Making History

Well, it’s almost official. The nation once known as Iraq has just about been completely destroyed by George Bush and Dick Cheney. All out civil war is in the offing as Iraq descends to become Afghanistan 2, the latest hotbed for Islamic terrorists. Now the Bush apologists have nothing left to justify the foray into Iraq.

We’ve heard about the weapons of mass destruction, how the world would be better without Saddam Hussein, how the Iraqi people would be better without Saddam, how Iraq worked with al Qaeda, how freedom and democracy would flourish in the Middle East and make us more secure. A lot of people bought into one or more of those explanations, but they were all lies. War in Iraq was never about any of those things – it was about arrogance. This administration looks upon itself as history-makers rather than observers of historic events. Better to be bold and decisive they tell themselves regardless of whether they are right or wrong.

The arrogance of such a thought process is mind-boggling. Bush’s little jaunt into history has destroyed the lives of thousands of people. Over 25,000 American soldiers have been wounded or killed in the war, but Bush doesn’t care. He’s making history and that’s what matters. The lives of ordinary American citizens mean nothing to this man.

Now Iraq is on the brink of civil war and it’s not like this possibility was never presented to the White House. It was presented several times before the war and during the occupation. Yet our history-making president eschewed these warnings, for he was decisive and he was going to show the world that he would act boldly. He would take Saddam down and damn the consequences. Ordinary Iraqis were of no concern and neither were the lives of American soldiers.

The destruction of the Iraqi nation is blood on the hands of the American people and we, as a people, need to deal with that reality. For those who voted for George Bush in 2000 and especially in 2004, I have a simple message for you: it’s your fault. You succumbed to the fear and you enabled this most moronic of all US presidents to continue his reign over the destruction of the American way of life. Will you ever wake up and realize what you’ve done?

Unfortunately, America seems oblivious to Bush’s transgressions and is far too concerned with who is on American Idol this week or what new song should we download to our iPod. Yet, while America remains in a coma, Bush continues to destroy the way of life he twice pledged to protect. How will history remember our bold and fearless leader?

The answer to that question of course is unknown, but here is how I’ll remember him. In my book, he will go down as the worst president in the history of the United States and the man who brought America as close to fascism as it has ever been. An inarticulate man who continually refused the counsel of experts in favor of the advice of an uninformed few. He presided over the rise of neo-conservatism in America and he put the religious right into the White House. On his watch, civil liberties have become a nuisance in the name of security.

This president must go, but that’s not likely to happen. Congress continues to capitulate to the White House with the latest example being their decision not to investigate the NSA Domestic Spying program, but to amend the law instead. For those of you paying attention, that means they know he broke the law, but they don’t care.

Is there anyone out there who cares? Of course, there are several groups that do like the ACLU, but the challenge is mobilizing enough people to actually get something done. Unfortunately, I’m not optimistic about the chances.

Cartoons and Globalization

Finally, it appears that the violence in response to the publication of cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed has begun to die down. This is just another example of so much violence over something so trivial and stupid. Of course, that’s the opinion of an avowed atheist and not of a devout muslim. To a muslim, perhaps this was the appropriate response. Or was it? Is this what the Koran states that muslims should do when confronted with blasphemy? Honestly, I don’t know if that is what it says and maybe that’s part of the problem.

Should people like me be more knowledgeable of Islam and its customs? Sure, from the perspective of being more worldly, I should know more about Islam as well as other world cultures. But should I be expected to adhere to Islam’s code of conduct? In my opinion, that is debatable.

At the core of the issue is religion. While religion represents many things to many people, at its most basic level is a code of conduct for mankind to live by – created by man, for man. Because there are numerous religions around the world, there are also various codes of conduct. What is tolerable and what is permissible can vary greatly between these codes, and sometimes these codes may be in direct conflict.

With globalization today, people of different cultures and religions interact more than ever. This can create further conflicts between the various codes of conduct, and it may mean that a single country which was previously homogeneous is now multi-cultural. The first generation of people living under this new umbrella of multi-culturalism will surely have the hardest time adjusting to the change in their country. I think this is what we are seeing in certain European countries. The dominant culture reacts negatively to the newcomers who don’t appear to be integrating into society. Of course, in America we’ve seen this countless times and it still happens today. America is a country built on immigration, and while the first generation of a new group of settlers may struggle with the dominant culture, the second generation tends to integrate and at the same time redefines the dominant society. Each generation of Americans born here seems to forget that fact as newcomers arrive.

In the struggle of the dominant culture and the new culture, the cartoon controversy is not a surprise. Ignorance of the customs of each society abounds on both sides. To a muslim, a cartoon depiction of the Prophet Mohammed is offensive, yet to many in the West, the prohibition of depicting the Prophet Mohammed in a cartoon is equally offensive. Many people are chiding Europeans for publishing these cartoons and provoking muslim society, yet I don’t hear anyone criticizing the muslim reaction as ignorant of Western customs. Should the people of Denmark begin to riot in reaction to muslims disregard for their fervent belief in freedom of speech? Maybe they should. Perhaps that would point out the flaw in reacting with violence to such offenses.

The point here is that both societies need to be more tolerant of each other. Muslims cannot expect the rest of the world to abide by their customs, and vice versa. State sponsored riots don’t accomplish anything except further alienation, which is exactly what those states want.

Leak Authorization

In the wake of recent reports that Vice President Dick Cheney authorized the leak of Valerie Plame's name to the media, CPLA has obtained the following transcipt from an upcoming made for television movie that has yet to be titled.


Scene: Scooter Libby is sitting at his desk in his White House office. He is simultaneously reading a briefing paper and looking at pictures of Kristy Swanson on Maxim magazine’s website.

Libby’s secretary enters the room.

Secretary: Mr. Libby, the Vice President would like to see you.

Libby: Oh … right now? I’m kind of busy with some research. (Libby is working the mouse frantically to close all of the Kristy Swanson pictures) Did he say what it was about?

Secretary: No, but I think it’s serious. He’s in his Darth Vader outfit again.

Libby: Ugh! … I heard he wants to be buried in that thing. Well, I better not keep Lord Vader waiting.


Scene: Vice President Dick Cheney is standing and looking out his office window. He is dressed in his Darth Vader outfit complete with breathing apparatus. Scooter Libby knocks on the door and enters the room.

Cheney (in the voice of James Earl Jones, turns to face Libby): SCOOTER! … Destroy them!

Libby: OK … uh, who???

Cheney: You know … that Joe Wilson and his wife. They must pay for betraying the Empire.

Libby: Ah …yes… I see. Did you have any thoughts on how to do this, my lord?

Cheney: Leak the wife’s name to our agents in the media. Tell them that she works for the CIA. Work with The Troll (Karl Rove) on this. He’s experienced in these matters. He is awaiting your instructions.

Libby: Excellent, my lord. The Troll and I will do as you say.

As Libby leaves the room, Cheney doubles over into a coughing fit.

America: Where Lies Are Truth And The Truth Is A Smear

I didn’t watch the State of The Union the other night. I thought about blogging it, but I decided that I didn’t want to be enraged for the balance of the evening, so my plan was to read about it the next day to get a fix of second-hand rage. I thought that would be easier to deal with and I think I was right. Reading about it was a lot easier than watching it; I’m convinced.

Nevertheless, the reviews have left me in a state of rage, as well as bafflement. Here are some items from President Bush’s speech that piqued my interest.

“And second guessing is not a strategy” – perhaps that’s true, but it’s better than the current strategy, which appears to be non-existent. Bush says that our strategy is clear, but why is it that no one can figure it out? Let alone that the reasons for being there continue to be discredited as we learned this week that the CIA informed Vice President Dick Cheney that the Niger uranium claims were not credible in July 2003. With information like that, how can any responsible citizen not second-guess this government?

“Stand behind the American military in its vital mission” – translation: stand behind me while I wield my increasingly unchecked power as the Executive. Of course, Bush invokes the name of the military instead because he knows that politicians in opposition are hesitant to say anything that could be interpreted as not supporting the troops. That makes it dangerous to say you are not on board with the mission, but it’s not really the military’s mission, is it? It’s the President’s mission. And let me be perfectly clear, I don’t stand behind this mission and I don’t stand behind you, President Bush.

“Isolationism would not only tie our hands in fighting enemies; it would keep us from helping our friends in desperate need.” – I’m not an isolationist, and in today’s global society, it’s not realistic to be an isolationist. However, the President’s vision of international involvement is one of unilateral intervention, not of international cooperation. That is what is objectionable about this administration’s approach to world affairs. Imagine living in a neighborhood where the rich guy with the biggest house decided to pave over your lawn and paint your house black. Wouldn’t that bother you? That rich guy in your neighborhood is the equivalent of the United States in the world today. “Don’t tell us what to do; we’ll do whatever we want and if you don’t like it, tough luck.”

“Terrorist surveillance program” - this is a beauty; you have to love how spying on anti-war groups has morphed into terrorist surveillance program. This part of the President’s speech was particularly misleading. He implied that if the domestic surveillance had been in place prior to September 11, two of the terrorists would have been stopped. The 9/11 Commission’s Report disputes this claim.

The President claims that his authority to institute such a program is Constitutional and by statute, however, this is hotly debated and by no means a certainty. This is also an attempt to obscure the real issue with the NSA surveillance, which of course has to do with obtaining warrants, not the actual spying. The President also stated that previous Presidents had used the same authority to order this type of surveillance, but again, this is false. In fact, during President Clinton’s tenure, the FISA law did not cover electronic surveillance and that is why Clinton didn’t get a warrant to obtain the authority. The Clinton administration had the law changed because it was concerned that evidence obtained under this surveillance may not be admissible in court.

The President also stated that appropriate members of Congress were kept informed about the program. Anyone who can read a newspaper knows this isn’t true.

As I write this and read the President’s speech at the same time, I realize I could go on for quite a while, however, I want to address the Democratic response to the speech. Calling it a response might be somewhat generous as it was the kind of weak-kneed speech that Democrats didn’t need. Governor Kaine of Virginia decided to go the soft route in his speech and talk about a “better way” to do things. Ugh! Bush’s speech was full of rhetoric and needed to be blasted. Instead, we got more rhetoric, just from the other side, that demonstrated that the Democratic Party has no idea what it’s doing.

A couple of weeks ago, Al Gore and Hillary Clinton made strong speeches against the President and the war in Iraq, as well as domestic spying. These are the kinds of speeches that need to be made every day by leaders of the Democratic Party. The airwaves must be saturated with the message that the very foundation of this country is under attack from within. Americans must constantly be reminded that this President has lied us in to war, threatened civil liberties and quite possibly broken the law. The mainstream media cannot be counted on to provide a balanced message any longer. Its views are becoming more and more pro-administration. Therefore, liberals need to get out there and bring the message to the people. Blogging can only get through to so many.

The lies of the Bush Administration must be constantly combated and discredited, else they become the de facto truth. America has become a land where lies are truth, and the truth is a smear. We need to change that for the sake of our country.

Rep. John Murtha is the man who should have been asked to give the Democratic response to the State of the Union. The fact that he wasn’t shows that the Democrats are lost in how to deal with the Bush Administration and quite possibly, are not the party for Progressives to support.