This was never my intent

I have to be honest; the benefit of maintaining this blog is that it forces me to think. It forces me to view the world through a completely different set of glasses. The original intent of my blog was not to rail against injustice or governmental abuse of power. To the contrary, I have aspirations of being an author and of writing a novel. So I figured what better way to hone my writing skills than to write a little bit every day. I never really intended for my writings to turn so political, even though I have always been somewhat of a political animal. You see I was once very much like the person I referred to in my previous entry as a new friend. I was an ideologue, conforming my thoughts and belief system to fall under a specific political category or label. For my entire life, I considered myself to be an economically conservative, socially moderate Republican. Now how is that for a label? As a person who was comfortable with galvanizing political nomenclature, I was able to categorize others, easily identifying them as political friend or foe. Thus, I was able to discuss or discount their political views accordingly, often without even listening to them speak. Sound familiar?

As I stated in an earlier entry, I voted for President Bush in both elections and I honestly feel that I did this country a great disservice. It’s not that I feel that my one vote put the President into the White House; it’s just that I believe so passionately in our system and I know that ultimately every vote counts. So as I’ve said before, this web log is my penance, it is my attempt to engage people in such a way that they will critically think about the importance of what is going on around them. Because I voted for President Bush and in the aftermath of his war in Iraq, I became disenchanted with the President, his administration and with our government in general. Every article in the paper, every lead story on the news, highlighted some new scandal, some new abuse or some new crime perpetrated by our government in the name of liberty. However, I didn’t look at it in quite that way. The Declaration of Independence clearly states that the government derives its power from the consent of the governed. That said I honestly feel that these acts have not been committed in the precious name of liberty in as much as they have been committed in my name, our names, the consenters. So I will continue to speak out, regardless of political party or where issues may fall on liberal/conservative spectrum. I will continue to speak out because it is my right, it is my duty, and it is my penance. What about you?

Think about it.

I'm a Liberal!!!

"The flames kindled on the Fourth of July, 1776, have spread over too much of the globe to be extinguished by the feeble engines of despotism; on the contrary, they will consume these engines and all who work them" -Thomas Jefferson, 1821

I really love this whole blogging thing. Meeting new friends, engaging in spirited debate and quoting cool stuff from famous people. Here is something funny. I have just read an email that I believe accuses me of being a left-winger. Now that is a first! As always, I appreciate your comments and I look forward to more of them as we continue this journey together. I also love political neophytes who like to label that which they do not completely understand. My new friend questioned my whereabouts when President Clinton was in office, stating that the Clinton Presidency was much more abusive than the current administration. He cites the war in Bosnia, Clinton's sexual proclivity and the fact that the President lied on television as evidence of this abuses. That stuff is just Bush league (no pun intended). I would like to respond to my new friend just for the record. First, I agree with you regarding the war in Bosnia, it was certainly politically motivated as most wars are. Second, it is my understanding that President Clinton was impeached and I believe that he should have been removed from office. Third, all politicians lie on television. Here is a hint; you can always tell when a politician is lying because his or her lips are moving. Is my new friend really defending a President who ignores the limits of executive power so clearly outlined in the Constitution by comparing it to a misguided war in Bosnia? Can you say Grenada? Can you say Panama? Is he really defending the actions of President Bush by comparing it to oral sex in the White House? I must admit that is a tough one, which is the biggest threat to national security, Monica Lewinsky and her famous blue dress, or the complete and utter disregard this President has for the First and Fourth Amendments? You cannot defend the horribly misguided actions of one President, by bringing up dirt on another. Remember, momma always says, two wrongs don't make a right.

Seriously, if we are going to talk about President Clinton why don't we just compare apples to apples? How about the Clinton administration's misguided policies with regard to China and the future ramifications of those policies on the United States? Discuss if you will the magnitude of the Clinton administration's numerous missteps, fumbling and outright appeasement of the Chinese Government and what that means for the future of this country and for world peace. In my humble opinion, the Clinton Administration actually helped to create a new superpower threat, which in time will challenge the United States for economic and military supremacy. It is also my opinion that the Pro-China policies of the Clinton-Gore administration were a disaster for American national security interests. The Clinton administration's loosening of trade restrictions on China dramatically strengthened China's military power through the legal transfers of strategic high-level technologies. Why not discuss the Clinton-Gore fund-raising scandal, where as the Chinese government indirectly and directly influenced the 1996 Clinton-Gore reelection campaign. Expound if you will upon the manner in which the Chinese government funneled over $1.2 million into Democratic Party coffers, purchasing direct access to top officials in the administration. To quote Mao, "The mind of the enemy and the will of his leaders is a target of far more importance than the bodies of his troops." It is clear that the influence of the Chinese government on the Clinton administration made it easier to conduct espionage against the United States, particularly against our nuclear weapons facilities and that loosened trade restrictions enhanced China's massive technology gathering efforts to the point that they were able to acquire hundreds of advanced U.S. supercomputers. The NSA reported in May 2000 that the China Academy of Engineering Physics, the Chinese government's primary nuclear weapons development facility, was using U.S. acquired supercomputers to conduct simulated nuclear detonations. Clinton ignored these reports and his administration sought to further loosen controls on high performance computers to China. Now we begin to compare apples to apples.

The fundamental flaw with arguments such as those made by my new friend is that they fail to address the issues. Right is right and wrong is wrong. As people become indoctrinated into the political process, they allow themselves to be labeled. They identify themselves and others as Democrat or Republican; conservative or liberal; left wing or right wing, and the list goes on and on. Can you say Compassionate Conservative? What does that mean? The funny thing is that most people don't even know what these labels mean. Since when do you have to be right wing in order to be right? Do people really think that any side of the political equation has a monopoly on right and wrong? Here is a unique idea, just make informed decisions. Evaluate the facts and make your determinations on truths, which are based on knowledge and not ideology. My friend, I have been there and I want you to know that it's ok to develop your own thoughts and ideas, even if they don't conform to your self administered labels or your particular party's ideology. It is a truly liberating experience and one that I recommend highly.

I would like to address your remaining concerns. You rhetorically inquired as to my whereabouts during the Clinton administration years. I was waiting for the idea of web logging to be developed. Had the whole blogging thing been available during those years, you would probably have considered me a brother right-winger. As for concerns over rising gas prices and drilling for oil in Alaska, I wonder if you have read any of the recent studies on the impact of increasing fuel mileage standards on all vehicles and the corresponding reductions in the emissions of greenhouse gasses? If you did you would realize that the answer is not in Alaska but in Detroit. We put monkeys in space for crying out loud; you would think that we could design a car that gets 60 miles to the gallon. Greater fuel efficiency means that our vehicles would require less fuel to go greater distances. The corresponding lower demand for fuel will ultimately mean lower prices at the pump (see the law of supply and demand). Finally, burning less carbon-based, fossil fuels in our vehicles will reduce greenhouse gas emissions thereby helping the environment. Did I say environment? I must be a liberal. As you ponder this remember, it is ok to think big picture and still be a Republican. However, if there are people out there who are more afraid of a $3.00 gallon gas than they are about protecting our rights guaranteed under the Constitution, than we have bigger problems than the fact that we elect idiots as Presidents. Apologetically and in closing, I must admit that I find your comparisons of Yahoo and Google cookie caches to the dangers of NSA data mining and domestic surveillance as funny. I am far more concerned with losing my rights and privileges as an American and about our governments continued assault on the constitution, than I am about Google or Yahoo knowing that I like to visit ESPN.com.

Think about it.

What a Bunch of Hooey

Well President Bush is at is again. Monday night the President announced on national television his plans for stemming the tide of illegal immigration and for the deployment of the military along our southern border with Mexico. It’s amazing to see how this President continues to ignore the Constitution and how these abuses of power have become so commonplace in our country. The government is clearly playing to our fears about border security, jobs lost to illegal immigrants and the fact that we will all be speaking Spanish by the end of the decade. The President will have us believe that fencing off our newly militarized southern boarder will somehow make us safer. The fact is that his address to the nation was nothing more than a prime time photo op for a floundering administration desperately attempting to portray Bush as a wartime President, protecting our national security interests in post 9/11 America. What a bunch of hooey! If you are talking about national security in the post 9/11 era you have to begin with the actual event. You have to demonstrate an understanding of the basic causes of that terrible day and of the days leading up to the attack. Then you must develop and execute a strategy predicated upon those findings. The problem for me is that I have no doubt that this administration has done that. The fact that we have not been attacked again is not simply a matter of blind luck. However that is not the real issue is it? The real issue is that this President once again feels compelled to ignore U.S. Federal Law when it is politically convenient to do so. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 prohibits the use of the United States military in civil law enforcement. There are those in the government and elsewhere who would debate this legal point and who knows they may be right. However, isn’t it interesting that the same President who this week claimed the right to deploy federal troops on domestic soil in order to stem the tide of illegal immigration, is the same President who refused to deploy federal troops on domestic soil in order to stop the chaos, looting and murder occuring in New Orleans immediately after Hurricane Katrina. If you recall, President Bush stated that he needed the Governor of Louisiana to request federal military assistance before he could legally approve federal troop deployment. How crazy is that? Can anybody say hypocrite? The fact of the matter is that it is all about party politics and what is in the best interests of the party. Now if you are still unsure about the Presidents political motivations or you actually believe that the deployment of U.S. troops along our southern border is critical to national security, ask yourself one question. How did Mohammad Atta and the rest of the 9/11 terrorists gain access to the U.S.? I’ll give you a hint; it wasn’t because of our porous border with Mexico.

These are indeed troubling times. It is troubling that most people today are so ambivalent and politically unaware that they are willing to sacrifice the precious rights and freedoms that so many of our sons and daughters fought and died to protect. More troubling than the general lack of political efficacy in this country is the absolute moral bankruptcy of our elected officials. When I think about this moral decay, I cannot help but to recall a famous quote regarding the corruptible nature of power and how absolute power corrupts absolutely. We need to wake up and we need to wake up fast! It should be obvious to even the most uninformed person that this President and his cronies are willing to do anything in order to maintain their tight grip on power…even if it means violating our civil rights or trashing the protections guaranteed each of us by the Constitution of the United States. That’s what makes this political mumbo jumbo all the more disturbing. The deployment of federal troops on domestic soil is not about national security…it’s about votes. It's about Republicans talking tough and trying to rally their conservative base. It's really quite simple, mid-term elections are just around the corner, it’s looking ugly for the Republicans and they are all running scared. Apparently lost in all this talk about illegal immigration, building 500-mile fences and domestic troop deployment, is the fact that Republicans genuinely seem more terrified about the potential fallout from mid-term elections than they are concerned about actual terrorism and that the Republican leadership is currently more concerned about Al Gore than it is about al Qaeda.

Think about it.

Can you hear me now?

Is it just me or does it seem as though every day there is a new story breaking in the media regarding governmental abuse of power? A few days ago we heard about the NSA illegally obtaining domestic phone records and of electronic spying on US citizens. Then it was announced that the Pentagon has been asked to develop a domestic military deployment plan in order to use American troops to patrol our borders. Oh, and by the way, did you know that we are going to put an Air Force General in charge of the CIA?

Let’s talk a little bit about the issue regarding the NSA. According to reports published in the USA Today, the NSA has developed and maintains a database of over two trillion domestic phone calls, using information obtained from Bell South, AT&T and Verizon. Can you hear me now? The NSA can, according to published reports. Over two trillion calls…think about that! The fact that this information was collected and that it exists, not to mention the manner in which it was obtained, is a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment. For those who are not familiar with the Fourth Amendment, it goes like this:

“The right of the people to be secure in their own persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue without probable cause, support by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons”

Soon after the tragic events of 9-11, President Bush issued a secret executive order authorizing the NSA to conduct electronic surveillance of international communications without the need of a warrant. President Bush defended these actions by stating that surveillance was conducted only on international calls or on calls from anyone suspected of having links to al-Qaeda or its affiliates. However, this is only the tip of the iceberg, as full and complete details of this order are currently classified and not known. In fact the order is so closely guarded that only a few select members of the Joint House/Senate Intelligence Committee and the Congressional leadership are fully aware of the complete details. The very existence of this executive order remained hidden from the public until December 2005, when the New York Times broke the story.

Here is where the rubber meets the road. The NSA debacle is an excellent example of how the President is deftly using the concepts of executive order to circumvent the Constitution and executive privilege to withhold “sensitive” information from the other branches of government. This is a very, very slippery slope. A President who shows such contempt for the law of the land is a threat to the very structure of our government. The Founding Fathers were adamant that they established a government of law…not of men. The system of checks and balances was designed with the purpose of ensuring that the country would be governed through the rule of law. A President, who assumes to himself the power to ignore the legislative directives of congress or to operate outside the checks of the judiciary, becomes exactly the type of threat to democracy that the Founding Fathers sought to protect our country from.

Whatever the current administration has not been able to accomplish through the use executive order or executive privilege it has accomplished through the use of the Patriot Act. Have you ever read the Patriot Act or is what you “know” about it been obtained through media sound bites or politician double speak? Be honest with yourself. If you are not familiar with the Patriot Act, then I advise you to become familiar with it quickly. You should be familiar with the Act that allows the government to monitor your activities without the need of judicial review or the issuance of warrants. You should know that the Patriot Act allows the government to secretly obtain your credit and library records without prior judicial review or approval. You should know all about the Patriot Act provisions granting the government powers to arrest and detain suspects without warrant, probable cause or criminal charges. You should know every intimate detail of the legislation that is keeping the basic workings of our judicial branch of government hidden under a veil of secrecy and violates the essential principals of our American democracy.

Do you know anything about the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA)? It specifically prohibits the surveillance of people within the United States without individual approval by the US Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Now here is a great question; how do you go about collecting two trillion domestic phone calls with individual court approval? The answer is you don’t get court approval. Thanks to the Patriot Act, the protections provided by the fourth amendment and FISA have been altered or eliminated. They can arrest you, detain you, deny you your rights as an American citizen and refuse to admit that you even exist. They can listen to your calls, read your communications, check your credit, review your bank records and enter your home without warrant or probable cause. They can restrict or eliminate your right to effectively protest, all the while curtailing the rights of a free press so essential in holding our public servants accountable. Remember, the Constitution clearly states that the people are the ultimate source of our government’s power. So for the people to make informed decisions about the direction and position that our Government takes, the press must have unfettered access to the workings of government. Unfettered access to government, combined with information obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, should in theory help keep honest people honest within our government. When access is limited and critical information is withheld, altered or edited, decisions are made without fear or consequence.

I hope this entry will stimulate your thoughts. I hope that you begin to question. Unlike our President, I do not ask that you accept anything I am saying at face value. I only wish to encourage people to gain knowledge, eliminate ignorance and search for the truth. I also want to make a confession, for I fear that these entries may be viewed by many as the ranting of an anti-Bush left winger. The truth is that I am a lifelong moderate Republican and I voted for President Bush both times. In my opinion, President Bush and his administration have severely damaged the honor and dignity of our country, escalated the level of tension and hostility worldwide. Yes I voted twice for “W” and I apologize. I hope that through the written word this Blog will serve as my penance.