Did Obama Just Lose My Vote?

This is serious. I’ve been saying for quite a while that Obama has not yet earned my vote and I am quite happy voting for Nader to help strengthen efforts toward a multi-party system. However, I voted for Obama in the primary here in Texas and was excited to vote for the first viable African-American candidate in the U.S.

Also, this is the most important election in years, if for no other reason than the necessity to populate the Supreme Court with judges who will protect civil liberties unlike those Bush has appointed or McCain would appoint.

While I have continuously lambasted the lack of character Hillary Clinton and her husband have shown during the primary season, I would not say I have been sipping “Obama Kool-Aid.” I understand that his “Change We Can Believe In” slogan is only as effective as his ability - to put it simply - to get things done. And politicians have to work together to accomplish progress. (Unless you’re President Bush, in which case you use the 9/11 attacks and existence of terrorism to scare Americans and politicians alike into marching behind your efforts to make the U.S. more of an authoritarian regime than ever before. Ugh, the thought makes it difficult to keep my coffee and chocolate granola cereal down.)

Obama is a politician first. With a degree in Government, I never lose sight of this. While Democrats fall in love (and Republicans fall in line) we must not forget that politicians must operate within the existing confines of the Washington Dance. This will inevitably lead to widespread disapointment with Obama, when he’s president, because he simply cannot please everyone and will have to compromise in order to accomplish certain goals. A president must make decisions when no option is the right one. It’s a hard gig - the hardest one in the world; I thoroughly recognize this.

However, much of my free time this week has been spent trolling the internet for a reasonable justification for Obama’s approval of the new FISA Act of 2008. Of course, I already have my fair share of underlying bitterness because the Democrats have performed disgracefully since taking control of the Congress. They are inexplicably banner ankle-grabbers again and again despite Bush’s record disapproval ratings. Yes, they do not want to seem weak on national security, but they are greatly underestimating the American people’s desire to have their civil liberties protected in this era of heightened danger.

Congressional members have far more concern with the length of their federal careers than casting the appropriate vote - rendering them impotent in the areas of war profiteering (Diane Feinstein’s husband is a defense contractor and why she still enjoys support in California, I have no idea. BTW, she vote AYE on FISA as well), criminal activity at the executive level (erasing emails, Karl Rove and Harriet Miers refusing to testify, Valerie Plame, fixing EPA reports and much, much more), reforming health care and national energy policy, policing unfair lending practices and allowing the establishment of a credit industry that works against the American people, not for them. It inexplicable that Congress has utterly failed to inhibit Bush’s harmful activities when the majority of Americans do not favor his policies in the slightest. It is frustrating and goddamned ridiculous.

So, Obama is Change personified, right?

Apparently, not so. Yes, I have read his blog on The Huffington Post regarding his FISA vote, which proffered no substantial logic for his approval of the bill. A few gems from the piece are:

Given the choice between voting for an improved yet imperfect bill, and losing important surveillance tools, I’ve chosen to support the current compromise. I do so with the firm intention — once I’m sworn in as president — to have my Attorney General conduct a comprehensive review of all our surveillance programs, and to make further recommendations on any steps needed to preserve civil liberties and to prevent executive branch abuse in the future.

Democracy cannot exist without strong differences. And going forward, some of you may decide that my FISA position is a deal breaker. That’s ok. But I think it is worth pointing out that our agreement on the vast majority of issues that matter outweighs the differences we may have.

The problem with our agreement on the vast majority of issues is that his vote on the FISA bill illustrates his inherent weakness and willingness to compromise when no comprise is needed simply to prove (which he fails to do with this vote) that he is strong on national security. This “aye” was unnecessary, dangerous, wrong, hurtful and potentially, yes, a deal breaker. Especially when assessing the guts of the bill, along with those who voted against it. On The Huffpo website, David Bromwich provides a very concise, yet in-depth look at the governmental powers granted with this legislation. I strongly recommend reading the blog and the readers’ comments below.

Among the senators who opposed the vote are Biden, Boxer, Dodd, Clinton, Byrd, Durbin, Feingold, Harkin, Kerry, Leahy, Reid and Levin.

The bottom line is that political agreements with a candidate are moot if the candidate does not have the political strength or fortitude to operate in accordance with that agreement.

Of course, Obama’s folding on FISA was a political calculation - that’s practically consensus. And I wish he could offer an honest defense of his vote; but, alas, this theater of election season would lead any such candor to damage the candidate.

Obama will be elected president barring any unforeseen, intensely damaging and highly unlikely circumstances. Though the media portrays the presidential race as close - it is a facade. McCain’s chances of succeeding in November, in my opinion, are around 1 in 5. Incumbent parties do not win when the economy is in the tank - mentally or not (and it’s not mental, Phil, when milk, bread, cereal, gas and all other necessities are more and more expensive and the dollar is weaker and weaker). McCain is not galvanizing and voter trust of most election issues points toward Obama. I wish Obama the best and will be hopeful as he takes his oath of office.

Furthermore, I applaud Obama’s willingness to work across the aisle and understand there will be areas in which he will break with Liberals. Support of faith-based community initiatives, for one (and this coming from an agnostic).

The FISA Act, however, is so detrimental to democracy itself, my respect for not just Obama himself, but the very idea of Obama has been irreparably damaged. I would encourage hardcore Obama supporters to keep this particular vote of his in mind when daydreaming of the days to come as he takes on the heavy mantle of President of the United States of America. Perfection at this level does not exist and any romance with a candidate will certainly abate over time.

I would never cast a vote for McFlip-Flop, nor would I ever stay home and waste a voting opportunity. Also, I am a thorough, complete supporter of a multi-party system. While I wanted to vote for Obama - and was excited to vote for him - my decision was not cast in stone. It still is not cemented. However, the odds I would pull the lever in support of him this November are greatly diminished. Truthfully, I am ever more looking in Nader’s direction.

If Obama’s political contributions continue to decline, I encourage him to address his FISA ‘08 support with increased seriousness. This is no small issue for those of us who follow politics and government activity.

This weekend, I plan on purchasing Obama’s two books and will begin reading them with a large grain of salt. Perhaps this will allow me some insight behind this recent mind-boggling decision of his.

As of this point, Obama is not Hope and he is not Change We Can Believe In. He is merely Better Than Bush, but isn’t everybody else?

Review: Maxed Out

Are documentaries getting better or is it just me? At least, they’re getting more interesting. Last night, I watched Maxed Out: Hard Times, Easy Credit and the Era of Predatory Lending (2006) and must offer my highest recommendations to those considering adding to their rental “queue.”

While this documentary is certainly a biased vehicle through which writer, director, producer James Duncan Scurlock expresses his opinions on the unethical credit industry and the government’s collusion, it nevertheless provides an eye-opening paradigm behind the every-man’s everyday experience with credit card companies. If you think you have it bad, watch this documentary - for real - and you’ll feel like you’re living large and in charge. And happiness is all in the mind, which is why the Danish are on top of the world.

It’s easy to take away from Maxed Out the the significance of the lack of regulation of the unethical credit industry by the government. It’s so cute when the Republicans and Libertarians parade their free market ideals and forget that the human element prevents these theories from successfully materializing, despite all the good intentions and numerical data. And they want to open the health care industry in the same manner - unregulated, free market doctors, medicine, scalpels. Yeah, that will work out real well! Lack of regulation has proven so effective in the housing industry, which has resulted in mass foreclosures and helped initiate a recession, and global trade, which provides us Americans cheap consumer goods by taking advantage of poor working conditions outside of our borders. Don’t ask don’t tell and the like.

What we need is a combination of economics and anthropology. The human element - which differs from culture to culture - inhibits capitalism, socialism or communism in their pure forms. China has had to mix capitalism with their brand of communism. The U.S. will never fully achieve a free market system that does not victimize the lowest common denominator. Until economists and legislators alike realize this fundamental reality and Americans stop falling for the right-wing line that all their taxes and all the government regulation only benefit the undeserving over the hard worker, we’re going to have these economic meltdowns - most especially when a Republican Congress rubberstamps a Republican White House.

But I digress as I often do.

Maxed Out hit home for me especially as I am a poster-child for financial misunderstanding and irresponsibility. To put it mildly, I bit off more than I could chew when I was in college and partied like a rock star in my early twenties. And while it can take a week to ruin your credit, it can take a lifetime to repair it. The cards are stacked against you and the system is designed to squeeze every penny from your cold, dead hands. It’s grotesque.

As a wise, old 30-something (does 30 count as 30-something?), I have seen the light and rectified my ways. What I have taken from my experience, however, is the belief in the necessity of financial training for children - especially teens. We have typing class, calculus, electives, foreign languages and yet the very basics of money-management is exempt from regular school curricula. I’m very happy to have learned about STD’s and what PCP does to the human and mice brains. But the development of my adulthood would have been greatly improved had the Texas School Board of Education seen fit at some point to include information on CHECKING ACCOUNTS, OVERDRAFT FEES, FICO SCORES, etc., etc., etc…

Few other skills in life rank above that of money management and merely having a weekly allowance doesn’t cut it. I have no idea why there are not parents at every PTO meeting calling for the inclusion of such education. We are left to our own devices and my devices were fairly shitty. I’m improving bit by bit (my stepdad gives me a subscription to Money Magazine), but you know it’s a long, hard slog and watching college loan payments the size of luxury car payments head into the wind every month still stings.

Quality of life is determined by the quality of our decisions and the quality of our decisions is largely dependent on the quality of our training and education. I knew nothing of finance when I entered my twenties, but I’ll be damned if I’m going to let avoidable circumstances dictate the outcome of my financial existence.

So, be smart, get learned and watch Maxed Out. Cause that shit is crazy.

Freaky Friday: John Edwards & Karl Rove to Debate

Did anyone catch this last Friday? The Buffalo News has learned that the University of Buffalo intends to include in its Distinguished Speaker Series a debate between John Edwards and Karl Rove on September 26. John Edwards and Karl Rove. Naturally, my mind immediately searches for the nearest comparison to such an unpredictable and unlikely competition of the minds (I use that term loosely).

The fastest duo to surface is, of course, Dopey vs. Beelzebub. But that’s too easy. I’m looking for something more nuanced. More apropos. Barbie vs. Cobra Commander? No…. Nemo vs. Ursula? No…. Luke Sykwalker vs. Jabba the Hutt? No! Not even close. John Edwards has no Force.

Gumby vs. Squealer from Animal Farm. That’s it.

Yes, I remember that John Edwards is a former trial attorney, but the images of him getting smoked by Dick Cheney in 2004 are seared into my brain. And while Karl Rove may have the morality of a dung beetle, his ability to misrepresent facts with a straight face is supernatural and would require Edwards to acquire an encyclopedic knowledge of politically-related statistics and their sources to properly refute Rove’s machinations. My not-so-amateur prediction is that John ain’t got the stuff. And I’m being kind.

If the debate is televised, I will certainly perform the masochistic duty of viewing the event - with a fist firmly planted between my teeth. Naturally, I try to avoid having Rove’s visage offend my home from the television and relegate my involvement with him by reading his erroneous comments online. Blech.

In the meantime, I’m going to entertain myself with paint.net and make fun graphics with hopeful themes.

john edwards crushes rove's head

I made Rove’s eyes red, but they may be too small to tell.

And did you see the headline on The Huffington Post this morning that Rep. Henry Waxman is considering legislation that would prevent a White House employee from being paid by taxpayer money to work on political affairs? He might wait until Obama is elected to launch this legislative attempt.

I’m encouraged by the possibility that Obama will roll back a number of powers Bush and Cheney concentrated at the executive level. McCain, of course, would not. Checks and balances are so silly, aren’t they?!

And one last tidbit of morning news - let’s give Howard Wolfson a big round of applause and wish him good luck as he joins Fox News. In a way I get it - he wants to bring a democratic voice to the network. But I also think he’s selling his soul to do it. Although, he seemed comfortable bending the truth when he worked for Hillary, so maybe he’ll fit right in.

Prosecuting the Bush Administration

This morning is a beautiful morning, if a little chilly. And it only improved when I clicked on The Huffington Post and read the headline “Obama Would ‘Immediately Review’ Potential Of Crimes In Bush White House.”

The HuffPo basically provided an excerpt from The Philadelphia Daily News’ Will Bunch’s Attywood column in which Obama said:

What I would want to do is to have my Justice Department and my Attorney General immediately review the information that’s already there and to find out are there inquiries that need to be pursued. I can’t prejudge that because we don’t have access to all the material right now. I think that you are right, if crimes have been committed, they should be investigated. You’re also right that I would not want my first term consumed by what was perceived on the part of Republicans as a partisan witch hunt because I think we’ve got too many problems we’ve got to solve.

So this is an area where I would want to exercise judgment — I would want to find out directly from my Attorney General — having pursued, having looked at what’s out there right now — are there possibilities of genuine crimes as opposed to really bad policies. And I think it’s important– one of the things we’ve got to figure out in our political culture generally is distinguishing betyween really dumb policies and policies that rise to the level of criminal activity. You know, I often get questions about impeachment at town hall meetings and I’ve said that is not something I think would be fruitful to pursue because I think that impeachment is something that should be reserved for exceptional circumstances. Now, if I found out that there were high officials who knowingly, consciously broke existing laws, engaged in coverups of those crimes with knowledge forefront, then I think a basic principle of our Constitution is nobody above the law — and I think that’s roughly how I would look at it.

Now, there have been plenty of crimes committed by the Bush administration, whether it was illegal domestic spying, no-bid contract assignment in Iraq, torture, the illegal destruction of mountains of documentation and more. It would give me untold satisfaction if Congress or the next administration conducted effective investigations of the goings-on under Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld. I have little faith that such investigations will proceed as most politicians are in the re-election business and obviously care more about the preservation of their careers than carrying out their fundamental duties as lawmakers and designated check-and-balancers.

Furthermore, I have not allotted my general election vote as of yet and am seriously considering marking the box next to Nader’s name. If Obama gives serious commitment to investigating criminal activity in the Bush White House, he will greatly increase the odds I will vote for him. But, he wants to be a uniter and that probably entails glossing over most of the illegal activity or going after smaller potatoes than those at the top of the administration. Also, Bush will most likely strategically hand out pardons, as he did with Scooter Libby, that will help prevent investigation of his activities the way his father did at the end of his term regarding his participation in the Iran Contra affair.

It’s enough to make me want to win the lottery and buy an island in the South Pacific on which to live and wear a sarong for the rest of my days.

You know what else makes me want to go native among palm trees? This comment on The Huffington Post:

“In the end, elitist liberals are impotent and embittered by that fact. They cling to fantasies such as prosecuting righteous, upstanding American patriots. They fall back on empty rhetoric such as “I’ll fight for the common man, because they know in their own feeble, prejudiced minds, that they don’t have the courage to fight anything evil or anything with the capacity to fight back.

They denigrate core beliefs such as Christianity, because they are empty vessels, devoid of any faith other than weak dependence on the wished-for power of twisted liberal government to FORCE their will upon those made of real and stronger stuff. They are deathly afraid of true faith because they have none. They are terrified of tools such as guns because they generally don’t know how to use them to feed themselves and are too afraid to use them to defend themselves.

They are everything in reverse that Obama tried and failed to heap disdain upon with his elitist mumblings in San Fran. No, we know who they are and what they lack; and they know we know, and that’s what really destroys them.”

To which I responded, complete with typos:

“wow. you are seriously living in fantasy-land. and your one-sided, close-mindedness makes me shudder because your zeal presents you prime meat for the those politicians who would take advantage of your brainwashed, sheep-like desire to follow and believe the lies you are fed.

Committing torture does not make you a patriot. It makes you an immoral hypocrite.

We have faith. Faith in reason, logic, common sense. Not unfounded fairytales only constructed as a tool to control. It is a good thing to question everything. And I’m not deathly afraid of anything except profound ignorance.

And I’m from Texas, honey. I KNOW how to use a gun.

Remember, discussion and debate is always a good thing. No one is right on ALL the issues and when you are certain you are right and no one else, it is time to retire. For your mind is petrified, you can progress no more and are no longer useful.”

I should proofread, I know, I know…

German Arms Co. Halts Cooperation w/ Blackwater

It’s good to  know that not everyone is so money hungry, they’re willing to look past the U.S. government’s outsourcing of the war in Iraq. German arms manufacturer Heckler & Koch says it will end its relationship with mercenary firm Blackwater (legally answerable to no one, btw) after a media report in Germany that the Blackwater was using H&K’s arms in Iraq. The report went on to say that the German government had not issued permission to H&K to provide Blackwater with arms.

Aaaahhh, we don’t need not steenking laws! Perhaps one day when the birds once again sing and The White House no longer subverts the American legal system for its own gain, indictments will naturally gravitate to all those involved in the no-bid contract work in Iraq (Halliburton, Cheney, Bush, Blackwater, etc.). Hopefully, this will not happen before Goober Bush is out so he can’t pardon ever Tom, Dick and Shithead (pronounced Shi-theed) he helped make rich with his baseless war.

Dems Cracking Down on Pharmaceutical Companies - Commentary on Republican Aiding of Big Corporations

While this just might be political payback - after all, Edwards kept accusing Obama and Clinton of taking contributions from big drug companies - but, either way, Democrats in Congress have launched investigations into pharmaceutical corporation’s behaviors regarding Medicare, television advertising and the drug approval process. I for one, am thrilled. The pharmaceutical companies committed many transgressions under the approval of the Republican Congress.

Political philosophy has long held the belief that a vote for a Democrat means a vote for bigger, more powerful government. And this may be true (though not under Bush, who has expanded governmental powers above and beyond what any democrat could have ever gotten away with). The philosophy that a vote for a Republican will result in smaller government. Hmmm. That might be so, but instead of the powerful government you get with Democrats, you get powerful corporations with Republicans. And that is not good for the everyday American.

The pharmaceutical industry is simply one example of the havoc unregulated companies and industries can wreak on Joe Schmo. Just this past Sunday, 60 Minutes offered a report on the deaths caused by Bayer’s Trasylol each month due to the FDA’s unwilling to pull the drug that is 200 times more expensive than other drugs that are just as effective and don’t lead to renal failure and death.

Drug companies have armies of lobbyists who push the approval of drugs onto the public without effective clinical trials, who push for the approval of the use of adult cold medicines and antibiotics for children with no testing on children, who lobby doctors incessantly to prescribe chemicals for people for the slightest ailment and questionable diagnosis. Has anyone ever considered depression to be a developed-world condition and perhaps a visit to Sierra Leone or a labor camp in China or regular exercise might help to alleviate the symptoms rather than a myriad of tablets and pills? Just wondering…

Furthermore, and this is a comment on the free-market ideals of all the Ron Paulies out there, pharmaceutical companies control the patents on their drugs for years and can assign any cost they choose to life-saving medication. Customers simply cannot wander over to another drug company if they are unhappy with the services provided by the makers of Drug X.

Corporations collude, they merge, they control prices when unregulated. The free-market ideals introduced by Adam Smith and others that came during the Industrial Age in their purity do not apply in today’s setting. Pure theories, such as Communism, Capitalism and Socialism fail when taking into account the human psyche and cognitive dissonance. A balance must be struck. And the Republicans certainly are not willing to attempt such an endeavor. And so, we have unregulated industries.

The oil industry, with its record profits soaring - along with the prices of consumer goods; the airline industry, with its delays, overcrowding, and mass consumer disapproval; out-of-control lenders with their adjustable-rate-mortgages preying on subprime borrowers; dangerous toys from China making their way to kids’ mouths; CEOs with bonuses in the tens of millions while bottom-level employees can’t afford healthcare; monolithic corporate mergers; insurance companies that won’t pay their customers’ claims; the list goes on an on.

Personally, I’d rather a vote for bigger government. With a vote, I still have the power over who has the power. With a corporatocracy, I have no control over board-room deals that dictate my expenditures and consumer choices.

I do not prefer the idea of government regulation of our life, such as media censorship, but I choose react to the political reality of today, rather than the political ideal of what is supposed to be. The result of a Republican vote no longer means limited government, if it ever did. Republicans limit government when it comes to corporate behavior, not citizen behavior.

If it were up to Republicans, government would have greater control over what we do and don’t teach our kids in schools (creationism, abstinence) with very detrimental consequences. If it were up to Republicans, the government would control our decision to have an abortion. If it were up to Republicans, we would be much more concerned with NFL coaches destroying tapes of opposing teams’ play signals than the destroying of the CIA tapes and much more concerned with a boob shown during the Superbowl than genocide in Darfur. If it were up to Republicans, the concentration of executive powers acquired under Bush would remain, thwarting the effort of checks and balances intended by the founding fathers. If it were up to Republicans, government would launch a massive effort to criminalize undocumented workers in this country, going against the very foundations of our country’s greatness. Small government? Whatever!

We have a reality that must be recognized. Political party philosophies no longer apply to political party behavior. It is a shame we do not have a greater choice in the political parties to whom we may assign our votes. Given the two we got, however, I’m going with the Democrat. Because, in reality, with the Democrats, I stand a much better chance at determining the situations which affect my life rather than ceding them to Republican power whores and their corporate pimps.

Al Franken Gaining Ground in Minnesota Senate Race

Won’t that be fun? To have a Senator Al Franken? I love it when people put their money where their mouth is. He’ll definitely inject some change on Capitol Hill. And I say we need more Saturday Night Live alumni taking the lead in the steering our nation. Chevy Chase! Rob Smigel! Tina Fey! If nothing else, politics will be more entertaining for those who are not junkies. At least Franken will have the cajones to say what’s on his mind - hopefully he won’t be infected with the virus that causes long pauses on only politically correct speech to emerge from one’s mouth.

HE’S BAAAAaaaack!

Who is back? Who you say?

NADER!!!!

According to The Boston Globe, Ralph launched an exploratory committee website Jan. 30 in his efforts to decide whether to enter the presidential campaign. He launched a lawsuit against the Democratic National Party back in October, naming, among other evildoers, Terry McAuliffe, who is now chairman of the Hillary Clinton for President committee.

I’m always in support of more candidates getting in the presidential race and have considered sending persuasive letters to Bloomberg for his inclusion. The debate and dialog are so much richer and in-depth when thinkers of various ilks throw their lot into the race. Especially Independents.

The devolution of the two-party system has reduced the efficacy of our government on all levels as candidates sell their loyalties and congressional/judicial/gubernatorial votes to the highest bidder. The two-party system is what allowed Gingrich and Delay to create the most corrupt and despicable Congress of all the ages.

The Republican and Democrat parties have outlived their usefulness, if they ever had any. I say come one Independent, come all!

Stimulus Package - In Case You Were Wondering

This is from the Treasury Department website:

Link to the PDF Fact Sheet on the new stimulus package

I still haven’t figured out if we’ll have to pay these rebates back next year, as we did with Bush’s first set of rebates (which he kept calling refunds) in 2001. I’ve heard that we won’t, but until I see it in writing, I won’t believe it.

Iraq, Whitehouse in Negotiations for Long-term US Military Presence

We discovered a few months ago Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki signed an agreement, called U.S.-Iraq Declaration of Principles for Friendship and Cooperation, that would open negotiations towards a U.S. military presence in Iraq for an undetermined length. The democrats, especially Sen. Clinton during the debates, have recently become more vocal in their disapproval of the agreement, which would require the consent of the Iraqi Parliament, but not the U.S. Congress. They also claim that this is an effort to cement the U.S. presence in Iraq despite possible efforts by the next president to withdraw troops.

The official word is that the agreement would simply redefine the U.S. military role in Iraq and would not bind the next president’s decision capabilities, as well as replace the expiring U.N. mandate regarding coalition activities in Iraq.

Are you with me so far? Does this pass the smell test??

In a word, No.

First of all, the administration and Iraqi government want negotiations concluded around July and an agreement complete with signatures by the time U.S. elections arrive.

Secondly, and this is well, significant, the Center for Public Integrity reports the President Bush and his top officials “made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11, 2001, about the national security threat posed by Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.” It is common knowledge without the CPI report that the administration issues false statements (the CIA leak case, Att. Gen. Gonzales’ involvement in the firing of many U.S. attorneys, just to name a mere fraction).

Fact: the administration if full of lies and liars. If the administration were a witness in a criminal trial, it would be indicted for perjury. If lightning struck liars, The White house would be a sea of smoking embers. There isn’t a bar of soap in all the world big enough to clean those dirty, rotten, fallacious mouths. Basically, we have a pants on fire situation here. Hell, he learned it from his father who tried to sell us a bill of goods on the level of the deficit during Sr.’s campaign in ‘92. Guess it runs in the family.

The administration thinks Congress is simply playing politics and the U.S. population is too retarded to understand the means behind their ends. Karl Rove and Dick Cheney have better judgment than we do. Rumsfeld had better judgment than we do. Condoleeza Rice, for all her irrelevance, has better judgment than we do. We should just sit back and drink our Coors Light and watch Nascar and trust Bushie to take care of this war for us like good little patriotic citizens.

I’d rather choke on a hot dog.

Of course Cheney, uh…I mean Bush, wants to establish an agreement with the Iraqis before the next president can come in and stomp all over his withered legacy. He has convinced himself, to the point of psychosis, no doubt, that his intentions (not decisions based on REALITY) determine the outcome. A democrat with the same access to information he has will make far worse decisions than he would (though how that could happen when they would undoubtedly have better judgment, I’ve no idea).

Hopefully, those senators on the campaign trail can see their way back to Capitol Hill for a moment to either find some existing legislation or slap some together that would require their participation in this “agreement” with Iraq.

I understand we have just under a year left before he’s out, people. But realize that it will be one nail-biting, hair-pulling year. And I can’t wait for the roller coaster ride of pardons at the end! It’s sure to make Clinton’s and Bush Sr. before him look as innocent as one of those pukey Precious Moments figurines.

It’s almost enough to make me start praying. Almost. Not quite, though.

UPDATE: While the Washington Post says there is no historical precedent for such agreements to go before Congress,  The Boston Globe has issued an article with a different view, saying “After World War II, for example - when the United States gave security commitments to Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Australia, New Zealand, and NATO members - Presidents Truman and Eisenhower designated the agreements as treaties requiring Senate ratification. In 1985, when President Ronald Reagan guaranteed that the US military would defend the Marshall Islands and Micronesia if they were attacked, the compacts were put to a vote by both chambers of Congress.”

There is a reason a democracy commands the participation of many. To trust the steerage of our country to few, who are not only untrustworthy when it comes to the simple act of telling the truth, but proven poor decision-makers, is insanity-defined.