“--------- and that’s the way it is on July 30, 2009”

Frankly, I am appalled by all the fuss being made about the incident in Cambridge, Mass. between Professor Gates and Sergeant Crowley. If that isn’t an example of much ado about nothing, I don’t know what is. I don’t believe race had anything to do with the issue, nor should it. It looks to me as if the rather inflated ego of a Harvard professor came up against the rather rigid routine of the Cambridge Police Force. Better to be right than reasonable. A little humility and less confrontation would have probably put the issue to rest. We can all arm-chair about what was done vs. what should have been done, but I dare say most of us would be off base if we tried. For it to go all the way to the level of the President of the United States is nothing less than ludicrous! For Obama to have dignified it is a reflection on his judgment. The beer among the guys at the White House is, in my humble opinion, just another cheap bit of political theater. Who needs it?


Don’t you just love the way people lay in wait to pounce on anything that might be the least bit offensive? As a good friend of mine once observed, “Our relationship to life is rather like a pubic hair on the edge of a toilet. If you stay there long enough, someone is sure to come along and piss you off.” If you want to be offended, there is always someone willing to accommodate you.

We really get a lot of mileage out of the word “racist” these days. Television provides us with endless hours and days of detailed coverage and analysis of the most insignificant issues regarding race, just to keep stirring the shit. You can always count on Joan Walsh to appear, with her most pained facial expression, admonishing us as to why this is such an important issue that has to be addressed. Al Sharpton can be counted on to remind us why we are a racist society. As far as I am concerned, Al Sharpton is a racist. But, do I give a damn? Would I lose any sleep over it? Hardly. He is a free man and a free agent. If his diatribe gives meaning to his role in society, so be it.

From my perspective, I resent being portrayed as a “white” person. When I look in the mirror and the millions of others of my ilk, I don’t see “white” people, I see “pink” people. However, given our political and racial sensitivities, I have no doubt that if I referred to the likes of so-called “white” people as “pink” people, I would immediately be pounced on by the conservative right as a socialist or, worse, a communist. I shudder at the mere thought of the wrath of Sarah Palin coming down on my head. So, better to be politically correct and safe with the label “white.”

Then, there is all the smoke and mirrors over a national health plan. That the average person believes the massive numbers of lies and distortions of the issue, I am surprised it didn’t die a long time ago. But, I am reassured by some of the key players, as well, such as Mitch McConnell, who carries a perennial facial expression that looks as if he had just let a wet fart in polite company. Max Baucus is rather reminiscent of a fading Hollywood star whose face lift is dropping while he struggles in vain to look forever handsome. But, that is not all, as the hawkers on television remind us. Let us not forget the inimitable Joe Lieberman. His caricature is more akin to that of the Pillsbury Dough Boy. No one can really take him seriously. They just want to squeeze him. Every one of the heavy hitters on this issue is as crooked as a Roman Road. Why in the hell we dignify or place any stock in anything they have to say is beyond me.


I think we can do with a hell of a lot more maturity when it comes to being offended. As far as what the sleaze bags in Washington are doing to us, I think we could (and should) be far better informed and take less seriously those who are so blatantly compromised because of the total corruption of any character they might have left.

Other than that, let us all continue to play the violin while the empire burns. Life is grand!


Have a good day.

Cowboy Bob
July 30, 2009

P.S. Inspiration for the lead-in goes Walter Cronkite, one of the great journalists of our time.

"The Natives are Restless"

I would have to say that, in my lifetime, I regard the four best presidencies as those of Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy. We started to go down hill with the imperious delusions of Lyndon Johnson and the paranoia of Richard Nixon.

Jimmy Carter was way off base when he opened the Social Security Fund to government largesse for immigrants. I can’t quite square that with the intent of the Social Security Act, not to mention how it has affected all those who have paid. and continue to pay, into that fund. He may be a good statesman, but he didn’t show me much as a president.

Ronald Regan rode into Washington like the Grade B movie actor we all knew him to be, deriding the excesses of government, admonishing us that “government is the problem,” all the while piling more debt on the backs of the American people during his administration than all of the presidents who preceded him in office. I am still suspect that the ruse deifying him was so successful that he is freeze-dried somewhere waiting to be dragged out by the Republican Party for ceremonial occasions.

George H.W. Bush? Well, he and Gerald Ford would have made good fraternity brothers, what with all their personal charisma and notable accomplishments in office.

Bill Clinton was and continues to be a national disgrace, Monica Lewinsky not with standing. Virtue of any kind is an alien concept to this man. Despite his ability to chatter in the vernacular of the African-Americans and the working class, he is no friend of either. He sold his soul to big money. It was he who signed the bill deregulating the financial industries. It was he who had insiders like Robert Rubin, Larry Summers, Rahm Emanuel and the likes in key positions within his administration. It was he who was an advocate for NAFTA and who was the great champion of free trade that effectively emasculated our industrial base and competitive place in the world economy. He baited the trap as he was leaving office and ------

George W. Bush took the bait when the Supreme Court ordained him President. As Clinton gave new meaning to the term, “greed,” Bush gave new meaning to the term “Commander in Chief.” The haunting words of President Eisenhower regarding the dangers of the Military-Industrial Complex came floating back from an earlier time. I would append that term to read Military-Industrial-Intelligence Complex. Bush was the coward and the Office of President was the club that enabled him to be a bully.

We were eager for a fresh face, an honest man and a decent soul to assume the Presidency. Barack Obama gave this nation new hope and a promise for a better and more just future. Instead, he gave us a cabinet heavily weighted with re-treads from the Clinton Administration in the likes of Larry Summers, Rahm Emanuel, and others with ties and loyalties to Wall Street, all the while marginalizing superior economic and financial minds that might have helped to solve, rather than exacerbate, our economic problems. While he has pandered to Wall Street, he has promised a new future of abundance and plenty for working class America. Where is it? How can good jobs be promised to a work force whose means of labor have long ago been shipped overseas? If they are to be retrained for new, environmentally friendly jobs, how are they going to support their families while they are going to school? Where are all those “shovel-ready” jobs that are supposed to be waiting for those eager to render honest labor in exchange for a home, food on the table, education for their kids and quality healthcare? I don’t see any nor do most of those who heard and put stock in those same promises. All who have lost their jobs and their homes are still waiting for their bailout. Compared to what was so lavishly bestowed on Wall Street, the bailout simply wasn’t there for others equally or more deserving. A whole lot of people out in the hinterlands don’t see much happening. However, at the end of the day, he sure gives a good speech, doesn’t he?

I live in a rural community on the fringe of a major metropolitan area. I am retired, with friends from across the socio-economic spectrum. I can tell you, unequivocally, that they see little difference between Republicans and Democrats, except in name. Both parties are perceived as being held hostage by corporations and big money, aided and abetted by the offices they hold and the largesse that comes from their seducers. When did the social, economic and moral values that sustained our government institutions give way to those of a perversity of greed and avarice known only to Wall Street, K Street, the Military-Industrial Complex and the corporate news media? I would add, those same folks don’t place much stock in President Obama and the stuff he peddles either.

Like most of us, I never paid much attention to the professed merits of a third political party. However, I am beginning to rethink my position. A very wise man opined to me many years ago that, when we as a people are no longer shocked by anything, then the distinction between right and wrong becomes blurred, and it only becomes more so with time. We have been on a downward trajectory for a very long time that has only increased in mass and speed. We tolerate things from our political and business establishment that would have been unthinkable in the not-too-distant past.

Why do we tolerate the corrupting influence of lobbyists (both foreign and domestic) and their bulging pockets of money as a legitimate part of our government process? Aren’t the people we elect to public office there because of our votes and there, ostensibly, to serve us, the body politic? Aren’t the activities of lobbyists and the acceptance of huge sums of money by politicians clearly a conflict of interest with those of the electorate? Why do we blithely accept “pork barrel projects” as just part of doing business in Washington? Isn’t that the people’s money being garnered for pet projects by the fat cats we euphemistically refer to as “servants of the people?” Why is this regarded as “business as usual,” rather than the egregious conduct it is?

Why have we allowed corporations to continue with all of the rights and privileges of citizens just because it became precedent over the course of history, reputedly because of an “error” by a two-bit law clerk? That precedent was never legislated. Is it not time to correct one of the most deadly assaults on our democracy and the people of this country? They have finally arrived at the point where we are expected to defer to many of them as simply “too big to fail.” Too big to fail by whose measure? By those who have gone to Washington on our votes only to sell themselves to the huge sums of money and massive power of an entity that has claimed the right to be one of us, without ever having been legitimated by action of our government and the consent of the people?

Why do we tolerate the deliberative bodies sitting in the Capitol Building as representatives of the people who, in fact, behave as if they have an imperial mandate from some invisible monarch, the interests of those who put them there be damned? Their bloated salaries, benefits and perks (which they determine for themselves) would tend to underscore that perception. Why do we allow them to serve in perpetuity, often to the point of being so feeble and incapacitated they can’t function? Shouldn’t there be a retirement age for them as there is for the rest of us? But, most of all, why do we tolerate their blatant corruption, serving as the pawns of big money and corporate power to the detriment and at the expense of those who have worked so hard and paid so much to make this country what it is supposed to be?

Why do we have a Supreme Court that is regarded as a deliberative, judicial body when, in fact, it is clearly political and legislates accordingly? Why is there more concern about whether a nominee is a liberal or a conservative than there is for his/her judicial record prior to ascending to the highest court in the land?

Why have we created and supported what amounts to an imperial presidency? He is our elected Head of State, not a reincarnation of the emperors of Ancient Rome. The very trappings we have condoned for the office and the excesses we tolerate would give anyone serving in the office a swelled head and a distorted perception of reality. He works for the people of the United States, not the corporate cartels of Wall Street, the health care industries, foreign governments, etc.

Why do we allow corporate ownership of the nation’s news media that is supposed to serve as the people’s watchdog on our government? They should be telling us where our government has failed us rather than brainwashing us into believing the company line from all the putrid environs inside the Beltway!

I believe the time has come to accept the fact that both major political parties serve the same interests, just in different ways. They do not represent the interests of the American people whose labors and lives have made this country what it is. They are like the parasite that can’t see that he is killing the host. It is time for them to stop sucking the very life-blood out of this country in order to serve the masters of greed in the name of free enterprise and de-regulation. It is time to stop the hemorrhaging of our national resources by shipping our industrial base overseas and outsourcing jobs to cheaper labor markets around the world. It is time to stop giving away that which rightfully belongs to the people who have labored so hard to provide for a decent standard of living and a secure old age. Those resources belong to us, not to cheap labor pouring across our southern borders in order to feed the avarice of business interests that want to avoid paying a decent wage and providing a respectable package of benefits to those who labor on their behalf. We need to stop allowing drug dealers and criminals to freely enter this country, only to set up shop on our public lands and on our city streets. Like all of those who came before them and those who have legally followed, they haven’t earned the right to our resources, the bleeding hearts be damned. It is time for those of the cloth to tend to our spiritual needs rather than serving as advocates for plundering our resources out of some perverted notion that they have an inherent right to do so. Do you suppose God told them to?

I am all for this country being a responsible part of the world community, but I am not in favor of a pathological need to apologize for what we are because of what they are not. We are what we are because of the blood, sweat and tears shed by our ancestors. Like us, let them make the same sacrifices for democratic forms of government in their homelands that will serve the people, rather than the paragons of absolute power and corruption inherent in their government institutions, and the oppressive power of big business. Let them emulate all that we have become, rather than allowing them to emasculate us for what we are.

We sold our souls and abandoned the need to nurture those virtues that build character and responsibility in favor of the big house, the fancy cars, the pursuit of the perfect body and sexual pleasures that would have been the envy of the gods of ancient Greece. Big business interests and the political establishment that enabled them gave us the tools to live beyond our means so they could reap the vast wealth created by our overly stimulated appetites. The result has been the collapse of the house of cards, with the ill-gained spoils created by the wealthy remaining with them, while the average American descends deeper into a state of destitution brought on by their own materialistic and hedonistic pursuits. As they are responsible for their avarice, we are responsible for having abandoned the cardinal lessons of history that built and sustained our national character.

From conversations I have had with members of the intellectual community, from merchants, from professionals, from blue-collar workers, from those who work the land and labor in the fields, I am convinced the time is ripe for serious consideration of a new political party that is built on the intent and wisdom of the Founding Fathers, and as embodied in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. We need a government that is truly one “of the people, for the people and by the people.” Honesty and integrity must be the hallmarks of such an endeavor. We must end self-serving practices that prostitute the foundations of our political parties, and reign in the elected representatives who profit from the largesse of those whose interests are diametrically opposed to those of the citizens of this country. Moreover, we need to stop deluding ourselves into believing that they have our interests at heart. Look at Wall Street. I always thought the fundamentals of a free market meant, if you invested wisely, you reaped the profits. On the other hand, if you invested foolishly, you took the hit for your poor judgment. That distinction has morphed into the notion that if you win, you win. However, if you lose, you still win; all at the taxpayers’ expense. Aristotle would turn over in his grave at that bit of twisted logic.

Look at all that we have reaped from being too tolerant of corrupt politics and corporate domination of our economy, and a Fourth Estate that serves the centers of power at the expense of the people. The current debate on health care reform is a good example. The massive amounts of money spent on bombarding us with lies designed to put the kiss of death on a single-payer system boggles the mind. What happened to “truth in advertising?” Truth is an absolute concept, or at least I thought it was. It is not situational. As a result, in the name of bi-partisanship and inclusiveness, we have the classic example of undermining what is best for the country. We run up the cost of healthcare so profit-making healthcare industries can continue to prosper at the expense of the taxpayer. It is reminiscent of the example of that which says, “The definition of an appeaser is one who keeps feeding the alligators hoping they will eat him last.” Consensus decision-making vs. leadership? Just look at who is defending the business interests of healthcare. It is not just Republicans or Democrats; it is both. The President is, also, doing his part by his lukewarm support of a “single-payer option,“ and behind-the-scenes politics.

We need to get over our braggadocio about being the richest nation in the world. We gave away the store eons ago. Ordaining ourselves as the protectors of the world siphoned off (and still does) billions and billions of dollars to the military-industrial complex and, just because of the nature of the beast, very little is returned to the economy. We forego desperately needed programs for the population and go, with begging bowl in hand, to rich nations around the world (even adversaries) hoping they will loan us enough to keep the ship afloat (no pun intended). Rich? Who said that? We are flat-ass broke and going deeper in the hole with each passing day as our political and corporate elites continue satiating their gluttonous appetites, while we passively feed ourselves by sweeping the crumbs off the floor. As the health care industries reap gargantuan profits, we just get sicker and sicker, and go with less and less as premiums go up and up.

We are expected to buy into the bull crap that the economy is improving, all the while feeding the bandits on Wall Street as the average family falls victim to the loss of their jobs, foreclosure on their homes, and go from the supermarket to the food bank just to stay alive. Is that what we want? Is that what we are all about? I don’t think so.

It has been said that a shrewd man never underestimates what may lie behind the eyes of the man he is looking at. That is an apt caution as to where I see this country now. There are far more people who are very well attuned to what is actually going on and how they are getting short changed by the current brand and mix of politics in Washington. They are aware of the preponderance of former members of the Clinton Administration who are particularly close to the President and hold key positions of influence in his administration, especially when it comes to dealings with Wall Street and the favors doled out to them compared to the rest of the economy. All of which is wrapped in a shroud of secrecy with scant attention being paid to the professed virtues of transparency and accountability aided, once again and contrary to his campaign rhetoric, by our President. They are much more conversant about the pernicious activities and pervasive influence of the likes of Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and the Bank of America, enabled and assisted by such notables as Robert Rubin, Larry Summers, Timothy Geithner, Henry Paulson and Ben Bernanke. They see the sweetheart deals given to the bandits of Wall Street, what with their fat salaries and bonuses underwritten by the taxpayers of this country. All the while they go without work, see their homes repossessed and go without food and healthcare. They are well aware of who is getting the short end of the stick. More and more of these folks have come to mistrust the President, what with his talking out of both sides of his mouth when it comes to stimulus programs for middle-class working Americans, health care, etc., ad nauseum. Barack Obama is being seen more in political terms than in those of a leader who can be trusted. I predict it is only going to get worse. The dismissive arrogance of Congress is even more glaring. As for corporate news media they, too, fawn over and feed from the largesse of the rich and powerful. More and more people now depend on alternative sources for their news. Thank God for the Internet!

If we don’t seriously take stock of what we were intended to be vs. what we have become, and set ourselves to the task of cleaning up the mess and righting the wrongs of the past, we are surely destined to go the way of all great empires throughout history. We have to start by adopting a humility as to all we are and all we are not, by our very nature as mere mortals, followed by the courage and the determination to put in place institutions that will enable us to foster that which is best about us and remain vigilant against that which is the worst within us.

For too long those of us who exist at the mercy of big money, big business and a corrupt government have been content to behave as if we were a band of sheep being led to the slaughter. It is time to assert ourselves and demand all that went into our votes. We should expect and insist on integrity and openness in our government and by our government institutions. We need new leadership. Not relics, extremists or those of the lunatic fringe from the Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians or the Green Party. We need a person of strength and character, who is charismatic, articulate and independently wealthy, and supported by a political party that is genuinely dedicated to all that made this country great.

Change we can believe in? Already been there, done that. We are waiting for something more credible and tangible. Meanwhile, patience is running out. The natives are restless.


Cowboy Bob
July 27, 2009
　
　
　

"Where is the Hope?"

In the course of reflecting back on my lifetime, I vividly recall sitting in front of a Philco console radio with members of my family, listening to the haunting words of Franklin D. Roosevelt as he intoned the somber announcement of the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor by the Empire of Japan on December 7, 1941; “a day that will live in infamy.” That is my first clear memory of the horrors of a war that would be the focus of the United States for the next 4 years.

I can still recall the newscasts of the setbacks and triumphs of the European Theater, the African Theater and the Pacific Theater. I can still see the pennants hanging in the windows of the homes of those whose sons were serving in or who had been lost to the ravages of war. We could not pass by one of those homes without being humbled by the meaning behind each of those reminders of the sacrifice that had been brought down on this nation.

Despite our many imperfections, and there were many, we were for the most part a nation of good and decent people. To this very day, the overwhelming generosity of the American people remains unmatched by what we did for the nations that had been ravaged by the conquest of dictators and the following liberation of those so deeply affected by their evil, including our former adversaries.

From this war came the beginnings of a stark reminder of all of those who had been left behind in the wake of the pursuit of “liberty and justice for all,” and they were right in our own backyard. It was a piece of our national fabric that could no longer be ignored. Every immigrant population that ever hit the shores of this country, voluntary and forced alike, had to struggle for and earn their place in the sun, their part of the American dream. Internment camps for the Japanese Americans during World War II were but the latest reflection of that struggle. It was to be manifest in myriad ways and by many others, some of whom had a longer and more difficult road to follow towards becoming Americans. Those most forgotten were the Native Americans, long ago forced onto some of the poorest real estate and into the most remote backwaters of this country, and where they remain to this very day. Perhaps it is too much for us to be reminded of what was taken by all those “immigrants” and what rightfully belonged to an indigenous people long before this continent was known to the rest of the world.

The post war years brought a surge in economic activity in response to the pent-up demand of scarcity created by the war machine. Homes, durable goods and discretionary spending became the order of the day. However, through it all we retained a sense of decency, honor, integrity, dignity and propriety that held our social fabric together. We could count on each other and the social system for support. That is not to say we were without our faults, but some of what were regarded as flaws was an underlying hypocrisy that enabled us to carry on with some semblance of civility. I am not so sure that was altogether bad.

Then came the 60’s and the flood gates of “freedom” opened. We were engulfed by the excesses of the extreme. There was the drug culture, free love, campus revolts, etc. The mantra of “do your own thing!” carried the day. Selflessness morphed into a wave of selfishness that became instantly legitimized by having thrown off the yoke of convention. Instead of a nation of “us” we became a nation of “me.”

It would be naive to subscribe to the notion that this phenomenon reflected an “all or nothing” proposition. To be sure, there was a lot of good that resulted in this new found openness and freedom, but in many respects we threw the baby out with the bathwater. This was the time when, in my opinion, the seeds of greed as a legitimate pursuit were sown and which have taken us down the path of materialism, hedonism and depravity. We wanted it all and we were prepared to sell out everything and everybody in the pursuit of those ambitions. Greed became a noble pursuit, money became our god, and human misery was just a part of the cost of “having it all.”

We dismantled and sold off our industrial base to the new Utopian concept of globalization and free trade, never stopping to reflect on what the long-term consequences of those pursuits would be. We invested in every conceivable “get-rich” scheme imaginable. Cheap imported goods and a pocket full of plastic cards opened the world of riches to us all. We moved into our faux mansions with kitchens that would be the envy of Julia Childs, and bathrooms that would have made Polly Adler and Sally Stanford salivate at the “Romanesque” delights that could be had in such lavish surroundings. Mercedes, BMW’s, Lexus and the like became the “in” cars for those who were obsessed with keeping up appearances, and who had the means to tap into the credit pool necessary to sustain the illusion.

We managed to slip from an age of reason to an age of information. The warmth and comfort of human relationships gave way to the coldness and impersonality of communications and all the electronic gadgets that have made that possible. We no longer talk to each other. Rather, we ostensibly “communicate” by Blackberry, Face Book and Twitter. We can easily be totally alone in a crowd. We don’t need to take the time to interact with others around us. Is that healthy? I don’t think so.

We thrive on an advertising diet of “fun” in every conceivable form. Our focus is on the body beautiful and, more specifically, on those parts of the anatomy that have to do with the erotic pleasures of life. Erectile dysfunction is today’s equivalent of the bubonic plague. Nothing in life is possible without being in a semi-nude state, from the simple act of eating a hamburger to pursuing a dietary regimen that will guarantee the perfect body within a matter of weeks!

The reproductive organs haven’t changed over the course of the ages. They still remain much the same and serve the same functions. Most people know what they look like and how to use them. So, what is the big deal with showing a bit of cleavage, or sub-pubic flesh that requires waxing in order to be acceptable, and bikinis that have nothing to do with the function of swimming? I am almost convinced that, in order to be fashionable in today‘s world, there has to be a bit of the slut in every woman. The next “fashion statement” I expect to see is something on the order of a small hole in the crotch of men’s trousers so the viewing public can be titillated with a glimpse of partially exposed hairy scrota. Nothing would surprise me anymore. But, at the end of the day, it is a reflection on the minds and values of our human response to the corporate peddlers of anything that makes money. There is absolutely no dignity associated with much of anything marketed by commerce, the entertainment industry and the mass media. Vulgarity is very much “in.”

Spirituality is looked upon as something to be sold on the Internet by gurus of one ilk or another. Religion has been co-opted by those who market a “touchy-feely” brand of salvation, or a theology of absolutes and intolerance that pander to our worst instincts. They are the stuff of those who honestly believe God wants everyone to be rich, or who see themselves as the guardians and bastions of all that is good and righteous, the human cost be damned. The former gives a nobility of purpose to the pursuit of our baser side and the latter exiles from salvation anyone who dares to challenge their system of beliefs. Where, I ask you, is reason and common sense in all this?

So, what is the bottom line? Those of the current generation will never see the day when they can hold a candle to those who survived the Great Depression, those who endured the horrors of the Great War, those who survived the death camps of Nazi Germany, those who stormed the beaches at Normandy, and the countless millions of others who sacrificed, supported and stood behind them. We no longer have a sense of what is good and decent and kind and generous. Why?

• Because our moral compass is broken and we are off course.
• Because we cannot defer gratification and temper our proclivity for excesses.
• Because we either cannot or will not see that our political establishment is hopelessly corrupt and totally self-serving.
• Because we are blind to the deadly seduction and tyranny of multi-national corporations and the vast wealth created by their pursuits.
• Because we cannot feel the pain of or demonstrate a modicum of empathy for our fellow man.
• Because we simply don’t have the ability to think, question or feel anything beyond what is required in the pursuit of our own materialistic and hedonistic appetites.
• Because we are too complacent, lack the discipline and sacrifice, or simply don’t have the guts to right the wrongs of the past in order to save the future for those who will follow us.
• Because we have no sense of decency, decorum and propriety that makes for a civilized society.
• Because we have entrusted our future to the hollow promises of “change” promised by the current occupant of the White House, the dubious successes of the reconstituted Cabinet from the former Clinton Administration, and the shallow hope of a better future embodied in the likes of Sarah Palin.
• Because we are the culmination of a wayward nation that has finally arrived at a generation of our own making --- humanoids and automatons.
  

With this as our legacy, what hope is there for the future? Given the grotesque public adoration and the perverted attempt to deify Michael Jackson, I would submit, not a hell of a lot.

Cowboy Bob
July 10, 2009

"The Grand Deception Continues"

Despite my enthusiasm for Barack Obama during his campaign and up to the time of his inauguration, my confidence in him has steadily eroded since he took office. I see him much less as an inspirational leader and more of a ruthless, raw politician, in the game far more for himself and his rich and influential buddies than for the American people. However, that should come as no surprise against the backdrop of how our so-called “democracy” actually works. Promise the peasants the moon up front and throw them a few crumbs after the fact. While politicians play behind the scenes with the high rollers and lace their pockets with tons of money, they simply keep us, the masses, fat, dumb and happy so they can conduct their business without so much as a whimper. The main stream media fawns all over them and keeps us focused on diversionary issues so we don’t know or aren’t aware of what is really going on.

Our resident houseguest at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue does a masterful job of talking out of both sides of his mouth. Any semblance between his campaign promises and what we actually get is purely coincidental. However, community organizers manage by consensus. Hence his obsession with partisanship to the point of being ridiculous. That style of management mocks real leadership.

Those sitting in opulent offices in the Capitol Building need to realize we are living in tough and dangerous times. We need a strong, honest leader who has a hefty set of gonads and isn’t afraid to show them when the situation calls for it. I, for one, have had a belly full of having them blow smoke up our asses and distract us with an endless stream of platitudes while they administer another dose of Washington politics as usual. I am tired of being robbed, patronized, seduced and oppressed by the political scum covering our nation’s capitol. We need to see a resurgence of real honesty, genuine integrity, a well-grounded sense of morality and the courage to do what needs to be done in order to fix the system. We don’t need any more hot air and lofty speeches to cloud the issues and sugar coat the problems we face.

If we really want meaningful reform within the Beltway, let’s call a spade a spade and get on with real reform, clean up the mess and truly get on with the “people’s business.”

Let’s start by legislating a separate and independent news media, free of corporate ownership and control, and one that has a mandate to be a bona fide watchdog on government. I don’t see that it would take a cadre of lawyers and intellectuals to put that one together.

If corporations have too much power, then strip them of their status as human beings and redefine their status for what they are. Let real people keep them honest and properly regulated. Let them serve us rather than the reverse. They belong to us, not the other way around. They have gotten away with their favored status only because some legal clerk either deliberately or inadvertently screwed up and precedent took over. Mistakes can be corrected and it sure looks like this is one that is crying to be rectified.

If big money and the lobbyists who represent them are corrupting our government and the people who represent us, then pass a law outlawing the whole damned practice. That shouldn’t be too difficult to accomplish. If elected officials need campaign contributions, then let them go back home, face their constituents and earn their support for another term. If they need campaign funds, let them ask for them from those who put them in office, not a bunch of corrupt and self-serving parasites pursuing their own ends at our expense, and destroying the nation in the process. If they need technical assistance in order to draft a particular piece of legislation, let them hire a consultant and pay them with government funds that are subject to government audit and oversight. They have become far too insulated and arrogant what with living in their Georgetown mansions, Virginia estates and surrounding posh environs. We vote them into office and they should damn well be accountable to us. Although they act like it, they have not morphed into royalty by virtue of having been in office too long. They drop their drawers the same way as we do.

If complacency and power become problems because of tenure, then perhaps we need to revisit the whole notion of term limits. The question we need to address is, “Whose interests are best served by what we have and how do we ensure that they will always be those of the electorate, not the elected?” Just because we have always done something a certain way doesn’t make it right.

The sacred notion of seniority and all the trappings that go with it trouble me deeply. Why is that necessary and by what right is greater power bestowed on the incumbent because he/she has managed to stay in office longer? By what right does his/her constituency enjoy greater influence and privilege because of tenure? It all seems rather unfair and makes no sense. There ought to be a better and more democratic way to accomplish this rather than what is assumed by the amount of time one has enjoyed squatter’s rights in office. It breeds an unhealthy hierarchy and concentrates too much power in the hands of a few. The only real benefit I see is what may accrue to the incumbent and the amount he/she is permitted to steal before his/her colleagues rise up in a token display of righteous indignation.

We need a real oversight and audit function with both the power and independence to make a discernable difference in the way we collect and spend the people’s money. Every arm of government and every agency should be subject to the same scrutiny and accountability, including our defense establishment. What we have appears to be much too weak for what has to be done, given the vast amounts of money involved, and the disproportionate amount of influence enjoyed by different agencies within the overall structure of our Federal Government. This is no place for sacred cows.

I think “diversity” is one of the biggest piles of bull crap I have ever seen. I am sick of the hollow rhetoric, while myriad splinter groups pursue their own vested interests, and our so-called elected representatives give away the store in order to court their favor and garner their votes. If they represent all of us, why is there such a concerted effort to incur their political favor? If the spoils to be had by “service” as an elected official weren’t so lucrative, why in the hell do they do everything they can to remain in power? Duh! How does this practice unite us as a nation?

We profess to be one people, but have you noticed how it has crept into our national fabric to place our ethnicity first and our nationality second? Why do we refer to ourselves as Irish-Americans, Italian-Americans, Japanese-Americans, Mexican-Americans, African-Americans, etc., ad nauseam? Rather, should we not operate within a frame of reference such as “I am an American of Irish descent,” or “I am an American of African descent,” or “I am an American of Japanese descent, etc.?” Does that not more accurately reflect what we should think of when we call ourselves “Americans?”

It seems to me we should be one nation, with one common language, one set of laws for all and equal rights for everyone. Just because a particular ethnic group has taken it upon themselves to flaunt compliance with and break the laws of the land certainly doesn’t make it right. If we don’t all play by the same rules, how can there be any functional social order? If we continue with this silly obsession, we will become so distracted from who and what we are that governing will be more akin to a constant struggle for power within the context of a popularity contest, rather than a way of getting the work of the nation done through an open and honest government that serves us all, equally. Those who have come here legally and who have become a part of what we refer to as “one nation” seem to be getting short changed in the deal. That doesn’t seem quite fair to me. The Pledge of Allegiance ends with the words, “……one Nation under God, indivisible, With Liberty and Justice for All.” I don’t see why those words should be a problem for anyone.

To the extent that our laws against discrimination do not serve everyone equally, then they should be strengthened or changed, and enforced to make sure they do. Let’s fix the problem, not abandon it. Quotas should not replace justice. Rights and privilege should go with citizenship, not ethnicity.

Now, I have a few questions for the “Charmer,” some of whose promises ring hollow and are clouded from the transparency we were assured would be a part of his administration.

Why has this administration chosen to shroud the dealings between the government and the financial houses on Wall Street in secrecy? What is really going on and how much of the taxpayer’s money have they really been given? Is it really just 750 billion dollars in TARP funds, or is it the one or more trillions of dollars that we keep hearing about? Better economic minds than those surrounding the President see things much differently and make a whole lot more sense. There is so little we do know and so much we don’t know.

Why has this administration cast its lot with the likes of Larry Summers and Tim Geithner, both of whom have a track record and reputations for having compromised their objectivity by previous relationships with the very institutions on Wall Street they are supposed to be regulating?

Why has this administration dismissed, ignored or marginalized distinguished economists from any participation the discourse on dealing with the financial crisis? I refer, specifically, to Joseph Stiglitz of Columbia University (Nobel Laureate), Nouriel Roubini of New York University, James Galbraith of the University of Texas, Paul Krugman of Princeton University (Nobel Laureate), Robert Reich of the University of California at Berkeley, and Simon Johnson of MIT and former Chief Economist for the International Monetary Fund?

Why was the President, ostensibly, unaware of the following? He doesn’t impress me as a person who has a problem with recall.

1. The AIG bonuses that his administration approved and signed into a bill.
2. The man nominated for Secretary of Commerce was under investigation in a bribery scandal.
3. The man nominated for Secretary of Health and Human Services, one of the biggest lobbyists for the health care industries, had seriously compromised himself on his tax obligations.
4. The man nominated for Secretary of the Treasury had tax issues.
5. The man nominated for U.S. Trade Representative had tax issues.
6. The woman nominated for Chief Performance Officer had tax issues.
7. The man nominated to be the No.2 at the EPA was under investigation
for mismanaging 25 million dollars in EPA grants.

Why has the President deliberately engineered the process on a National Health Plan so those in favor of a single-payer system are marginalized from deliberations on the matter? Yet, over sixty percent of Americans prefer that option. He is pandering to those who bear sole responsibility for the outrageous escalation in the cost of healthcare, excluded millions from coverage and has millions of others forced into bankruptcy. Those who are fighting any kind of a national system are, like the financial industries, the very ones who have precipitated the crises we now face.

From 2003 to 2007, the combined profits of the nation’s major health insurance
companies increased by 170 percent. CEO compensation for the top seven health
insurance companies now average 14.2 million dollars!

Why has there been such a gross difference in the financial commitments to the automobile industries and his stimulus package, compared to the blank check given to the financial institutions? The disparity is glaring and smarts of a bias in favor of those who have, literally, plundered the nation and, indeed, the world. Meanwhile the common man suffers inordinately because of his failure to act proportionately and in a timely manner because of other priorities that they don’t understand, if they can be understood at all. Frankly, I don’t think Summers and Geithner are up to the job. There are better minds available and the administration is much too bright not to know that.

Why has the President back peddled on his promises regarding warrantless wiretapping?

Why has the President done an about-face on his campaign promise regarding the issue of “Don’t ask, don’t tell” in the military?

Why has the President hedged his position on the closure of GITMO and the right of habeas corpus?

The President has a solemn obligation to be a role model that embodies the virtues of honesty, integrity and transparency we rightfully expect from our elected officials. To the extent that he has failed to do so, he has tarnished the image of the office he occupies. Given what we have been through the last 16 years, we expect and deserve better. This is not the time for political maneuvering, but it is the time for statesmanship. Instead, we got a calculating, ruthless politician of the worst kind. And all of us common folk are paying dearly for having put him in office.

For us to continue to believe that we have a two-party system is folly. Democrats and Republicans all share the same objectives, albeit a slight difference in the way they choose to get there. They feed from the same largesse of corruption that dominates and controls our nation’s capitol. Absent a viable third party, I don’t see any hope beyond an informed electorate and an iron-clad will to change what we have.

I recall recently watching Bill Moyer’s Journal on Public Broadcasting when his guest, an outstanding writer and scholar, said his biggest fear was that we were moving to a new form of government, which he labeled “Corporate Government.” Given all that I have seen since 1992, compounded by what has transpired in the last 5 months, I fear corporate government is already upon us. The pervasive power and influence of multi-national corporations, coupled with the scale of corruption in our nation’s capitol, and the prevailing level of ignorance and complacency among the populace is so formidable I don’t see how it can be stopped. The American form of democracy is so broken, I don’t hold out much hope that it can be fixed.

The ending in the last sentence of Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address are these words, “---- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.” In the span of just 146 years it appears as if the culmination of this magnificent experiment in American democracy has descended into the abyss of “a government of corporations, by corporations and for corporations.” Kind of scary, isn’t it?

The classic definition of credibility is “when a person’s actions are consistent with his words.” Our incumbent president has failed miserably in that regard. The nation awaits, with baited breath, for the unfolding of the future this administration has charted for us.

Do we get dressed up for a parade or simply bend over and grab our ankles once again?


Cowboy Bob
June 9, 2009

“Do Pigs Fly?“

　

I have a great respect for all this country represents to the world. For all its foibles throughout history, in the final analysis, we have done pretty well in terms of what we have accomplished. I have had the good fortune of living through over seventy years of that history. Like all reasonably rational people, I have had my moments and have not hesitated to voice them. But, like a good marriage, if it is going to work and stand the test of time, you have to have the courage to disagree and hold true to your convictions when the situation calls for it, but remain committed through it all. I am not an ideologue. I do not deal in absolutes. That is irresponsible and unfair to this country.

I have witnessed quite an evolution and metamorphosis in our national fabric during my lifetime. I regard the best decades of my life the 1940’s, 1950’s and the 1960‘s. The awful war that struck fear in the heart of a young boy came to an end. Those thousands of young men came home full of hope and promise for the future. As a nation, we were so proud of what they had accomplished and we stood strong on the principles that had led us to victory, principles that we knew would shape this country for some time to come. To be sure, we had the stain on our history of the incarceration of the Japanese-Americans, the second-class citizenship of African-Americans and, the most forgotten of all, the Native Americans. But we were a good and decent people who had the where- with-all to address those issues in a fair and just manner. That was just a part of who and what we were. After what our nation had been through, we were all very mindful of the fact that we were a part of the international family of nations and our world would never be quite the same because of it. We were ready and willing to make things better in peace just as we had in war. We may not have always been absolutely certain about issues, but we knew it was within us to rise to the occasion improvement always demands.
Beginning with the decade of the 1970’s I saw a decline in that sense of decency that was such an integral part of us as a people. I don’t necessarily take great umbrage at the objectives, but I do with the manner in which we have chosen to realize those objectives. Our frame of reference appears to have shifted from one of “we” to one of “me.” We talk a good story what with all the rhetoric about diversity, inclusiveness, etc., but in the process we have lost sight of what is just good old common sense. We seem to be more content with what is expedient and trite than what may be arduous but right. We rationalize and accept the baser sides of our human nature because we don’t have the fortitude to stand on principle and defend common decency as a virtue. Our colleges and universities, once the bastions of reason and discourse, have become little more than sophisticated vocational institutes and high tech trade schools.

As a former executive, I learned to accept the fact that all formal organizations are political and can have a will of their own, which is not always noble. Responsible ownership and good management strive to nurture a higher purpose, keep focused on the dynamics of the market and maintain a healthy competitive edge. Fundamental to success in that regard is a sound plan for the future and a self-correcting planning process. Most conceptualize that process into short-term, intermediate and long-range goals. Ideally, the efficacy of that process is evaluated at the end of each year, with appropriate adjustments made in each of the three phases based on the results of the past year. Good planning requires commitment, discipline and objectivity. It cannot be done by the seat of your pants and for no other reason than because it is required. It has to be done because it is essential and imperative to a viable and healthy organization.

Despite being a collection of elitists and egalitarians, I suspect most of us would agree that the Founding Fathers probably put together one of the most enduring plans ever conceived as a blueprint for a democratic form of government. All of the essential elements were put in place for governing the new nation that had been created. However, like all organized efforts, the job is never done. It is continually evolving with the tides of time and history. For it to be a healthy process, the changes brought about through the process of historical evolution must be evaluated in terms of their subsequent impact. That has been our most egregious failing, which has brought about an evolution that has not necessarily resulted in an orderly, healthier or more viable form of democracy. That is the scrutiny that was essential from the outset, but which has rarely, if ever, occurred in fact.

With the passage of every amendment, law, court decision, etc., it would appear as if no one ever stopped and asked the question, “Where is all this taking us?” “What are the intended consequences of this action?” And, further down the road after the fact, “What have been the unintended consequences?” Did anyone bother to ask? Did anyone care? We seem to have forged full speed ahead without the remotest notion of what had been wrought by one fleeting moment of dubious enlightenment. Over 200 years of history and no one seems to have been the least bit concerned about the end result of actions that had a profound and lasting effect on the intent of the Founding Fathers and the future of the Republic! Isn’t that rather like putting the Titanic on autopilot in the middle of an ice flow?

Today we have the largest collection of the dregs of humanity in our Nation’s Capitol to be found in any city and its surrounding environs anywhere in the world. The stench from all they are and are not rises to the heavens in one gigantic sickening affront to God. The place is teeming with people who are totally amoral, lacking any concept of right vs. wrong, honor, decency, character, integrity, etc. The four branches of government live to foster their own vested self interests at the expense of those they have been elected to serve. They are aided and abetted by corporations, lobbyists, media celebrities, oligarchs, plutocrats, etc. We are fed a diet of deception that numbs the senses and deceives us as to what our reality actually is. The nation suffers, writhing in agony while they indulge their own gluttonous, materialistic and hedonistic appetites as they shower us with hollow words and lofty promises. They are where they are and what they are because of their collective and cunning ability to prostitute the spirit and intent of the Constitution for their own ends. Any semblance of what we have vs. what was intended by the Founding Fathers is purely coincidental.

I wonder what the outcome would be if the entire history of our government was subjected to the rigors and principles of sound planning by the best and brightest minds that could be assembled. What do you think would be the outcome if a collection of graduate students, from the finest universities and colleges in the United States, and in disciplines that relate to the functions of government, was assembled for the explicit purpose of engaging in a retrospective assessment of the actions of our federal government from its inception to the present day? The focus would have to be on the Executive Branch, the Legislative Branch, the Judicial Branch, and all agencies attached and subordinate thereto. Every amendment, piece of legislation, legal opinion and executive order of major significance would need to be scrutinized against a backdrop of two fundamental questions: (a) what were the intended consequences of those actions, and (b) what are the unintended consequences of those actions? Where an obvious conflict exists between intent and outcome, then what actions would have to be taken in order to render the outcome compatible with the intent?

A published report of such an endeavor would result; I am sure, in panic the likes of which this country has never seen. We would probably find that we are faced with the daunting task of restoring integrity and clarity of purpose to our system of government. The rats that have for so long fed on the putrid flesh provided by the largesse of the power structure within our nation’s capitol, and all those who do their bidding, would flee into the night in fear of all that would be revealed by the light of day. The fresh air generated by the winds of change needed to restore intent and integrity to our government might just get us back on track with the vision of those who gathered so long ago to found this fledgling republic.

Were such an idea to take root, you can bet that every political hack, vested interest, lobbyist, banker, defense contractor and corporate news media pundit would pounce on it, claiming that it was some sort of a subversive plot to destroy our “American way of life!” It would be like watching a swarm of flies on a pile of fresh cow manure on a hot Wyoming summer day!

Could it happen? Would it happen? Do pigs fly?


Cowboy Bob
May 6, 2009

"Power Concentrated In The Hands Of A Few Is Toxic To Us All"

　
“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.“ -- Lord Acton 1887


I do not think there is a more powerful or insidious force in the arena of human relationships than power itself. It is a force that should never be minimized. By the same token, should it be regarded as something not to be feared. It can seduce us so we lose all sense of perspective, compromise our sense of morality and set us on a course of covetousness that can eventually destroy us. By any measure, that is an awesome force not to be taken lightly.

That the Founding Fathers were judicious in their regard for the distribution of power is evident in the meticulous attention they gave to the wisdom inherent in the separation of powers between the institutions of government and the electorate, and the relationship between the powers of the federal government and those of the states.

I have great respect for the Founding Fathers and the vision they demonstrated as they struggled to put together the framework for a Republic that would ultimately become the model to be emulated by others struggling with democratic forms of government. I don’t necessarily agree that the end product of their endeavors has resulted in a perfect outcome, but it came pretty close. Like all fine instruments, a bit if fine tuning had to occur in the wake of ratification of their efforts. However, the guarantees and the separation of powers were right on the money. Any damage that may have occurred in the wake of their efforts has been brought about by imperfections within the human condition. We think and act as if we lived in a perfect world which, by our very nature, is impossible. That, in turn, leads to over-simplification and the extremes that follow.

I believe the greatest threats to our democracy are those posited by the centralization and concentration of power. We, as responsible citizens, have abdicated our sacred responsibility to remain ever vigilant over how and why power is acquired, and how it is exercised and retained. We are far too trusting. We much too readily acquiesce to ideologies and personalities, rather than keeping them at arms length, and constantly questioning their motives and actions. Those in office know this and are very adroit in exploiting it to further their own ambitions.

Except for the ideological bias individual justices may bring with them, I believe the Supreme Court has done a pretty good job of holding to the intent of the Founding Fathers, the rather blatant interference in the outcome of the election of 2000 not withstanding. That will be a blight on its record for all time to come. However, even in the chambers of this great body, the imperfections of our human nature serve to remind us of how elusive perfection actually is in the real world, and the need for all of us to never assume that only good will follow in the wake of our trust.

The Executive Branch has certainly had its share of megalomaniacs, some good and others not so good. The egos of a few have served to inspire us and lead us to new heights. Others have led us into the jaws of disaster with their imperious notions of a royal aura enveloping them. The last administration is a rather good example of the latter. There have been those who genuinely worked to improve our lot and others who have set themselves to plundering the country for their own benefit and that of their cronies. All said and done, it has been a rather mixed bag in my opinion. In the final analysis most of them have proven to be just another politician hoping to leave an historical legacy that extends beyond the presidential library. There are those few who should have been freeze-dried for political campaigns and ceremonial occasions, but most are best forgotten. We can learn a great deal from those few who set themselves above any sense of morality and accountability for their actions to those who put them in office. It should reinforce the notion that too much trust comes at one’s own peril. They are the ones that bear watching before, during and after their terms in office.

The House of Representatives is comprised of representatives elected by the voters in congressional districts within each state, apportioned by population. Their terms of office are for a 2-year period which, effectively, ties them rather closely to their respective constituencies. By definition, they are more attuned and responsive to the will of those who elected them to office. We now have what is probably the closest tie of accountability directly to the people of any arrangement now in effect. I regard this as the most analogous to the House of Commons in a Parliamentary System of Government. Two-year terms probably do the best job of limiting the extent to which influence can be peddled and the amount that can be stolen.

However (and this is very significant) senators were elected by the legislatures of each state, and were subject to recall by the legislatures of that state if he/she failed to represent their state’s interests at the federal level. Their very political survival was contingent upon their ability to advocate for their individual states. Their terms of office were for a period of 6 years; the longest term of any serving member in the Legislative Branch.

Then, in 1910 some self-styled expert decided to introduce the 17th Amendment to the Constitution which removed the election of Senators from the State Legislatures and transferred that power to the popular vote of the people within their respective states. The Amendment was ratified by the voters on April 18, 1913 and became law. That action cemented the federal monolith in Washington, D.C. and insulated them from any meaningful control by the individual states. Terms of six years each certainly gives one plenty of time to overcome the frailties of memory and, as a consequence, provides for far greater latitude in lacing their pockets with the largess that goes with the spoils of power, six-year terms of office and seniority. Much can be overlooked and much can be had with the passage of time. I would say they do a pretty damned good job of making hay while the sun shines. Not only do they become independently wealthy at the expense of the taxpayers, but they blatantly thumb their noses at us while they do it.

The result of passage of the 17th Amendment is, in my judgment, one of the two most glaring examples of how the popular mentality of the voters effectively destroyed the wisdom of the Founding Fathers. I cannot help but wonder how powerful and plentiful lobbyists would be today were it not for ratification of the 17th Amendment. I suspect they would be less akin to the House of Lords in a Parliamentary System of Government and more akin to an ambassador at the United Nations.

The power that was given to corporations by allowing them to be treated the same as individual citizens, with all of the rights and privileges thereto pertaining, has resulted in a concentration of power that most threatens our very existence as a democracy. No individual in our society can even hope to amass the financial and political power of the corporation. And, my dear friends, I would submit to you that it is a natural marriage for them to join forces with the political and economic establishment that now threatens the future of our very existence. We have effectively created a federal monolith with unlimited power over our lives, and destroyed the essence of a democratic form of government in favor of a plutocracy. Political and economic power is now effectively concentrated in Washington, D.C. and on Wall Street. We are the poorer for it and getting poorer by the day because of it. They all feed at the same trough of power, influence and money, all the while treating us like mushrooms by keeping us in the dark and feeding us bullshit. And what is worse, they are further enabled by our own self-imposed ignorance.

They pat us on the head and tell us to go outside and play as if we were a bunch of obedient children. How in the hell can power rest with the people, which is what a democracy is supposed to be, if we so willingly give it all up in exchange for the paltry favors with which they seduce us? If we won’t even take the time and effort to stay informed and take an interest in the issues of the day, how can we be anything but easy prey for their greed, avarice and lust for unlimited power?

Next to the 17th Amendment, the action of government that has most crippled our ability to be a healthy democracy is by allowing corporate ownership of the news media; the concentration of the power of information in the hands of a few very big organizations, all of which have motives contrary to those demanded by a viable democracy. What used to be healthy discourse has now morphed into passive participation in the intellectual equivalent of pabulum! But, how can a reporter be an adversary to ones he/she joins for cocktails in the evening? Just watch today’s reporters fawning over the power structure in the halls of power.

Another institution that, in my humble opinion, acts contrary to the best interests of a healthy democracy are those privately funded academic institutions of higher learning. They breed a brand of privilege and elitism that spawns the avaricious appetite for more and more power that is leading us inexorably down the road to ruin as a civilized society, a healthy democracy and a world power to be respected and revered. We are beholden far too much to their alums for the “expertise” we require in order to manage our affairs of state. Let us not forget that an expert is nothing more than one who is better organized and uses audio-visual aids. History clearly demonstrates that great wisdom is not complex and has been abundantly available to our nation in the hands of those often regarded as far too humble to grace the corridors of power.

They are now telling us that there are some institutions that are simply too big to fail. Too big to fail for whose benefit? If that is the case, isn’t it about time we set ourselves to the task of reducing the size of the political, economic and social institutions that have wrought such havoc on this country and, indeed, the world? I cannot think of a better way to start than ---

1. Repeal of the 17th Amendment to the Constitution, restoring the election of senators to the power of state legislatures. Let’s do away with this imperious aura that breeds corruption and indifference at the expense of those whom they are supposed to serve.

2. Enact legislation that forbids corporate ownership of the news media. Set up franchised service areas for each newspaper, television and radio station and require that they be locally owned and operated. Limit today’s networks to a role as national and international news bureaus that sell their services to locally owned news outlets.

I have frankly had enough of the bovine scatology that the complexity of our nation and the world is beyond the comprehension of the average person. That is double-speak that is skillfully used to retain the power and influence that will ultimately lead us down the road to what William Grieder has termed, “corporate government.” If that term doesn’t have a sufficiently ominous ring to it, I don’t know what does.

I no longer trust Barack Obama because I haven’t heard any compelling reasons why he chose to reincarnate the Clinton Administration as his own. That doesn’t pass the smell test and is cause for me to wonder what kind of a bargain was struck during the primaries. Was it on the order of “If Hillary wins, this is Barack’s role in her administration with a guarantee that he would be the next “first” in 2016. If Barack wins, this is Hillary’s role in the next administration. Insofar as the occupants of key positions are concerned, they would essentially be identical in both of the administrations.” It is just a question of who plays first violin in Big Money’s Symphony Orchestra of unlimited and unbridled power, to be played at the requiem of a society that totally abdicated its fundamental responsibilities to the best democracy the world has ever seen - that of being intellectually curious, fully informed and totally involved. Complacency is the stuff of fools and saps the lifeblood out of the afflicted. Let that not be our ultimate failure.
　
Cowboy Bob
March 30, 2009

“A Rose By Any Other Name………….?”

The current controversy about the resignation of Charles Freeman, Chairman-Designate of the National Intelligence Council (NIC), has created quite a firestorm in the news media, and rightfully so. However, the issues surrounding his resignation are so convoluted that one needs to be very careful about drawing erroneous conclusions and a tendency towards stereotyping.

Suffice to say Charles Freeman is probably one of the most consummate diplomats in the business. He is extremely intelligent, has a wealth of experience, is forthcoming and has a keen ability to work collaboratively with others without compromising his principles. His decision to resign is a tremendous loss to the government and to the people of the United States, all because of a cadre of right-wing, neo-conservative Zionists who have long exerted far too much influence on our government in their zealous allegiance to their dreams of a pure Jewish State of Israel.

Given their control over the government of Israel, I regard their pursuits as that of a renegade state that is completely ruthless in the character assassination of anyone who dares to take issue with their pursuits. Among their most notable demonstrations of their loyalty to the United States, was an unprovoked attack on a United States naval vessel (USS Liberty) in international waters without provocation and consequence. They have spied on the United States with impunity and have effectively dominated U.S. foreign policy towards the State of Israel since its founding. Except for the death camps, their treatment of the Palestinians rivals anything the Third Reich inflicted on all sorts of those regarded as less than perfect specimens of humanity, not limited exclusively to the Jews. Anyone who fails to realize that their goal is an exclusively Jewish State is out to lunch. One only has to scratch the surface of their unrelenting land grab in the Palestinian Territories to readily see their ultimate objective. And who gets the blame for their ruthless pursuit of empire? God, of course. Now I ask you, what sane and rational person would believe that nonsense?

The endless rhetoric about a permanent peace and a two-state solution is nothing but smoke. It is a ruse to keep the United States placated so they can control the relationship and continue to receive untold billions of dollars in aid. And every politician since Harry S. Truman knew and knows it. The slightest criticism immediately causes a knee-jerk reaction resulting in their classic charge of anti-Semitism. A cursory attempt at a clear definition of that term reveals that for one to be a true anti-Semite, one would have to have an ingrained hatred of the Jews, Arabs, Assyrians, Babylonians, and Phoenicians - a tall order for the worst of bigots. Despite their best efforts to limit that term to anyone who disagrees with their aspirations of empire, they don’t have a claim to exclusivity on that one.

However, let us not equate the international Jewish community with the posturing of the government of Israel. Were it not for the fact that the Jews have always been a literate people and super-achievers in every academic, scientific and artistic discipline known to man, the rest of humanity would still be in caves. They have, also, historically been a peace-loving people opposed to violence and human injustice. They are generous to a fault in their support for the institutions and activities that enable civilized societies to flourish and prosper. The agenda of the majority of Jewish people is the complete antithesis to that of the neo-conservative Zionist zealots dominating the Government of Israel. The world owes them a debt of gratitude that can never be repaid, and we are still reaping the benefits of their talents and accomplishments that push the boundaries of knowledge and enlightenment ever forward into the future for the benefit of the world community. We, also, owe them our insistence on a balanced foreign policy by the United States towards the State of Israel, our role as an honest broker in a two-state solution, and the broker of an honest peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. It is time for the integrity of Palestinian lands to be restored and the brutality towards its rightful owners to cease.

The United States has the power to make it happen. But, in order for that to come about, those in power in Israel need to know that we regard their lobbying activities in the United States as direct interference in our internal affairs by a foreign power; something we would not tolerate from any other nation on earth.

The American Israeli Political Action Committee (AIPAC) changed its name to the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee, no doubt hoping to soften its image among American voters. However, its mission still remains that of the neo-conservative Zionists whose sole objective is a pure Jewish State. Does a tiger change his stripes? A rose by any other name? They have proven themselves to be consummate adversaries of the United States, to the extent we may have challenged their objectives and tactics.

We need a fair and balanced foreign policy in all our international relations. Sad to say, Charles Freeman is uniquely qualified to have had a profound influence in bringing about that balance, so urgently needed and so long overdue.

Cowboy Bob
March 19, 2009

"Today's Rant"

Following is an e-mail I recently received from a British national working in the Middle East.

Cowboy Bob

March 17, 2009

************************************************************************************

"Today's Rant - Inspired by news of the troop increase in Afghanistan."

So who's kidding who here? In this current age of excessive PC (political correctness) we all seem to have been consumed by the desire (imposed or voluntary) not to upset anyone over anything, for fear of being labeled as anything from uninformed to racist. In this mindless rush to protect the sensibilities of any group, or individual, whose agenda does not include criticism of any sort, we appear to have lost the right or the ability to call a spade a shovel.

Take Barack Obama for example (let me finish this sentence before jumping to incorrect conclusions); here is a new president, committed to bringing the 'Boys' home from Iraq as promised, suddenly wanting to increase the presence of US troops in Afghanistan. Now why would anyone who actually wants the troops out of harms way, want to immediately send them into a similarly dangerous area.

We know it isn't for their good, because they will certainly die and in probably higher numbers than the British and others are currently sustaining. This is the lot of the American GI. At some point during their training (one does assume that these bodies in uniform do get trained despite evidence that whatever they got didn't sink in) they appear to be taught that they are both invincible and at a higher point in the food chain than any national of any other country they are sent to protect, or fight. This unfortunate arrogance does tend to piss off a great deal of normally passive people, directly resulting in the average GI becoming the embodiment of everything everyone hates about America and Americans, and consequently a target.

(I diverge for a second, but can anyone tell me if the average American is deaf? There must be some explanation why they seem oblivious to their volume in a restaurant when the nearby tables are treated to their conversational prowess and opinions whether they want them or not.)

We also know that the western style of democracy just isn't applicable at the current stage of development of a country like Afghanistan. It's a bit like trying to impose this style of democracy on a tribe in the Amazonian rain forest. They already have a system that actually suits them well, but we - in our infinite wisdom - believe ours is better, without learning how theirs works. It is a bit like the British Raja 'educating' the natives, only to find themselves a hundred or more years later, mourning the loss of culture and heritage. Why do we fail to see, from the example of Saudi Arabia, that you can buy all the artifacts of civilization, but they are pretty useless without the two thousand years of experience to make them work?

It was only a few years ago that the British were being encouraged to leave Iraq to the USA (around the time of "to the victor goes the spoils" attitude of the US) when they thought it was still profitable to hang in there. The Brits were being 'given’ Afghanistan to play with. As usual they were being left something that was of no real value to the US - so what is new there?

So why this sudden interest in Afghanistan? Well actually, the sudden interest is in America. The land where deregulation of the financial sector allowed the spawning of the world's fiasco that will eventually affect every person on the planet (with the exception of the bastards who created it and who are now still receiving bonuses bigger than most of us earn in a lifetime). The very last thing that America needs right now is another two hundred thousand battle worn soldiers rucking up on their doorstep looking for their old jobs back (many of which no longer exist) and a heroes welcome. Where would Obama's rescue package go with a whole new army to feed back in the homeland? I doubt the DOD would roll over and transfer their costs to a domestic budget.

The obvious solution is to keep them as soldiers and send them far away from America where they can rustle up a bit of patriotic support for the new missionary mission to educate the savages into the ways of American democracy. Teaching them that if they are friendly to the US, buy all their products and basically toe the line - that is democracy US style.

The answer then is that the real reason is socio-economic, in America’s interest at this troubled time. There is no problem with that, every one is doing it, but then, please, don't try and kid the world that this is some new humanitarian mission to bring democracy to the bunch of warring tribes that have been kicking the shit out of each other for a few centuries (and will probably still be kicking the shit out of each other long after we have gone). It's all about money and unemployment figures, so stop asking the rest of the world to stump up more "help" for the American cause in Afghanistan, when all that is really meant is "please legitimize us being there in greater numbers".

I think we have all given legitimacy to America's abhorrent foreign policy for quite long enough. We backed the illegitimate war, we supported the thieving American Companies that delivered less than thirty percent of the value of their contracts to the Iraqis and now we are supposed to play second fiddle to the US because they have no where else to put their unemployment problem other than Afghanistan.

Grow a spine and admit that is the basis of the new frontline, and then pick up the tab - bodies and all.
--
Peter
Kuwait

“Will The Real Barack Obama Please Stand Up?”

I have to confess that Barack Obama is a real enigma to me. Try as I may I just can’t quite figure the guy out.

My first exposure to the man was his appearance at the 2004 Democratic Party Convention when he mesmerized the party with his Keynote Speech. Regardless of your political persuasion, you have to admit that was one fine oratorical performance. I felt then that he was presidential material and the brilliance of his charisma was almost blinding.

I was not the least bit surprised when he announced that he was running for president. I thought he demonstrated a keen sense of history by announcing his candidacy on the steps of the Old Capitol Building in Springfield, Illinois, and carried over the theme of Lincoln’s influence throughout the campaign. However, as his run progressed and the histrionics of his speeches became more grandiose, rather than perceiving him as an inspired man, I came to see him for what should have been apparent from the outset. You don’t play in the ballpark of national politics without being very skilled in the art and science of politics. I am now more inclined to think everything he does stems from a strategic design as to what he perceives to be good politics and what is good for his personal ambitions.

He promised us change, when and if he came to Washington. Admittedly I am a simple man. But, to me, change implies new faces and new thinking on the national political scene. However, what we got was a massive resurrection of the Clinton Administration and the cronies who go with it. We got the same faces and the same loyalties we had with Billy Boy. From my perspective, that sure as hell isn’t change. It is simply more of the same repackaged, and I don’t think that is what the electorate wanted or expected.

Let us not lose sight of the fact that Bill Clinton was the sitting President with a Republican Congress when the financial industries were almost totally deregulated under the evil inspiration of Phil Gramm and the Senate Banking Committee. Bill Clinton could have, and should have, vetoed the legislation rather than signing it into law. Robert Rubin, as Secretary of the Treasury should have vehemently opposed it. That did not happen. So, try as the Obama Administration may, to hang total responsibility for the financial meltdown around the neck of George W. Bush, let us remember who opened the flood gates on this disaster.

I find it all rather interesting that, since leaving office, Bill Clinton has pocketed well over 100 million dollars from “speaking” engagements. God only knows, how much has found its way into the coffers of his foundation from the financial industries that he was instrumental in deregulating. Further, Chelsea finished college and promptly joined one of the largest hedge funds on Wall Street. Robert Rubin left the Clinton Administration to become CEO of one of the largest investment houses on Wall Street, with a very lucrative salary and bonus package. Is all of this coincidence that befell a few innocent bystanders? I think not. Let’s fix responsibility where it belongs. Bill Clinton had more of the characteristics of a liberal Republican than he ever did those of a centrist Democrat.

I am willing to concede, at this juncture, that Barack Obama seems to be a man of honor, as politicians go. He would have to get up early in the morning to get ahead of the Clintons, whose ideology I regard more as amoral than I do as matters of principle. Only after a lot of backdoor “negotiating” did Hillary agree to accept the nomination for Secretary of State and, you can be sure, with a lot of input from Billy Boy. However, I find it rather interesting that only yesterday did I notice a television journalists’ observation that, as of now, Hillary Clinton is the most powerful woman in the world. If that is indeed the case, how could any rational mind believe that she was first offered the position of Vice President? Anyone who knows anything about Hillary Clinton should not be the least bit surprised that she would much prefer the power of the Secretary of State than the ceremonial role of Vice President. Nice try, Mr. President.

Now, permit me to focus on the financial debacle staring us in the face. Despite attempts to convince us that Obama has surrounded himself with some of the finest financial and economic brains in the country, I am more inclined to think he suffers from the “old boys’ myopia.” Instead, we are stuck with retreads from the Clinton Administration who seem more inclined to play footsie with the rogues on Wall Street than to hold them accountable for their dastardly deeds of the last eight years. We have Larry Summers, who appears more like a bird drunk on overly ripe pyracantha berries than one of the more respected economists on the national scene. He is aligned with Tim Geithner who can’t even do his own income tax returns accurately, yet we are supposed to defer to him as one of the greatest financial minds in the business.

Obama has summarily dismissed a significant faction of economists who appears to be much more capable of “thinking out of the box,” than those he has gathered around him for advice and counsel. Some of the more notable ones are Jim Cramer on CNN, Joseph E. Stigler (Nobel Laureate), Paul Krugman (Nobel Laureate) and James K. Galbraith, Ph.D., School of Economics at the University of Texas, Nouriel Roubini, Professor of Economics, Stern School of Business, New York University, all of whom appear to be persona non grata at the White House. One who should not be overlooked is Professor Robert Reich at the University of California, Berkeley who served on President Obama‘s Transition Team but who seems to have been relegated to second string these days. All of these people are, essentially, saying that Obama is not doing enough to address the serious flaws inherent in the banking and investment houses, nor is he doing what needs to be done with the urgency and haste required. I don’t hear any of them advocating outright nationalizing of the banking industry. Rather, I hear them saying the government must take them over, clean up the mess they have created, and then sell them back to private investors under new management. In the meantime, the rogues who have done such an abysmal job of “managing” those houses and the investors who profited so handsomely from their shenanigans will take the hit that rightfully belongs to them, instead of the taxpayers.

I raise the question, is President Obama all that naïve, or is he taking care of his cronies who carry on their foul deeds in the canyons of New York City? Is he a dedicated statesman or a very calculating and skilled politician? If it is the latter, this is neither the time nor the place for paying back political favors.

Now, let me focus on a subject near and dear to my heart --- health care. The President has very skillfully avoided any national discourse on the merits of a single-payer healthcare system, and has focused almost entirely on his plan to work with insurance companies on a national health plan, despite national polls that show more than 60 percent of Americans favor the former. The preference for a single-payer system is underscored by some of the best minds and organizations in the country, one of the most prominent being the California Nurses Association. Who are the ones likely to benefit the most from Obama’s plan? I smell a rat.

Healthcare costs are the greatest single financial burden on businesses in this country, and the single largest impediment in their inability to fairly compete in the international marketplace. Further, the cost of providing healthcare has impoverished and deprived more citizens of access to healthcare in this country than any other industrial nation in the world. Why have costs escalated at such an astonishing rate? Principally because of the effective lobbying and unbridled greed of insurance companies, drug companies, organized medicine and overly zealous entrepreneurial efforts by hospital management companies. Their success at milking the golden cow in Washington, D.C. almost ranks right up there with Wall Street. Computerized medical records and working with insurance companies isn’t going to do the trick, no matter how much we get of the President’s finely tuned oratory and his ability to summarily dismiss the voices of real dissent. Experience on the world scene clearly demonstrates that a single-payer system will beat anything Obama is proposing, hands down. As a point of comparison, let us be mindful that the President is still stumping for “clean coal,” despite the legions of scientists and environmentalist who have labeled clean coal as nothing more than one grand oxymoron peddled by the coal industry! Where have you been on this one, Mr. President?

You, Mr. Obama, were elected to the Presidency of this great country because an overwhelming majority of Americans genuinely believe you will effect the changes necessary to meet the needs of those who are truly suffering because of the naïve philosophies and blatant corruption of previous administrations. These are tough times and not one when we should be “sampling” a lot of unproven alternatives. We need honest, bold, firm and inspired leadership rather than a holding of hands in a pathetic attempt to reach consensus on all issues. Time is of the essence.

Humility is one of the greatest of all human attributes. The time has come to back off from riding the coattails of Abraham Lincoln, the staged histrionics on the public stage and belaboring bipartisanship. You, Mr. President, need to take a long, hard look in the mirror and ask, “Who am I, really?” When you give your first State of the Union Address next January, we don’t need to see you coming down Pennsylvania Avenue in a golden chariot, pulled by six white horses. We don’t need to see you enter the chambers of the House of Representatives adorned in a white toga with a wreath of laurel on your head. Rather, we need to see, and indeed identify with, a strong and determined president who has the admiration and respect of every one in this country and around the world. We must know in our hearts you are one of us, with all the ideals, courage, honesty and integrity we all cherish and so desperately need, but which so few of us have. That is the ideal and the beacon of hope we most need.

The vast majority of us genuinely want to believe in you, Mr. President. You have captured our hearts. Don’t let us down. We may never get a second shot at this one.

All the best.

Cowboy Bob
March 5, 2009

"Obituary for Common Sense"

The following obituary is reputed to have been published in the recent past by the London Times. They deserve a few cudos for having done so. It is interesting and, sadly, is rather true.

Cowboy Bob, March 2, 2009

***********************************************************************************

"Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, who
has been with us for many years. No one knows for sure how old he was,
since his birth records were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape. He
will be remembered as having cultivated such valuable lessons as:

Knowing when to come in out of the rain; why the early bird gets the
worm; Life isn't always fair; and maybe it was my fault.

Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies (don't spend more
than you can earn) and reliable strategies (adults, not children, are in
charge).

His health began to deteriorate rapidly when well-intentioned but
overbearing regulations were set in place. Reports of a 6-year-old boy
charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate; teens suspended
from school for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired for
reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition.

Common Sense lost ground when parents attacked teachers for doing the
job that they themselves had failed to do in disciplining their unruly
children.

It declined even further when schools were required to get parental
consent to administer sun lotion or an Aspirin to a student; but
could not inform parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to
have an abortion.

Common Sense lost the will to live as the churches became businesses;
and criminals received better treatment than their victims.

Common Sense took a beating when you couldn't defend yourself from a burglar in your own home and the burglar could sue you for assault.

Common Sense finally gave up the will to live, after a woman failed to
realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot. She spilled a little in
her lap, and was promptly awarded a huge settlement.

Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents, Truth and Trust; his
wife, Discretion; his daughter, Responsibility; and his son, Reason. He
is survived by his 4 stepbrothers; I Know My Rights, I Want It Now,
Someone Else Is To Blame, and I'm A Victim.

Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone."