Category Archives: Military

A Rare Slip Of The Tongue By Sen. McCain.

Posted on by

It doesn’t happen often, but last Thursday, a nugget of truth slipped between the lips of the self-described maverick.

Appearing on Fox News Channel, he stated that the reason for the filibuster of former Sen. Chuck Hagel’s nomination for Secretary of Defense is Hagel’s statements regarding former President Bush. McCain said, “it goes back to there’s a lot of ill will towards Senator Hagel when he was a Republican, he attacked President Bush mercilessly and said he was the worst president since Herbert Hoover and said the surge was the worst blunder since the Vietnam War, which was nonsense. He was anti his own party and people – people don’t forget that.” 

So that’s it. That’s McCain’s reason for taking the unprecedented step of voting to filibuster the nomination of the Secretary of Defense? McCain cares so little about our soldiers in Afghanistan that he would block the nomination during a war? Apparently, if you’re a Teapublican, political payback is more important than patriotism. It’s come to a point that, if you’re a Republican, you can’t tell the truth about your own party if that truth is negative.

As it turns out, you don’t dare turn your back on them, either. Not even a kevlar vest could protect you from a back-stabbing like this. 

Guns And Bibles.

Posted on by

Or is it Bibles and guns? The two now seem so inexplicably linked it’s difficult to know.

For example, many of the nation’s leading Bible-thumping states also have the largest percentage of gun ownership. And although I know of no studies on the subject, these same states would seem to rank high on a paranoia index.

It all seems intertwined.

Many churches quote the Bible to justify their hatred of gays, abortion rights activists, minorities and other faiths. When the government defends the civil rights of minorities and the right of women to control their own bodies, the faithful are given to paranoid delusions of an “attack on Christianity,” of a loss of “family values” and of a tyrannical government. That, in turn, leads to more gun ownership in order to fight the “jack-booted” (whatever that means) thugs who, according to the faithful, are coming to destroy their churches and take away their right to hate whoever they want.

All of this leads to despicable demonstrations such as those by the Westboro Baptist Church. Even worse it leads to violence against gays and minorities, and murders of abortion providers.

Hallelujah and pass the ammunition!

Although the faithful will be furious at my characterization, it has become reality. Moreover, such actions of the faithful are nothing new. Early Christians turned on the Jews who initially supported them (especially surprising given that Christ was a Jew). Christians fought Crusades against the Muslims. Catholics spawned the Inquisition to torture and murder anyone who displayed the slightest independence from Church teachings. Catholics also slaughtered the Cathars, Huguenots and more. Hitler claimed spiritual guidance as he exterminated Jews, Russians, Poles and Hungarians. And the Japanese believed that they were Divinely protected against all outsiders.

In our own nation’s history, the KKK toted Bibles and quoted scripture as they tortured, hung and burned African-Americans. Neo-Nazis have aligned themselves with “Christian” churches. So have many other militias and hate groups.

Even our once secular military has embraced Christianity to such an extent that it has trampled on the rights of soldiers who practice another religion or no religion at all. According to the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, there have been numerous cases of religious discrimination at our military academies and at military bases around the world. The organization is understandably concerned about “a rapidly expanding and unconstitutional influence of religion over military operations and affairs that must (for both national security and service member civil and human rights) remain strictly and forever secular.”

I am not opposed to religion, but I am opposed to religious discrimination and Bible bullying. And I see absolutely no value in allowing religious zealots to push their beliefs at the end of a gun!

A Heartless Dick Who Won’t Go Away.

Posted on by

On the day of President Obama’s State of the Union address, Richard “The Dick” Cheney crawled out of his hidey hole to show off his new black heart.  He used the opportunity to criticize the president’s choices for Secretary of Defense and CIA Director as “second rate.”

Even if The Dick were to be believed, no one would be more familiar with second-rate leaders than Cheney.

At the risk of being whisked away to another country to be tortured by The Dick’s extraordinary rendition crew, I’ll remind you that Cheney was a supporter of Condoleeza Rice, the former National Security Adviser who ignored numerous warnings of a possible attack on US soil using hijacked airplanes.

Cheney supported the elevation of Rice to Secretary of Sate.  He supported other incompetents such as Donald Rumsfeld and I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby. Cheney ordered the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame, thereby endangering the life of Plame, her husband and everyone associated with her. Even worse, Cheney orchestrated the charge to invade Iraq by claiming Saddam Hussein not only had built a nuclear arsenal, but collaborated with al Qaeda prior to the attacks of 9/11.

The Dick’s actions led to the deaths of approximately 5,000 US soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan along with civilian casualties so numerous that no one has been able to accurately count them.

If that’s what The Dick considers first-rate foreign policy leadership, I’ll take second-rate leaders any day.

Let’s Have A Real Debate About Drone Strikes And Torture.

Posted on by

Over the past decade, our “war on terror” has led to two highly contentious policies. Extraordinary rendition (AKA torture) involving the US and 50 nations which acted in defiance of the Geneva Conventions’ ban on torture, and unmanned drone strikes (AKA assassination by remote control). These two policies were created and undertaken by the CIA and the US military without open debate.

It’s long past time for that debate to take place.

Today, Congress will have what promises to be a highly partisan circus of self-righteous statements by both parties during the confirmation hearing for the position of CIA Director. But it’s unlikely that we’ll learn anything from the hyperbolic statements of partisanship.

What we need is a series of non-partisan Congressional hearings and a public debate on both policies at the same time. After all, torture was authorized by the Bush administration and drone strikes by the Obama administration.

By addressing both policies simultaneously, we might see an honest debate without the usual posturing for the media that accompanies most Congressional hearings these days.

Admittedly, it’s unlikely that anything will actually be accomplished by such a debate other than focusing public attention on the issues. But at least voters would be informed and could make their opinions known to our elected representatives. Then, and only then, our elected officials might arrive at workable constraints that control these policies.

Better yet, they might prohibit the policies entirely. There simply must be better methods of pursuing terrorists and stopping them before they strike.

Torture and assassinations without due process have no place in modern society.

Are We Willing To Settle For This America?

Posted on by

There are those, particularly on the political right, who are satisfied with the way things are in the US. They truly believe that everything about the US is better than any other country in the world. And they believe it’s unpatriotic to criticize our faults.

But can we really settle for the way things are in the US?

Can we accept a nation where freedom and opportunity are still not shared equally? Are we willing to allow large, multinational corporations to buy elections, dictate government policy and send our jobs off-shore? Can we afford to watch our nation fall farther behind in education and technology?

Can we afford to allow our infrastructure to continue to crumble? Can we afford to have corporations devastate our environment in search of ever-larger profits? Are we content to allow military-style weapons to fall into the hands of the paranoid and the criminally insane? Can we watch more Aurora and Newtown-style massacres and do nothing?

Can we afford to be perpetually at war? Are we willing to accept that more of our soldiers now die from suicides than firefights? Can we settle for being the only advanced nation in the world that doesn’t provide healthcare to all of its citizens?

Can we accept ever-higher education costs and ever-lower salaries for our youth? Are we willing to cut pensions and retirement plans for our elderly in order for large corporations to avoid taxes? Are we content to put drug users and petty thieves in prison and let the bankers who stole trillions continue to walk free?

Can we any longer listen to those who demand “a return to Christian values” then turn their backs on the starving, the wounded and the infirm?

At his inauguration, President Obama spoke passionately of his vision for America. An America at peace. An America with freedom and equality for everyone. An America based on a growing and prosperous middle class. An America that provides opportunity for everyone. An America that is, once again, a true leader in the world.

It’s time to for all Americans to follow our president’s vision and stop settling.

This Confirmation Hearing Is Going To Be Good!

Posted on by

Numerous Teapublicans have already stated that they will not support the nomination of former Republican Senator Chuck Hagel for Secretary of Defense. Set aside for a moment that tradition dictates that a president has the right to choose whom he pleases for his cabinet, it’s going to be really entertaining to watch Teapublicans attack one of their own.

Why, you may ask, would they attack a Republican who is qualified for the position and share many of their own beliefs? A man who is a decorated war hero?

It seems that while still in the Senate, Hagel had a nasty habit of telling the truth a little too often. For example, he dared to say that our invasion of Iraq was all about oil – in contrast to the Bush administration’s official position that we were “bringing freedom and democracy to the Middle East.” Hagel was also against the surge of troops in Iraq, fearing that so many troops might drag Iran into the war. Worse yet, Hagel is said to be “weak on Iran” because he opposed the Bush administration’s attempt to declare Hezbollah a terrorist organization.

In doing so, Hagel said that, though he fully supports Israel, he swore to uphold the interests of the United States first.

How dare he take his oath of office so seriously? Didn’t he realize that Israelis and their Jewish-American supporters were watching? Didn’t he understand that his position could cost Teapublicans votes? Didn’t he know that the US is supposed to support everything the Israeli war hawks want, no matter how much it inflames the situation in the Middle East?

Whatever your position on the issues, the confirmation hearing is going to be fascinating. So pull up a chair and a bowl of popcorn and turn on C-Span. The Teapublican questioning of Hagel is going to be entertaining. Having watched Hagel for a number of years, I’m convinced he’ll give a lot better than he gets.

Is It Finally Time To Talk About Guns?

Posted on by

Every time there is a mass shooting, the National Rifle Association, Fox News Channel, right wing radio loudmouths and the GOP say, “Now is not the time to talk about gun control.” They claim that doing so would be disrespectful to the victims.

Seriously? Talking about measures to prevent more victims is disrespectful?

Given that we’ve just experienced yet another mass shooting, this time in an elementary school, I think any reasonable person will now admit that the time to talk about guns is finally here! When small children, teachers and school administrators are targeted, we must finally examine the role of guns in a civilized society.

To start the conversation, allow me to make a few observations:

1 – Outside our military, no one in the US needs a military-style assault rifle. These weapons have no purpose other than to kill people.

2 – Almost no one needs to carry a handgun. Handguns are virtually useless as a means of defense. If an attacker is armed, and has his weapon drawn, it’s already too late to draw your own weapon. Moreover, if you’re carrying a handgun, you may be all too tempted to use it; in a fit of anger; in a personal crisis; or in a moment of fear.

3 – Guns in the home are only useful for defense if they are readily accessible. However, if they are easily available for the adults who own them, they are also available to children in the home.

4 – Guns are far too easily obtained by the criminally insane. Any non-felon can walk into a gun shop and purchase as many guns and as much ammunition as he can afford. The only regulation is that the buyer pass a quick background check. Worse yet, anyone can purchase guns and ammunition at one of thousands of gun shows without any restriction at all! (40 percent of guns are purchased this way.) It’s time to change the gun show exemption.

5 – A national registry of the owners of handguns and assault weapons is not a threat to anyone’s freedom, except those intent on causing harm. There are far too many guns in the hands of US citizens for any “black-shirted anti-second amendment thugs” to take them away from us. The benefits of being able to quickly and easily track guns used in the commission of a crime far outweighs any potential inconvenience to the gun owners.

6 – Dramatically reducing the sale of handguns, assault weapons and large capacity magazines will eventually be rewarded with fewer mass shootings. It may take a while, but it will gradually take these weapons of choice out of the hands of the criminally insane.

As important as reducing the availability of weapons that have no purpose other than to kill people is the need to moderate our national paranoia. Despite claims by the far right, the UN is not going to take away our freedoms. And given our enormous military budget, we have no one to fear but ourselves.

The Etch-A-Sketch Debate.

Posted on by

We should have seen it coming.  For months, Mitt Romney ran further and further to the right.  Then during last night’s debate with President Obama, Romney did an about face.  Living up to the Etch-A-Sketch strategy that Mitt’s campaign manager promised following the Teapublican primaries, he abandoned most of the right wing rhetoric and ideas he promoted in the primaries and promised to be a moderate healer, instead.

Defying arithmetic, he promised to increase spending for the military, cut taxes for everybody, cut healthcare costs while repealing Obamacare, increase spending for education and student loans, increase spending for Medicare and Medicaid, maintain Social Security and create 12 million jobs.

Whew!

And, of course, while doing all that, he promises to cut the deficit and the national debt – all without revealing a single detail or plan other than to say he would cut funding for PBS and Big Bird.

Disregarding the fact that there is no possible way to pay for his promises, has he forgotten that he’s living in the 21st century?  We have an endless number of video recordings which show him saying that he will privatize Social Security, voucherize Medicare, slash Medicaid spending, eliminate the Department of Education, cut taxes for the wealthy, cut taxes for businesses, eliminate tax deductions for the middle class, cut Pell grants for students and turn back the clock on healthcare.

About the only thing consistent with his statements in previous speeches and debates was the promise to increase defense spending even more than the Department of Defense has asked for.

Of course, political pundits have already concluded that Romney won the first debate.  If so, it was only because President Obama couldn’t tell who he was debating.  It wasn’t Mitt.  It was some guy who looks like Mitt but who was espousing a completely different platform from the plutocrat who won the Teapublican nomination.  That Mitt was decidedly anti-middle class, anti-woman, anti-health reform, anti-green energy, anti-small business, anti-entitlement, anti-education, anti-government, anti-environment, and pro-war.

It’s not easy debating someone who’s willing to lie about absolutely anything and everything to get elected.

Obama’s America In 2016.

Posted on by

The shockumentary “2016” provides one man’s view of what America will be like in 2016 should President Obama be re-elected.  The future it portrays would be dim, indeed, IF this example of Teapublican propaganda were true.

But “2016” is based on a false premise…that President Obama is un-American.  That he’s a socialist out to destroy the very nation he has sworn to protect.

In truth, given his history of accomplishment against long odds, no one represents the American Dream better than Barack Obama.  And despite Teapublican rhetoric (and the film’s premise), Obama’s policies are decidedly not un-American.  In fact, the reverse is true.  It is the continuation of Teapublican policies that threatens to undermine our democracy.

For 40 years, the GOP (Guardians Of Privilege) have weighted tax cuts to aide the wealthy and large, multi-national corporations.  They have engaged in union-busting and cut funds for the poor.  They have used those in the military to pursue their goals of international domination and they’ve abandoned them as soon as they were injured or retired.  In order to win election, they have vilified teachers, firefighters, our postal service, government employees and immigrants.  In order to maximize the profits of multi-nationals, the GOP has proposed to eliminate the agencies responsible for clean air, clean water and product safety.  GOP policies have even rewarded those who ship jobs overseas and who take advantage of offshore tax havens.

President Obama threatens to change all that.  He dares to propose tax fairness, higher standards for fuel efficiency, sustainable forms of energy, investment in infrastructure, improved education and incentives to bring jobs home to the US.

So every time you see an ad for “2016,” imagine how much better off we’ll be with President Obama in the White House than with Mitt the Twit and his 47 percent-hating plutocrats.

It’s Not Just About The 47 Percenters.

Posted on by

The video of Mitt Romney’s speech to a Florida gathering of the wealthy shows his utter contempt for much of America.

Who are those he considers to be “freeloaders?”  They are not the “welfare queens” and lazy louts you might expect.  The 47 percent who have not paid federal income taxes in the past few years include the working poor, the elderly, veterans, military who are serving in a combat zone, even the wealthy who have enough tax write-offs to zero out their federal income taxes.

But Mitt didn’t limit his disparaging comments to the 47 percent.   He also went out of his way to insult Latinos and other minorities.  And he again inserted his highly polished loafers in his mouth with regard to foreign policy.

He said that Palestinians do not want peace, so as president, he would just kick the issue down the road.  After all, by Mitt’s standards, the Palestinians trapped in Israeli-controlled ghettos don’t earn enough money to be of consequence.

None of this should come as any surprise to those who have followed Romney’s career. 

As a vulture capitalist, he showed complete disdain for those who lost their jobs as the result of his hostile takeovers and business conquests.  His tax-evading investments in offshore accounts display a lack of patriotism for the country that allowed him to accumulate wealth.  And his trip to Europe during the Olympics showed his incompetence and lack of tact with regard to foreign policy, leading European media to label him “Mitt the Twit” and the “American Borat.”

So let’s review: Contempt for nearly half of our voters, dismantling American companies and shipping jobs overseas, legalized tax evasion, and arrogance in dealing with foreign leaders.

Exactly why should anyone other than the very wealthy vote for you, Mitt?