I happened to watch the coverage of the July 4 celebrations in the U.S. on CNN. For the first time in the almost-3 years that I've been residing in the Philippines, I found myself a bit nostalgic for these festivities. I guess that it's because I recently happened to read the full American Declaration of Independence and grasped what a truly magnificent document it is both in style and substance, and why it's worth celebrating .
As a reflection of the Enlightenment spirit of the day, in the matter of invoking a supreme being the Declaration of Independence cites the "Laws of Nature" first before including "Nature's God" in order to justify self-government and the dissolution of the Colonies' bond with England. Further on, while the Declaration refers rights of man as originating from a Creator, and uses such phrases as "Divine Providence", in no instance does this work reference Christianity in any way, shape, or form.
This is also true of the U.S. Constitution, which not only omits any mention of that religion, it does not allude to a supreme being, period, even in the Preamble. Not to mention, the first amendment itself of course provides for the separation of church and state. This is why it is patently ridiculous for anyone to call America a "Christian nation". (Attention, fundies: This means you!) America belongs to all of its citizens, regardless of our religious beliefs or non-belief.
Even the American pledge of allegiance which was written in 1892 originally did not reference a supreme being. The phrase "under God" was added in 1954 by Congress at the behest of Presidient Eisenhower, who was persuaded to so by Christian religious interests (see "Pledge of Allegiance").
One can only hope that the outcome of the presidential election will reverse the theocratic direction that the U.S. has taken. However, even if Obama wins, given his position on government aid to faith-based charities (see Obama Speech: "We Can Expand Faith-Based Charities And Separate Church From State") , which although not as aggressive as that of Bush in that Obama with his version of this program claims separation of church and state will be maintained, we may be lucky if we can just slow down the trend.
Sunday, July 6, 2008
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Take It Off
I support Barack Obama's progressive and populist positions. If he is elected President and follows through on the policies outlined in the speech that he gave in early June, Change That Works for You, then maybe America can be saved from the economic and social ruin that we are now heading for thanks to the Bush and the rabid Republicans.
However, as a Jew and a nontheist I am worried about other news regarding Obama's campaign: his meeting with "Christian Leaders"--mainly evangelicals who subjected him to a philosophical strip search to which he apparently willingly submitted (see Christian Leaders Meet Privately with Obama.) I know that office seekers are subject to ideological scrutiny by various interest groups, but the implications are frightening that a candidate for president of the United States had better "explain" him/herself and undergo cross (no pun intended)-examination by the religious fundies.
Here in the Philippines, which is ostensibly a democracy with a constitutional guarantee of separation of Church and State, there is a very strong religious lobby called the CBCP (Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines) through which the religious establishment exerts its political authority and power. No serious candidate for office can possibly hope to succeed without the stamp of approval of this very conservative group of Christian clergymen. Has it also come to this in the U.S. as well?
However, as a Jew and a nontheist I am worried about other news regarding Obama's campaign: his meeting with "Christian Leaders"--mainly evangelicals who subjected him to a philosophical strip search to which he apparently willingly submitted (see Christian Leaders Meet Privately with Obama.) I know that office seekers are subject to ideological scrutiny by various interest groups, but the implications are frightening that a candidate for president of the United States had better "explain" him/herself and undergo cross (no pun intended)-examination by the religious fundies.
Here in the Philippines, which is ostensibly a democracy with a constitutional guarantee of separation of Church and State, there is a very strong religious lobby called the CBCP (Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines) through which the religious establishment exerts its political authority and power. No serious candidate for office can possibly hope to succeed without the stamp of approval of this very conservative group of Christian clergymen. Has it also come to this in the U.S. as well?
Monday, June 9, 2008
Maybe We Had It Coming
Americans have long held a misplaced sense of entitlement to cheap fossil fuels. Maybe $4-5 per gallon is a long overdue wake up call for us to get off our collective asses, start conserving, and investing in mass transit as well as in alternative energy sources.
What a sorry sight it was to see President Bush go begging hat in hand to the Saudis to give the U.S. a price break for crude (which, the Bush ties to the royal family notwithstanding, they refused anyway). That spectacle in itself should be enough to raise American consciousness in favor of energy independence.
What a sorry sight it was to see President Bush go begging hat in hand to the Saudis to give the U.S. a price break for crude (which, the Bush ties to the royal family notwithstanding, they refused anyway). That spectacle in itself should be enough to raise American consciousness in favor of energy independence.
Friday, May 30, 2008
Onward Christian Soldiers—To the Right, March.
I recently read of attempts by American soldiers stationed in Iraq to convert the Muslim locals to Christianity. Why am I not surprised at this turn of events. It was only a matter of time before this would happen. The U.S. military has already become a captive force of the American fundies, no doubt with the blessing of their Commander-in Chief, President Bush, who has dialogues with God and has said that his favorite philosopher is Jesus Christ.
An example of this religious zealotry is the takeover of the U.S. Air Force Academy by the Christian right as discussed by Michael Weinstein in his book With God on Our Side published in 2004. Mr. Weinstein found forced proselytizing Christian evangelicals to be rampant at the Academy and called for a stop to this practice. A subsequent report dated 2005 by Kate Randall states that the an investigation of this problem fell short of its job.
Then there is the recently retired Undersecretary of Defense General William Boykin. Boykin made a name for himself during his career by making inflammatory pro-evangelical Christian remarks, preaching in churches while dressed in uniform, which gave the impression that he was speaking for the entire U.S. military.
But it doesn't stop there. An American religious extremist movement called the Christian Embassy is recruiting military officers and civilian leaders to work in its behalf. To see the how these people have subordinated loyalty to America to their movement and the dangerous situation that this has created, click here.
Religious extremism in the military is something one might associate with places like Afghanistan or Pakistan. Who would think America now has its own homegrown counterpart to the Taliban and like the Taliban, hold no sense of duty to their country--just to their fanatical ideals.
An example of this religious zealotry is the takeover of the U.S. Air Force Academy by the Christian right as discussed by Michael Weinstein in his book With God on Our Side published in 2004. Mr. Weinstein found forced proselytizing Christian evangelicals to be rampant at the Academy and called for a stop to this practice. A subsequent report dated 2005 by Kate Randall states that the an investigation of this problem fell short of its job.
Then there is the recently retired Undersecretary of Defense General William Boykin. Boykin made a name for himself during his career by making inflammatory pro-evangelical Christian remarks, preaching in churches while dressed in uniform, which gave the impression that he was speaking for the entire U.S. military.
But it doesn't stop there. An American religious extremist movement called the Christian Embassy is recruiting military officers and civilian leaders to work in its behalf. To see the how these people have subordinated loyalty to America to their movement and the dangerous situation that this has created, click here.
Religious extremism in the military is something one might associate with places like Afghanistan or Pakistan. Who would think America now has its own homegrown counterpart to the Taliban and like the Taliban, hold no sense of duty to their country--just to their fanatical ideals.
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Is the Secular Humanistic Movement Elitist?
Secular humanism is based on such concepts as rational inquiry and attempts to understand the human condition unfettered by a reliance on a supreme being. So it's no wonder that this philosophy would have it's largest following among members of academia and other highly educated professionals.
In turn, considering the correlation between education and income, it's no surprise that these individuals are predominantly found in the upper socioeconomic ranges of American society and that they interact mainly with each other. This demographic skewing presents a problem in that this affluent group does not seem to be interested or are even able to relate to those of us in the middle class who are also adherents of secular humanism.
Given the rise of obscurantism this country, it would behoove the more influential supporters of S.H. to reach out to the masses, even to the "small town guns and religion" sector as so aptly described by Barack Obama. To ignore the working people is to jeopardize the intellectual freedom and growth of all Americans.
In turn, considering the correlation between education and income, it's no surprise that these individuals are predominantly found in the upper socioeconomic ranges of American society and that they interact mainly with each other. This demographic skewing presents a problem in that this affluent group does not seem to be interested or are even able to relate to those of us in the middle class who are also adherents of secular humanism.
Given the rise of obscurantism this country, it would behoove the more influential supporters of S.H. to reach out to the masses, even to the "small town guns and religion" sector as so aptly described by Barack Obama. To ignore the working people is to jeopardize the intellectual freedom and growth of all Americans.
Friday, April 25, 2008
More on Bush's War Against Science
The phrase "politically correct" was originally a label used by conservatives to derisively describe the euphemistic, "feel-good" terminology used by postmodernists who distort word and idea meanings in order to fit their relativistic ideology. But what if the shoe were on the other foot? In other words what if Republican government policy dictated that scientific findings must conform to right-wing ideals in order to be considered valid?
Well, that's exactly what has come to pass. In my original blog Bush and The Rabid Republicans: Menace to America I commented on how the Bush Administration interfered with and politicized government science research and findings in the FDA. It comes as no surprise that the Republicans' malicious mischief didn't stop there. A recent survey of scientists at the EPA reported pressure from the White House to cook their findings to favor private industry.
It's no secret that Bush and his team are anti-intellectual and have no use for the scientific method, especially when the results are not to their liking. But to see just how demoralizing and difficult it is for government researchers to work under these conditions and how prone their studies are to manipulation by Dubya and his people, see "Hundreds of Scientists Report Political Interference".
Well, that's exactly what has come to pass. In my original blog Bush and The Rabid Republicans: Menace to America I commented on how the Bush Administration interfered with and politicized government science research and findings in the FDA. It comes as no surprise that the Republicans' malicious mischief didn't stop there. A recent survey of scientists at the EPA reported pressure from the White House to cook their findings to favor private industry.
It's no secret that Bush and his team are anti-intellectual and have no use for the scientific method, especially when the results are not to their liking. But to see just how demoralizing and difficult it is for government researchers to work under these conditions and how prone their studies are to manipulation by Dubya and his people, see "Hundreds of Scientists Report Political Interference".
Friday, March 21, 2008
Real Estate Meltdown-When Bad Loans Happen to Good Borrowers
The collapse of the real estate market has generated a lot of discussion from various pundits about personal responsibility. It has been said that many stranded homeowners especially in the sub-prime category contributed to their own financial woes by taking on a larger mortgage than they could afford, or by reckless borrowing against their equity. There is a lot of truth to this. I know that from my years of experience in the credit industry how people do in fact borrow and spend irresponsibly (sort of like the fiscal policies of the Reagan and Bush Administrations).
But what about consumers who buy property, especially their first homes in good faith, not to take advantage of rising values but instead based on the recommendation of financial professionals who advise their clients to go for it, even if they lack the funds to pay at least 20% down, or simply because they want a piece of the American dream?
That is what happened to my wife and me. We bought our home in 1984. Doing so at that time was against my better judgment, but we were looking for tax relief, and our CPA trotted out the cliche about having nothing to show for renting an apartment but a drawer full of rent receipts, and how home ownership would furnish a tax deduction for the mortgage interest.
We had a solid credit record, no debts, and an excellent combined annual income, so my wife and I certainly did not fit the sub-prime profile . But because we had less than 20% to cover the down payment, we were steered into an ARM (adjustable rate mortgage) which included monthly PMI (private mortgage insurance premiums). Fortunately, we were later able to refinance our way out this loan into a conventional mortgage, but we were still stuck with the PMI premiums for years to come.
As for those who got in over their heads by purchasing more expensive homes than they could really afford, they couldn't have done so without being "enabled" (aided and abetted) by the lenders who financed their mistakes . In the tract that where we purchased our home, many of our neighbors could not keep up their payments or refinance their loans, and thus lost their homes. Just as is happening today in many of today's housing markets across the country, this wave of foreclosures created an instability in our area along with a lot of abandoned properties that the lenders had no incentive to maintain after their repossessions were vacated. Often they would then rent to anyone regardless of their background and qualifications. As a result, the neighborhood deteriorated. In our own case we had a succession of next door neighbors from hell who were financially and mentally unsound and almost drove us nuts as well.
In short what we experienced in the 1980's was a foreshadow for the events that are now taking place in the housing market. Being ahead of the times one's time is usually considered an advantage. Instead, for us and many other homeowners of that era it was a disaster. This was shortly after the deregulation of the savings and loan industry, the excesses of which would result in the Keating scandal later in that decade. Meantime, S & L's were going hog wild creating exotic mortgage loan packages to the detriment not only of themselves but of borrowers as well. Sound familiar?
Deregulation and subsequent irresponsible lending played a role in the decline and fall of our neighborhood. We stuck out the aftermath but as I previously mentioned, at great expense to our psychological and financial health. We were trapped there for 16 years before we were finally able to sell our home for an amount that just barely exceeded the original purchase price. But at least we managed to get out in one piece.
The shame and degradation of that fiasco lingers with us through this day, but how much more traumatic it must be for those who lost their homes in the 1980's and for those who are facing foreclosure now. Heartbreak is a timeless emotion.
So when I hear the Republicans' praise of the "free-market" and their insistence on deregulation and "self-policing", the picture that comes to mind especially for the finance industry is pigs regulating themselves at a trough. Yet the government agencies that feed the oinking investment banks with bailouts refuse to spare a scrap for distressed homeowners. This is nothing less than state socialism for the business sector and social Darwinism for the working people.
So it's a wonder how and why the public allowed themselves to be hoodwinked by the Republicans in this decade after the abuses of the 1980's. It's as though the relatively benign fiscal policies of the Clinton era in the 1990's never happened. Well, as the old saying goes: Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. All things being equal and after what this country has experienced, if the Democrats lose the election this year, then Americans are a truly hopeless bunch.
But what about consumers who buy property, especially their first homes in good faith, not to take advantage of rising values but instead based on the recommendation of financial professionals who advise their clients to go for it, even if they lack the funds to pay at least 20% down, or simply because they want a piece of the American dream?
That is what happened to my wife and me. We bought our home in 1984. Doing so at that time was against my better judgment, but we were looking for tax relief, and our CPA trotted out the cliche about having nothing to show for renting an apartment but a drawer full of rent receipts, and how home ownership would furnish a tax deduction for the mortgage interest.
We had a solid credit record, no debts, and an excellent combined annual income, so my wife and I certainly did not fit the sub-prime profile . But because we had less than 20% to cover the down payment, we were steered into an ARM (adjustable rate mortgage) which included monthly PMI (private mortgage insurance premiums). Fortunately, we were later able to refinance our way out this loan into a conventional mortgage, but we were still stuck with the PMI premiums for years to come.
As for those who got in over their heads by purchasing more expensive homes than they could really afford, they couldn't have done so without being "enabled" (aided and abetted) by the lenders who financed their mistakes . In the tract that where we purchased our home, many of our neighbors could not keep up their payments or refinance their loans, and thus lost their homes. Just as is happening today in many of today's housing markets across the country, this wave of foreclosures created an instability in our area along with a lot of abandoned properties that the lenders had no incentive to maintain after their repossessions were vacated. Often they would then rent to anyone regardless of their background and qualifications. As a result, the neighborhood deteriorated. In our own case we had a succession of next door neighbors from hell who were financially and mentally unsound and almost drove us nuts as well.
In short what we experienced in the 1980's was a foreshadow for the events that are now taking place in the housing market. Being ahead of the times one's time is usually considered an advantage. Instead, for us and many other homeowners of that era it was a disaster. This was shortly after the deregulation of the savings and loan industry, the excesses of which would result in the Keating scandal later in that decade. Meantime, S & L's were going hog wild creating exotic mortgage loan packages to the detriment not only of themselves but of borrowers as well. Sound familiar?
Deregulation and subsequent irresponsible lending played a role in the decline and fall of our neighborhood. We stuck out the aftermath but as I previously mentioned, at great expense to our psychological and financial health. We were trapped there for 16 years before we were finally able to sell our home for an amount that just barely exceeded the original purchase price. But at least we managed to get out in one piece.
The shame and degradation of that fiasco lingers with us through this day, but how much more traumatic it must be for those who lost their homes in the 1980's and for those who are facing foreclosure now. Heartbreak is a timeless emotion.
So when I hear the Republicans' praise of the "free-market" and their insistence on deregulation and "self-policing", the picture that comes to mind especially for the finance industry is pigs regulating themselves at a trough. Yet the government agencies that feed the oinking investment banks with bailouts refuse to spare a scrap for distressed homeowners. This is nothing less than state socialism for the business sector and social Darwinism for the working people.
So it's a wonder how and why the public allowed themselves to be hoodwinked by the Republicans in this decade after the abuses of the 1980's. It's as though the relatively benign fiscal policies of the Clinton era in the 1990's never happened. Well, as the old saying goes: Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. All things being equal and after what this country has experienced, if the Democrats lose the election this year, then Americans are a truly hopeless bunch.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Bush and The Rabid Republicans: Menace to America
Hello and welcome to my blog.
My wife and I retired and relocated to the Philippines, her native land, in August, 2005, and from the looks of things we couldn't have picked a better time to do so. Within this short period, it seems that America's retreat from reason which began in the 1980's and has accelerated since 2000 has become even more pronounced in these few short years. President Bush (who, by the way, says that he gets his instructions from God) has continued to wreak economic and social havoc in America.
Never has one president caused so much harm in so many different ways.
The Iraq war which Bush started based on lies , such as Saddarm's possessing weapons of mass destruction, is out of control and has resulted in the deaths of thousands of American troops and Iraqi civilians along with the depletion of our national treasure. Yet he has nevertheless managed to conflate Saddam Hussein with Osama bin Laden in the minds of the American people and convinced them that we are in Iraq to "fight for our freedom" instead for oil. For a more gripping protest to this madness than I could ever express, please see After Pats' Birthday. Another anatomy of Bush's deception is well documented in Exhaustive Review finds no link between Saddam, el Qaida
Meantime, the holier-than-thou Republican Administration has spun a web of corruption and greed. Dick Cheney and Halliburton, the company of which he is a former CEO, have profited immensely from past dealings with Iraq, and the war itself. See Cheney's. Lies about Halliburton & Iraq and Dick Cheney: War Profiteer. Bush's practice of cronyism in appointing hacks to important offices has done serious harm to the country. Witness the Hurricane Katrina preparations and aftermath disaster which was mainly due to the incompetence of the then head of FEMA, Mike Brown, whose sole qualification for the position was his experience as a horse rancher.
Another example of cronyism run wild is Daniel Cooper, who resigned under fire after stating that his bible study was more important than his job as Undersecretary of Veterans affairs. He purportedly used his office as part of a network that proselytizes government workers and military personnel in behalf of Campus Crusade for Christ instead of fulfilling his work responsibilities. Meantime, veterans disabilities claims under his watch have been neglected and are now heavily backlogged. See Embattled Veterans Official Resigns Post.
Bush and his appointees also politicized and undermined the functions of the Justice Department by appointing the unqualified Monica Goodling, who received her training from an poorly rated evangelical law school to a position of responsibility in the Justice Department (see Another Hearing, Another Monica. Further there was the manipulation of the Attorney General's office by the former head of that department, Alberto Gonzales, and the politically motivated firing of 8 employees from the United States Attorney's offices through the offices of (now former) White House Counsel Harriet Miers.
I could go on with this laundry list of the Administration's missteps and examples of ineptitude, but all these fiascoes and more are much better articulated in the book, American Theocracy by Kevin Phillips. However, what I want to point out here is the danger to America posed by the viciousness of Bush and the Republicans and and their willingness to stop at nothing to advance their agenda, such as the politically motivated impeachment of President Clinton for what were really nothing more than sexual indiscretions that hypocritical Republian politicians were found to be even more guilty. See Republican Sex Scandals Dwarf Those of Democrats.
The Republicans ruthlessness sabotaged the 2000 elections. The Florida Secretary of State in Florida, a Republican and co-Chairman of Bush's campaign there, refused to recuse herself in the disputed ballot count in that state, and the Supreme Court dominated by right-wing appointees of the Republicans, threw the Presidency to Bush.
According to a remarkable article "Learning from the Cultural Conservatives" the Right's (and by extension the Republicans) plans to create a paradigm shift in American values began about 30 years ago, laying the groundwork with their message throughout the 1970's, and coming into power beginning with the Reagan era.
At that time, there was a shift in the economic structure away from recognizing the value of the American working people in the production of goods and services. This change was brought about throughout the implementation in the 1980's of supply side economics-- a system which basically steals from the poor and middle class and gives to the wealthy, a sort of income redistribution in reverse that continues through this day. An example of this rip-off is the federal tax structure, under which investment income is assessed at a lower rate than wages. Then there is the federal minimum wage, for which there was no increase from 1997 to 2007. Yet CEO compensation as a ratio to the minimum wage increased from 78 in 1978 to 207 by 1989 (most of the increase took place during the 1980's, the Reagan Era). By 2005, about midway through the Dubya Administration, the multiple had increased to 821. See CEO Pay-to minimum-wage ratio soars. Talk all you want about the free market, this disparity is nothing short of obscene..
As previously noted, it was also about this same time that the trend of "new age" irrationalism and religious fundamentalism began manifesting itself in the U.S, even into the reaches of the government executive branch. For example, President Reagan (along with his wife Nancy), was a believer in astrology and said that he followed his horoscope daily. Further, he had the street number of his California residential address changed from 666 because he believed that set of numerals to be the (biblical) "mark of the beast". Reagan's Secretary of the Interior James Watt said that there was no need to protect the environment because the end of the world was at hand and Jesus was coming soon.
This was also the era of the of the Moral Majority which supported Reagan in his first election, and the Christian Coalition which was founded in 1989. During the 1980's the Fundamentalist Christians moved in on the Republican right and consolidate their power with a vengeance during the 1990's. See The Rise of the Religious Right in The Republican Party.
In a combination of shortsightedness and a kind of fanaticism that caused Reagan to see the Soviet Union as the "evil empire", the Republican Administration sent aid and weapons to mujahedeen guerrillas in Afghanistan--whom Reagan praised as "freedom fighters"--to battle the Russians when they invaded that country. The mujahideen gave rise to the the Taliban who eventually turned against America. In turn, their hatred towards the U.S culminated in 9-11.
Ironically, the waste of resources in an unwinnable war in Afghanistan, not U.S.foreign policy, was likely the cause of the collapse of communism in the USSR. America did not need to get involved in that war. The USSR probably did itself in, as the Soviet invasion turned in to a Vietnam type quagmire.
Likewise, Reagan's and President Bush Sr.'s support of Saddam Hussein in the war between Iraq and Iran has come back to haunt us with a vengeance. The events in Afghanistan and the Middle East are the the consequences of America's adopting the flawed policy "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". Directly or indirectly, it was this kind of thinking that made America responsible for the rise of Osama bin Laden, the mastermind of the attack on America. See How the CIA created Osama bin Laden. American military forces have been tied up in Afghanistan since then and according to the Wikipedia article Coalition Casualties in Afghanistan, as of February 13, 2008, the casualty count for American troops stands at 414. Perhaps things might have turned out differently if more troops were available there and not tied down in Iraq. But considering the Soviet experience, the outcome may not have been that different after all.
Religious fundamentalism right here at home which has advanced in the U.S. in direct proportion to the decline of rationalism, has been so heartily sponsored by the Bush administration. For this reason, the Republicans scare me. The President and his party have formulated and /or supported such policies as so called faith-based initiatives and the war on science, especially the campaign to eliminate from public schools the teaching of the Theory of Evolution or require so called equal time for teaching the doctrine of religion based creationism as an alternate explanation to the existence of humans. A prime example of Bush's war on rationality is his administration's policy of interference in FDA's scientific research. See Oversight and Government Reform. Yet another example is Bush's blocking America's participation in the Kyoto accords, despite strong evidence of global warming. For a complete list of international treaties that Bush has violated or opposed, see Bush's Crimes.
But the end of Bush's term in office in November will not be the end of right-wing fundamentalism in the Republican Party. Sen. John McCain, the Republican nominee who has been considered a "moderate" declared that only a Christian is fit to be the President of the United States. I find this remark offenseive to non-Christian Americans and disrespectful to the Consitutional guarantee of separation of Church and State. But what is alarming is that there has not been a storm of outrage against this comments. Imagine what would have happened if McCain had said that only a male or a white person should be President.
It used to be said that there's not a dime's worth of difference between the Democrats and the Republicans, and that they are basically two sides of the same coin. At one time I would have agreed. Yet over the past 15 years or so, the GOP politics of hate and venom have gone beyond the pale of acceptable partisan politics. But you can't have a bully without a victim, and the Democrats have jumped in to fill that role by allowing their party be steamrolled and led by the nose by the Republican jack booted thugs. Bush shamelessly exploited 9-11 by pushing for the Patriot Act and intimidating the Democrats into voting for the Iraq War by impugning the patriotism of dissenters.
A contemptible (but typical) breach of ethics conducted by the Republicans was during the 2004 presidential election campaign. Here we had the hawkish party who pushed for the Iraq War not only supporting Bush--the Vietnam War draft dodger who hid out from combat by cutting in line to enlist in the National Guard (from which he was frequently absent)--but the GOP also managed to trash the Vietnam War honorable service record of Bush's Democratic opponent, John Kerry. Yet Kerry still rose above the Swift Boat Veterans Campaign calumny and for the first part of the race managed to build a lead over Bush. But true to form for the Democrats, Kerry blew it .
Isn't it just incredible how they Dems manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory? It turns out there was even a cloud over the balloting in Ohio in the 2004 election, which if Kerry had challenged may have redirected enough votes in his favor for him to win the election See "Kerry Suspects 2004 election Was Stolen". It is due to his failure to aggressively go toe to toe with the Republicans that I lost respect for Kerry.
But another factor contributing to Bush's win over Kerry in 2004, was the release the by the Al-Jazeera Network of a speech by Bin Laden shortly before the U.S. elections condemning Bush. However, this broadcast instead and instead provoked or scared Americans into voting for Bush. So don't worry about the Bush Administration pulling a surprise capture of Bin Laden this year to win points for the election. He's too valuable to them where he is--wherever that may be.
Then there is the state of economy. At one time it was the Democrats who were labeled as the "tax and spend" party. Yet under President Clinton, America ran a budget surplus, which in the year 2000 was $230 billion. Under President Bush and the Republicans "borrow and spend" policies, that surplus has vanished and has been replaced by a deficit which in 2007 amounted to $163 billion in 2007 and is expected to reach $400 billion by the end of 2008. The budget for this year includes a reduction of Medicare spending and increase in military spending. See President’s Spending Plan Would Rival 2004 Deficit. Programs that Bush wants to eliminate include a federal literacy program (This from the "No child left behind" President.)
On top of everything else is the collapse of the housing market, no longer just confined to the sub- prime set. At this writing, for the first time in U.S. history, American homeowners as a whole, owe more on their homes then their properties are worth. The unrealistic increase in home prices over the past couple years was a speculative bubble just waiting to burst, and there's no excuse for the Administration not to have taken preventive measures. I'm not an economics expert. Frankly, I'm not even a college graduate, but I worked long enough in the credit business and had enough personal experiences to realize years ago where this runaway train was heading. American Theocracy which by the way was copyrighted in 2006 also predicted this disaster. So for Bush and company to pretend that there was no warning for this disaster is utter bullshit. Another interesting read that discusses the warning signs which Dubya ignored is American Politik .
Republicans claim to champion so called traditional family values but had no problem with Bush's history of abuse of alcohol and other drugs such as cocaine, plus a drunk driving conviction while already an adult. In fact Bush has the distinction of being the only U.S. President with a criminal record. Yet the Republicans pilloried President Clinton for using of marijuana while a college student. Interestingly, note the way the children of these two men turned out. Compare the behavior of the daughters of George W. and Bill Clinton and tell me who among them these three offspring is truly the class act in terms of intellect and decorum. I guess the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, nor the berries from the Bush.
Along the line of line of "family values" is the the so called "right to life" movement championed by the Republican right. Senator Bill Frist and Congressman Tom DeLay politicized the Terri Schiavo case in trying to invoke federal power and legislation to prevent removal of the feeding tube of this woman who was in a persistent vegetative state. This action was taken despite her purported wishes that she not be allowed to kept in this state, according to her husband.. Even Bush intervened in the matter. It turns out, however, that when DeLay's own father was in a similar comatose position in 1988, no heroic measures were taken to extend his life, in accordance with the wishes of the family. Bush's position in the Schiavo case also contrasted his actions as Governor of Texas when in 1999, he signed a bill permitting doctors to remove life support from patients whose conditions were hopeless.
It's nothing less than sadistic how the conservatives support the "right to life" but not the relief of suffering while being kept alive. Witness for example "states rights" Republicans invoking federal power against states that have decriminalized the use of medical marijuana for sufferers of the side effects of chemotherapy and for victims of glaucoma.
And speaking of drugs, for all the right-wingers' ranting against narcotics, America's alliance with Colombia is another tribute to Republican hypocrisy. The President of that nation, Avaro Uribe, along with his family, is apparently tied to drug trafficking and smuggling, and may well have connections with the Medlin Cartel. See Bush, Colombia, and Narco Poliitics. Yet this hasn't stopped Bush and Uribe from forming a mutual admiration society, and from the U.S extending aid to the Colombian military. Further, Bush has turned a blind(?) eye towards Colombia's right-wing death squads which operate with Uribe's blessings. These organizations are of course also deeply involved in the narcotics trade.
The savaging to which American ideals have been subjected over the past three decades is tragic but not hopeless. Earlier I mentioned the article "Learning from the Cultural Conservatives" which documents the rise of the Republican party and the extremist conservative takeover of the U.S. This essay goes on to discuss how we progressives can take back our country. But frankly, I question whether the left has the will and the grit to engage in the social-political-economic street fighting against the right wing bullies that, as the author states, is necessary to rescue this country from the clutches of intellectual tyranny and obscurantism that the right-wing has imposed on this nation. It's going to take a huge effort, but keeping in mind the goal of a new Enlightenment, it will be well worth the battle.
My wife and I retired and relocated to the Philippines, her native land, in August, 2005, and from the looks of things we couldn't have picked a better time to do so. Within this short period, it seems that America's retreat from reason which began in the 1980's and has accelerated since 2000 has become even more pronounced in these few short years. President Bush (who, by the way, says that he gets his instructions from God) has continued to wreak economic and social havoc in America.
Never has one president caused so much harm in so many different ways.
The Iraq war which Bush started based on lies , such as Saddarm's possessing weapons of mass destruction, is out of control and has resulted in the deaths of thousands of American troops and Iraqi civilians along with the depletion of our national treasure. Yet he has nevertheless managed to conflate Saddam Hussein with Osama bin Laden in the minds of the American people and convinced them that we are in Iraq to "fight for our freedom" instead for oil. For a more gripping protest to this madness than I could ever express, please see After Pats' Birthday. Another anatomy of Bush's deception is well documented in Exhaustive Review finds no link between Saddam, el Qaida
Meantime, the holier-than-thou Republican Administration has spun a web of corruption and greed. Dick Cheney and Halliburton, the company of which he is a former CEO, have profited immensely from past dealings with Iraq, and the war itself. See Cheney's. Lies about Halliburton & Iraq and Dick Cheney: War Profiteer. Bush's practice of cronyism in appointing hacks to important offices has done serious harm to the country. Witness the Hurricane Katrina preparations and aftermath disaster which was mainly due to the incompetence of the then head of FEMA, Mike Brown, whose sole qualification for the position was his experience as a horse rancher.
Another example of cronyism run wild is Daniel Cooper, who resigned under fire after stating that his bible study was more important than his job as Undersecretary of Veterans affairs. He purportedly used his office as part of a network that proselytizes government workers and military personnel in behalf of Campus Crusade for Christ instead of fulfilling his work responsibilities. Meantime, veterans disabilities claims under his watch have been neglected and are now heavily backlogged. See Embattled Veterans Official Resigns Post.
Bush and his appointees also politicized and undermined the functions of the Justice Department by appointing the unqualified Monica Goodling, who received her training from an poorly rated evangelical law school to a position of responsibility in the Justice Department (see Another Hearing, Another Monica. Further there was the manipulation of the Attorney General's office by the former head of that department, Alberto Gonzales, and the politically motivated firing of 8 employees from the United States Attorney's offices through the offices of (now former) White House Counsel Harriet Miers.
I could go on with this laundry list of the Administration's missteps and examples of ineptitude, but all these fiascoes and more are much better articulated in the book, American Theocracy by Kevin Phillips. However, what I want to point out here is the danger to America posed by the viciousness of Bush and the Republicans and and their willingness to stop at nothing to advance their agenda, such as the politically motivated impeachment of President Clinton for what were really nothing more than sexual indiscretions that hypocritical Republian politicians were found to be even more guilty. See Republican Sex Scandals Dwarf Those of Democrats.
The Republicans ruthlessness sabotaged the 2000 elections. The Florida Secretary of State in Florida, a Republican and co-Chairman of Bush's campaign there, refused to recuse herself in the disputed ballot count in that state, and the Supreme Court dominated by right-wing appointees of the Republicans, threw the Presidency to Bush.
According to a remarkable article "Learning from the Cultural Conservatives" the Right's (and by extension the Republicans) plans to create a paradigm shift in American values began about 30 years ago, laying the groundwork with their message throughout the 1970's, and coming into power beginning with the Reagan era.
At that time, there was a shift in the economic structure away from recognizing the value of the American working people in the production of goods and services. This change was brought about throughout the implementation in the 1980's of supply side economics-- a system which basically steals from the poor and middle class and gives to the wealthy, a sort of income redistribution in reverse that continues through this day. An example of this rip-off is the federal tax structure, under which investment income is assessed at a lower rate than wages. Then there is the federal minimum wage, for which there was no increase from 1997 to 2007. Yet CEO compensation as a ratio to the minimum wage increased from 78 in 1978 to 207 by 1989 (most of the increase took place during the 1980's, the Reagan Era). By 2005, about midway through the Dubya Administration, the multiple had increased to 821. See CEO Pay-to minimum-wage ratio soars. Talk all you want about the free market, this disparity is nothing short of obscene..
As previously noted, it was also about this same time that the trend of "new age" irrationalism and religious fundamentalism began manifesting itself in the U.S, even into the reaches of the government executive branch. For example, President Reagan (along with his wife Nancy), was a believer in astrology and said that he followed his horoscope daily. Further, he had the street number of his California residential address changed from 666 because he believed that set of numerals to be the (biblical) "mark of the beast". Reagan's Secretary of the Interior James Watt said that there was no need to protect the environment because the end of the world was at hand and Jesus was coming soon.
This was also the era of the of the Moral Majority which supported Reagan in his first election, and the Christian Coalition which was founded in 1989. During the 1980's the Fundamentalist Christians moved in on the Republican right and consolidate their power with a vengeance during the 1990's. See The Rise of the Religious Right in The Republican Party.
In a combination of shortsightedness and a kind of fanaticism that caused Reagan to see the Soviet Union as the "evil empire", the Republican Administration sent aid and weapons to mujahedeen guerrillas in Afghanistan--whom Reagan praised as "freedom fighters"--to battle the Russians when they invaded that country. The mujahideen gave rise to the the Taliban who eventually turned against America. In turn, their hatred towards the U.S culminated in 9-11.
Ironically, the waste of resources in an unwinnable war in Afghanistan, not U.S.foreign policy, was likely the cause of the collapse of communism in the USSR. America did not need to get involved in that war. The USSR probably did itself in, as the Soviet invasion turned in to a Vietnam type quagmire.
Likewise, Reagan's and President Bush Sr.'s support of Saddam Hussein in the war between Iraq and Iran has come back to haunt us with a vengeance. The events in Afghanistan and the Middle East are the the consequences of America's adopting the flawed policy "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". Directly or indirectly, it was this kind of thinking that made America responsible for the rise of Osama bin Laden, the mastermind of the attack on America. See How the CIA created Osama bin Laden. American military forces have been tied up in Afghanistan since then and according to the Wikipedia article Coalition Casualties in Afghanistan, as of February 13, 2008, the casualty count for American troops stands at 414. Perhaps things might have turned out differently if more troops were available there and not tied down in Iraq. But considering the Soviet experience, the outcome may not have been that different after all.
Religious fundamentalism right here at home which has advanced in the U.S. in direct proportion to the decline of rationalism, has been so heartily sponsored by the Bush administration. For this reason, the Republicans scare me. The President and his party have formulated and /or supported such policies as so called faith-based initiatives and the war on science, especially the campaign to eliminate from public schools the teaching of the Theory of Evolution or require so called equal time for teaching the doctrine of religion based creationism as an alternate explanation to the existence of humans. A prime example of Bush's war on rationality is his administration's policy of interference in FDA's scientific research. See Oversight and Government Reform. Yet another example is Bush's blocking America's participation in the Kyoto accords, despite strong evidence of global warming. For a complete list of international treaties that Bush has violated or opposed, see Bush's Crimes.
But the end of Bush's term in office in November will not be the end of right-wing fundamentalism in the Republican Party. Sen. John McCain, the Republican nominee who has been considered a "moderate" declared that only a Christian is fit to be the President of the United States. I find this remark offenseive to non-Christian Americans and disrespectful to the Consitutional guarantee of separation of Church and State. But what is alarming is that there has not been a storm of outrage against this comments. Imagine what would have happened if McCain had said that only a male or a white person should be President.
It used to be said that there's not a dime's worth of difference between the Democrats and the Republicans, and that they are basically two sides of the same coin. At one time I would have agreed. Yet over the past 15 years or so, the GOP politics of hate and venom have gone beyond the pale of acceptable partisan politics. But you can't have a bully without a victim, and the Democrats have jumped in to fill that role by allowing their party be steamrolled and led by the nose by the Republican jack booted thugs. Bush shamelessly exploited 9-11 by pushing for the Patriot Act and intimidating the Democrats into voting for the Iraq War by impugning the patriotism of dissenters.
A contemptible (but typical) breach of ethics conducted by the Republicans was during the 2004 presidential election campaign. Here we had the hawkish party who pushed for the Iraq War not only supporting Bush--the Vietnam War draft dodger who hid out from combat by cutting in line to enlist in the National Guard (from which he was frequently absent)--but the GOP also managed to trash the Vietnam War honorable service record of Bush's Democratic opponent, John Kerry. Yet Kerry still rose above the Swift Boat Veterans Campaign calumny and for the first part of the race managed to build a lead over Bush. But true to form for the Democrats, Kerry blew it .
Isn't it just incredible how they Dems manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory? It turns out there was even a cloud over the balloting in Ohio in the 2004 election, which if Kerry had challenged may have redirected enough votes in his favor for him to win the election See "Kerry Suspects 2004 election Was Stolen". It is due to his failure to aggressively go toe to toe with the Republicans that I lost respect for Kerry.
But another factor contributing to Bush's win over Kerry in 2004, was the release the by the Al-Jazeera Network of a speech by Bin Laden shortly before the U.S. elections condemning Bush. However, this broadcast instead and instead provoked or scared Americans into voting for Bush. So don't worry about the Bush Administration pulling a surprise capture of Bin Laden this year to win points for the election. He's too valuable to them where he is--wherever that may be.
Then there is the state of economy. At one time it was the Democrats who were labeled as the "tax and spend" party. Yet under President Clinton, America ran a budget surplus, which in the year 2000 was $230 billion. Under President Bush and the Republicans "borrow and spend" policies, that surplus has vanished and has been replaced by a deficit which in 2007 amounted to $163 billion in 2007 and is expected to reach $400 billion by the end of 2008. The budget for this year includes a reduction of Medicare spending and increase in military spending. See President’s Spending Plan Would Rival 2004 Deficit. Programs that Bush wants to eliminate include a federal literacy program (This from the "No child left behind" President.)
On top of everything else is the collapse of the housing market, no longer just confined to the sub- prime set. At this writing, for the first time in U.S. history, American homeowners as a whole, owe more on their homes then their properties are worth. The unrealistic increase in home prices over the past couple years was a speculative bubble just waiting to burst, and there's no excuse for the Administration not to have taken preventive measures. I'm not an economics expert. Frankly, I'm not even a college graduate, but I worked long enough in the credit business and had enough personal experiences to realize years ago where this runaway train was heading. American Theocracy which by the way was copyrighted in 2006 also predicted this disaster. So for Bush and company to pretend that there was no warning for this disaster is utter bullshit. Another interesting read that discusses the warning signs which Dubya ignored is American Politik .
Republicans claim to champion so called traditional family values but had no problem with Bush's history of abuse of alcohol and other drugs such as cocaine, plus a drunk driving conviction while already an adult. In fact Bush has the distinction of being the only U.S. President with a criminal record. Yet the Republicans pilloried President Clinton for using of marijuana while a college student. Interestingly, note the way the children of these two men turned out. Compare the behavior of the daughters of George W. and Bill Clinton and tell me who among them these three offspring is truly the class act in terms of intellect and decorum. I guess the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, nor the berries from the Bush.
Along the line of line of "family values" is the the so called "right to life" movement championed by the Republican right. Senator Bill Frist and Congressman Tom DeLay politicized the Terri Schiavo case in trying to invoke federal power and legislation to prevent removal of the feeding tube of this woman who was in a persistent vegetative state. This action was taken despite her purported wishes that she not be allowed to kept in this state, according to her husband.. Even Bush intervened in the matter. It turns out, however, that when DeLay's own father was in a similar comatose position in 1988, no heroic measures were taken to extend his life, in accordance with the wishes of the family. Bush's position in the Schiavo case also contrasted his actions as Governor of Texas when in 1999, he signed a bill permitting doctors to remove life support from patients whose conditions were hopeless.
It's nothing less than sadistic how the conservatives support the "right to life" but not the relief of suffering while being kept alive. Witness for example "states rights" Republicans invoking federal power against states that have decriminalized the use of medical marijuana for sufferers of the side effects of chemotherapy and for victims of glaucoma.
And speaking of drugs, for all the right-wingers' ranting against narcotics, America's alliance with Colombia is another tribute to Republican hypocrisy. The President of that nation, Avaro Uribe, along with his family, is apparently tied to drug trafficking and smuggling, and may well have connections with the Medlin Cartel. See Bush, Colombia, and Narco Poliitics. Yet this hasn't stopped Bush and Uribe from forming a mutual admiration society, and from the U.S extending aid to the Colombian military. Further, Bush has turned a blind(?) eye towards Colombia's right-wing death squads which operate with Uribe's blessings. These organizations are of course also deeply involved in the narcotics trade.
The savaging to which American ideals have been subjected over the past three decades is tragic but not hopeless. Earlier I mentioned the article "Learning from the Cultural Conservatives" which documents the rise of the Republican party and the extremist conservative takeover of the U.S. This essay goes on to discuss how we progressives can take back our country. But frankly, I question whether the left has the will and the grit to engage in the social-political-economic street fighting against the right wing bullies that, as the author states, is necessary to rescue this country from the clutches of intellectual tyranny and obscurantism that the right-wing has imposed on this nation. It's going to take a huge effort, but keeping in mind the goal of a new Enlightenment, it will be well worth the battle.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)