Still Going Strong

For those of you interested, my Torrid Affair (and believe me it deserves capitals, only modesty prevents the use of bold lettering) with my dancer girlfriend continues. (See below.) Her boyfriend will move out as soon as he is released from his electronc tether, which should happen at the end of next month, if the lazy SOB can pass a clean UA. After that its a GED and maybe art school. (She's real creative.)

Of couse, my wife still knows nothing about my raucuous debauchery. Just another detriment to not reading The Overpass.

Not A Great Day for Imperialism

Today the Ulster Police Omnbudsman released a report confirming what many had already suspected. Throughout the 1990's the British government and the police department sheltered members of various Irish paramilitray militias from prosecution for the murders of Irish Nationalists. This has been a allegation made by the IRA and Sinn Fein for quite some time.

Also today, the Inspector Genreals' office issued a report indicating that millions of US dollars slated for Iraqi reconstruction have been misspent or are just missing.

Fingerprints boys. Messy messy Fingerprints.

Edwards Let's Us Down ... Almost

For the past few weeks I have been looking at John Edwards' nascent campaign and liking what I see. Yesterday, he came perilously close to disappointing me. Responding to a question about Iran, Edwards gave the conventional tough guy answer of "all options are on the table." In other words, Edwards doesn't want anyone to think he is scared of putting boots on the ground in Iran and bullets in the heads of Iranians.

I am sure all of us can picture a scenario in which military intervention in needed in Iran. But once again, we have an American politician leaping to the military option in a rush to let everyone know he is not afraid to shed others' blood.

It might be nice if someone would reframe the issue and say that military action would be a last resort, and unilateral military action the absolute last resort.

It might be nice for some candidate to separate himself or herself from the herd by pointing out the terrible downside to the use of force, emphasize that violence has only bred violence and that long term solutions are not going to come from the barrel of a gun.

It might be nice if someone said, "I would use military force reluctantly and only in the face of an imminent verified threat to innocent human life. The sacrifice of lives would be the last, not the first, second, or third option I would examine. " Instead, Edwards tipped us all of that he may well be willing to continue our long history of military interference in the Middle East, much of it unjustified and much of it only to protect our "interests," not our lives.

On some level, you cannot blame him. The willingness to use military force is right up there with church going as one of the unwritten requirements for the Presidency and the more willing you are, the more we seem to like you. It like every candidate wants to show us how quick he is on the draw, not whether he (or she) thinks before pulling the trigger.

SOTU

Not much to report on here. The Pres. is for a bunch of stuff no one can really be against. Iraq was no surprise and he actually sounded kind of contrite asking for another chance.

I did note that after acknowledging global warming -- something the Administration has been denying for six years -- both the President and Vice President had to simultaneously take a drink of water. Vice was probably downing a nitro.

More Confusion on Iraq

Saturday's Washington Post contained a relevant bit of information: in November 2006, Iraqi Prime Minister al Mailiki told President Bush that he wanted US soldiers out of Baghdad, and pushed back to the limits of that city, thus leaving it in the "control" of Iraqi security forces.

We basically blew him off and instead are "surging."

Isn't one of the supposed reasons for the surge the idea that the Iraqi's cannot stand up for themselves? Sounds like they want to try. Isn't al Mailiki supposed to be the a sovereign ruler whose requests we must obey? Doesn't sound much like a budding democracy.

I hope this doesn't have anything to do with all those neat permanent military bases we built in Iraq --whose presence is one of the key reasons we lack credibility when we talk about withdrawal.

Dear Readers

I wanted to let you all know that I am leaving my wife for a dancer at the Bazooki Club. Her name is Helena and we and her five children should be very happy. We are soulmates and I suspect we will be very happy once she is no longer infectious and her boyfriend moves out.

(Not really. But I just want to see how long it takes for my dear wife to actually read my blog.)

Da Playoffs

Pleased as punch that the Brady Bunch will not make another February appearance. Given his star quality, I was far too concerned that Tom Brady would take a turn with Prince during the halftime show.

Also, as a dedicated playoff watcher, may I offer the following to my friends at Lincoln Mercury -ditch the spokesmodel. America is sick of her. She is cute and all, but her ubiquity is beginning to grate and her "sshh don't tell the boss" line betrays a need to return to community theater.

Ethics, Schmethics

According to this mornings news, a comprehensive ethics bill proposed in the Senate was killed by a Republican amendment. Apparently the bill would have done away with a lot of the lobbyist -paid perks that Senators now enjoy, including the use of corporate jets, (a favorite of Harry Reid (D Nev)). Republicans were able to scuttle the bill by insisting on including an amendment that included a mini-line item veto for the President. A cagey move as Republicans were certain that the Democrats would never give this President the line item veto. At any rate, the Senate could not muster the votes necessary to table the amendment and the GOP rebuffed a promise to take up the line item issue in a separate vote.

One commentator suggested that Sen Robert Byrd (D WV) was actually behind the move. I really hope this story gets some more play. (USA Today ignored it and concentrated on some lobbyist/spouse issues that are already taken care of). It just seems like the Senate is all too insulated from public opinion. They judge their actions based on what other Senators find acceptable which is probably not a very good measure.

McNeil Lehrer

I watched a replay of the President's appearance on PBS last night. One of the points the President kept making is that he realizes there is a "headwind" and that many are opposed to his choices. He also stated that he would "choose victory" rather than listen to his critics. Were I the President and in this situation, I suspect I too would take on a Jimmy Stewart- one -man -against-the masses tone. It is really your only option. The trouble is that the brave and stoic posture is only effective when you don't spend all your time telling people how brave and stoic you are. Maybe the President is worried his supporters won't pick up the nuance so he needs to spell it out -- "Hey!!Look how brave and alone I am. Look at me. Face in the wind. Tough going but I will be ok"

The President also said that the Iraqis owe us a thank you. For what? For invading their country, opening the Pandora's box of sectarian violence and destroying their infrastructure. For turning their country into the rugby pitch where the Middle East's conflicts will be played out? I am trying to figure out who this delusional message was intended to sway. Is there some subset of the population who still thinks this invasion was some selfless act, some necessary bit of unpleasantness that we chose to undertake for the greater good. Who are these people and why have they fallen through the cracks of our mental health system.

Free Samoa

As we all know, Congress is preparing to raise the minimum wage. Controversy broke out this week when the first draft of the House Bill exempted American Samoa from the raise. Seems like the largest employer in American Samoa - Starkist Tuna -- (whose parent company is headquartered in San Francisco), did not want to pay Samoans any more than they already get. A few calls to Speaker Pelosi and its done.

Luckily the uproar -- most of which was on the net -- forced Congress to dump the exemption and American Samoa will be treated like every other state and territory.

In Pelosi's defense it appears American Samoa had been exempt from past minimum wage increases and so could argue that this one would constitute a shock to the system. (The current wage on the island in about $3.60). Furthermore, American Samoa's non voting rep (whose name I cannot spell or pronounce) pushed the exemption -- likely at the behest of his corporate masters.

If there was a case to exempt Samoa (and I am not sure there is) someone in Pelosi's office should have been front a center explaining that. Instead it looked like Madame Speaker was simply playing the same games as her predecessors. How can she not see that one coming.

Good Googly Moogly

I saw the President's interview last night on 60 Minutes. Three things struck me immediately. First, the President is very concerned that if our troops leave Iraq, chaos and political instability will ensue. Iran will take a larger role in Mid East politics and the region may be destabilized. Trouble is, Mr. President, all of those things are happening now.

Second, the President insisted that "everyone was wrong on weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq. Everyone, that is, except our own weapons inspector, the U.N., the U.N. weapons inspector, our allies, and some in our own intelligence agencies. No, Mr. President, everyone who told you what you wanted to hear was wrong about WMD.

Third, the President seemed to say that the Mid East was more stable today because he deposed Saddam Hussein. On a balance of power analysis this is just wrong. The secular Saddam was an important check on Islamists in the region. On a different level, Saddam was an isolated autocrat reduced to veiled threats and empty rhetoric. He had no capability of building an arsenal of weapons. His army was in shambles. He was the poster boy for the efficacy of UN sanctions (save the botched oil for food program that the U.N and Great Britain botched). Suggesting that Saddam was some sort of smoldering volcano just does not comport with the facts.

But then again, this has never been a fact based Presidency.

Brooksy is At It Again

David Brooks' column yesterday was a huge disappointment. Brooks is the conservative who usually bats for average in the making sense category, but yesterday he was sounding too much like a FOX NEWS echo chamber.

His column was ostensibly about how upset he is that Democrats have been unable to offer an acceptable solution to the Iraq War. This, for Brooks, is just a searing indictment of the Democratic leadership and it makes Brooks ever so sad.

What tripe.

Brooks never bothers to deal with two problems. First there are no good answers to Iraq. Every possible solution is laden with potential downside. Pull out and you may leave behind chaos. Phased withdrawal admits defeat and emboldens Iran. Stay in and the situation only gets worse. Side with the Shiites and you alienate the majority of the Middle East. Protect the Sunnis and you alienate the majority in Iraq. That is why everyone has a suggestion, but no party has an answer. The GOP has not figured a way out, but somehow, as if by magic, the Democrats can transcend this mess.

Second, the Democrats now control Congress, not the Presidency. Their ability to control foreign policy is at best symbolic and at worst non existent. No one is going to gut funding for the war because no one is going to risk under equipping the troops we have already put there. (Notably, the appropriation for Bush's surge, will not even get to Congress until those men and women are already overseas and need guns, bullets armor and rations). Moreover, if the President did not listen to the Iraqi Study Group, why do you think he will listen to Nancy Pelosi or Joe Biden?

David, the Iraq war is a huge mess created by a President with delusions of grandeur and a serious misunderstanding of the Mid East. It is a huge mess made worse by an Administration who bullied forward despite a string of failures (or non victories). Granted there were a lot of enablers in the press and Democratic Party who did not push very hard to stop the invasion, but the bottom line accountability here stops in the West Wing.

Live with it.

Trying to lay this on the Democrats now results in just too thin a case, a bit too much haranguing without facts. Save yourself David. I am sure that in the future the Democrats will do something that is actually unprincipled or non sensical. (They are Democrats after all.) Than you can have your day and gnash your teeth. Rent your garment if you want. But until then, lock Angry David back in his closet.

Timing is Everything

This morning we were greeted with news that US forces had located and killed Al Queda activists in Somalia. On FOX News, the big story is that US & Iraqi forces killed 50 insurgents in an all night firefight.

I am sure that it is simply a coincidence that the President plans to unveil his new and improved Iraq plan tomorrow night. I am sure that we are not timing our military actions to meet some political calendar. It would be paranoid to think that .... right?

The Annoying Habit of Being Right

Last night, I watched Florida destroy Ohio State. This morning, I listened to the sports pundits continue their criticism of the BCS.

The BCS has a lot of annoying features. One of them is its accuracy at the very top of the pyramid. Florida won. Michigan lost.

Do Over

According to a recent poll of United States Senators, 58 of them wish they could change their vote on authorizing the use of force in Iraq to "no." Were such a re -vote possible, we would have never invaded that Middle Eastern country.

We were unable to reach the 3000 service men and women killed in Iraq to see if they also would like a do over.

Gerald Ford

This week, the news was packed with stories about the entertaining, moderate and deceased Gerald Ford. First let me say that I think President Ford was a very nice guy. Second, I think his light shines only brighter when compared to the excesses of our current President. As the Republican pundit Peggy Noonan said, it was comforting to know there was "a normal man in the White House." Genial and pragmatic though he was, I have to break with the conventional wisdom on Ford in one respect. I think pardoning Richard Nixon was a big mistake. I think this for primarily two reasons.

First, it seems that the rationale most often trotted out in defense of the pardon is that the investigation and trial of Richard Nixon would open worm cans, take up time and resources and "distract" the nation. In other words, impeachment would have been a royal pain in the ass. I am not sure that is ever a good reason to avoid anything. Most things worthwhile are difficult and time consuming. Holding an elected official accountable for his betrayal of the American people is no exception. Make no mistake about it. In all likelihood Richard Nixon committed impeachable offenses. Excising that wrongdoing from the bowels of our government and holding the perpetrators accountable was a worthy endeavour regardless of the time, money or "distraction" involved. I quote the word "distraction" (twice now) because I have never understood its use in this context. What exactly is it that we think was more important than safeguarding our democracy? What important tasks would insuring the rule of law distracted us from?

Second, the whole pardon argument carries with it the smell of hypocrisy. It seems that President Ford's actions are most often defended by those who, in other contexts, think the country is suffering from a chronic lack of accountability and "personal responsibility." From welfare reform to the War on Drugs, we hear all sorts of blather about people having to own up to the consequences of their actions. It simply does not make much sense that we will lock up a non violent criminal offender for decades, yet pardon a man who committed crimes of a Constitutional caliber. If our leaders are not accountable for their misdeeds, where is the rationale for anyone else being held accountable?

(Note that I will leave for another day the argument that so many people who thought it was wise and prudent to pardon Nixon wanted to impeach President Clinton for having a Johnson Wax and not owning up to it. The moral astigmatism present in that position would require pages to properly fully revel in. And by "revel in" I mean "make fun of.")

Another Milestone

This weekend, the death toll among U.S forces in Iraq crossed 3,000. In other news, over 70 bodies were discovered in and around Baghdad over the weekend -- a new record.

If only the liberal media would have reported on our successes in Iraq, this would have never happened.