I am already tiring of the Presidential debates... I ask you; could they be any less Presidential? In fact could they be any less of a debate? I was present at the Charleston Democratic "forum" and I must admit I thoroughly enjoyed the evening. I was entertained by the banter but in terms of debate... as John Stewart might say.."not so much". If anything the questions asked were mainly concrete and frequently impossible to answer in any meaningful way. To her credit Senator Clinton gave the most obvious answer to the now famous "would you meet with the (bad guys) question". Although her answer was cleverly framed to score political points, she accidentally or otherwise exposed these "what if questions" as the lowest intellectual common denominators that they are. These types of questions seem to seek to dignify the answers. Remember the "what if" question that hurt the Dukakis campaign? "What would you do if Mrs. Dukakis were assaulted"? Better yet, do you remember the old Saturday Night Live sketch.."What if Napoleon had a B52 at Waterloo?" Can you explain to me the difference in the two"? What would you do Governor Dukais if your wife were assaulted and you had a flame thrower?
These forums are just opportunities for candidates to state what they say are their beliefs...about everything! Now stating belief is OK to a point; and I guess it is important to know if someone believes in the Easter Bunny (or other myths?), but I would prefer to hear a debate about the issues of the day. To categorically say you are in favor or against something because of your "beliefs" does little to advance the discussion, in fact; it stifles it. On the other hand to debate the merits of a policy or program, in the context of projected outcomes for the country, forces we, the electorate, to think about it. After hearing the arguments we would then apply our own reasoning to these arguments and then decide which candidate we can support. I "debated " this issue with an acquaintance recently. He asserts that these topics are too complex for most people, that they can't make reasonable decisions about these important issues . "That is why we elect politicians" he said.
Every day citizens in this country conduct one of this Republic's most sacred "rites". They sit on juries and listen to opposing arguments. They weigh those arguments and then render decisions as best they can - important decisions - life altering decisions. I think the average person is more than capable of "figuring" out if it is in our best interest as a country to pay for children's health care, to build a wall along the Mexican border or to continue the occupation of another country.
I would love to see a format of debate where 2 or 3 of the candidates take on an important topic of the day: let's say Universal Health care. They can state the facts (as they see them) and present the short and long term cost/benefit of the program or policy. They would actually debate, presenting point and counter point, building an argument... and the only real rule would be - you can't just say "because".
Wouldn't hearing this type of discussion, covering all the important topics of the day be a help to we the electorate? Wouldn't it also give the candidates a chance to think through how the different issues relate to each other? And... wouldn't this format expose the "Ideologue"? - The person who really is only interested in cultural manipulation and not the advancement of the state of the Republic and it's people.
Finally wouldn't it be fun! It would invigorate the process. I am also not against injecting some "theater" as well. I suspect the Lincoln - Douglas debates had their dramatic and perhaps light moments. Nothing wrong with injecting humor or gamesmanship after all; it is the American way. A sense of humor is OK as well. I think a person who takes the job seriously but not themselves, has a better chance of success during adversity. So entertain me if you like, but please give me something to think about... not just something to feel about, because as it stands now we are all certain to be numb by November 2008.
What do you think?
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Best Foreign Film ----- 2030
A wonderful film is about to be released on DVD. I saw this film a few months ago in the theater and with it's re-release, I am reminded just how important a film this is. The movie is called "The Lives of Others". It is set in East Germany, in the year 1984 and the story in essence, is about government control and its no holds barred attempt to totally dominate the lives of it's citizens, through the use of the media, "official" intimidation, surveillance, "secret" inquiries and covert (and overt) "actions".
The movie is in German and since I do not speak German, I had to rely on the subtitles for the dialogue. I actually love movies with sub-titles. Perhaps that is why the ever present "crawlers" running under most news programs today does not annoy me as much as other people. These movies are unique to me because I actually find that I get much more out of the acting: The pain in his facial expressions, the way she turns in the doorway, their posture when they learn the "news" of one development or the other. These explicit communications of what "is" rather than what is "explained"- makes the experience so intimate for me.
This is the kind of film that keeps your attention for days afterward. The layers upon layers of message and movement continue to be revealed, long after the reels have run out. This movie transported me to the cold war era. The images and sounds were stark and haunting: grey tones, cigarette smoke, the European police "sirens". It's structure was vague; a "pretend" society where the rules are always present but rarely mentioned. And it's characters were "determined" yet confused. They seemed to me like dancers on a dingy marionette stage who are not quite aware of the strings attached to their bodies. It is a startlingly accurate portrayal of a truly frightening prescription for existence. A way of life that demands pretense and denies "freedom".
As the movie concluded and the credits rolled, I retreated to my own thoughts. Quite abruptly a woman rose in front of me and spoke, rather loudly. She made one awkwardly cliche' comment - "I am so glad I live in America". Then she smiled and walked out of the theater. For months now, her simple affirmation, as well as the complexities and nuance of the film have been bouncing around in my head.
This film told the story of the dreary existence in Soviet controlled East Germany. During that time we in the USA, more precisely my parent's generation, seemed to be aware of what was happening in the GDR, and I suspect we also could not understand why the people of the East Germany just tolerated it. We scratched our heads and wondered " just when will the people march?" Then we saw the tanks roll in and watched the armed soldiers at the "wall" . Then we held our heads and wondered "just when does it become too late to stop it. "
These people were wiretapped and they were blacklisted. Their careers were threatened by politicians. Women were exploited and forced to "cozy up" to the "bosses". People were threatened with prison without trial and resistors of any type were marginalized, often via the state run media. And others... Well, some others just disappeared.
I am certain that we are all aware of the irony of a movie like this coming out at this point in time, in this country. So I will not "over emphasize".... But I do hope, with more than a dash of skepticism in my mind, that our current society is not the subject of a "docudrama", to be released somewhere in the not too distant future... I hope that the script for the best foreign film of 2030 is not being drafted today... "I Am So Glad I Live In America"...
Be lucky!
The movie is in German and since I do not speak German, I had to rely on the subtitles for the dialogue. I actually love movies with sub-titles. Perhaps that is why the ever present "crawlers" running under most news programs today does not annoy me as much as other people. These movies are unique to me because I actually find that I get much more out of the acting: The pain in his facial expressions, the way she turns in the doorway, their posture when they learn the "news" of one development or the other. These explicit communications of what "is" rather than what is "explained"- makes the experience so intimate for me.
This is the kind of film that keeps your attention for days afterward. The layers upon layers of message and movement continue to be revealed, long after the reels have run out. This movie transported me to the cold war era. The images and sounds were stark and haunting: grey tones, cigarette smoke, the European police "sirens". It's structure was vague; a "pretend" society where the rules are always present but rarely mentioned. And it's characters were "determined" yet confused. They seemed to me like dancers on a dingy marionette stage who are not quite aware of the strings attached to their bodies. It is a startlingly accurate portrayal of a truly frightening prescription for existence. A way of life that demands pretense and denies "freedom".
As the movie concluded and the credits rolled, I retreated to my own thoughts. Quite abruptly a woman rose in front of me and spoke, rather loudly. She made one awkwardly cliche' comment - "I am so glad I live in America". Then she smiled and walked out of the theater. For months now, her simple affirmation, as well as the complexities and nuance of the film have been bouncing around in my head.
This film told the story of the dreary existence in Soviet controlled East Germany. During that time we in the USA, more precisely my parent's generation, seemed to be aware of what was happening in the GDR, and I suspect we also could not understand why the people of the East Germany just tolerated it. We scratched our heads and wondered " just when will the people march?" Then we saw the tanks roll in and watched the armed soldiers at the "wall" . Then we held our heads and wondered "just when does it become too late to stop it. "
These people were wiretapped and they were blacklisted. Their careers were threatened by politicians. Women were exploited and forced to "cozy up" to the "bosses". People were threatened with prison without trial and resistors of any type were marginalized, often via the state run media. And others... Well, some others just disappeared.
I am certain that we are all aware of the irony of a movie like this coming out at this point in time, in this country. So I will not "over emphasize".... But I do hope, with more than a dash of skepticism in my mind, that our current society is not the subject of a "docudrama", to be released somewhere in the not too distant future... I hope that the script for the best foreign film of 2030 is not being drafted today... "I Am So Glad I Live In America"...
Be lucky!
Monday, July 2, 2007
Martha, Paris and Scooter "Justice in America?"
President Bush, the made a decision today. He decided to be an "Activist Executive" and commute the sentence of Scooter Libby. He essentially made it clear that if you obstruct justice in the name of protecting his administration you will not serve time in jail. Just as I noted in my previous post, the decision by Gerald Ford to pardon Nixon was a outrageous act - with long term consequences and today's decison will also impact generations of Americans to come. Because once again the word on the street will be, do whatever you want to do, lie to whomever you want, and as long as it benefits a Republican, we will make sure you never see a day behind bars. (G Gordon Liddy must have really ticked someone off). If you've "made your bones" in the GOP you are set for life.
Is this enough for you? Is this enough to make that call? Does it not strike you as odd and distorted, that Martha Stewart and Paris Hilton each have spent more time in jail than Mr Libby?
HE LIED TO THE FBI! HE LIED TO A FEDERAL PROSECUTOR! HE LIED ABOUT A MATTER OF NATIONAL SECURITY.
Does this not outrage you? Does this not make the bile rise up in your throat? Is this your idea of justice?
Read any non partisan opinion regarding the sentencing of Mr Libby, they all conclude that it was standard and just.
I guess what is so ironic about the commutation is not that Bush actually did it, but the in reasoning he gave. It is his right to act as he did but to say it was because the sentence was too harsh... well that is rich! What is this? The 3 bears? Too much- too little -just right? It seems he has to lie, even when protecting a liar. He should have just said... "I commute his sentence because I can" because that is the truth. When any president grants pardons as he leaves office, I do not believe he gives a reason. We all know the reason, he is doing someone a favor or paying back a debt. Too harsh a sentence? Give me a break! This from a man who as governor of Texas refused to pardon or commute the death sentence of a single person ... even if he or she was mentally retarded. Too harsh a sentence indeed. How does he sleep at night?
What happens now? Will Congress act? I believe that if the executive pardons a person with whom he is criminally connected then that is grounds for impeachment and trial by the Senate. I think Libby lied to cover up for Cheney and Bush in the Valerie Plane case. To avoid the information getting out that by "outing MS Plane, they compromised CIA agents and their assets in the field, and thus compromising national security.
Ask yourself this question... If you were lie to the FBI or a federal prosecutor under oath, to protect even an innocent person, even your 85 year old grandmother, would your sentence be commuted?
So tomorrow is the day you need to make up your mind to act.... Call the White House ad tell them how outraged you are.
Then call your Congressman and tell him or her that you are concerned that the Chief Executive may be gulty of high crimes and/or misdemeanors and that it is the duty of Congress to begin the impeachment process. Do it because it is the right thing to do.
If something is not done to stop this administration... who knows what else they will do - just because they can.
Be Lucky........we need it.
Is this enough for you? Is this enough to make that call? Does it not strike you as odd and distorted, that Martha Stewart and Paris Hilton each have spent more time in jail than Mr Libby?
HE LIED TO THE FBI! HE LIED TO A FEDERAL PROSECUTOR! HE LIED ABOUT A MATTER OF NATIONAL SECURITY.
Does this not outrage you? Does this not make the bile rise up in your throat? Is this your idea of justice?
Read any non partisan opinion regarding the sentencing of Mr Libby, they all conclude that it was standard and just.
I guess what is so ironic about the commutation is not that Bush actually did it, but the in reasoning he gave. It is his right to act as he did but to say it was because the sentence was too harsh... well that is rich! What is this? The 3 bears? Too much- too little -just right? It seems he has to lie, even when protecting a liar. He should have just said... "I commute his sentence because I can" because that is the truth. When any president grants pardons as he leaves office, I do not believe he gives a reason. We all know the reason, he is doing someone a favor or paying back a debt. Too harsh a sentence? Give me a break! This from a man who as governor of Texas refused to pardon or commute the death sentence of a single person ... even if he or she was mentally retarded. Too harsh a sentence indeed. How does he sleep at night?
What happens now? Will Congress act? I believe that if the executive pardons a person with whom he is criminally connected then that is grounds for impeachment and trial by the Senate. I think Libby lied to cover up for Cheney and Bush in the Valerie Plane case. To avoid the information getting out that by "outing MS Plane, they compromised CIA agents and their assets in the field, and thus compromising national security.
Ask yourself this question... If you were lie to the FBI or a federal prosecutor under oath, to protect even an innocent person, even your 85 year old grandmother, would your sentence be commuted?
So tomorrow is the day you need to make up your mind to act.... Call the White House ad tell them how outraged you are.
Then call your Congressman and tell him or her that you are concerned that the Chief Executive may be gulty of high crimes and/or misdemeanors and that it is the duty of Congress to begin the impeachment process. Do it because it is the right thing to do.
If something is not done to stop this administration... who knows what else they will do - just because they can.
Be Lucky........we need it.
Monday, June 25, 2007
Vice President - In Charge of Vice?
These days Mr Cheney is yet again the focus of the news, the focus of my rage and I hope, the focus of political strategists, now prosecuting their tactics for the 2008 presidential election. I awoke a few days ago with Air America's "Young Turks" lulling me from my last sleep of the weekend. I was not surprised to hear yet more conversation about the Vice President's latest snubbing of the Constitution, the Congress and the American people. After rising I spent the next several minutes in the shower, working up a lather of Zest and consternation as I fantasized about the VP getting his just "come uppins". "We have to impeach him", I thought; not part of the executive branch? ... not subject to scrutiny by the Congress? As my resolve to make yet another call to congressman Brown slid down the drain I started to dress myself with a new perspecive on this situation. I have no idea where Cheney stands in terms of contempt of congress or if he is or isn't in the executive branch... and I do not know if he is guilty of high crimes and / or misdemeanors. However it does appear to me that this Vice President is like no other we have known. More precisely, what it really means is that this President clearly behaves like no other we have known in recent or distant history.
It painfully occurs to me, that this administration has cleverly devised an operational strategy to take advantage of the Constitutional ambiguity of the Vice Presidency and is using the office to prosecute the neo-con agenda with almost total impunity. How ingenious! So much so, that I predict that one of the enduring effects of this Presidency will be that at yhe very least, much more attention will be paid to the Vice Presidential candidates. On the other had it may even come to pass, that as we learn more about Mr Cheney's behind the scene antics, that a Constitutional Amendment of some type is passed. An ultimate legal clarification that defines the limitations and accountability of what became in this century's infancy, the "most influential" office in government. The Vice President's role currently has no official constitutional function other than to serve as President of the Senate and via the 23rd amendment, succeed the president in the event of his/ her death or resignation. (or some other incapacity). This may be the only real recourse to deal with effects of "the man behind the curtain" To prevent the creation of a second "shadow president" who could basically rule with impunity.
It seems to me that whatever Mr Cheney may be guilty of, to take the time to actually figure it out ... to determine what can be done or not done?... Well that could take years, cost millions of dollars and serve as yet another diversion; keeping our focus away from the issues of the day: health care, oil dependence and of course Iraq.
Then again.... NO WAY!!!
I cannot abide the notion of letting him off the hook. He has broken the law, caused the needless deaths of thousands, diverted our treasure to corporate parasites and eroded the rights of citizens. When all is said and done, I still believe that impeachment is the imperative... No matter the cost.... Because, unlike most of the opinions I have heard, I believe the Gerald Ford made a gigantic mistake by pardoning Richard Nixon. He should have been impeached and brought before Congress or a court of law, to answer for his crimes. If that had been the course chosen rather than the easy way out, then we would have never arrived at this crisis of Constitution. There would not have been an Iran Contra and perhaps no "Bush 41" and certainly no "W". I believe instead that the bar would have been raised to the highest level of accountability, which is actually the basic level of accountability for all citizens. I suspect that the pardoning of Nixon let "the word go forth" that you can wiretap and cover up and lie every day and still ultimately you can get away with it. Which is exactly what we are seeing played out today. They, the Cheneys and Bushes of the world, seek power above all else. They do the things they do simply because they can. They lie openly now because no one calls them on it.
I say now is time to call the question. Time to call your representatives and senators. It's not that difficult to do. Just pick up the phone and speak. The staff member on the other end will be polite and they will indeed pass the message along. A phone call still has an impact, an impact that e-mail does not.
So that is how I feel today. Who knows what tomorrow's shower will bring.
Be Lucky!!
By the way..... Our first atheist President was none other than George Washington. Jefferson wrote extensively on the subject, so if you don't believe me.."you can look it up"
It painfully occurs to me, that this administration has cleverly devised an operational strategy to take advantage of the Constitutional ambiguity of the Vice Presidency and is using the office to prosecute the neo-con agenda with almost total impunity. How ingenious! So much so, that I predict that one of the enduring effects of this Presidency will be that at yhe very least, much more attention will be paid to the Vice Presidential candidates. On the other had it may even come to pass, that as we learn more about Mr Cheney's behind the scene antics, that a Constitutional Amendment of some type is passed. An ultimate legal clarification that defines the limitations and accountability of what became in this century's infancy, the "most influential" office in government. The Vice President's role currently has no official constitutional function other than to serve as President of the Senate and via the 23rd amendment, succeed the president in the event of his/ her death or resignation. (or some other incapacity). This may be the only real recourse to deal with effects of "the man behind the curtain" To prevent the creation of a second "shadow president" who could basically rule with impunity.
It seems to me that whatever Mr Cheney may be guilty of, to take the time to actually figure it out ... to determine what can be done or not done?... Well that could take years, cost millions of dollars and serve as yet another diversion; keeping our focus away from the issues of the day: health care, oil dependence and of course Iraq.
Then again.... NO WAY!!!
I cannot abide the notion of letting him off the hook. He has broken the law, caused the needless deaths of thousands, diverted our treasure to corporate parasites and eroded the rights of citizens. When all is said and done, I still believe that impeachment is the imperative... No matter the cost.... Because, unlike most of the opinions I have heard, I believe the Gerald Ford made a gigantic mistake by pardoning Richard Nixon. He should have been impeached and brought before Congress or a court of law, to answer for his crimes. If that had been the course chosen rather than the easy way out, then we would have never arrived at this crisis of Constitution. There would not have been an Iran Contra and perhaps no "Bush 41" and certainly no "W". I believe instead that the bar would have been raised to the highest level of accountability, which is actually the basic level of accountability for all citizens. I suspect that the pardoning of Nixon let "the word go forth" that you can wiretap and cover up and lie every day and still ultimately you can get away with it. Which is exactly what we are seeing played out today. They, the Cheneys and Bushes of the world, seek power above all else. They do the things they do simply because they can. They lie openly now because no one calls them on it.
I say now is time to call the question. Time to call your representatives and senators. It's not that difficult to do. Just pick up the phone and speak. The staff member on the other end will be polite and they will indeed pass the message along. A phone call still has an impact, an impact that e-mail does not.
So that is how I feel today. Who knows what tomorrow's shower will bring.
Be Lucky!!
By the way..... Our first atheist President was none other than George Washington. Jefferson wrote extensively on the subject, so if you don't believe me.."you can look it up"
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
DEMOCRATS = The Fear of Success? ...Maybe
Today on www.commondreams.org, Thom Hartmann has published a very compelling piece outlining his view of the Republican strategy for 2008. I urge you to read the article in total but essentially he makes the case that the purpose of the Iraq war was nothing more than consolidating political power. Not for oil, not for peace, not to fight terrorism but as a device to maintain control.
Well this makes perfect sense to me.... I have been searching for some sense in this madness... and all this time it was the most simple of plans: Focus the masses, exploit it for as long as you can then change strategies... First it was lead us towards war now "morphing" again... Suddenly the responsibility for the war is shifting to the Democrats... The media is playing it up...the republicans are working the angle and the Democrats are working their way toward a stunning defeat in 2008...
Yes, put away your Hillary Stickers... forget about Barach... and let Al sleep; because as the economy of thought evolves and the "shape shifter" conservatives get "fuzzy", we should get ready to wake up one dreary November morning to yet another republican landslide. The reason is quite simple actually, the Democrats are working last elections angles while the Republicans have moved on. They started this war and now they are getting ready to end it...on their terms...on their time frame.
The Democrats had their chance to take back control and initiative... They could have just not funded the War PERIOD!....That is, let the funding run out...no vote...no veto... no more deaths.
Instead we have more fear...fear to take a stand...fear to be painted as non patriotic... ultimately: Fear to take control. I think this crop of Democrats are so used to being number 2 that ever since they took control in November they have been doing nothing but try to give it back. They want the titles, they want the roles but they fail to embrace the true essence of leadership...To paraphrase JFK they should do these things "not because they are easy...but because they are hard"... The Democrats believed, I think, that they would be "greeted as liberators"... That the remaining republican legislators, tired of the tyranny imposed on them by Delay and company, would greet Pelosi and Reid with flowers. That the votes would pile up and the war would end soon....or not.
Maybe they don't want to end this war...maybe they just want power and are really hoping for their own Rove to ride in with a blue shade of psychological Jiu-Jitsu to use the people's own power against them...maybe they don't really care about us either...
Maybe we the voters are the one's really afraid of success.
I voted for Nader in 2000. I guess, looking back, it was a wasted vote (and I take responsibility for that vote!) but at the time I was fed up with the 2 party system which seemed to me like 2 sides of the same coin. All about power..all about lobby money, all about maintaining things as they are.
Now I am starting to believe that it is we the people who do not want change. It is we who are afraid of success. I hear the phrase bandied about so frequently in terms of Iraq.."the definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing over and over but expecting different results". Well maybe we are insane to believe that voting Democratic will make any more difference in 2008 than it did in 2004. Or that this time it will be different...they will try and break our oil addiction...that we will address address global warming...that health care will be recognized as a right...that the middle class will not only be salvaged but revered!
Thom Hartman thinks the war will end in September... Well it should have never started and what about all those soldiers who have died?...What do we say to their families? Sorry about that?
I fear that if we trust the Democrats we will end up back in the hands of conservative social "craftsmen" who play Black against White and the Middle against the bottom in the service of transferring more power to the powerful...
I fear that if we do not make better choices in the voting booth then we can then look forward ....to more of the same.... the next war... the next crisis ... the next illusion.
Or maybe we can stop acting insane.... Maybe its time as voters to finally succeed....Third party anyone?
Well this makes perfect sense to me.... I have been searching for some sense in this madness... and all this time it was the most simple of plans: Focus the masses, exploit it for as long as you can then change strategies... First it was lead us towards war now "morphing" again... Suddenly the responsibility for the war is shifting to the Democrats... The media is playing it up...the republicans are working the angle and the Democrats are working their way toward a stunning defeat in 2008...
Yes, put away your Hillary Stickers... forget about Barach... and let Al sleep; because as the economy of thought evolves and the "shape shifter" conservatives get "fuzzy", we should get ready to wake up one dreary November morning to yet another republican landslide. The reason is quite simple actually, the Democrats are working last elections angles while the Republicans have moved on. They started this war and now they are getting ready to end it...on their terms...on their time frame.
The Democrats had their chance to take back control and initiative... They could have just not funded the War PERIOD!....That is, let the funding run out...no vote...no veto... no more deaths.
Instead we have more fear...fear to take a stand...fear to be painted as non patriotic... ultimately: Fear to take control. I think this crop of Democrats are so used to being number 2 that ever since they took control in November they have been doing nothing but try to give it back. They want the titles, they want the roles but they fail to embrace the true essence of leadership...To paraphrase JFK they should do these things "not because they are easy...but because they are hard"... The Democrats believed, I think, that they would be "greeted as liberators"... That the remaining republican legislators, tired of the tyranny imposed on them by Delay and company, would greet Pelosi and Reid with flowers. That the votes would pile up and the war would end soon....or not.
Maybe they don't want to end this war...maybe they just want power and are really hoping for their own Rove to ride in with a blue shade of psychological Jiu-Jitsu to use the people's own power against them...maybe they don't really care about us either...
Maybe we the voters are the one's really afraid of success.
I voted for Nader in 2000. I guess, looking back, it was a wasted vote (and I take responsibility for that vote!) but at the time I was fed up with the 2 party system which seemed to me like 2 sides of the same coin. All about power..all about lobby money, all about maintaining things as they are.
Now I am starting to believe that it is we the people who do not want change. It is we who are afraid of success. I hear the phrase bandied about so frequently in terms of Iraq.."the definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing over and over but expecting different results". Well maybe we are insane to believe that voting Democratic will make any more difference in 2008 than it did in 2004. Or that this time it will be different...they will try and break our oil addiction...that we will address address global warming...that health care will be recognized as a right...that the middle class will not only be salvaged but revered!
Thom Hartman thinks the war will end in September... Well it should have never started and what about all those soldiers who have died?...What do we say to their families? Sorry about that?
I fear that if we trust the Democrats we will end up back in the hands of conservative social "craftsmen" who play Black against White and the Middle against the bottom in the service of transferring more power to the powerful...
I fear that if we do not make better choices in the voting booth then we can then look forward ....to more of the same.... the next war... the next crisis ... the next illusion.
Or maybe we can stop acting insane.... Maybe its time as voters to finally succeed....Third party anyone?
Wednesday, May 2, 2007
Endless Presidential Debates... The new "Excess of Believal"
I am already tiring of the Presidential debates... I ask you; could they be any less Presidential? In fact could they be any less of a debate? I was present at the Charleston Democratic "forum" and I must admit I thoroughly enjoyed the evening. I was entertained by the banter but in terms of debate... as John Stewart might say.."not so much". If anything the questions asked were mainly concrete and frequently impossible to answer in any meaningful way. To her credit Senator Clinton gave the most obvious answer to the now famous "would you meet with the (bad guys) question". Although her answer was cleverly framed to score political points, she accidentally or otherwise exposed the intellectual process actually exposed these "what if questions" as the lowest intellectual common denominator. This type of question seeks to dignify the answer. Remember the "what if" question that hurt the Dukakis campaign? What would you do if Mrs. Dukakis were assaulted? Better yet, do you remember the old Saturday Night Live sketch.."What if Napoleon had a B52 at Waterloo?" Can you explain to me the difference in the two"? What would you do Governor Dukais if your wife were assaulted and you had a flame thrower?
These forums are just opportunities for candidates to state what they say are their beliefs...about everything! Now stating belief is OK to a point; and I guess it is important to know if someone believes in the Easter Bunny (or other myths?)... but I would prefer to hear a debate about the issues of the day. To categorically say you are in favor or against something because of your "beliefs" does little to advance the conversation, in fact; it stifles it. On the other hand to debate the merits of a policy or program, in the context of projected outcomes for the country, forces we the electorate, to think about it. After hearing the arguments we would then apply our own reasoning to these arguments and then decide which candidate we can support. I "debated " this issue with an acquaintance recently. He asserts that these issues are too complex for most people, that they can't make reasonable decisions about these important issues. "That is why we elect politicians" he said.
Every day citizens in this country conduct one of this Republic's most sacred "rites". They sit on juries and listen to argument. They weigh those arguments and then render decisions as best they can - important decisions - life altering decisions. I think we are more than capable of "figuring" out if it is in our best interest as a country to pay for children's health care, to build a wall along the Mexican border or to continue occupying another country.
I would love to see a format of debate where 2 or 3 of the candidates take on an important topic of the day: let's say Universal Health care. They then state the facts (as they see them), the short and long term cost/benefit and any other alternatives. They debate point and counter point, building an argument... and the only real rule would be - you can't just say "because".
Wouldn't hearing this type of conversation, covering all the important topics of the day be a help to us as an electorate? Wouldn't it also give the candidates a chance to think through how the issues relate to each other? And... wouldn't this format expose the "Ideologue"? - The person who really is only interested in cultural manipulation and not the advancement of the state of the Republic and it's people.
Finally wouldn't it be fun! It would invigorate the process. Let me also add that I am not against injecting some "theater" as well. I suspect the Lincoln - Douglas debates had their dramatic and perhaps light moments. Nothing wrong with injecting humor or gamesmanship it is the American way. A sense of humor is not a bad thing either. I think a person who takes the job seriously but not themselves, has a better chance of success during adversity. Entertain me if you like but please give me something to think about... not just something to feel about, because as it stands now we are all certain to be numb by November 2008.
What do you think?
These forums are just opportunities for candidates to state what they say are their beliefs...about everything! Now stating belief is OK to a point; and I guess it is important to know if someone believes in the Easter Bunny (or other myths?)... but I would prefer to hear a debate about the issues of the day. To categorically say you are in favor or against something because of your "beliefs" does little to advance the conversation, in fact; it stifles it. On the other hand to debate the merits of a policy or program, in the context of projected outcomes for the country, forces we the electorate, to think about it. After hearing the arguments we would then apply our own reasoning to these arguments and then decide which candidate we can support. I "debated " this issue with an acquaintance recently. He asserts that these issues are too complex for most people, that they can't make reasonable decisions about these important issues. "That is why we elect politicians" he said.
Every day citizens in this country conduct one of this Republic's most sacred "rites". They sit on juries and listen to argument. They weigh those arguments and then render decisions as best they can - important decisions - life altering decisions. I think we are more than capable of "figuring" out if it is in our best interest as a country to pay for children's health care, to build a wall along the Mexican border or to continue occupying another country.
I would love to see a format of debate where 2 or 3 of the candidates take on an important topic of the day: let's say Universal Health care. They then state the facts (as they see them), the short and long term cost/benefit and any other alternatives. They debate point and counter point, building an argument... and the only real rule would be - you can't just say "because".
Wouldn't hearing this type of conversation, covering all the important topics of the day be a help to us as an electorate? Wouldn't it also give the candidates a chance to think through how the issues relate to each other? And... wouldn't this format expose the "Ideologue"? - The person who really is only interested in cultural manipulation and not the advancement of the state of the Republic and it's people.
Finally wouldn't it be fun! It would invigorate the process. Let me also add that I am not against injecting some "theater" as well. I suspect the Lincoln - Douglas debates had their dramatic and perhaps light moments. Nothing wrong with injecting humor or gamesmanship it is the American way. A sense of humor is not a bad thing either. I think a person who takes the job seriously but not themselves, has a better chance of success during adversity. Entertain me if you like but please give me something to think about... not just something to feel about, because as it stands now we are all certain to be numb by November 2008.
What do you think?
Thursday, March 22, 2007
"Can We Talk?"
When the administration accuses the Democrats as "not interested in getting the truth ... but instead conducting a political fishing expedition", they once again either miss the point or are avoiding the point. To speak off the record with a few members of congress might indeed suffice to satisfy their own personal curiosities. However this is not about the members of the administration answering to individuals. It is about answering to the citizens of this country. This is not a private corporation that can adjourn to executive session to keep private the details of this "situation" and hide it from the rank and file. The congress is the proxy for "We the People"...and the only way to guarantee what "We" have this information available to us is to have the testimony be sworn, be public and be in the congressional record. If the "testimony" given is not sworn, then it is not testimony at all; it is spin, and we cannot trust it's credibility. Of course we all now know all that if you lie under oath, then the special prosecutor gets a call and the real fun begins.
So let's call on the congressional leadership to move forward on this matter by the book. Otherwise they may as well just all just go off on a golf junket, leaving or perhaps "forgetting" all of the details of the people's business at the 19th hole.
What do you think?
So let's call on the congressional leadership to move forward on this matter by the book. Otherwise they may as well just all just go off on a golf junket, leaving or perhaps "forgetting" all of the details of the people's business at the 19th hole.
What do you think?
Monday, March 19, 2007
"They Act in Our Name"
We just returned home from a vigil commemorating the 4 year anniversary of the Iraq war. We were a small group that withstood the wind and the traffic noise and strained to listen to our neighbors as they read the letters from family members who have lost someone due to this war. We stood close to each other each, listening and becoming lost in our own thoughts. The same words kept being repeated; "he loved his country... he wanted nothing but to serve... he was 20 or 23 or 37 years old". They were each "unique"; they were each "special". They hailed from California, South Carolina, Massachusetts and from Iowa. They each came home to loved ones who regretably laid them to rest and who now move forward in life, trying to somehow fill the hole in their hearts.
I stood there and asked myself over and over; how does this happen? How do our young people end up memorialized on a Monday evening by strangers standing near a park fountain, in a city that most have certainly never visited? Who decided it was the right time, in the correct place for them to risk their lives? And why did they go so willingly?
Of all the stories I have heard of fallen soldiers, of what motivated them, of what they believed in, never have I heard; not in 2007, 2002 or 1968, that they risked their lives for the president or the congress or Exxon or Bell Helicopter. They always had a much nobler calling. They always risked it all for you and and for me.
Listening tonight to the heartfelt expressions of families trying to convey the magnitude of their loss, it was clear in the faces of all present that their loss is our loss. It is also clear that those brave soldiers acted in our name... indeed they acted solely on our behalf. If we understand that point then we must also understand that we must now act in their name. The time has passed when we rally to "support our troops". We are now called upon to "save our troops". It is time to deliver them from the chaos of this civil war. It is time to save them by bringing them home. It is an odd irony that the new "silent majority" seems to be in favor of ending this war. We must now be willing to be a lot less silent!
If you need a way to think about this war or need a way to understand your personal responsibility to now get involved. Try to embrace the realization that the soldiers are there only as long as we allow it. Think about that for a while. Then send an e-mail to your Senator, call your congressman's office or write to your local newspaper and tell them. Stop! Enough! I will not have this! This will not continue; not in my name. Because a few less letters, read at a few less vigils will be perfectly fine with me.
What do you think?
I stood there and asked myself over and over; how does this happen? How do our young people end up memorialized on a Monday evening by strangers standing near a park fountain, in a city that most have certainly never visited? Who decided it was the right time, in the correct place for them to risk their lives? And why did they go so willingly?
Of all the stories I have heard of fallen soldiers, of what motivated them, of what they believed in, never have I heard; not in 2007, 2002 or 1968, that they risked their lives for the president or the congress or Exxon or Bell Helicopter. They always had a much nobler calling. They always risked it all for you and and for me.
Listening tonight to the heartfelt expressions of families trying to convey the magnitude of their loss, it was clear in the faces of all present that their loss is our loss. It is also clear that those brave soldiers acted in our name... indeed they acted solely on our behalf. If we understand that point then we must also understand that we must now act in their name. The time has passed when we rally to "support our troops". We are now called upon to "save our troops". It is time to deliver them from the chaos of this civil war. It is time to save them by bringing them home. It is an odd irony that the new "silent majority" seems to be in favor of ending this war. We must now be willing to be a lot less silent!
If you need a way to think about this war or need a way to understand your personal responsibility to now get involved. Try to embrace the realization that the soldiers are there only as long as we allow it. Think about that for a while. Then send an e-mail to your Senator, call your congressman's office or write to your local newspaper and tell them. Stop! Enough! I will not have this! This will not continue; not in my name. Because a few less letters, read at a few less vigils will be perfectly fine with me.
What do you think?
Sunday, March 18, 2007
Best Foreign Film... 2030
A wonderful film is about to be released on DVD. I saw this film a few months ago in the theater and with it's re-release, I am reminded just how important film this is. The movie is called "Other People's Lives". It is set in East Germany, in the year 1984 and the story in essence, is about government control and its no holds barred attempt to totally dominate the lives of it's citizens, through the use of the media, "official" intimidation, surveillance, "secret" inquiries and covert (and overt) "actions".
The movie is in German and since I do not speak German, I had to rely on the subtitles for the dialogue. I actually love movies with sub-titles. Perhaps that is why the ever present "crawlers" running under most news programs today does not annoy me as much as other people. These movies are unique to me because I actually find that I get much more out of the acting: The pain in his facial expressions, the way she turns in the doorway, their posture when they learn the "news" of one development or the other. These explicit communications of what "is" rather than what is "explained"- makes the experience so intimate for me.
This is the kind of film that keeps your attention for days afterward. The layers upon layers of message and movement continue to be revealed, long after the reels have run out. This movie transported me to the era of the cold war with its images: the grey tones, the cigarette smoke, the European police "sirens" and it's structure; the "pretend" society where the rules are always present but rarely mentioned and it's characters who seemed for the most part like the dancers on a dingy marionette stage, who are not quite aware of the strings attached to their bodies. It is a startlingly accurate portrayal of a truly frightening prescription for existence. One that denies every "freedom" that we as "Americans" have come to take for granted.
As the movie concluded and the credits rolled and I retreated to my own thoughts; a woman rose in front of me and spoke, to herself I suppose, this awkwardly cliche' comment - "I am so glad I live in America". For months now, her simple affirmation, and the complexities and nuance of the film have been reverberating in my head.
This film, viewed from a western perspective, was not surprising in it's portrayal of the dreary existence in Soviet controlled East Germany. We in the USA at that time, seemed to know what was happening in the GDR and I suspect we also wondered why the people there let it go on.
They were wiretapped. They were blacklisted. Their careers were threatened by politicians and women were forced to "cozy up" to the "bosses". They were threatened with prison without trial. Resistors were marginalized, often via the state run media and some... Well, some just disappeared.
I am certain that you are aware of the irony of a movie like this coming out at this point in time, in this country. So I will not "over emphasize".... But I do hope, with more than a dash of skepticism in my mind, that our current society is not the subject of a "docudrama", released somewhere in the not too distant future... I hope that the script is not currently being written, for the best foreign film of 2030...... "I Am So Glad I Live In America"...
Be lucky!
The movie is in German and since I do not speak German, I had to rely on the subtitles for the dialogue. I actually love movies with sub-titles. Perhaps that is why the ever present "crawlers" running under most news programs today does not annoy me as much as other people. These movies are unique to me because I actually find that I get much more out of the acting: The pain in his facial expressions, the way she turns in the doorway, their posture when they learn the "news" of one development or the other. These explicit communications of what "is" rather than what is "explained"- makes the experience so intimate for me.
This is the kind of film that keeps your attention for days afterward. The layers upon layers of message and movement continue to be revealed, long after the reels have run out. This movie transported me to the era of the cold war with its images: the grey tones, the cigarette smoke, the European police "sirens" and it's structure; the "pretend" society where the rules are always present but rarely mentioned and it's characters who seemed for the most part like the dancers on a dingy marionette stage, who are not quite aware of the strings attached to their bodies. It is a startlingly accurate portrayal of a truly frightening prescription for existence. One that denies every "freedom" that we as "Americans" have come to take for granted.
As the movie concluded and the credits rolled and I retreated to my own thoughts; a woman rose in front of me and spoke, to herself I suppose, this awkwardly cliche' comment - "I am so glad I live in America". For months now, her simple affirmation, and the complexities and nuance of the film have been reverberating in my head.
This film, viewed from a western perspective, was not surprising in it's portrayal of the dreary existence in Soviet controlled East Germany. We in the USA at that time, seemed to know what was happening in the GDR and I suspect we also wondered why the people there let it go on.
They were wiretapped. They were blacklisted. Their careers were threatened by politicians and women were forced to "cozy up" to the "bosses". They were threatened with prison without trial. Resistors were marginalized, often via the state run media and some... Well, some just disappeared.
I am certain that you are aware of the irony of a movie like this coming out at this point in time, in this country. So I will not "over emphasize".... But I do hope, with more than a dash of skepticism in my mind, that our current society is not the subject of a "docudrama", released somewhere in the not too distant future... I hope that the script is not currently being written, for the best foreign film of 2030...... "I Am So Glad I Live In America"...
Be lucky!
Saturday, March 10, 2007
The embattled "Middle Class"...It is time to focus inward
We have been so obsessed with external threats. Threats from people who "hate us for our freedom" that many of us have all but ignored the internal threats to "our way of life". The war in Iraq and terrorism still dominate public focus and debate, and rightly so, but while we have been consumed with these issues the other effects of a so called conservative agenda are now significantly impacting our society. Over the past several years there has been a systematic transfer of wealth and influence from the lower and middle classes to the upper classes. It has been achieved, somewhat insidiously via legisltaion, judicial rulings and eroding governmental oversight. Now we have energy legisltation drafted by oil companies, HMO executives authoring health care bills, judges allowing pension funds to be raided, credit card companies given protection in new bankruptcy guidelines and freedom to raise rates indescriminately. These tactics have resulted in soaring gas prices, exploding health care costs and millions of Americans forced into what amounts to indentured servitude, to their credit card companies.
The public was slow to react to the situation in Iraq, in fact we are still somewhat aimless in our response. I am not certain as to the reasons why, other than we have been somewhat insulated to its day to day effects. But now we are faced with a far more greater threat to our way of life. We are faced with the possible demise of the middle class. I would like to examine two of the more significant contributing causes to our potential downfall.
We have all heard the parable of the boiling frog. It goes something like: if you drop a frog into a pot of boiling water the frog will jump out. However if you place a frog into a pot of cool water but gradually raise the tempterature to a boil, then the frog will remain in the pot until he eventually is cooked. Such I fear is the fate of the middle class.
There are several sentinel indicators that have set off alarm bells drawing me to this conclusion. Near the top of the list is the negative effect of "Global Free Trade" on labor. Free trade is the notion that we should freely participate in a world market with minimal or no protections for our own "products or services". Free trade was sold to us as "essential" for our economy to grow. It was backed of course by big business, opposed by labor and most substantially delivered upon us via The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) by none other than Bill Clinton. He was and still is a proponant of global free trade. (Perhaps this provides some insight into his surprising affinity for George Herbert Walker Bush). In any case the net effect of NAFTA and the WTO in general has not been the promised opening up of vast new markets but instead it has been increased access to a vast impovershed workforce. Manufacturing jobs are farmed out to 3rd world countries to take advantage of essentially slave labor, allowing huge profits for investors who in turn pocket the inflated profits. The alternative strategy of creating jobs in the US, providing a living wage with a future for American workers who pay taxes, educate their chidren and build an infrastructure for the future is sidestepped. Of course this approach would mean far less profit for investors and senior management.
A second key development has been the rapid demise of the pension plan. Labor has taken a beating over the last decade in many areas and as labor goes so goes the middle class. They have sustained huge losses, most notably in "give back contracts" and evaporated pension funds. Pensions in my opinion, are the one benefit that keeps people motivated and loyal. I believe that the notion of working for and protecting your financial future, even for those who are many years from retirement, has a quality of purpose and focus unlike any other. The promise of living out your life with some measure of guarenteed financial secuirty is greatly comforting, but to live it out "independently" not being a burdon to anyone else is really the ultimate satisfaction. I am not certain where the first pension was put into place but what a marvelous idea it is for a company to say to a worker; "we will enter into a bond. If you dedicate your time and energy in a partnership with us, we will honor that partnership even after your working days have finished. We value you not only when you are on the clock doing a day's work for a day's pay but we will also value you as an individual, who has dreams. We will treat those dreams with dignity and respect". Without this key piece of the employee benefit plan, workers are less likely to invest themeselves in a company and instead become more transient in their work life. I think this hinders companies as they try to create solid enduring organizations.
Alas the days of the company sponsored / under-written pension are just a memory for most. There are exceptions of course, but from what I can see even those groups who have retained the traditional pension, teachers, nurses, railroad workers, are losing ground quickly. As the boomers age and move towards retirement, many school boards are stonewalling teachers trying to force cuts in pensions and other benefits. I think it is the symbol, like the assault on social security, of a society once again focusing away from traditional values of productivity, and instead revealing a change in sensibility that is obsessed with corporate profit.
In summary I believe that World Trade has opened up an oversea's work force, for "the bosses" to exploit, a new group of "scabs" willing to work for pennies a day, without any other sort of benefit. Obviously they are not to blame for this situation, these unwitting souls have no choice because their reality is perhaps the reality of the US worker in the 19th century. They are not reaping the benefit of their sweat and blood. Even the corporations though primarily culpable do not bear the full burden of responsiibility here. Their job is to turn the most profit they can, always has been. I am pro business and pro capitalism. This also means that I am pro labor. There is a natural tension between ownership and labor that needs a mitigating force to keep their efforts, if not their goals and aspirations in harmony. That mitigating force is government and our government has failed us. Failed to keep in check the greed of the corporation, failed to protect the life blood of the the economy, failed to protect what is at the heart of the very idea that is America - the middle class. They have slowly turned their backs as the the heat has been turned up on this melting pot of frogs and I hope we are starting to feel the heat. Maybe this could motivate the American people to take action, or at least take notice. Are we now ready to jump out of the pot or are we still looking for the thermostat?
What do you think?
The public was slow to react to the situation in Iraq, in fact we are still somewhat aimless in our response. I am not certain as to the reasons why, other than we have been somewhat insulated to its day to day effects. But now we are faced with a far more greater threat to our way of life. We are faced with the possible demise of the middle class. I would like to examine two of the more significant contributing causes to our potential downfall.
We have all heard the parable of the boiling frog. It goes something like: if you drop a frog into a pot of boiling water the frog will jump out. However if you place a frog into a pot of cool water but gradually raise the tempterature to a boil, then the frog will remain in the pot until he eventually is cooked. Such I fear is the fate of the middle class.
There are several sentinel indicators that have set off alarm bells drawing me to this conclusion. Near the top of the list is the negative effect of "Global Free Trade" on labor. Free trade is the notion that we should freely participate in a world market with minimal or no protections for our own "products or services". Free trade was sold to us as "essential" for our economy to grow. It was backed of course by big business, opposed by labor and most substantially delivered upon us via The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) by none other than Bill Clinton. He was and still is a proponant of global free trade. (Perhaps this provides some insight into his surprising affinity for George Herbert Walker Bush). In any case the net effect of NAFTA and the WTO in general has not been the promised opening up of vast new markets but instead it has been increased access to a vast impovershed workforce. Manufacturing jobs are farmed out to 3rd world countries to take advantage of essentially slave labor, allowing huge profits for investors who in turn pocket the inflated profits. The alternative strategy of creating jobs in the US, providing a living wage with a future for American workers who pay taxes, educate their chidren and build an infrastructure for the future is sidestepped. Of course this approach would mean far less profit for investors and senior management.
A second key development has been the rapid demise of the pension plan. Labor has taken a beating over the last decade in many areas and as labor goes so goes the middle class. They have sustained huge losses, most notably in "give back contracts" and evaporated pension funds. Pensions in my opinion, are the one benefit that keeps people motivated and loyal. I believe that the notion of working for and protecting your financial future, even for those who are many years from retirement, has a quality of purpose and focus unlike any other. The promise of living out your life with some measure of guarenteed financial secuirty is greatly comforting, but to live it out "independently" not being a burdon to anyone else is really the ultimate satisfaction. I am not certain where the first pension was put into place but what a marvelous idea it is for a company to say to a worker; "we will enter into a bond. If you dedicate your time and energy in a partnership with us, we will honor that partnership even after your working days have finished. We value you not only when you are on the clock doing a day's work for a day's pay but we will also value you as an individual, who has dreams. We will treat those dreams with dignity and respect". Without this key piece of the employee benefit plan, workers are less likely to invest themeselves in a company and instead become more transient in their work life. I think this hinders companies as they try to create solid enduring organizations.
Alas the days of the company sponsored / under-written pension are just a memory for most. There are exceptions of course, but from what I can see even those groups who have retained the traditional pension, teachers, nurses, railroad workers, are losing ground quickly. As the boomers age and move towards retirement, many school boards are stonewalling teachers trying to force cuts in pensions and other benefits. I think it is the symbol, like the assault on social security, of a society once again focusing away from traditional values of productivity, and instead revealing a change in sensibility that is obsessed with corporate profit.
In summary I believe that World Trade has opened up an oversea's work force, for "the bosses" to exploit, a new group of "scabs" willing to work for pennies a day, without any other sort of benefit. Obviously they are not to blame for this situation, these unwitting souls have no choice because their reality is perhaps the reality of the US worker in the 19th century. They are not reaping the benefit of their sweat and blood. Even the corporations though primarily culpable do not bear the full burden of responsiibility here. Their job is to turn the most profit they can, always has been. I am pro business and pro capitalism. This also means that I am pro labor. There is a natural tension between ownership and labor that needs a mitigating force to keep their efforts, if not their goals and aspirations in harmony. That mitigating force is government and our government has failed us. Failed to keep in check the greed of the corporation, failed to protect the life blood of the the economy, failed to protect what is at the heart of the very idea that is America - the middle class. They have slowly turned their backs as the the heat has been turned up on this melting pot of frogs and I hope we are starting to feel the heat. Maybe this could motivate the American people to take action, or at least take notice. Are we now ready to jump out of the pot or are we still looking for the thermostat?
What do you think?
Friday, March 9, 2007
Originally Posted December 2006 "It's A Wonderful Life for Some"
I have actually tried to read the Iraq Study Group report (I at least wanted to "out do" congress' reading of the intelligence reports leading us into war with Iraq). I have made a good deal of progress. I wanted to read it because I was so excited when I heard first the leaked and then the official recommendations. Here I thought is the reality check we have been waiting for. I can stop experiencing the cognitive dissonance, that envelopes me when I bounce back and forth between the alternative realities of Tony Snow, Air America, The Times, the Post, the Cleveland Plain Dealer and the BBC etc etc etc .. . I thought that finally someone is really telling it like it is and now we can finally get some traction on our efforts to get out of there. (Iraq)
But then as I was reading the report I started to realize…this is a sales (“Snow”) job. A classic case of appease the masses by affirming our good sense and “superior intelligence” by stating the obvious in the hope that it will suffice enough to buy more time? Time for what I am not certain. Time to funnel a few billion more dollars to Halliburton?
In the days following my reading the report I kept thinking about the classic holiday movie, It's a Wonderful Life, specifically the scene where the befuddled George Bailey is sitting in front of Mr. Potter, puffing on a fine cigar as he (Potter) has just offered “the bright young man…the best house in town…trips to New York and Paris and a 5 year contract”. Of course George quickly comes to his senses and proclaims: ”You sit here and spin your schemes …well the world doesn’t revolve around you Mr Potter!” You know the scene. Well I think Mr. Potter has just offered the American public the illusion of a chance to step out of this “blight” all the while “staying the course” to nowhere.
You know; It’s a Wonderful Life could really be the story of George Bush. Think about it. In the end the deluded George Bailey thinks that the world is "perfect”, but Potter still runs the show. His military hero brother may raise a toast to the richest (smartest?) man in town, while his doe eyed wife stands by his side. But in the end, …George’s roof will always leak.
Well the deluded George Bush still thinks that he is the smartest, most principled guy in town. But Iraq has become “Potter’s Ville” and in spite of reality he prefers to listen to his guardian angel. He saw Iraq last week for a few minutes but before he could get a swig of eggnog down he was crying out: “Get me back Clarence ( or was it Cheney)…I want to go back”…back to the days of Mission Accomplished…back to the days of Shock and Awe”
Now after listening to the talking heads this weekend, even the leading Democrats. I have concluded that just like George Bailey, George Bush appears to be once again choosing an alternative reality……while Potter remains in charge…
And of course the real ultimate grotesque sadness here is that “every time a bell a ring…a US soldier gets his/her wings”
But then as I was reading the report I started to realize…this is a sales (“Snow”) job. A classic case of appease the masses by affirming our good sense and “superior intelligence” by stating the obvious in the hope that it will suffice enough to buy more time? Time for what I am not certain. Time to funnel a few billion more dollars to Halliburton?
In the days following my reading the report I kept thinking about the classic holiday movie, It's a Wonderful Life, specifically the scene where the befuddled George Bailey is sitting in front of Mr. Potter, puffing on a fine cigar as he (Potter) has just offered “the bright young man…the best house in town…trips to New York and Paris and a 5 year contract”. Of course George quickly comes to his senses and proclaims: ”You sit here and spin your schemes …well the world doesn’t revolve around you Mr Potter!” You know the scene. Well I think Mr. Potter has just offered the American public the illusion of a chance to step out of this “blight” all the while “staying the course” to nowhere.
You know; It’s a Wonderful Life could really be the story of George Bush. Think about it. In the end the deluded George Bailey thinks that the world is "perfect”, but Potter still runs the show. His military hero brother may raise a toast to the richest (smartest?) man in town, while his doe eyed wife stands by his side. But in the end, …George’s roof will always leak.
Well the deluded George Bush still thinks that he is the smartest, most principled guy in town. But Iraq has become “Potter’s Ville” and in spite of reality he prefers to listen to his guardian angel. He saw Iraq last week for a few minutes but before he could get a swig of eggnog down he was crying out: “Get me back Clarence ( or was it Cheney)…I want to go back”…back to the days of Mission Accomplished…back to the days of Shock and Awe”
Now after listening to the talking heads this weekend, even the leading Democrats. I have concluded that just like George Bailey, George Bush appears to be once again choosing an alternative reality……while Potter remains in charge…
And of course the real ultimate grotesque sadness here is that “every time a bell a ring…a US soldier gets his/her wings”
Originally Posted January 23rd 2007 "Fate of The Union"
Tonight as we listen to the President's address please think about the following:
Is there anything new or will he try and sell us the tired old notions of connecting 9/11 to Iraq, weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? Iraq as the center of the "War on Terror"?..Fight them there so we don't have to fight them here?
All these ideas have been debunk-ed. Clearly we have been brought into this war for reasons other than those stated. Follow the money or OIL perhaps?
Is there anything worthwhile?
Or will he try and give a "lip service" push to a domestic agenda; challenging congress to fix Social Security, Health care or perhaps to address education?
Mr Bush has had 6 years of a republican congress in his pocket which could have allowed him to effectively address many domestic issues and all he has done is facilitate the transfer of wealth from the middle class to the elite. He doesn't care about the elderly; he wants to privatize Social Security to provide a wind fall profit for Wall St. He doesn't care about health care; he wants profits for the drug companies. How much have your health care premiums increased in the past 6 years?. Please do not fall for the argument that utilization has increased. The facts are, that the same amount of money is being spent in health care, but without federal oversight HMOs etc can pass on any fluctuation in cost to the consumer and preserve their profits!. In the past there had to be documented utilization trends, over several quarters before a company could raise premiums. Now they are allowed to raise rates for any reason. Even 1 quarter of utilization increase, or even 1 incidental "Overhead Event" ...including senior management bonuses are passed on to the consumer, without any justification! And what if the utilization goes down? Well I haven't heard of any ones' premiums dropping. Have you?
If we really want health care reform, get the government to underwrite health care. Medicare only cost 2-4% in administrative fees vs private health care companies with 20-30% administrative overhead. Will that save a penny or two?
Want to really help business? Help them keep jobs in the US and help restore the middle class! Universal health care will certainly put us back on that road! If we can shovel tons of cash onto the Iraq - Haliburton dung heap, then we can spend some money to help businesses and working people stay healthy. Keep them from choosing between proper health care and heating oil.
Is there anything visionary?
Or will we hear more about trips to Mars and breaking our addiction to oil?
What we really need is a massive commitment to seeking out and developing energy alternatives....and not just switching lobbies form oil to corn. We need a project that is federally funded to help us re-build the aforementioned middle class. Put people back into well paying jobs. Jobs with a future.
As you listen tonight think about the "fate of our union".
What will it be?
A country that in spite of it's foibles is still the envy of the world? Still the leader on human rights? Still the shining light of opportunity? A country where we deal with terrorists threats as they arise with solid intelligence and police work and military action if needed? A country where we invest in our own infrastructure? A country that makes friends by helping other countries not by occupying them? A country that negotiates with our potential enemies instead of baiting them?
Or will it be a militarized, neo fascist society? A society blindly led to protect the interests of a small upper class while creating a vast lower class and all the while decimating the middle class?
FDR, and even Eisenhower believed in a middle class and so did the founders. The middle class they created was actually the most radical notion of this new country. A middle class that drove the economy, stood guard over our freedoms and was guarded in turn by a system of checks and balances. Today we have a situation where the Attorney General shocks even me by proclaiming that he is not certain that Habeas Corpus is "in the constitution"!!
Think about our fate as you listen tonight. Think about the fate of your children. The one thing Mr Bush has given us; is a chance to see what as a people, we do not want to become. He has given us a wake up call perhaps?
The fate of the Union is in our hands. Or perhaps it could be, if we stop sitting on them.
Be Lucky!....Mike
Is there anything new or will he try and sell us the tired old notions of connecting 9/11 to Iraq, weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? Iraq as the center of the "War on Terror"?..Fight them there so we don't have to fight them here?
All these ideas have been debunk-ed. Clearly we have been brought into this war for reasons other than those stated. Follow the money or OIL perhaps?
Is there anything worthwhile?
Or will he try and give a "lip service" push to a domestic agenda; challenging congress to fix Social Security, Health care or perhaps to address education?
Mr Bush has had 6 years of a republican congress in his pocket which could have allowed him to effectively address many domestic issues and all he has done is facilitate the transfer of wealth from the middle class to the elite. He doesn't care about the elderly; he wants to privatize Social Security to provide a wind fall profit for Wall St. He doesn't care about health care; he wants profits for the drug companies. How much have your health care premiums increased in the past 6 years?. Please do not fall for the argument that utilization has increased. The facts are, that the same amount of money is being spent in health care, but without federal oversight HMOs etc can pass on any fluctuation in cost to the consumer and preserve their profits!. In the past there had to be documented utilization trends, over several quarters before a company could raise premiums. Now they are allowed to raise rates for any reason. Even 1 quarter of utilization increase, or even 1 incidental "Overhead Event" ...including senior management bonuses are passed on to the consumer, without any justification! And what if the utilization goes down? Well I haven't heard of any ones' premiums dropping. Have you?
If we really want health care reform, get the government to underwrite health care. Medicare only cost 2-4% in administrative fees vs private health care companies with 20-30% administrative overhead. Will that save a penny or two?
Want to really help business? Help them keep jobs in the US and help restore the middle class! Universal health care will certainly put us back on that road! If we can shovel tons of cash onto the Iraq - Haliburton dung heap, then we can spend some money to help businesses and working people stay healthy. Keep them from choosing between proper health care and heating oil.
Is there anything visionary?
Or will we hear more about trips to Mars and breaking our addiction to oil?
What we really need is a massive commitment to seeking out and developing energy alternatives....and not just switching lobbies form oil to corn. We need a project that is federally funded to help us re-build the aforementioned middle class. Put people back into well paying jobs. Jobs with a future.
As you listen tonight think about the "fate of our union".
What will it be?
A country that in spite of it's foibles is still the envy of the world? Still the leader on human rights? Still the shining light of opportunity? A country where we deal with terrorists threats as they arise with solid intelligence and police work and military action if needed? A country where we invest in our own infrastructure? A country that makes friends by helping other countries not by occupying them? A country that negotiates with our potential enemies instead of baiting them?
Or will it be a militarized, neo fascist society? A society blindly led to protect the interests of a small upper class while creating a vast lower class and all the while decimating the middle class?
FDR, and even Eisenhower believed in a middle class and so did the founders. The middle class they created was actually the most radical notion of this new country. A middle class that drove the economy, stood guard over our freedoms and was guarded in turn by a system of checks and balances. Today we have a situation where the Attorney General shocks even me by proclaiming that he is not certain that Habeas Corpus is "in the constitution"!!
Think about our fate as you listen tonight. Think about the fate of your children. The one thing Mr Bush has given us; is a chance to see what as a people, we do not want to become. He has given us a wake up call perhaps?
The fate of the Union is in our hands. Or perhaps it could be, if we stop sitting on them.
Be Lucky!....Mike
Sunday, February 18, 2007
Democrats now have the hammer....will they use it? WHAT DO YOU THINK?
The new democratic majority in the congress has been trying to address the Iraq conflict within the context of their constitutional authority. Their initial step has been to try and formally "speak" on behalf of the people to the executive. The non binding resolution passed by the house states that they do not approve of the current surge of troops in Iraq. The Senate minority republicans have blocked this strategy by trying instead to turn the maneuver into a decision to wield a blunt instrument, (cutting off funding) which I personally think the Democrats understand is a political trap. If the congress withdraws funding for this endeavor, now that it is progress, I do not think anyone knows what the effect would be. They (the democrats) I believe hope that following a non binding resolution they will attempt to transform their blunt instrument into a surgical device and try to cut specific funding for the troop surge. Given the fact that their are many hawks in the senate such as Graham and LIE-berman who like the president and vice president, seem to want war at any cost, I do not hold out much hope for this approach... This executive branch has led us into this endeavor...they are responsible for strategy..they are responsible for tactics and they are responsible for their actions...
The congress is responsible for oversight...they have the "blunt instrument" of the power of the purse... but they also have the responsibility to speak for the people...which is what they are trying to do with these resolutions. They also have other powers.
I believe that if the executive does not respond to the congress then the congress has the responsibility to take additional steps to represent the will of the people...they have the power and duty to act on the behalf of the people. They have the power to impeach this administration....
Do they have the justification to do so? I think they do. Has this administration lied to get us into this war? Have they tortured? Have they illegally wiretapped? Have they encouraged war profiteering? Have they ignored the returning troops who need extended care? Have they now begun to bang the drums of war in the direction of Iran?
What do you think?
The congress is responsible for oversight...they have the "blunt instrument" of the power of the purse... but they also have the responsibility to speak for the people...which is what they are trying to do with these resolutions. They also have other powers.
I believe that if the executive does not respond to the congress then the congress has the responsibility to take additional steps to represent the will of the people...they have the power and duty to act on the behalf of the people. They have the power to impeach this administration....
Do they have the justification to do so? I think they do. Has this administration lied to get us into this war? Have they tortured? Have they illegally wiretapped? Have they encouraged war profiteering? Have they ignored the returning troops who need extended care? Have they now begun to bang the drums of war in the direction of Iran?
What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
