Sunday, January 31, 2010

A Saner Foreign Policy

... Just Leave People Alone

This morning, Howie (Down With Tyranny) blogs about the "green on blue" deaths of two US soldiers earlier this week in Wardak Province, Afghanistan. Sadly, this event has passed with hardly any notice in the broader stream of traditional media blasted at the American people. Howie places this event in a better context, noting the great likelihood that disrespect of and failure to understand your allies (and enemies) culture are the root cause for these deaths.

Howie also highlights comments made by Rep. Alan Grayson several months ago. As with understanding national financial scandal, anti-citizen politics, and blatant unconstitutional governance taken up by Congress, Grayson has been a stalwart proponent of bringing our forces back home and simplifying our foreign policy.

I think that the aid program is a fig leaf trying to make Congress and the American people feel better about the war and about killing. I think that diplomacy in the areas of fig leaf to try to make the American people think that there is some constructive alternative to the war when the war itself is destructive and not constructive.

I think that the basic premise that we can alter Afghan society is greatly flawed. Afghanistan is simply the part of Asia that was never occupied by the Russians or the English in the Great Game. It’s not a country; it’s not even a place. It’s just an empty place on the map. It’s terra incognita. People who live there are a welter of different tribes, different language groups, different religious beliefs.

All over the country you find different people who have nothing to do with each other except for the fact that we call them Afghans, who don’t even call themselves Afghans. They’re Tajiks, or they’re Pashtuns, or they’re Hazzaras or someone else. The things that hold them together are simply the things that we try to create artificially.

The idea that we could transform that society or any other society through aid, I think, is entirely questionable. I’ve never seen it happen; probably never will happen. If you go to the Stan countries north of Afghanistan, and I’ve been to all of them, what you find is that the way that the Russians altered that society was by crushing it. Stalin killed half a million Muslims in Kazakhstan, in Turkmenistan, in Kyrgyzstan, in Uzbekistan.

He simply sliced off the head of that society in order to remake it in the image that he wanted. And I think that we would have to do no less if we wanted to remake Afghanistan in our image. We’d have to destroy it in order to save it, and I don’t think the American people are ever going to do that to anybody. So I think that the underlying premise is simply wrong.

I’ve been to 175 countries all around the world, including Afghanistan and every country in that region, and what I’ve seen everywhere I went is that there are some commonalities. Everywhere you go, people want to fall in love. Everywhere you go, people love children. Everywhere, they love children. Everywhere you go, there’s a taboo against violence. Every single place you go. And everywhere you go, people want to be left alone. And that’s the best foreign policy of all. Just to leave people alone. (Alan Grayson, 10/9/2009)

Think about that for a moment. Just Leave People Alone. A thoroughly American sentiment, one that can be traced all the way back to the wisdom of Washington:
My policy has been, and will continue to be, while I have the honor to remain in the administration of the government, to be upon friendly terms with, but independent of, all the nations of the earth. To share in the broils of none. To fulfil our own engagements. To supply the wants, and be carriers for them all: Being thoroughly convinced that it is our policy and interest to do so.

Saturday, January 30, 2010

A Musical Interlude...

... Something a Little Different

Old Crow Medicine Show
I Hear Them Now




The song's a couple years old now, but I think touches on the angst deep into our national psyche. Hope and warning all rolled into one.

Do you think our leaders "hear them all"?

Thursday, January 21, 2010

If Corporations Are "Persons"...

... Why Don't They Pay Federal Income Taxes Like Citizens?

Not so long ago, I highlighted what I consider a fundamental misreading of our Constitution, namely the century-long assertion by the Supreme Court that business corporations are entitled to constitutional protections as living citizens are. In that post, I mentioned that the SCOTUS was expected to rule on corporate free speech in relation to federal election campaigns. (Curiously, this was one of the more trafficked posts in what is a very scarcely read blog.)

Well today, the SCOTUS ruled -- and not unexpectedly -- in a 5-4 decision that reinforces the principle that "corporations" are "persons" in the eyes of our Constitution and laws. (Of course, "enemy combatants," real living humans who probably engaged in real crimes against our Citizens, remain "non-persons" not entitled to any protections given in our Constitution and Bill of Rights. But, I digress.) Naturally, opinions are as divided as our "apolitical" SCOTUS, with many of our more expressive authoritarian leaning citizens expressing glee that no one can be silenced, not even corporations! On the other side, citizen advocacy groups bemoan this decision as the end of any real representation in elections as now even greater amounts of BIG MONEY will flow into the electoral process, lining the pockets of the infotainment ad delivery companies, airing even more campaign ads (at least they will displace the erectile dysfuntion pitches) and further distracting-bamboozling-and stupefying the voters who bother to do their civic duty.

Do powerful interests already greatly influence our elections? Yep. Do they really need more ability to influence elections? Apparently so. (Don't believe me? Take a few minutes watching David Corn and Kevin Drum on a recent episode of Bill Moyers Journal.)

Does today's decision make our elected representatives more responsive to their constituents? Nope. But does anyone really care anymore? Based on the ill-informed punditry screaming the same BS talking points all over the media tonight ("Now Unions can spend unlimited!" "Small Business can get into the elections YAY!" "Middle class candidates have a shot against multi-millionaire, self-financing incumbents!"), it seems that the level of delusion is high and that by next week, many will be convinced that this is the best thing to happen to elections since Bush v. Gore equally protected all ballots (except for the ones not counted).

How many will be so informed as to know that the plaintiff in this case is a criminal, wingnut election fraudster backed by the very corporations so happy to be able to throw their money around unfettered? My guess, only that "angry left" -- you know, the same cabal of people who are so all powerful that Scott Brown pretty much walked away in the Massachusetts special election!

Well friends. We do live in a Republic. That is, if we can keep it.

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

The Guant�namo “Suicides”

A Cover-up Continues?

Scott Horton has published an advance text of the upcoming cover story in Harpers regarding the 2006 deaths of three Guantanamo detainees while in U.S. custody. Horton is a dogged investigator, renown lawyer and compelling blogger. He has been strongly critical of U.S. torture and rendition policies throughout the Bush Administration and, like Glenn Greenwald, strongly advocated for the Obama Administration to dump it's "look forward, not backward" policies.

"When President Barack Obama took office last year, he promised to “restore the standards of due process and the core constitutional values that have made this country great.” Toward that end, the president issued an executive order declaring that the extra-constitutional prison camp at Guant�namo Naval Base “shall be closed as soon as practicable, and no later than one year from the date of this order.” Obama has failed to fulfill his promise. Some prisoners there are being charged with crimes, others released, but the date for closing the camp seems to recede steadily into the future. Furthermore, new evidence now emerging may entangle Obama’s young administration with crimes that occurred during the George W. Bush presidency, evidence that suggests the current administration failed to investigate seriously—and may even have continued—a cover-up of the possible homicides of three prisoners at Guant�namo in 2006." The Guant�namo “Suicides”: A Camp Delta sergeant blows the whistle—By Scott Horton (Harper's Magazine)
This article demands to be read. And read again by all officers of our government who are connected to national security and intelligence. Most importantly, it demands an answer from our Attorney General, not only to the specifics of this case, but to the broader issue of what exactly is the Department of Justice doing to investigate torture- and "enemy combatant"-related crimes, but also how FREE the Department actually is to go after those who committed heinous crimes in all our names.

As the first year of Obama'a administration ends, we learn new and, quite frankly, disturbing details about the "suicide" of detainees in Guantanamo. And, as this year ends, we now officially see the failure of one of Obama's signature promises made in the heady, post-inaugural days. That is, to close GTMO within one year. Probably the saddest and most damning aspects of this entire case is that the facts have long been well known. And whitewashed.


Update: Scott Horton published a follow-up to the original story today focusing on the compromised statement made by a key officer in charge of the Cuban prison camp as well as the tepid "non-response" by the Justice Department. If you're smelling a rat, you should be. The response so far seems all very reminiscent of the "official" stories being put out ahead of the first breaking of Abu Ghraib story.

Will there be accountability? When?


"In the Nurse's Office...

... Because Once Again They Glued Their Balls to Their Thighs!"

No one, but no one, tells the sad state of political affairs better than John Stewart.

Yes, I know. This is the second Stewart riff in as many posts. But what can this serving patriot say but , "yup."

Well, maybe all I can say anymore is "sigh."

The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Mass Backwards
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show
Full Episodes
Political HumorHealth Care Crisis


By tomorrow, it will be all over but the crying. Or the celebrating?

But I have to ask. If it is close, with the Massachusetts pols play the same game that kept Al Franken out of office for months?

Thursday, January 14, 2010

"We Just Paid a Lot of Money...

... for Someone to F*&k Us!"

Only John Stewart and his crew at the Daily Show can really explain why "we had too."

The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Clusterf#@k to the Poor House - Wall Street Bonuses
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show
Full Episodes
Political HumorHealth Care Crisis

Saturday, January 9, 2010

A Corporate Solution?

... or a Solution to Corporations?

Not so long ago, I read John Michael Greer's book, The Long Descent, and found it to be an excellent, thought-provoking exposition on our shared future in the declining resource world. Greer's fundamental thesis is that despite the cresting of the cheap energy era, our chances of complete, Hobbesian collapse and chaos are much less likely than a slow, steady roll into a de-industrialized future. If you've read James Kunstler's The Long Emergency, and then feared for your future, then The Long Descent may be for you.

After reading his book, I traveled over to Greer's blog - The Archdruid Report (yep, he's a druid). And right off the bat, I found another interesting location in the intertubes to read and ponder. In a post this week, Greer lays out some thoughts on the difficulties powerful special interests and corporations are wreaking on our polity and our attempts to respond the the dynamic world around us. Its an interesting post, but what really caught my eye was Greer's thoughts about how to deal with the "personhood" corporations have long enjoyed in the United States. (Yep, in many ways, corporations in this country have all the rights of a living citizen.... you can think a 19th Century Supreme Court ruling for that!). Greer suggests that if corporations are indeed "persons," then perhaps they should also suffer for the felony crimes they commit:

"My more perceptive readers may be wondering at this point whether I’m seriously proposing that corporations should be thrown in jail or put to death. Yes, that’s what I’m proposing, with the adjustments needed to account for the differences between corporate persons and natural persons. What’s the essential nature of imprisonment for a crime, after all? The criminal ceases to be a free person; for a specified period of time, he is a chattel of society, and society has the right to profit from his labor during that period. And capital punishment? The criminal, having proven that he isn’t willing to abide by even the most minimal standards of social existence, ceases to exist by act of society. Both of these can be applied to corporations easily enough."

An interesting thought, no? Personally, I'd rather see the corporations stripped of their "rights" as persons in the eyes of the law. But, this would seem an appropriate remedy and fair treatment of all "persons" (living and corporate) under the laws.

Greer is far more optimistic than I amthat such taming of our out-of-control corporation could actually occur. Nevertheless, I do agree with him that "the power of corporate interests might more usefully be seen as a response to the general weakness of all other parties." If and when these "other parties" (labor, main street business, disaffected minorities, etc) learn (and re-learn) how to focus their political power, then we might just see an end to corporate personhood, or failing that, adoption of corporate sentancing outlined above. After all, are we Melians, bound to suffer "what we must?"

No. I think not.

Updated 1-10-09: Here is a short video from McClatchey and the Real News Network discussing the upcoming SCOTUS ruling on Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. The decision, which is due soon, portends to lighten existing regulation of corporate "persons" and put even more of their money into our political election process. Take a look:


More at The Real News

Thursday, January 7, 2010

Mercenaries....

... an affront to us all.

Jeremy Scahill delivers yet another report of American-paid mercenary crime...

Two former Blackwater operatives were arrested by US federal agents on murder charges, stemming from their alleged involvement in the shooting deaths of two Afghan civilians in Kabul in May. They have been identified as Justin Cannon, 27, of Corpus Christi, Texas, and Christopher Drotleff, 29, of Virginia Beach, Va. They have been charged with “crimes including second-degree murder, attempted murder and firearms offenses while working as contractors for the U.S. Department of Defense in Afghanistan,” according to the Justice Department. The 13-count indictment was returned by a federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia on Jan. 6 and unsealed today.
RebelReports - Two Blackwater Guards Arrested by FBI on Murder Charges
Mercenaries were suppressed after Europe's devastating Thirty Years War... for good reason. Mercenaries are not bound to states or their citizens; they are only bound to their next paycheck, and when that paycheck stops or the wars end, then what? Britain's use of mercenaries in North America during the 1770s was a significant part of why the colonists formed their own army and fought to free themselves. And the return of these unlawful combatants to our modern scene is yet another indication that the world of states that monopolize the use of lethal force within their established borders is in decline (perhaps terminal decline).

But who will control them? I once thought the plot lines underlying such popular series as "24" (Starkwood) and "Jericho" (Jennings & Rall) was far-out Hollywood writing that was impossible in my country today. But with the tentacles of private corporations spread across the entire national security establishment, one has to wonder exactly who these companies, and their mercenaries, are loyal too?

Once again, wisdom can be found in the actions of our republic's founders. Or, in the case of the wingnuts, from one of their historic stars, Machiavelli:
...if one holds his state on the basis of mercenary arms, he will never be firm or secure; because they are disunited, ambitious, without discipline, unfaithful; gallant among friends, vile among enemies; no fear of God, no faith with men; and one defers ruin insofar as one defers the attack; and in peace you are despoiled by them, in war by the enemy.

Wednesday, January 6, 2010

Just for fun...

... The Capitol Steps tell us about the security theater at the airport.... before Mr. Underpants lit up!

There's a Reason....

... I always return to Driftglass

I don't know exactly how this Gilly-spawn blogger from Chicago can capture so many of my opinions. And I would really love to have his gift of prose, a unique eviscerating style that lays waste to the crass, the evil, and "Teh Stoopid" among us (and let's not forget Blago and Da Mare!). I'd really like to split a six-pack of Old Style with this guy and just talk life, politics and how we can salvage a country we could be proud of out of the mess it's become.

Drifty's weekly serving of Sunday Morning Comin' Down is liberally used by your's truly to salve the searing damage done to my brain by the inane and fatuous Sunday morning gas bag shows like Press the Meat and Faux News Sunday. He skillfully crushes the weekly memes, highlights the foibles of the talking-point armed stooges who use the sacred hours to pretend there is any real political debate in this country. (One wonders why such pious hosts like Brit Hume are not in the church pews on Sunday mornings anyways?)

But this week, Drifty simply rises to new heights. And since I'm making a post that extols Drifty's, let me give you a taste and tell you to Read.It.All.

We’re a nation with 30 million angry Goobers whose bloody political paw prints are all over virtually every act of Conservative fuckuppery and treason this country has suffered for the last generation.

We’re a nation with 30 million "Party of Personal Responsibility" Pig People who are desperate to skip out on taking Personal Responsibility for eight years of cheering on the catastrophes they're now whining about; eight years which had been preceded by another eight years during which these same mob of drooling halfwits screamed for Bill Clinton's "socialist" scalp.

We’re a nation in which those 30 million culture war cannon fodder idiots – lovingly hand-crafted by Ronald Reagan, Lee Atwater and Karl Rove – are also 30 million voters.

30 million viewers and listeners.

30 million consumers.

Sunday, January 3, 2010

Health Care Reform ...

... is it to be???

In looking over some of what I wrote in the past year or so... or should I say in the few recent posts I made... seems that the health care reform debacle was a topic on my mind. It sure has made it to my Google "Shared Items" list a lot! Since I last wrote, both houses of Congress passed respective, internally conferenced and terribly flawed reform bills. In short, the GOP pretended to be in charge, had the various bills vastly compromised in the pursuit of "bipartisanship" and, like hookers when the dollars run out, left the johns sitting in the dark without even a kiss (or even the votes)!

Then again, given the pernicious influences of lobbyists (from the beginning!), big-time corporations and conflicted spouses, it is really hard to tell exactly who is the whore and who is the john during the entire health care reform process through the oh-so-dramatic Christmas Eve vote on the Senate floor. At this point, it seems the only people who are going to get screwed is everyone in this country who does not have health insurance now (legal citizens or not), those with modest employer-paid coverage (who are still bankrupted by a medical catastrophe), and, of course, the average taxpayer. Cui bono? Well, weep no tears for the fantastically wealthy who don't really need insurance anyways ("cadillac" plans or not) and will find a scummy ethically-challenged way out of any newly imposed taxes. Nor should one cry for the giant medical-drug-insurance corporations; they are already reaping outrageous fortunes for taking money, and guaranteeing profits by limiting payouts.

Naturally, John Stewart tells the sad saga in a much more compelling way than I could. Including the perfidious role our old friend "Droopy" has played.
The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c
The D.C.
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show
Full Episodes
Political HumorHealth Care Crisis


Of course, the existing health care "system" in the USA is an immensely complex, interconnected and sadly, profit-driven enterprise. It makes vast fortunes for a small number of Americans while delivering just about every possible health outcome. From stupendous life-saving emergency services, to equally miraculous life-extending surgeries and drugs, to stunning cosmetic makeovers and baby-making, our national health care system does it all. Yet somehow, it also lets some 4,000 Americans die each month because these people do not have the coverage necessary to partake in this wondrous "system."

Think about that. Four thousand a month! That's like September 11th every third week! And still our Congress serves up a melange of changes that will not fundamentally change the system that exists today (except perhaps to make every Citizen even more resentful of it).

Not so long ago, I discussed this whole health care issue with some friends. As part of that, I extolled the excellence of a couple of shows NPR's This American Life had done back in the fall. In the first (More Is Less), looked at why our country spends so much money on health care (because doctors are basically "pieceworkers"? Or because the patients demand unnecessary tests? Or because the hospital companies extort higher fees from the insurance companies?). It begins to flesh out for you, in a very easy to understand way (despite the David Frum cameo), just how multifaceted the health care "problem" actually is. The second show (Someone Else's Money) exposed the internal battles between big pharma and insurance companies (guess what, premiums go up to pay off pharma), the insanity of billing administration (and the overhead that must be paid), and the disgraceful dumping of insurance customers to protect the company itself (due to the cost-sharing predicament). Bill Moyers also did an episode called Money Drive Medicine which is well worth your time.

When you are done listening to these shows, you come away with the realization that complexity and unintended consequences is only part of the bigger problem -- and perhaps the result of what seems to truly be the problem. That is, the U.S. health care "system" is essentially ruled by three very large, monopolistic trusts (big hospital, big pharmaceutical and big insurance corporations). And, what is missing from any of the reform legislation awaiting conference in the Congress?? You guessed it -- regulation (or even busting) of these trusts.

Once again, everything old is new again. Unfortunately, unlike Teddy Roosevelt, our current President will not be taking up the mantle of trust buster -- he is much more of a McKinley it seems (does that make Rahm the new Mark Hanna?? he seems to fit the mold...)

So, is health care a "right" deserved by everyone?? Or is it a business, deserving its own freedom to generate profit?

This patriot pretty much comes down here: health care for everyone is a public good that requires public regulation. A utility so to speak. Everyone must have adequate health care to lead the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness bequeathed to us by our Founders. And, like having clean water or electricity, the "delivery system" is so expensive that it naturally tends toward monopolistic behavior which the forces of "free marketism" use to turn their customers into paupers if left unconstrained. Therefore, in the interests of all our good, health care "reform" should seek to push our present "system" towards the public-utility model. I will judge the merits of any final bill passed by Congress (this issue remains in doubt I think) based on the how much (or little) the reform does to move towards this model.

Friday, January 1, 2010

A New Post for a New Year

... or is it a new post for a new decade?

Whatever.

So those few of you who do stop by to read my ruminations know that I've been an infrequent commenter on the scene, a ghost who comments on what others write but rarely stands up and makes statements in their own blog. It's true; I've been pretty delinquent in posting my various thoughts about where we are today in our country, where we seem to be headed, and why we are on the course we are on.

The very interested wonder "why"?? Every now and then, I wonder the same thing. Is it too much work? Too many other commitments?? The burning out of the fires of "hope and (or for) change"??? Or simply boredom with commentary on the contretemps of the times????

Others simply shrug their shoulders and move on to the next blog.

The lack of activity here at this blog is probably due to all of the above and more. No doubt I am very unhappy, as are many, many other patriots, with where we find ourselves theses days. Heck, we can't even keep the few, mildly progressive and wholly patriotic appointments made by the new Administration. But yet, "Ben the Beard" Bernanke keeps his job and Wall Street tycoons fleece the rest of us (and each other every now and then). And we have to wonder what the heck this guy has been telling his boss in the wake of this abject failure.

Sadly, we've watched our new president stumble down the path of his predecessors, wading further into the big muddy of Afghanistan and failing to uphold his pledge to shutdown that embarrassing on us all, Guantanamo. To hear how unbelievable (or inevitable) these actions are, simply listen to how Bill Moyers brought to life LBJ's Path to War in a November broadcast. Sigh.

And don't even get me going on the debacle that is health care reform! It's even worse than it was when I last wrote. Apparently we have the best Congress that money and inherent conflicts of interest can buy.

I guess it is not surprising then that I've been silent. What victory is there to speak of these days? Heck, it is so bad that one has to take pleasure in the "morans" climbing to ever higher heights of astroturfed recognition -- so high indeed that they might complete the GOP's ideological purity firing squads in the fallout of the party's failure last year.

At least we've seen a couple of truly upstanding new Congressmen take the principled stands their constituents expect them to take.

And, I even hear Karl Rove is joining the rest of his right wing, family-values buddies in the ranks of the divorced! Maybe the next time he shows up on TV to extol family values, one of the punditry could ask him how long it will be before he marries again? Even that ever pompous windbag Rusty had some sort of medical problem while vacationing in exotic Hawaii that he doesn't want to talk about (too bad it wasn't fatal, but it would be karmic if it were Parkinson's; jus' sayin'). So, maybe things are looking up?

Anyhow, for those who do take the time to read this --- Happy New Year!!! Let's make 2010 a better one than last year --- whether we act individually, with our small circles of family and friends, or collectively. For, as I noted almost a year ago, we have a lot to do in our country and we are the ones who are going to get it done if its going to get done.

And you can bet I'm going to see this if it ever makes it to where I am at!


(PS - you'll note some admin changes to the look of the blog -- and several additions to my blogroll. I hope you'll visit those fine folks too.)