Category: Politics

Posted on
by

I have received some very positive commentary on a couple of the questions I submitted for the CNN/YouTube Republican debate, and I cannot be happier that I decided to participate.  Commentary is obviously no guarantee any of my questions will get chosen for the debate (which would be an awesome thing to happen), but I’m just happy to know that people took a look at them.

I do plan on submitting some more questions in the coming weeks, and I’ll probably touch on some other hot button issues as illegal immigration and abortion.  However, with the slew of other people asking these same questions, I want to be creative.  Ever sine I submitted it, I haven’t seen any questions asking the candidates to choose one mistake they’ve made during their terms, and tell the lessons from it.  There could be some out there, who knows, but I have yet to see it.  So, I hope to really focus on more questions such as that one.  Something that could get the candidates really thinking.

Since, honestly, any candidate can just repeat a platform position that anybody could look up.  But when they have to start getting honest with voters about their past, I think it can really show their character.  It is true that they could just simply deflect the question, but I hope they would not, as that too would be a show of character.

So, in conclusion, I’m happy with what people have said, and though I was planning on doing so anyway, seeing that really makes me want to continue submitting questions.  Prepare to see more in the coming weeks!

Posted on
by

Whatever I was going to write about tonight, forget about that. Tonight, I’ll be live-blogging (well, as live as I can get, looking at my TV) the Democratic debate on MSNBC.

I must say, from just a few minutes of watching it, wow. This is unlike any other debate I’ve ever seen. The others so far (both Dems and Republicans) have been solid, stagnant, and just downright yawn-worthy. This one on the other hand, you have Democrats sniping at Democrats, and a pretty active exchange between the moderator and the candidate. Doesn’t seem as though there are many standing rules in this one.

Unfortunately, I think that Tim Russert (the moderator) is having some trouble controlling the candidates, which might not bode well later in the night, when they’re all feeling a little heated. They’ve already exchanged some pretty heated remarks. For example, Mike Gravel lambasted everybody but Dodd and Biden for voting against a resolution calling the Iranian Republican Guard a terrorist organization, which Gravel is basically calling a prelude to a war with Iran.

Update 9:30pm EDT: Seems they’re a little more controlled on questions about if they’ll back Israel if they’d respond to a threat against their security. Also, I don’t think any of them are going to tonight, or ever, speak out against Israel, at least outright. They’d be dead-in-the water. if they do.

Update 9:32pm EDT: Richardson seems to be using the McCain rhetoric on the immigration issue. Didn’t really answer the question, which was about Sanctuary Cities, though. Good answer on it, Biden. The right answer, IMHO.

Obama didn’t really answer the question.

Don’t do it, Dodd……ooooh…not answering the question.

Kucinich isn’t afraid to answer Russert’s question…not my favorite answer, though.

Hilary kind of skirted around it. Not much different from Obama. Interesting explanation for why you wouldn’t stop Sanctuary Cities, though. She has a point that other illegals might not talk if they’d be afraid of being deported. They might be able to find other people, though? Who knows..

Gravel just went off on a tangent completely. Started talking about education or something. Didn’t even try blaming the feds.

Update 9:47PM: If Hilary’s plan really is what she says (I need to study it more before making a final decision), then kudos to that. It’s what I’ve been talking about here. Not exclusively either solution.

Update: 9:50PM: Edward’s solution sounds idealistic. I’m not sure what a President can do about his cabinet’s or VPs healthcare (probably little to nothing), but Congress isn’t going to vote out its own. Sounds good, but isn’t going to happen.

Update 9:54PM: Russert’s going after the candidate’s past management problems. This might get nasty. Don’t know if I like the accusatory tone he’s taking with them though. He’s supposed to be the moderator, not a judge.

Update 10:00PM: “Do you want your children read a book about same-sex princes?”

Edwards: Hard to tell his real answer. “I want my children to decide.”

Obama: More of less, I think, “Yes.”

Clinton: “Parents should decide. And all of you should vote for the hate crimes bill.”

Up to come…Social Security and Medicare.

Update 10:15PM: I’m sorry, I can’t really pay attention to all this economics talk, lol. Lets see…

Richardson: Don’t remove the cap. And the amendment to the constitution to balance the budget sounds stupid. The document is how to run the government, and to open up rights to people who are being denied them. Not for economic policy. That’s why we have a Congress and a process to create laws. Create a binding law in Congress to do it, not an amendment.

Edward’s argument on people making $50 million paying SS tax on only $97,000, while middle class people paying tax on all or almost all their money has some merit, though. Maybe what’d be better (and I though I heard Kucinich say this), but why not tax on a percentage? How about…just throwing out an arbitrary number…say 50%? That way, people making $20,000 are only paying taxes on 10, and people making $20 million, and paying on $10 million?

Of course, can’t do that, because the Republicans would say it’s redistributing the wealth, and vote against it.

Update 10:22PM: On to smoking now…Ban it in public places?

Hilary: Leave it local…no federal law.

Obama: The locals are doing a good job. If they can’t, then yes on federal.

Biden, Kucinich, Edwards and a couple others: YES!

Drinking age…lower?

Biden: No. Counterproductive, and there’s a problem with women drinking while carrying.

Dodd: No

Richardson: No. Need national commitment to rehabilitation.

Gravel: Yes.

Kucinich: Yes. Lets have confidence in young Americans.

Obama, Clinton, Edwards: No.

Lighting round time….lets see who gets under 30.

Obama: No.

Clinton: No.

Biden: He almost got by the challenge with a two word answer, lol.  And he got under it with a more complete one.

Kucinich: No.

Gravel: Yes.

Dodd: No.  So instead he’s going to go way over.

Obama again: Almost got it.

Richardson: No.  WAY OVER.

Ok, back to issues now.

Obama: We can’t get out magically.  Must do it in a way that makes sense.

And a weaving camera.  As a student of television production, that makes me laugh a little.

Update 10:42PM: I think Gravel is a little idealistic on wind power.  Never going to happen in so few years.

Sorry, kind of ignored the rest of the debate.  Was talking to someone on IM.  I like the last question about the baseball, though.

Posted on
by

Hear me out before you attack me as some neocon (which, from anyone who’s read this blog, knows is not true).

Was the report the entire truth? Maybe not, though it’s tailed some of my own views on the situation in Iraq. Apart from the fact that I don’t like attacks against our soldiers fighting overseas – even if Petraeus may not be doing any actual combat work, he’s helping plan the fight – I like to consider his position.

Did the Democrats really expect Petraeus to waltz on to Capitol Hill and paint a dark, grim picture and say that we need to pull out tomorrow?  I hope not, or they’re clearly deluded.  I don’t know if Petraeus thinks the current strategy can work (that’s what some pundits says), but what ever the case, he was ordered to tell the war, at the very best, like it is, and at the worst, like the administration wants it to be.

I think Petraeus needs to stay in Iraq, because as long as we’re there, we need a competent leader for our troops.  This is what Petraeus seems to be.  If he went out on a tangent, he might end up fired. Then we could end up with someone incompetent there, though a loyalist to the administration.  We don’t need someone who’ll fight this war to his dying breath on a bad policy to try and prove a point.  We need someone who will competently lead.

The MoveOn ad was shameful, regardless of what I might think about the situation.  You don’t attack an active military man like that.  Just my thoughts.

Posted on
by

Speaking of parties, yesterday, my Dad and I stopped by a bar on the way home, since he had noticed my uncle was there on his way up to get me.  It only dawned on me, as I was drinking my beer, that it was my first time drinking at a bar.  In the U.S., anyway.  I’d already been to a couple in Greece.  But, I digress.

Now, as promised several days ago, I’m going to discuss how the Democrats and Republicans handle scandal.  As I see it, anyway…

*P.S., like my new post image?

Continue reading →

Posted on
by

Wow.  I must admit, even I thought the Republicans had a chance for a few months of peace, a time when they wouldn’t make big news.  Now that Albert Gonzales and Karl Rove had jettisoned, they could get back to the job of running the country, right?

Well, apparently we were all thrown for a surprise.  Enter Senator Larry Craig.  I won’t bother explaining all the details that everybody already knows, but no sooner had the big news gone out than we were thrown some more.  In a more serene time, this probably would have been swept under the carpet, but these are no peaceful times in scandal land.  With everything else that’s gone on at Capitol Hill, I think Republicans are desperately looking for an escape hatch.  This is the kind of stuff that got the Republicans overthrown from their lofty leadership positions, after all.  No Republican wants to hear that one of their own is making the whole party look bad.  Not only do they have their own butts to worry about, but they want a Republican President elected next year.

Like with Gonzales, I think we’ll see more and more Congresspeople call for his resignation.  As far as I understand, however, he’s a pretty tough old bird.  He’s had the “he’s gay” accusation thrown his way before, and was even linked to a 1980s version of last year’s page scandal.  So, it may be hard to boot him out.  However, I think this is the first time he’s actually gotten gotten convicted of something so against party morals.  That may increase the pressure that much more.  But, we’ll see.  Even if he doesn’t leave himself, his constituents may have something to say about this next year.

This scandal has brought something up I’d like to discuss more fully tomorrow.  About how the two parties deal with scandal, and who does or doesn’t keep it under wraps.  The topic was prompted by comparisons former Congressman Tom Delay (who I don’t really think should be a spokesperson on Congressional scandal given his record) made today on MSNBC.  All that tomorrow in what’s should hopefully make for a nice long entry.

Posted on
by

As I predicted in an earlier entry, Alberto Gonzales has announced his resignation, to take place next month. Well, alright, as they say, the writing was on the wall for his imminent departure.

As I discussed in my entry about Karl Rove, I believe that Gonzales’ resignation is part of a plan by the administration to make themselves look better before next year’s elections. I can’t know this for certain, but it’s a hunch, and I think a good one. Gonzales is just as, if not more important than Rove to making things look peachy for the Republicans come a year from November. Rove is the behind-the-scenes guy, but his kinda-maybe-sort of-possible role in some of the scandals of this administration would surely come back to create trouble for the Republican candidate. Gonzales, on the other hand, is even more important because he’s as publically available as Rove is privately unreachable. Take whatever trouble a continued Rove tenure could cause and multiply it by 10. That’s a to-term’s-end story of Alberto Gonzales.

As I’ve said before, I think the hope is that with Rove and Gonzales gone, the investigations might be continuing, but without them on the public scene, the news media won’t pay as much attention. They can only report on this stuff for so long before it becomes boring. Then they switch to other things for a while, until something big happens. With them out of the way, the media might be more apt to ignore the whole thing, mostly, until the Presidential election is over. By then, it won’t matter, since we’ll (they hope) have a Republican President-elect, and maybe a Congress to boot.

I don’t know how well this idea can work, since I’m not a political expert. But, the fact is that fired U.S. Attorneys and a leaked CIA operative are just not as interesting as Lindsay or Paris going to jail, or serving time over in their local rehab center. Probably they hope that the American public will tune in to that instead.

So, Rove and Gonzales are gone. I know some left-wingers would probably like to see Condoleezza Rice go, too. However, the fact is that she just hasn’t been as scandal-prone as Rove and Gonzales. I think she’s pretty safe for the rest of her term. The same people would also probably like to see Michael Chertoff go, but I also think he’s safe. He may have screwed up during Katrina, but lets not forget “Heck of a Job Brownie” got the shove on that one.

And so, I guess, ends the major resignation run of the Bush administration. Perhaps some bit players will leave, but I don’t foresee any more major people leaving. But, we’ll see what happens.

Posted on
by

Back, finally! The reason for my absence for the last 10 days is, well, because I was initially being lazy. But, then, the server the site is on was moved to a new machine, and some things got mucked up in the process. But, it’s all fixed now, at least as well as it can be.

Gods, there is a lot to talk about since I’ve been away. However, there is nothing more important on my mind at the moment than The Architect himself, Karl Rove. I know I’m late on this by a couple days, but server issues will do that to you.

Do I think he was forced out ala Rumsfeld and definitely Powell? No, I don’t. Do I believe the crap about wanting to spend time with his family? I’m not questioning his ability as a family man, but am questioning the explanation. The “family needs” explanation is often used when a politician either wants to retire, resign because he feels it’s time, or resign because he’d rather it not be time, but the situation calls for it. It seems that for a lot of the administration officials who’ve recently resigned, I think it would be safe to use the latter option. Here’s why it’s so for Rove.

Continue reading →

Posted on
by

Unfortunately, I only got to see the last 4o minutes or so of the Democratic CNN/YouTube debate. However, I think it was time enough to get an idea of my likes and dislikes.

Likes: The whole idea of using public-submitted videos is important to me, because I feel it may give the candidates a taste of what questions and concerns the American public has, as well as give them something of a say in how the debate is run. Obviously, I won’t delude myself into thinking that they had total control. Still, I think it could have been better for CNN/YT to have perhaps picked, say, the 50 videos they considered the best, then have held a public vote over at YouTube (how they’d figure in multiple votes, I’m not sure, but I know they could have done it). That would have given the people more control over the process.

I thought most of the questions seemed pretty fair, even if I didn’t like some of the answers (Healthcare for illegals? Come now…be realistic) . The only question I thought strange (and others agree) is the assault-rifle toting hick asking about their views on gun control. Come on, CNN. I know you’re liberal leaning, but be responsible here. You could have surely picked someone who asked the same question in a more mature manner, without having to drag out his “baby.”

As for Anderson Cooper, I thought he did a fantastic job in keeping the candidates in line, which is a difficult task at the best of times. By the way, listen up, Senator Dodd. Shame on you for making Connecticut look bad talking out of turn! I know they shafted you on time to speak yet again, but you’re running for President here, not a race to see who could get in the most words before being shushed.

I didn’t see enough of the debate to make fully formed opinions on who won it, though I do think (and know this means little) that Biden and Obama are the most Presidential looking. Sorry, Dodd. I know you’re my home boy, but I somehow can’t see you in the White House. As for the questions they answered, I felt some were well answered, and others not so well. The candidates need to stop spouting off campaign slogans and tell how they feel in plain language. I concede, however, that this is difficult when Cooper gave you so little time.

Finally, I’d like to take a moment to comment on something that wasn’t in the debate, but happened during the analysis time afterward. Wolf Blitzer had an interview with Elizabeth Edwards, the wife of John Edwards. What possessed them to do this is beyond me, but they asked her who would do better in womens’ rights – him or Hilary Clinton. Hello! What the hell did you think she was going to say? “Oh yea, that Hilary will do so much better than Johnny Boy!”? She’s the wife of a candidate for President, for cryin’ out loud. Of course she’s going to support Edwards, no matter what her real feelings may be. She wants him in the White House as much as he does. She’s NEVER going to say that Hilary is better on some issue, because that would only hurt him. That said, she did compliment Hilary on her record, which I liked. Very polite on that.

So, I come out of this feeling pretty good, and I look forward to the Republican CNN/YouTube debate on September 17th.

Posted on
by

I finally have no excuse to not continue my two parter on the Veep. Something else came up, but luckily, it’s directly related to the subject.

Dick Cheney. The man, except not really. George Bush is really the man, but it would seem that the Vice President has had an incredibly large amount of say over big portions of what seems to be mostly domestic policy. If the Washington Post article is to be believed, then Cheney has sneaky ways of getting his agenda pushed through the White House without his name ever attached to it.

So, how much power do I think he has. I’m going to be forward, and say I haven’t studied this outside of what I’ve heard and read, all of which can be very biased. I’ll admit that. However, what I think is that the Vice President has a great amount of say in the White House. The President is a man who can’t decide everything on his own, so he needs advice. This President in particular seems to have a very small circle of advisors. Having been in a lot of places during his career – Congress, the DoD, and the private sector – Cheney has a lot of experience under his belt. President Bush was Governor of Texas, one position for which I hear doesn’t actually have an incredible amount of power. So, he needed help.

Enter Dick Cheney. A man who’s been around the block a few times in Washington. A man who clearly wishes to push an agenda. Any man who needs advice on what to do is likely to listen to someone like Cheney, and listen a lot. From what the WP article claims, the President seems to have listened a lot, and more than that, shared his policy making powers with Cheney. Anybody who’s studied American history knows that sometimes a person does more than their position requires of them (the Chief of Staff is another one of these). Especially after the attacks on 9/11, Bush will need to have had someone to focus on some domestic policies issues while he conducted two wars. Who better than Cheney (well, there is the Department Secretaries, but they need direction). He allows Cheney to focus on a few key areas. Though, I think Cheney has probably laid at least a finger in just about everything this administration has pushed for these last 6 1/2 years.

So, my point? Some Vice Presidents sit back and enjoy the title, and other get their hands dirty. Cheney would appear to be the latter type. He seems to know what he wants, and does what he must to try and make it a reality. However, you think he’d be proud of what he’s done, and want to flaunt. Instead, he’s tried to keep a lot of it secret, including making sure all the bad stuff doesn’t hurt him and the President. Enter Scooter Libby, who just got his 10 month sentence commuted by the President (probably on the recommendation of Cheney). There’s probably no doubt that Libby is involved, but is he the fall guy? It would seem that the administration makes use of these people (Michael Brown, anyone?) to great effect.

Have one guy who takes a lot of the blame, and keeps it far away enough from the President and VP. Then you can praise them later, and never have it effect you, because you’re out of office (or close enough to). Do I think Libby is a fall guy? Sort of. He definitely lied, but either agreed to or was put as the fall guy, even though nobody really thought he did anything wrong. I’m also certain the VP had a hand in this as well (Libby was his Chief of Staff, how could he not?). Yet, due to the way the VP works, we’ll probably never know.

So, to end this series, I believe that the Vice President is a hands-on type VP. However, his methods are questionable, since he’s too secretive. A government official should not be so secretive, because it makes them look shady. We’ve had secretive before, and we know how that went. If I could advise Cheney, I’d tell him to open up. But, Cheney will do as Cheney does, and we’ll see how history sees him (and what the voters say next year). Cheney will be secretive if he wants, and there’s probably little Congress can do about that. For those who really don’t like him, think about it. Only a year and a half more.

Beginning tomorrow, I’ll be doing the first entry in a series I started last year. Yes! It’s Independence Week 2007! That means positive articles every day for seven days. That includes a very special article focusing on the past, present, and future (highly optimistic for all of three) of the U.S. on July 4th. I’ll be making a few cosmetic changes to the site tonight, bringing out some very patriotic colors. Unlike last year, I intend to see it through every day (pre-writing an article if I feel like I’ll lapse). It should be a very good week! It’s Independence Week here at Dymersion, so stay tuned!