Bush the "Genius"

Everyone who ever accused Bush of incompetence or ignorance needs to take another look, quickly. He's just proved his real genius with his unilateral hijacking of the foreign policy of the United States. He not only has engaged preemptive war, has preemptively occupied a nation, but will now seek preempt Congress and his successor! His legacy will be the long term occupation of Iraq, and the unilateral dismemberment of the separation of powers with the complete disembowelment of Congress.

Harold Meyerson in the WAPO:

The president who waged a preemptive war now wants to lock in place a preemptive occupation. Only this time, instead of preempting a foreign nation, he is seeking to preempt Congress and his successor. It's the logical conclusion for his misshapen and miserable presidency, and I doubt the American people -- if they have any say in the matter -- will stand for it.

More indication of his “genius” came in the local newspaper today when Bush announced that in order to “support the troops,” Congress should pass the new funding bill “clean” with no limits on his conduct of the war. President Bush will undoubtedly veto any measure that doesn’t give him exactly what he wants. He knows that by continually repeating the mantra of troop support, he keeps the public from reflecting on the real reasons of his occupation. The real curious part is that he’s now announced his grand dream of conquest! He wants to conquer Iraq and milk it for it’s resources. He wants a large (and expensive) military presence to dominate the Middle East.

The tragedy is that it works. Bush has purposefully followed this course, deliberately choosing to rule as a tyrant, willfully manipulating an electorate with clever but sinister half-truths, conventional wisdom, and deliberate obfuscation and defiance of Congress. Consider the idea that a President with a 30% popularity rating can unilaterally go to war, occupy a nation, snub Congress, spy on private citizens, and dictate terms on nearly all legislation that passes his desk. Consider the idea that the Bush legacy can be pretty much guaranteed, no matter what the opposition thinks they can do about it. Bush has declared through his “War Czar” that he doesn’t consider the agreement between the US and Iraq negotiable. He’s said that Congress doesn’t need to see it! Military bases, oil profits, security guarantees involving military support, all declared unilaterally without the consent of Congress.

Speaking of Congress, consider the co-conspirators in the Bush legacy, the Republican members of Congress who still blindly follow his lead. They continue to provide veto insurance for the President. Throw the bums out! Defeat as many of them as possible in the ’08 election. And by the way, just a reminder…. Representative Goodlatte has supported President Bush 98% of the time in the past 7 years. Sam Rasoul for Congress!

We've Conquered Iraq!

Today in American Progress, Faiz Shakir, Amanda Terkel, Satyam Khanna, Matt Corley, and Ali Frick, report on the conquest of Iraq.  We finally learn why we went into Iraq and why we are "winning."  On Monday President Bush and Prime Minister Maliki declared their everlasting devotion by signing a non-binding "Declaration of Principles for a Long-Term Relationship of Cooperation and Friendship"

Wow!  All it says is that the US will guarantee the safety and security of Iraq forever, both from internal and external enemies.  In return Iraq will graciously let the US have four huge military bases (already constructed or nearly finished) and a sweetheart deal for the Big Oil Companies. America has CONQUERED IRAQ. Plain and Simple

The debate is now much clearer.  President Bush has finally confirmed what we've been guessing for a long time. The purpose of going into Iraq WAS the oil AND to have a big military presence in the Middle East to protect it.  Pure Imperialism.  These rich guys understand unbridled Capitalism better than anyone! You spend money to make money, period.  Bush got his hands on government money, saw the opportunity to make a LOT of money and away he went. 

Support the troops if you will, but be sure to count the cost!  We’ve spent a lot of time, money, and military might on this conquest.  The President made this choice for us.  By not giving us the real reason for going to war and playing cutthroat political games to make it happen, the large majority of the American people were left out of the loop. He made war for conquest and now he’s finally declared his true intent. 

Let the debate include accountability.  Was this the proper use of America's wealth and military?  Should unbridled Capitalism and Imperialism be the lynchpin of American culture, politics and foreign policy?  Are there better ways to insure the security and welfare of the citizens of THE UNITED STATES?  Should the leader of the free world be allowed to invade and conquer nations WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF “WE THE PEOPLE?”

READY? GO!

The Truth about the "Do Nothing Congress"

Obstructionism as a strategy is working for the Republicans.  They are making it look like the Congress is doing nothing.  Of course Congress is getting an approval rating in the teens!  Republicans are putting up walls, blocking legislation, and threatening to filibuster anything that moves and President Bush does his part by vetoing any bill that gets through the Senate's gauntlet. 

Republicans want to tear down the temple in the hope that both parties will be equally discredited in the rubble. This is akin to someone mugging the postman and then complaining that the mail isn’t delivered on time.

 

and from Robert Borosage in Campaign for America's Future 

Their strategy is clear – and very likely to work. The public expects the party in charge to get things done. Excuses are largely dismissed as political bickering. The Republican minority blocks popular reforms and then charges Democrats with running a “do-nothing Congress.” For scandal-stained Republican legislators yoked to an unpopular president pursing an unpopular debacle in Iraq, this may be their best hope for survival.

It works, of course, only if the public doesn’t learn of it.

The second half of the strategy is to then blame Democrats for not getting anything done! Bush will veto a bill (See SCHIP, or the supplementary funding bill for the Iraq war) because it doesn't suit his rigid ideology and then blame Congress for not passing a bill that he can sign.

Shine a light on this behavior!  Help point out every obstructionist policy that is being used to thwart the actions of Congress and the American people.  Trent Lott said it best, "Sometimes the obstructionist strategy can work for us or it can work against us." If we learn about this behavior and report it when it occurs, the strategy will fail.  Evidence of the success of pointing out the egregious behavior of our radical republican obstructionists can be found in Australia  where Conservative Prime Minister, John Howard, was defeated handily. Not only was he defeated but he was denied even a seat in the Aussie parliament, the first such ignominy suffered by a party leader in 78 YEARS!    

Mr. Howard has now joined the

COALITION OF THE DEFEATED: Like Britain's Tony Blair, Italy's Silvio Berlusconi, and Spain's Jose Maria Aznar before him, John Howard suffered greatly from his decision to participate in Bush's "coalition of the willing." His full-throated support for the Iraq war hurt him domestically. More than 60 percent of Australians want forces out of Iraq within a year, and Rudd pledged that Australian troops would leave by mid-2008 after consultations with the United States and the United Kingdom. Analysts noted that Bush "was a little more isolated in the world Sunday" after the loss of his close Australian ally.

Be vigilant.  Point out the failing strategy of the radical republicans wherever it occurs. Here's a start: Republican filibusters have been used to

block efforts to bring the troops home from Iraq, to frustrate passage of clean energy legislation, to block giving Medicare the power to negotiate lower prices for prescription drugs, and much more.

and just recently,

the resolution offered by Sen. James Webb, D-Va., and Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb., to guarantee the soldiers fighting in Iraq adequate home rotations.

Keep watch. Keep close watch.

Don't mess with the Kids

Here's one more go 'round with and issue that, according to polls, is supported strongly by 61 % of Republican voters and 86% of ALL voters.  Both President Bush and Congressman Goodlatte are spinning and spinning to avoid our recognition of their ideological rigidity on health care.  They've use the "straw man" of "socialized medicine." They have tried to scare us using some examples of the failures of  some of the European models, always presented in the worst case trying to scare us into accepting their radical position.

Fear mongering, false choices, fallacious arguments sounds like lying, but is simply the sound of radical politician trying to spin an otherwise unpopular ideology.  Folks, DON'T FALL FOR IT!  Peer through the smoke and the muck and try and figure out what the real choices are.  

I've read Jane Quinn Bryant for years and I admire her straight-forward pragmatism regarding economics.  In a recent article she does an excellent analysis of the whole SCHIP debate. 

From Jane Bryant Quinn in Newsweek on October 29, 2007:

Is SCHIP "government run"? No. Like Medicare, it's government funded but privately run. The states contract with insurance companies (usually HMOs). Many patients have a choice of plans, and pay premiums and co-pays.

Does it cover illegal aliens? No, although this is the wing nuts' nastiest slur. SCHIP doesn't even cover legal immigrants until they've been here for at least five years.

Did the bill squander taxpayers' money on the undeserving middle class? No again. It financed coverage for 3.2 million lower-income kids, including 2.5 million who are eligible but haven't been included yet. It could have paid for 600,000 more kids from families earning up to triple the poverty level ($61,950, for four). That's the income group losing health insurance today, mainly because fewer companies offer the benefit or the premiums cost too much.

Is SCHIP funding more adults than kids? No way. Adults make up fewer than 10 percent of the SCHIP population. They're insured under waivers approved by the Bush administration, back when the president supported the program. Eleven states cover pregnant women. Eleven cover low-income parents (family coverage gets more kids signed up). The bill that Bush vetoed prohibits new waivers for parents and phases single adults out of the program.

Are parents dropping private coverage to go on the government program? Some parents switch, but that can't be helped. "It's like fishing for tuna," says MIT economist Jonathan Gruber. "When you let down the tuna nets, you catch some dolphin, too."

Bush's offer on SCHIP is $4.77 billion—not enough to maintain the program as is. Monthly enrollment of children and some pregnant women would have to drop by 840,000 over five years, the Congressional Budget Office says—that is, unless the president ups his bid.

Bush favors a different program entirely—tax deductions for people, at all income levels, who buy their own group or individual coverage. An analysis of his proposal by the Lewin Group, a health-care consulting firm, found that 80 percent of the money would go to people already insured. Seventy percent would benefit families earning more than $50,000, with most of the gains in the highest brackets. Call me a wing nut, but that's really squandering money on people who can afford to pay.

It's a simple ideological principle upon which President Bush and Representative Goodlatte will not budge.  They both feel that there should be NO government funding of health care.  This ideological rigidity will deny health coverage to over a million kids. 

Ultimately all economic decisions come down to "guns or butter."  Please know that President Bush and Congressman Goodlatte support another 48 billion in war funding over and above the original budget request, yet they steadfastly veto 35 billion for children's health care. They would rather kick a million kids off the health care program than cut spending for war.  This choice is not "either, or." There will be Guns AND Butter. The choice is simply regarding what is most important to most of us? What is more in our national interest?  Supporting our citizens including our children or supporting our war-making machine?  Choose well.

Sam Rasoul for Congress in 2008

Anyone else for President!

Musing today...

Why does the President insist on only speaking in front of carefully selected audiences if he truly is the President of the United States and not the President of the Republican Party?


Why does the President insist on fiscal responsibility only from Democrats in Congress?  When will the President decry his OWN earmarks? or criticize just ONE Republican sponsored earmark?


Why does President Bush continue to believe that his sole constituency is the "haves and the have mores?"


When the INTEREST ALONE on the war in Iraq is now over 28 BILLION DOLLARS per year, why is 8 BILLION dollars for Children's Health Care such a hard sell?  


Why does our representative in Congress support this President virtually ALL the time?


Why does it make the President very happy to be able to unilaterally circumvent Congress through executive orders, signing statements, and administrative actions?


Thanks to Dan Froomkin for inspiring these questions.

Can a Good Christian be a Good American?

BlueRage welcomes guest blogger Shannon Dove who adapted this blog entry from an excellent, provocative essay from Dennis Diehl. The question is, "Can a Christian be a good American?" The original, for those who didn't go read it, was "If a good Muslim can't be a Good American, Neither can a Good Christian." Read on:

Theologically- NO Because his allegiance is to God, the Sun God of Egypt. This is why God is Most High (At Noon), Jesus can be seen as an archetype Son of the Sun God and the Gospels are the account of a one year trip of the Sun Jesus through the signs of the Zodiac, and I ain't kiddn! The origin all gods in the human psyche is the SUN and all that it does for humans. This is why in the Old Testament it says in Malachi that the "sun will rise with healing in his wings," which is statement about the messiah to come. In Revelation, Jesus is also called the "son of the morning star," which of course is the SUN, or the Planet Venus depending. Long story.

Religiously- NO Because "there is no other name under heaven, (Jesus) by which a man can be saved. There is one true Christian Church and whoever believes on the name of the Lord..Jesus Christ, shall be saved, while others are condemned. Christians do NOT accept any other religious beliefs as valid to theirs, so no difference here.

Scripturally NO because his allegiance is to the Ten Pillars of Christianity, which they tend to modify according to the need, and the Bible, which is neither always historically accurate nor inerrant, no matter what they say! There is nothing in America that says you have to be a Bible believing Christian to be a true American. It is freedom of religion here...all religions. If Fundamentalists have their way, we might all want to amend the Bill of Rights to say "freedom FROM religion."

Geographically No because his mental allegiance is to Jerusalem, Israel and the Holy Land at least twice a week, about which they talk all the time as if they have ever been there, know the real history of, or think they would be welcome. Millions of Christian Americans have a soft spot for Rome too

Socially NO because his allegiance to Christianity forbids him to make friends with "the world" (love not the world, neither the things that are in the world, whoever loves the world, the love of the father is not in him.") Paul cursed the Jews in the New Testament, and hoped they'd cut their private parts if they wanted to be circumcised. Martin Luther , a Christian, taught they should be killed like pigs. Lots of places in NT tell the church to have no relationships outside the church. including not being "unequally yoked with unbelievers."

Politically No because he must submit to the ministry, ( "obey those that have the rule over you, {ministers}, for they watch out for your souls"). Many Fundamentalist Christians teach and hope for the annihilation of everyone outside of Israel. Christians often attribute anything against them as of the Great Satan Christian fundamentalists call Roman Catholicism, the Great Whore, so don't sweat someone calling America or Washington the Great Satan. Paul cursed anyone who did not believe his true gospel and called the people of Crete, liars. Jesus is said to have said the Pharisees were "of your Father the Devil." Name calling invoking the name of Satan to define the enemy is a fundamentalist art form. It's what you do when you are afraid of the unknown.

Domestically no because a fundamentalist Christian is instructed to marry only one which is his property, but cannot talk in church and can only ask her husband bible questions at home. A christian believes if you "beat (spank)a child with a rod, it won't kill him." Fundamentalist Christian women are to keep silence in the church, obey their husbands as unto the Lord, and call him "Lord" as did Sarah (all in NT). They are to give him sex as a part of her duty and submit. The Koran and the Bible sprang from the same culture, which few Fundamentalist Christians realize or think about. In many respects the Taliban are to the Koran what the Fundamentalist Christians are to the Bible. PS...Lots of Christian men abuse their wives with the word.

Intellectually no, because he can't accept that the American Constitution was NOT predicated on founding fundamentalist, Old Covenant believing Fathers. I would not use the word "intellectual" with Christians either, as critical thinking or the examining of evidence that runs contrary to their established belief system is not encouraged. This was called the Dark Ages in the European past.

Philosophically no because Christianity, Jesus and the Bible do not allow freedom of religion if you take the Old and New Testaments as the only way to be or literally enforceable in our culture today. Some Christians look to the commands of "God" in the Old Testament, to kill unbelievers, just as much as they think Islamics do in reading the Koran. Fundamentalist would only tolerate Christian values, which can be atrocious at times, and morality, which can be appalling. True Democracy and Biblical Christianity cannot co exist either. Someone would insist on someone else losing their rights to free thought. "My Kingdom is not of this world, if my kingdom was of this world, then would my servants fight," said Jesus in Matthew. No military solutions were encouraged by Jesus unless there was only one sword per 12 disciples allowed. Turn the other cheek, Love your enemies, don't slay them. Christian Fundamentalism is a good example of the mess you get when you mix Old Testament politics with New Testament sentiments, thinking it takes both to make up a proper Christian text. It's old wine in new wine skins.

Every Christian Fundamentalist government is either dictatorial or autocratic too. This statement shows the ignorance of whoever made it up. The Christian Kings of Europe didn't do to badly in the dictatorial or autocratic department, and might we mention the Popes?

Spiritually no because the God and Jesus of the Book of Revelation drowns the world in blood, plagues, signs, trumpets, vials and slaughter. The Christian Jesus is loving but no one does what he really says as it really is too hard. The Christian God the father is absent mostly, but is angry, jealous, and is patterned after the war gods of paganism every bit as much. I suggest a good read of Karen Armstrong's. History of God. The Fundamentalist Christian God is 'loving" only to the degree you obey and fall in line. If not, you are toast just as with any other "god" The Jesus of the Gospels is NOT the same being in the book of Revelation. Jesus comes back with a Rod of Iron to threaten and beat the poop out of those that don't obey and love God #1 the father and God # 2 himself...we won't get into God #3. Monotheism is basically divisive by nature, even if the one God is three, co-this and co-that.

Therefore after much study and deliberation, perhaps we should all be very suspicious of ALL, and I Mean ALLLLLLLL Christians in this country. They obviously can't be both good Christians and Good Americans. Call it what you will, it's still the truth.

Republican Values..

This is the silliest letter I've seen in the DNR in a long time. (Better stop and read it HERE.) Who decided that it is "Our Conservative Community?" What about "Our Liberal Community?" Thanks Chuck, Love you too! Logic? "Rockingham County is predominantly Republican" and so everyone has the same values? How big is that brush you are trying to paint us all with? What is it that makes you think that it is actually a benefit to be IN LINE, following orders...? FROM YOU! Dude! I can think for myself thanks very much!

How about that limited Constitutional Government? Are you concerned at all about the "unitary executive?" Does the word "Tory" come to mind? How about "King George?"

Does lower taxes mean lower prices too? Privatizing those "non-critical" government functions means that those private companies can raise prices, deny benefits, go out of business, fire workers, pay minimum wage, and maximize profits... WITH NO OVERSIGHT OR PENALTY! Prices go up benefits go down and THAT'S GOOD?? I'll listen when your concern about my money extends to the boondoggles of health care and national security too! These two "non-critical" government functions aren't going so well in the private sector are they? (You might say that national security would be a "critical function," but what about Blackwater? and Haliburton? and Bechtel? and the myriad private defense contractors.. How are they working out?)

How about that strong national defense? How about that 500 BILLION DOLLAR WAR that's soon to be a TRILLION dollar war? Are we safer? Where's that concern about fiscal responsibilty and sound monetary policy? Why do your values give a blank check for anything in the defense budget, but nothing (literally... remember the transportation bill? or the famous "underwear" bill? or the rebuilding of New Orleans?) for the citizens. Support the troops? Sure, but do you also support "We the People?"

Show me some righteous concern about the phenomenal waste and fraud in the defense budget. Show me some concern about butter and not so much macho posturing about guns. Show me some concern about making the government work, including the clerk's office, instead of simply assuming that "He's Republican, He's one of us, 'nuf said."

Your values sir, are admirable. It's when you pull back the screen and see what's really going on that your letter just sounds silly! I'm a Liberal, I live in the valley, I get to vote for the clerk, and WE HAVE TO ALL GET ALONG! I think we'd all do better if we remembered that we are Americans, NOT Republicans.

The Cult of Mediocrity

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you the ...CULT OF MEDIOCRITY... Presented by that icon of purity, that promoter of 'real' Americans and American values, the protector of all Decency.... Michelle Malkin!

Here we go.. According to Ms. Malkin, America would be better off without: educrats, secular humanists, multiculturalists, yoga classes, public schools, immigrants, Muslims, non-Christians, public school teachers, acupuncture, hypnotism, deep breathing, stress relief, Oprah, Deepak Chapra, Richard Simmons, edu-babble, homework-free weekends, Tantric chanting, Kabalah, Madonna, hot stone messages, Bonsai tree clipping, any and all relaxation techniques, Yoga Education in public schools, and YouTube.

In Michelle Malkin's perfect world there WOULD be: concentration on the basics, schools that emphasize drilling and tests, international math competitions, Honor Rolls published in the media, family time management training, a strong ethos of super-achievement at affluent suburban high schools, and extreme competition over college admission.

So for Ms. Malkin, if you aren't elite, rich, pissed off about something, and willing to stomp over anyone who gets in your way, then you aren't a real American. This ladies and gentlemen from media pundit, commentator, writer, generator of all that ad revenue.... Michelle Malkin, "All Mad, All the time."

Update #1

I'm still waiting for Ms. Malkin's condemnation of those troops in treatment centers around the country for PTSD who are receiving treatment that includes meditation, yoga, message therapy, and counselling. Does Ms. Malkin support THESE troops too?