was elected President – well, he didn’t say that in those words, but he answered yes to a question which asked that. Then, almost under his breath, he added “but not for very long.” He made non-sensical comments about Obama’s policies that really meant that the idea of a Black President succeeding would lead to the failure of our great nation (apparently for no other reason than he’s Black). He, in a very clumsy manor, tried to find a way to say that he wasn’t rooting against America by hoping President Obama failed. What he actually said was “If President Obama succeeds, the country will fail.” The absurdity of some of his comments were such that I, as I’ve been for many years, was left wondering how this thug gets any credibility whatsoever, ANYWHERE.

Let’s just look at that last statemen of his from a rational, logical point of view. What could he possibly be implying that if President Obama succeeds, America fails. Well, President Obama is trying to extract us from two entrenched political and militarial nightmares that were caused by the very people Limbaugh still believes should be running the show – how can anyone root for Obama to fail in this endeavor (well, I guess if Obama’s success would only exacerbate someone’s own failure, then an UNBELIEVABLY SELFISH person would root for him to fail – despite what that would mean for our prized troops that that person is so much “in support” of). Worse than that, Obama is trying to close GITMO, the house of horrors where America gained the moniker of torturers – torture that was authorized by the very people Limbaugh supports – and torture that he, himself, has come out in favor of (here again, Obama’s success only heightens Limbaugh’s and Bush’s failures). Obama is trying to “right the ship” in an economy that the very people that Limbaugh supported nearly (and may still have) ruined. The fallout from the Bush economic crisis could last for years to come – it was nearly another Great Depression – only headed off by Obama’s quick action to “stimulate” the economy (I say this, even though I personally believe the stimulus was too small) – I guess if you’re making hundred’s of millions and everyone else having a job makes you look bad, you root for the President’s failure – again, HOW SELFISH CAN SOME PEOPLE GET? Obama is trying to bring confidence into the justice department, the agency that Limbaugh’s heroes totally politicized, so that the American people believe they are going to be fairly treated by the government when it comes to the laws of this land (I guess if your desire is for Republicans to be elected NO MATTER HOW IT HAPPENS, and you expect the justice department to do their part to insure this, then you would root against success here as well).

In fact, Limbaugh should be thankful that Obama is so fair minded. Although I haven’t given up hope that the torture policies of the Bush administration along with the illegal wiretapping and the lying us into war will all be investigated by our justice department at some juncture – Limbaugh should be thankful that President Obama is “looking forward and not backward.” He should also be thankful that Obama has an extreme belief in freedom of speech, because some of Limbaugh’s own rhetoric is, in my view, WAY OVER THE LINE. There are laws against sedition (encouraging the destruction and/or overthrow of our elected government) and some of the inciteful language used on the public airwaves by Limbaugh (and some of his associates) is borderline treasonous. Which reminds me, when Limbaugh claims to be independent from the Republican party (which he did tonight) – how does he explain that he’s been spouting the so-called “talking points” – along with all the other Republican “puppets” – for the past 20+ years. I’ll give him credit for being the first “puppet,” it’s just that all that money has made him see himself as something way more than what he really is (believing his own lies again).

And, I’ll end with, I believe all his “vitriole” is coming back at him. In the last few days I’ve witnessed something that virtually restores my hope that America is going to get through this difficult time of people like Limbaugh rooting for our failure. It was reported last week that Limbaugh, along with some partners, was attempting to purchase the St Louis Rams NFL (National Football League) team. The thought of that, I’ve been an NFL fan for my entire lifetime, made me shudder (I remember Leroy “Crazy Legs” Hirsh). I’m in a fantasy football league, and to a man, everyone in the league said they’d boycott St Louis players the day Limbaugh became the owner. Much to my surprise and admiration, in the past two days, the NFL players association has written a letter to the league taking the position that they want nothing to do with Limbaugh. His long history of insensitive racist comments caused them to point out they are a league that seeks unity among people and Limbaugh’s divisive, racist nature has no place in the NFL. I hope the NFL listens. Additionally, based on the interview questions tonight, it’s fairly obvious that there are those in the Republican party who are evidently “jumping ship” from Limbaugh. One of the interviewer’s questions was framed with the statement that many Republicans feel he’s ruining their party. As stated above, his response was that they are liberals and they are the ones ruining the party. The reality: the Republican party is imploding and it will continue to do so until it repudiates racists like Rush Limbaugh.