Category: politics

The argument outran the facts. I had a big long post here about how angry I am about this whole thing. I couldn’t bring myself to post it. You know, I have a couple of subtle but important distinctions in my head. One is the separation of our Government with the current Administration. The Government is all those folks in all the government’s many agencies who’ve made a career out of it. The Government handles the day to day stuff and actually changes very little over the course of any four year administration. The Administration is the group of people who are politically appointed during a President’s term.

It’s pretty clear that the Administration ignored our Government in the build-up to the war. They cherry-picked evidence and used debunked, suspect and out of date information in making their case to the American people for the need to go to war with Iraq. I’m not sure how to react to all this other than anger. We were intentionally misled. The Administration knew their goal and knew they didn’t have the case to back it up. They massaged, manufactured and created out of thin air, evidence used to convince Congress and the American people that we needed to spend billions of dollars, sacrifice American troops, remove thousands of Iraqis from the face of the Earth and spend untold amounts of money and time rebuilding Iraq. That’s unforgivable to me. They played on our fears and anger about September 11th and sold us a lie. They said Saddam Hussein was responsible for September 11th when the link between Al Qaeda and Iraq has been thoroughly debunked. They said that Saddam would have a nuclear weapon “in the very near future” when it’s been shown that there was no formal nuclear program in Iraq. They said that Saddam could launch a chemical or biological attack in forty-five minutes when we still haven’t found any chemical or biological weapons in Iraq. They told us they knew where the weapons are, and again, none have been found. They lied to us.

This is now longer than the “angry post” I deleted. You know, I am angry. But, I’m also resigned to the fact that not enough people in this country care that they were lied to, or think they weren’t. I know that no one in the Bush Administration will ever be held responsible for lying to the American people, and for lying to Congress. I know that the only way I can do anything is to do my best to make sure that George W. Bush doesn’t with the election next year. It doesn’t feel like that’s enough, but it’ll have to do.

I finished reading Them: Adventures With Extremists last night. I was about a hundred pages from the end when I went to bed, but I had to finish it. I was too unsettled not to. I have all these unpleasant thoughts running through my head that I want to get down so I can hopefully get some comments on them before I really sit down to write them out, especially if you’ve read the book, or watched The Secret Rulers of the World.

I was truly disturbed by the people profiled in the book. Here are the unformed thoughts rolling around in my noggin:

• It feels like everyone’s story is true to a degree. The problem is that each on of the “extremists” projects their own personal prejudices. There’s a group of mostly white, conservative Christian radicals, and the Islamic Fundamentalists who think the world is run by the Jews. The Irish Protestant Extremists think it’s the Catholics. The people actually in the group these folks think is the New World Order really don’t give the extremists a second thought. What if they’re all right? What does that mean for me, sitting here somewhere between the different camps?

• The extremists are called extremists because they left the mainstream of their (mostly) religions because they became entranced by a cause, or because they felt the World was against them. It feels like they’ve decided that this New World Order is the reason their lives suck and have vowed to fight it. It feels like class warfare to me, with one side (the Bilderbergs of the world) so removed from the battle they don’t even smell the blood.

• Can these extremists be brought back into the mainstream? Is there some way to extinguish the hate without extinguishing them? Should we try? Do we try because we can’t handle people who don’t fit into a nice little box?

• The Ruby Ridge / Waco chapter was probably the most discomforting part of the book. Both events were so badly handled by the government. But, was it part of this vast conspiracy, or was it just sheer incompetance?

I don’t honestly know what I think about everything in the book. It’s too much to take in and try to think about in one sitting. What do you think?

Michelle’s at it again, blasting someone who’s lamenting us killing Uday and Qusay Hussein. Now, I’m not sad they’re dead. But, it would have been nice to capture them alive and put them on trial for their crimes. They could even be tried by the new Iraqi Governing Council, as a show that they do actually have some power. I don’t see how people can view these two psychopaths’ deaths as a victory for the President. He didn’t find them, corner them, or shoot them. The military did. The military, and most likely military intelligence, deserve the credit for this one, plain and simple. No matter what the President says, we’re still at war in Iraq. It’s a different phase of the war, but still war. Claiming military victories or losses as political capital is the height of hypocrisy, no matter which side of center your politics lie.

Michelle says she’s a cheerleader for the deaths of those who want us dead. I hope that’s hyperbole. I’d rather be a cheerleader for justice. I would love to see Saddam and those that worked for him face the people of Iraq and be held accountable for their crimes. That’s justice. Just killing people who disagree with us is the bully’s way out, and just saying, “Well, we’re the biggest and strongest so we’re right” isn’t a justifiable reason.

Justice is more important than death. Seeing someone dead doesn’t mean their influence has died. Killing someone in battle makes them a martyr to their supporters. Trying them in front of an impartial court (ok, for the Hussein family, that could be difficult) makes them guilty, and decreases their “Martyrability”. If everyone can see their crimes laid out in the bright lights of a court room, it becomes that much harder for reasonable people to support them. The unreasonable and zealots will support them no matter what (just look at the militia movement and Tim McVeigh), but they’re not really who we should be trying to persuade. The reasonable people in Iraq and the Middle East need to see that we’re not butchers. We’re offering them something better – the rule of law. We’re offering them self-determination and freedoms that they’ve never experienced. Once the people of Iraq can see that, and we can convince them (and ourselves) that we’re not there for our own selfish purposes, we’ll be on our way to stability and peace.

I understand that the Brothers Hussein put up a fight, so their deaths were probably unavoidable. I’m not blaming anyone involved in the firefight for their deaths. They acted as they should have – they returned fire. It think would have been better had they been taken alive and stood trial. Am I glad they’re no longer going to kill, torture and maim their people? Yeah, I am. I wish they could have been put on trial first though.

Most of you know me as a pretty left-leaning kind of guy. I honestly didn’t start out that way. I was raised Republican (not that politics was religion in my house – we rarely talked about it, but my parents are both on the Right), and voted for George Bush the Elder in ’94, and voted for John McCain in the 2000 Republican Primary. Trent Lott, Newt Gingrich, George W. and John Ashcroft forced me out of the GOP for good. But, I still have a lot of respect for a lot of Senators on the right, and don’t think Republicans are evil. I think the party has been taken over by the Religious Right and the Neo-Conservatives and that concerns me. The moderate voice of the party has been effectively silenced.

This should change. There are some good ideas on the moderate Right, especially when it comes to the now forsaken idea of fiscal responsibility and I would love a bipartisan moderate majority in the Senate (I have no hope for the House) and a moderate Democrat or Republican in the White House. George W. Bush, with all of his “compassionate” conservatism he touted during the 2000 campaign is far removed from anything that smells like compassion. There is hope! What hope, you ask? Let’s get someone to run against GW in 2004! I nominate John McCain and John Warner. They both have better qualifications on national security and defense (because whoever inherits the White House after GW better be able to handle this mess) than the current President. They’re both moderate and have proven track records of bipartisanship, and they’re both willing to buck the party line and go with their conscience.

I know, I’m crazy. I’m still recovering from the flu, but you know, I’d be willing to sacrifice the chance to vote for Howard Dean in the VA Primary if I could vote for John McCain again and show that it’s time to abandon the radical fringes of the Republican party and move towards the center with the great majority of the country.

Dean’s declaration speech was pretty stunning. I only heard the last half, but went back and read the whole thing. Reading it, I almost teared up. I need to go back and compare this speech, and Dean’s platform to that list I came up with of what I want from my elected officials. He sounds too good to be true. And what’s funny is he sounds, acts and even kinda looks like John McCain, who I voted for in the Republican primary in 2000 (yeah, I was a Republican at one time, remember?).\
Even if you’re planning on voting for GW, or anyone else in 2004, please go read the speech. It’s good. It’s inspiring. It gives me hope that there is a chance of dethroning President Bush and putting some sanity back into the Executive branch. It’s time to stop being afraid and actually do something.

Ok, I know I told Nancy Pelosi I was voting for Dean last night. That was a bit of an exagerration. I wasn’t sure. Seeing him on Meet the Press this morning helped tip the scale. He was thoughtful and intelligent and gave some answers I agree with. That would have been OK and completely unimpressive had it not been for his answers about parental notification. I went in disagreeing with his position. The answers he gave didn’t really change my mind, but he showed the thought process that went into making his decision and that process was logical. I don’t agree with him on this issue, but I definitely respect him for being willing to talk about the events that led him to take the position he has.\
It was a tough interview. Tim Russert took it to him, as he should. Russert’s a great interviewer, and especially tough when someone’s new to the national stage. It’s the toughest interview I’ve seen on the show since Dick Cheney sometime last year (don’t remember exactly when, just remember Tim hammering him on several issues). I can’t imagine President Bush holding up and answering intelligently, or even being able to defend his positions under that kind of questioning.\
I’m still not sold 100%, but Dean’s a solid candidate, and I hope he does well. He shows that there is some fight in the Democrats and we might not be stuck with GW for another four years.

I got your “letter” yesterday asking me to send money to the Democratic National Campaign Commitee. While I appreciate the address labels, at this time I can not donate money in good conscience. You may ask yourself why. The Democrats haven’t done anything to earn any of my hard earned money. You and your fellow Representatives and the Senators of the Democratic party have failed to mount even a token resistance to the President and the Republicans’ extreme agenda. The party is in disarray and from the looks of the current crop of folks running for President, it looks like George W. Bush may win re-election.\
If the leadership of the Democratic party gets their act together and puts up real resistance, I’ll consider donating to the cause. For now, I’m waiting for you to prove it to me that you’re willing to put up a fight.\
I’m waiting anxiously for the Virginia Democratic Primary so I can vote for Howard Dean. Do I think he’ll win? No, but he’s the only member of the current crop of candidates who’s willing to ask the hard questions and come out against the President’s far-right agenda (and not look mad doing it, sorry Congressman Kucinich) with the vigor it deserves. If only the rest of the party could follow his lead and be as passionate.\
Sincerely,\
Kevin Lawver

According to The Political Compass, I’m: Economic Left/Right: -5.75 and Authoritarian/Libertarian: -3.85, which puts me in Gandhi territory. I think I can live with that.

It also puts me almost equidistant from the X and Y axis in opposite directions as our President, which explains a lot.

I don’t even know how to write about this story about “The Foundation”, it’s so out there and scary. Even if some of it’s true, if any of it’s true, I’m afraid for the world.

I don’t even know what to say. It’s the mother of all conspiracy theories. Just getting my head around the concept of this Fundamentalist Christian, Old Testament based fascist terrorist organization (only with better suits, even more money and better connections), organized in small cells and ingratiated in the highest levels of goverments all over the world is too much to take in all at once. Even if it’s not true at all, the story is amazing.

I know this doesn’t make any sense. I’m floored. I’m gonna go back to playing with tDOM and pretend I didn’t read that over my roast beef sandwich.

Could Bush be impeached? It’s a great article on the possible manipulation by the Administration in making the case for the war in Iraq to the country and the world.

It makes me think of this post from Michelle at A Small Victory about babies being buried alive by the Iraqi government. Her opinion is that because of this and other finding, the war was justified. I don’t disagree one hundred percent. But, what I’m left pondering is if the ends justify the means when it comes to war.

I think they don’t. As criminal as it is, there are other countries whose human rights abuses are more egregious and long-standing than those of Iraq. China, North Korea, several Arab and African states and the old Soviet Union all have or had horrible records on human rights that never led us to war with them. If we had made the case for war on Iraq based on the human rights abuses, would we have gone to war? Would the government even have made the case?

If the President and the people who work for him lied to us about the threat to our national security and went to war for other reasons, is that wrong? Is it impeachable? I would certainly think so. Let’s get some perspective. President Clinton, who lied about his relationship with an intern, was impreached and censured by the Senate. President Bush may have lied to the American people and the world about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein and either exaggerated or outright lied about the existance of Weapons of Mass Destruction that may have been sold to terrorists and therefore posed a threat to our country. Which one is worse? If true, and the President and his Administration pushed into war using false, fabricated, hyperbolized or editorialized intelligence, I would fully support him being impeached, and him possibly being charged with treason.

I supported President Clinton being impeached and censured. Not because he lied about the whole Lewinsky affair, but because he took avantage of an employee and then covered it up. It was sexual misconduct, and possibly sexual harrassment – especially if you consider the ends he went to to get Lewinsky employment after the affair. I’m sure those same efforts weren’t extended for other interns.

Back to the question at hand. I don’t disagree that Hussein was a bad guy (still is if he’s alive), and that getting rid of him wasn’t an entirely bad thing. His people will probably eventually be better for it. Will we? Did it serve to improve our security? I’m not sure it did. The way things are shaping up, they may end up with a radical Islamic theocracy aligned with Iran. That seems much worse to me than the agnostic, crazy yet predictable despot there before.

If the President lied to us about this, what else has he lied to us about? What lengths will he go to to get his way?