Bill Clinton: We Have to Give to the World. But, Why?

A Pace Toward Civic Activism & World Engagement
We are here. Hopefully we also have a future. But how do we get there? The “vision thing” [as a former President called it] is nice to have, but there are choices to be made and how to get there. Much depends on how you see yourself as an individual, as a citizen, and, how you see the world at large. The political debate on the role of the government rages on; the disagreements about the role of the government go back to the time when we became conscious of a national identity.

In these modern times, we’re increasingly becoming interdependent and integrated into the greater sum out there. Local and global issues are intertwined closer today than ever before. The Age of Technology has instantly connected us to our fellow humans throughout the globe. Global environmental issues know no artificial borders. Yet, progress isn’t advancing at the same rate everywhere. This discrepancy can be measured not in different time zones but in centuries! There is a global crisis when billions of humans don’t have access to clean water, food, medicine and education. The advanced countries would be deceiving themselves if they think that they can maintain the present situation for ever. This chasm of wealth and quality of life between the have-nots and the affluent will eventually lead to greater conflicts. We already see this happening around the world It’s about water rights, control of natural resources, and a piece of the pie, as much as ideology & religion.

A big and powerful country like the United States has an important role to play in making the world a better place. This is the theme President Bill Clinton touched upon when he came to Pace University’s Centennial Kick-Off Event last Sunday. Bill is a master communicator and he can motivate people; perhaps he’s the strongest voice out there asking for help on behalf of worthwhile causes and institutions. I don’t know whether he wants to rehabilitate his name after a troubled presidency [failings that don’t even come close to the scale of incompetence exhibited by Dubya’s administration] but he’s on the right track. I’d take anyone who wants to help and actually makes a positive difference. He may have failed to act in Rwanda, for example, and hundreds of thousands of people died, but he can save people's lives today through his engagement--like in the battle against HIV/AIDS, abject poverty, etc.

The majority of people in our world don’t have access to clean water. Some 3 million die, 1/3 of them children, because of water-borne diseases. Billions live on under a $1 a day. Hundreds of million of children have no schooling whatsoever. And, on and on. These conditions breed discontent; desperation leads to desperate acts. Wretched conditions with uneducated minds are prime grounds for the recruitment of terrorists. Clinton correctly pointed out that it is in the interest of the US to improve living conditions throughout the globe. But, how do we do this?

A Culture of Life
To begin, we must relate to people as human beings. To “see them” as he put it. I would add, to recognize that the “culture of life” extends beyond the womb and beyond our national borders. The only regions the US has gained ground (post Iraq war) are those tsunami-affected and the earthquake-stricken areas, because we showed up as people who wanted to help fellow humans. People’s hearts are conquered not by bullets but by kindness. Of course the US cannot solve all problems everywhere by itself, but I think we can do a lot better by having a smarter foreign policy. It would have been smarter if we had allocated a trillion dollars [estimated total cost of the Iraq war & occupation] in a Marshall-type plan (which also benefited the American economy) as we did after WWII in Europe. Smarter, because of the good will we'd have gotten in return, not to mention the greater geopolitical benefits.

Americans are generous people. They raised over $1 billion for the 2004 tsunami victims, almost 50% through the internet. Technology and the internet have given the citizen new & effective ways to participate & be connected-- from his local community, and the national government, to the world at large. We have to do more though, but, again, we have to answer the question, what the role of government is. Contrary to public perception, the US gives a lot less in foreign aid (excluding military) to poor countries than many other advanced countries do. We give about 17 cents for every $100 we make, in private and government donations. Scandinavian countries, for example, give upwards of 80 cents. If every country gave a quarter for every $100 earned (that’s 0.25%) of GNP the world would indeed be a better place to live in.
Choices
OK, there are those who’d say we better fix our house before we go out helping others. I just don’t think it’s an “either-or” proposition, but it's a good idea to have our own house in order. We better do this by throwing out the bums every chance we have at the ballot box. Sunshine is a great disinfectant and civic engagement a must. Under the present White House elite our country has become weaker not stronger. We are in ever-increasing debt, have made more enemies, have lost friends, and we’ve changing the image that this is a land of opportunity, tolerance and progress.

Speaking of image, President Clinton’s has improved since he left the White House. I suppose Jimmy Carter showed him the way to become a world statesman. I’m not going to judge Clinton’s motives, but I like it when an image is used to create substance. Clinton may have faltered in bringing about universal healthcare in this country, but, I welcome his voice in this cause today. We can’t keep on spending twice as much for healthcare and get less for it. We’re spending 16% of GNP on healthcare per year. The next highest spenders are Canada and Switzerland, at 11%. The difference (5%) between 11% and 16 % is $700 billion, a third of which is spend on administrative costs. Many corporations are complaining that healthcare costs add a burden to the company’s bottom line and make their products more expensive, less competitive. It can’t be a good thing when the US ranks 27th in the quality of healthcare.
The Stength Within
It can’t be a good thing when 37 million fellow citizens live in poverty [according to the US Census Bureau], when 46 million are uninsured, when real wages have fallen steadily since 1973 (except during Clinton’s last couple of years in office). What can the government do to affect positive economic change for the greater number of Americans? Can we implement an economic policy that generates good jobs? Or, do we accept the rain when it comes in a “trickle down” fashion?

A stronger America can be a good thing if we make the right choices. But, we cannot maintain our leadership status just by beefing up our military. It is impossible to have a security policy that has a primary focus on killing, jailing, occupying our enemies. We simply we can’t do it fast enough, and, under present leadership, we’re falling further behind in our security needs, and stated goals. We all agree that we need to defend ourselves, but we have to think rationally. “We’re fighting over there, so we don’t have to fight them here,” “the war against terror” that will never end, “this is a crusade,” “we’re fighting the axis of evil,” etc., are not practical strategies. The Bush administration exploited & manipulated Americans' feelings for revenge after 9-11. It exploited the feelings of patriotism. Many Americans wanted revenge; many wanted to feel safe again, so they were willing to believe anything!

Opportunitas
We have a job to do, domestically and internationally, and choices to make. Education is the key, I think, because almost by definition it broadens a person’s horizons. But, you can’t think before you eat, or, get an education before your basic human needs [safety, food, shelter] are satisfied first. Those of us—who are fortunate enough to have the means to satisfy our basic needs and have leisure time to think & learn—must put our good fortune to good use as citizens. There are values, resources, responsibility, and opportunity to be shared. You can sit back and do nothing, or, you can be the change you want to see.

How We Look at Things Shows Who We Are (well, mostly...)

Who's up to the challenge?
Art is in the eye of the beholder, much like watching & judging the figure skaters I suppose. Life often imitates art—or is it the other way around? Anyway, I think it’s good to live life creatively and with an open mind. This doesn’t mean that I have to accept everything thrown at me, nor that something which isn’t tasteful to me should be discarded or banned. I’m comfortable with other points of view, even if I totally disagree with them. I believe in individual liberty and I justify the need for freedom not by appealing to Natural Rights but to utility.

Freedom is a good thing because it promotes the “permanent interests of man as a progressive being,” wrote J.S. Mill. Both individuals and society benefit if people are encouraged to think and act freely! Totalitarian cultures & regimes produce a certain kind of people, who are not very likely to be inquisitive and confident enough to seek change. Some of our practices today we think as normal and rational—like equal rights for all the races and genders—have been considered “abnormal” and against the “natural order of the universe” for much of human history! [Do you know that slavery still exists today? Yes, the selling of human beings!]
What's fragile?
I also subscribe to the Harm Principle, that is, a person can do whatever he wants as long as his actions do not threaten or harm others. Government’s interference with individual liberty in order to protect a person’s “own good” is not “a sufficient warrant,” as Mill noted. Of course there are those who argue that certain speech threatens the fabric of society and therefore should be purged. I simply don’t agree. Making others uncomfortable is no reason to stomp freedom and fee speech. Socrates, Galileo, and Jesus were among those individuals who irritated their societies. Yet, their non-conformist ideas benefited society, even helped transform it!

Being progressive liberals means that we recognize the need to keep the dialogue going and open, even if we don’t accept all that’s being put forward. The marketplace of ideas requires active thinking and constant evaluation, but nevertheless it’s an exciting exercise. Humans are capable of reason—we know this much—but they don’t always act in the light of reason. Obviously when you have to struggle for survival, you don’t have the luxury of a dabbling in philosophy; even serious introspection & reflection is out of reach when you’re dead tired. Modernity has brought leisure time and ..laziness; so, sometimes we’re slower in developing a better understanding of the world, and in building a better, freer, more rational society.

Age of Enlightenment?
Institutions (formal or informal) that propagate uncritical thinking, fear, and superstition have inflicted great harm to humanity. Yet, they too should have the protection of free speech, even if themselves are enemies of free (dissenting) speech!

Recently, I paid a visit to the Museum of Modern Art (MOMA) in New York City where I spent several hours being challenged. Yes, it was a challenge to understand what the heck those artists were trying to tell me. I don’t know that much about art, and I often wondered whether the artist’s creation was a message to the world or an expression meaningful only to him and couldn’t care less what others thought about it. Anyway, MOMA has some odd-looking pieces that defy explanation and even description! But, that’s OK with me. I wasn’t there to buy artwork, not to adopt any particular artistic style as my favorite. However, I came out of the museum elated. If that art can do this to me, it’s worthwhile in my estimate.

Why do people fear something they don’t understand? It must be a primal reaction. It is, though, a political and cultural reality, and many people operate with such an attitude. I bet you that the reason some of the right wing-nuts who are opposing the port deal today is because they fear all Arabs; while the neo-con view of the world is 95% America, 3% water, and 2% “all other”. Further, we have too many bigots and racists in this country, and anyone who doesn’t realize this lives in a blissful parallel universe. I think I can speak for the liberals I know and for a great number of other progressives when I say that our objection to this deal has nothing to do with racism, xenophobia, or temporary insanity! It’s is the past conduct of those involved in the deal—both sides—that we don’t like. What is to like from cronyism, incompetence in handling national security issues, on one side, and helping terrorists move & hide their finances on the other side?
Tools of the Taliban?
I think the conservatives and the Taliban of all stripes are afraid of things they don't understand, that why they destroy other people's temples, art that is different than their brand, and, ultimately, they de-humanize the others. This de-humanization helps to justify all sorts of attrocious behavior. Sadly, even a democratic country like the US has demonstated such terrible behavior in times of crisis. I believe that it is our duty as citizens to speak up; as a matter of fact it's our patriotic duty to criticize ill-conceived policies and question the rulers when they're wrong. We can't give up our civil rights, our hard-won freedoms in exchange for some unquantifiable security. In the end, those who give up liberty for safety not only deserve neither--as Ben Franklin said--but unfree people aren't safe from their own rulers! Think about it; history is a good teacher.

I become very skeptical when someone employs the politics of fear to try to "convince" me about the need for action, or, for me to give up something. The creation of the Devil has been one of the most ingenious inventions, for it has motivated & scared people into submission. The language used by those in charge (either of our government or our ..salvation) bears this stamp, "the evil empire," "the axis of evil," "the evil doers", etc. Bush has raised the stakes by asking us [when he asks anyway, which isn't always] to give up more than the previous generation during the Cold War, because now the war on terror has no end and is everywhere!

Come on, we have so many means at our disposal for making this life a meaningful one--meaning that every individual decides for him/herself. We can all be Renaissance persons to some extend; it takes an effort, but we don't have a good excuse for being lazy and not use the best tool we have at our disposal. [What's that?!!] We can create our own art and blaze our own trails. Otherwise, we'll spend our lives in perpetual immaturity. That can't be a good thing I reckon.

Pictures by GP from the exhibits at the Museum of Modern Art, New York City.

It Would Be Outrageous Under Any Name or Pretext. (It's All About Conduct)

Updated Post, 2/23/06, below
Our ports just became more vulnerable
Hillary is the President and we’ve just learned that she’s been illegally spying on Americans and she wants lots more executive power to “protect America” even if this means operating torture (overt or covert) facilities and “rendition” programs in violation of a bunch of “old laws that don’t apply to today’s reality.” That she has surrounded herself with a bunch of extremists whose main qualification is loyalty to her & her corporate interests. She has had long and profitable relations with Arab leaders whose countries have been known to support terrorism. Her family has close ties to the Saudis (where 15 of the 19 highjackers on 911 came from), and the only civilian airplane to fly right after that tragedy was the one to carry Saudis out of the US. Hillary lied to Congress and the American people to launch a very costly & on-going war in Iraq that has made America from the most loved country to the most hated one in the world.

Now, insensitive to the feelings formed in our country after 911, she’s giving control of all US major seaports to the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The conservatives are outraged and are demanding the impeachment of the President for high crimes & misdemeanors, according to Artile 2, Section 4 of the US Constitution. After all, this conduct rises way above the bar set a few years ago when another President lied about a sexual tryst and was impeached for it. Can you believe it?

For a President that has been talking big about national security, he has shown utter incompetence and indifference to the needs of our troops & the veterans. Bush hasn’t done much to make our country safer. Sure, he can talk in the abstract about preventing terrorist attacks, but his policies show a different track. Katrina, four years after 911, revealed how unprepared and bloated with political cronies Bush’s administration is. Now he’s giving control to a UAE company, Dubai Ports World, not only our ports but much of the US Army’s movement of its military equipment—which flows out of two Texas ports.

Let’s see what the UAE/Saudis have been up to in the last few years. They have been the transfer point for nuclear material to Iran, Libya, and North Korea. They had been the only countries that recognized the Taliban in Afghanistan as the legitimate government. [remember that war & Mr. “Bin Missing”?] When the US asked for help to examine the financial transactions of Al Qaeda through UAE banks, they refused, just as they have been uncooperative with our investigations regarding terrorist attacks against us.

When the Chief Homelander, Michael Chertoff, was asked about it on CNN, he refused to explain why the administration has turned over control of operations at six of the nation’s largest ports to a company owned by the United Arab Emirates, a country with dubious ties to international terrorism: “The discussions are classified. I can’t get into the specifics here…As far as my agency is concerned, port security really rests principally with the Coast Guard and Customs and Border Protection.” OK, in other words, “stop asking, we know better!” Sure, I cannot see any reason why we would not trust this administration…

I don’t know what to make of the following facts: Papa Bush was in a business meeting with a brother of Osama Bin Landen when the 2 planes hit the twin towers on 911. Dubya’s first oil partner in Texas was a Bin Landen who later got killed in a private airplane accident. Strange coincidence. I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist/adherent, but if I were I'd say one of the Bushes may be the anti-Christ, hell-bent to bring about Armageddon. It could be good for business, especially for Bushco. And, if you profess to be a born-again Christian, who knows, maybe you'll get to see the good side of Rapture. It's a win-win situation!
So, what is your area of expertise?
Meanwhile, back in the real world, we have elected people who don't give a damn about the rest of us. And, having Americans, like FEMA'S Brownie, in charge doesn't exactly make me confident and secure. Why, Bush has surrounded himself with inccompetent people. Can you name one cabinet member (past & present) who's done an outstanding job? Has there been anyone who hasn't compromised his/her integrity?
I hear the laughter behind our backs, you know the kind, when the salesman thinks we deserve to be ripped off because we're stupid and we haven't done our homework....

Addendum (Updated, 2/23/06)
Bush hasn't vetoed a single piece of legislation since he took office, but he's ready to do so if Congress acts to invalidate the selling of American ports to a state-run company with dubious reputation. His spokesman, McClellan, lied again when he said that the top brass and the Secretary of Defense had been asked and approved of the action. Rummie came out and said he knew nothing about it and heard on the news this past weekend. Likewise for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Peter Pace who also said that he found out about the deal over the weekend. The deal was concluded back on February 13th.

If there are any persons left who maintain the illusion that we're safer today, they should read this. The US authorities failed twice to to detect a shipment of depleted uranium in a container sent by ABCNEWS from overseas as part of a test of security at American ports. The 15 lbs containers went undetected through the New York/NJ and Los Angeles ports. "If they can't detect that, then they can't detect the real thing," explained Tom Cochran, a nuclear physicist at the Natural Resources Defense Council, which lent the material to ABCNEWS for the project. Both containers were clearly labeled "RADIOACTIVE" when shipped from Asia to the US!

The race card
El Presidente, all the right-wingnuts, (and curiously, some progressives), have been trying to attach extraneous attributes--like racism--to this argument in order deflect the criticism and to make it easier to shoot down. What's unacceptable to me is that this adminstration handles security issues incompetendly. There is a huge public record out there about this, and most of us are very familiar & very uncomfortable with Bushco's policies regarding national security. [Those who care about racism, conditions of ..serfdom, and treatment of foreign workers, should check out UAE.]

Further, the deal to sell our seaports--a very sensitive security gate--to foreigners has to do with ..security indeed. I don't care if the persons in charge are white, black, green or purple, as long as they're qualified and are thoroughly checked to meet security clearance because of the sensitivity of their work. We do just that throughout our sensitive areas of our government, non-citizens are often denied security clearance, and those who get it usually don't have ties or have abetted terrorists! Of course, we have to ask questions and exhibit an alertness the Bush administration lacks. This issue slipped by [this is the timeline of the deal] for a week, when (as noted above) several key members of the US government weren't aware of the sale; some reports say that even the President didn't know until a few members of Congress raised objections!

Lastly, our concerns, much like our liberal attitude towards people, has to do with standards of conduct not with ethnic orgin, race, and religion. Why wouldn't you raise an eyebrow or two upon learning that the keys to our door were handed over to people & a country with a very questionable conduct? The blue-ribbon 9-11 Commission (to name one source) has documented aplenty the connections between UAE and terrorists.

Our Lonely Planet is the Only Home We've Got

Science and Common Sense Dictate Our Environment is at Risk
We got record-level snowfall this past weekend here in the New York Metro area. Actually I liked it; though I would have preferred a “snow day” on Monday too. It wasn’t too bad though, as the roads I had to use were OK, and I didn’t terribly mind working that day as I enjoy my job at the university. Thank goodness we didn’t need FEMA or the Homelanders. Any time there is some extreme weather, I can’t help but wonder about the state of our environment. Obviously there has been a warming trend in the last 30 years and all indications point to this phenomenon continuing in the foreseeable future. The question for us to ponder is whether this trend is the result of human activity or is it part of the earth’s cycle.

I believe it’s good to be a skeptic, though open-mindedness is necessary. Perhaps we can’t come up with a definitive answer as to the causes of global warming right now, but this doesn’t mean we should sit back and do nothing. Who can really argue that our energy needs and our wasteful ways do not produce huge amounts of pollution? Just on these grounds we have to sit up and take notice. Unfortunately, there is more bad news. Humans have been responsible for dumping incredible amounts of Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere (and in the oceans through absorption)—so much that we alone may be responsible for increasing the global temperature by 2-3º Celsius. It’s a risk assessment, and it appears that we are at risk.

Granted, the earth has had temperature cycles in the past, but because of our species’ technological advances for the first time in geological history there has been such an influence on earth’s climate. NASA’s top climatologist, Dr. James Hansen, has issued an alarm, “Multiple lines of evidence indicate that the Earth’s climate is nearing, but has not passed, a point or no return, beyond which it will be impossible to avoid climate change with far ranging undesirable consequences.” So, can we tip the balance to the point of no return? Dr. Hansen was one of the many scientists who participated in the New School’s Conference on Politics & Science this February in NYC, and all agreed that we have to be pro-active, and the US a leader, in reducing the emission of gases that contribute to global warming.

Of course, there are those (too many) who believe that we are living in the “end of times” [check the Rapture Index], and there are those who believe in the divinity of the marketplace to regulate everything under the sun. We also have the socio-economic elites in power who gain so much today from lax environmental standards that they’re willing to skew the scientific evidence to fit their political agendas. NASA, NOAA, EPA and so many other federal agencies have been under pressure from the Bush administration to suppress data that’s politically inconvenient. Scientists have been assigned “minders” who monitor what the scientists say to the media & the public! But, it’s no secret that El Presidente Bush is no fan of science, and the Republican Party has started a war on science for good measure too. [Read Chris Mooney’s book on the subject]

When half of the people in the world don’t have access to clean water, when acid rain is destroying forests, when polluted air shortens lives, then we have lots to do to improve our housekeeping and stewardship of our lonely planet this side of the universe. We don’t have to wait to make it a better place to live in; it’s for our own good and it will feel superbly invigorating. For starters, we have to kick out those who’ve been partying at our expense and have been messing our house. Let’s pick up a broom and put it to good use…

Fishing for whatever bites the lure
Besides, I'm tired seeing them distort science, common sense, the English language, and ..hunting! Maybe it's their privileged, elite in-bred, upbringing that makes them unable to understand. For example, they think hunting is getting in an SUV, driving to a ranch, and shooting some farm-raised birds that were just released for their target practice! Oh yeah, and according to Barbara Bush (the elder witch) sleeping on cots in the Astrodome is like camping in the woods! Anyway,it was probably an upgrade for "those underprivileged people" ...Tsk, tsk.

Addendum: Bobby Kennedy has written a great book, Crimes Against Nature, exposing in detail the conservatives' attack on the environment. It's a must-read for those who want to understand how the economic elites and their advocates take over power (via Republican presidents since Reagan) and are placed in charge of the "common good" which in turn they plunder for the benefit of the big fat corporations and to the detriment of our interest and our health.

Humans have been around for only a few tens of thousands of years--a blink of an eye in geological terms--but we may be pushing Gaia to a "tipping point." There is a new book out, The Revenge of Gaia, by James Lovelock, who adds his voice to those who believe our Mother Earth is about to catch a fever that may last 100,000 years! Interesting stuff, even for a skeptic.
[my thanks to Elizabeth and Gus Karam for bringing this book to my attenton]

Cartoon Controversy Shows We Need More Liberals in the World

Who's Afraid of Offensive Speech, Art, and  Ideas? 

I believe in the freedom of speech. I am a thinking, rational person. I have my own set of morals and values, and, yes, I do find several things that other people say &do as offensive or disgusting. However, I do not see vile speech as an infectious threat, thus I do not need to inoculate myself by killing it as a “virus of the mind.” Being a liberal doesn’t mean I have to accept everything thrown at me. On the contrary, I have a very discriminating brain, which is skeptical but open. Being a liberal also means that I can tolerate expressions I don’t like. Want to know a main difference between liberals and the "Taliban of all stripes" ? Here it is: The Al Qaeda type wants to kill everything they don’t like; the American type wants to ban everything they don’t like. We liberals laugh at, we may get angry at, and we boycott stuff we don’t like!

As a liberal, I welcome being in charge of myself and accept the responsibility of my actions. I want to be trusted with all sorts of information, even exposed to ideas that may contradict my own point of view. I see life as something to be treasured, enjoyed (in the here and now), and take it as an opportunity to explore whatever is out there and tickles my fancy. I choose not to live my life trying to avoid offending the gods, be in fear of them, always try to strike a bargain with them. Nor do I think I have to resort to violence in the extreme to prove that I’m a worthy believer and a soldier against offensive speech, particularly against anything that offends the divine.


Who Accepts the Devil?

That is why I do not buy the argument, "the devil's out there ready to destroy us." The Devil does not exist; evil does! However, evil is perpetuated by humans alone. “The Devil made me do it,” is a lame argument in my judgment, though it’s been amply used, and, worse, many people even buy into it! How? Well, when they say that they want to kill offensive speech because it may incite violence. When they say that we must be protected from anything that threatens our soul and the "fabric of our society." In other words, we're not to be trusted with what they deem "dangerous material." Well, some of us are up to the task.

I don’t doubt that offensive speech can make people violent, but is this a good reason to limit speech? In this country we protect, as we should, the free speech rights of vile organizations like the KKK, the neo-Nazis, and all the other idiots--who are tryinng to appeal to the other closed-minded bigots since they can't put forth any thoughtful argument. They can't reach me. I am more suspicious of people who are after my soul than of those who are after my money. As for accessing my grey matter, they need to come up with some good rational argument to gain access.






Orwell's a Classic
 
I understand the world a bit, so I do realize that those cartoons (originally appeared in a few European publications months ago and republished recently) featuring the Prophet Mohammed do offend a great number of Muslims. Art has been known to inflame and insult. Art is speech, and, like George Orwell said, “if liberty is to mean anything, it means the right to tell people what they don’t want to hear.” Those cartoons weren’t gratuitous in the abstract, but they had a point of view (I’m posting a couple of them for you to see here). I agree with Keenan Malik who wrote, “Far from censoring offensive speech, a vibrant and diverse society should encourage it. In any society that is not uniform, grey and homogenous there are bound to be clashes of viewpoints. Inevitably some people will find certain ideas objectionable.” I suppose that any cartoon that would critize the status of the (subjugated) women in a traditional Muslim society would also be provocative, insulting, and inflamatory to millions of people in the world today. Some of the rioters might be women too!

The Need for Liberal Democracies
Since there aren’t any liberal democracies in the Arab world, it’s hard to know how many Muslims find the on-going violent attacks justified. But, the lack of a liberal political system breeds intolerance and promotes a suffocating religious conformity. I want to emphasize the “liberal” aspect of the political system. Democracy is indeed a good political system since the majority elects its leaders; the people have to be consulted regularly & frequently; there is freedom of speech, etc. But, it is the liberal democracy which guarantees minority rights—be that of a small group or an individual.

We are fighting to maintain and strengthen our liberal democracy here in our country, something that the American “Taliban” (religious Christian fundamentalists) sees as a threat. For them liberalism is like the Devil who can manipulate the hearts & minds of the people. Again, it’s a “protection” thing—protects us from evil; and, the God’s emissaries know best. I believe that our Christian religious extremists have much in common with the Muslim extremists; the name of the prophet is different and God has written & delivered different versions of his book to the different groups which are utterly convinced only they hold the authentic copy.


Graphic Depictions of Violence
 
There are many brave persons in the Muslim world, like those Jordanian newspaper editors who published the controversial cartoons while saying, “Muslims of the world be reasonable!” They were promptly fired and arrested! Here’s a great point by Jihad! I’m talking about Jihad Momani who wrote, “What brings more prejudice against Islam, these caricatures or pictures of a hostage-taker slashing the throat of his victim in front of the cameras or a suicide bomber who blows himself up during a wedding ceremony in Amman?” How true!

There are also reasonable religious leaders who have urged restraint. I welcome the comments of the Iraqi Grand Ayatollah, Al Sistani, who said that militant Islamists were partly to blame for distorting the image of Islam. On the other hand, the rioting continues, people are being killed, and there is no shortage of bigots who want to escalate the controversy; like the biggest Iranian newspaper that has launched a Holocaust cartoon competition! Who said that God made us in his own image… I wonder what exactly this means… With all the terrible things humans have been doing to each other, he probably has second thoughts about including this creation in his resume. But who knows for sure?
Effort Required
 
What I know through observation and reason is that the world would be a better place if we had more liberals in it. It would be better for the non-liberals too! They would be free to believe whatever they want and would have equal opportunities to offend the rest of us—as they do today in this country and in other liberal democracies. So, let’s make sure we protect this precious thingy we call liberty!

At least Three More Years of Darkness: Groundhog Says

Protection Against Mind Manipulation?
I know most Americans didn’t watch the President’s speech the other day, and those who did thought this guy isn’t doing much to improve the lives of the “average person.” I was playing the... drinking game, whereas I had to imbibe some alcohol every time Bush said his favorite phrases, terror, 911, freedom, democracy, to protect, etc. It was a trip let me tell you, yet, no amount of drinking can take the edge off the painful experience I go through every time I hear this man speak. It’s not his “nukelar” vocabulary—especially when he talks unscripted—but it’s the realization that our country is led by a bunch of selfish people. I’m not sure to what extend their incompetence stems from the lack of sense and sensibility, but it doesn’t really matter.

I always recommend George Orwell’s books, like, Animal Farm, and, 1984. Although he wrote many decades ago, his themes have been very relevant today as well the past. In Animal Farm he shows us how a society can be organized, theoretically on merit and need, but in reality the elite is “more equal” than the rest. In 1984, he shows us how a totalitarian regime operates by using the politics of fear, the crushing of individuality, the spying, repressive conformity, the leader-knows-best, the re-writing of history, and Newspeak (when words have lost their true meaning as applied to reality).

So, we have a few people who are “better than others,” not by ability, but by ascribed status. This inner circle usualy has disdain for most of the commoners because the latter are easily deceived, especially when their emotional buttons are pressed; they further demonstrate their ignorance by voting against their own interests. The myth of socio-economic mobility is holding well, because who has time to check the facts? Have we realized that the actual income for 90% of Americans [yes, it includes YOU], when adjusted for inflation, has fallen in the last 25 years? Or, that the gap between the super-rich and the rest has grown exponentially in the same period? People like to hear about tax cuts, but how many people really know that we’re giving even more to those who already have lots, and we’re doing it by increasing our national debt, and by cutting services the rich don’t need/use but are essential for the “other” Americans? “We are not doing it, they are!” is often the retort. But I don’t buy it! We elected “them”; they act on our behalf though not in our best interest.

Hurricane Katrina gave us ample warning and when it struck it blew away the emperor’s clothes; those make-believe clothes that had been woven with much fanfare for four years, since 9-11.They needed more powers to protect us they said; we gave them such. They want even more, and have argued the Nixonian line, “when the President does it, it’s not illegal.” Meanwhile, the expanded bureaucracy suffers not from quantity but quality. For example, Horse playing is a good enough qualification to be hired as FEMA director. [OK, he did bring lots of money to Republican coffers too]. The remaining fig leaf cover was blown away too when Congress returned from its summer vacation, few days after the Katrina disaster, and the Republicans' first concern was to push a bill to revoke the estate tax! It’s the one I call, “the Paris Hilton gift,” since it benefits the children of the supper rich (less than 1% of Americans).
Double Talk, a.k.a, Newspeak
So, we have presidential declarations about this and that, but when they are compared to presidential policy they fall short or never materialize. Newspeak is “in”. He talks about the “Clean Air Act” and we get more pollution. He talks about “No Child Left Behind” and we have less education (most of it federally unfunded), especially in science. He talks about oil dependence on the Middle East [currently only 13% of our needs] and that he wants to cut this by 75% in 20 years, but his Energy Secretary just came out to say, “don’t take this figure literally.” Who really has the time to pay close attention to his energy bill anyway? Who notices his cuts in programs like biofuel, alternative & renewable energy? How about conservation, CAFE standards and environmental policy? The additional $70 billion he asked for the war effort when combined with the past and future expenditures for the Iraq war could have been spent on programs to make America less dependent on oil. That’s a debt I’d welcome, and whose payoff would be far greater and more universal in the benefits distribution.

The wealthy Romans—the ones who had power—felt a duty to keep the masses entertained, so they arranged for gore fests in the Coliseum. Our present day emperor, his senate, and the other patricians, act in like manner. OK, the carnage is kept overseas, where our legionnaires are vanquishing the barbarians, but the national myths are well fed and promoted. We are a remarkable country indeed, but we’re rapidly losing ground. We may have the best health care system in the world, but the question is how many Americans have access to it. Of course the capitalist system is a system of inequality (and this isn’t necessarily bad), but that’s why we have a government to make sense of it and not let it run amok. Personally, I don’t find it meaningful to say, “between Bill Gates and me we have a gigantic fortune!”

Those in power would like us to feel superior and content. In the abstract, we do compare favorably to the best countries out there. We can say we spend twice as much on healthcare per person than others but we are the only advanced country that doesn’t have universal health care coverage—with more than 45 million Americans uninsured. Don’t they count? Where’s the compassionate conservatism? Who's worthy of compassion? I find it shocking that we’re 28th in infant mortality and, although climbing, life expectancy in the US is much lower than other countries. For the wealth and abilities we have at our disposal, we aren't doing as well as we should, and, most importantly, we aren't giving our children the best we can.

I’m offended by Newspeak too. They say one thing, they mean & do the opposite. The President talks to us like we’re like little children; well, maybe we are, but I’m fed up by the dumbing down. What’s up with the President’s anti-intellectualism and anti-scientific stance? Is he trying to be folksy, or is he a wolf in sheep's clothing? He had a chance (via ascribed status) to attend a first-rate school—not that he did much with this opportunity, but he didn’t have to. He came from a privileged family [a "dynasty" according to the very Republican Kevin Phillips--read his books] with connections to money and power. But, most Americans aren’t that fortunate. Yet, the President and his Praetorians in Congress don’t believe in using the power of the government to improve the lives and chances of the “average person.” Maybe they are the new Kalvinists [they believed that only some persons were “chosen” by birth, and there was nothing one could do to jump ship; Martin Luther and the Reformation attempted to change this]

It’s obvious that those in privileged positions are always afraid of the “masses.” In the fashion of a Machiavellian advice, keep the masses entertained; feed those masses myths & fear and they’ll leave you alone. They might even cheer you up. They might even buy into the idea that what you’ve got you deserve because you are special! Above all, you don’t want to give them the means to wake up, so you make it difficult for them to get a higher education by cutting billions in student aid/loans. Rip, rape, and burn as much as you can, for you don’t have to feel the ill effects of your actions; besides, the benefits are so great today that even if the ..unthinkable happens, you'll have more than enough to last several generations of your kin. Go ahead, and while at it, cancel the ..winter in the Northeast. Who needs it?

I believe that the quality of our politics is a reflection of the people involved. Further, that there is a strong correlation between the citizens’ level of education and the quality of their politics. Politics is what we do, from the family unit [like choosing to watch 12 hours of football on Thanksgiving as a distraction to family disfunction] to the national level. The question is how we use politics to better our lives, for the maximum benefit & for the greater number of people. Did I mention that our government made cuts in education for the first time in 10 years? At least “freedom is on the march” they tell us. Do you feel as free today as before? Come on, be honest, there is nothing to be afraid of (unless you're not a citizen, in which case please go away as I don't want any problems with the Fatherland Security Apparatus).

New Realities Shape a New Generation of Americans

Opportunities Bring New Challenges and Critical Choices
This new generation of Americans--those under 25--is a unique one in that it has been raised in the age of the internet, instant communication, the shrinking of the world, and global inter-dependence in economic & environmental terms. These young persons are coming to age in a post-911 reality, whereas the war on terror appears to have no end [at least we're all told so] and no clear lines, no front. The current government is treading on this concept heavily and is making policy decisions that will have long-term effects. Behind the rhetoric, the reality is that the US has been accumulating huge debts, has an army fighting wars overseas, while not investing in its youth as much as other advanced countries. Guess who's disproportionally charged for paying these burdens?

Surely this is an exciting time to be alive--if one likes change and new discoveries. But in a rapidly changing and complicated environment the many challenges lying ahead need to be dealt and critical decisions to be made. Yet, with more privilege comes more responsibility, exercised or not. With globalism/interdependence the impact of critical decisions increases too.

I don't think any generation should be apathetic, especially this young generation which has the advantage of easy access to all sorts of information. For most of human history, (including many parts of our world in the 21st century), people's activities have been centered on scraping a living under very harsh conditions with little if any leisure time. As usual, education is the key to a better life and to greater self-realization. Of course, you must develop the sense and sensibilities before you get education to work for you. I should note that, for me, education is not the accumulation of trivia, or the memorization of tomes of text in order to excel at repetition and to instruct others on how to close their minds. Education is the sharpening of the mind, the broadening of one's horizons.

Many more Americans have the opportunity to go to college, to get an education. Yet, many don't fully appreciate it. It should not be just about getting a degree in order to make more money in the future. There is nothing wrong with making money and improving your lot, but there has to be more to life than money and power. And, there is. Money and power can be put to good use. The debate is what kind of use.

Here's where the new generation of Americans can play an important role by being interested, informed, and actively engaged in the affairs of our country. When we debate the notion of the "public good," the role & the limits of our government, and the policies for the future, those who have the greater stake (and stay) in the future should be the most active.

Obviously this blog has an opinion; its name reveals alot. However, the common currency with those who may disagree should be reason, civility, and an open mind. Not everyone has the same priorities in life or the same worldview. But, since I think education is the key that unlocks doors to exciting discoveries and to improving possibilities, I take issue that my country is ranked 14 out of the top 15 in per student spending. I do realize that throwing money at a problem doesn't necessarily solve it, but nevetheless this figure shows something about the priorities of our government.

President Bush gave a speech at Kansas State University the other day where he was stumped during the Q & A session: "My name is Tiffany Cooper. I'm a sophomore here at Kansas State and I was just wanting to get your comments about education. Recently 12.7 billion dollars was cut from education. I was just wondering how is that supposed to help our futures?" Excellent point! The President turned to his aides for advice but his inarticulate answer was either an attempt to confuse the issue or a demonstration of his usual stance not to bother with "the details." [here's the full text of the exchange]

The facts are as follows, Student Loans: On Dec. 21, 2005, the Senate passed $12.7 billion in cuts to education programs "the largest cut in student college loan programs in history." Vice President Cheney cast the deciding vote in favor of the cuts. The bill also fixed the interest rate on student loans at 6.8 percent, even if commercial rates are lower.Despite Bush's claims, students will be left off the program.

Pell Grants: Pell Grants have been frozen or cut since 2002; they are now stuck at a maximum of $4,050. In his 2000 election campaign, President Bush promised to increase the maximum Pell Grant amount to $5,100. From 2004 to 2005, 24,000 students lost their Pell grants, according to a report pre-pared by the Congressional Research Service. This was the first drop in the number of students receiving the grants in several years; the number had been growing steadily since 1999.
Equal opportunity may as well be a myth, but there are many ways we can make the US a more egalitarian country by leveling the playing field and by creating opportunities through education for those who don't have the connections or the financial means to get a shot at upward mobility. One of the few Republicans who make sense is Kevin Phillips. I urge everyone who's interested in the distribution of wealth and the dangers of plutocracy to read his books. He also demonstrates how the Republican party has changed since the 1980s by giving up on the middle class and concentrating on the upper economic elite. [Phillips's other recent book, American Dynasty : Aristocracy, Fortune, and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush, 2004]

The world is what we make of it, so is our country. When I ask people what they think of politics I get many answers but the description is invariably negative. Perhaps politics will never satisfy most people because it involves a lot of compromise and hard choices. But, who makes these choices in our name? Who comes to the bargaining table, what kind of influence does he bring, and even who has access to our representatives. Politics are necessary in an organized society. Imagine how our country would be different if there were many more people like you... Well, what's your answer?

It's High Noon at the Supreme Court & The Three Amigos are Looking for a Fourth Hired Gun

The Axis of Evil Closer Than You Think

As a liberal I’m happy that the Supreme Court decided (by a 6-3 margin) to uphold Oregon’s right-to-die law. Interestingly enough, there are six justices who are willing to look favorably toward individual rights, and, in extension, state law. It is a personal right to leave this world on one’s own accord, preventing the unnecessary suffering of a prolonged and terminal illness. Yes, the state has an interest to preserve and protect life, but it is the individual who should be in charge of his own self, including his own life.

Of course, there have to be certain safeguards to prevent abuse, but the ultimate decision should remain with the individual. When a person is dead, or near death we generally accept that his wishes should be respected and carried out, that is, about his own affairs. The opponents do not respect this right. We’ve seen it with the Schiavo case in Florida. I won’t rehash that case [hit the link if you like to read my archived post], but the circus played out by the opponents shows that they aren’t interested in the welfare of the patient. They want to promote their own religious point of view—a view that’s not up for revision or discussion. And, it is about a point of view that isn't arrived by reason--hence no discussion allowed--but by revealed "truth."

Chief Justice Roberts’s sided with the minority (along with Thomas and Scalia) that holds the federal government has the right to oppose state law, arbitrarily, in the absence of an applicable law by Congress. Roberts is beginning to reveal his true colors—at least to those who wanted to be color-blind during his confirmation. As I said in a recent post, Alito’s appointment may make some justices on SCOTUS sit up and take notice, and not to allow the country to swing too far to the conservative extreme. Justice Kennedy may become the new swinger up there. I wouldn’t be surprised if the conservatives begin a new campaign to impeach Kennedy! Of course, we can’t rest easy, because I have no doubt that Alito will be the fourth vote on the very conservative side of SCOTUS. What makes these people extreme is that they don’t have the possibility to “evolve” and change their hard-core conservative ideology.

Furthermore, Kennedy is no liberal, and can’t be relied upon to protect the rights of the individual especially when such rights are paired against corporate rights. Let’s not forget that Kennedy voted to give the presidency to Bush in 2000. Unfortunately, the nation compounded this mistake by electing Bushco in 2004, and subsequently allowed Shrub to get two shots at SCOTUS. This is what happens when the Dems fail to win the presidency and lose control of the Senate. Elections have consequences. The federal judiciary has a conservative majority today. Law is important and has a direct effect on the quality of live of the "average" person. Even in a nation of laws [this is up to debate nowadays] where no president & our government aren't above the law, it doesn't mean that bad law is not enacted or it is the consequence of lobbyists with very narrow interests [as in the banking/bankruptcy law which was written by the industry's lobbyists].

We are on borrowed time because if Bush gets another shot at SCOTUS, then there will be a clear conservative majority on the high court that will shape the affairs of this country for several decades. The centrists & liberal of SCOTUS are much older than the three [soon to be four] amigos who shoot from the hip and claim to smite us on behalf of God. Liberals are pro-life! We believe in protecting life and enhancing it with quality, and individual choice! We are humanists and therefore we hold the position in favor of life when it clearly matters, not use theatrics to show that we care when it's too late.

Perhaps we won't see any time soon a court like the one under Chief Justice E. Warren, but we have to explain to all Americans what's at stake here. They have to understand that the role of the government is not just to make war and safegurad our borders, but also to improve the quality of our lives. I'm taling about establishing a social and legal framework where the individual has a reasonable opportunity and the means to reach his potential. The way we organize our society should reflect this, but unless most of us realize that in order to be in charge of our own affairs--collectively and individually--we have to be responsible too. Take the time, invest some effort, cultivate an interest in the affairs or our nation, otherwise the banditos will roam unchecked. Now let's start by making sure El Presidente understands who's the boss here.

It is About Liberty & Justice for All

The bottom line, for me, is that liberty is at stake. Liberty is special for it gives the individual the opportunity to self-fulfillment. The concept is rather simple: when I'm in charge, leave me alone; when I'm not, I need the government to protect me. In other words, I should be sovereign of myself and my privacy; I also want the government to work for me. But, I do not want to be protected under lock & key! As I see it, this is not an either-or situation; and it should not be made into a zero-sum game. Well, liberty is indeed at stake in our United States today, so we are concerned and alarmed by lifetime appointments to the federal bench when judges don't have this sensibility; much more so if they don't have the sense to understand this concept as Justice Thomas has repeatedly demonstrated.

I watched the entirety of the Alito hearings and I thought that the last two days of the testimonials--pro and con--were much more interesting. I'd advise that they should precede the show. Yes, that show where the nominee pretends to answer the questions from the minority party by using immense longitudes & platitudes, while the majority party presents him as a deity of impeccable character and of a mind that has the brilliance of a supernova. At least the panelists that followed Alito shed a lot more light, made excellent points, and posed questions for all of us to ponder. This should be the start for future hearings, because now the coaching is good so good as to restrict any occurrence of a response with any substance. We won't see again another Bork who would candidly say that Roe v. Wade is a bad law and he'll do whatever he can to overturn it!

The departing Justice O'Connor has said, "We have long since made clear that a state of war is not a blank check for the President when it comes to the rights of the Nation's citizens." During times of crisis there's always been attempts from the executive to grab more power, and people often have acted impulsively in giving up their rights without thinking of the consequences. Will Alito vote to enforce the checks & balances provided by the Constitution? Or, like Justice Thomas [lone dissenter in the recent "Hamdi v. Rumsfeld" SCOTUS case], will he hold the view that the executive has the authority to label anybody as "enemy combatant" and hold him indefinitely without affording him any rights whatsoever? Will Justice Alito wink at the President when the latter [as in the McCain anti-torture bill] "understands" the law better [read: disregard it] than Congress's intent? How will SCOTUS [Supreme Court of the US] react to the imperial presidency having Alito as a member?

The war on terror should be taken very seriously. But, we can't substitute competency in gathering & analyzing intelligence, and having a sound foreign policy with turning a blind eye to the violations of our civil liberties. We shouldn't become like our enemies in order to fight them. We shouldn't exchange good & hard work for the empty promises of a corrupt & incompetent administration. We're often told that these are "difficult times" that we fight a "war on terror." Yet, this war on terror has no front and can last forever! Are we so willing to give up our unique and much-envied liberties to obtain some dubiously safer world ? Was Ben Franklin right when he said that those willing to give up their liberty to obtain safety deserve neither?

I have to ask, how would America have been different if we had more ScAlitos on the high court instead of the justices of the Warren Court? In my estimate, we would not recognize our country today for we'd still reside in a very dark age! SCOTUS under Chief Justice Earl Warren righted many injustices of the past--it dispensed justice that was long overdue. This is a philosophical view that I'm afraid the Thomases and the ScAlitos don't share: the tools we have at our disposal, what we call government or, (in other words, how we organize ourselves into a civil society), are there to improve the quality of our lives; to respect and protect the collective and the individual.

There are a few extremely important issues for which we must engage in a national dialogue. What kind of United States of America do we want? When we elect our representatives it is not just a democratic exercise, but it is also a measure of our responsibility. It demonstrates the level of our maturity and the ability to make decisions. Those elected by us act in our name, but not always in our interest. Law has a profound effect on people's lives. But law has to be interpreted, weighted and applied without prejudice. The 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments, for example, provide for the protection of the "average person" but they won't provide anything worthwhile if the "average person" does not care to preserve them; if the "average person" doesn't take action to ensure that his representatives in power share the same sensibilities regarding freedoms & rights.... that people's rights are not subverted by government or are beneath the rights of the big corporations.

Yes, it's about liberty and it's about the future of our country as a beacon of freedom, democracy, equal opportunity, tolerance, and modernity. Unfortunately at this point, instead of working to enhance & advance liberty we have to worry about safeguarding it first as it is violently attacked by elements from within. Many empires thought that by using the power of the sword to fend off the barbarians at the gate would be good enough of a strategy to survival. However, the most enduring power is that of the ideas; ideas that give life to a society of free people. If you've got something good, don't try to enforce it on others but rather enjoy it. If it's really good others will try to steal your ideas and imitate your practices! We should be having a national dialogue on how to move our country forward, but, sadly, we now have to fight to hold the line, not to allow them to turn the clock back.

In the practical sense, it seems that Alito will be confirmed and that the Dems don't have enough votes to block him. He'll go to the whole Senate from the Committee on a partisan vote, 10-8. The key, I think, is for the Dems to have fewer than 5 defections--I meant 4, as Joe Lieberman is a practicing Republican already. This would show that the Repubs won't have 60 votes and that the Dems can filibuster if necessary. Hopefully this time next year, there will be additional Dems in the Senate. No one knows exactly how the dynamics within the high court will change with the addition of Alito, but I wouldn't be surprised if Justice Kennedy becomes the new important swinger there. Thomas's appointment to SCOTUS made a couple justices there sit up and take notice, and they incrementally moved to counter-balance this nitwit ideologue of the extreme right.

Finally, there is lots of work to be done this year before the elections in November so don't lower your guard. There are several scandals to investigate, and several Repubs soon-to-be felons that we have to go after. Time to clean house.

A Peek Under Judge Alito's Robe: It Looks Ugly

Attempts to Cover Up His Sortcomings
It’s one of those opportunities for me to waste lots of time in Washington DC, this time by watching the pageantry of the Alito hearings. The only consolation is hitting the pubs later in the day for some local fare and some cold refreshing ale. So, maybe it’s not such a waste of time after all. It’s no accident that, with Bush’s capturing of the White House, we needed a group like Drinking Liberally for liberals to gather and commiserate together. Hopefully, starting this year with the mid-term elections, we’ll have lots to celebrate in the near future.

As of today, it seems that ScAlito is a confirmable case. Not that we’ve learned anything new about Bush’s SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the US) nominee; nor do I think that the American people are being served well by these confirmation hearings the way they run. Alito’s performing up to the standards of being quite boring and evasive. Everything is so over-rehearsed that there is no spontaneity and no real answers from the nominee. The Dems on the committee, for the most part, have been asking good questions, while the Repubs are there just to promote Alito. They’ve learned how to coach a conservative nominee to avoid the mistakes of Judge R. Bork, and they have the votes to push him through.

Speaking of Bork, Alito said that this guy should have been confirmed to SCOTUS and that “he was the best nominee to the high court in the 20th century”! Isn’t this alone a disqualifier? Alito has agreed with Bork’s accessory to Nixon’s Saturday Night Massacre [Click on the link to read the WaPo article to further understand Alito’s views on placing the executive above the law and to refresh your memory about tricky Dick’s last gasps to remain in power]. Maybe we’ll see a repeat when Shrub is consumed by the serious scandals engulfing him already.

Anyway, at least Alito has a long history, on and off the bench, so it’s not hard to figure out that this guy will swing SCOTUS way over to the conservative side. It doesn’t look pretty to us liberals, but this is no surprise. Elections have consequences and we’re paying the high price for having the worst president in office.

When it comes to privacy issues, the imperial presidency, the rights of the corporations versus the rights of the individual, cases of habeas corpus (including torture), the environment, judge Alito’s views are very clear. Check Think Progress has a good summary, and the People for the American Way has a comprehensive review of judge Alito.

As for the so-called strict constructionist argument that the Repubs often refer to as a criticism against the activist “liberals who legislate from the bench”, Alito refused to say where he stood on the most activist case of SCOTUS--that of Bush v. Gore (2000). The conservatives are just as activists as anyone else when it comes to promoting their agenda via the courts. Those members of the Federalist Society (yes, the ScAlitos & Roberts are members) don’t believe that the government, and for that matter the constitution, exist to protect the rights and the life of the individual.

“No one is above the law”, and “no one is beneath it either”—two phrases heard these days. But, this doesn’t mean much unless we define with precision the boundaries of the law. If the executive can claim that in times of war the President has the authority to spy with no restrictions, to arrest & indefinitely confine in isolation any person, etc, and such actions are deemed legal, then the ceiling of presidential “legal actions” stretches to the boundaries of the solar system—quite high in my estimate. And, there are those persons who are indeed below the law, deserving little or no rights when the Emperor declares them “enemy combatants” or, when they are part of a “rendition program.” [Read: flown to other countries to be tortured]


Much has been made of Roe v. Wade, precedent (starre decisis), and “settled law.” Though, the ScAlitos don’t mean that any law can’t be re-examined and even totally overturned! Especially when they don’t “see” rights of privacy in the Constitution! As strict constructionists, they don’t want to invent rights the Founding Fathers didn’t put specifically in the Constitution. So, according to the conservatives' interpretation, this great document is a dead document, written by the infallible, the wisest people ever to walk this earth, who, by the way, also knew everything about the future! Hmmm. I wonder why we changed our ways regarding slavery and treating our women as chattel... The abortion issue is a peculiar one as it is no secret that the Cons don’t want to overturn Roe v. Wade. This has been a very important weapon in their strategy to mobilize their conservative base, along with the anti-homosexual measures of the recent years.

Alito’s membership in the Concerned Alumni of Princeton (CAP) also shows his attitudes towards women, minorities, and homosexuals. Check out what this vile organization stood for. Alito touted his membership in CAP in his resume as a great credential in order to get a politically-appointed job in the Reagan administration (late 1980s). Conveniently, he’s forgotten about CAP today. Yeah, right.

Friends, I know we’re seeing things that we don’t like because they're harmful to our country. We can’t give up. It’s not that hope dies last, but there is hope. We can solidify our base in the Blue states and begin taking back Congress in this year’s midterm election. Who knows, maybe god will listen to loony Pat and strike down those cuckoos. Here’s my list of people who have misused god and America: The whole Bush clique, the theologs, any fundamentalist who kills, torture, exploits in the name of god. There's nothing like an angry and vengeful god. Go Zeus!

Ah, the hope for the future soothes the soul, blunts the unbearable of today (and those dull Senate hearings), and gives us energy to move on and fight on. As Homer might say when thinking about his reward: mmmm sacrilicious beer! [insert your own pleasure here, and enjoy life!].

Hey, What Happened to the "Contract With America"?

The Republican Moral Imperative: Blame it on Bill Clinton and the Democrats!
The pagan-religious-commercial holiday around the winter Solstice is over (until the retailers alert us to the next one), so back to the salt mines now. Hey, 2006 can be an exciting year for the politicos among us as we will have an opportunity to restore some checks and balances into our government. I hope the American people are up to this important task. Unfortunately, we will have plenty of scandals and more misteps to keep us busy. This Republican Congress and the Bush administration have set records in efficiency when it comes to ..corruption. Most importantly, however, we must take back our country from the social darwinists, the theologs, and we must throw the lunatic fringe where it belongs--in the margins of our society. This extremist minority has captured the Republican party. But, authoritarian government has a high price: corruption. I can't wait to see how many unworthy politicians are burned by the Abramoff scandal. What a bunch of weasels those Republicans are. Not so long ago, they argued for a "moral imperative" in impeaching President Clinton who lied about his sexual encounters. Of course, now they sit red-faced, praying that all their troubles is just a bad dream. Maybe it is rapture time as trials and tribulations are upon them!

At any rate, I had some spare time these holidays, so I read stuff, here and there, and strangely enough I came upon the "famous" and much talked-about Republican promise in 1994, the Contract with America. Let's see what those Repubs "promised" to do when they'd come to power. [the comments in the brackets are mine; why not start the new year with some fun?]

This is what that "contract" stipulated:

FIRST, require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply equally to the Congress; [ha! I guess they didn't mean the President and the Republican leadership in Congress! The laws shouldn't apply to those who are in charge of the public good, because our leaders need some ..flexibility in order to make us safe and keep us safely ignorant under lock & key]

SECOND, select a major, independent auditing firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of Congress for waste, fraud or abuse; [ha, ha! waste?!! No way! Get out of here! Never mind the $8.8 billion missing in Iraq... Most likely, this money has probably fallen between the seat & pillows of our national couch!]

THIRD, cut the number of House committees, and cut committee staff by one-third; [unless they needed to add more in order to keep up with the growth of the federal government under Bush 43]

FOURTH, limit the terms of all committee chairs; [what they meant: they can stay only as long as our party is in the majority, that's all... Oh, and remove the "ethics" out of the Ethics Committee]

FIFTH, ban the casting of proxy votes in committee; [better yet, pass bills without making the members read thousands of pages of ..boring stuff]

SIXTH, require committee meetings to be open to the public; [hahaha! they had you going on this one! Nice try! Actually, just save time & energy by letting the lobbyists write the laws]

SEVENTH, require a three-fifths majority vote to pass a tax increase; [yes! such a super majority is necessary to safeguard against accidentally raising taxes on the well-off. But, the Repubs can invoke the "nuclear option" and change the rules of the Senate when it comes to other serious matters, like life-time appointments to the US Supreme Court, etc.]

EIGHTH, guarantee an honest accounting of our Federal Budget by implementing zero base-line budgeting [hahahhahhahahahha.... Who said, they couldn't put more on our national credit card than all the previous governments combined? It sounded like a ..challenge to Bush! Besides, it's not that they would have to pay for the charges themselves...]

The Repubs are capable of producing some nice fiction, which, under the right frame of mind, can be hilarious! Yet, at some point we have to remind ourselves of the sad state of our country as it has been led by the autocratic Republican machine. For the real impact of the "contract with America" in a post-Katrina, Iraq war, scandals, and the law-breaking, read this article in the Nation.

We need a revolt of our own this time, not just for the sake of putting the Dems in control of one or both chambers of Congress, but because we care about the direction of our country. The quality of our democracy and the quality of our lives depend on the quality of the people involved. I seek accountability not only from those who are in power but also from those who elect them. What is the responsibility of the average person? How would this country be different if, say, the individual citizen had more power? Often, we are our worst enemy. The first good step is to be informed and engaged in the affairs of our nation. We have a new year ahead of us, let's make the best of it. See tomorrow as the first day of the rest of our lives. Let's make the future a better place to be in.