As I see it . . .

2010-01-20T20:12:00.001-08:00

One Year and counting. . .

One year ago today, Obama took the oath of office. Where are we now? Unfortunately, not as far as those who voted for change wanted to be!

The point of this blog is to speak truth to power; whoever is in power. I voted for change. I supported change. I donated to change. I worked for change. Where is the change?

It’s not here yet!

Wall Street still hands out billions of dollars in bonuses and is not any more regulated than it was a year ago, though it is talked about.

Health care reform is not yet available to “We The People,” though it has progressed without Republican support and further than under any Republican administration. It is also structured NOT to increase the deficit, unlike the Republican Part D Medicare plan that gave prescription drugs to the elderly and wasn’t paid for!

Jobs are still being lost, though at a much slower rate than when the Republicans were in control and doing nothing about it.

The economy is very bad, because we are suffering from a collapsed “Housing Bubble” created by Republican policies. What has Obama done? In a bi-partisan way, he gave tax breaks (that don’t work) to the wealthy, (because that is what the Republicans said was needed) along with funds to create “Shovel Ready” projects to get the economy going again. It is a two year plan. We are nearing the end of the first year. How many Republicans voted for the Stimulus? None!

And yet, with all this evidence of Republican Obstructionism, Republican “Do-Nothing” philosophy, Republicans looking out for the corporations and the Wealthy instead of the “Working Man,” I am upset with Obama!

Democrats have a 60 vote majority in the Senate and a substantial majority in the House (Which is not where the problem is) and we can’t get anything done for the People. Bush got things done for the Wealthy!

Bush got all of his Tax Breaks for the wealthy done in 2003 (in the first year of his Presidency) and in 2005, and the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (cutting money from Medi-Cade) passed with a 51 vote majority in the Senate through a process called Reconciliation!

Why hasn’t Obama and the Dems done that? I want change NOW!!!

2009-08-18T19:23:00.000-07:00

Two Philosophies, Democrats Vs. Republicans; a perspective. . .

You can take the time to look up the philosophies of each major party. You will find many explanations and after you read enough, you will get the gist of their ideals; their platform. Specific issues are described as planks in that platform.

For example, one of the planks in the Republican Party platform is the elimination of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. This plank is not listed in their philosophy, but it exists in their goals to take this nation back to what they believe it should be; self-sufficiency.

A similar plank exists in the Democratic Party platform with the exact opposite goal; to establish a one-payer, or more easily described, Universal Health Care system in addition to Social Security, and Medicare.

In the simplest terms, the difference is “every man for himself” vs. “all for one and one for all.” Put another way, “the means justify the end” vs. “the end justifies the means.” (More on this one later) This blog perspective is not about the values of those two philosophies, but the way in which they are argued to the public.

Simply put, Republicans lie to their constituency to defeat a bill. Democrats try to explain the bill to gain support. It is more difficult to talk with and gain support from people who have been lied to than people who are well informed. When lied to, when misled about the goal, people with a false understanding get riled up. Fox News listeners certainly fall into this category, with 72% of them believing that Obama’s Health Care goal is to 1) Take health care from grandma and give it to illegal aliens, 2) Make the government pay for abortions, 3) Have “death panels” to deny care to old people, 4) Establish health care rationing, 5) Have Government bureaucrats between you and your doctor, and finally, 6) It is a government take-over of the health care system.

All of those are LIES! If you are one of those who believe any or all of those lies, then you probably get your news from Fox, Rush Limbaugh, McConnell or Boehner. They lie to you! They are lying to you. They will continue to lie to you. That is their justification of means to an end. Their desire, their end, is to defeat Health Care reform; in any shape, any form, any style. They SAY they want health care reform, but everything they do says otherwise.

What do the Democrats do? Democrats continue to bargain, deal, debate, and compromise to get a bill. Democrats adjust, back off, back off, and back off trying to get Republican support. No matter what the Democrats come up with, Public Option, Co-ops or even eliminate the Public Option; the Republicans are just saying NO. The only thing Republicans want, (their means to an end), is a requirement for everyone to buy health insurance from For-Profit health insurance companies. What a gift to the health insurance companies. It is similar to the gift they gave the pharmaceuticals with their Medicare Part D. It was a requirement to pay for your own drugs once you exhausted the benefit and reached the donut hole. Remember that?

Remember what I said earlier, about being informed vs. being lied to? Well, those who are well informed out number those who are lied to. We, the well informed, call our representatives, our Senators and are actively working for a Universal Health Care plan. There may be a counter in that work and calling, but we have a substantial advantage. We out number you! We vote, as you do, but when the votes are counted, well, it’s pretty simple; we out number you!

Representatives and Senators want to be re-elected. They need votes to do that. If the Congress does not pass the kind of Health Care reform we want, they will be voted out of office; and they know that!

We WILL get what we want; without lying, without yelling at town hall meetings, without carrying loaded guns to those meetings as a means of intimidation, and without preventing others from being able to speak at those meetings. Our means justify the end; we will have a health care program that serves “We the People” and not corporate profits.

In a way, I feel sorry for you, the uninformed. It will take a complete implementation of the program, your use of it and finally, you fondness of it before you realize what we, the informed, have provided for you. Then you can say, similar to what you say now, “I don’t want no stickin’ government run program and keep your hands of my health care!”

That’s As I See it. . . .

2009-08-17T12:16:00.000-07:00

When voters hand you a Mandate; USE IT!

The House of Representatives is under Democratic Party control by a wide margin. That margin began in the election of ’06 and continued in ’08, rejecting the Republican Party philosophies and control. We the People were fed up with Bush and all of his cronies.

The Senate got a bare majority of Democrats in ’06 by a margin of 51 to 49. That, admittedly, included two Independents, Sanders and Lieberman. Sanders votes solidly with the Democrats, but Lieberman can go either way. That tenuous grasp of control of the Senate could and would transfer to the Republicans when and if Lieberman voted with the Republicans, giving a 50/50 vote and letting the Vice President (Cheney as the President of the Senate) cast the deciding vote.

I explain all of that because I want you to remember what it was like in Congress when the Republicans had complete control. Bush wanted tax cuts for the wealthy; he got it. Bush wanted “No child left behind;” he got it. Bush wanted supplemental bills to fund his war in Iraq; he got it. Virtually every Republican voted for what the president wanted and some Democrats voted with him as well.

Now what do we see? Every; that is worth repeating; EVERY Republican votes against Obama. Republicans demand “Bi-partisanship.” But we know what that means. Just look at their performance when they were in charge. If Democrats didn’t agree and follow, they were called Obstructionists. When the democrats threatened the filibuster, the majority leader threatened the nuclear option of removing the filibuster with a simple majority vote removing the filibuster rule.

Remember that!

Because what I advocate now is for my Representative and my two Senators to do what We the People want. End the tax cuts for the rich to help stop the deficit. Put in a Universal Health Care system that doesn’t rob someone of their home and a life’s worth of work just because they got sick. END Corporate control of my country!

I am fed up with Democrats continuing to seek bi-partisan decisions and attempting to get Republican support. Apparently, THEY DON’T GET IT! Republicans will not cooperate with Democrats. Republicans do not want “Bi-Partisanship” unless it is done their way. Republicans are the true obstructionists, just saying “NO” to everything.

But we don’t need their support!

We have control of the Congress. JUST DO IT! Give us, give “We the People,” what we want; what we voted you into office to get, and what this country needs. Take control of our country away from corporations and give it back to us!

If it doesn’t happen, many Democrats will find themselves voted out of office in the next election.

- - -

Now, a personal note. . .

This blog is not an outlet for religious freaks to bark their philosophy. They have every right to believe the way they do, practice their religion the way they do and to preach about their beliefs the way they do. I will just not allow it on this blog.

There is a separation of religion and government in my country. “We the People” ARE the government. This blog is about how “We the People” can use secular means to make this country fulfill the promise; a government of, for, and by the people.

If what you want is a theocracy, a government based on religious principles (even though you deny it), then live in Iran, Iraq, or Taliban controlled Afghanistan. These are places where religious based thoughts are being worked out. If you prefer a more peaceful example, try Indonesia. It is a religious based, secular government with such stringent rules that there is no freedom of choice. Do the research.

I served in the military, representing what I believe is a wonderful country and defending the rights we hold dear. Did you? I defend everyone’s rights, whether I agree with what you believe or not. I will fight for you to maintain your rights. But remember this my little inexperienced, ill-informed, radical preacher: I will fight just as hard and to the death to prevent you from taking those rights from others!

Now, go away.

That’s As I See it. . . .

2009-08-11T15:22:00.000-07:00

“Change” Or government as usual?

It’s been quite a respite. I have suffered personally from this economic disaster created by conservative, Republican philosophies. (Ever notice that previous staunch Republicans are now saying they are actually more Libertarian? It was also difficult to find anyone who voted for Nixon after he was disgraced. Before that disgrace, it was hard to find anyone who wasn’t a Nixon supporter.)

I want to pursue my team-of-horses metaphor. The team is now loaded with left leaning, people oriented horses and they are starting to pull the coach toward the center. The Democrats have passed a Recovery Act, pulling us away from the edge of another Republican caused Depression. Republicans can only unanimously vote against it, criticize it and then partake of it by exploiting the advantages to their states that “they” have somehow secured. All without giving credit to the recovery act which is funding that very same project.

As the team makes its way back to some sort of center path through the wilderness of the future, pushing to be progressive with their choices, they discover that some on their team do not want the same things. There are three divisions in our team: Republicans, Democrats and Blue Dogs.

Dogs chase cars and, in our case, coaches. They run along side and bark and bite at the heels of those trying to move the cause ahead. It slows down, stalls and could even stop altogether if some of those horses don’t gather their courage and continue despite the barking and heel biting. Why does this happen? Didn’t “We the People” have our say, vote in Democratic Party control of government and expect things to improve?

Yes, we did. Each one of us, a majority of us, cast our vote for “Change.” Having done that, we sit and we wait and we watch. We may have changed the control of the government by party, but we haven’t yet defeated the influence of money: money that flows for example, in a volume of 1.4 Million Dollars a day to defeat Health Care Reform. Where does that money come from?

Answer: the Health Care industry, the Republican Party and their sub, sub, sub groups they fund. Is that the simple answer? No, because there’s another question. Why are the some of “We the People” so alarmed and scared? Why can’t “We the People” have a discussion at Town Hall meetings all across the country?

Money from special interest groups, the health care and pharmaceutical industries, groups and societies whose funding leads back to the Republican Party, those same special interest groups and health and pharmaceutical industries, pay for commercials that misinform and excite some of We the People. Then, a whole network, Fox News (news in name only) incites and misinforms. Talk radio incites and misinforms with constant references to fascism. Those misinformed and those deliberating misinforming are the dogs biting at the wheels and horses hoofs, trying to stop our coach and our progress. They call it free speech and hide behind that right.

Political contributions cause second thoughts in blue dog Democrats and almost all Republicans. Each politician in office has to run for office every two or six years. That easy money is hard to resist and difficult to disagree with what it represents.

So, instead of Congress investigating the crimes committed by the last administration, instead of reform of the Financial Banking industry that caused a near financial collapse and another Great Depression, instead of passing a Health Care Reform Act that stops insurance companies from denying pre-existing conditions and putting profits before people, (Pay or Die!) instead of pursuing CHANGE that would help “We the People,” we have a government controlled by special interests, industry and money!

This is not what I voted for.

That’s As I See it. . . .

2009-02-18T11:47:00.000-08:00

Left v Right on my Team of Horses . . .

In my last blog, I likened Bi-partisanship to a team of horses all pulling the same load in the same direction. That would be ideal. The challenge, however, is that neither side of the team (left v right) really wants to pull in the compromised direction. Each side wants to pull the load in their chosen, partisan direction.

The result is that the “coach” ends up traveling in a zigzag fashion as one side gains strength over the other and pulls in their direction. Then the other side gains strength, and on it goes. This zigzag pattern pulls us eventually through time to where we are now.

In the last cycle, (a very long Zig) the right side pulled us far to the right starting all the way back to Reagan. The left at first worked with the new direction, compromising and assisting. But as it got more and more radical, the left worked diligently to prevent the worst of such philosophy. The coach is now so deeply off the path of Bi-partisanship that the whole country is hurting, mired in debt, moving slowly and passengers are unsure of the way back.

Some of the things the left was able to prevent were the elimination of the Estate tax, the elimination of the Capital Gains tax and decreasing the Corporate tax. I think I heard an audible gasp through my computer. Yes, I AM serious! Think about it for a moment. Not with the partisan mind warping done by the right in the last twenty-nine years but with your rational brain.

How many readers of this blog are actually susceptible to any of those three taxes? I don’t know anyone wealthy enough to pay an Estate tax. I don’t know any leaders of industry that would pay a corporate tax. Since the middle class has decreased so dramatically under the influence of the right, there are not many left in the middle class that worry about a Capitol Gains tax.

Yet, these are the three taxes that the radical right propose to get us out of this mire and yet apply only to the very wealthy. Newt Gingrich said, “And we have three big things. First, we have zero capital gains. We eliminate the capital gains tax, which is the same as China and Singapore. Second, we go to the Irish corporate tax level, which is 12 and half percent. And third, we make permanent eliminating the death tax, so that small businesses and family-owned businesses aren’t threatened by the IRS when somebody passes away. Let me mention briefly on capital gains, cause it’s a new, bold idea.”

A “Bold new idea?” I don’t think so! It’s the same old strategy they have been using since Reagan. Notice how he calls an Estate tax a “Death Tax?” It’s the right’s way of sound-bite diplomacy to convince the public to vote against their own best interest. By calling it a death tax, it makes it sound unfair and unreasonable. In actuality, the Estate tax affects a very few who have exceeding wealth. Anyone wealthy enough to pay Estate taxes have enough lawyers and advisers to be able to protect their best interests and preserve their wealth. You and I don’t have that access and we don’t pay that tax.

The rights only answer to a sound-bite, created-for-media unfairness is to eliminate it. There are other ways to make things fair. If the level at which the Estate Tax kicks in is too low, then adjust the level with an inflationary calculation. Don’t eliminate the tax.

Will the right’s solutions get us out of the mess they created? NO! It’s what got us here! There will be more on this later.

That’s As I See it . . .

2009-02-14T15:35:00.000-08:00

TEAM OF HORSES OR TUG OF WAR?

I think a fair analogy to make about Bi-partisanship and Partisanship would be to imagine a team of horses. You can imagine the Liberal/Progressive/Democratic horses on the left side of the team and the Conservative/Republican horses on the right side of the team. Let’s imagine them pulling a stagecoach like I used to watch in old TV westerns. That would be Bi-partisanship. Yes, we have different points of view but we are pulling in the same direction for the good of the stagecoach. We work together for a common destination, each member putting in effort.

Now picture a group summer picnic with its potato salads, chips, burgers and dogs and for entertainment, a tug of war game. After everyone has had a fill of the salad, grilled burgers or hot dogs, the game begins. In this type of game it becomes about winning. The goal is to defeat your opponent, or the other “team” in this case of tug of war. I can picture the teams struggling with all their might, straining on the rope to pull the other team to their side and thereby win the match. They sometimes make it interesting by putting a mud hole to pull the opponent into.

Which type of game do you want our Congress to play? I want the team of horses, pulling our country toward a goal of prosperity for all. Obama has been fulfilling a campaign promise to try and make Washington more functional, to make a cabinet of both Republicans and Democrats. He has been attempting to do that and at present has two Republicans there. He has reached out his hand of cooperation. He has traveled to the Congress to meet with Republicans and get their ideas. He invited conservative pundits to the White House for drinks to get their views and impress upon them the importance to this country of Bi-partisanship and with what result?

That hand of friendship and Bi-partisanship has been slapped, ignored, ridiculed and even insulted by those “tug of war” Republicans. Still, Obama has not given up. I believe he will continue with his extended hand diplomacy, but perhaps with a bit more discretion. What will be the result of the continued Republican stubbornness?

We the People should be watching this interplay very closely. Our future and the future of this country are at stake. If Republicans continue their lock-step opposition to efforts at making this country sound, they will continue to loose elections. If We the People don’t pay attention, they may win this Tug-of-War! And then what will happen to our nation?

I can see that symbolic team of horses now; the horses on the right keep pulling right to lead the team. The horses on the left keep countering the pull and pulling forward. The left horses only recently became successful because there are now more of them. But it hasn’t changed the tactics of the horses on the right. Those horses keep playing tug of war, even when it is in their benefit to pull as a team.

Democrats aren’t innocent in this game. Democrats, I believe, have been trying to get Bi-partisanship but have been conditioned into a tug of war by Republicans. I hope We the People are watching this and vote accordingly. We need a team in Congress expressing valid yet different points of view. We don’t need to continue this Tug-of-War Politics that has been happening for the last 16 years.

That's As I See It . . .

2009-01-30T13:04:00.000-08:00

I Disagree with our New President. . .

It didn’t take long before I found something to disagree with. It has always been my intention with this blog to be a discerning blogger, unafraid to voice disagreement with whom ever is in charge.

Obama’s recent efforts at reaching out to the Republicans are commendable. At first my belief was to just discount them and get done what We-the-People want. Republicans and their Conservative philosophy have been running this country for eight years. Look where it has gotten us. (Truthfully, the Conservatives have been running this country since Reagan, 1980; but that’s a different blog).

What is interesting to me is how the Republicans now say they have a plan for stimulating the country that will produce twice as many jobs and cost half as much. They, of course, announce this after the bill goes through the House and have not revealed any details of their “plan.” Their “plan” is merely a continuation of “Tax Cuts” that have not worked. Let’s see now . . , What was that definition of insanity? Oh yeah; keep doing the same failed task and expect different results!

Simply put, the Republicans are just being Obstructionists. With their lips they say they want Obama to succeed and with their efforts they are trying to make the country fail. “In confusion there is opportunity for wealth”. And Conservatives want opportunity to continue. I truly believe they want this country divided into the extremely wealthy and the extremely impoverished.

The Conservative, Republican strategy will fail. Since We-the-People have expressed our desire for the Congress to get something done and move this country forward, Obama has made an effort to “reach across the aisle” to get Republican support for an American Recovery Project. Republicans hold to their hardcore beliefs and slap that hand. When this country begins to recover, (and it will), what will Republicans say then? Watch how they jump on the bandwagon, forget their obstructionists ways and make it sound like they were always working for the country’s benefit.

I admire Obama for his efforts although I wish he had not removed some of the details from the recovery bill that he did. The People will realize that he is doing what he promised and is making honest effort to help the country. Republicans will be seen to be the obstructionists they are! But that is not what I disagree with Obama about. I voted for his judgment, his careful consideration of solutions and his ability to bring people together. So I choose to trust that judgment and let him do it his way.

What I disagree with Obama about is the Super Bowl. I will be backing the Arizona Cardinals!

And that;s As I See It. . .

2009-01-20T17:54:00.000-08:00

It’s Time to Begin The Great Undoing . . .

I watched Barack Obama take the oath of office today. I heard words of praise, respect, admonition, reality and warning. It has been awhile since this country got a dose of reality, asking all of us to get to work and help bring this nation out of the mess 28 years have put us in.

Kennedy was the last one to ask not what this country can do for us but to ask what we can do for this country. Barack is asking us to work together and rightly so. We the people are in a mess!

The mess is from greed, deregulation, trust and belief in the free market system and too many years of Conservative control of our country.

Of note to me were the passages in the inaugural speech that showed a clear separation from the Bush agenda. We, as a people, will not separate our values from our safety. We, as a people, will welcome healthy relations with foreign nations of every religion and creed if they open their fist and shake our hand. If foreign nations choose to clench that fist, they will find a resilient nation ready to defeat them and defeat them we will!

That is the first Great Undoing from the Bush administration!

We the People, must now hold this administration responsible for the proper direction of this country. The time of promises had passed. The time of elections and debates have passed. It is time for the correction to begin.

We must establish fair business practices and prevent the wealthy from exploiting the rest.

We must establish a health system that allows for everyone to receive proper medical treatment without loosing his or her life savings.

We must correct our image to the rest of the world. We are a nation of laws and those who break those laws will be held responsible. No one is above the law; even an ex-president of the United States. Crimes committed against humanity and in violation of International treaties must be prosecuted. It is the only way to correct our image and restore faith that America is a nation of Freedom and Right!

We must begin to heal from within. This philosophical divide between Democratic and Republican ideals must work together so, We The People, are well served by a government that works.

My fear is that too many believe it is “business as usual” for politics. Already, Cronin from Texas has put a stop to the voice vote to accept Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, inevitable as it is. Some Republicans may think they can stifle progress and cooperation. Hopefully, the steady work by Obama and the Democratic Party will counter that and get things done so we can undo all the damage. And when these “Obstructionists” persist in their efforts, We The People will contact our representatives and senators to encourage them to do the right thing for the country and for the masses.

We the People are tired of being spoken down to; like we are too uninformed to understand the complexities of politics.

We understand this: You, the politicians, work for us! And we are taking this country back!

That’s As I see it. . .

2009-01-08T19:58:00.000-08:00

Bi-Partisanship? What the Hell?

I have been watching the political scene since Georgie-Boy became president. Until then, I left politics up to my representative and senator in congress. Since then, I have heard a lot of word tossing of “Bi-Partisanship” by both parties. It scares me.

Republicans have controlled the congress for over eight years. They have had their way with complete disregard of Bi-Partisanship while at the same time, requesting it from Democrats. What I heard was, “Let us do what we want because we have the majority!”

To prove that, remember when the Senate Majority Leader, Bill Frist from Tennessee ®, threatened the “Nuclear Option” of modifying the rules-of-the-senate to eliminate the Filibuster? Remember how the Republicans whined when they couldn’t have their way in the 109th Congress in every little detail because of the filibuster by the Democrats? Remember that they had their way enough to put this country in the mess it is in right now! (If you don’t know what the filibuster is, Google it)

Now I am hearing the same bit of “Bi-Partisanship” requests from the Democrats in the upcoming 111th Congress. It scares me because I want the Democrats to act as swiftly as they can to undo as much of the harm the Republicans have foisted on We The People as they can in the shortest amount of time!

Conservative Economics does not work! It has never worked! It will never work! Any time you hear “supply side” “trickle down” or “conservative” associated with an economic philosophy, vote against it! It gives increased wealth, power and control to the wealthy and transfers the tax burden to the middle and lower classes. Just look at the situation we are in; record setting deficits, high unemployment, we are a debtor nation instead of a loaner nation, we manufacture very little. Conservative Economics, by its very nature, hates labor, a strong middle class and tries to give as many breaks as possible to business. The last go-around did it by eliminating regulations. The lack of regulations allowed risky loans, bad decisions and theft of our National Wealth.

Talk to your congressman and senators. Tell them to move swiftly to restore regulations that prevent their sort of economics, just as this country did after the Great Depression.

I wonder what we will call this Republican Depression?

2008-12-08T20:13:00.000-08:00

And again, the Democrats fall into the trap!

Republicans have once again tricked the Democrats into doing the dirty work of the Conservative Economic Philosophy, (hereafter called the CEP). It is the CEP that created the economic disaster we face today; major financial companies, the big three car companies, and, of course, Wall Street.

Notice that the CEP didn’t consult with the nation or the Congress about whether to “Bail Out” Wall Street. They just did it. Want to complain? Write you Congressman? Vote them out? Too late! It’s DONE.

Want to help the big three auto companies? Refer that to Congress. Let the Democrats take up the cause of all the potential unemployment, the economic disaster of putting two million people out of work and the cascade effect to confidence and trust in the government to run this country!

It doesn’t matter that the people have spoken, dissatisfied with the Republican Administration and economic philosophy, and elected to replace this corrupt and ethically challenged system! It only matters that the Republicans can now say. . . ! ! !

“The Democrats did it! They wanted the Auto Bail Out! They wanted the deficit spending! They are responsible!”

Remember that in four years when their way of doing politics rears its ugly head and starts blaming this country’s woes on the Democrats. They will. My fear is that some, stupid inattentive ones, will listen and be persuaded.

The Democrats have done it again! Walked into the political trap of wanting to help We-the-People and save our country.

Is there something wrong with this picture?

That’s As I see it. . .

2008-11-05T20:38:00.000-08:00

The most significant FIRST in this Presidential election, for me. . .

Pundits have talked about the first “Black” President elected. That is not so significant to me. I’ve worked with, been hired by, hired and fired black people, white people, Asian people and many other people of differing . . . something, all without thought of race or gender. Race, color and gender are not significant to me. It is the quality of a person’s character and their work ethic that matter most.

I voted for Obama, not because he is “Black.” I voted for him not just because he is a Democrat, although I have voted that way in the past and it was an important factor in my vote in this election. At times, my vote has been cast “against” something as much as it was cast “for” something. But that wasn’t the significant thing in this election.

It is easy to be against the Bush philosophy and the Karl Rovian tactics. The fact that Obama didn’t use those kinds of tactics is not why I voted for him and it is not the most significant part of this election.

Political “Dirty Tricks” by Republicans have been around for my entire voting career. My first vote was cast “against” Richard Nixon. They didn’t call him “Tricky Dickey” for nothing. Remember Water Gate! Don’t forget the Iran Contra Hearing, which revealed that the Reagan Administration was paying the Iranians to hold our hostages until he won the election in ’80. And the Willie Horton ads George H. W. Bush ran in 1988 got my candidate, Dukakis, defeated. Yeah, those were dirty tricks! But that wasn’t the most significant thing about this election and this President elect.

The world’s reaction to the President elect is completely understandable, given the flagrant disregard the Bush Administration has given to other countries sovereignty. The Bush Doctrine of Pre-emptive War doesn’t exactly instill the other nations to rush to our side. Still, that was not the most significant part of this President elect.

I worked hard for Obama’s election. I contributed money to the campaign and Democrats in tight races and came through when asked to contribute. I called, emailed and talked to people about the issues (many of them total strangers), trying to convince them (and was successful in some cases) to vote for Obama! I have yard signs, probably to my neighbors chagrin. But I had done all that before in the Kerry Campaign. So that wasn’t all that significant.

No, none of those things were the most significant to me. The most significant bit of reality to me: This is the first President that will be younger than I am!

How’s that for reality? That’s As I See It. . .

2008-10-26T20:00:00.000-07:00

Gay Marriage Vs. Civil Union

I wanted to get married at the courthouse and my wife wanted to get married in a church. Guess who won? She did. I was unsure about most religions having observed a great deal of hypocrisy and she was dedicated to the idea of a church wedding. The end result was a church wedding with the majority of guests sitting on “her side” of the isle.

My personal experience isn’t that relevant but in the interest of full disclosure, I explain it. You see, I agree with the “Christian Right” that “marriage” is generally accepted as a Bible based ceremony and belongs in a church. But since in this country we have a practicing separation of church and state, we the people have laws that allow for church ceremonies to be accepted as state ceremonies by sanction of the state. A “Preacher” must have state authority to perform the ceremony and that’s what makes it legal. Look at your marriage "license" to view it for your state.

What if I had had my way and we married at the courthouse? We would still be “married” (a derivative of the word Marriage) and we would still be “legal.” The difference? Both are state sanctioned but only one is church sanctioned.

Here’s what I propose; Let the churches keep their ceremony of marriage and let the state perform “civil ceremonies” at courthouses and let them both be legal! The difference would be a true separation of church and state, but both satisfy the requirements of the state. The technical difference is that a church “wedding” would be “marriage” and a courthouse “wedding” would be a “civil union.”

Churches that deny homosexual marriage do not have to allow them. The state, which does not allow discrimination based on race, gender, national origin, sexual preference, (or any others I may have overlooked), would not call it a “Marriage.” Thus, one is a civil union while the other is a marriage. Both are equal under the state law.

Problem solved, solution applied and let’s get on with serious problems. . .What was that? You say, “What about religious gays that want to marry in a church?”

That’s between you and the church! Don’t get the state involved. It doesn’t belong there!

That’s As I see it. . .

2008-10-26T17:36:00.000-07:00

I recently sent the following to friends and relatives. It created quite a stir among non-Barack supporters. So I thought I would share it with as many people as I could. Sorry I've been gone for awhile.

I want to change the world.

So I ask myself, “How do I do that?” I want the world to be peaceful. I want the world to be tolerant of each other. I want the world to empathize. “How do I do that?”

Well, if I had the power, I could make the world leaders meet and agree on a plan to get along. Make them compromise on issues that everyone can live with. And I don’t mean to just “tolerate” but to really live! Get along!

But I don’t have that power. I barely control the world I live in with bills and obligations. I don’t hear from my children as often as I would like. Taxes on my house keep going up. They haven’t fixed the street I live on in a long time. How can I change the world?

I listened to the promises of the presidential candidates. I’m no fool. I know that neither of them can do everything they want. But I did hear the same kind of desire I have, “I want to change the world.”

I’ve lived long enough to know that this election, in my country, can have the biggest impact on the future more than any election I have ever voted in before. Why? It will decide if “we the people” want to keep giving our power to the wealthy or take back our country. We can only do that if we put in power people who will listen to us, the people, and not to the wealthy.

We have lived in a great experiment since 1980. The promise of wealth will trickle down to all if we just let the wealthy have their way. Well, they have had their way. And now we find that “we the people” have to come to their aid and “bail them out.” I guess that promise didn’t work out so well.

It’s time to take another approach. Let the people rule! Tax the wealthy! Give the revenues to the state and let the state pay for the debt, the streets, the sick, the poor, the destitute and maybe even fix my street.

We, the people, cannot continue to pay the greatest share of taxes and let the wealthy take the greatest share of profits and wealth. We just can’t let it continue!

I’m voting for Democracy! I’m voting for Barack Obama! I hope you do too.

Householder
Tax Payer
60 Year old soon-to-retire fed up with the status quo of rich getting richer and we the people inheriting deeper debt.

2008-02-02T11:52:00.000-08:00

THE AMERICAN WAY

I believe we are at a defining moment of choice in America. We, the voters, the people, must decide if we want a Me or We Society. I believe that is the simplest way to describe the choice before us.

We the People can decide to be a Me Society by voting and putting into office the conservative philosophy of big business and every man for himself. Or we can vote in Progressives who believe that a successful society works together, a We Society. Progressives believe that government works best when it works for all the people and regulates corporations for the benefit of its workers, stock owners and the consuming public.

Look what conservatives have brought to this country in the last seven years; deregulation that allows contaminated food, toothpaste, toys and a devaluation of the dollar; jobs being exported at an alarming rate; a doubling of the National Debt and tax breaks for the top 1%.

Choose the conservative way and there will be more of that. Choose the progressive way and it will start to turn around. It will take time to undo the damage done but it will start and gradually a strong middle class will establish itself again.

I am encouraged by the strong turn out of voters in the Democratic primaries. So far they have almost doubled the Republican turn out. It is a sign that Americans, the People, have had enough of “Rich man rule.”

My concern now is for the future, both immediate and long term. We must reverse the deficit spending, end the Occupation of Iraq, raise taxes on the rich, give the poor and middle class a tax break and pass legislation that reestablishes regulations on corporations.

But that will be only a start. We the People must keep watch so these Me Philosophy, power hungry, war-mongering conservatives don’t assert control some time in the future. There is a tendency for the People to become lax and loose attention, eventually allowing the conservative shallow promise of “tax breaks” to cloud their minds.

How will you vote? Me or We.

2007-10-16T20:06:00.000-07:00

I’M ABOUT TO GIVE UP, AMERICA . . .

There are so many things happening in the news today and over the last three months that I wonder if Americans are watching and, more importantly, listening. Republicans (which may be an unfair way of describing ALL the people in the administration) are trying desperately to do several things: make the Democrats look bad or stupid, make the Iraq OCCUPATION look successful and make the Congress look ineffective.

First: The Democratic Party is the official name of the Democrats. So when you hear any Republican or the president refer to the “democrat party,” they are being purposely disrespectful. No matter how much you (both the individual and group “you”) disagree with someone or a group’s opinion, showing enough respect to address them by their proper name is considered proper decorum. Republicans are being deliberately disrespectful. If you ask why, it is because their opinion poll revealed that the term democrat polled as less positive than Democratic.

Second: The Iraq occupation is referred to as the “Iraq War” solely for the purpose of gaining (or appealing to) patriotic feelings that we, the nation, are at war! The reality is that the war was over when “Mission Accomplished” was declared. We, the Americans, as represented by the American military, had vanquished Iraq. The obvious next step was to find the “weapons of mass destruction” that we could never find; and still have not found.

Third; Republicans are obstructionists! Remember when they accused Democrats of being obstructionists? And all because the Democrats didn’t want to allow the blanket acceptance of right wing judges? What did the Republicans do then? They threatened the “Nuclear Option” of removing the rule allowing filibusters from the senate rules. Have you heard the Democrats propose anything like that? Of course not! The Republicans are truly obstructing governing by majority by not allowing the Democrats to complete motions and laws that would put an end to this “Dictatorship” of Bush!

Are you listening America? Are you watching your rights slip away? Are you listening to the spin of Republican rhetoric and realizing how much they are lying to you, subverting our government “by the people” and turning it into a Fascists State of Corporatists?

If you don’t wake up soon; get involved soon; speak out soon; we will loose this country!

2007-08-28T19:41:00.001-07:00

DOES RESIGNATION TRUMP TRUTH?

Within the Bush administration, many loyal servers of George Bush have left. The most recent are Alberto Gonzales and Karl Rove. Both George and Karl are two of the most sought after witnesses in Congress. Congress is trying to get to the bottom of the attorney firings done for political reasons. All “roads” seem to lead to the White House and to Karl Rove, Roberto Gonzales and George Bush.

Does their resignation allow the investigations to just stop? Should they?

Every person who has resigned so far has put an end to the concern about their performance while they held the office. It was a magic eraser, making all the official interest go away. If that has been the history, will it be the same with Roberto and Karl?

Our society “seems” to want to put unimportant things behind us. By unimportant, I mean things no longer pressing, in the news or seemingly of done with. My fear is that if Democrats in Congress continue with investigations about warrant less wiretapping, torture, ignoring the Geneva Convention, going to war with intelligence fixed around the desire; then the people will tire and just want the problem to go away. That is my concern.

If you should feel that way, think about this. What precedent has been set for the future? Also ask this question: If a Democrat were President, would the Republicans want the same policies? Remember how they were when Clinton was president?

A greater principal is involved. That principal deals with respect for the Constitution, being a nation of laws, and a check and balance system of democracy with the three branches of government.

If you DON”T believe in the three branch system with oversight, then go back to you video games and TV. If you do, WRITE your congressman and senators. Tell them how you feel. Remember! They work for us in the this country.

2007-08-04T17:16:00.000-07:00

OPEN LETTER TO CONGRESS

Bush is a bully. He’s a bully on the people’s “playground” of congress. Bush has ignored the Constitution he swore to uphold. Bush considers himself above the law. He has dedicated followers, Cheney, Gonzales, Harriet Meyers, and a great many young, dedicated, (however delusional), interns, a few generals and a great many fellow neo-cons. Bush threatens and gets his way because no one is willing to stand up to him and endure the criticism of the Republican “Spin Machine.” Many representatives talk a tough line, but when called upon to stand up, make excuses and give in. We, the people, have had enough!

We are an orderly people. We are a nation ruled by laws, not kings. We ARE the government. As Lincoln said, “…a government of the people, by the people and for the people.” When our representatives stray from the course we want, we must act. We the people, will elect a whole new set of representatives who will do our bidding. We, the people, will not allow a sect of idealistic power to rule us!

Act now! IMPEACH BUSH AND CHENEY! Or we will surely replace all of you!

It takes only one to stand up and start because a bully cowers in fear when challenged. Bush has yet to be seriously challenged. If any one of you, the congress, will stand up despite the political incriminations from the right wing spin meisters, begin the investigations for impeachment and let the truth come out, We, the people, will be served!

The truth is: bush has spied on Americans without judicial oversight and admitted it, misled the American people into pre-emptive war against a country that did no harm to us, destroying the middle class with tax breaks for the rich, and has taken over the judiciary system.

When one person stands, suddenly many others have the courage to stand with them. Then the bully looses his courage, his friends and his power.

Congressman or Congresswoman, you could be the one to stand up! Start impeachment hearings. Impeach Bush and Cheney! These people have done so much damage and harm to our country, our Constitution and our image in the world. If you can’t be the one, be one of those who stand together.

Speak truth to power!

2007-07-27T22:20:00.000-07:00

REPEATING AN ACTION AND EXPECTING DIFFERENT RESULTS IS. . .

. . .the definition of INSANITY. If that is true, then George W. Bush has taken insanity to a new level. All experts on Arabic culture agree that Arabs will unite when threatened. The “Uniter” keeps saying that al Quida in Iraq is the enemy. Experts say that of those opposed to American occupation, only 5% are al Quida. The remaining fighters are Arabs opposed to American occupation believing that America is there to hurt Islam.

George W. Bush, the “Uniter,” the “Decider,” the “Commander Guy,” says we are “fighting them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here.” The reality is that if we get out of Iraq, the Iraqis will fight al Quida because they don’t want them there either.

So the “Decider” is not only committing the same action and expecting different results, he is basing his action on a wrong assumption that he refuses to re-think! He is even going further in his insanity in that he refuses to change his actions with changes in developments on the “battle front.”

HOW INSANE CAN ONE PERSON GET?

The question I keep asking is “Why?” Can he possibly be that stupid? That fixated? That ideological; that he pursues his “dream” despite the rationale of reality?

Apparently; Yes!

IMPEACH THE PRESIDENT, THE VICE PRESIDENT AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL!

2007-07-20T19:36:00.000-07:00

WHAT IF CLINTON DID IT?

. . . ignored the co-equal part of government, the Congress, and just did what he wanted by “Executive Order?” What if Clinton spied on Americans without warrants and completely ignored the FISA Court? What if Clinton ordered torture and extreme “rendition?”

Imagine what the “family values,” conservative right, “moral majority” would respond to all of that! They would IMPEACH him!

Why are the President of the United States, the Vice-President of the United States and the Attorney General of the United States still in office? If roles were reversed and the Democrats had done what this president claims is his right as the “Unitary Executive,” you know the Republicans would be hollering at the top of their lungs, “Foul! Foul!”

I have been patient, waiting for the congress to plod through the seemingly endless rounds of subpoenas, investigations and committees. What I didn’t expect was for the president to simply declare himself above the law and completely ignore the processes well established by this country, our Constitution and the hard work of Congress. That surprised me. That scares me!

We are closer to a Fascist government than we have ever been before! This president, his vice president and the attorney general need to be removed. The only thing that protects them from the Constitutionally authorized process of getting it done are some stalwart Republicans that support their party above their country!

If you have followed the Congressional hearings into the attorney firings, you will observe things like witnesses saying they took an oath to their president. WHAT!?

When people are elected or appointed to an office to serve the people, they swear an oath to the CONSTITUTION! Not the president! They serve at the “pleasure of the president,” but they do not swear an oath to him. If you study history, you will find the last few times people swore an oath to an individual, their FUHRER, it was either to Hitler or Stalin! Did that come out well?

America, WAKE UP!!!! Pressure your representatives and senators to action! We have to take back our country!

That’s not only “As I See It”; It should be how we ALL see it!

2007-07-05T19:25:00.000-07:00

WITHDRAW FUNDS, PULL OUT, IMPEACH!

So says former National Security Advisor for Ronald Reagan, Gen. William Odom. His logic is perfect. I just hope the Congress of the United States is listening.

. . . but probably not.

I have talked to my congressman, written my senators and received explanations. I have listened to politician’s interviews on Air America by various talk show hosts and what I hear is this: “They are so busy with day to day business, they do not have time to keep up with the news media.”

What does Congress listen to? Do you realize how meaningful ‘what they listen to’ is? They listen to you! . . .IF you communicate with them. . . .

The principal of our government is representation. That means that many voices are represented by one; and for that voice to represent us, they must understand what we want. For our representatives to do their job, they have to hear from US! Contact your Congressman or Senator and tell them how you feel.

Tell them how you feel about . . .

Falsified information to go into Iraq,
Conflating the 9/11 attack with Iraq,
The outing of a CIA agent working on nuclear proliferation,
Torture,
Suspension of habeas corpus,
The denial that habeas corpus is in the Constitution,
Cronyism,
Being above the law,
Granting “no-bid” contracts to Halliburton,
The Energy Commission being private,
The Vice-President declaring he is not part of the Executive Branch,
The deaths in Iraq; of Iraqis and Americans.

Choose a topic and call your representative. Choose from the above or make your own issue. Just call!

If you really want to support our troops, you will do this simple thing!

That’s As I See it. . .

2007-06-30T20:35:00.000-07:00

PASSION VS. ARTICULATION

At first, articulation seems to out weigh passion. Articulation seems like it should logically explain a point of view. Passion seems like someone who blurts out a view without consideration for the process. RETHINK YOUR VIEW!

What I’ve noticed about the discourse between Democrats and Republican supporters is the tone of their argument. Republicans are articulate and slow to explain their point of view. Democrats are passionate. Which has more believability?

To me, the answer is that whoever has the shortest argument is supporting the truth. The longer, slower argument is a masterful way of constructing the defense of the lie! It takes very few words to tell the truth. It takes many, many words to spin a lie. The truth is always passionate.

I am partisan when it comes to this issue because I listen to Republican Senators and Representatives spin their tales of logic. They are so determined to get the public to believe their twisted sense of justice and morality, they explain it slowly, letting each step of logic set in the listeners brain so the next step will sound more logical. In reality, they are twisting a person’s sense of justice to make the dishonest sound honest.

For example: Americans love their country. Americans support their country. The President is the leader on the country. Therefore, Americans support their president.

It SOUNDS logical, but in reality, some Americans support certain policies of presidents and some do not. The difference is in the policy and the individual’s beliefs. Don’t let them fool you into false logic. Trust your beliefs. So when they go down the false trail of logic that makes you feel like you SHOULD agree, Question that decision. Listen to your heart. Vote your conscience.

Notice that I have not suggested HOW you should vote; just that you should consider the logic of your vote.

That’s As I See It . . .

2007-06-14T12:01:00.000-07:00

DON’T WATCH THE LEFT HAND! KEEP YOUR EYE ON THE RIGHT!

This administration, George Bush, Dick Cheney, Roberto Gonzales and their direct subordinates that support and implement directions, are guilty of “High crimes and misdemeanors.” Their wire tapping, torture of detainees, and fabrication of evidence alone are enough to put them in jail. Of course, they want the public to believe that the important issues are to keep this country “safe” from terrorists. That is their left hand.

Watch the investigation into the attorney firings. THAT is the right hand. This administration has tried to make the Department of Justice an extension of the Republican Party. Because the House of Representatives was controlled by the Republicans for the first six years of Bush’s reign, Bush got a rubber stamp on all his wishes. Now that the Democrats have a slight majority and can do committee hearings, the facts are coming out.

Watch the investigations into this issue. Watch the White House claim “executive privilege” and attempt to block internal investigations by the Department of Justice. Just watch; and you will see an administration guilty of “High Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

That's As I See It . . .

2007-05-17T18:16:00.000-07:00

I HAVE NOT COME TO PRAISE JERRY FALWELL. . .

I have come to bury him, . . . in reality and truth!

It is a simple reality about religious people. Some are sincere and some are in it just for the money. Which was Jerry Falwell?

I remember coming across the Jerry Falwell’s religious programs during the 70’s and 80’s. The big thing I remember was the way he asked for money. Jerry told people how it took faith for God to act. To express that faith, they should send him what ever they could send so that Jerry could “pray” for them. They should send in their “prayer wish” and explain what their need was. Then Jerry Falwell would pray for them and their need.

Of course, Jerry Falwell had proof that his prayers worked. Jerry Falwell produced witnesses that told their stories about how they sent in their “Prayer wish” and how they were rewarded. Jerry Falwell got a lot of “prayer wishes.”

I can imagine poor, needy, and yet gullible people; so desperate for help in their lives that they took their last few dollars and sent them in. I can imagine those who had abundance and yet sent some money in to Jerry Falwell with a hope that more abundance would come their way. I can imagine struggling families, with sick members, desperate for hope, sending in all they had; just so Jerry Falwell would say a prayer for them and God would help them.

Can you imagine this?

Was Jerry Falwell doing the work of the Lord? Or was Jerry Falwell doing the work of a con man preying on the weakness of true believers? How does sending money to Jerry Falwell equal faith? How does money equate to cure? Why do people in need believe that Jerry Falwell can help them through prayer, aside from the obvious that Jerry Falwell told them he could? How was Jerry Falwell feeding the sheep of Jesus? How was Jerry Falwell fulfilling the directive that Jesus gave to his disciples?

The twenty first chapter of John highlights some of the activities of Jesus after he was resurrected. After feeding the disciples on fish and bread for breakfast, Jesus asked some interesting questions of Simon Peter. Starting with verse 15; When, now, they had breakfasted, Jesus said to Simon Peter: “Simon son of John, do you love me more than these?” He said to him: “Yes, Lord, you know I have affection for you.” He (Jesus) said to him: “Feed my lambs.” 16 Again he said to him, a second time: “Simon son of John, do you love me?” He (Simon Peter) said to him: “Yes, Lord, you know I have affection for you.” He (Jesus) said to him: “Shepherd my little sheep.” 17 He (Jesus) said to him the third time: “Simon son of John, do you have affection for me?” Peter became grieved that he said to him the third time: “Do you have affection for me?” So he said to him: “Lord, you know all things; you are aware that I have affection for you.” Jesus said to him: “Feed my little sheep….”

Feeding the sheep was so important that Jesus emphasized it three times. Jesus never talked or asked about what the sheep would do in return! Jesus only emphasized “Feeding the sheep.” In fact, Jesus said that loving him would mean feeding the sheep. How was Jerry Falwell “feeding the little sheep”? Or was Jerry Falwell fleecing the “little sheep”?

That’s As I See It. . .

2007-05-15T15:39:00.000-07:00

WHICH TWO HUNDRED SOLDIERS DO YOU WANT TO SEE DIE?

That may seem like a crazy question! But the reality is this: the Iraq government wants to take two months vacation this summer whether or not they have solved their problems. Since we are losing soldiers at the rate of one hundred per month, we would loose two hundred soldiers waiting while their government rests and relaxes.

If you were a soldier over there, would you like your prospects while their government is on vacation? If you’re a family member, are you going to worry? Of course you are. Family members worry the whole time their loved ones are over there. But it would be so meaningless to die while the government is on vacation!

Dick Cheney was over there recently. He supposedly talked to the Iraqi government and told them it would not be advantageous to do it. Dick then reported from the deck of an aircraft carrier that the Iraqi government listened. I just wish Dick had been right about anything in the past. Perhaps that would represent some hope for the future.

I think the reality about Dick Cheney’s visit was that he was there to offer a threat to Iran. He warned Iran to keep the water ways open! I have not heard anything about the water ways being blocked by Iran. There was that one skirmish between England and Iran. Iran captured the English soldiers and held them for a short time. Personally, I believe the English were in the right. But perhaps that was what Dick was warning Iran about.

Let me get back to the main point. We should be deploying our soldiers out of Iraq and limiting our engagements with the locals. While we deploy to other locations, we should only be defending ourselves and preparing to leave. The U.S. Army, Marines and the rest of the military have done their job. They removed Sadam from power and looked for WMD. It is time to get out.

Imagine soldiers coming to your door at all hours, kicking the door in, ransacking your house looking for three kidnapped soldiers of theirs. Would you like it? I see the video on TV of our troops doing exactly that to the Iraqis. Put yourself in their place. I wouldn’t like us either.

That’s As I See It . . .

2007-05-02T14:01:00.000-07:00

"SUPPORT OUR TROOPS" is yet another buzz phrase for "SUPPORT OUR WAR"

I served in the U.S. Army during Vietnam from 1968 to 1971. When I returned from Okinawa where I had been stationed for 15 months, I had to travel in uniform. As I got off the plane in San Francisco, I was walking through the terminal and looking for the baggage claim area. I was tired and disoriented for, to me, it was the middle of the night.

A woman with child in tow caught my eye. As she approached, she looked straight into my eyes, leaning slightly as she herded her child along. It was evident to me she was trying to intercept me. The child was confused. As a result, the woman was partially dragging the poor girl. We got nearer and nearer.

I’m not sure, or at least, I don’t remember what went through my mind as she approached. Perhaps I was hoping to be greeted and welcomed. When the woman and child got within a few feet, the mother spoke these two words, "Baby Killer!"

I took perhaps two more steps as the words sunk in, then stopped, turned to watch her dragging her child away. The woman looked back and observed my reaction. Our eyes met and locked for an instant. She spat in my direction. I read such hatred and loathing in those eyes. Then a rush of emotions surged through me. Instantly, I understood all the things I had heard about the discontent back home and even though I had not killed anyone, for I was never in combat, I felt ashamed.

As soon as I could, I removed my uniform and put on civilian clothes.

Now, as a country, we are fighting another war. The street demonstrations are not like they were then. The protest against this war is civil, organized and takes to a new technology called the internet. Even as things change, they remain the same. War is killing, destruction and chaos. War is not the result of sane men talking through problems. War is an act of desperation, futility and in many cases, greed. War is profitable. This war in Iraq is a misdirection of what this country should have done; get Osama bin Laden!

The Vietnam War was to stop communism. The Iraq War is to stop terrorism. The real enemy during Vietnam was Communism and the North Vietnamese. The real enemy in Iraq is a tactic used by Islamic fundamentalists. Both were mistakes that the leader of this country refused to acknowledge.

Another significant difference between Vietnam and Iraq is the push to honor the soldiers. Magnetic ribbons on cars, posters, bumper stickers all proclaim the need to support our troops. To me, the people that failed to get the public’s support for the war in Vietnam learned a lesson. They learned that they must get public support in some way. And that way is to "support the troops." This administration, like the administration during Vietnam, keeps this war going because it is profitable. They do NOT THINK about the troops, although they say they do. They do NOT CARE about the troops, although they say they do. They use the troops to further their selfish goals of power and oil. Those who buy into the buzz phrases and talking points are not really supporting the troops. They are supporting the war. This administration has been successful in conflating the two.

With George’s veto of the supplemental bill, he is using the troops in a political battlefield. He is using the emotion they have been successful in building about the troops. He uses them to blackmail congress to give him what he wants. He believes public opinion will force the congress to give him the blank check he so desperately wants to continue his endless war.

There is legitimate emotion about the troops. Those who truly understand the horrors of war, the futility of endless service, the separation from loved ones and the impact to those who have seen what they have seen, want the troops to come home. They want to repay the troops for their service, ensure they receive proper medical and mental care and benefits when they come home. Walter Reed shows how this administration shows support.

Today, soldiers are welcomed home. Soldiers are greeted and showered with honors and parades. Before, they were insulted, spat on and disparaged. But the wars are the same. It is futile, wrong, wastes lives, gives wealth to the wealthy and power to the powerful.

We the people learned something from Vietnam, too. Do not misplace your anger. Direct it at the war mongers, not at the troops. Bring the troops home! That’s how you show support!

That’s as I see it. . .

2007-04-26T19:18:00.001-07:00

Republicans are screaming, “This is just a witch hunt!”

Interesting how they think that what is happening in the congress is a “witch hunt” when it is what the Constitution requires. It’s what’s called, Oversight! The Democrats are doing what the Constitution calls for, investigating the Executive branch to ensure it is operating in the best interest of the people.

The “Do Nothing” one hundred and ninth congress was a rubber stamp for Bush and his ego. It, controlled by a Republican majority, allowed Bush and his administration to do whatever it wanted. Not, just without objections, but with no oversight what so ever!

Do you know how many subpoenas have been issued against this administration? Five! And three of those were issued just yesterday. Now guess how many subpoenas were issued against the Clinton administration. Before you answer or take your guess. . .

Remember that the then Republican controlled congress wanted to investigate White Water, Travel Gate, Hillary’s investments, Bill’s sex-capades, and every thing they could possible exercise “oversight” on. They, the Republican controlled congress, finally got Bill Clinton on lying about sex in the White House. But how many subpoenas were issued? One Thousand and Fifty Two!

Kind of makes the Republicans yelling “witch hunt” a little silly, doesn’t it? This Congress is investigating egregious acts of hubris.

What is so interesting to me is the Hatch Act. Orrin Hatch, the senator from Utah, a good Republican deeply involved in the impeachment of Clinton, spear headed the Hatch Act. He was so concerned about the Clinton administration using government offices or government time to do campaigning. Hatch was convinced the Democrats and the administration was using their office and power to ask for campaign contributions, get out the vote efforts and furthering the interests of the Democratic Party. Thus the Hatch Act was conceived, passed by both houses of congress and signed by the president.

Can you guess which law the Republicans are probably guilty of breaking? Rove put together an Excel Program encouraging all government workers to perform their jobs in a way that will further the Republican efforts for elections. It was required viewing for all administration workers, not just in Washington, but all across the nation. It is a violation of the Hatch Act.

You gotta admit, this is not just justice, this is a metaphor for Karma!

2007-04-06T15:47:00.001-07:00

SOMEBODY HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE DEVOTION TO BUSH AND THIS ADMINISTRATION!

I’m serious. Take some recent examples from just this year; The surge, Walter Reed and the eight US Attorneys that were fired.

The surge: After all the advice of the Iraq Study Group, the generals in the army and the politicians on both sides of the isle, Bush decides to listen to the minority opinion and surge the troops.

Walter Reed: The shinning example of Military Veterans care has revealed the absolute disrespect and the reality of how little they care for the troops. This reality is the exact opposite of what this administration wants the American public to believe.

US Attorneys fired: This administration and its vocal support group have tried to explain and spin away from the truth about the firings. The reality is that these (Republican) attorneys were fired for political reasons. These attorneys were either pursuing Republican politicians or NOT pursuing Democratic politicians. Bush and his administration are trying to use the justice department as a political tool to do their bidding. And now that they have been caught, they are spinning their lies as fast as they can to explain their actions away.

But these three recent examples are not the subject of my concern. The fact that some and one could even say, many people are still devoted to Bush and this administration. I got into a conversation with one such person. Aside from the trick of trying to jump from subject to subject every time he found himself without explanation, he would assassinate the character of the people I used as sources or reference to debate his reasoning.

That’s what it seems to be about. These devoted Bushies are soooo devoted and believe in their (There simply MUST be a word for him) so much, that they just can not accept reasoning, truth and logic that would change their minds. Instead, they twist the truth to make it something they want and they disparage any one who presents proof of Bush’s ineptness. They ignore the actions of their fellow worshipers and complain about the same actions of Democrats. Then they accuse Democrats of playing political games.

They go further. They form themselves into groups and incite each other to political orgasm talking up their beliefs. It is almost like a cult. I honestly do not understand their devotion and lock step loyalty to Bush and their cause. Somebody explain it, PLEASE!

2007-03-24T22:55:00.000-07:00

REAGAN WON THE COLD WAR and other lies!

IF YOU DON’T SUPPORT THE WAR IN IRAQ, YOU DON’T SUPPORT THE TROOPS! I am so TIRED of this lie! I don’t know about you, but I want the Democrats to DO something substantial that says, “WE DON’T SUPPORT THIS LUNATIC PRESIDENT AND HIS DECISIONS!” I am tired of hearing every statement about the Iraq War started with, “We support the troops.” Do Not Let the Republicans define us by making us defend our patriotism about troop support! Get a set! Address the real issues and stop defending your troop support! Stop the War!

YOU DON’T LOVE OUR COUNTRY! Just saying you’re more Patriotic than someone else is like saying you have a LARGE PENIS. Chances are, it’s not true. I’ve heard many a braggart. They all sound the same. They imply they have some special power while at the same time diminishing YOUR effort. Just watch this president do a “casual” interview and the way he stands with that “macho” image, arms out at the side, hips slightly thrust forward. He is trying to sell you an illusion of manhood, not a reality! Like when he landed on the aircraft carrier. His “Cod Piece” was very prevalent, but the reality is, he dodged service in Vietnam. His glassy eyed supporters are all the same. Instead of using body language, they are more skilled with words that imply a lack of patriotism if you don’t see things the way they do. Don’t fall for it. Learn to separate the truth from the Bull S. . .

TAX BREAKS WORK. . . Like a strangle hold on your throat! (Sorry about the double metaphor) The rich are getting VERY rich and the middle class is disappearing. That is because the Tax Breaks only allow for the rich to get richer. It shifts the tax burden to the middle class and the poor, while at the same time cutting government social programs like Social Security and aid to children. Look into it! Don’t just believe the FAUX NEWS channel! I believe in a progressive tax. And, YES, they will call it SOCIALISM! But don’t believe it. Social responsibility is not the same as socialism.

TREASONABLE DOUBT. . . When you “out” an undercover CAI agent, that’s treason! When you “out” that agent for political reasons, THAT’S treason! When you send your sacrificial lamb to the slaughter, like “Scooter Libby,” THAT’S POLITICS. There’s a difference. Learn it!

THE DEMOCRATS ARE IN CONTROL! THIS is the next great lie! The Republicans will want you to believe the Democrats own the Iraq War. They will do their best to shift that responsibility to us; the Democrats in Congress and the people. Don’t let them do it. Bush OWNS this war. The Neo-Cons own this war. For the first time in history, this country is seen as torturers and occupiers. We are so disrespected in the world, it will take a Democratic President to restore our image. Remember this when, years from now, the Republicans want to say they will restore “decency” to the White House!

Wouldn’t it be great if HILLARY CLINTON ran on the “Restore Decency To the White House” ticket? American Justice!

2007-03-19T12:02:00.000-07:00

FOR THE IMPATIENT AMONG US, LOOK WHAT’S HAPPENED

The Democrats have been "in power" for about two months. In the previous twelve years, the Republican controlled congress investigated Clinton mercilessly. Then when they got a Republican into office, investigations ceased. The congress became a blank check for anything the president wanted to do. Bush never even had to veto a bill until there was bi-partisan support for stem cell research.

To say that the Republican controlled congress was a "Do Nothing" congress is an understatement. To say they were in "Lock Step" doing the president’s bidding is also an understatement.

Now we have a congress that is by a small majority Democratic. Look how much "Check and Balance" has been done. Committees have been set up to ensure that taxpayer money has been properly spent. In the little over two months, there have been three major scandals exposing the Republican lack of oversight and corruption. All of this simply because the Democrats have been asking questions and looking into the way the things have been run.

We have Walter Reed Hospital. The Libby trial implicates Bush, Cheney and Rove in outing a CIA agent, an act of Treason. Federal attorneys fired because they would not follow the Bush political agenda.

AND IT’S JUST THE BEGINNING FOLKS! This is gonna be more fun than Watergate.

2007-02-22T16:38:00.000-08:00

WHY WE MUST WAIT AND WORK OUR WAY THROUGH IMPEACHMENT:

Many of us, and I am certainly one, are calling for the impeachment of George Bush, I believe there are many reasons to impeach this sitting president. Illegal eve’s dropping on American phone calls, authorizing the torture of captured "enemy combatants," ignoring the Constitution’s clear requirement for habeas corpus, outing a CIA agent under "non official cover" are just a few of the reasons.

So why do I think we must wait? Because I want George Bush removed from office, not just impeached. Impeachment is just a trial by the Senate. To remove George from office as the incompetent fool he is requires sixty votes. Democrats have a slim majority of fifty one to fourth nine members. If we do not proceed carefully, showing through investigations how George conspired with Cheney, Gonzales and the rest of his gang. If we do not show how they ignored the Constitution and grabbed power for themselves under the guise of protecting the American people, the vote in the Senate to impeach will go down strictly party lines and Bush will stay in office. I don’t want that.

The same thing happened to Clinton. The vote went down strictly party lines. In the case of Clinton, it was a witch hunt starting from when he first took office. They, the Republicans, spent millions of dollars investigating investment deals, affairs, and bank transactions. They finally got him on a technically and rushed to draft papers of impeachment. Fortunately, the Democrats had enough votes to prevent the sixty votes required. But there is a better example for impeachment; Richard Nixon.

I watched all those years ago while the Senate investigated the actions, conduct and cover up of Nixon and his gang. They spelled out such an obvious case that even the Republicans saw that he was guilty and were willing to impeach. Nixon was told he had to resign to avoid impeachment, so he resigned.

The effect of a slow, deliberate investigation made it plainly clear to the Americans and the Republicans alike that Nixon was guilty of several things, qualifying as "high crimes and misdemeanors" under the Constitution.

That is what we must do now. We MUST get the votes of the Republicans to join the votes of the Democrats so we can get this guy out of office. The only way to accomplish that is to make it very clear by uncovering the evidence. We must force the Republican senators to see the truth. And more importantly, we MUST make it clear to the Republican senators that the voters see the truth! Then the Republican senators have no choice. If they want to get reelected, they will have to vote to IMPEACH!

That’s As I see it. . .

2007-02-20T20:39:00.000-08:00

VALUE VOTERS: Are they a Reality?

There’s a fundamental problem with labeling voters as “Values Voters.” What exactly does that mean? It implies (and there will be more on this later) that people or voters who do not agree with that particular philosophy do not have values. When you point that out to those who claim the “values voters” feel such-and-such a way, they respond with, “Well, we are not saying they don’t have values.” But they never complete the thought. They just deny.

I grew up in an area that had values. Those values also assumed everyone else also had the SAME values, whether they did or not. It was the way things were done and the way life was viewed. It was peer pressure, a statement that said, “If you are going to live here and have the people of this area as your friend, you MUST believe the same way we do!” THAT was the “values” they had.

One line statements that imply a particular assumption of fact are very illusive. Without even realizing it, a person reading or listening to a conversation can get caught up in the feeling and the assumptions rather that a factual look at the facts. Here are some examples:

“…Support our troops…” If you don’t agree with us, you don’t support our troops!

“Pro-Life …” If you don’t agree with us, you don’t value life!

“Flip flopper…” is a way to twist what you say to make you look foolish.

…and the more recent, “slow bleed”

…being bandied about in the right wing blogosphere. If you are a right-winger and normally read the right wing blogs, you have probably read that phrase. It originated from a right wing blogger and immediately got applied to the Liberal Democrats as though that was their strategy about the troop support. Do some home work! Look it up!

SUPPORT OUR TROOPS! If you don’t support the president’s “surge” idea, you don’t “support the troops.” This administration has sent troops into battle without proper armament, support and benefits. They have further cut the veterans benefits for wounded vets at the very time the war in Iraq was starting. This administration cut the combat pay and the isolation from the family pay for soldiers. At that same time they were spending billions, including billions of dollars that could not be accounted for, on private contractors. That’s the Republican way.

Pro-Life! Republicans and right wingers support the fetus but not the child! THEY will do whatever they can to ensure a woman has her baby. But when children need help, they cut the budget. THEY support the fetus but not the child.

Flip flopper! Take ANY politician and you can show how what they say can be used against them. George Bush is the biggest flip flopper. Here are some examples. “There’s an old saying in the old west, ‘Wanted: Dead or Alive’” George’s comment on what he was going to do about Osama Bin Laden. Later he said, “…I don’t know where he is. I just don’t give it a lot of thought.” Is that flip flopping?

John Kennedy said, “We must never negotiate out of fear. And we must never fear to negotiate.” George Bush is doing both with Iran and North Korea.

Another example of flip-flopping is John McCain. He says things that seem appropriate for the audience he addresses and then, with a different audience, he says the opposite. All the time condemning politicians that do such things. That’s some “values”!

Be aware, valued voter. When you hear phrases that make assumptions, question what those assumptions are! I am actually hopeful about the voting population. In the last election they showed they weren’t being fooled by the Republican administration. Not a single incumbent Democrat lost their office. Enough Republicans were voted out to swing both the House and the Senate for the Democrats. It gives the people a better choice in government. It also gives the Democrats the committee chairs. Republicans hate it.

Just when a voter might think that the Republicans got the message, Goergie Boy proposes a “Surge.” And the staunch right wing Republicans, blind to their duty as Americans and the obligation of listening to the American people, blindly support their “Leader” and his disastrous ways. Their ideology requires them to further their cause and ignore the common people, the masses. That is the Republican way.

My confidence is high that in the next election, We the People will take back our government. We will put into place a caring; serving administration that will heed the People. We will eliminate this present chaos and serving the desires of the wealthy.

What we have to fear is that Georgie is still in charge until January 2009. What will he do until then? The possibilities are all too real. George wants a war with Iran! Is that what you want? BEWARE the Republican in charge! BEWARE the one line phrases that assume values not explained. Keep thinking!

Value voters are a reality. It's just not the reality THEY want to have!

That’s As I see it. . .

2007-02-14T21:07:00.000-08:00

Neither of us knew the other was doing the same thing.

We grew up at about the same time, in different places and in different circumstance until we met. I still recall my first view of Mary. She was standing by her locker, selecting her books for the hours of high school ahead and turned to see who was being introduced as the new kid in school. I was interested at the very first glance. I have told her in those moments of doubt that every couple has, that we have a connection that lasts. Nothing is going to change that.

Still, I didn’t know she was doing the same thing I was. . .

I think I understand why. It’s because we lived through a very emotional time in our lives; the Vietnam War. She was a young woman watching a generation she was part of go off to war. Some of them didn’t come back. I was a draftee that found a way to look after myself by enlisting so that I had a choice where I could go. I ended up in Okinawa, working in electronics; missile sites and the like. It wasn’t fun.

We got together when I was home on leave. We eventually married and have had three wonderful (though challenging) boys who are all on their own now. Through all those years we rarely talked about the Vietnam era. It was something we lived through. It wasn’t pleasant. It was over. . . Only, it wasn’t. . .

I need to tell you about our usual evening routine. I get home about six from my job after a one-hour commute. She is making dinner and has it ready for us to dine together sometime between six thirty and seven. We discuss some things together, news of the day, interesting experiences; those sorts of things. But at seven o’clock, we watch the News Hour with Jim Lehrer on PBS. I think it’s the best available balanced news program in the media.

We watch the news of the day; finish our dinner and Mary starts putting the dishes away. If this sounds stereotypical, it is! She does not work outside the home and often describes herself as a “housewife.” I prefer “homemaker” but if you’re married to someone for thirty-five years, you know she is going to do and say what she wants.

My point is this. At the end of the News Hour program, they sometimes make an announcement about the deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan. They explain that they announce the deaths as soon as the deaths are confirmed and pictures are available. Then they play the statistics in complete silence: A picture of the dead with accompanying information of rank, branch of service, age, and hometown.

That’s when it happens. I didn’t know she was doing it and she didn’t know I was doing it. We are both engrossed in reading the names and studying the pictures, we are oblivious of the other, and both of us in complete silence. I can’t tell you how long that went on until we realized it. We made some mutual recognition of each other’s face and demeanor. Then we went quite again and just studied the faces of the dead soldiers.

2007-02-13T20:18:00.000-08:00

How can one man be so stubborn AND wrong?!

Georgie Boy wants to escalate the troops in Iraq. This administration has tried escalation four times already. On each occasion, insurgency rose from 20% to 84%. Please remember that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results. To be completely fair, this time, George wants the Iraqis to take the lead with our troops supporting them. That is slightly different from previous escalations, although also tried before and the Iraqis didn’t show up.

I’m not sure why George believes this will work when it hasn’t before, but that’s not the point of today’s dissertation. Today I want to focus on the argument the goose-stepping supporters are saying; that if you don’t support George, you don’t support the troops! Let’s examine that.

According to the Pentagon’s own report, the troops going to Iraq will not have proper weapons, proper armored vehicles, and even proper ammunition. They will be required to share existing vehicles already there. The up armoring problem was discovered in ’04 and still has not been resolved. The question comes immediately to mind, “How can a country that switched from a peace time economy to a war time economy to defeat the Nazis and the Japanese, NOT be able to provide the proper tools needed by the troops? And how dare this administration send them in without vital needs?” We’re not talking optional equipment. We are talking about NEEDED armor, weapons and ammunition. You can’t ask the enemy to wait while you run and get some ammunition! And how do you share a bullet? It can only be fired once!

The answer to my question is this. This country COULD dedicate itself to a war effort, IF it felt it was at war! But nothing has changed for the average American citizen. Except, of course, that we are worse off than we were six years ago. No one feels like we are at war. We make no sacrifices. We make no effort to produce enough war materials. We are told, instead, to go shopping. That was George’s advice for Americans.

Would you call any of this supporting the troops? And when Americans say this is enough! Bring our troops home, THEY are accused of not supporting our troops? The logic escapes me. Remember the definition of insanity? It is insane to send troops into battle without proper armor, ammunition and support! Condemning that choice is not Unsupportive, it is the epitome of SUPPORT!

And yet, we have Republicans arguing in the Congress today that condemning Georgie’s choice for escalation is NOT supporting the troops.

The second conflation the Republicans want to fool you with is that the war in Iraq is but a sample, the front, of the greater war on Islamic Fundamentalists Terrorism. This, too, is a lie! We can fight the fundamentalist terrorists with an effective method of policing. The British have already demonstrated that. ALL of the terror attacks uncovered in Britain have been done with policing procedures, not a standing army.

And yet, when John Kerry suggested this policing method in the presidential debates in 2005, Bush and the Republicans ridiculed him. Yet, all things have proven he was correct. George’s way; failure. John Kerry’s way, proven to work by Britain. When are we going to be realists and recognize the correct path? Get out of Iraq! Focus our efforts, money and young people on the greater threat through police action.

The question, my dear fellow Americans, is not about the troops. The question is how much longer are we going to allow this abuse of our troops by a madman? We can’t wait ‘til ’08. As much as that could be a bumper sticker, we must impeach Bush and Cheney and get the entire administration turned around.

“President Pelosi;” sounds pretty good to me!

That's As I see it. . .

2007-02-01T15:03:00.000-08:00

Could we all just TRY to get along?

Race is a sensitive, frustrating, volatile, and politically hot subject. It’s one most people try to avoid and also try to show how tolerant and accepting they are. I believe no one is truly tolerant or accepting until race is not an issue.

Two recent and ongoing events come to mind. Joe Biden’s comment about Barrack Obama and the Super Bowl.

Joe Biden: During an interview and when asked about Obama, (his competition in the upcoming 08 election), Joe Biden said, "the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy." I heard a replay of the interview and I felt Joe was choosing his words carefully, realizing that anything he said could and probably would be used and twisted. Joe labored over the words, articulating each one as a constructive and complementary adjective.

How did it get construed? As though Joe Biden made an ethnic slur. When I heard that I said to myself, "What? That’s not what he intended!" So the news report on PBS went onto say that African Americans consider the complementary word "articulate" as a racial slur because it is used in a way to imply they are acting "white like." I would never have known that if I hadn’t heard it on the TV.

I remember my days in the south as a youth and the popular phrase to show that one was not racist was, "some of my friends are black." It was said sincerely, to reflect that one did not choose the value of one’s character by the color of their skin. I understand that, but the way it was over used became a stereotype of white acceptance. I understand that, too. This thing about the word "articulate" is completely new to me. I suspect it was also unknown to Joe Biden.

When I heard Joe’s quote, I suspected the objection would be to the word "clean." But that turned out to be okay. My bad!

What did offend me was the notoriety given to the coaches of the two teams that made it to the Super Bowl, Chicago Bears and Indianapolis Colts. I watched during the entire playoffs and it never once occurred to me that the color of a coach’s skin was any kind of attribute OR hindrance. But when the two teams won and both coaches were "black" it was picked up on immediately.

My first and still prevalent thought was "Why should that be important?" But each coach was interviewed and both acquiesced to the recognition, saying something about it being historical and how they owed their success to other coaches who gave them an opportunity. I suppose those words are true enough. I just wish it wasn’t important!

I don’t think what Joe Biden said about Barrack Obama is important either. A candidate for the presidency running in the Democratic Party said something nice about an opponent running in the same party and for the same office. Race has nothing to do with it.

If you hear the opposing party (or the right leaning media) condemning Joe Biden, they will be making news and not reporting it. If you hear the conservative talk show circuit making a big deal about Joe Biden, that would make sense. What might fool some of the people most of the time is if the conservative talk show hosts say something nice about Joe or say that the incident is unimportant. THAT would be like saying "Some of friends are Liberals!" THAT would be VERY condescending.

That’s As I see it. . .

2007-01-23T13:33:00.000-08:00

Do we live in an America that one must "Love or Leave?" Do we live in an America where one can express thoughts, though not agreed with? And does not agreeing indicate that one does not love America?

I roam about on the blogs and invariably I read (mostly from the right) something like this, "If you feel that way then you are supporting the terrorists and you should pack up and leave this country!" Some may even be sarcastically nice about it with something like, "Would you kindly leave my country?"

What they are really saying is that if you don’t agree with them, you are wrong and don’t deserve to live or, at least, live in this country. Okay, they have the right to feel and say what they like. Why can’t they accept that I have a right to say something they don’t like and I am still an American and I still love my country?

They explain (and I realize I’m speaking for a group I can’t agree with) that there are qualifications for living in this country AND for loving this country. Those qualifications go something like this.

1) You must embrace the President and support his efforts.
2) If the President is a Democrat, you must ridicule him his party and everything they do, hound him the entire time he is in office, impeach him for lying about sex and defend a Republican for lying about everything.
3) You must Chant the Rant. There are several of these ranging from "Clinton is a murderer and an adulterer," "Flip Flopper" to "Carter caused inflation". Other rants will appear from time to time, especially during elections, and must be repeated with all your heart. A rant is never longer than a bumper sticker and always easy to learn.
4) Never try to verify history as told by us. Believe in what we say is true. Repeat it as often and as loud as necessary to drown out those who oppose you.
5) A "Values" voter is one who believes in God, believes in the power of Democracy to civilize the world, is pro-life, owns a gun and worships on Sundays.
6) We defend the Freedom of Speech, unless someone uses that freedom to express ideas we don’t like.
7) We defend the Freedom of the Press explicitly called for in the Constitution; unless we find it insulting, pornographic or unpleasant.
8) We defend the Freedom of Religion; unless that religion argues that there is more than one god, allows gays and or the teaching of evolution or science.
9) Anyone who does not agree with all of the above does not love this country.
10) Anyone who does not love this country is a leftist extremist and must leave.

I take some writer’s liberty to make the point, but the thought is essentially expressed. It gives one pause. Basically they are saying that an American is only an American if they are defined as only they define them. No one else should be allowed.

Tolerance is not high on their list of what is right. Of course they claim tolerance by saying they put up with "Liberals," (all the time using the word liberal as an expletive). Apparently, not killing people is also an example of tolerance. And this is all the while claiming to be Christians, a faith expressed by love of their fellow man. I don’t want this to be a discussion about religion. I just use that as an example of hypocrisy.

If "They" (the far right) are that hypocritical, imagine how their political views may be strongly radical. This swing towards radicalism has been going on for so long, that what is called "Moderate" today is still right of center politically. I give you Senator John McCain as an example. Another example is Senator Gordon Smith. Both claim to be moderates but have voted with Bush in perfect lock step loyalty.

There is one other thing the far right has been successful in doing. Making the press pull to the right. Apparently, their strategy of ridiculing and calling the main stream media the "Liberal Media" has had the effect they want. Most news stories are right leaning. Most talk programs are right leaning. Most of both barely offer any time to liberal ideas or reasons. When some news program does offer a truly fair and balanced view, like The News Hour with Jim Lehrer on PBS, the right feels the need to "correct" that leaning and pull them back to where they want the center to be. That center is right shifted.

This is a difficult time to be an American. With the pressure to be the type of American the right wants one to be, those who don’t follow suffer the verbal abuse I have outlined above. Liberal, progressive ideas are ridiculed and condemned. But here is the strange reality! When the public is presented with an idea and not told where the idea comes from, they will mostly choose the liberal, progressive ideas. That is how Social Security got protected. That is why most people feel the health care should be a right and not a privilege of the well off. Those are just two simple examples.

I am an American. I love my country. I have served my country. Look at the people today espousing radical right ideas and see how many have served. You may be surprised to find the loudest have not served at all.

The People see. The People understand and will only put up with so much. Then we will see who are the REAL Americans.

That’s, As I see it . . .

2007-01-22T10:21:00.000-08:00

George Flip Flops AGAIN. . .

Remember when George Bush said he would preserve the environment by curbing CO2 emissions and then when it came time to do it, he flipped flopped? Remember when George promised to allow small companies to join together to get a better insurance program for employees and then didn’t do it? Twice; once in each election? Remember when George promised a "New Way Forward" by listening to advisers and taking in all the information about Iraq? Then fired generals who did not agree with him, ignored the Iraq commission and put a Navy Admiral in charge of land forces because the admiral did agree with him? Remember that George’s New Way Forward is just the same endless war but under a different name!

My point is that George seems determined to stay in Iraq no matter what the cost, no matter what the feelings of the country are and no matter how many smart people are telling him it is the wrong thing to do. George will continue with continuing because to George, staying the course is the only sign of strength.

George has no personal involvement in Iraq. If someone he cared about were there he might feel differently. But he has two partying daughters that won’t serve and several cousins, nieces and nephews, none of which are in the service. The only ones with a personal involvement with this war are the ones serving and their loved ones. This country may be at war but you would never know it by the way we conduct ourselves. Life goes on. In fact, George’s admonition to the people of the United States, "Go shopping."

I have said before that I think George is insane. He is not the type of insanity that would cause harm to himself. He just causes harm to others. He is a Sociopath. He is incapable of feeling, of empathy. George only thinks of George. And a person who feels that way is a coward!

We are not as close to Fascism today as we once were before the mid-term elections due to the American people seeing what was happening and showing up to express their dissatisfaction. That is fortunate. The unfortunate reality of now is that George wants to go to war with Iran and has people around him who feel the same way.

I will be watching the congress very closely to see how they deal with him. I hope you will, too.

That’s, As I see it. . .

2007-01-13T12:31:00.000-08:00

Dear One, I agree with your entire first paragraph. The business side, (big money), have manipulated the “Christian Right” into voting for them as the “Values Party.” But just look at their supposed “Values.” This has been a very corrupt Republican Party, using Christian Principals to appeal to voters. From Jack Abramoff to Terri Shiavo, they have demonstrated their hypocrisy. That’s what got them voted out and put the Democrats in control.

Your second paragraph causes us to depart philosophically. I am not claiming infallibility for Democrats, nor am I saying that ALL Democrats are pure and honest. Power can and does corrupt. That’s why we, the people, must watch our politicians and vote accordingly. However, your assertion that Democrats were responsible for the inflation of the 70’s is an old Republican rant I’ve heard for years. The reality is quite different. Nixon put in price controls and froze wages to prevent inflation. That’s how Republicans dealt with it. When Nixon resigned in disgrace and Ford took over, he left them in place. Quite a tactic for the party that supposedly believes in the free market, huh? When Carter got elected, (and, by the way, a Christian) he removed the wage and price controls to let the economy do a natural balancing out. The economy did just that and the Republicans have been saying disparaging things about Carter ever since. We still have the remnants of that inflationary spiral with credit card interests. Haven’t you ever wondered how they get away with 16 to 25% interest rates? Because they found out the public would pay it, that’s why. And here’s a little side bar I encourage you to research; when the last congress passed the bankruptcy bill, they let the credit card companies write much of the legislation, wouldn’t allow the Democrats to make amendments and didn’t allow enough time to read before the vote.

Your third point, about the Christians helping the poor, YES, I see it all the time. They truly do have empathy and act in small groups like that all the time. But let me point to Katrina. Where were the big “Christian” organizations then? There were a lot of individual Christians and church groups that helped, but where were the big name groups that Bush gives taxpayer money to? Check the history. They weren’t there.

Finally, Empathy. If money means more to a person than feelings for their fellow man, then I consider that as having no empathy. Money is not the root of all evil. The LOVE of money is the root of all evil. When a person or party puts the value of the dollar above the value of life, the right of privacy or the freedoms of the individual; that shows a lack of empathy, even if that person is a Democrat! I’m just saying that tendency rests more with Republicans than with Democrats.

2007-01-04T21:09:00.000-08:00

“How will we influence each other’s thinking?”

I had a conversation recently with someone who is dear to me. The conversation was about politics. He suggested that family members shouldn’t discuss politics or religion. I disagreed and said that as long as people are civil, it absolutely should be discussed because how else would we influence each other’s thinking?

During a conversation, sometimes things are said that weren’t intended; or, are phrased so brilliantly, they should be written down. Such a thing happened in our conversation, something brilliant, I mean. It was said that the main difference between a Democrat/Liberal/Progressive and a Republican/Conservative/Libertarian is one of empathy.

A person with empathy can “feel” another’s pain, discomfort or need. A person without empathy feels only his or her own need and desires. A person with empathy is a Democrat/Liberal/Progressive; a person with none, a Republican/Conservative/ Libertarian. [(My apologies to Libertarians who do not align themselves with Republicans) and there are many of you]

There are, of course, levels of empathy. Some can feel a little empathy while others feel a great deal. Does this level of empathy make one lean a certain way politically? Perhaps. But I believe a person without the ability to have empathy and to think only of themselves, relegates one to being a conservative. I make that statement because of their stated philosophy.

If you Google Republican Philosophy and then Google Democratic Philosophy, you will find countless sites defining in grandiose terms the Republican ideas of free enterprise, business without government interference, and the right for the individual to make a living for themselves. I didn’t find a single site defining the Democratic Philosophy. Does this mean they don’t have one? Hardly.

I think it means the Republicans/Conservatives/Libertarians are very vocal about their beliefs and very militant about protecting them. They state their philosophy in grand written terms. My problem is what they DO in practice. They attempt to take advantage of the uninformed, underprivileged, or needy. If there is a way to make money from someone’s misery, they will find it. One recent example that comes to mind is the instant loan companies. Republicans representatives actually defend the right of that type of business to exist. In reality, those companies get up to 500% return on loans. Sixty Minutes recently did an expose on it. One example they gave was a military Sergeant that borrowed approximately $250 and had to pay back almost $1500 in payments. Do you see anything wrong with that? Republicans don’t.

If you see something wrong with that but are a Republican, maybe you are in the wrong party and for a wrong reason. If you see something wrong with that, you have empathy. You belong in the Democratic Party!

When you feel someone’s pain, discomfort, struggle, or need, you are part of a community. Civilization takes a community that supports each other, not people who prey on each other.

The right to make money or establish a business is not exclusive, giving one the right to act unethically, selfishly or greedily. The right to live in a community and be part of a community requires us to care about each other and assist each other. Does that mean you can’t make money from loaning money? No, it means the loan needs to have a reasonable interest. That’s where government regulations come in.

Republicans HATE government regulations. They imply it in their philosophy.

Democrats WORK to help their community. They prove it by what they do.

Which do believe in? The right to prey on your fellow human being? Or the obligation to help?

That’s as I see it. . . What about you?

2006-12-28T15:56:00.000-08:00

The Legacy of Gerald Ford. . .

It is common to speak in eloquent terms of the recently departed. And I am hearing such things about Gerald Ford. It has caused me to second think my earlier supposition that Ford did a healing thing for the nation in pardoning Nixon. It was true that the nation had endured a great injury from Watergate. A president of the United States had lied to this country. That president tried to use his power and influence to stop an investigation into his illegal activities and suppress evidence. That president failed!

When Ford pardoned Nixon, to put it simply, I was pissed! I had just spent the last two years pointing out to everyone who would listen (or anyone I could trap into listening) how corrupt he was. I pointed to the evidence and I asked questions about why Nixon had all those lawyers around him and what was the function of all those "presidential aides?

Finally, the evidence was so overwhelming that even Republicans had to agree that Nixon had lied and had tried to corrupt our system of government. That was a glorious day for me and I immediately began looking forward to the trial. We speculated about how it would happen. Would Nixon end up in jail? Would he spend time behind bars before the trial? Get out on bail? Or just after he was found guilty? After all, his resignation was pretty much a confession of guilt!

Then Ford, after receiving the inclination while in church, pardoned Nixon. Ford explained how the nation had suffered enough through the thralls of Watergate and it was now time to move on and heal.

I was angry. I was very angry. The nation would not have the opportunity to see justice. The nation would not have the chance to witness our system in its full capacity of putting on trial its own leader because, no one, not even the President of the United States, is above the law! But the nation did not get to witness that! The nation did not get to heal through justice and fairness. The nation was preempted from seeing and viewing all the evidence and the true depth of Nixon’s crimes. Ford pardoned him. And I had no choice. The nation had no choice. We had to go on and accept the way things were because Ford had that power and Ford had used it.

Now, with Ford’s death, all those memories are coming back to me; the same anger, the same unfairness. And it’s causing me to rethink the matter.

What if Nixon had gone to trial? What if the nation had had the opportunity to see the evidence and witness the consequence for someone who had deceived it? How would that have stopped the healing this nation needed? Wouldn’t the nation have healed anyway?

We will never know because Ford pardoned Nixon. Yes, there was a committee that looked into any deal making that may have gone on when Ford was appointed to the Vice Presidency. Ford denied that. There was nothing this nation could do but move on and accept the reality of the situation. I moved on because I had no choice but to move on. And as the years passed, I could even forgive and come to believe that Ford had done the right thing.

Now, I have come up with new questions that are relevant. Let’s say that Nixon had been put on trial, convicted and jailed. What message would that send to later presidents? Like Bush? A message about usurping power, ignoring the Constitution, and outright law breaking? Could that have made him think twice before he attempted the things he has done? At least there would have been a precedent to show the Congress it could and should act in their capacity as a check and balance! Perhaps Ford’s pardon of Nixon wasn’t so good for the nation after all.

Now, we hear that Ford gave an interview in ’04, saying how he was opposed to what Bush had done in going into Iraq. His statement could be released when the book was published OR upon his death. This is what caused me to do my rethinking.

If Ford felt so strongly then, why didn’t he say something, THEN! What was the purpose for waiting? Did he feel it necessary to protect his Republican Party more than protecting the country? Or, perhaps, because he was never elected, he felt his opinion was inadequate in some way? Somehow, less important? That’s what got me to wondering about Watergate and the pardon of Nixon. If I can wonder that now, perhaps I was justified in being so pissed then!

It’s difficult for me to speak in eloquent terms about a man that may have put party before nation. Perhaps Ford was, after all, just a quick fix so someone, perhaps someone like Bush, could try it again later!

That’s as I see it. . . How do you see it?

2006-12-22T23:17:00.000-08:00

The Constitution. . .

. . . is a wonderful document. It spells out every conceivable situation our government can experience with respect to the presidency except; . . . . . . . . INSANITY. If a president is incapacitated for physical reasons; the president gets incapacitated; a stroke, an illness; there is a plan for who should be in charge during that disability. There is NOTHING in the Constitution for a president who is insane!

George W. Bush is insane!

Insanity has many forms. We know this from modern science. Georgie ignores modern science. Einstein said the definition of insanity was repeating the same procedure and expecting different results. I can’t imagine a better definition for our president than that!

Georgie is now repeating the method used during Vietnam of giving enemy body counts to show we are winning. Georgie initiated the Iraq Study Group, gave Americans the impression he would respond to their advice, then ignores them and now says we need to commit more troops.

George is delusional. He is probably affected by his childhood, his alcoholism, and his desire to be better than his father. It all adds up to being nuts!

At what point do we, the people, decide this man is nuts and do something? This is no longer a partisan viewpoint. People on both sides of the isle are whispering. This man is incapable of leading this country. What do we wait for? How far do we allow this insanity to go on? Do we allow a war with Iran?

At what point do we declare the president as incompetent and follow the Constitution?

We are there! It just takes someone with courage to say it!

2006-12-22T21:54:00.000-08:00

I used to enjoy disaster movies. It’s funny how attitudes change. . .

There is a trend now to make war movies. Clint Eastwood made one about Iwo Jima and then a Japanese version of the same thing, a very intriguing idea. The weird thing is; not a single veteran I know has gone to see them or wants to see them. Yet every “macho man” talks about seeing them or wanting to see them. I wonder why that is?

Life experience has a lot to do with it. Those who have been in the military and have seen the carnage do not want to see it again. Those who, for whatever reason; . . . circumstance, timing, or desire, and avoided military service somehow want to experience the adrenalin of that experience.

Which of the above do you figure Gerogie Boy is from?

2006-12-02T11:55:00.000-08:00

NAFTA? CAFTA? What’s Afta’?

I think most people sleep fairly well at night. I know I do. The only things that wake me up are the occasional loud noise from outside or our barking Lassa Apso, Shanna Bu. I describe the waking type of outside noise because there is always noise from outside. We live in a small town west of Portland, Oregon and there is always the noise of trucks on the highway, distant barking dogs or the newspaper delivery person with squeaky brakes. I can sleep through all of those because I am used to it and the noise itself is meaningless.

I believe that’s how most Americans see politics. It is the usual distant noise that doesn’t require ones attention until it gets so loud or disturbing that you must pay attention and give it notice. That has been what has happened since George W. Bush took office in 2001. The noise of politics seemed distant and not too disturbing until things got so out of hand we had to change the course!

I don’t know how long it will take to undo the damage Georgie Boy and his cohort Republicans have done to this country, if, indeed, all of it can be undone. Time will tell. It will also take a dedicated, thoughtful and persistent congress to accomplish it. But all the damage to this country was not done under the rubber stamp congress.

Unfortunately, Americans weren’t paying attention when Clinton was president and the government passed NAFTA. My only excuse is that I was sleeping and the noise of politics didn’t disturb me enough to pay attention. I thought at the time it was a bad idea and could hurt our labor economy, but I reasoned that Clinton had been doing a good job and was a much smarter man than I, so Clinton probably knew more than I did and I trusted him. Well, I shouldn’t have! I should have spoken up. I should have written my congressmen and senators to express my concern.

NAFTA lowers the American middle class standard of living by exporting jobs to countries that pay pennies to our dollars for labor. This country’s labor force cannot compete at those prices for labor. The result is that jobs are exported, factories close and the labor force that had a middle class standard of living now have to take lesser paying jobs to survive. The middle class is disappearing.

The price conscious consumer may like it. Corporations most definitely love it! Corporations get cheaper labor, maintain good selling prices and increased profits and appeal to the uninformed consumer. That's why trickle down economics does not work. The wealthy do build factories and put people to work. They build them in China or South America!

Then Bush and the government passed CAFTA. It is the same, middles class destroying disaster that NAFTA was. What’s afta’ NAFTA and CAFTA? A disappearing middle class is what’s after any of the AFTA measures. They must be stopped!

Can they be undone? I don’t know. I believe that right now, the government has greater problems to solve, such as Iraq, health care and Social Security funding. The unfortunate big looser in this lack of priority is the middle class victims that have already lost their jobs, adjusted to a lesser life style and can not wait for government to “get-around-to-them.” When you are hungry, you must eat.

The most important lesson I learned about politics in all of this is to pay attention to all the noise. My only hope now is to make politicians listen and influence their vote as much as a constituent can. I encourage you to do the same. Watch the government! Remember, they work for us and we are their Boss!

I still sleep well at night, though I am concerned about the future and my own ability to continue to earn a living. But it’s been a hell of a lesson!

That’s As I see it. . . How do you see it?

2006-11-29T11:14:00.000-08:00

Impeach or not impeach: It’s a fair question.

I am sure there are many who would like to see George and Dick impeached for their crimes against this country, against Democracy and against humanity. There have been times I strongly felt that way. But the real course of action should be to listen to the voters. And the voters have clearly spoken;
"GET OUT OF IRAQ."

Now that Democrats will be heading committees and chairing panels, there will be investigations. Some may say (and probably will say) the committee is on a "witch hunt," out to hang George W. and Dick Cheney. The reality is that the congress is charged with the obligation of oversight and to investigate and ensure the government is doing what the constitution says it should do. The "rubber stamp" congress of this last Republican controlled mess did no such thing. They allowed the executive branch free reign over the country and it has proven to be a disaster.

None the less, there will be those who advocate for impeachment and those who will proclaim "Witch Hunt!"

My personal opinion is this. Let Congress do the job they are constitutionally obligated to do. As the committee begins to gather information, it may be necessary to subpoena certain individuals to get their testimony. Then when the truth begins to come out, the evidence will indicate whether impeachment and of whom is necessary.

The first sign that truths are beginning to be uncovered is when witnesses give vague, "I don’t recall," types of answers. The second sign is when they use the fifth amendment right of not incriminating themselves. When you hear and see those things you will know there are hidden truths that "someone" doesn’t want us to know.

The question comes to mind about how the American people will know these things are beginning to come out. I don’t believe the major news media will cover the events fully at first. Only after the information becomes so obvious that it has to be acknowledged will the media begin to report. It will take someone with courage and audacity to start. Someone like Dan Rather.

Dan Rather has a news program on HDNET. You can only see it if you get high definition programming from a satellite or cable. I have watched it and find it to be the kind of news program I commonly saw in the 70’s. It doesn’t take a side but gives the facts. And Dan Rather is not afraid of telling it like it is about the most sensitive of subjects such as Iraq, K street and lobbyists, to name a few. When I say "sensitive," I mean the subjects George Bush does not want the news media to talk about. The exact types of subjects Americans need to be told. Check it out as soon as you can.

Dab Rather will cover the committee hearings and the investigations. Dan will let the American people know the truth. The truth will become so self evident that the decision to impeach or not impeach will be obvious. Watch for it!

That’s as I see it. . . How do you see it?

2006-10-16T22:38:00.000-07:00

Blame Clinton!!!

Isn’t it amazing? Whenever the Republicans get caught with their pants down they blame Clinton. That is if they are not blaming gays or liberals. Let’s look at just the most recent examples from just the last few weeks.

Gays! Congressman Foley from Florida gets exposed as a pedophile. Not only is he a pedophile, it has been known for some time by the Republican leaders in Congress. The Speaker of the House knew it. The one in charge of the congressional pages knew it. And, apparently a lot of the Republicans knew it. So what did the Republicans do when it became public knowledge? Did the Republicans come clean and admit it? Did they apologize? Did they do one single thing that wasn’t reprehensible? The Republicans conflate Foley being a homosexual with pedophilia! The Republicans say that all homosexuals are child molesters. (By the way, 98% of pedophiles are heterosexual) The unified, single minded, reprehensible action by the Republicans is to BLAME THE GAYS!

Liberals! When it finally comes out, or at least suspected, that the Republicans have been covering up Foley’s pedophilia, what do the Republicans do? Do they apologize? Do they admit there was a cover up? No! The Republicans accuse the Democrats of a master conspiracy. A conspiracy to infiltrate the Republican Party with gays and, just before a midterm election (not a presidential election, mind you, which would have done more good for the Democrats than a midterm), the Democrats reveal their master plan by exposing Foley! What do the Republicans do? BLAME THE LIBERALS!

Clinton! The North Korean Dictator threatens to make nuclear weapons. Clinton prepares to attack North Korea, negotiates with the dictator making it clear that a nuclear North Korea was unacceptable. They negotiate and stop their processing of fissionable material started under Bush the First. Clinton provides them food and fuel oil for their electrical generators. They STOP their nuclear program, let in the IAEA and secure their fuel rods. I call that a success. What did the Republicans call it? Cowardice.

Then Georgie Boy becomes president. Georgie Boy refuses to talk with North Korea. Georgie boy invades Iraq, a nation with no nuclear weapons. North Korea sees that and realizes that Georgie Boy attacks nations without nuclear weapons. So they start their nuclear processing. Did they keep it a secret? No, they announced it to the world. The Republican administration says it is just as ploy to have one on one negotiations with the U S. North Korea agrees to six party talks. What does Georgie do? Georgie freezes their banking assets. And still, Georgie Boy refuses to negotiate. North Korea starts the processing and finally announces they are going to detonate a bomb. They announce it to the world! They detonate a bomb and what do the Republicans do? Do they realize that it is perhaps better to negotiate than to ignore? No. Do the Republicans take responsibility for what has transpired, knowing that not one single ounce of Plutonium was made by North Korea while Clinton was President? No. All the Plutonium made by North Korea was made while Bush One was president or when Georgie Boy was president! What do the Republicans do? BLAME CLINTON!

It makes me laugh. The Republicans always blame someone else for their shortcomings. They rarely, if ever, stand up and act like real men and admit their errors. But they sure do like looking tough. Take Chris Wallace.

When Chris Wallace on Fox (faux) News interviewed Clinton after promising to talk about Clinton’s pet project, thirty seconds into the interview asks, “Why didn’t you do anything about the attack on the Cole?” Keep in mind that the attack was in October of 2000. The CIA would not or could not confirm that Osama Bin Laden was behind the attack until February of 2001. So Clinton could NOT do anything about the attack on the Cole. It would have fallen to the next president inaugurated in January of 2001. Who would that be? Could it be Georgie Boy? What do the Republicans do? BLAME CLINTON!

When I saw Clinton turn the tables, wag his finger in Chris Wallace’s face and emasculate him with logic and reason, it made me feel good. It made me feel that there was a leader who was not afraid to tell the truth. It got me fired up to work hard for our good cause! What do the Democrats do? Do the Democrats use that kind of fire, that kind of willingness to stand up to lies? No. The Democrats are silent. . .

. . . and so is the rest of the Democratic Party. Do the Democrats defend Clinton and applaud him for telling the truth and for his good presidency? No. The Democrats are silent. . . and so is the rest of the Democratic Party. Do the Democrats rally around their falsely accused fallen leader? No. The Democrats are silent. . . and so is the rest of the Democratic Party. Do the Democrats even realize what an opportunity they have if only they could use Clinton to energize the people and get them fired up to fight for our cause? for truth? for justice? for Democracy? No. The Democrats are silent. . . and just let it quietly fade away.

I don’t know about you. But as for me, give me an outspoken, won’t take any crap from some weasel, articulate, educated, knowledgeable man like Clinton and I will follow him to the polls! I think a lot of Democrats would. I think a lot of Americans would! I think we need that kind of fire and leadership!

That’s as I see it. . .

How about you?

2006-10-16T15:32:00.000-07:00

Why Grid lock would be better than new legislation.

If and when there is an honest counting of ballots and Democrats take over the House of Representatives and, perhaps even the Senate, I wonder if the Democrats will be able to get any controversial legislation passed? There would most likely be a sufficient number of Lock Step Republicans that could filibuster any significant laws "The People" want. You know, laws like increasing Veterans benefits, taxing the high profits of the big corporations, providing money for schools and school security, or even breaking up the huge corporations with the Sherman Anti Trust Act. I would call those examples significant legislation.

Also to prevent such legislation would be the Veto power of the president. This president has only used the veto once in six years and that was to stop stem cell research. I’m sure Georgie Boy would pull out the old Veto Power to stop any legislation that would threaten his big Republican contributors, all the time professing a "Christian" belief in his cause. Of course, the Senate would not be able to over ride the veto because of the closely divided numbers of Democrats to Republicans.

But you know what? A Grid-Locked two years would be an improvement over the past six years! That’s because the Lock-Step Republicans couldn’t continue making legislation that benefits big business, places higher taxes on the little guy and subsidizes the oil, pharmaceuticals and the credit card companies. At least that would stop. That is why I say Grid Lock would be preferable to any new Republican sponsored legislation.

Now let’s focus for a moment on what kinds of things could get done in Congress during the next two years. Two words; Subpoena Power! Here’s an example: Which matter do you think is more vital to the reputation and honor of the United States, using a Christmas card list as contacts for political contributions or authorizing torture at an American run prison? The Republican Congress spent 140 hours of sworn testimony investigating whether Clinton used the White House Christmas list to contact people for political contributions and that Republican Congress spent just 12 hours investigating Abu Ghraib. (Thanks to the Mahablog for that info)

With Subpoena power, the Democrats will be able to do honest investigations into the atrocities of the Bush administration, the misuse of taxpayer funds, the writing of legislation by lobbyists or even the Energy Commission under Cheney. Just imagine how things could come to light and have to bare the scrutiny of truth!

Yes, I won’t mind a Grid Locked Congress. Watching the subpoena power work and expose the truth will be a better show than the Water Gate Hearings were.

That’s as I see it. . .

How do you see it?

2006-09-30T21:38:00.000-07:00

Things from the last century have way of being carried forward into the next.

Buggy whips were important in 1900. They became out dated as the automobile became popular. We are at another turn of the century and it seems that FREEDOM has become replaced by a more popular right of religion. Let me explain how I feel about religion before I break into my main point. We have Freedom OF religion in our country. That means we can worship any way we want. There is no STATE RELIGION, like there was and is in England. If you did not worship in the state certified religion, you ran the risk of being jailed back then. That is why the founders thought it important to give us that freedom. Religion and church should and does not have any connection with governance. We are free from state sanctified religion.

But doesn't that also mean freedom FROM religion? Shouldn't we be allowed to NOT worship at all? But that freedom seems to be going the way of the buggy whip. It is a "quaint" and "interesting" idea but "no one of any importance believes it." It is important for our politicians to be "RELIGIOUS."

When I hear George W. Bush supporters say, "At least he is a christian." I think to myself, weren't all the previous presidents christian? If you check your history book, you will find they were ALL Christians! What's different about George W. Bush?

Does he have some special anointment by God? Is George some kind of heavenly messenger?

I say "NO!" George is just like every other demagogue in histroy that thought he was a messenger of god. George is a man; and a not too intelligent man at that. George didn't finish his military obligation. George didn't have to compete to get into college, (his daddy was an alumni). George didn't have to suffer the consequence of his many failures. There was always someone with MONEY to bail out poor George. George was born with a silver foot in his mouth.

George is a failure. If you don't belive me, Goggle FAILURE and click on "I feel lucky." But does that account for the religious right to support him with such loyalty? The religious right is looking for that prophesied moment in the future to bring on the "Coming of God." Could George possibly be that person?

Let's look at it logically. EVERY human interpretation of prophecy has ended in failure. EVERY single one who said "LOOK! HERE IS THE COMING!" has been wrong! Since George is already a failure at everything he has ever done, he fits right in. George is not your messiah. George is a failure.

My point about religion is this: You are free to worship any god you wish. You are free to have the most bizarre of religious beliefs. YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO CONTROL THE WAY I WANT TO DO THINGS! Because I have freedom FROM religion!

When Geroge W. Bush uses his religious philosophy to make decisions for this country, he is wrong and should be removed from office. It's as simple as that.

Freedom of Religion is not a buggy whip. Freedom FROM Religion is a right! DO NOT force a religious philosophy upon me because YOU think God Is Coming!

Allow me to pause and stop yelling. . .

Here is my point:

Freedom FROM religion is as much a right as Freedom OF religion. Do not force religious thought upon me! I am an American and I have that right.

2006-09-29T21:17:00.000-07:00

Substitute "Jew" for Liberal:

When you listen to, or hear the right talk about the political situation in America, substitute "Jew" for Liberal. See if it reminds you of anything. Fascists create an enemy for the country to hate. Hitler created the Jews. George bush has his "Terrorists." But the entire Republican party has the "Liberal." The word Liberal is used as a pejorative, a curse word, a defamation. From the Republican point of view, nothing is worse than a "LIBERAL!"

LIBERALS would have you "advocating terrorists rights" or preventing the terrorists from being "effectively questioned." Those quotes are from the president of these United States, George W. Bush. "Advocating terrorists rights" means standing up for the Constitution and the rights it grants everyone accused of a crime in this, OUR country.

"Effectively questioned" was how George W. Bush described TORTURE. Is that what you want your country doing in the name of freedom? "Effectively questioning" someone who was sold to our military by as a "terrorist" but in reality was just a victim. How would we know unless there is a formal hearing for the accused to explain himself? That's George W. Bush's America. It is not my America!

For the first time in 230 years, we TORTURE and PREVENT people from receiving human dignity. Does that make you proud to be an American? Does that make you feel safe? Do you think we could suffer another attack like 9/11 if we torture our enemies and defame anyone who disagrees with George?

Read your history people! This country is heading the same way Nazi Germany did in 1933! Now that George has been ENABLED, what is next? Does he declare that anyone who speaks out against him is subject to imprisonment? Could people who disagree with George "Disappear?" It happened in Germany. We used to think it could never happen here. Is declaring him the "FUHRER" next? Of course, George will use a more pleasing word. Perhaps something like, "Interim Premier" or "War Time President."

When you hear the right talk about the Liberals, substitue the word "JEW!"

Then you will understand!

That's as I see it. . .

Tell me what you think!

2006-09-28T19:41:00.000-07:00

Today, September 28, 2006, the Congress of these United States has taken a gigantic step in the dirtection of Fascism. For 230 years, since 1776, we have been a nation that respects individual liberty. How vital is that word, "Liberty?" How important is it to this nation; this nation of laws? Can we so off handedly discard such a concept? Are the situations of today so different from anything we have ever faced that it requires us as a nation to discard Liberty?

Liberty is the right to be respected, heard and treated like a human being. George W. Bush feels that Liberty is in the way of what he wants to do with people he says are bad people. George says that the Geneva Convention is vague when it says that a person can not be treated in a way that is humiliating. George thinks that needs to be quantified. Apparently, George does not understand what humiliating means.

But George did not get just an explanation of what is "humiliating." George got the privilege of deciding what he wants to do with "unlawful combatants." George can now torture them. It's no surprise. George used to torture animals when he was a kid. In fact, he was very proud of how he tortured animals; fire crackers up the anus and such. Now George can do that to people he does not like.

"Oh, but that is only to people who have helped the Taliban or the terrorists," you say. No, unfortunately, it is ANYONE George feels is a terrorist. George can make them disappear and be put into jail without trial or a hearing before a judge. I am sooooo glad George is infallible! Then we, as American citizens, can know that whatever George says is true, is true! If George says you are a terrorist, you are a terrorist! If George says you are helping terrorists by contributing to a charity, you are a terrorist! You become whatever George says you are.

The last time in history that such a law was passed was when a leader said he needed such power to prevent enemies of the state from doing damage to the country. It was called the "Enabling Law" and it was granted to Adolf Hitler by a Democratic government believing it was doing the right thing. The year was 1933.

Remember that date! 1933. September 28, 2006 is the new Enabling Law. And your government just did it!

2006-09-26T15:34:00.000-07:00

Two Societies:

There’s such political division these days. People who are politically active are either far left or far right. There doesn’t seem to be any way of reconciling the differences. It proceeds with name calling and labeling. So I started wondering how this country would be if one side won. . .

Conservative America, AKA Neo-Con America:

Business is king. There are no restrictions on opportunities to make money in any way that any entrepreneur wants to try. Of course, that entrepreneur must get support, funding or permission from the leading corporation in their district before trying because government and corporations are closely aligned. This business class has worked so well that people are divided socially into just two classes; Officers and Working Class. Every college graduate, only the wealthy go to college, has the goal of becoming an oficer and all uneducated people, and there are many, must be satisfied with useful employment.

Jobs are difficult to find and the only way to become successful, as defined by how much money one makes, is to stay with a job for life. That way one works their way into ever-higher positions of salary and can afford to provide for their family. Families are encouraged, one man, one woman, one or two children. Single life is not acceptable.

On the social level, people are encouraged to stay at home or go to church. The only government approved activity is professional sports, for which tickets are highly sought and expensive. Non approved activities are monitored and names are taken and added to a list. The Officer class has special seating and are often recognized to the admiring crowd prior to the start of the match. Highly paid athletes compete in various individual and team matches that are violent and can cause serious injury or even death. The crowds cheer loudest at those moments.

People move in assembled groups on streets and in shopping centers. Buying is encouraged and credit is abundantly available. Most are in debt to their corporation, living facility or the government. Their only hope of paying that debt is to continue working and make more money. Hard work is encouraged. In every store, street and park, there are public broadcast screens encouraging people to be part of society, to work hard, to buy things that make them happy, to worship in their local church and to have only two children to replace themselves. They must support the working class and the conflict that is always going on somewhere because of terrorists.

Laws do not allow for individual freedoms because survival and protection of society is more important than the individual. Corporations have been given legal authority to enforce laws, keep the peace and identify any that would defy the state. Anti-corporation movements are quickly squelched. Protest is illegal. Unions are illegal and defined as anti-corporation. Government functions mostly as a figurehead to support the military and the corporations.

War news is generally good but the vigil must be kept. The nation is always winning but is in a continuous battle against the godless terrorists that would destroy the nation. The national leader is a handsome man of middle age that gives rousing nationalistic speeches that stir the patriotic blood and increase the ranks of the military fighting men. Flags are everywhere. Anyone who does not have a flag, disrespects the flag or misses more than two patriotic celebrations is investigated by the secret police. Privacy is non-existent. All communications are monitored and any suspicious activity is quickly investigated. It is part of the War Powers act passed many years before.

Progressive America, AKA Liberal:

Business is good. Corporations, though legal, are no longer considered persons and are regulated for the common good of workers and consumers. New businesses arise, some succeed and some fail. Small businesses are the largest employers. Medical benefits and old age security is guaranteed and people are free to take any job they wish, join a union or start their own business. Taxes are progressive. Those that make more, pay more.

College education is guaranteed and anyone who does not want to attend college can take abbreviated training to learn a trade. Both are supported by taxes. Due to this arrangement, the nation has established itself as a leader in technology and medical research.

People enjoy many activities in and out of the home and are free to choose. Churches are independent and all religions are legal as long as they do not cause harm to others or violate the laws of the land. There is complete separation of church and state. There are nine classes of people, the very rich, the middle class and the poor. Each class has three classes of upper, middle and lower. People can achieve whatever status they want, accumulate all the wealth they desire and can pass on most of it to their heirs but it is taxed when it exceeds a certain amount. The poorest class can get government subsidy to ensure sustenance and housing.

Home ownership is encouraged. Lending institutions are regulated so interest rates are fair and reasonable. Employment is abundant and it is a crime to hire or employ illegal aliens. Imports may have tariffs to control and protect our industries. Manufacturing has increased and exports are on the rise.

The people are free to protest, vote and change the participate in government. Government answers to the people and elections are fair. There is a constant battle of philosophy between the Liberals and the Neo-Conservatives, but people are well educated about history and are careful not to repeat it. Neo-Cons are free to express themselves but no one takes them very seriously. Conservative ideology has been reborn and is on the rise.

It is an ever, persistent vigil to protect our way of life. Many people from other nations want to move and live here so immigration is controlled. Many disputes arise about immigration laws, defining our National Culture, language and borders. It is an ongoing struggle in the legislatures.

Life is generally peaceful. Although there are those who would destroy us, our nation keeps a steady vigil and watch to protect us.

That's as I see it. . . How do you see it?

2006-09-19T16:39:00.000-07:00

Pardons:

I remember a time when the President of the United States was pardoned and how it made me feel. I was angry! I was angry that Nixon wouldn't get his just deserts. I was angry that I would not have the satisfaction of seeing him go to jail and suffer the indignity of that experience. I was angry at Gerald Ford.

It wasn't until many years later that I saw the true worth of Gerald Ford's wisdom. He said he pardoned Nixon to get the country moving forward. The country had suffered enough from Watergate and it was now time to heal. It was all those years later that I agreed with him. I would have to be satisfied with the humiliation Nixon suffered upon resigning.

Do we now have a similar situation with Bush? Should he be pardoned for the crimes he has committed against the People of this country and the Constitution? I say NO! Bush has suffered no humiliation, no evidence laid before a committee, and his own party has not condemned him. All that his party wants to do now is pass a law to prevent Bush from being charged and facing the evidence.

Is that enough to satisfy the country? to heal the country? to move the People forward to solve the real problems we face? Unequivocally NO.

The reason for this pardon is to avoid punishment and humiliation, not just of Bush but of the Republican Party. To avoid the obvious situation of admitting he was wrong. This is not a healing act by a wise government. This is a deliberate attempt of avoidance. There is no regret, no remorse of deeds done. Instead we have an arrogance that claims Kingly power and continues with illegal activity. That is not worthy of forgiveness!

Right now the Senate of these United States is considering a bill to forgive Bush and his cohorts of past crimes. Is that what you want for this country? Is that going to heal the wrongs? Or is that just going to leave us with a mess and no one to investigate?

That's as I see it. . .

2006-08-31T12:43:00.000-07:00

Roman Gladiators

Most people know about the Roman Era, how they used the coliseum as theatre with gladiators dueling to the death and Christians being slaughtered. Focus for a moment on the crowded seats of spectators though. Could you call them bloodthirsty? Certainly there was no risk to their life or limb, protected as they were by the walls of separation and their paid ticket to view the spectacle.

Imagine how the spectators cheered, actually becoming part of the event, not just viewing the carnage but cheering on the slaughter and offering an up or down vote on whether the vanquished loser should live or die. Imagine their exhilaration as the up or down vote was followed and the losing gladiator was executed; blood gushing from the killing wound.

Very few of the Gladiators actually enjoyed what they did or had much of a choice about it. And many stories have tried to illustrate the gladiator’s perspective, showing rebellions and their quest for freedom. Few stories place the focus on the spectator and how (gory? uncivilized? bloodthirsty?) they seemed. But when I thought about it, it parallels today’s attitudes about the situation in Iraq.

We have the spectators; those who "support the war," want to "stay the course" and feel very protected in their high offices. We also have those that openly oppose the choices being made and want to end this country’s presence there. It is all too easy to draw a parallel with the troops as the gladiators and this administration as the spectators. But the reality is that we are all spectators! The question is "What type of spectator are we?"

As I see it. . . If we really believe that "fighting them over there" is the solution to this undeclared "War on Terror," if we support this occupation in Iraq, we are the bloodthirsty type and enjoy the carnage and gushing blood. If we believe that the military has done its job by removing Sadam Hussein and "major military action has ended," then we are the thumbs up type of spectator that respects life and says it is right and honorable to re deploy the troops as Murtha has suggested. It is not "Cutting and running."

I wonder if the spectators fought amongst themselves? Can you imagine, "Kill him! Kill him!" While another spectator says, "No. He fought nobly. Let him live!"

And then the Emperor has to decide. . . Party of life? or Party of Death?

Is our discourse similar?

How do you see it?

2006-08-29T12:01:00.000-07:00

I was in a department store the other day;. . . you know, the kind that sells groceries, paint, auto supplies and clothing. I was looking specifically for some painting supplies and found the brush I wanted within a group of other brushes. I made my selection and went to the check out to pay. The brush rang up at a very different price than what it was labeled on the shelf so I questioned it immediately.

The checkout clerk paged a coworker for a price check. The eager coworker showed up then quickly ran to the paint brush shelf and did a price check, returning with the news that my selection had been put on the wrong shelf and the price it rang up as was correct. I chose to make a different selection and returned to the paint supply area.

As I perused the shelves studying the selections and deciding which one would fill my need at the most economical price, I couldn’t help thinking how miss labeling also has an impact in our political environment and spending. Do you recall the "Clear Skies Initiative"? It sounds like we are going to clean up our atmosphere, but in actuality, allowed factories to put more pollutants into the air.

Do you recall the "Healthy Forest" package put out by this administration? It sounds like we are going to clean up our forests and make it healthier for us and the forest. In actuality, it lets large corporations harvest trees on government land and in protected areas.

Here’s another one; the "Prescription Drug Bill." Do you remember it? Labeled as a Drug Benefit for Americans, in actuality, is a multi-billion dollar boondoggle for the pharmaceutical companies.

I don’t believe that department store intentionally miss labeled that paintbrush. It wouldn’t be in their best interest to do that. But can I trust an administration that says one thing and does another? What is their best interest?

When "they," the administration, explains the above miss labeling, they explain as brilliant political maneuvering by Carl Rove. Is it really? Is it "Political Maneuvering" or outright lying? The department store did not intentionally miss label that paintbrush. This Republican Administration purposely miss labels almost everything it does. That’s lying!

That’s As I see it . . .

What do you think?

2006-08-28T11:10:00.000-07:00

"The Undefeated"

I watched an old John Wayne movie the other night. It was nostalgic. The movie was "The Undefeated" made in 1969. John Wayne played a Union Colonel in command of a brigade.

In the opening scene, the Union Colonel is attacking a Confederate stronghold, routing them and killing many of the soldiers. Several "Rebels" grab their Confederate flag and keep it from falling to the ground as rebels are killed in the battle. Finally one rebel soldier gets hit and falls, wrapping himself in his flag as he dies.

The scene changes to show John Wayne, the victorious Union Colonel astride his horse, surveying the vanquished, rebel camp. A messenger rides up shouting that the war is over. The Union Colonel reprimands the messenger and orders him to report his message. The Union Colonel finds out that the war had ended three days earlier with Lee’s surrender to Grant at Appomatix. The Union Colonel looks around at all the dead soldiers and realizes the futility of the battle. He orders a flag of truce and he rides into the rebel camp to share the news that the war is over.

The rebel camp honors the flag of truce and a gaunt Confederate Colonel with an empty sleeve where his right arm used to be comes out to talk with the Union Colonel. The Union Colonel shares the news about the war being over. To his surprise, the Confederate Colonel says he learned of it the day before.

Then the Union Colonel asks a logical question. "If you already knew the war was over, why did you fight this battle?"

The Confederate Colonel says, "Because this is our land and you’re on it."

Our occupation of Iraq is not eliminating terrorists. It is creating fighters against us simply because we are there. It is time to re-deploy the troops!

2006-08-15T13:02:00.000-07:00

This country we live in, this America, has two levels of government. I am talking not about parties, but about the philosophical and political differences in the parties.

Democrats believe in the strength and survival of the community. Republicans believe in the strength and survival of the fittest and the corporations. [To Republicans, corporations are people in the legal sense and have created laws that have given them that right. Therefore they can take you to civil court and win through attrition with deeper pockets. It is very difficult for the little guy to get justice in this America!]

Democrats believe that survival of a group of people, a community, a village, a city, a state and a nation depends on concern for each other, helping each other and allowing the government to be there to help when only the government can help. Republicans call this socialism. Republicans go further. They call their survival of the fittest philosophy "Individual Responsibility." It is your individual responsibility to provide for yourself in hurricanes, old age, health care and tragedy. If bad things happen, it is through your own lack of planning or responsibility. Republicans believe social programs that protect citizens, prevents "Free Enterprise" and opportunities to make money.

Democrats believe that the proper way for corporations to operate is with regulations. Regulations ensure companies are safe working places, have safe products, don’t pollute our environment and do pay their fair amount of taxes to support the things common to communities. That requires regulation. Republicans want to eliminate regulations; saying that through "Free Enterprise" companies can be more profitable, employ more people and when these things happen, society benefits. That type of thinking is the politicizing of their philosophy. Through these types of arguments, Republicans have removed regulations to the detriment of society. Another way they express it is to call it "trickle down" economics. Every time trickle down economics is tried, it has not worked to the greater benefit of society. Republicans will argue and say it does work. Perhaps they actually believe it, but it only works for corporations and the wealthy. It is in reality, Republican double talk. The greater benefit to society is to regulate corporations.

Society to Republicans is a labor source. Many in society are perfectly fine with being the labor force. But they also want to be treated fairly, know that they will not be taken advantage of and to be told the truth. An informed labor force knows that the company they work for must make a profit. They know that without a profit they will not have a job. When the lowest paid employee is making $5.15 per hour and the CEO is making $5000 per hour, there is a problem with America!

To Republicans, society is the labor force that must be kept busy, poorly informed and unaware of their rights as citizens. In this way a labor is kept strong through ignorance, provides an army for wars of Peace, and maintains freedom through slavery to corporations. If that sounds Orwellian, it is!

Perhaps I over simplify. Here is what we must do to take back our country from the Republicans and the Corporations. Declare corporations as businesses, not persons. Regulate them for the common good. Counter every Republican political phrase with the truth of their philosophy.

If we want to improve our government as a whole we must do three things. 1) Get rid of the lobbyist’s influence in government, 2) Make elections state funded and 3) Amend the constitution so that any bill passed by Congress can only deal with a single issue. Let me address each one in detail.

Get rid of the lobbyist. There have been numerous scandals of government officials being paid off for their votes. Congressmen and Senators have discussed laws and official rules of conduct such as review boards, limiting paid travel and limiting paid lunches, dinners and parties. Some of them actually get passed and then are later modified. Eliminate the money and you eliminate the influence. Congress can not have anything paid for by someone else, period! Then there is no greed, no vote buying and no influence.

Make elections state funded. Congressmen and Senators have to make anywhere from $1000 to $5000 per day while in office to run for reelection. That makes it possible to gain influence by contributing money. Laws limiting certain kinds of contributions from certain kinds of entities do not work. Eliminate the requirement for the money by having the Federal and state governments fund elections. Also make the campaign a fixed length of time. We could also address the ethics of campaign issues.

Amend the constitution. One of the biggest wastes of money and a source of corruption is the deal making that goes on in Congress to get a bill passed. If we eliminate the deal making by making each bill a single issue bill, then the Congress will have to vote on the merits of the bill. How they vote will become apparent to the voters and the voters can select the people they want to represent them based on how they vote or promise to vote in Congress.

This may seem like an over simplification. But I believe that solving the greater issues of this country starts with these three principals.

That’s as I see it. . .

How do you see it?

2006-08-04T15:30:00.000-07:00

"Senate halts minimum-wage bill
Friday, August 4, 2006; Posted: 7:56 a.m. EDT (11:56 GMT)

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A Republican election-year effort to fuse a cut in inheritance taxes on multimillion-dollar estates with the first minimum wage increase in nearly a decade was rejected by the Senate late Thursday.

The GOP strategy put Democrats in an uncomfortable position. Either they could vote against the bill -- thus rejecting a minimum wage increase -- or they could vote for it -- thus agreeing to cut taxes on multimillion-dollar estates. Most rejected the bill, blocking a GOP victory months before the election."

This is perfect example of what I have been talking about! This was a Minimum Wage Bill with a tax cut amendment. The minimum wage portion would have given a $2.10 increase to the Federal $5.15 minimum wage over three years. The tax cut was for the wealthiest among us to get an inheritance tax cut. Republicans call it the "Death Tax" and Democrats call the attempt to cut inheritance taxes the "Paris Hilton Tax cut."

It is obvious that the two parties can not agree on the issue of who should pay the highest or lowest taxes, but that is not the point of this blog! My point is how Business-as-usual affects We-the-People and getting the work done in Congress that we want done.

Republicans have a majority in Congress but could not get the bill passed because it required 60 votes. Democrats are forced to choose between voting against the Inheritance tax cut or against the Minimum Wage increase. Tough choice!

The other factor in the vote is the upcoming election. Republicans want to appeal to voters saying that they tried to raise the minimum wage. Democrats will have to explain why they voted against a minimum wage increase. Then the election becomes an accusation-fest and turns people off to paying attention. Very cleaver! And both sides do it!

But that is not the way our government should run. If each issue is presented as a separate bill and Congress votes on each single issue, then voters can see and decide how their representative votes and if they want to have that person continue to represent them. That’s a REAL choice and how America should be run!

That’s as I see it!

2006-08-01T20:14:00.000-07:00

Earmarks; Good for Americans or Good for Congress?

The following is a direct quote from a close personal friend and conservative. "I think I'll pass on the political comment for now, except to say that instead of fighting for single-issue bills through congress, which will never happen, that I think energy should go to stopping/curtailing/public awareness of earmarks. I'm not sure I understand everything I should about earmarks, but I know I don't like what I've heard."

Ummm; How to respond to that? Did she really mean "...stopping/curtailing public awareness?" In other words, the public should remain in the dark and unaware of what Congress is doing? I don't think so. I know this person and she is more level headed than that. I think she meant that the public has become aware of "Earmarks" and that they (Earmarks) need to be stopped! I agree with that. The interpretation is in the last phrase, "I know I don't like what I've heard."

The problem with earmarks is that they are "business as usual" for Congress. It is a deal made with other congress men and women to give a vote and get a vote. "You ensure that I will get this funding and I will make sure you will get your funding." Let's rephrase: I vote for your pet cause if you will vote for mine. Vote swapping!

Where's the integrity? Where's the keeping of their oath. Wikipedia; Oath of Office; "It is often considered treason or a high crime to betray a sworn oath of office."

This is the oath of office taken by all congress members. " I, Loyal Citizen of the Republic, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."

Where does it allow for Earmarks? Where does it allow for deal making and vote swapping? "..true faith and allegiance to the same;" Doesn't that mean supporting and defending the Constitution? "...without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion;" Doesn't this mean to be true to the oath? "...I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office..." Doesn't this mean that they will do what they promise and keep their word?

How can deal making and vote swapping be an action of faithfully discharging the duties? Don't you get it? "Earmark" is just another word for deal making or vote swapping. The solution to the problem is to FORCE congress to deal with just one issue; one bill! Then the issue being voted on is the issue! Not a swap! Either you vote for it or you vote against it. You, the Congress, are the People's voice. We did not send you there to make deals! We sent you there to look after the People's Business! We sent you there to be loyal to the cause of governing! So Govern!

If "We the People" want to "focus our energy" on something worthwhile, focus it on single issue bills in Congress. Write your representative. Tell them how you feel about their conduct in Congress. Tell them you don't care for the deal making and vote swapping. Tell them you want a response from them explaining how they feel about the issue. Tell them you are watching their performance.

Do you want business as usual or do you want to help take back this country? If you don't get involved, aren't you just conducting "business as usual"?

That's as I see it!

Please read my previous discourse on "Single Issue Bills."

2006-07-28T10:04:00.000-07:00

"It doesn’t matter who votes. It only matters who counts the votes.” -- Josef Stalin

A bit of wisdom from an historical figure. Wouldn't you agree? I have been getting emails about the 100 days remaining until the election. In fact, I'll be attending such a meeting tonight to discuss what We the People can do about taking our country back. I can only hope that we are successful.

But it occurs to me that no matter how many of us vote, not matter how great a turn out, it only matters how the votes are counted. I recently learned from listening to an Air Amercia interview that in Alaska in the last election, the vote count for George Bush exceeded the registered voter count by something like 50%. I had heard many accusations from the left about voting fraud in Florida and Ohio during the last two presidential elections, but Alaska was something new.

It finally starts to make sense why the right is not too concerned about the fall elections. We hear about some legislators separating themselves from Bush. (The right leaning media seems to point that out) But when I listen to politicians on the News Hour on PBS, the right is just as fixated as they have always been with their hot issues of God, Gays and Gagging free speech in the name of patriotism.

As voters, presented with a choice of selecting a party that stands for War, Spying on its citizens, giving Coprorate Welfare to oil companies, and using Federal Lands to benefit Corporations versus a party that wants to protect individual rights, establish a fair tax structure, and present America's power as a Peacekeeper rather than a War Monger, I think most people would choose the latter. So why does the Republican Right seem to keep winning?

Perhaps they aren't! Perhaps it only matters who counts the votes!

Yes, I understand the Christian Right has their influence but that is, in actuality, a minority. Could it really be enough to swing an election? Could all the right leaning, Personal Responsibility preachers, Neo-con thinking, Anti-Abortion, Make our Constitution like the Bible, single issue voters total up enough votes to set the course of our country?

Truth rings loud and clear! When the philosophy of a political party is that the end justifies the means, then it doesn't matter how they get elected. It only matters that they ARE elected. Voting machines are, for the most part, Corporate owned and operated with proprietary software. The data can be manipulated.

Do you trust the counting to be accurate and honest when the counting is done by a corporation with a philosophy of "The end justifies the means" and are Republican supporters?

Addressing this concern has to start at the grass roots level. We the People must get involved, speak out, and show force to take back the election process and verify that we get accurate vote counts. When enough people stand up for an issue, action gets taken.

That's as I see it . . .

2006-07-26T10:57:00.000-07:00

"Of the People . . .

By the people and For the people." How does that thought mesh with President Bush using signing statements to get around laws passed by Congress? Since we have a representative government, the representatives have the obligation to make laws and the president can either veto a law or sign it, (See Article 1, section 7 of the Constitution) where does this other option come from? How does it comply with the constitution?

The simple answer is that it doesn’t. Signing statements are the prerogative of a monarch. Prerogative is the "exclusive right, privilege, etc, exercised by virtue of rank, office, or the like." George W. Bush does not have that right, that prerogative! Therefore, George W. Bush is not enforcing the Constitution; therefore George W. Bush has violated his oath of office to uphold the Constitution; therefore, since his oath of office included the phrase "so help me God,"he has violated a sacred oath to his God.

Perhaps a closer look at an example of his signing statements will shed some light on this principal of Constitutional authority. The signing statements used by Bush have been statements that he will construe the law from his perspective as Commander in Chief (My description, not his). A good example is the McCain Amendment to the 2006 Department of Defense Appropriations Bill about torture. From the Boston Globe, January 4, 2006.,''The executive branch shall construe [the law] in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President. . . as Commander in Chief," Bush wrote. He added that this approach ''will assist in achieving the shared objective of the Congress and the President. . . of protecting the American people from further terrorist attacks."

Interpretation of the Bush statement is dependent on a person’s political view. A Bush supporter might say he is looking after the welfare of the country. A Bush opposer might say he is redefining the role of Congress and inserting his own unjust authority. However you interpret it, he is, in actuality, not following the choices mandated by the Constitution to which he has sworn an oath to uphold. He has, in effect, given the office of the president the line item veto on laws.

Regardless of your support for or against signing statements, if you uphold and agree with the constitution, you also must agree that this is an invalid method of governing. If We the People want the president to have the same authority as a monarch, then we must pressure our representatives to initiate a constitutional amendment to allow such authority. Until that happens, George W. Bush is in violation of the Constitution and his oath of office.

But then, that wouldn't be government ". . . of the people, for the people and by the people." Would it?

That's as I see it . . .

2006-07-25T14:46:00.000-07:00

Chickenhawks

I am enjoying the blog buzz on chickenhawks, at Glenn Greenwald and Mahablog.

I have one experience I would like to share in that regard. I was in the Army during the Vietnam War. I did not serve in Vietnam. Since I was trained to operate missiles, I ended up in Okinawa. We had a "lifer" as we called them, a career soldier who had been in about eight or so years, had never seen combat and had attained the rank of staff sergeant, that's three stripes with one rocker. He was a fat little sergeant, always talking tough and threatening Army regulations. One day he was assigned to lead us in exercise.

Needless to say, he began the exercise and then as the rest of the platoon performed, he would strut around barking out the numbers, "Two, three four.." His breathing would become quite labored as the exercise proceeded so he would take breaks and then join back in, barking the numbers, often to a different count. That is, until it came time to run. He gave the command for the run, barked the count and didn't get past the first "two, three, four." He was so exhausted, a senior sergeant E7, that's three stripes and two rockers, had to take over and finish. The E7 wasn't just senior in rank. He was senior in age by about ten years.

I can still see that fat little sergeant near to collapse, bending over trying to catch his breath as we double timed on by. That's the image I have every time I hear the term "Chickenhawk," A person who expects others to perform that which they can't or won't do themselves.

I know it may not be accurate by the definition being discussed today. But just imagine Cheney, Rumsfeld or any of those Chickenhawks in that position and it will give you a bit of joy!

2006-07-22T14:01:00.000-07:00

Campaign Financing

We, the People who follow politics and the news from Washington, know about lobbyists. Jack Abramhoff and political finger pointing like "The culture of corruption" comes to mind. Unfortunately, this type of thing has been going on in congress for a long time and with both parties. It's more a culture of normal than any other culture. So what do We the People do about it?

First we have to realize how Congress works and then we have to look for a longer lasting solution to solve corruption. I didn't say permanent solution because we must continually watch and stay active so Congress does what we want them to do.

Congress seems to operate on the cycle of election and re-election. To do that they need money. I heard a congressman on the radio say they need at least a Million Dollars. There are 435 congress people. So that would be 435 Million Dollars every two years. Assuming the same for the Senate (which is a 6 year term but one third of them run for election every two years), that's another 33 Million every two years for a total of 468 Million. Let's be generous and say the National Election process requires 500 Million Dollars every two years at a minimum.

Then there are state political offices. States have the right to make laws of how that is done. But, just for the sake of argument, let's say it equals five times the cost of National Elections for all 50 states and We the People are going to pay for it. That's another 2500 Million Dollars. If you add them together, that is 3 Billion Dollars. Seems like a lot of money, doesn't it?

Now let's look at what the Congress recently did for the oil industry. Congress gave the oil industry 17 Billion Dollars as a subsidy. We the People are paying $3 a gallon for gas and the oil industry is showing record profits. Yet, Congress felt they needed to give the oil companies 17 Billion Dollars. That would be enough to publicly finance campaigns for the next five election cycles, or ten years.

My point is that if we have publicly financed elections, Congress would not be obligated to contributors and lobbyists for campaign costs. Where does their new obligation belong? To us, the People.

If you think that is just another burden on the tax payer, think about the promises and corruption in Congress we DON'T know about. What promises, what obligations are payed off by legislation to repay campaign contributions that only benefit some business or industry?

If we do the math on the 17 Billion Dollars, it comes to approximately $56 for every man, woman and child in the country. And that's just for one year! Our tax burden will decrease when We the People are the primary obligation of Congress.

How do we make this happen? Be active. Get involved in a political party of your choice. Make your voice heard by your representative and make it clear what issues are important to you. We the People (and I will never tire of saying that) need to take charge of our country. We ARE the government. It will not happen over night, but it will happen when we stay involved.

And that's as I see it. . .

2006-07-20T10:58:00.000-07:00

Single Issue Legislation

I hear so much rhetoric ". . That if our Congress was ethical, responsible and selfless, then . ."

It's time we wake up. Congress members will NEVER be completely Ethical, Responsible, or Selfless as long as they have to bargain with other Congress members and Senators to get their cause completed! Spending will NEVER be controlled unless "We the people" do something about it.

The solution is a Constitutional Amendment that disallows a bill to deal with more than one issue. I truly believe it's that simple. Members of Congress that want to give presidents line item veto power just don't get the simple Common Sense of "Balance of Power." Congress has the responsibility for spending, not the executive branch. Congress has to stop the pork barrel politics! The only way to stop it is to prevent them from doing it.

Here's a made up example (and I'm not picking on any state or any similar recent situation): Let's say a Defense Bill is being considered. Then building a bridge in Alaska has nothing to do with defense. Building bridges belongs in a Transportation Bill. So putting bridge financing in a defense bill would be a violation of the Constitutional Amendment. By keeping spending bills to one issue (and I concede that Congress will probably be very creative in connecting their pet issues to a bill under discussion) "we the people" will not be taxed as much and spending will be controlled. Line item veto power in the hands of the president allows too much power to the executive branch of our government. Although the idea seems like a way to control spending, it would be unconstitutional.

Agreed! The Amendment would have to be crafted very well to prevent creative connections. Using my earlier example, a congress member from Alaska could say that a certain bridge would improve traffic to a military base and is, therefore, a defense issue. The Amendment must not allow such connections.

We are, at present, a long way from getting this kind of thinking into Congress. It starts with "We the people" and ends by electing Representatives and Senators that will do what we want them to do!

And that's how I see it. . .