Issue:CNN.com - Gov. Bush:�Prosecutor taking up Schiavo inquiry - Jun 17, 2005

Specific:"he found his wife collapsed at 5 a.m. on Feb. 25, 1990, and he said in a 2003 television interview that he found her about 4:30 a.m. He called 911 at 5:40 a.m."

Comment:It empties one's spirit to think that this Republican mind-set is pursuing this. It is wrong. No good comes from this. There is no great injustice.

A couple of things to note. I am making a reasonable assumption. I will stand for correction should this assumption be inaccurate. If the AM is accurate, that indicates they were just waking up for the day - at best. At that hour of the day, who actually tells time accurately.

Then there is the notion that if my wife of 24 years was lying still and quiet at that hour, I would be inclined to believe that she was asleep and would not disturb her. If She got up to go to the bathroom, closed the door and I heard something - I might drift off asleep for a bit, thinking my wife simply dropped something.

Then there is the notion that a 2003 interview is some 13 years after the fact. Memories of traumatic events blur with time.

The final observation is that the implausibility that no one before the Governor thought to ask the question!

Issue:The Real News in the Downing Street Memos:

Specific: "virtually none were used in March and April, an average of 10 tons a month were dropped between May and August.

But these initial 'spikes of activity' didn't have the desired effect. The Iraqis didn't retaliate. They didn't provide the excuse Bush and Blair needed."

Comment:This goes to the notion that the Bush administration are not concerned about governance, but about power. "Power" is about getting your way.

Issue:In Reversal After Bush Meeting, Frist Will Seek New Bolton Vote - New York Times:

Specific:"WASHINGTON, June 21 - Senator Bill Frist, the leader of the Senate's Republican majority, abruptly reversed himself after a meeting with President Bush today and said he would schedule another vote on the nomination of John R. Bolton to be ambassador to the United Nations. "

Comment:An example of a man that does not take no for an answer. If he doesn't get the vote he wants, he will surely use a recess appointment. Someone over the weekend made the point that the rights of the minority are feature designed into the system. Minority preferences were not to be ignored or dismissed.

For why else would the does the smallest state have as many senators as the largest states. Balance was desired and respect for the minority was a key, check.

This President does not understand the difference between governance and power. This President is simply a bully.

Issue:Reuters AlertNet - CIA's Goss has 'excellent' idea where bin Laden is-Time

Specific: "dealing with sanctuaries in sovereign states, you're dealing with a problem of our sense of international obligation, fair play."

Comment:My father passed away recently. I miss him dearly. We didn’t talk about politics. Yet it was his and my mother’s activism in the Republican party in the 70’s that eventually drew me into Political Science a college major and my form of activism. His Republican party in the 1960’s and 70’s were outnumbered – so as my mother tells it. That’s why they joined the party. They were into good governance – not about power.

Governance versus power, that is a key item we now have to debate. Respect for the man or the Office is part of this debate. Democrats/Liberals can be wrong. They can be clueless. But they are open to discussion. It is this characteristic that is one distinction between good governance and bad. Good governance is a non-partisan concept. For the issues I’m about to raise, I may indeed be wrong and clueless. You the reader should judge. Ask yourself if the issues add up to Good Governance.

H. J. RES. 24 - Proposes an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the 22nd amendment to the Constitution. It has been referred to the Judiciary Committee in April. This is the amendment that prevents Bill Clinton and now George Bush from running for President every 4 years for the rest of their lives.

President Bush does not want to set a pull out date in Iraq. He has set up terrorism as permanent fear, much like communism was positioned during the cold war. Al-Quaida is set up as a perpetually imminent threat. Al-Quaida is a threat – no doubt. One issue of the Vietnam War was that the Vets did not have a parade to honor their sacrifices. Does not a perpetual state of war, against an enemy that is a tactic(not a political philosophy), prevent the parade of honor for Vets of the Iraq war?

Then there is the United Airline pension plan default. This President wants to “fix” social security by adding the burdens of being concerned about the future. In a previous century, when industry broke the promises to the elderly employees, and American government said – we will take care of you. An American government relieved its population of a burden in a time of life that is transitional for family and difficult for the individual.

When the scope of an issue grows because smaller concerns gravitate a problem, a need to categorize, prioritize and define the limits of the smaller issues develops. Limits must be defined. It is good governance to define reporter questions. Such is the Iraq war and the war on Terrorism. Questions like who, what, where, when and why have never been adequately defined by this administration.
Personally, I feel comfortable and more willing to support dramatic policy shifts when I can watch several different media outlets ask variations of the questions. In the periods between shows and questions about the issues, time is spent on bubbling up the next set of questions I need to be answered.
The Bush Administrations secretiveness, lack of open press conferences have not enabled me to get behind a perpetual war on terrorism. There always have been and always will be individuals and groups who want to do harm to Americans. There will be great catastrophes in which large numbers of Americans will get harmed. Al-Quaida is as much a threat as a the idea permanent President.

Is it good governance to be perpetually protecting America from short term threats? In some neighborhoods, it is wise to keep a gun handy while one sleeps. The principle of freedom dictates that those that live in those neighborhoods choose to do so. No one makes them live there, rhetorically speaking. But logic dictates that if they made efforts to protect the neighborhood, they may not need a gun in the bedroom. The risk of accidental shootings in the home are reduced. Children are better protected, when short term threats are addressed by long term thinking.

Terrorism is a tactic, not a philosophy. Yet the administration is treating terrorism as if it is the new communism. It seems reasonable that they do this to enhance their domestic political control.

And then there is the recent comments by Porter Goss concerning sovereignty and Osama Bin-Laden. In case you had not heard, the US govt knows where the number one 9/11 bad guy is located. Yet we are NOT going after him in deference to a respect for the sovereignty of a nation. Personally, I favor respecting a nation’s sovereignty, as sort of a “prime directive”. It is makes sense to me.

But is this good governance to change policy like this in the middle of a war? We occupied 2 nations. Clearly these were acts that did not respect the sovereignty of the particular countries. Yes, indeed we gave them back their countries. So what is the principle? What are we teaching our young?

Mr. President please lead me. When it is ok to occupy/invade a country? What is the principle I can tell my children? Pre-9/11 it was enough to think that if America was attacked – like Pearl Harbor – we are morally justified to stomp on any entity that hit us first. Ok post 9/11 things are different – so what is the rule now?
Is it good governance that such a question can be asked?

Thousands cross the borders from Mexico into the US on a daily basis. Container ships dock in America ports daily with the potentially deadly cargo. Chemical plants with inadequate security. According to news media, these loopholes are as big as pre-9/11. Before you discount some news media, some have gone the extra lengths of actually shipping radioactive material from Asia to Washington DC. Are the fair and balanced media outlets testing our governments security ascertions?

Is it good governance that such security holes exist – 3 years after 9/11?
And yet this party in complete control, wants to eliminate Presidential term limits, before fixing these holes. Is this good governance? Is it fair and balanced governance? Is it good governance? Mr President – what is good governance?

Issue:Bush Is Expected to Address Specifics on Iraq:


Specific:"Bush's new approach will be mostly rhetorical, however, as the White House does not plan any changes to the policy "


Comment: This is consistent with the notion that Bush does not retreat, does not "cut and run", does not make mistakes. We are to have complete confidence in him simply because he tells us to believe. It is matter of Faith.

Issue:The Interactive Truth - New York Times:

Specific:"What if we all vote on the truth? We don't need to, because we will be overruled by what becomes a legend most: entertainment."

Comment:History is not set in concrete. History is as the scientific method. Everything is a theory. When one drops a hammer, they are testing gravity. The existance of gravity is confirmed only when the hammer hits the floor, not the moment before. As new evidence becomes known, the old theories are tested. If history appears static and cast in concrete, it is only because the length of time since the last piece of new evidence relevant to a question of history is soo long.

There is a mechanism in the systems of society that process this confluence of time and fact.
Myths, legends and folklore are part of that mechanism.

The value of truth is in its static appearance.
The value of truth is that it is not dynamic.
The value of truth is that it is a baseline - a starting point
The value of truth is that anyone can test it,
and get the same answer as the last time.
Therefore the value of history is anyone can test it
and come to their own decision.

Society cannot endure long if the individual is told what is the truth.
It is human nature, the mechanical/analog nature of the brain to make decisions.
It is human nature to be able to separate an internally decision about a truth,
and the outward presentation of that decision.
History is the aggregation of these internal decisions about a truth from each member of a society.

To have a mechanism that enables the testing of truth is good.
To have a mechanism that enables the testing of truth faster is good.
Therefore a wikitorial (a wikipedia style editorial), while uncomfortable, has value.
The discomfort come from fear of change.

To which 2 things come to mind:
After 45 years - Change is a constant.
There truly is nothing to fear but fear itself.

Issue:Lexington Herald-Leader | 06/14/2005 | Mother of dead soldier vilifies Bush over war:

Specific:"Hard work is seeing your son's murder on CNN one Sunday evening while you're enjoying the last supper you'll ever truly enjoy again. Hard work is having three military officers come to your house a few hours later to confirm the aforementioned murder of your son, your first-born, your kind and gentle sweet baby. Hard work is burying your child 46 days before his 25th birthday. Hard work is holding your other three children as they lower the body of their big (brother) into the ground. Hard work is not jumping in the grave with him and having the earth cover you both,' she said.

Since her son's death, Sheehan has made opposition to the Bush administration a full-time job.

'We're watching you very carefully and we're going to do everything in our power to have you impeached for misleading the American people,' she said, quoting a letter she sent to the White House. 'Beating a political stake in your black heart will be the fulfillment of my life ... ,' she said, as the audience of 200 people cheered."

Comment:I found this story via Drudge. The nature of the selection of stories by Drudge is to belittle those in opposition to the political "right" by framing them in a kind "these are the loons" kind of context. Drudge does not select stories to inform. He goes for the headline - the outrageous - what the political right would find outrageous.

So by this selection criteria, this woman's demonstration of pain is outrageous according to Matt Drudge.

Issue:Don't Follow the Money - New York Times:

Specific:"Carl Bernstein calls 'the best obtainable version of the truth.'"

Comment:This is reality from any media. The phrase "Best obtainable version of the truth", allows a story to be told and not dismissed because there may be technical gaps. This allows logic and reason to bolster "truth", and to dismiss excessive passion and the tunnel visioned.

"The best obtainable version of the truth" - this is the objective and function of history.

Issue:CNN.com - Military academies attract fewer applicants - Jun 14, 2005

Comment:While the President is looking to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people, he is losing with Americans. This is a stage setting for things to come. Specifically a new kind of vulnerability. How it will take shape is not clear. This is a relevant poll that the Administration should note.

Issue:An Important Election Safeguard - New York Times:

Specific:"The solution is to require that each machine produce a paper record that can be inspected and verified by the voter. The paper records are then stored, and can be counted after the polls close. If the results on the machine do not match the tally of the paper records, it will be clear that there is a problem"


Comment:This is a gist of the idea that was/is Voter Decision Project since back in the late 80's. Back then the idea of voting using computers was ridiculous. But the core need for accountability to the voter by the "system" was/is key. I speculated that ATM machines might be utilized because they already provided the technical facility of software and a receipt. I was working at a company call SEI on a product called TRUST-AID. The design of that system, combined with my education at Temple University, allowed to explore these issues from a political rhetoric basis and a technical basis.

I encoutered confusion and concern from people. It was too foreign an idea. Computers and politics? It was too sci-fi. It was/is too democratic.
I never had the courage to ask for real money to develop the idea.

Issue:CNN.com - Time�report fuels Guantanamo criticism - Jun 13, 2005:

Specific:"'If in fact we are treating prisoners this way, it's not only wrong, it's dangerous and very dumb and very shortsighted,' Hagel said."

Comment:Far-sighted or visionary and smart are not high on possible lists of characterisitics to describe the Bush administration. Some other blog or article asked the question - is this what President Bush means by "values"?

Issue:The Downing Street Memo Story Won't Die: "The story attracted some news coverage in the United States, but not much. Last month, the Chicago Tribune concluded that 'the Downing Street memo story has proven to be something of a dud in the United States."


Comment: Why has it not gotten more traction? The Bush administration simply dismisses it as not being real. And since the Republicans control the investigations - the are dealing with it much the way they are dealing with Tom Delay.

Republicans are not about accuracy in historical terms. They are not into truth. They are into power only. This again furthers the notion that truth and reality at the national level, is merely a means to an end. The end is power.

Issue:The secret Downing Street memo - Sunday Times - Times Online

Comment: This should be a bigger issue for the Bush administration.

Issue:CNN.com - Bush: Syria must not interfere in Lebanon - Jun 10, 2005: "Bush: Syria must not interfere in Lebanon"

Specific:A senior State Department official told CNN that the United States has received what it believes are credible reports that Syria has drawn up a "hit list" of Lebanese political figures targeted for assassination in an effort to regain control of the country.

Comment:What flashes in my mind is reaction of a mindset that doesn't make mistakes. This smacks of picking a fight. A line in the sand - again.

Given the offensive that took heavy losses on the Iraq/Syrian border last month, combined with rumors that any WMD were moved to Syria before the war, how much more of a reason would the administration need?

I'm all in favor of homeland security and fighting terrorism.
With our relations with Iraq, Iran and Korea in militarily sensitive states, what is the President to do if the Syrians tell him to go blow it out his ass?

How is he to follow through?
How "credible" is "credible reports" from the same administration that sold us a war on WMD as an imminent threat?

With a genocide taking place in Africa, which is allegedly an important piece in the President's foreign policy - how could he justify another war that would not benefit Africa or stop the genocide?

Isn't one of the charges against Saddam, that he killed thousands?
Isn't a genocide more serious than the tragic and unecessary deaths of those thousands of Iraqi's?

Not in the President book apparently.

Issue: Me thinkst thou protest too much?TV show depicts 9/11 as Bush plot - The Washington Times: World - June 09, 2005: "TV show depicts 9/11 as Bush plot"

Specific #1:"According to the plot, which was seen by approximately 7 million Germans, the dead man had been trained to be one of the September 11 pilots but was left behind, only to be tracked down and killed by CIA or FBI assassins.
The woman, who says in the program that the September 11 attacks were instigated by the Bush family for oil and power, then is targeted, presumably to silence her"

Specific #2: "Any claim or suggestion that the United States government was behind the 9/11 disaster is absolutely absurd and not worthy of further comment," said Robert A. Wood, spokesman for the embassy.

Observation: This TV show was not presented as reality

Comment:Okaaay. Why is this being reported here in the states? Why is it worthy of a diplomatic exchange? A possible pattern begins to emerge. Republicans wishing to be upset at fictional content. Or are they actually open to discussing different points of view? Recently it was Tom Delay commenting on Law and Order. Before that there was Dan Quayle and Murphy Brown.

What's curious to me about all three events is an apparent rhetorical diversion of sorts. The focus of the episode aka the directors artistic commentary is ignored. The focus of the episode aka the directors artistic commentary is not addressed head-on.

The Republican pattern still remains clear - do not engage.
Pursuit of the development of a shared or centrist governance is not done by Republicans.
Is there not a responsibility of those with power, to manage it for the benefit of all?
Republicans of this generation do not seem to acknowledge this responsibility.

It will be quite a day, when a Republican of this stripe, seeks to build on from ideas presented as fiction. Democrats do it and they are denegrated.

Issue:Deep Throat Speaks

Specific:"While publicly ordering the FBI to investigate, he secretly directed a coverup intended to prevent the agency from confirming the connections between his campaign and the Watergate burglars"

Comment:The he is "President Nixon". He operated a "bait and switch" on the FBI.

This is a tactic of politicians, even honorable ones. It is a tool of in the science of politics and rhetorical debate. Say one thing and mean another.

In terms of the current administration - WMD and Iraq come to mind. CNN had a story were a military official was saying that the Iraqi's "invited" us.

What is President Bush's impression of Mr. Felt?

Given the administrations bent on secrecy and its inability to indentify Valerie Plame's leaker - is it stretch to think that the President will not comment or honor Mr. Felt.

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Issue:Day 141 of Bush's Silence - New York Times

Specific:"Today marks Day 141 of Mr. Bush's silence on the genocide, for he hasn't let the word Darfur slip past his lips publicly since Jan. 10"

Comment:This strikes me as dissonant with the notion of a compassionate conservative. It is wrong.

Issue:CNN.com - DeLay angered by 'Law & Order' mention - May 27, 2005

Specific: "This manipulation of my name and trivialization of the sensitive issue of judicial security represents a reckless disregard for the suffering initiated by recent tragedies and a great disservice to public discourse," DeLay wrote in a letter to NBC President Jeff Zucker.

Comment: It is this kind of short thinking that is the problem for public discourse. There are problems in today's world that require volumes of thought to find a solution. In that volume of thought there needs to be different presentations of the ideas. This provides perspective.

For a good idea, or a good solution to a problem is by definition one that can stand the scrutiny of different perspectives. The source is irrelevant.
John Stewart is popular not because he entertains us by one-liners. He makes relvant points wrapped in humor. His humor as that of the piano playing Mark Russell, highlights the truth of an issue.

Star Trek's first interacial kiss gave Norman Lear cultural cover for Sammy Davis Jr. to kiss Archie Bunker. No one thought either these were a mainpulation of a sensitive issue or the trivialization of something important. These provided a service to public discourse because it initiated discussion of the issues with different perspectives.

Tom Delay is not the problem. For me it is the unknown of how many more neo-Republicans (Republicans not of my father's generation) that do not want to have discusssions with different perspectives involved. How many of these neo-Republicans equate John Bolton type behaviors as appropriate diplomacy to "get things done"? What's the rush for these neo-Republicans - is time running out? There is always time to think things through. Work smarter, not harder - I think the neo-Republicans think the other way.

Issue: GOP Tilting Balance Of Power to the Right

Specific: "House Republicans, for instance, discarded the seniority system and limited the independence and prerogatives of committee chairmen. The result is a chamber effectively run by a handful of GOP leaders. At the White House, Bush has tightened the reins on Cabinet members, centralizing the most important decisions among a tight group of West Wing loyalists. With the strong encouragement of Vice President Cheney, he has also moved to expand the amount of executive branch information that can be legally shielded from Congress, the courts and the public"

Comment: Without being a conspiracy theorist, this continues the notion of the pattern I've been seeing for years. This was not my father's Republican party. My father was not into power for the sake of power. He was not in secretive powers and abilities. Yet it is from the work of my Father's Republican party, that the current Republican party has used to gain power. It is off the power of the Dot.Com boom and bust that the current Republican party has used to gain members to my Father's Republican party. And it this current Republican party that used Bill Clinton to wrench control from my Father's version of a Republican Party and the country.

9/11 only made the current Republicans' job easier. If it had not happened, they would have found something else as a excuse. Their policies have changed governance by elected officials and representatives into an MBA government. We are being lead by a CEO, not a President.

My Father's version of a Republican party wanted a President of the people, akin to Abraham Lincoln, not a CEO, akin to Ken Lay of Enron.

Issue:Political Battle in Schiavo Case Rages On

Specific: "The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior," said the Texan. DeLay was a driving force behind legislation Congress passed two weeks ago that gave federal courts jurisdiction in an attempt to save Schiavo's life.

Comment: It goes back to the notion of power and control. He makes threats of retribution hours after she died. Can it be pointed out that the kind of decision that would have appeased the Republicans and Mr. Delay is exactly the kind of "activism" they have been against!

The judges are supposed to operate on the rules of law. They are to be independent. The key decision was that of custody of Terri Schiavo. It was determined that according to the Law - Micheal Schiavo was her appropriate guardian. This was never contested to my understanding.

The scary part are those advocating extra-legal alternatives. Sean Hannity on Fox was advocating that the President and the Governor had the right and responsibility to use their executive order powers and simply take Terri into custody. This is wrong on so many levels.

There are stories of people being arrested for threatening to kill Micheal Schiavo. What's wrong with this picture of America?

Issue:DeLay Had Own Tough Quality - Of - Life Choice

Specific:The Texas Republican also accused Schiavo's husband and the courts of ``an act of barbarism'' against Schiavo, who doctors say is in a persistent vegetative state.

Comment:Can we say hypocrisy? This simply goes to the pattern of Republicans at all levels seeking power for the sake of power, and not for the service of other or the country as a whole.

IssueGeorge W. to George W. - by Thomas Friedman for the NYTIMES

Comment: Yet again - Bravo to Mr Friedman - for putting into words a perspective that needs attention.

Issue: The Mind-Body Problem and Terri Schiavo

Specific: "Descartes thought that mind and matter are fundamentally different sorts of thing. The mind is a thinking thing, while material objects are extended in space. They have dimension. The physical realm is mechanistic, governed by physical laws, while the mind is subject to different principles, laws of thought, and is moreover - literally- a free spirit, a ghost in the machine." - by Jason Holt from his essay in a collection of essays in "The Matrix and Philosophy"

Comment: Can this notion be philosophically resolved with those of a religious philosophy who want to deny Ms. Schiavo her right to die? I sometimes speculate that this "ghost in the machine" or "free spirit" is not unlike software in a computer. As long as the programmer knows how to write the code or the "spirit" - the soul - it does not die when the machine is shut off.

Much is being made of a philosophy called a "purpose driven faith". This comes from the recent Atlanta courthouse shootings.

If God is the great programmer and the heart and soul of Terri Schiavo is software in a defective machine, is it not up to God to move that software where he wants it? Why is it up to Congress, the Bush family and the religious right to keep this "free spirit" trapped in a defective machine?

Personally, I find a line was crossed when the Federal Congress wrote Terri's private bill. The "rule of law" is part of the "laws of thought". In order for a society to operate it needs a fundamental mechanism to resolve conflict. The American political system's fundamental mechanism to resolve conflict is the judicial system. All party's are to adhere to the primacy of this concept.

The "ends justify the means" is a priniciple that leads to a lack moral discipline. Yet this is the ideology or theology the Bush Administration is using. And they are quite clearly doing so to pander for vote of the religious right. They do not want the "rule of law" vote.

Issue:The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Masters of Sleaze:

Specific:"Abramoff's and Scanlon's Indian-gaming scandal will go down as the movement's crowning achievement, more shameless than anything the others would do, but still the culmination of the trends building since 1995. It perfectly embodied their creed and philosophy: 'I'd love us to get our mitts on that moolah!!' as Abramoff wrote to Reed.
They made at least $66 million.
This is a major accomplishment. And remember: Abramoff didn't do it on his own. "

Comment:Bravo to Mr. Books for making the observation. However, jeers to Mr Brooks and his party for not stopping this crew.

Let's not forget that Tom Delay is involved with this guy in some fashion. It was Tom Delay that pushed the Terri Schiavo private bill.
Note: >The Washington Post,The NY Times and The LA Times all seem to indicate that while the situation tragic and sad, the Terri Schiavo bill is bad for our democracy

This is the compassionate conservatives of the mid-90's. These are the Neo-con's. This is the Republican Party today. This is the kind of bait-and-switch political machinations that brought down the Nixon administration.

It is this kind of political thing that turns the general population off to participation in governance.

The current Republican party is not about governance of the people, by the people - they are simply into political control - nothing else.
They are not interested in the individual. They will deny it when confronted. It is not a radical suggestion anymore.

This is not the Republican Party of my parents.

How far will they go?

Issue:The New York Times > National > In Schiavo Feeding-Tube Case, Notoriety Finds Unlikely Judge:

Specific:"People who know him say he considers himself a 'compassionate conservative,' a man whose religious faith is as dear to him as his reputation as a legal scholar."

Comment:This is a example for judges and justice. While I suspect he is Republican. The mindset that controls the Republican Party thinks this judge is wrong. As illustration - later in the article the the statement: "Now Mr. Bush and the Legislature are rushing to agree on a bill that would outlaw the withholding of food and water from certain people in a persistent vegetative state, including Mrs. Schiavo"

This is a abuse of power by the Republican party. But given the treatment of Tom Delay, my complaint is easily dismissed. As in the movie Gladiator, the characters talk of a "vision of Rome". Well, the "vision of America" is not what it used to be.

DeLay Ethics Allegations Now Cause of GOP Concern (washingtonpost.com): "DeLay Ethics Allegations Now Cause of GOP Concern"

Issue:Bush Defends Packaged News Stories from Government :

Specific:"'There is a Justice Department opinion that says these -- these pieces -- are within the law, so long as they're based upon facts, not advocacy,' the president told a news conference"

Comment:And we feel better because....what was that again? While I've been known to mis-speak a few times in my life, I don't personally hold that against George Bush the man. As President, I try to see past to words to the vision thing. I chalk it up to him being colorful. While I don't like it, it doesn't cross a line.

This position crosses some kind of line. The man is not a lawyer or even a particularly logical man, yet he cannot see that the line is blurred! From that comment above - is the President saying that all "advocacy" is fictional or without facts?

Was it Senator Robert Bryd that commented this blurring between fact and advocacy was prevalent in the Third Riech? What is propaganda Mr President? Or do you see this question much like the questions about your "mistakes"?

Issue:The New York Times > Washington > Under Bush, a New Age of Prepackaged TV News:

Specific:"In all, at least 20 federal agencies, including the Defense Department and the Census Bureau, have made and distributed hundreds of television news segments in the past four years, records and interviews show. Many were subsequently broadcast on local stations across the country without any acknowledgement of the government's role in their production."

Comment:At least I'm not alone in thinking there is a "government truth" and reality that are not necessarily the same thing. What is the neo-con bent on this subject? What is the vanilla flavor conservative bent on this?

Issue:Yahoo! News - Scalia Slams Juvenile Death Penalty Ruling:

Specific:"If you think aficionados of a living Constitution want to bring you flexibility, think again,' Scalia told an audience at the Woodrow Wilson Center, a Washington think tank. 'You think the death penalty is a good idea? Persuade your fellow citizens to adopt it. You want a right to abortion? Persuade your fellow citizens and enact it. That's flexibility.'
'Why in the world would you have it interpreted by nine lawyers?' he said. "

Comment:Justice Scalia is not a football fan or a fan of any sport that requires an "official". I mention football because of the NFL's instant replay. The analogy is that one team on the field is the Executive Branch and the other is the Legislative branch. The Judical Branch are the officials in this analogy. The fans are the people. Even in the NFL it is not the officials that decide the rules of the game.

Judges like the officials are to interpret a game situation, a play on the field. If 2 plays go to "instant replay" - it is incumbent on the officials to call the second play using the same interpretations as they used for the first. It is incumbent on the officials to call the play the same way in the next game. It is incumbet on the officials to use the same interpretations for a given play for the season. At the end of the season, those interpretations are factored in making new rules for the next season. Some are kept, to improve the game. Other do not.
This is the nature of the beast - yet Justice Scalia does not see this.

The strict constructionists do not see this concept. I don't agree with Justice Scalia

Issue:DOD dismisses claims on Saddam capture:

Specific:"Pentagon officials dismissed as ridiculous and untrue a report that the capture of Saddam Hussein in Iraq was staged."

Comment:I would have thought that the claim was less than valid if the DOD had said nothing. That they saw fit to comment - even though it is a denial - makes one wonder if there is a truth in the story.

That's the problem with a government controlled truth.

Before I forget again and without a specific cause. I think I want to believe that the value of a country is something that can be assessed and determined. And perhaps I can agree with President Bush on "Good" vs "Bad" countries.

There is a saying about the quality of a society can be judged by the care given to the most vulnerable in its mist.
Should another measure be the average length of periods of peace?
War is necessary at times.

There is more but let me think about it.


Issue:The New York Times > Opinion > Editorial: They're Back, and Still Unworthy:

Specific:"Thomas Griffith, who has been nominated to the powerful Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, has the unfortunate distinction of having practiced law in two jurisdictions without the required licenses. "

Comment:These appointees are immaterial to the real objective of the Republican's. The real target is the "filibuster". Republican figure this is payback time.

ISSUE:13WHAM-TV ROCHESTER || NEWS:

SPECIFIC:"we found him in a modest home in a small village and not in a hole as announced,' Abou Rabeh said. "

Comment:This continues the notion that the Bush administration is not so straight. They continue to hide and distort realities in order to control the news and make their version of the truth take hold.

Issue:Syria Remarks Were a Joke, Legislator Says (washingtonpost.com):


Specific:"According to Roll Call, Johnson said he told the president: 'Syria is the problem. Syria is where those weapons of mass destruction are, in my view. You know, I can fly an F-15, put two nukes on 'em and I'll make one pass. We won't have to worry about Syria anymore.' "

Comment: Is there something in the Texas water? Perhaps I'm simply dropping an "s" - maybe it's spelled Tex-ass

Issue:Yahoo! News - Federal Judge Orders 'Enemy Combatant' Jose Padilla Charged Or Released:

Specific:"'For the court to find for [the U.S. government] would also be to engage in judicial activism. "


Comment:Hooray for Logic and Reason. The rule of law relies on Logic and Reason. The Bush Administration has relied on it own definitions of the rule of law, and then ignores the affect on society, mainly because it is beneath them.

If the neo-cons want strict judicial constructionism, then it must also apply equally.

Issue:TIME.com: Vladimir Putin, CBS News Loyalist -- Mar. 07, 2005:

Specific: " If the press was so free in the U.S., Putin asked, then why had those reporters at CBS lost their jobs? Bush was openmouthed. 'Putin thought we'd fired Dan Rather,' says a senior Administration official. 'It was like something out of 1984.' "

Comment:Shall I point out that Jeb's "Big Brother" is the President? But this response from the White House is consistent with the disconnected nature of the administration with the effects of their policies. The are good at manipulating the image to fit their reality.

Issue:CNN.com - Bush:�Attack on�Iran 'ridiculous' - Feb 22, 2005


Specific: "'This notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous. Having said that, all options are on the table,' Bush said."


Comment: The President use of bravado and "Cowboy Diplomacy" and the lack of WMD makes his credibility very much in question.

Issue:The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Calling All Democrats

Comment: Still a man of logic and reason.

Issue:CNN.com - White House reporter's credentials questioned - Feb 9, 2005:

Specific: "James Guckert reported from the White House under the name 'Jeff Gannon.'"

Comment: This is now 2 instances of the white house using techniques to bias the news. Armstong William was the first and now this. How many more are yet to be on covered? How many in the White House Press are really who they say they are? Whose advantage is it, that anyone in the White House Press Corp is not who they say they are?

Issue:The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Inherit the Windbags

Comment: I like her turn of phrase.

Issue: Herald.com | 02/02/2005 | Check on U.S. power:

Specific: "FEDERAL COURT DEFINES LIMITS OF PRESIDENT'S AUTHORITY"

Comment: Bravo!

Issue: NPR : Amid Relative Quiet, Sharon and Abbas Plan Summit:

Specific: "Abbas has deployed thousands of police officers to prevent attacks against Israeli targets in Gaza. Israel has responded by halting offensive operations. "

Comment: If peace between the Palestinians and Israel should develop in the next four years it is not due to Bush policies. It would not be anymore the result of Bush policies than the fall of the USSR was not the result of Reagan policies. As the rise of Gorbachev to power was key in the USSR situation, the death of Arafat is key between Israel and the Palestinians.

It should also be noted that peace between the Palestinians and Israel may not necessarily be peace in the middle east. What if Iraq and Iran go after each other again... There are many other combinations to be concerned about.

Issue:The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Read My Ears:

Specific: "... the only thing that Mr. Bush could do to change people's minds about him would be to travel across Europe and not say a single word - but just listen. If he did that, Mr. Bush would bowl the Europeans over. He would absolutely disarm and flummox people here - and improve his own image markedly. All it would take for him would be just a few words: 'Read my ears. I have come to Europe to listen, not to speak. I will give my Europe speech when I come home - after I've heard what you have to say.'"


Comment:
Logic and Reason - the words of Mr. Friedman sooth the soul by demonstrating Logic and Reason - two qualities that President Bush's passions (or fanaticism) destroy.

It is possible to integrate emotions with logic and reason. Mr. Friedman's suggestion is one of emotional intelligence. Mr. Bush's alcoholic past means that he cannot complete this integration.

Not because of a physical inability - simply because he was unable to control his drinking, means that he has difficulty integrating his feeling with reason. This is not partisan rhetoric. But it is reasoned.

The President cannot go to Europe and bite his tongue anymore than Terrell Owens can play all season and then sit out the Superbowl. It simply goes against their natures.

He won't do it - "He" being either one of them.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Issue:CNN.com - Bush denounces paying commentators - Jan 26, 2005:

Specific:"Bush said, 'We didn't know about this in the White House.'"

Comment: And we believe this because......why?

Issue:DRUDGE REPORT FLASH 2005�:

Specific:"A FOXNEWS spokesperson responded: 'Ted is understandably bitter having lost his ratings, his network and now his mind -- we wish him well.'

In 1996, Turner apologized to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) for comments he made comparing FOX head Rupert Murdoch to Hitler. "


Comment: Matt Drudge does not acknowledge the President's payments to a pundit to push "no child left behind".

Is that transaction not the definition of propaganda?

Is not propaganda the tool Hitler used to get into office and maintain power?

Is Matt Drudge a part of the propaganda ministry for missing to note the transaction? The President commented on it today - why not Drudge?

Issue:The Salvador option:

Specific: "Faced with our inability to come to grips with a popular-based resistance that has grown exponentially over the past year, the best the American policy planners can come up with is to embrace our own form of terrorism, supporting death squads we cannot control and which will only further debase the moral foundation of our nation while slaughtering even more Iraqis.

As an American, I hope and pray that common sense and basic morality prevail in Washington DC, terminating the Salvador Option before it gets off the ground. "


Comment: Is the Bush Administration advocating Death Squads? Why is this not in Main stream Media? Did they work in El Salvador? Why is Scott Ritter writing for Aljazeera.net?

Issue:OpinionJournal - Peggy Noonan on President Bush's speech:

Sepcific: "'We are led, by events and common sense, to one conclusion: The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands.' 'Across the generations we have proclaimed the imperative of self government. . . . Now it is the urgent requirement of our nation's security, and the calling of our time.' 'It is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in the world.'
Ending tyranny in the world? Well that's an ambition, and if you're going to have an ambition it might as well be a big one. But this declaration, which is not wrong by any means, seemed to me to land somewhere between dreamy and disturbing. Tyranny is a very bad thing and quite wicked, but one doesn't expect we're going to eradicate it any time soon. Again, this is not heaven, it's earth."

Comment: A conservative is concerned about the President's comments. I've bolded a part that particularly troubles me. Logic tells me that American system and Liberty is based on the ability to vote and speak. So as long as there is a group that governs itself by allowing all to vote and speak, then liberty will survive. It is not dependent on external forces. Liberty is dependent on the "will of the people" - only.

This President just doesn't get it. He has great intentions, but he has missed the lesson that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

A concern is that his arrogance is going to draw non-terrorist fire. Because I am lost as to why this President's attitude about "freedom's march" is different that the spread of communism? We fought the cold war because a country with a different idea of governance was forcing that idea of other countries. Vietnam was fought to stop the domino effect.

I'm sorry if I'm missing something. I want to understand.

Issue:The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Ballots and Boycotts:

Specific: "That civil war was started by the Sunni Baathists, and their Islamist fascist allies from around the region, the minute the U.S. toppled Saddam. And they started that war not because they felt the Iraqi elections were going to be rigged, but because they knew they weren't going to be rigged."

Comment: Tom Friedman speaks with logic and reason. Can the President?

Issue:President outlines role of his faith - The Washington Times: Nation/Politics - January 12, 2005:

Specific: " 'I think people attack me because they are fearful that I will then say that you're not equally as patriotic if you're not a religious person,' Mr. Bush said. 'I've never said that. I've never acted like that. I think that's just the way it is. "

Comment: BINGO!!! The more truly dishonest part is that he is unaware that while he may not say it, his media members DO! And this says nothing of rank and file of the party.

This administration has paid columnists to push agenda items, whether it is education policy or applying pressure to people who are related to spies (I'm referring to the Novak/Plame affair).

It is the swift boat ads. It is the connection between 9-11/Iraq and WMD. It's that he never made a mistake.

What is troubling is the notion of reality for this President. While I might grant that the President is a decent human being and means well. I believe he is genuine in his feelings. But he clearly does not have a concept for "emotional intelligence"

The President is making a statement about how he thinks about the relationship between the office and the people. He does not believe his power comes from the people.

The President is stating that he is unaware of the less scrupulous or less genuine are using his personal religious position of faith as cover for political and governmental power.

- That was my being kind version.
- My not so kind version:

The not so kind take is that he is a holy warrior on a crusade...
The concern is not that he will not leave after 4 years.
Prediction: Before next Presidential election season cranks up - A serious challenge to the Presidential term limit will be initiated in Congress. It is a logical next step in a pattern of a pursuit for power and control over and above a less than genuine faith.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Issue:USATODAY.com - Education Dept. paid commentator to promote law:

Specific: " the Bush administration paid a prominent black pundit $240,000 to promote the law on his nationally syndicated television show and to urge other black journalists to do the same."

My Comment: This is wrong. It is consistent with FOX news arm of the administration.

Issue:The New York Times > Business > Media & Advertising > CNN Will Cancel 'Crossfire' and Cut Ties to Commentator:
Specific: "CNN is a different animal,' Mr. Klein said. 'We report the news. Fox talks about the news. They're very good at what they do and we're very good at what we do.'"

Comment: Bravo and congratulations to Mr. Klein and CNN for noting that journalism is not only opinion!

On NPR it was reported that the Capital Gang was also get the axe. The other commentator that deserves to have cut ties is to Robert Novak. Remember, he had a significant role in the Valerie Plame/CIA operative incident.

Well, without Crossfire and without the Capitol Gang - Robert Novak may find it a good time to retire.

Issue: CNN.com - GOP finds way out of�ethics�spat - Jan 4, 2005:

Specific:"the House adopted a separate change that will make it harder to pursue ethics probes of members of Congress."

Comment: Did I not call this earlier?

Issue:The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: A Tale of 2 Systems:

Specific: "The question is: Will we leave our children a system as flexible, dynamic and productive as the one that was, fortunately, left to us? Or, by doing nothing, will we succumb to the same ineluctable pressures that now afflict Europe, and find that we are immobilized at the exact moment China and India are passing us by? "

Comment:I read this piece and saw that it was informed and presents some decent logic and reason - enough to make me thinking.

Then the tag line - the final summarization - "the exact moment China and India are passing us by" - I'm now confused - passing us by in what? Their cultures have always had more respect for their elders and seniors than do American. And those models operate under communist systems and a social cast system.

Am I to understand that Mr Brooks is advocating that our national economic output is more important than the standards of living for the people? Is he advocating Communism for taking care of retirees?

The lack of a mention of China and India in this preceeding logic, leads to the notion that economic output is the thing, Mr Brooks feels that US is lacking.

So can it be said that reaching the global finish line first in terms of economic output is more important than support our retirees? It is better to be ahead of China and India than to have a lower economic output and also taking care of folks who need to be caring.

So then why donate to Tsunami Relief?

Issue: ABC News: Poll: Outlook for 2005 Is Less Bright

Specific: "Optimism for the Year Ahead
Personal Optimism Global Optimism
Dec. 2004 66%54%
Dec. 2003 85 69
Dec. 2002 63 43
Dec. 2001 80 62"

Comment: Note the drop from 85 to 65 percent. Does this indicate a failure in the sampling methodology to take into account the "Red States"? Are they only polling Dems or people in the "Blue" states.

Issue of the Day:ABC News: House GOP Giving Ground on Ethics Rules

Specific: "House Majority Leader Tom DeLay ponders a question during a press conference in Houston in this Oct. 22, 2004 file photo. House Republicans suddenly reversed course Monday, Jan. 3, 2005 deciding to retain a tough standard for lawmaker discipline and reinstating a rule that would force Majority Leader Tom DeLay to step aside if indicted by a Texas grand jury. (AP Photo/Pat Sullivan)"

Comment: What do you believe? Does this mean that the Republicans had an "oops"? Does this mean the party mentality has changed? Is this a shift away from a power only focus?

I suspect that it means that Delay has found another way to dodge the bullet and does not believe he will be indicted. Tom Delay does not feel that he did anything wrong - afterall this is standard for Washington Hardball politics - so he is entitled.

Republican do not seek out good ideas and good governance, they have to "react" after the case. The President's leadership on the Tsunami relief is supports this notion.

The New York Times > Opinion > Editorial: Are We Stingy? Yes: "resident Bush finally roused himself yesterday from his vacation in Crawford, Tex., to telephone his sympathy to the leaders of India, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Indonesia, and to speak publicly about the devastation of Sunday's tsunamis in Asia"

It occurred to me that this delay is a parallel to the Presidents 7 minutes in front on children on 9/11/01.

CNN.com - Bush monitors earthquake damage - Dec 27, 2004: "Bush also spent time clearing brush at his ranch and thinking about what he'll say in his inaugural speech and upcoming State of the Union address"


I'm not certain off the appropriateness of the following comparison. I apologize for not finding the reason sooner, if in the future I'm convinced that this comparison is wrong.

The article reported that 22,000 lives were lost. 3,000 American died and the President went to war. This President is alleged to be a compassionate conservative. Apparently, to this President, the price of an American is higher than 3 lives from ay other part of the world.

The lack of a reaction by the President supports the notion that political power means more to the Republicans than governance or humanity.

This is a harsh thing to say. Perhaps even unfair. Fairness is not a part of the Republican ideology.

In a slight change of thought - on Bill Moyer's last "NOW", a Republican advocate indicated that "journalism is opinion". That explains the FOX news organization. But what about cut and try facts. I can understand the logic that indicate perception is always part of reporting any fact. But what kind of opinion is involved with reporting a score or the results of an election?

Based on that show, then it can be said that Republicans do not believe in dry facts can be of value to Americans. So that if the Eagles win a football, it is a matter of opinion, not of fact. So if there are no WMD's it is a matter of opinion not fact.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

KR Washington Bureau | 12/20/2004 | Harsh interrogations in Iraq went beyond FBI standards, memo says: "We have also instructed our personnel not to participate in interrogations by military personnel which might include techniques authorized by executive order but beyond the bounds of FBI practices,"

Remember journalism is opinion

So when the following is indicated:

"White House officials also said the memo's reference to an executive order from the president was a mistake.

"No such executive order exists or has ever existed," said Frederick Jones, a spokesman for the National Security Council.

Then can I say I can feel comfortable that the White House is not expressing fact - but simply their opinion?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOW with Bill Moyers. Transcript. December 17, 2004 | PBS: "HANNITY [10/29/04]: Why would Osama bin Laden, who's been quiet for so long, come out and virtually try and influence the election today in favor of John Kerry by attacking the president the way he did?
MOYERS: Do you think what Sean Hannity said is fair?
VIGUERIE: Oh, absolutely.
MOYERS: But there's no fact to back that up. There's no effort to substantiate that with documentation.
VIGUERIE: That's what journalism is. It's just all opinion. Just opinion. "

My take on this:

Journalism is Opinion.
That's what he said
Journalism is Opinion.

So according to the Republicans we do not need facts.
We don't need documentation according to Republicans
We don't need accountability according to the Republicans, because any information that is reported is just opinion, not fact. And since the Republicans are in control their opinion is all that matters.

Sounds an awful lot like the Soviet Union information machine during the Cold War.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------
TIME.com: Will Iran Win Iraq's Election?: "Will Iran Win Iraq's Election?
Probably not, but Tehran may do better than Washington when Iraqis vote "

My guess is that Sistani or the Shiite majority that sides with a more theocratic form of governance will win. The Iraqi silent majority that is afraid to publicly support the radical insurgents will find it reasonable to vote against the perception of an occupation force.

Isn't this the worst case scenario that was a concern during the pre-war?
-------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------
The pattern of discontent in US ranks | csmonitor.com: "Evidence includes numbers of deserters (reportedly in the thousands), resignations of reserve officers, lawsuits by those whose duty period has been involuntarily extended, and a refusal to go on dangerous missions without proper equipment. There's also been a willingness at grunt level to publicly challenge the Pentagon - as Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld found out recently in a trip to the war zone, where he got an earful about unarmored humvees"

The above item is just another indication of folks not wanting to work with President Bush.

-------------------------------------------------------------

The New York Times > International > Europe > Britain's Highest Court Overturns Anti-Terrorism Law: "Britain's highest court ruled today that the British government cannot indefinitely detain foreigners suspected of terrorism without charging or trying them, and called the process a violation of European human rights laws."

If it is a violation of European human rights then how can President Bush be so right?

FT: Greenspan spurns Treasury Secretary feeler - Dec. 16, 2004: "WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan was asked by senior Republicans if he was interested in becoming Treasury Secretary, but rejected the suggestion, a British newspaper reported Thursday.
The Financial Times said on its Web site, citing people familiar with the talks, that the informal approach reflected concern that current Treasury Secretary John Snow was not the most effective leader to sell President Bush's ambitious second-term economic agenda. "

Poor George - no one wants to work with him.

The New York Times > Washington > Defense Missile for U.S. System Fails to Launch: "An important test of the United States' fledgling missile defense system ended in failure early Wednesday as an interceptor rocket failed to launch on cue from the Marshall Islands, the Pentagon said."

I was going to add this to the dumping on Republicans.

But I want to be fair and balanced - so I checked the Republican news organizations for this same story. This story is not being reported on those sites. I accept that there might be a tilt of the NYtimes to the left. But until now, I assumed that there was more or a commonality to the stories being covered. I assumed that it was a matter of emphasis, and presentation of content that took on Republican/Democratic or right/left angles.

This is something I can follow - track the stories that are in common and those that are not.

wnbc.com - News - Newark Airport Screeners Spot -- Then Lose -- Fake Bomb: "Despite an hours-long search Tuesday night, the bag, containing a fake bomb complete with wires, a detonator and a clock, made it onto an Amsterdam-bound flight."

This is not the rule, but there have been enough of these kinds of stories to make this ordinary. Combine this with Bernie Kerik and Homeland Security - and you feel safe because....why?

Oh that's right because President Bush said so. And we know he has not been wrong - he's a leader - leaders can never be wrong or questioned.

"I feel much better now" - John Astin from the TV show Night Court.

New York Post Online Edition: commentary: "One thing is clear: This man had serious issues with impulse control.
The Kerik-Regan pairing may look unlikely � she's Vassar-bred, he's a high-school dropout. But two friends used almost identical terms to describe the duo. 'They are male and female versions of the same people,' they said of the 'power-addicted' couple. "

Republican's - Strong - but without impulse control - this image was a good man according to the President!

GOP Pushes Rule Change to Protect DeLay's Post (washingtonpost.com): "House Republicans adopted the indictment rule in 1993, when they were trying to end four decades of Democratic control of the House, in part by highlighting Democrats' ethical lapses. They said at the time that they held themselves to higher standards than prominent Democrats such as then-Ways and Means Chairman Dan Rostenkowski (Ill.), who eventually pleaded guilty to mail fraud and was sentenced to prison. "

I've been reminded of the double standard or hypocritical natures of Republicans. While I noted the rule change for Tom Delay when it happened, I failed to mention Mr. Rostenkowski.

Republicans don't get it - keeping wrong elements out of the system is more important than control of the system. Republicans seem to think that if they can control it, then they can protect it.

What's wrong with this picture?

Philadelphia Daily News | 12/14/2004 | Vallas, cops apologize for girl's arrest: "State Rep. John Taylor, however, said 'discretion has proven to be flawed in the past... I'd rather see them have a strict adherence to the law. It's not left up to anyone's discretion,' said the Philadelphia Republican."

The Republican party strikes again. This story combined with another recent story about the F16 pilot that accidentally shot a school further supports the perspective that Republicans have issues that they have not acknowledged. So it is ok to shoot up a school with a fifty caliber vulcan canon, but it is not ok to get caught with scissors in that school?

The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Judges as Plumbers: "Liberals may now be fearful of opposing mindless media hatred, but why are principled conservatives not aroused by imperial judges? The founders ensured freedom of the Fourth Estate as a check against the powers of all three branches of central government. Most states are doing their part. Pass that federal shield law before a judiciary on steroids throws Strike 3. "


Mr. Safire don't get it - Mr. Bush and the neocon's are not about governance. They are about power. It is about complete and total control by a few - and I'm not talking about political power. I'm talking about imperial kinds of power.

The New York Times > Washington > Hearts and Minds: Pentagon Weighs Use of Deception in a Broad Arena

If the pentagon is not going to be truthful, and there are no WMD, what good is the first amendment? Why is this not a violation of that paradigm? What is reality? Is it reserved for only the faithful and patriotic?

This is a concern and should not be dismissed.

USATODAY.com: "This rapid decentralization is creating �a tribe of people who not only don't work in cities, they don't commute to cities or go to the movies in cities or have any contact with urban life,� writes New York Times columnist David Brooks. The exurbs they inhabit, he says, �have broken free of the gravitational pull of the cities and now exist in their own world far beyond.�
Here's what we ought to be asking: Is this world sustainable? Is it even what we want? And what is the alternative?"

Welcome to Newtown, Pa.

The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Contributor: Talking Our Way to Peace: "It is encouraging to witness the quick response from the White House, particularly when President Bush stood with Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain shortly after his re-election and said that he wanted to establish an independent Palestinian state living in peace and security next to Israel. 'I intend to use the next four years to spend the capital of the United States on such a state,' he said.
While the United States cannot dictate the terms of peace to either party, it can and should actively promote the resumption of negotiations. The time to start is now.
- James A. Baker III was secretary of state from 1989 to 1992."


If the policy of pursuit of power for the sake of power exists in the White House, the anticipated action is inaction. To negotiate means to offer something that is perceived to be an advantage for the other side. This is weakness. Weakness is not power.

There is also the prediction that it is too daunting a problem and therefore success cannot be gauranteed. Without that assurance, nothing will be done.

IOL: Science & Tech: "Blog will be a new entry in the 2005 version of the Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, Eleventh Edition. The complete list of words of the year is available at www.merriam-webster.com - Reuters"

The transition from the old world to the new world continues. The marriage of technology and society and specifically politics continues to deepen in intimacy.

Good Stuff!

CNN.com - Pentagon debate rages over 'information operations' in Iraq - Dec 2, 2004

Further evidence that the Republican party and specifically the Bush administration is not a straight forward as they indicate.

The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: The 9/11 Bubble: "It is now clear to me that we have followed the dot-com bubble with the 9/11 bubble. Both bubbles made us stupid. The first was financed by reckless investors, and the second by a reckless administration and Congress. In the first case, the public was misled by Wall Street stock analysts, who told them the old rules didn't apply - that elephants can fly. In the second case, the public was misled by White House economists, peddling similar nonsense. The first ended in tears, and so will the second. Because, as the dot-com bubble proved, elephants can fly - 'provided it is not very long.' "


I like Tom Friedman - he uses logic and reason.

The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: The 9/11 Bubble: "'The 9/11 crisis has been used as a license to spend and cut taxes rather than to set priorities and focus our resources on what is critically important to our nation's security,' said Robert Hormats, vice chairman of Goldman Sachs International."

Let's remember that it is the Republican party that is in total control. This comment supports the notion that the Republican Neo-cons are into gaining power rather than benefit of the nation as a whole.

MSNBC - Four More Years to Finally Get It Right: "After the 2000 debacle, one might have expected that our leaders would move mountains to make the next election an exemplary one. The fact that we cannot convince the doubters proves otherwise. Don't call them paranoid, but recognize their passion for fairly run, accurately tabulated elections. If only their zeal were more contagious. "

This conclusion is something that is what should be in center of a patriotic heart.

Alas it is not.

CNN.com - GOP lawmaker: Tax-return measure aimed at IRS oversight - Nov 22, 2004

In this day and age - can this lead to any substantive benefit?

The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: The 28th Amendment

No one man, No single individual should be the focus of a change to the constitution - a document for all "the people". Let me be even more specific - It cannot/shoud not be for a future presidency.

In this day and age when images are so vulnerable to manipulation it is dangerous.

In a day and age when governance is second to the pursuit of power, it is dangerous.

In this day and age when a single party apparatus controls all branches of government, it is dangerous.

The constitution is to me thought of in long time periods. To change the constitution for one man, to enable him to run for this center of this power, is like what Mike Ditka did to the New Orlean Saints to draft Ricky Williams.

It is short sighted to AmendForArnold.

Can any one man be worth this risk?

Do we really want to change the constitution because we haven't done it in a while?

The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Contributor: The Power of One

Here is a piece by a man how has served both side of the aisle. He is concerned "omnious signs of 'group think'"

I read somewhere that the rule that the Republicans rolled back for Tom Delay recently, was actually put into place by Republicans to take out Democrat Dan Rostinkowski (if I'm spelling it right).

This is the kind of "fair and balanced" approach to governance that makes me concerned. It is this kind of momentum that is the biggest concerns.

The New York Times > Washington > House Republicans Adopt Change That Would Benefit DeLay

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. How far will the Red Party go to unify power, for the sake of power? How aggressive will they get in their tactics? We have 4 years to find out.

ABC News: Silicon Insider: The Myth of the Mistake-Free War

As a software developer of many years, it is a responsibility further this discussion. Just as Jon Stewart got into the faces of the Crossfire gang for their damage to public discourse, this piece should serve the same purpose. Mr. Malone make some eloquent points. We are all human. And we all make mistakes. I too see this digitalization of public discourse. I think it is something we will be better for in the long run. I think we are in a period of adjustment in the context of public discourse.

The measures of "current knowledge" have changed. Water-cooler conversations are being tempered until they can check CNN.COM or NYTIMES.COM. Even then one can still get caught. But people are learning to adjust the communication timing.

This means that it is an opportunity to excercise fundamental elements of political philosophy. Perhaps the speed of things is helping ordinary folks, discern or percieve elements of how society operates. The notion of propaganda in the 1930's is something that took months for a single message to get out and around. If you asked folks in the 1930's if they could identify pieces of propaganda, they may not even know the meaning of the word. Today more and more folks know about The Drudge Report and FOX news.

They are just now learning how to delineate between that form of information and the FACTCHECK.ORG, SMOKINGGUN.COM or other similar sources. It is a good thing, but it is a transition and it will take time. It also cannot be stopped.

Change is a constant - perhaps because to Err is Human.

PBS - American Experience: A Woodrow Wilson

Wasn't it the current President's Father who indicated a "New World Order"? This PBS program on President Woodrow Wilson highlights the committment a President once had to building a "New World Order". The objective was to build an institution from scratch with the purpose of building a permenant Peace.

Imagine that, building something to help mankind from killing itself. Remember that when judging President Bush as a Candidate.

CNN.com - Man fired for heckling Bush - Aug 21, 2004

Not long ago Tucker Carlson on new PBS show, was curious as to why "Bush haters" were show intense. Well, it is news like this story that inflames the notion that Republicans are more into control and wins than the real business of the people or the business of real people.

I will have more on this later...

A simple story

I couldn’t help but laugh. It was a memorable sight to be sure. It took guts. I didn’t think she had it in her emotionally. I was wrong. Am I a proud parent?

This story properly starts at work. I’m a corporate borg. I’m titled as “Software Engineer” for a large national bank in there sub-accounting group of the mutual fund back office service area. Very dry work. Very slow in terms of pace. I’m writing this at work because I have the time. Our work area is a group of half walled cubicles. A very open area. This leads to a great deal of idle conversations to pass the time.

One can get an impression or see a persona of people. They are not real or complete. But unavoidable. Typically, the talk is of oddities in the news or personal lives. There have been online stories of exploding whales, beer guzzling bears that generates talk in the pit. It is a constant drone for the most part.

There is this one red-headed fellow with yellow lensed glasses and a moustache and short hair. Pleasant enough to converse with during the day. He lives alone in a rural suburb. He describes it as true farmland. He found an ad in a local paper for a job. “Corn pollinator”. Did I mention that he is young widower. In fact most of the guys are single or available. Being that we are a group of men, in a period of history when the Republicans and George Bush Junior is in office and there are shows like the “Man Show” and “Spike TV”, humor tends to devolve into things nasty or sexual or some combination. So, the jokes revolve around this ad take a sexual tilt.

This guy is into hot sauce and spice like I’ve never seen. He keeps Tabasco sauce in his desk in the office for most of his meals. Boasts of how hot is hot are not unusual. Occasionally, he brings in different batches of chili for testing. Apparently there is a cadre in the company that share this taste for soft-tissue oral pain. Anyway, he goes out of his way to get the “good stuff”.

So when he brings in vegetable there is always some good nature humor about various combinations vegetable, sex and what really happens “down on the farm”. One day he brings in some tomatoes. One tomato in particular stood out. It was red, round and had a texture not unlike a tomato. It allegedly came from a plant that had other tomatoes. This one had 2 protrusions. Pointed protrusions from the top, that were 180 degrees from each other. Yes, it looks like a devil.

We all were amazed, until a couple of days later, he brought in some peppers. Small ones. Red Small ones. Red Small ones of a Chinese name that he couldn’t pronounce. It appeared that the shape of the tomato protrusions paralleled the peppers exactly. So we speculated that perhaps the somehow there was some kind of cross pollination going on in the tomato.

So I took a bag of the pepper as an experiment. I wanted to see something. If the tomato could pick up something from the nearby peppers, perhaps the bite the peppers might be lessened. My brother-in-law is into the hot stuff also, so I thought if they were too much for me, I’d give them to him.

On the way home I got an evil thought. A cruel one to be sure. One that I don’t think I would have really followed through on. One that I didn’t think anyone take the bait. Being a bit mischievous, I called home and my 13 year old picked up the phone. Her mother was at the movies with some friends, and so she was left to make dinner for herself. Without telling her exactly what it was, I tried to convince to wait on the Mac-n-cheese because I wanted her to have some vegetables.

No luck. She didn’t want to wait. When I got home with the baggy of peppers, I found a half empty pot of mac-n-cheese on the stove. I put the peppers on the island to check the mail on the kitchen table.. In walks my girl. And as I’m looking through the mail, and half thinking of ways to raise the subject. She spots the bag of peppers. As I turn and look, she is picking one out of the bag and smelling it. She takes a bite.

I half expected her to transform into a cartoon character, complete with smoke coming out of the ears. Her eyes dialated and her face turned red. She couldn’t get it out of her mouth fast enough. We laughed. If she were a baby or toddler, I would comfort her, but at thirteen when she knows enough not put things in her mouth, I laugh with her while looking for the milk, or something cold to help put out the flames. This went on for about 10 minutes or so.

I then tried the stunt on the older daughter. She is leaving for college this week. So I thought she might see it as a challenge. I and the little one, tried for about another ten minutes to convince her, but to no avail. So I went back downstairs to finish the other half of the mac-n-cheese. It looked good. The little one followed.

I still don’t completely understand, but the little one, again on her own, proceeded to take a second pepper, cut it open and eat one of the seeds alone.

Now go back to the first line of the story.

Congressman James Greenwood - Press Release

A couple of more things have come to mind recently about this election season.

Since the the speculation of his departure from Congress have come to mind. What if I was wrong about his motivations and timing? What if this really could not be interpreted to be a commentary on his part? Then I read his statement

In the fourth paragraph
"But in my work in health care and particularly with regard to the issues of stem cell research and somatic cell nuclear transfer, I have come to comprehend the enormity of the transformation in human health that is possible with the advancement of cellular therapy"

This is counter to the Bush administration position.

That's one thing.
----------------------

The next thing is the notion of what kind of response at the initial onset of a crisis should a President have? It is fair to measure a candidate's character and integrity as well as their background. We assume that this kind of information will tell us something about how a candidate might respond. In an age of the ICBM and the suit case bomber, is not relevant to ask of candidates how they might respond?

As a voter, if you are going to judge a candidate "strong on defense", is the strength of character to start a nuclear war? Is it not a strength of a defense to know about the sucker punch? Is not rapid-response part of the Rumsfeld style Defense Department? Well, how can the Armed forces respond if a President is unwilling to pull the trigger? President Bush sat for 7 seven minutes before reacting. He gave the Terrorist additional 7 minute head start.

I keep flashing on "Back to the Future" and how the weaker, but smarter, character always won. Are we positioned, as the only super power, to be vunerable to sucker punches? Are we one day going to overswing and miss landing a punch? Al Qaeda is not going to sit still for us to drop a nuke on them.

Clearly the Bush administration that is against "reading newspapers" and stem cell research, is not solititous of new ideas. That the initiative to Mars was only political smoke is further proof that while the Bush Administration is capable of winning a war involving tanks and territory, it will not win a war of ideas.

The war against Terrorism can only be won by starving them of our vulnerabilities without starving ourselves of what makes us American. That takes time, thoughtfull insight and ideas.

CNN.com - Sources: Greenwood to leave House - Jul 19, 2004

I want to thank Congressman Jim Greenwood for restoring in me a bit of hope and help restoring my faith in my parents and specifically my mother. My parents are passionate, reasonable and educated. In the 1980’s they helped a guy they felt was nice and well suited for the state Senate. My mother was his campaign manager for that early effort of Mr. Greenwood.

I even got to meet him and talk briefly with him about the possibilities of computers and politics. When Mr. Greenwood ran for Congress in the 1990’s, I myself voted for him. He impressed me. He gave me hope about a vision of a possible future I was seeing, because he listened carefully, and intently. I got the impression he genuinely cared. I was most impressed because he used logic and reason when we talked.

At the time I thought it would be naïve to believe too much of this sensation. After all he was a politician. But he was making a bit of sense, because of his logic and reason. My mother, the college professor thought highly of his reasoning even if she happened to disagree. I watched his career with interest.

As time passed, things happened that fed my more cynical side, but I suppressed that sensation. I was a married, educated, professional software developer (a profession that values reason and logic), and I set aside my judgment because it seemed reasonable and Mom said it was ok.

The things that were happening in Congress did not seem to fit the mental image of the guy my mother felt was worthy. The party politics I was seeing in the 1990’s was concerned with one thing – winning. The pattern was that they not concerned with the business of the people. They were into “control” and power.

The man and current occupant of Congressman Greenwood’s old state senate seat, told me in no uncertain terms, that it is more important to have fewer people participating in the process, because it meant more work/effort to control. It is easier to manipulate a few than to lead many.

My disillusionment grew. I even had heated discussions with my mother. She didn’t want to believe that the Congressman was of the same breed that I was seeing. But the evidence mounted of the years. There was the pledge not seek re-election after so many terms. Then there was his “townhall” meeting at BCCC, prior to the war.

While I won’t speak for my mother, I think it is safe to characterize her opinion of the current Bush administration as below low. My parents objections to current Bush administration are so profound that in recent years my mother as made a hollow threat of leaving the country. While I say it was a hollow threat, she did take a teaching position in Bulgaria early 90’s.

Since about 2000, this poster boy of a compassionate conservative left his logic and reason some place. I started to blame my parents for helping the country’s political swing to the right. It was tough, I didn’t want to believe that my parents could be duped.

Today’s news changes that. My parents and I were not deceived or tricked by Congress Greenwood. The notion that fits the facts about the timing suggests that perhaps Congressman Greenwood may indeed feel a bit let down by the current controlling interests of his party.

Perhaps Jim Greenwood, my parents and I were all – “neo-conned” or perhaps out FOXed by people who are into fair and balanced control of power by themselves. I think my parents would agree that participation, and opened reasoned discussion and not party affiliation is what makes our system.

The common enemy is fanaticism. The philosophies that do not allow for alternatives, options. Whether they are on a Islamic Jihad in NY or a bare-beer-bellied, painted-face NY Giants fan going to an Eagles game in Philadelphia, it is the rhetoric and tin ear to a context that leads to violence and war.

Ginny Schrader and Jim Greenwood, in the race for the 8th Congressional seat have combined to make a case for logic and reason over ideological fanaticism. Together they make a case for a faith in the political will and human nature of the people over the dogma of party. I will remember this election season as the beginning of a budding a reunification of logic, reason with “We the people”. There is reason to hope, cautiously anyway.

My interpretation of this is that Jim reasoned more people will benefit by taking a small bit of national control away and giving it back to us, the people.

Congressmen Greenwood, I thank you for this final act as my Congressman. My mother thanks you.
Good Luck Ms Schrader!

CNN.com - Officials discuss how to delay Election Day - Jul 12, 2004

There is a scary headline. It feeds the emotional notions sparked by a President who "guarantees" he will be re-elected. A man who does not concede or acknowledge error. This is not a singular emotion. I'm not the only one to have this emotion.

The President claims we are safer today. This statement itself illustrates the limited vision of the administration. The world is indeed a dangerous place. But it always will be. Nature abhores a vacuum. Human nature abhores a vacuum. Evil people and things must exist or there cannot be Good.

It is balance and harmony that should be keywords to U.S. Policy.
Policies of preemption and being on the offensive decidedly tip the balance of power too quickly and too far.

The President may even be right in his assertion that when America was changed on 9/11, America changed the world. But the question is are we changing it for the better? Is it our place to take the world in a direction it may not be ready, willing and able to go?

With power must come discipline and common sense. There are additional capabilities that our powers place in front of America. America should not feel entitled to grab these capabilities, because we can.

Has everybody forgotten Oklahoma City? How about the anthrax mailer? These are American's who are upset with the government. Does it truly matter? Will American terrorists kill fewer?

The administration within a very short period have said "Ridge: Terrorists' aim is to influence presidential vote" and then "No one is thinking of postponing the elections." If we are talking about how to postpone (while knowing the "when" and "if" are different questions) an election, then have not the terrorist already succeeded in "influencing" the vote?

The truly offensive part of the notion of this issue is that it consolidates power in Washington and not the states. It ignores the reality that a federal election is actually secured by the damned thing that cursed the last election. It is the Electoral College that elects the President.

Nothing could stop the process because it is decentralized in terms of time and space.
Nothing needs to stop the process because it is decentralized in terms of time and space.

Will President Bush leave office quietly the election is close, contested and has been influenced? How badly does he want re-election? Does he want it more than Nixon did? I've yet to see a side of the President or folks in his administration that indicates the kind of internal self-confidence that suggests they would feel that fighting the good fight is enough. They still are selling WMD - and folks "that dog won't hunt".

I'm against voting for Republicans because what they define as "fair and balanced" sounds an awful lot like "offensive". Their "fair and balanced" does not stand up to socratic debate and the search for truth.