Is there a strategy?

It is possible that the Democrats have chosen to keep their own counsel while the effects of the Bush administration take their toll on the country and the world. After all, Bush's own policies are causing his poll numbers to fall as fast as the price of oil is rising. So, why should Democrats offer strategies or opinions that are sure to be ridiculed by the corporate pundits and take the country's attention away from the administrations self immolation?

As much as I would like this to be the case, I am more of the opinion that Democrats find themselves at odds with the war in Iraq. The front runners for the presidential nomination are Hilary Clinton and Joe Biden, who have both stated their belief that we must see the war through and warned of dangers by removing the troops immediately. Isn’t this the same song and dance we heard from John Kerry in ‘04’ and can’t we expect the same results?

A scant few Democrats have taken a position in opposition to the war while most keep to the sidelines, making their critical observations in relative safety. But, now there are several Republicans who have come forward to criticize the war and voice their opposition to their own party’s policies in Iraq. The Democrats are now in jeopardy of being behind the curve as more Republicans find their spines and dare to defy Resident Bush’s war policy.

Even the most faithful republicans are approaching their limits for the abuses of power carried out by this administration. The list of atrocities stretches from the administration’s initial disregard of any and all warnings and intelligence offered by the out-going Clinton team, to the current morass of CIA outings, lying to Congress, misleading the country to go to war, wrecking the economy, the environment and America’s reputation around the world. Moderate Republicans are beginning to realize that their political careers will be at stake if the Democrats regain the presidency, and considering the degree to which this administration has taken liberty with policies, laws and the constitution, they certainly can not feel their positions will be secure. In fact, some may be realizing that they can be judged complicit with some of the transgressions perpetrated under Bush, et al.

Democrats need to take a strong stand against the Iraq war and demand the administration take immediate steps to remove our troops and replace them with an international force. They need to take responsibility for abdicating their duty and voting to give the president the power to declare war with Iraq. They need to demand investigations of the Bush administration’s actions leading up to the war and not be afraid to issue indictments to anyone found in violation of US or international law.

In other words, they need to start doing the jobs they are being paid to do.

A Suggestion for Democrats

The Democratic leaders need to understand that rhetoric like that of Senators Joe Biden, Harry Reid and Hillary Clinton is not what their party wants to hear:

Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.), Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (Del.) and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) reason that success in Iraq at this point is too important for the country. Washington Post

The very Democrats that have complained that Bush has never defined his strategy for Iraq and has no benchmarks for success, are now claiming the importance of achieving it, but have not themselves attempted to define success.

From the WaPo article above an argument is made that Democrats who voted for the war now cling to the belief that we must stay the course in Iraq. "Clearly Democrats are not united in what is the critique of what we're doing there and what is the answer to what we do next," said Steve Elmendorf, a senior party strategist whose former boss, then-House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (Mo.), voted in 2002 to authorize the invasion of Iraq. "The difficulty of coming to a unified position is that for a lot of people who voted for it, they have to decide whether they can admit that they were misled."

I have a suggestion for the Democrats described by Senator Gephardt. First, re-read the Constitution to familiarize yourselves with whom the responsible party is for declaring war. They will learn that - Article I, Section 8 specifies that Congress alone must "declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water."

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

Finally, they should contemplate the obvious conflict between having sworn to uphold the Constitution in their capacity of office holders in Congress and the abandonment of that duty they committed when they voted to give the authority to go to war in Iraq to the president. If and when they are able to admit to shirking their responsibility, they should reassess their position on the war based on its legal and moral issues and not its impact on their political careers.

Once they have admitted to having made a mistake they can take action to correct it. If they continue to deny their responsibility, they should not be considered seriously for any office.

Ode to a Tyrant

There once was a boy from New Haven
Who by nature was reckless and craven
But he came from a clan
With an imperial plan
So his treatment of others was raven

His family was invested in oil
So the boy for a living wouldn’t toil
He would live off his name
Impervious to shame
And less fortunate lives he would spoil

His dad became second in charge
The boy, Texas governor at large
Since in business he failed
On to politics he hailed
Though all his faults wouldn’t fit on a barge

Then the country elected his dad
For their leader, but he turned out so bad
He claimed “no new taxes”
But that ain’t what the facts is
So one term is all that he had

The new century found the boy in control
Appointed since he lost at the polls
But his ass needed cover
As a democracy lover
So dad’s cronies got all the top roles

9/11 changed the rules of the game
A chance for the boy to win fame
But, once we knew we’d been had
We were already in Baghdad
Though the reasons he gave were all lame

Now he rules over the land like a king
War and torture are now his big thing
Yes, he has broken the law
But claims that God oversaw
But the nation’s opinion he can’t swing

Stop the Presses

Hannity, O’Reilly, Limbaugh, and the rest of the right leaning commentators in the media love protesting the Liberal media and its dominance in the press and over the airwaves. This always amuses me since they are part of the media and must be part of the calculation to determine the media is liberal. Also interesting is the criterion used in determining what qualifies as liberal.

A pet phrase of the conservatives over the past 25 years has been “the liberal media” when referring to any coverage they did not like. The New York Times, LA Times and the Washington Post have been their favorite targets and branded as the “Liberal media elite”. However, any comparison of the so called liberal media with media outlets deemed acceptable by the right wing demonstrates that the main difference is that those labeled as liberal are guilty of covering both sides of an argument. They also have the audacity to include liberal viewpoints along with conservative columns on their editorial pages.

The conservative assault on the liberal media has been a disciplined and long term effort that is now paying dividends in a big way. Either through intimidation by the right, or by corporate influence of the mega-businesses that have acquired the major media companies, news organizations have shown reluctance to cover stories that might leave them open to further ridicule. All of the news outlets, cable and networks, now invite far more conservatives than liberals to discussion panels or to supply political analyses. Press releases from the White House and from Congress are reported uncritically and often with little editing and minimum if any research to corroborate the information supplied.

This environment, created by conservative effort to suppress news that is not to their liking, enabled the abuse of trust introduced by the Bush administration in the form of fake news stories using fake reporters, but aired without informing viewers of the source or the story or who was paying for them.

The most telling example of the conservative take-over of the media is the comparison between news coverage of the Clinton and Bush administrations. You will recall that for nearly eight straight years, every lead, rumor, and unconfirmed hearsay tidbit was headlined by the press. A special prosecutor, Ken Starr, was assigned to investigate the Clintons, but after $80 million and years of investigating not one charge could be proven against them. Had it not been for Clinton’s own indiscretion with that intern, the Republicans would have never been able to foist the circus they called impeachment upon the public. Yet, there is a plethora of evidence to show Bush lied to the American people to garner support for a war with Iraq but, more criminally he lied to Congress and submitted a signed letter to congressional leaders justifying his invasion of Iraq based on these very lies.

Congress has not seen fit to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate these much more serious charges and the reason for that is that the Congress is in the hands of the Republican Party and is in lock-step with their despotic leader. Bush and his accomplices have ridden to power on the torrent of corporate donations which they secured through quid pro quo arrangements with the corporate raiders who want maximum influence in government, exoneration from prosecution for wrong doing and greater profits. This last item is not just greedy but absolutely frightening. Corporations are raking in record profits thanks to Bush’s willingness to sacrifice individuals’ safety and legal rights but, also by encouraging big business to view federal tax revenues as a source of untapped wealth that is theirs for the taking.