Gaza/Cuba: Do Embargos Work?

This article is about my feelings in regards to Gaza being big in the news because of Israel bombing it in reaction to the constant barrage of small rocket attacks into southern Israel. I claim to be no expert, in fact I do not know too much about Israel and Gaza other than things I have heard in the news and read about on the Internet. I may have my facts wrong, after all I'm not a history professor that has been studying the history of the Middle East or other places, I'm just a guy off the street thinking about the things I see and hear in the news about a place far from home on the other side of the world. If you have different views or other facts or know of my facts being wrong tell me about it, you could change my viewpoint and make me have to revisit the matter in a new blog.

When I first heard about Israel going into Gaza and bombing them I thought, well you can't expect Israel to sit there while rockets keep raining down on them and not retaliate. Then I started paying a bit more attention to what was being said and what was going on over there. Thinking about the embargo against Gaza I thought about Cuba closer to the United States.

I have been reading about Cubans eating patties of red mud because they are starving. I'm not sure if the people of Gaza were starving by that degree, but they are now for sure. The main reason the U.S. doesn't get more crap about Cuba is because of a few miles of ocean between us. Otherwise they would probably be out throwing rocks at us or firing crude rockets towards us. I think that Gaza is kind of like that. They are closed off from the outside world between Israel and Egypt. The amount of anything needed for daily life is restricted at the boarders. Kind of similar to a bunch of rats stuck in the bottom a barrel, they have no life, no food, and no way to get out. As things get disparate they are going to viciously attack anything edible that gets near them or start attacking each other. By firing unguided rockets into Israel factions in Gaza have no intentions or hopes to bring down Israel, they are just trying to spread the misery, bring attention to their plight, and show their discontent with the conditions that Israel is and has been imposing on them.

As in many other conflicts between countries there is a wide disproportional of technology and fire power being used. Israel controls the airways, the water ways around Gaza, firing guided missiles and smart bombs killing hundreds, Gaza is firing unguided missiles and mortar rounds killing dozens. The people of Gaza can not leave to have Israel and Hamas fight things out, they are forced to keep moving around between the two waring groups trying to stay clear of the crossfire. They have no food or water and they are running out of medical supplies. The people have no where to go to escape the crossfire and even the UN has stopped taking in supplies because they are being fired upon. With the whole world in an economic recession everyone seems to be content with destroying homes and businesses and using up valuable resources. There are no solutions for a peaceful end and there is no honor.

Peace on Earth Goodwill Towards Man

I know the United States is as bad as any of the rest the countries, but during this holiday season when supposedly we are to think of peace and feel love towards our fellow human beings it is too bad that there are so many people in so many countries at war with each other. If I were to pray for anything it would be for the world population to be at peace with each other. It all seems so senseless for us to kill each other.

The very area of the world that first promoted peace and goodwill to the world is one of the areas that is most caught up in the fighting. The U.S. is fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, Russia just had a squabble with Georgia and is supplying Iran with missiles and showing support for Cuba, Israel is fighting with the Gaza strip, the British, Pakistan, and India are all either fighting or building up troupes to fight, the pirates in Somalia, almost everyone is involved in one way or another in various wars and confrontations with other countries. What good is it? What is war good for? Who really profits by war other than the small handful of arms suppliers and how much do they promote war between the different countries of the world?

Think of the world's economic problems, the problems with pollution, the dwindling non-renewable resources. Think of all the money that is wasted fighting each other. Think of the grief war causes in loss of life and limb, and the falling of financial markets. Russia bankrupted itself keeping up the cold war with the United States. It is all such a waste. Think of all the money being spent on the machines of war, the amount of oil used in powering these machines.

Now think of all the good that could be done if all this money spent warring was instead spent trying to find solutions to the world's problems. Think about if all the human resources spent on trying to destroy each other and our resources was instead used to improve the lives of people around the world, how much good could be done and how much better prepared we could all be when oil and other renewable and non-renewable resources does run out. We work together in space with people from the same countries that we fight on the ground.

We are all people, all human beings. We might be different colors and speak different languages, but we are all the same. We all have pretty much the same goals. We all want to find someone to love. We all want to raise our families, we want to provide for our families. We want to take pride in what we do to provide for our families. We all morn when we lose loved ones. We all want to be healthy and have our basic necessities met. We want to have a clean, dry, warm places in which to live, we want to be free of diseases and disabilities. When we take up arms and kill people we are killing people who are just like us in more ways than they are different than us. The people who are killed all have mothers, fathers, family and friends that will miss them when they are gone.

We must all try to figure out how to end this madness.

Free Money

People, it is time to call, write, or Email your representatives in government office. We are getting ripped off big time over this bailout deal. According to an Associated Press article the banks and institutions that have received part of the first half of the $700 billion government bailout package are saying that they don't know what they are doing with the billions they have gotten from American taxpayers. They claim that they are not even tracking that money which is pretty sad and unbelievable. You can read the article from the Associated Press here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081222/ap_on_bi_ge/meltdown_secrets

Here is a copy of the Email I sent to one of my representatives:

Dear Congressman Obey,

I have just read an Associated Press article about the unaccountability the banks and financial institutions have with the almost $350 billion dollars they have received from American taxpayers in the form of a government bailout. Here is a link to the story: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081222/ap_on_bi_ge/meltdown_secrets

This is totally unacceptable and I would hope that there are going to be some accounting for the money these institutions already have received before they get a dime more out of the second half of $700 billion earmarked for bailing these businesses out. It's unacceptable and unbelievable that these businesses would receive billions without tracking what they are doing with the money, if this is really the case they are not fiscally responsible enough to receive any more taxpayer money. If they were lending money out you better believe that they would want to know what the intended purpose of that money was and they would keep track of it.

It burns me that Bush had to have the line about the businesses that have their troubled assets bought up in the government bailout scheme have to follow the rules of the bailout bill, but then Mr, Paulson instead bought up stocks in their companies effectively voiding out any oversight or accountability for the money they received from taxpayers. What the heck is that Paulson guy doing anyway? The Bush administration and Paulson basically got what they asked for in the first place, a large amount of money with no restrictions on what was done with it or who it was given to. Something is wrong when the administration asks Congress for that much money to do one thing and then after they get the money they do whatever they want with it anyway, don't you guys feel like you been hoodwinked? I do, even though its what I expected in the first place. You people in the House and Senate better be getting together and demanding information and accountability about the first half of the $700+ billion before you release any of the second half of the money or you all are going to have as high of approval ratings as Bush enjoys, and that wouldn't be good for your future elections. I just find this totally unacceptable.

Sincerely,
xxxxxxxxxxxx

Update:

This is the letter I received back from Congressman Obey:

Dear Mr. Chapek:

Thank you for contacting me to express your concern about how the Treasury Department is implementing the bank rescue program.

I absolutely share your concern. House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank is holding a series of hearings, with some already underway, about the implementation of the program. This is going to continue to be a challenge in the coming months and will be one of the many major issues President-elect Obama will face when he takes office in January.

Please be assured I will keep your views in mind if further legislation is brought to the Floor of the House this year and also into the next session of Congress.

Thank you again for taking the time to get in touch.

Sincerely,

David Obey
Your Congressman

Throwing Money to the Wind

What a mess this country is in. It's not all this country though, it's countries around the world. The economic situation is pretty bad all over. There are many countries where it's worse than it is in the United States. In a lot of other countries people and police are protesting and battling in the streets. Thinking back to hurricane Katrina, it really does not take long for all for lawlessness to break out when society starts to fall apart. We are learning that there are many different ways a society can fall apart too.

In Katrina it was the lack of services because they were knocked out from the storm. No electricity, no power for lights cooking, security, or most importantly refrigerators, because of no refrigeration people ran out of food very quickly. Because of no electricity for refrigeration stores didn't have food either, trucks could not bring in food and supplies because of the flooding. Hunger is a really powerful motivator. If you don't have food, you are going to try to get it one way or another even if you have to steal it and if it gets bad enough, to kill for it. Another drive that overrides all else is survival for your self and loved ones, if you or your love ones need medical supplies you are going to do everything in your power to see that they get the help they need.

Other causes of society breakdown is when the government breaks down. When this happens individuals and small groups start taking things into their own hands, and nothing is off the table when survival is at stake. Money can be another reason for a breakdown of a society, either too much of it, or too little of it, either way it leads to eventually not being able to afford the basic necessities. There are numerous other ways that a society breaks down including racism, difference in moral standards, religion, to much of a gap between the haves and the have nots.

The U.S. government has decided to throw money at the situation. First it was the financial institutions. It was decided that it would take at least $700 billion to set these Wall Street businesses right. I think giving out any money for them was a mistake. I did not agree with bailing them out in the first place and I am even more convinced that my thoughts were correct now that half of the $700 billion has been distributed.

I knew when the Bush Administration first came out with this plan that it was going to be no good. They first wanted the money to dole out with no restrictions, no oversight, and no legal or financial accountability. President Bush just wanted that amount to give to Mr. Paulson from the treasury to hand out to whichever companies or institutions he saw fit to do with whatever he thought would help the economy. Luckily, or maybe not depending on your opinion, Congress got involved and decided that they would need to have some oversight and not just cut Mr. Paulson a blank check. After some hemming and hawing they came up with a bill to give half the money to Mr. Paulson and have some oversight and restrictions on top executive salaries and bonuses. The whole idea of the plan was that Mr. Paulson would use the money to buy troubled mortgages and when the price of real estate recovered the mortgages could be sold for a profit and the money paid back to taxpayers where it was going to come from in the first place. When the bill went to the president he wouldn't agree unless there was one line stating that institutions that had their mortgages bought up would have to abide by the rules in the bill. Funny thing though, after getting Congress's approval for the $350 billion Mr. Paulson decided on his own not to buy up troubled mortgages. Instead he decided to just inject the money into the companies by buying stock in their companies and because of the line Bush made sure was in the bill, it pretty much voided any restrictions or oversight as to how the bailout money would be spent. It wasn't long before Bush and Mr. Paulson were on television pleading with the institutions to use the money given them to loosen up more money for lending, but of course there wasn't much they could do except plea at that point. Now if the economy gets even worse and these companies that we have bailed out go under what will their stock be worth, nada, just what the American people will get back from bailing out these companies. By the time the economy straightens out these companies have a good chance of being liquidated or will change hands and their original owners will be on to the next big thing, or perhaps starting new financial companies and there will be no entity to pay the tax payer back.

Next in the line of people wanting the government to bail them out was the big three auto manufacturers. Executives from the big three flew their private charter jets to Washington to ask for their share only to be mocked for flying their private jets into town. After a stern scolding from Congress the executives were sent home without a deal with the instructions to come back after they show how they would tighten their belts and restructure their companies so they could compete with the non union car manufactures in the United States and foreign car manufacturing companies. After what happened with the bailout money given financial institutions it looked like Congress was maybe getting smarter, but Bush stepped in and after scaring the big three talking about maybe letting them have a controlled bankruptcy decided that he would bail out Detroit with some money from the $700 billion gotten to prop up the financial institutions.

We should have never started giving money away. I believe that we are going to hit bottom anyway the only difference is that we are going to have at least $700 billion less when the dust clears. The free market system is supposed to be that, a free market. The financial institutions at least would have never took such chances if they weren't counting on the government bailing them out if it hit the fan. The auto companies have been fighting all the way of having higher mpg standards and alternative energy autos, the very issues they will have to address if they are to be able to compete with foreign auto manufacturers.

We started down a slippery slope now that we started giving money away. In the past weeks I have heard of many other big businesses jumping up shouting that they too will need government bailout money to keep their workers working and their companies above water too. There are many voices calling out for money because they are all thinking, "Well if they are bailing out them guys I should be able to get something too." How many more companies can we not afford to bail out? I think this is a big mistake, it's like throwing money to the wind.

If the Shoe Fits...

In many ways I think that it is fitting that Bush end his presidential career ducking shoes. With the words, "This is a gift from the Iraqis. This is the farewell kiss, you dog." and "This is from the widows, the orphans and those who were killed in Iraq." Muntazer al-Zaidi made history, one news article puts it as, "the shoe heard around the world." It is rumored that Muntazer al Zaidi was severely beaten for throwing his shoes at President Bush. It is hard to say if or how bad he was beat as he has been whisked away to jail and no one has been allowed to see him. The judge went right to his cell to talk with him instead of bringing him before the judge. I am sure that there are many other people besides myself who hope that the Iraqi journalist isn't hurt too bad and that his injuries are taken into account at his sentencing.

Normally, throwing a shoe at a country's leader would be looked at as a pretty disgusting, childish act maybe, but in this case at least it seems justified. George Bush has systematically been trampling our rights and ideals, not only in our country but in others as well, with his boot of oppression, it's only right that he sees the bottom of a shoe now and then. In fact if it were up to me, Bush would need to watch for flying footwear for the rest of his life. If they don't prosecute Bush for crimes against the people of the U.S. or for war crimes, Congress should at least pass a bill prohibiting the prosecution of anyone throwing shoes at the soon to be former president.

I really hope that Bush and his administration gets a lot worse than just shoes thrown at them, I'm hoping they get the book thrown at them too. There is a lot of talk about the possibility that President Bush will probably wait until the last days of his presidency to grant immunity to most all his administration and other key individuals who were directly involved in the illegalities of the Bush Administration. Just lately Dick Cheney admitted during an interview on a national television channel that he and other officials had personally approved torture techniques used on prisoners captured by the U.S. It is a question why would Cheney admit to such a thing unless he was putting that on the table as a way to force Bush to grant him immunity, that sounds plausible to me. We won't have to wait too much longer to find out what is on Bush's mind when it comes to granting immunity, it will be interesting to see what transpires.

If Bush does indeed grant immunity to himself and others in his administration we, as in the U.S., might lose the ability to hold Bush responsible for illegal wiretapping, holding prisoners without charges, lieing to get into war with Iraq among other charges, but he can not grant immunity for himself and others that will protect them when they are out in the rest of the world. This maybe about our only hope of seeing justice done to Bush and his administration. I am afraid that either Bush will grant immunity to his administration, or the incoming administration will let this issue slide not wanting to further hamper bipartisan relations. Even if he gets away with his crimes in the U.S. Bush maybe subject to the laws in other countries in the world.

BS: Bush Stuff

In less than a month Barack Obama will take office.

Trickle down economics don't work. There is a lot on the minds of many Americans as they wait for this historic event. In the meantime there are lots of things to be anxious about. Bush throughout his administrative reign has proved that he and his cronies are dangerous enemies to our constitution. With less then a month left, Bush can still do a lot of lasting damage to our government. For a lame duck Bush has been working double shifts to come up with everything he can to aid big business and hinder the Democrats coming into power on January 20, 2009. It will be as no surprise that he will come up with some really controversial things to do to us right before he leaves office. He is undoubtedly waiting for the last minute to come out with the worse he can do which will be far worse than we will expect. Just like during his presidency the bad news is coming out daily. It's almost to the point where it would be easier to list what all he hasn't done bad for the country than what he has. His government will be known as by the people for big business.

Trickle down economics don't work. This administration has been so bad that Bush won't be able to have a presidential library because all the information will be classified. Someday in the future at some point when they pull the classification of Bush's records and release them to the public, they will first laugh at us for being so gullible to be caught up in all the bs in the first place and then for how spineless we will be by letting him just walk from all his crimes and deceptions just because he was president. Hopefully after they have all had a big laugh, the information will be used to point out everything that can be wrong about an administration so that people can learn from our mistakes.

Trickle down economics don't work. In the past 8 years most businesses have profited by having a Bush Administration, many have had record profits. For the most part blue collared people haven't seen a balanced increase in their quality of life. If not for the crimes against the Constitution, war crimes, lies to go to war, and breaking all kinds of other laws, at least think. Trickle down economics don't work.

Agencies: Crime and the Damage: Healing

I have heard good and bad news coming out of Washington the last few days.

Some of the good news is I have heard that Obama was going to go through all the different agencies of our government, and restore them to what they should be in contrast to the way they were left from the Bush Administration. Many agencies, especially anything having to do with oversight, were completely gutted and broken. One of Bush's ways of making oversight agencies useless was to peel back funding over the years so that their staff was reduced to the point that they could not carry out their tasks required of them to do their intended jobs. Another thing the Bush Administration was good at was to put political appointees in oversight of the agencies, even though they had no scientific background, they would control the public release of reports by picking and choosing what information makes it out of them agencies to the public, this way any information that did not support the administration's agendas or ideologies would not be officially supported by agency reports.

It has been in the news more and more that Bush will possibly/probably pardon himself and most the people in his administration before leaving office in January. This would be totally outrageous. There is also talk from the other side of the isle, the Democrats, that they don't want to dwell in the past, but look to the future. So Democrats aren't concerned with bringing up charges or impeaching the Bush Administration. They talk like if Bush does pardon himself and others in his administration it will be an act of healing for our government. This is all horse pucky. The things the Bush Administration is has done should no way be pardoned with the approval of Congress or Democrats as "healing". Bush and members of his administration all took their positions by swearing an oath to protect and defend the constitution of the United States, they did not do this. There were numerous issues of broken laws, spying on Americans illegally with the help of telecommunication companies, torture of detainees, giving out the name of a CIA operative, destroying evidence, refusals to comply with subpoenas, capturing people off the streets of other countries without their government's permission, holding people indefinitely without charging them, lieing to gain support for the Iraq war that had nothing to do with 9/11, and the list goes on and on... If Congress allows Bush to pardon any of this, it doesn't make them healers, it makes them accessories. Two years ago when many Democrats were voted into office it was because they promised to reign in the lawlessness of the Bush Administration and bring the war in Iraq to an end, we have been lied to. Now they don't want to do their duties to impeach Bush and Cheney for their illegal actions while in office, this is why they have one of the lowest ratings for congress. Again I say they are not healers, they are accessories to the crimes. If the House members do not act to impeach Bush and Cheney they should all be prosecuted as accessories to the crimes of the Bush Administration. And, believe it or not I tend to classify myself as more of a Democrat than a Republican.

Impeachment: It's Still an Issue

A few days ago I received an Email from an activist group called The Pen. It talked about impeachment and the possibility of Bush pardoning the whole bunch of his click up on the hill including himself. The Email was set up in a form that you could send your comments to your state representatives, your senator and a local paper in your area. I typed in my comments, answered a few questions, included a zip code, and hit send. A couple of days later I received an Email from my U.S. Senator, Herb Kohl, and then I got a call from the paper in Chippewa asking if it was my own words and then tell me it would be included in the letters to the publisher part of the paper within a couple of days. Following is that letter:

Bush and Cheney Should be Impeached

Everyone, not only in our country but around the world, is celebrating the U.S. election of Obama for president, but we shouldn't lose track of why it is that we are so happy to get rid of Bush.

The Bush Administration will be a dark chapter in American history. If we don't impeach Bush and Cheney for their illegal acts while in office I believe that there is a good chance that Bush will pardon everyone involved, including himself, forever closing the chance to ever bring to justice these people who did more harm to America's constitutional rights than all the dictators and communist leaders combined.

It is not the time to bury our heads in the sand and pretend this will never be an issue again, because it will be. If we don't make sure that these people are brought to justice, we guarantee that our rights and freedoms will be assaulted again from the inside, from the very people who take oaths to defend the constitution of the U.S. when they take office.

We've had the elections, so let's stop using the excuse that no one wants to do anything because it will effect the presidential elections. Lack of action on Impeachment and the Iraq war is the reason Congress has such poor ratings. We were promised action when they ran and we elected them, so they need to do their jobs.
===========================================================
Here's the reply I received from Herb Kohl:

Thank you for taking the time to contact me with your
views on the current administration. I appreciate hearing from you
and welcome this opportunity to respond to you.

As a means of checks and balances, the Constitution
permits Congress to remove Executive Branch officials from office
if they are found to have committed "treason, bribery, or other high
crimes and misdemeanors." This critical power allows the
Legislative Branch to protect the nation from the abuse of
executive power.

As you may know, Representative Dennis Kucinich (D-
OH) introduced H.Res. 1258, 35 articles of impeachment relating
to President Bush, on June 10, 2008. Additionally, Rep. Kucinich
previously introduced H.Res. 799, three articles of impeachment
relating to Vice President Cheney, on April 24, 2007. These
resolutions seek to remove the President and Vice President from
office on the grounds that both of them intentionally deceived
Congress and the American public during the events that led to the
March 2003 invasion of Iraq.

The U.S. House possesses the sole power of impeachment.
H.Res. 1258 was referred to the House Judiciary Committee on
June 11, 2008, and H.Res. 799 was referred to the same committee
on November 6, 2007. Should the Committee determine that there
are grounds for impeachment, the resolution will be considered by
the full House. A simple majority is required to impeach. In order
for an official to be involuntarily removed from office,
impeachment by the House must be followed by conviction in the
Senate; this requires a two-thirds majority. I will be certain to
keep your thoughts in mind should this matter come before the
Senate.

Again, thank you for contacting me about this very serious
matter. I appreciate having the benefit of your views.

Sincerely,

Herb Kohl
U.S. Senator
===========================================================
The following are my words: The Northern Politic

People, my fellow Americans, I can not stress this enough. If we don't stand up for our rights and freedoms, well then that Constitution is just what Bush called it, "The constitution is just a piece of paper." If we think of it that way, then we don't very much value the live's of the people, who faught for those rights and the ideals for which they stand, and who paid the ultimate price for those rights and ideals that are spelled out on, "just a piece of paper."

Racism Rears it's Ugly Head in America

November 4th made us feel good as a nation, we elected our first black American as president. This was a time that we were able to reflect on 50 years worth of improved relations between whites and other races in the "Mixing Pot" of America. Now approximately two weeks after the presidential election it seems like many people are showing their dark side and it is not pretty or something to be proud of. It also goes to show just how far we as a nation have to go yet to separate ourselves from our racist past.

Since the presidential elections in America there has been a rash of racial hate crimes across America. Black dummies hanging from trees, graffiti sprawled across communities, websites that people are betting on Obama's assassination dates, property damage for people who show their support for Obama, and other senseless destructive acts across America. What is it that drives people to racism acts of hate because another person's skin is a different color than their own? I would assume that most of these acts are carried out by people who didn't vote for Obama in the elections. It would maybe be another safe assumption that these people haven't spent much time listening to anything Obama has been saying all through the campaign process. I don't think I have only been looking at things through a biased point of view, but I really didn't hear anything from Obama either before or after the election that would indicate that Obama's agenda is going to be lopsided in favor of blacks or other minorities once he takes office.

I have to admit that I am somewhat taken back at the amount of racist acts that have been going on since the elections. I am even more taken back by the apparent lack of discontent by people directed at the last president George Bush. I mean the present administration has trampled the constitution with it's wire tapping practices and spying against American citizens, lied to the American people and congress to start a war in Iraq that had nothing to do with 9/11, trampled human rights and international laws torturing prisoners, endangered CIA operatives and ruined their careers because they expressed views that differed from the administration's, extradited people off streets not only in America, but other foreign sovereign countries without the country's knowledge, held people for undetermined amounts of time with out charges against them or due process, fired prosecutors over their political affiliations, only hired people of certain political affiliations to fill key positions in government, have blatantly flouted breaking laws to further their public and secret agendas, acted under more secretive circumstances than any other administration in American history, obstructed justice by destroying evidence needed by oversight and legal investigations, pardoned criminal buddies, and the list goes on and on. With all these things that we know are true of the past administration, some people are being much more critical of a black man that hasn't even had the chance to show, by his acts or record, of how he's going to run the country. I mean, come on, compared to the record of the past administration is it too much to ask to overlook the color of one's skin, to look at things objectively, and at least give him a chance to see how he's going to run the country?

If these people who are doing these things were really patriotic Americans they would be doing things to help our country move along into the future not dredge up and revive bigotries from the past.

T. A. R. P. = Covering Over Taxpayer's Eyes

Troubled Assets Relief Program (T. A. R. P.) should stand for tarp, a covering over the taxpayer's eyes so they don't see that this is just a wealth distribution scheme for big business. This whole thing is such a mess, first the administration asked for $700 billion dollars for a bailout program and said that they would create accountability by buying up bad mortgage assets to hold until such a time that the mortgages would increase in value and be able to be sold to pay back taxpayers who are ultimately paying the bill to bail out Wall Street.

Earlier this week Mr. Paulson from the Treasury said he decided that that was a poor plan to buy bad mortgage debt and instead told us, that after getting this money, he decided to just buy stock in the failing companies to faster inject cash into the failing institutions. The problem with that is instead of having some land or property that would eventually be worth something again when the market recovers, Mr. Paulson has basically a handful of worthless pieces of paper bought from failing institutions that have a good chance of filing bankruptcy in the future leaving the taxpayer with worthless paper in exchange for $700 billion dollars. The other problem with just buying worthless stocks is that Mr. Paulson, the President, or the Congress has no way of restricting what these institutions do with the money that they are given.

It was never the Administration's intention to hold these institutions accountable for the money in the first place. If you look at what President Bush and Mr. Paulson originally asked for it was for $700 billion dollars to spend in which ever way they see fit, to anyone they see fit, for whatever way the institutions that receive the money see fit. Are the American taxpayers the only ones that saw this for what it really was, a wealth distribution program where every man woman and child would give $2300 to the fat cats on Wall Street who are making millions and getting big bonuses even though they ran their companies into the dirt with their greed. And what happened?

The institutions that received the bailout money, that the Bush Administration's "intention" was to free up money tied up in bad mortgage deals to lend out to people, to get the economy moving again, decided that they still don't want to free up money for lending. President Bush was on national TV pleading with the financial institutions to fee up that money, but without the teeth of regulation and oversight there is not much chance of the institutions using the money for much more than to shore up their accounts, buy other failed banks, and/or give their management people and stockholders something. We've already seen how they been spending money knowing that they are getting bailed out by the taxpayers, there were big parties, million dollars a month for people on retainer, and holiday bonuses of up to $230,000 for administration making close to $400,000 base salary. So for those paying attention it is Fat Cats - $350 Billion, taxpayers nada.

Now that the 2nd bailout plan didn't work, Mr. Paulson has a new, new plan on another way to use the 2nd half of the $700 Billion bailout money to bail out these financial institutions. Again I don't see much for regulations or ways to insure accountability. This latest play doesn't directly help mortgage holders that are either already in foreclosure or will be shortly. That's the one thing I don't really understand. One one hand I can't see giving money to people who obviously knew they were trying to buy properties they couldn't afford. On the other hand, there are a lot of banks and mortgage companies that took advantage of the housing bubble to convince people to take out money against their mortgages because the value of their homes had went up so much. Many of these people didn't fully understand what the banks were getting them in to and they took their lending institution at their word that they were sitting in a good spot to take on more debt. To a certain extent, if the government would just take over them loans that are on amounts higher than what the property is worth, reorganize the mortgages so that the people could have payments that they could afford, then the mortgages wouldn't be bad debt and shouldn't strain the financial institutions of Wall Street.

Now the major domestic car manufacturers want to be bailed out too, they are claiming that they will be forced into bankruptcy if they are not. Originally Obama and the Democratic Congress wanted the Bush administration to help bail them out too, but the Bush Administration didn't want to include the auto makers. Now the Bush Administration says that they would be willing to support bailing out car manufacturers long as there are no strings holding car makers to use the money to make more energy efficient cars to make the auto makers more competitive with other car makers. Again the Republicans don't want to place any restrictions on car makers on how they use that money. What is the sense if that? If we are going to bail them out shouldn't we retain the right to say how we want this money used?

President Bush recently made a speech claiming that the fault is not fault the free market system. This is one of the first things I agree with that Bush has said in a long time. The free market would be a working system without trying to bail out industries. It's not like these financial institutions didn't know what was happening, they just were hedging their bets that the government would bail them out. The auto makers and Republicans have been fighting any effort to make strides to increase mileage per gallon or make alternative fueled vehicles, two things that have caused the big three auto makers to lose ground to foreign car makers. The Bush Administration has already wasted $350 billion dollars that has no regulations on how it's spent for these failing industries to take and cut and run when that runs out. These industries should have just failed in the first place, they are going to any way, the only difference is this way taxpayers are going to be out $700 billion dollars first.

All in all this is a hell of a Christmas bonus for big business from the lame duck Bush Administration at taxpayers expense.

We Continue to Get Fooled Again

Unlike The Who song in the 70s, that states, "we won't get fooled again", it is instead, "we continue to get fooled again".

Remember that $700 billion bail out package for Wall Street financial companies that was supposed to free up money from bad debts for lending to get the economy back rolling? With most of the first half of that money gone or spoken for, it didn't work. A week ago a lame duck president got up on national television and pleaded with financial institutions not to hold on to that money to shore up their financial situation, or buy other failing institutions, but to use it for lending like it was intended. It looks like the original plan which was to buy up "bad" mortgages and eventually sell them at a later date paying back taxpayers when the housing market was higher wasn't really considered too hard to start with. Instead of buying failed mortgages, setting some kind of stipulations on how the money was spent or used to insure that the taxpayer could be paid off, the administration decided that we would just buy up the worthless pieces of paper called stocks from companies that no one else would ever in their right mind buy, because the companies are failing in the first place. It looks like Bush get's his money for his big business buddies one way or another. Now that almost half the money is gone, and they can't get banks to loosen up money for lending, the government is thinking about maybe starting to give the second half of the money to directly help homeowners, let's hope that they come up with a few better rules for regulating that half of bailout money.

Talk about redistribution of wealth? How are the bailed out or soon to be bailed out institutions reacting to the economy downturn? They are paying bonuses in the area of $230,000 to employees making base salaries of $400,000. Makes perfect sense to me. After your upper management loses all your money resulting that your company needs to be bailed out by the taxpayers, your management people need hundreds of thousands of dollars of bonuses to know they are appreciated. What?!! Yes during house hearings I heard that these institutions were paying up to a million dollars a month to people who weren't even working at the company anymore, but who were held on on retainer because the companies were afraid that these people would spill their trade secrets with their competitors. Trade secrets??? Mr. Big Business, you are broke, what is it about your company procedures would anyone want or value? Gee what would these trade secrets be? Something like, "How to Bankrupt Your Company and Get Bailed Out by the Government"? Or maybe, "Screw Your Company and Get a Million a Month for Not Working". And while those guys who make 400 thousand dollars a year and bonuses of 230 thousand dollars are getting paid by the American taxpayer if, God forbid, that taxpayer gets a 1 thousand dollar tax break, it is an evil wealth redistribution plot that will bankrupt the top 1-2% of Americans. While you are thinking about that, think about just how much that health plan or education, or disability is such a drain on society compared to them guys pulling in $600,000 dollars plus a year at your expense.

This is not even touching on all the taxpayer money going towards the war in Iraq or money going to other governments that are fighting wars for us. What about all the money going to the company Dick Cheney has ties to that supplies the instruments of destruction to support the wars around the globe. I bet that is another company that isn't feeling the pinch of the bad economy, the only company other than big oil. It isn't chance that in the movies Batman and Spiderman that more than one multimillionaire's fortune was built up using money from the arms industry, kind of like art reflects reality.

I have a bit of news for them politicians. The market is failing and stalled because the common man, the one that's not in the top 2% of income earners, doesn't have any money to spend on things that aren't absolutely necessary. Hell most of them don't have the money to spend on the things that are necessary. That what happens when you cater to the top 1-2% of the people who make the most, they divvy things up to make the most out of everyone else until everyone else don't have the money to keep the economy going.

These things should make you mad as hell. They should make you want to hold people, corporations, and administrations accountable for the mistakes that make and especially when they do things that either are illegal or should be illegal. The Bush/Cheney administration needs to be held accountable for their deeds while in office, they surely didn't protect the constitution that they swore to protect. They started wars where we had no business, screwed up the economy for their buddies gain, went against Geneva conventions and international law. The first step to fixing things is to find and admit where things went wrong to get to this time in space that we are in, and take steps that these things do not ever have the chance to happen again. Impeach Bush/Cheney. Then prosecute them.

Bailing Out Automobile Manufacturers

Well we have been helping all other big businesses and industries, so now the automobile manufacturers want to get in the act too. I mean after all we have been giving the oil industry tax breaks and making it possible for them to record record profits for two quarters in a row even though the rest the country is in financial chaos. We are rewarding the banking and financial industry hundreds of billions for their ungodly salaries, greed and waste. It's only fair for the government (the American tax payers) to turn around and bail out the automobile manufacturers. These are companies who have resisted all the mpg mandates that the government tried to impose on them to make their cars better for the environment and more completable with foreign imports. They have been pushing bigger and bigger SUVs and even most their other car models are getting on average less mpg than they did 10 years ago. The people in the rest of the world have been shaking their heads at us Americans in disgust as we zip around in our gas guzzling SUVs Why has the auto industry push these dinosaurs of responsible automotive design? They make the highest profit margin on the SUVs and they can get around some of the environmental and safety requirements, so in other words greed. So now because the auto industry also hire a large number of people that are making ungodly amounts of money, we are supposed to bail them out for their refusal to make autos that can compete with cars designed overseas.

There are reasons that bailing out the auto industry is as stupid as the breaks we have been giving the oil and banking industries. As mentioned above, The government has been trying to push regulations for higher mpg, which would have made the American companies more competitive against foreign companies and would have forced companies to make more smaller and mid sized autos instead of huge SUVs that according to advertisements they push as something people just got to have. Many of the American automotive companies are tied in with foreign companies to make cars in Europe that would fit the bill for suddenly economy minded American consumers, Some of the foreign manufacturers make cars in the U.S. to sell in the U.S. aren't these basically cars made in America? The automotive manufacturer's will have no better use of the money than the banking industry. The president was just on the TV pleading with the banking industry to not sit on, or invest in acquiring other defunct banks with the money that was given them from the government to free up money for lending, the auto industry will probably not put that money into retooling like it would be meant to used, instead they will probably use it to pump up their worth and pay their shareholders and executives as they wait out the crunch while waiting for a better time to again push SUVs back at the American public.

The biggest fear by oil companies both abroad and at home is that the American public start conserving oil enough it will drive the prices way down. We have already made Saudi government nervous because we have been conservative and it has drove down prices. One of the best things we could do for our country is wean ourselves from foreign oil. If American car manufacturers made smaller cars with better mpg it would tend to drive the cost of oil down even more reducing our dependence on oil from parts of the countries that aren't necessarily friends of ours. In a way if we bail out the auto manufacturers, we are enabling them to make bigger cars that drive more of our energy dollars overseas.

Most of all if we are to have unregulated capitalism we have to allow the market fall on big industries and institutions that continue to do stupid things for greed, if the banking institutions weren't thinking the government would bail them out they would have never took such chances or paid their administration people so well. It's the same way with the auto industry, if they wouldn't have got lost in their greed of high markup SUVs they would have been concentrating on building competitive energy efficient vehicles. They would still be hit by the economic situation that our country is in, but they wouldn't have set themselves up for the loss of business to car manufacturers who have already retooled to make energy efficient vehicles long ago.

Obama Wins Election

It's been three days since Barack Obama won the presidential election in the U.S.A. I think it's great that the people in United States has come so far as to elect a black man for president. For a country that has been labeled as a mixing pot it has taken a while for this to happen, I for one am not intimidated by the fact that our new president isn't a white man. I think it's about time. Our country has been built by immigrants and people of all colors it's about time that our highest office in the land reflects this. In the past I think we as a people have been pretty hypocritical as we are all immigrants in this land that was taken from the true owners, the American Indian. We have been often called the land of the free, but we have a sorted past for dealing with people who are not white. The American Indian was pushed across their land and eventually put on reservations. Many Chinese helped build the first railroads connecting the west to the east coasts, but they get a small paragraph in history for their accomplishments, the Japanese were rounded up during WWII and placed in concentration camps because powerful white men in power didn't trust them. As recent as after the 9/11 bombings Arabs have been subject to heightened scrutiny and harassment, maybe now we can, as a country, get past the color of a person's skin. To be a really great country we must provide opportunities for all people not just for people of a certain race. I think Barack Obama will be a person that can understand how to deal with these issues without trying to go overboard to correct past injustices or cater to tip the balances in favor of just blacks. Our country has many problems and issues that need to be addressed as soon as possible I hope and pray that he is up to the task, I believe he is. Congratulations Barack Obama.

Hope and Broken Promises

It's less than a 10 days until the final presidential elections in the U.S. At this point it looks like Obama is favored to win, but as was the case in 2000 and 2004, we know that it's not over until the fat lady sings. It will be interesting to see if the Republicans will continue to steal the election like they had in 2000 and 2004 they are surely going to try, after being successful the last two elections it is hard to believe that it will be a clean election this year, but we can hope.

America deserves better than what it has been getting for leadership the last eight years. The last eight years have been filled with scandals and illegalities of and from the Bush administration. First the Republicans steal the elections and put and keep in office a puppet that has been one of the worse in history for America, and then he has continued to commit crimes against the American people and the world community, so far with impunity of being held accountable. History will record this time as one of the darkest times in American politics for Americans and the view held of Americans around the world. We have lost our reputation we have had in the world as champions of what's right and fair and the defender of the down trodden. In a way I'm glad that I haven't been fortunate enough to travel the world, because I'm embarrassed of what it has become to be an American. We have a nasty reputation with the rest of the world and frankly we deserve it. No matter who wins the bid for the White House it is our duty to demand from them actions that will improve our image in the world and address the failures of the past.

For people who know me, it is no surprise that I don't hold any hope that a Republican will be one to fix what's wrong with America, what might surprise them is I also don't hold much hope that a Democrat will either. It's fine and dandy to claim that it's the American people who are accountable for the failure of the government to be fair and honest and address the problems of our country and our image in the world, but it would be a false claim. These last few years I think the American public has called for the right things to be done in government but short of starting a revolution their pleads have been falling on deaf ears of the occupants of both major parties. Two years ago the public voted mostly for Democrats who promised to end the war in Iraq and hold the administration accountable for it's crimes, it didn't happen.

I don't share the belief of Republicans that we can blame all the problems that have came to a head these last couple of years on the Democratic majority in Congress. For one thing, the biggest, the Democrats have held the majority, but they didn't hold a 2/3rds majority that it would have taken to push bills to address the burning issues through the House and Senate to overturn the president's veto. I do believe, as I think many other people do, that the Democrats caved in too easily to the demands of the president and his Republican party. Democrats for the most part are afraid to hold there ground over fears that they will lose the support of the American people and they will get voted out of office. I'm not sure what could be more a sign of support as they got from the last election where Americans voted almost entirely to put Democratic leaders in any open spot they could to represent them. The Democrats promised to hold the administration accountable for it's illegal activities and get us out of an expensive illegal war in Iraq that was approved for under false pretenses. Once in office though the Democrats developed the jitters to do anything decisive fearing their re-elections. Time and time again they would make a stand only to cave in later to the demands of the administration and Republicans, the Democrats had no balls.

Although I may be disheartened by the Democrats, I totally disagree with the Republican's agenda and views on how the government should be run. How many times in history do we have to have proven to us that trickle down economics does not work? Those who don't learn from the mistakes in history are destined to repeat them same mistakes, again, and again, and again. I think that trickle down economics was ever really intended to work for the common people, it's more of an instrument for the greed of the rich to get richer. Lets face it, our country has always been lead by a small handful of the super rich and famous, and they don't make a point of giving away power or money. Sure, if you know anyone who has a lot of money, I mean a really lot of money, they will say that they give to charity, and/or that they support various groups to help the unfortunate, but would they pay their workers a fair wage so that they are not the unfortunate ones? No. When they defend their wages and profits it's supporting their families, but when a common person uses the same argument for needing more money, the well to do claim it's not their problem that their workers have large families to support. To the elite, the common man is still looked down upon as breeding stock to replenish their workforce, a commodity to be managed to keep us high enough in numbers to ensure a cheap workforce without being too high in numbers so as to risk an revolt and a risk of the toppling of their empires.

This election we have two of the major parties claiming to represent change, will either one of the follow through on it? I really doubt it, not the way or intensity they hope or we need anyway.

The Great American Rip Off

By now, even if you live in a hole, you should have heard about and are hearing about United States' and the world's financial crisis. Within the last couple of weeks our President has got on the boob tube and pleaded with Congress and the American people for a $700 billion bailout for the fat cats of Wall Street. This had to be done as soon as possible meaning days, not weeks, giving no time to have hearings or research what the problem was, what caused it, or what would be the best way to go about trying to fix the economy.

Within days of Congress agreeing to spend $850 billion on the financial rescue (bailout), there has been hearings with the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform where we are learning that high executives and CEOs of Wall Street financial companies have left these companies with hundreds of millions of dollars that were paid to them, some of these fat cats were paid such amounts as a million of dollars per month having them on retainers. On top of the already tens of millions they were already getting, they took home millions of dollars in bonus or a form of severance, or retirement packages. Then as some at the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform heard yesterday and the day before, even as taxpayers were bailing these companies out, some such as AIG were holding week long events at posh hotels that charged up to $100,000.00 a night for rooms, spending $440,000.00 for these events.

I'm sure that the American tax payers are just happy that their representitives voted to bailout these Wall Street companies at the cost of over $2300 for every man woman and child to save companies that paid their officers hundreds of billions in salaries and bonuses as they left their jobs before pleading to the American people to bail them out. There are many families that live on under $20,000 a year, it is just wrong that some of these guys were making a million a month, no one is worth that much.

Bailing Out Wall Street

It's the politicians that just don't get it, or maybe they did but they decided to milk any available money they could from the populace any way. Let's look at it in a different way.

Say I buy a car from a dealer, the dealer wants to make big money off me so the price has been jacked up to the point where it is really over-valued. I drive it off the lot and it's price devalues a couple of thousand dollars, but that's not all. It turns out that the car is a real lemon requiring lots of money to be constantly stuck into it to keep it running, it gets to the point where I can not afford to keep the car because it has ate up all my money keeping it running, and if I sell it I will have to take a big loss because I can not recoup what I have stuck into it. Eventually I lose my job cause my car is not dependable and I'm late too often.

But it's not just my car with these problems, it's everyone's that has bought this particular make and model. Eventually word gets out and everyone quits buying this particular make and model. The dealer, having bought this make and model in huge numbers, even though he knew of the car's short comings, because he figured that he could make the most money from selling such high priced cars, is now stuck with a lot full of them and they are not selling. The dealer now is losing money and decides to file for bankruptcy. The government now steps in and says, "Oh this is bad, this dealer is really going to lose money and probably will have to go out of business. He will have to lay off mechanics, sales people, other people working in the office all of which have benefited from the high price of the car and the high commissions. This is going to have an effect on everyone, the people at the car washes, the people selling gas, people who sell tires and service, not to mention all the people who get money from the dealer and his employees like when they go to the bar, grocery store, buys a house, etc. We have to do something to protect the dealer's interests because it will affect all these other people and wreck the economy."

So the government comes up with the idea of collecting money from all the broke people who have been taken by the dealer's bad cars and they give that money to the dealer so that he can stay in business selling over priced crappy cars to other unsuspecting customers. At the same time the government, even though they know the car is over-valued and crappy, doesn't do anything for me, the person who is stuck with an expensive car that is not worth anything. This does nothing to make my car not a lemon, it doesn't get my job back, and it doesn't get my money back from all the repairs etc.

The dealer has a big fancy home, vacation home, mobile home, boats, ATVs, cars, SUVs, eats out a lot, gets paid vacations, and bonuses. I am stuck, broke from making repairs, no job, no 401s, and no running car........

Ok, it's maybe not quite the same thing, but in many ways it is. Wall Street has got itself in a bind. It's not because they didn't know it was coming, it was because everyone thought they could make their ungodly profits and get back out before the shit hit the fan. The financial people in Wall Street knew this, the president of the United States knew this, but everyone thought they'd be long gone before the ship went down, or maybe they figured that the government would not allow them to fail and bail them out. The president thought that he'd be out of office before the pumped up markets fail and he would leaving this mess on the next president (most likely a Democrat) and then the Republicans could use it against them in the next election. The failing market happened a bit too early, so now the Bush Administration comes up with this plan to give the very people who took advantage of deregulation to gouge the American public 700 billion dollars, from the very people that were taken advantage of, so that they can stay in business as usual.

This 700 dollar bailout does nothing to cure the problem at hand. All it will do is bring the market back up temporarily to give share holders a chance to get their money back and jump ship. After the share holders jump ship the country will be back to this same spot it is in now, except that the tax payers will be 700 dollars poorer. I believe that we need to demand from our leaders to let the market adjust itself back to responsible financial policies and reinstate regulations to keep this from happening again.

Got Lipstick?

What a sad state of our times when we reduce the presidential elections from platforms from which to preach solutions to our country's biggest problems, to the point of arguing about lipstick on a pig. I kind of doubt that my life will change much either way whether that pig, or pit bull, has lipstick or not.

I think that there are many more, more important issues than lipstick on a pig. Maybe the legalities of fighting a war in Iraq, illegal wiretapping, with holding and destroying evidence before they can be subpoenaed, picking people off the street in foreign countries without that country's knowledge or permission, keeping prisoners in foreign prisons, and we still don't know about the illegal firings of prosecutors or the big one, torture of prisoners in the war against terrorism. These are past failures of the present administration that no one wants to tackle.

Instead of lipstick on a pit bull or lipstick on a pig, why don't the candidates tell us about how they are going to tackle the problems we face in our government and the problems that are affecting the American people? I could give a rat's as* about lipstick on any kind of animal, doesn't strike my fancy, but apparently it's high on the Democrat and Republican list of important things that the American people need to know. How about letting me know how I'm going to afford to heat my house, or put gas in my car, how are they going to improve our infrastructure, how will we move into the future as a provider of high paying technology jobs in our own country instead of providing low paying jobs for people in third world countries? Apparently none of these things are very high on either candidates list as being important to the American people.

I would think that the first candidate that comes up with a workable budget plan for our country, the first candidate that speaks truth and shows out unfounded lies, the first candidate that promises to run the government openly in front of everyone for all to criticize and debate, that candidate should be our clear choice for president, not the candidate who tells the biggest or the most lies.

The Push for Oil

The Northwoods Politic

President Bush today has lifted the executive ban on offshore oil drilling. He's been pushing Congress to allow for the drilling of offshore oil deposits on the U.S. continental slopes. There are both executive and Congressional ban on drilling offshore, but he's hoping that by lifting the executive ban he can push Congress into lifting theirs.

There are two parties that both have fundamental differences in opinion on how this will affect energy prices. One party says this will bring the high cost of fuel prices down. The other side says this is mostly hype and it is just a matter of the first party taking advantage of people's fears that we need to do anything and everything to bring these prices down, because they just can't afford to pay these prices for fuel. What the true facts are is hard to tell. If you read about the companies that make these big drilling platforms needed to extract the oil from our continental slopes, they state that they are already backlogged 5 years on orders for other countries so it would be 5 years before they would even be able to start building the oil platforms to use in the U.S. On top of that, some say that the oil companies hold leases on all kinds of land with viable oil reserves that they are not drilling already.

Again as always, this is an issue that runs along Republican and Democratic party lines, with mostly Republicans wanting the drilling and Democrats not wanting drilling. This is one of the biggest problems in our government. We can't seem to have all these people sit down, look at the facts, and come up with what they think is good or not good. After deciding what their stance is, they should go back to their districts and try to persuade their constituents to what they think is right, but their main job after that is to take what views their constituents decide back to Washington and reflect that in their vote on the issue before Congress. Instead the top person, in this case the president, decides what he wants and all the rest of the people in their party fall in line behind him, they say this is what they want too, and they vote on the issue in Congress to reflect their party's will. Most of these people that we are talking about are addressed as Representatives, the reason they are addressed by that title is that they are supposed to represent the people from their districts. The way this has been working is a major flaw in the way our government is supposed to work.

Clean Air Interstate Rule of 2005

The Northwoods Politic

Today's news speaks of a decision of a federal appeals court that effectively cancels any air pollution regulations the Bush Administration implemented to cut down the levels of greenhouse gases, by stating that the EPA overstepped it's bounds when it established the Clean Air Interstate Rule of 2005.

Shortly after that, the same day, the E.P.A. Administrator, Stephen Johnson, announced that he wasn't obligated to regulate greenhouse gases saying that it would be an unprecedented expansion of the agency's authority.

Between these two actions, any new reductions of air pollutants during the Bush Administration has been canceled out. This basically is what the administration's, Transportation's, Agriculture's and the Commerce Department's want. Their position all along is that they didn't want to place air pollution controls on these industries anyway.

I think this is no accident, the Bush Administration's has all along used legal points to battle and effectively stonewall any attempts of getting any information needed by oversight committees to do their investigations. Do you think it's possible that the Bush Administration could have accidentally overlooked how their controls set up to reduce greenhouse gases could be deterred by the courts? I think it was planned all along.

Bush and his administration has played this country like a chess game, as the country's attention has been drawn from one contested issue to another in other unrelated areas, attention is always being shifted so as to never give enough time for people or agencies to act on or follow through with oversight or arguments against the earlier issues. In this way he has used his time in office to promote republicans,, that he can count on to go along with him, into just about all areas of government. Republicans have infiltrated all areas of the government and they use that power to promote their agendas not the people's. How many times have Bush and Cheney stated that public opinion isn't important to policy, what's important is that we stay the coarse on their agendas because they know what we need, even if it's not what we want.

Iraqi Government Does What U.S. Government Can't

The Northwoods Politic

I get most of my news from the Associated Press and The New York Times. Today I noticed that the Iraqi Government appears to be doing something that our Congress can't seem to do. Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is standing up to President Bush in regards to the Iraqi/U.S. agreement that Washington was trying to get approved by July 31st.

According to what I've read, the UN agreement for troops being in Iraq ends at the end of December, but the Bush Administration has been pushing Iraq for an agreement to allow U.S. troops to stay in Iraq before the end of July. The reason for this is obvious, Bush wants to get a concrete agreement with Iraq before he leaves office at the end of the year. According to the Bush Administration, they claim that they don't need Congress approval even if they decide to have full status of forces agreement with Iraq. The administration has been pretty mum about what the points of the U.S./Iraq agreement not wanting to have a bunch of resistance from Congress until after the agreement is signed.

Most of what we hear about the proposed agreement is coming from the Iraqi side, our government won't inform us of what they want with Iraq for stipulations. Some of the points that the Iraqi government has taken offense to are:

1.) The U.S. authority to carry out military operations within Iraq.
2.) The ability to arrest Iraqi citizens without Iraqi government's permission.
3.) Getting legal immunity for private security contractors.
4.) Control of Iraqi air space.
5.) Setting a time table for U.S. troop withdrawals.

It sounds like Washington might have dropped the immunity stipulation in regards to the private contractors, but nothing is set in stone yet. Washington has been pretty secretive about what it wants compared to what the Iraqis want. The Iraqis want control of their airspace and basically want the U.S. out of Iraq as soon as possible it sounds like. Even with Iraq talking about wanting withdrawal timetables, U.S. Ambassador Crocker has said, "We are looking at conditions not calendars, and both sides are in agreement on this point. So it doesn't appear like anyone in the U.S. is listening to what Iraqi leaders are wanting. I guess that they are just supposed to trust our government not to infringe on Iraqi rights just like we are supposed to trust our government to follow our constitution. Washington continues to say withdrawals would only be linked to conditions on the ground.

In the last couple days Iraq leaders have made headlines in their standing up to Washington against their perceived danger of turning into indentured servants of the United States. Some of the headlines are:

1.) Iraqi Raises the Idea of Timetable for U.S. Withdrawals
2.) Iraq Demands Pullout Timetable in U.S. Defense Pack Talks
3.) Iraq Insists on Withdrawal Timetable

The United States might bring the Iraqis factions together after all, but it will probably be done by pissing them off about us so much that they will unite against us.

While Iraq and the United States are trying to make some sense out of what to do with the agreement, Israel, the United States, and Iran are having a pissing contest in the gulf. First Isrial carried out maneuvers showing that they could feasibly get to Iran to start a war, then the U.S. and Iran both announced that they would do maneuvers in the gulf with a chance of starting an international incident. Iran stated that it would close out the traffic from the gulf if attacked, so the U.S. sent a convoy to the area to show that they would attack if any sign that the Iranians would put up a blockade. It's kind of like watching a bunch of young boys playing in a playground except that the stakes are much higher.

It's All About the Oil Baby

The Northwoods Politic

Before the end of his presidency Bush is doing what he can to advance his agendas in Iraq and Iran. New news is that one of President Bush's buddies Hunt Oil went ahead and made a Kurdistan deal, by ceding responsibility for writing contracts directly to a regional government instead of the central government in Iraq. A move that has seriously infuriated members of Iraq's central government.

In advance of the news that the Bush Administration knew about the deal ahead of time, and did not try to discourage the deal, Bush is on record as saying, "I know nothing about the deal." Hmmm, sounds an awfully similar to, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman.", doesn't it? If not in the words, it's familiar in the actions and intent of another leader trying to bullshit his way out of trouble, and again it didn't work, or did it? Also trying to back up their failure to tell the truth the State Department is trying to say that they discouraged the deal, even though there are a string of Emails backing up the information that the Bush Administration and the State Department knew of the dealings of Hunt Oil before anything was signed. Bush has his fingers in so many places trying to push things through for his friends that he slipped getting rid of this Email electronic paper trail. It's no surprise that the president has said something to the effect that he doesn't use Emails any more because of security reasons. Although he doesn't say it, I think the security reasons he refers to all the time is not the security of the nation, but the security of his own ass. Perhaps he's just not afraid any more what news comes out, after all he can always say any such information is internal communications and then claim executive privilege.

There is good reason to believe the Bush Administration has had it's hands in the dealings with Iraq that allows five major western oil companies non bid contracts to come in and start getting the oil flowing in Iraq. Makes a person wonder after hearing of some of the successions the U.S. wanted in their deal with the Iraqi government before the UN agreement expires July 31st. Could be that our government set the sights high so we could later drop some of them in exchange of some of these non bid contracts with western oil companies? I would imagine that we will eventually hear something like that, and it will be another thing that we will not impeach Bush over. It's starting to look like there isn't going to be any holding Bush and his Administration accountable for things at least while he's in office. The way he has setup his supporters all through the government's agencies would have to be fixed before any action on Bush himself can take place.

Now the Bush Administration says it's almost imminent that Israel is going to invade Iran to bomb Iran's nuclear facility. I'm sure Israel just came up with that idea on their own, just like they did in Syria, but it's kind of interesting how our government seems to know all the details as soon as that kind of thing happens. You can be sure that somewhere there is a wink and a nod to Israel from people in our government, some help like satellite images and the like, maybe even some extra money in aid or something too. It would also be a way of eventually getting the U.S. into a war with Iran. We couldn't after all let one of our allies be threatened by a war with Iran. This might be one way of Bush making sure that we eventually get involved with Iran even if he can't get us into it with Iran before he's out of office this fall.

The list just goes on and on about the departments of government that the Bush Administration has Bushtardized. The State Department lieing that they discouraged oil deals, a Justice Department that won't work with oversight committee to find out the truth about the leak of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame’s identity. Even in the Environmental Protection Agency, Bush has his puppets who will advance his agenda over the sound science and advice of advisers. It is going to take quite a while and a lot of work to fix the government and our rights from the damages of the Bush Administration.

A Depressing Interlude

The Northwoods Politic

It's been four days since I've wrote. It's not that there wasn't a lot of sad crap going on in politics worth writing about, maybe it was because there was too much. Ah I guess it was kind of self inflicted. I spent a good share of my spare time watching videos of hearings on the website from the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. This is a great site to visit if you want to know what is going on in your government from a 'first hand' point of view. There you can read transcripts of hearing testimonies, opening and closing statements, or even watch videos of past hearings. You can also read letters sent to President Bush and other top administration officials demanding information, documents and tapes to be released. It changes, some of the videos even have a degree of drama as witnesses squirm or get defiant under pressure of questioning. This was the original venue of the video of Rep. Dennis Kucinich presented 35 articles of impeachment against President Bush on the house floor.

You can go to the United States House of Representatives or the United States Senate web sites and get news and video on important matters going through the House and Senate and various committee actions and news. There are online help forms to send Email communications to your representatives in office. Let your representatives know where you stand on the issues. Learn the inner workings of our government.

C-SPAN and C-SPAN 2 Capitol Hill, The White House and National Politics is another great site on the web or available on most all cable and satellite television networks. This site will show many of the House and Senate hearings and debates on bills and other government business. There are news casts with current and upcoming political issues, events and coverage of the upcoming 2008 campaigns and primary elections. The TV networks have much of the same information that you can find online plus the political news casts, but online you have the option of watching and reading within your schedule when you have time to concentrate on the issues.

For our government to work correctly it is the responsibility of all it's citizens to take part to guide it on it's path. If the common people get discouraged and drop out of the process, that only leaves the rich, business, and special interests to court the government's power for their own gains. I think it has been shown again and again that left to the rich and big business that there isn't any issue more important to them than their bottom line and only things that affect their bottom line will get noticed or addressed. Our government is supposed to be balanced in it's care and deliberations to weigh the balance of educational, health, environmental, economic, and other issues. It is We the People that must stand up for our rights and demand that government is accountable to the people, or it will be We the People that continue to get the shaft.

What is really disheartening about all the illegal and immoral things that continue to go on in the government is that its like seeing a rat, for everyone that is exposed, you find there are over a dozen that you don't see.

A New Process for Selecting Our Representatives

What America needs is a new process for picking it's representatives. The way we chose our leaders has basically grown more and more flawed as the years gone by, morphing elections and thus changing politics into something totally different than our founders had ever in visioned. When this country was founded, there were only 13 colonies. It was a pretty easy task for everyone to know if one person held better leadership qualities than another person by their past actions. How we chose our leaders was much different than it is today. Through time, as our population spread out across the North American Continent, it became necessary for politicians to boast more and advertise their accomplishments to win over votes from people that they have never met or who have never heard of them before. Through the years the process of selecting our leaders has become broken. I'm not saying I have a completely worked out grand new plan to fix all our problems, but today I'm going to write about some of the reasons why I think our elections fail to bring before us good candidates for presidential selection who care as much for the interests of the common person on the street as they do for the interests of big business.

I've always heard that we are never going to get a person in office that is any more ethical or morally responsible then the people that put them in office. I somewhat agree with that statement. If the voters are not very ethical or moral, they won't hold the politicians they have elected accountable to being ethical or moral either. I do think that the way we select our politicians makes a big difference in the kind of leaders we have though.

One of the biggest failings in our process of selecting a government representative is the amount of money needed for anyone to run for office. This fails our government from the start in so many ways. One of the biggest ways this has a negative effect on our politicians is that they need to spend a pretty good share of time raising money for their re-elections, because they need lots of money to get re-elected. Usually, without some extenuating circumstances, or other form of fame and publicity, the person that spends the most money wins the election. It takes large amounts of money to travel around the district, state, or our country promoting one's self putting out television, internet, and radio ads. Ads must introduce the candidate, list where they stand on issues, tell of unscrupulous acts by the opposition, and defend one's self from smears made by the opposition. As our population grew and spread across the continent the cost of campaigning has grew.

Politicians are only human and it is human nature to do nice things for people who do nice things for us. Lets face it, people give large amounts of money or favors to candidates for basically one reason, and that is with the hope that their donations will help elect the candidate of their choice, and once in office that candidate will remember the donor's issues that they wanted help with. Other than that, whether it's a large amount of money from a large corporations or small amounts of money from individual donors, there is no other reason for anyone to give money to a candidate. It's a validation for the candidate. It's a way of saying you think like I do on the issues that matter to me, so here's some money to help you get elected so you can support those issues. Politicians are not supposed to think of who gave them how much money or let it influence their decisions when they vote on issues that may affect the donor, there are laws against it. But when money is so important to getting re-elected, who in their right mind would vote for something that would adversely affect someone who gives big money towards getting them elected?

Somehow we have to take the costs of campaigning out of the equation, that is about the only way to take the advantage away from big business and special interest groups. The government actually owns control of TV and Radio frequencies, there should be a certain amount of airtime given to the process of electing our representatives that they don't have to pay for. Candidates should have to present themselves within a structured format so that people can see where each candidate stands compared to their rivals. There should be no public advertisements by special interests groups smearing rival candidates. In fact anything that is said by a candidate or endorsed by a candidate should be factual. If it is found that any candidate lied about past voting records, past positions on issues, smears against rival candidates, they should be prosecuted for lieing or slander. It should not be up to the voting public to have to check up on every statement made by politicians and try to figure out whether it is a lie or not. We should demand that when politicians speak to us that they are telling the truth, they work for us after all.

Thanks For Reading

Thank you for reading. I have noticed that I am picking up a few readers on my blog. I want to thank all who have taken the time to check out my blog and a special thanks for those who have been interested enough to return multiple times. Thank you.

Long as I have your attention... Please feel free to leave a comment if you would like. The link to comments is at the end of each article, this is where you can agree or disagree and/or state your opinions. Comments are moderated not to deny opposing comments or viewpoints, (in fact I would encourage any civil exchange of ideas) but to try to catch profanity and to keep posts on subject. Please do not use profanity, respect the right of others to their opinions, and refrain from personal attacks of others.

The Northwoods Politic is my political views about headline news from my own personal Northern Wisconsin perspective. I have been in various stages of disability from fibromyalgia the last 15 years since having a back operation. To fill my time and to try to get a better understanding on our government I have been reading political news from articles off major online publications such as The New York Times, USA Today, Washington Post, articles from the Associated Press, internet sources, various local papers and magazines. I claim to not be an expert on any subject, but if you agree or you disagree and think I'm off comment about it. You may change my mind, I may change your's, but in the end maybe we will all know more about the issue than we started with.

In the future I may change formats somewhat, maybe I will have some regular feature spots, but for now, most of my articles are my off the cuff reactions I have to political current news and events. As to which topics I write about, at this time, I tend to write about whatever PO's me the most at that particular point in time.

With a Little Help For My Friends

There has been scant information regarding the 2008 American/Iraqi agreement that President Bush wants to have in place by July 31st when the current agreement that the UN has for having military troops in Iraq expires. What information that has come out is mostly from the Iraqi government commenting publicly in frustration of their disagreements with what President Bush proposed and wants in the agreement.

I was reading that the agreement that the Bush Administration has been trying to pass on the Iraqi government is very similar to what the British tried to enforce back in the 30's. as seen below.

1930 Pact Between Iraq and Britain

1.) Iraq had to consult with Britain on security issues.

2.) Iraq had to allow Britain use of all road, airports, ports, railways, and rivers.

3.) Iraq had to allow Britain to have two major military bases within Iraq.

4.) Britain could station troops through out Iraq.

5.) Iraq had to grant personnel immunity from Iraqi laws and prosecutions.

Proposed 2008 Pact between Iraq and United States

1.) Would allow officials to detain or arrest suspected terrorists with out the approval of Iraqi government.

2.) Would allow the United States complete control over Iraqi airspace.

3.) Would allow approximately 58 U.S. military bases in Iraq.

4.) Would give the U.S. troops, contractors, and personnel immunity from Iraqi laws.

The pact of 1930 did not go well, the Iraqi populations rioted in the streets and protested violently. The 2008 pact will undoubtedly be met with about the same enthusiasm. With the lesson of the history of the pact in 1930 why would anyone propose basically the same pact? One reason is by calling our occupation in Iraq a pact the Bush Administration claims that the process doesn't have to go through with getting Congressional approval to stay in Iraq. Something the administration is pretty concrete about. Also by not having to get approved by Congress the Bush Administration is hoping to keep most terms of the pact secret, most likely until the end of their term in office, at least until after the pact is agreed on. KBR, a large contractor who Vice President Cheney was formally a chief executive over working for Halliburton, for food and housing for the troop has just received a big $150 billion, 10 year contract for a Iraq.

The answer became clear about a day later when news that the five major oil corporations have been awarded no bid contracts for working Iraq's oil reserves. It wouldn't be a stretch of the imagination to figure out, ok we'll concede some of these crazy issues in our proposed pact if you give my buddies in the oil industry non bid contracts to work your oil fields.

Speaking about oil industry buddies... President Bush lately has been pushing to have federally owned land and the coastal shelves opened up to drilling for oil saying that we need this to bring down the price of gas, but here's the kicker, the companies that make the big drilling rigs are already five years behind on their orders for deep water oil drilling rigs. If American oil companies put in their orders for oil rigs right now, it would be over five years before they would posess any new oil rigs. American oil interests already own the drilling rights on big areas of land that they are not utilizing yet. So why is it that there is a push to open coastal areas to drilling now? Well we have to set our oil buddies up now before the Bush Administration leaves office this fall, it has nothing to do with the price we are paying for gas right now. In fact many of the articles are carefully worded as this move would' "help surpress the high price of gas", that means to slow the rising of the cost of gas, not the reduction of the cost of gas.

It's just business as usual for the Bush gang. Their eithics seem to be that nothing is wrong with gouging the American public and their tax contrabutions and giving as much of that money as possible to their friends in high places before leaving office. Oh what a way to get by with a little help for my friends.