Thursday, October 21, 2004

Bye Bye Miss American Pie ...
Will November 2, 2004 be the day the Republic died?

Americans will take to the polls on Nov. 2 to cast their votes. What's at stake though is greater than a Presidency, it's the very foundation of which our society has been built. Not in all our history, since our founding fathers signed into being the Declaration of Independence, have the ideals of Liberty and Freedom come under such threat.

The Republic (i.e. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic...") was conceived in this country on July 4, 1776. It was by no means perfect, but it was a start. On May 14, 1787 the Federal Convention met in Philadelphia at Independence Hall. It was then that they revised the Articles of Confederation to include the Constitution of the United States. During this time there was much debate amongst the Statesman regarding the protection of civil liberties. On September 25, 1789 the Bill of Rights was introduced.

For two hundred and twenty eight years it has been the material used to build the house of Freedom and Liberty, which has now come under siege by an enemy that can only be defined by the word Fascism.

How did we go from a republic to a fascist state? Well we did make a stop along the way to pick up democracy. Actually democracy was with us from the very start. The founding groundwork that was laid out for our government was flexible enough to withstand the principals of a democratic state.

A republic as it relates to our government can be best described by the first two definitions; 1 - a: A political order whose head of state is not a monarch and in modern times is usually a president. b: A nation that has such a political order. 2 - a: A political order in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who are entitled to vote for officers and representatives responsible to them. b: A nation that has such a political order.

The simple definition of a democracy is; 1 - Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives. 2 - A political or social unit that has such a government. 3 - The common people, considered as the primary source of political power. 4 - Majority rule. 5 - The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.

So what was born that day in 1776 was really neither a Republic or a Democracy, but the chance to create a nation and a government that embodied the spirit of both. While a true republic dealt solely with the social aspect of a nation, a democracy also embodied the economic powers of a nation. The only real difference between the two is that in a republic the supreme power lies in the people. In a democracy the supreme power of the people is demoted to being the "primary power" thus subjugating power to the economic factions of a society. This allowed for economic forces to influence and have a voice in the development of the society and nation.

Just as our founding framework had flexibility, so did the government in its' ability to change with not only the demands of the people but also that of a changing economic world. In the 1930's we saw the Great Depression nearly destroy the American dream. Under the leadership of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, democracy cemented its' place in America. It offered greater balance between the people and the economic interests of this country. Social programs were put in place. The government and business institutions created jobs. Industry boomed. People worked and earned money. Businesses grew and made money. The social and economic interests, balanced with the government took this country through the biggest and fastest growth period of any nation in history.

WW ll showed the world that we could stand on our own two feet as a nation and not waiver. We defeated Imperial Japan and helped Europe defeat Hitler and the Nazi movement (Nazi: National Socialist German Workers' Party- a fascist organization).

It's said that "What doesn't kill you, only makes you stronger". After WW ll we became the strongest that this country has ever been. With it came great power and financial wealth. It is also said that " Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Roosevelt knew this, which could be why he once stated that, "The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than the democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or any controlling private power. "

The world continued to change. As a nation we did not manage to changed with it while maintaining a balance in the forces that make up our society. Economic interests now far outweigh those of the people. Government has become corrupted by power, and the people have traded Liberty and Freedom for Fear and Hatred. Fascism isn't just something that's around the corner, it already has its' foot in the door.

Tuesday, October 19, 2004

Terrorism and chemical attacks in Jacksonville, Ore.

The biggest news story to hit the wires since 9/11 has been sadly overlooked by the major media corporations of this country. It took place at a small gathering in a small town. The story did appear in the Medford news and was also reported by local stations.

Jacksonville, Ore. is located near the town of Medford. The President had just finished speaking at an event in Medford, where three Medford school teachers, all of whom had tickets for the event, were thrown out and threatened with arrest for wearing t-shirts that simply said, "Protect our civil liberties".

Jacksonville was to be a stop-over for President Bush where he planned to have dinner and spend the night at a local inn. Jacksonville is a historic mining town that's located in an area that's about as apple-pie as you can get in the 21st Century. It's estimated that about 500 people, both Bush and Kerry supporters had shown up to see the presidential motorcade pass through town.

They had lined up on both sides of the street, with Bush supporters on one side chanting, "Four more years." and Kerry supporters on the other side of the street chanting, "Three more weeks." It was when the President's motorcade drew close and was within ear-shot of the crowd that terrorism came down full force on the people gathered, at least the ones on the side of the street that had criticized Bush.

According to eyewitness accounts, about 50 police officers in full riot gear moved in fast in an attempt to sweep and clear the sidewalk of Kerry supporters. They quickly forced the crowd back causing a crush. People had no where to go, some were falling down and being trampled by others as police forced the crowd away from the President until they could no longer be heard by him. In addition to these strong arm tactics, which were employed with great success by Hitler's "Gestapo" (Secret State Police), the riot police opened fire with pepper balls. These are small round projectiles similar to paintballs, only filled with oleoresin capsicum (made from cayenne pepper, it is classified as a chemical weapon, and as such banned for use in war--but not in domestic police work).

Many of the "demonstrators" were hit or effected by these pepperballs, including small children who were gathered with their parents. Some eyewitnesses even stated that police used clubs while forcing the people off the sidewalk. Although the Police claim that they acted only when some violent protesters had started to push some police officers, there have been no witnesses to support that claim. On the contrary, witnesses say that everything had been peaceful until the police came in.

The pro-Bush people were not bothered by police. They did stand watch over them but made no effort to hinder them in any way or to move them to another location.

I can now see why people once questioned how so many people in Germany supported Hitler. But that question only remains valid if you believe that the majority did support him. The realty is that those who did not support him were forced to be silent. Through fear of being physically attacked. Through fear of being hauled off to jail or arrested. Through fear that they would be taken in for questioning, never to be heard from again. The majority did not support Hitler but were instead silenced by a minority through the use of fear and violent force.

One day people of the world will look back and wonder how so many could have supported a man like Bush. It is only because the voice of opposition was silenced that they can even ask such a question.

Thursday, October 14, 2004

Kerry -vs- Bush ....Round 3

The third and final Presidential debate has come to an end. Again the Q&A time limits didn't allow for any in-depth debate between the two candidates. The focus of the debate was primarily Domestic Issues but Foreign Policy and Iraq were brought up a few times. Bush did his best job yet at keeping his facial expressions and temper under control. He also skated a number of questions regarding his polices and seemed to think his under-funded Education Plan would solve everything from employment, the economy, taxes and even foreign relations. Throughout the debate he constantly referred to the "No Child Left Behind Act" which he touts as one of his great achievements, even though there have been a number of law suites brought against the government by states that are not able to meet the requirements because there has been so little funding to meet the strict guidelines that were laid out.

Kerry again did a remarkable job in detailing his position while at the same time defending himself from Bush's attacks and criticizing Bush's performance as the President. Kerry was able to add substance to what he had to say. Bush on the other hand really said very little, said the same thing over and over, and failed to support his statements.

With regards to homosexuality being a choice, Bush says, " I just don't know." He also went on to state that, "...we have a choice to make in America and that is to treat people with tolerance and respect and dignity. It's important that we do that. And I also know in a free society people, consenting adults can live the way they want to live. And that's to be honored. But as we respect someone's rights, and as we profess tolerance, we shouldn't change - or have to change - our basic views on the sanctity of marriage. I believe in the sanctity of marriage. I think it's very important that we protect marriage as an institution, between a man and a woman. I proposed a constitutional amendment. The reason I did so was because I was worried that activist judges are actually defining the definition of marriage, and the surest way to protect marriage between a man and woman is to amend the Constitution." What Bush has actually said in this statement is that he doesn't really know what he thinks about homosexuality, and that regardless of ones views on marriage, we should respect those views and not force one persons view upon another. His way of protecting those rights is to amend the constitution so that only one view is accepted and forced upon others that do not share the same view. It's a hypocritical statement that uses doublespeak to form its' structure.

The Republicans have also now focused on Kerry's statements regarding gay marriage and a reference to Dick Cheney's Lesbian daughter. I say lesbian because that's exactly what she is. Look it up in the dictionary and it will say "Lesbian: A woman whose sexual orientation is to women." She herself has admitted to being one and it is in no way a derogatory remark.

What exactly did Kerry say? Kerry said, "We're all God's children....And I think if you were to talk to Dick Cheney's daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she's being who she was. She's being who she was born as. I think if you talk to anybody, it's not a choice."

Somehow this seemed to anger Cheney and his Wife. I guess they felt that she wasn't who God made her to be and is instead something else. Again they have taken something out of context and have tried to distort it into something that it isn't. This has been the tactics behind the GOP smear campaign throughout this Presidential Race to the White House and it seams that they are sticking with it all the way to the end.

"You saw a man who will do and say anything to get elected," said Cheney, "And I am not just speaking as a father here, although I am a pretty angry father." I can only guess that what he meant by "do and say anything", was that Kerry was willing to answer the question honestly and truthfully. A question which Bush skated around by talking without saying anything or confirming his stance, which sadly seems to be his strong point as a leader. Cheney's wife even voiced her view saying, "This is not a good man.", "Of course, I am speaking as a mom, and a pretty indignant mom. This is not a good man. What a cheap and tawdry political trick."

Mary Cheney, Dick Cheney's daughter, declined to comment.

It seams to me that the Cheney's are using their daughter as a political tool in the same manner that they claim Kerry has disgracefully done. Now to me that seams like a cheap and tawdry political trick if there ever was one.

Kerry was the clear winner of the debate, just as he has won the last two debates. The Bush camp is using every dirty trick they have up their sleeves to win the election. It would not surprise me in the least to see the "Terror Alert Level" boosted to it's highest possible level as we approach Election Day this November 2. I also wouldn't see it as being beyond the President's ability to mislead the American people by issuing Severe Terror Threat Warnings and even having the National Guard, at least the ones that haven't been sent to Iraq, deployed in areas of the country the Bush stands to possibly loose or in order to scare voters away from the polls so that the electoral votes go his way.

It's up to the American Voters now. The American people must now stand strong and not let fear dictate their lives. No matter what bad things you may think are going to happen, don't fall prey to your own fears. Go to the polls and vote. Go about your day as if it was just another day and not hide under your desk in fear that somebody is going to try and blow you up if you venture out to vote.

My prediction for the next four years is that if Kerry wins, Bush will go down in the history of this nation as the worst President this country has ever seen. If Bush manages to steal or con his way into the White House for another four years, then he will end up going down in the history of the world as one of the worst tyrants the world has ever seen. His name will appear on the roster right next to Hitler and even Saddam Hussein himself.

I fear that if this great nation of ours is forced to endure another four years under Bush, we will see civil war. Peaceful protesters will see that protesting peacefully will do nothing to change Bush's agenda which is destroying America and will resort to violence and fighting. What we see every day happening on the streets of Baghdad will happen on the streets of Washington. We are at a crossroads in this country. We will either see a renewed effort to become that Free Nation which our for-fathers have shed their blood to create and build, or we will see a violent end to a once great dream.

Tuesday, October 12, 2004

Bush releases new children's book...
"Agenda For America."

I've recently been taking a hard look the Official Websites of both John Kerry and George W. Bush with respect to what they have to offer the American Voter. It really strikes me as odd that Kerry would be the most prominent figure on both sites. I can understand why you would see Kerry and Edwards featured on the Kerry website, I mean hey, it's their site and they have seen it as an opportunity to get their message out to the American Voter. The Kerry site seams to be primarily devoted to offering information regarding his position on the issues as well as detailed material regarding his stance on everything from Foreign Policy to Domestic issues. Granted they do have their share of anti-Bush material, but it is featured on the lower portion of the page and is not the predominant feature as it is more of a side-note. The Bush website on the other hand seems to have taken another course altogether with regards to use of the internet. When you go to the Bush website the first thing that comes up on the monitor is an attack on Kerry.

When clicking through the links on the Kerry site the user is taken to areas that offer greater detail regarding Kerry's "...Plan For America". The Bush website has taken to presenting their basic statements over and over again. As you click through the Bush website you basically get the same overview of information that you have just read, only laid out on the page differently.

At Kerry's website you can download the entire 1.36mb pdf file "Our Plan For America". There's a link to the plan from the main page and it opens up in a browser window. The pdf contains 263 pages. Not counting the table of contents, header pages and photo-op pages, there are about 230 pages of text detailing their position and plan to move America forward.

The Bush website also offers a downloadable pdf version of Bush's "Agenda For America". This is a 2.2 mb file. It isn't easy to find a link to the downloadable file since you must dig down a few pages. The file must be downloaded and doesn't seem to open in the browser window, although this could just have been a technical problem on my end, even though the pdf on Kerry's site had no problems opening. Most of the pages are laid out in a two page format making the total number of pages 49. After eliminating cover pages and photo-ops, etc.., the total number of pages containing text comes to about 33. That's his entire plan, summaries, details and all. A person has to wonder why so little information takes up so much bandwidth and isn't easily accessed.

Now I can see why the Bush campaign would accuse Kerry's plan of being too complicated. "War and Peace", by Lev Nicolaevich Tolstoy is a complicated read. But come on now, the Presidents' "Agenda For America" amounts to nothing more than the children's book "My Pet Goat", in comparison to Kerry's ""Plan For America".

Monday, October 11, 2004

Kerry -vs- Bush ....Round 2

The second debate has come and gone. I've been out of town for the past few days and haven't had a chance to post since now. Sorry about that. I just whish I had a laptop. Anyhow, regarding the debate. Being a Town Hall style debate left me concerned whether any hard questions would be asked. I'm also not too keen on the time limits set forth for responses and rebuttals. It kind of defeats the concept of a debate when you can't go in-depth. It has also led to the Candidates basically re-hashing the basics of their position without being able to really go into any real details. Sadly this has worked against Kerry by not allowing him to fully tackle the issues with depth and thought. Bush on the other hand has benefited from this format since he really only seems to have spunky catch-phrases and declarations concerning his position and refuses to go into any in-depth discussions regarding his statements or his position.

Compared to their previous debate, this one definitely had a lot more energy. A lot was said in the short time they were given to respond to the questions. Before trying to score this debate, I decided to take a look at the manuscripts from the debate to see just what exactly Kerry and Bush were telling the American people and how they were telling it. I was also pleasantly surprised to see some really great questions put forth. Questions that were well thought out and well phrased.

Kerry immediately had to defend against the President's claims that he is a flip-flopper. He did a good job at explaining why the President accuses him of being indecisive. He also explained how his positions have not changed. Bush's' response was to attack Kerry. Throughout the whole debate, Kerry talked about issues, offered as much depth as the time frame allowed, and cited confirmed sources to support his claims and statements. Bush stood steadfast in his attack tactics, continued to cite sources that have now been debunked and even went so far as to occasionally cite those sources that have shown he was WRONG as support for why he is right.

When Bush was asked whether he has made any mistakes or had any regrets about his decisions over the past four years, he skated the question by going into a rant about how others may view his decisions as unpopular but refused to admit that he had ever been wrong about anything. It's as if he wants the World to believe he's some sort of infallible leader. At one point he even continued to talk over the moderator, which shows a clear disregard for the rules that he himself had agreed to put in place.

Concerning domestic issues and job growth specifically, Bush continues to state that he has created jobs without taking into account the jobs that have been lost. The recent report concerning overall job growth shows that after his last four years in office our Nation has seen an overall loss of jobs not known since the Great Depression, yet he claims the economy and job growth are on the rise by only looking at one side of the equation. It's pretty simple to figure out that two minus four doesn't equal two, yet it seems to be the way he looks at the equation. It's one thing to be short sighted, but it's another to be blind altogether.

With respect to Foreign Policy. Bush continues to attack Kerry by stating you can't build alliances and gain support by saying "Wrong War, Wrong Time". He fails to see how Kerry can take this position. Bush continues to claim that you can't go out and say, "Join me in the wrong war at the wrong time at the wrong place. Risk your troops in a war you've called a mistake."

Well I can see why Bush can't do so, because it would mean that he had been WRONG and had made MISTAKES. This argument doesn't apply to Kerry though. Kerry didn't make the decision to abandon the United Nations. Kerry didn't make the decision to rush off to war without providing the troops with the proper support and equipment. Kerry didn't make war without a plan to win the peace. Kerry can go in front of the World and say "Wrong War, Wrong Time." because he's not admitting to having made these mistakes. These are Bush's failures, yet somehow it seams to mystify Bush that somebody out there can see him as having been wrong, misleading and rash in judgment. Kerry isn't saying to the World that he was wrong, he's saying to the World that Bush was wrong.

Throughout the debate Bush also continued to use Patriotic statements such as "...our long-term security depends on our deep faith in liberty. And we'll continue to promote freedom around the world."...."Freedom is on the march."...."In Iraq, we'll be having free elections, and a free society will make this world more peaceful." (note that he did not say THEY will be having free elections. His statement implies ownership of Iraq by America), and "...the way to defeat them (terrorists) long-term, by the way, is to spread freedom." Bush seems to believe that the only way to better the World is to spread his ideology of "Freedom and Democracy" to everybody.

Now this isn't the first time the American people have seen this sort of thing. The last time was back in 1939 and we fought to ensure that Hitler would not succeed in this kind of egomaniacal ambition. It's said that history repeats itself. I can only hope that it is true and that the American people rally together to put a stop to what has happened in this country and what is being done in the World under the guise of "Freedom and Democracy".

At the end of the second Presidential debate I have to give Kerry the point and also give Bush a -2 since he has had two chances to prove that he is a leader and has only succeeded in proving that he aspires to be a Dictator.

Current Score: Kerry = 2 ---- Bush = -2

Wednesday, October 06, 2004

Cheney -vs- Edwards ....1 Round Bout.

Well the Vice Presidential debates have ended and it's time to chime in with my opinion about what went down. It would seem clear that Cheney scored a decided victory, but alas this was just a victory over himself. I had expected him to be the huff-and-gruff politician that has become his trademark character. Instead he seemed to do a good job at portraying himself as somebody who really cares about America. Aside from an almost believable facade he put forth, the torrent of lies and misrepresentations that spewd forth from his mouth was unbelievable.

Granted, Edwards had put the liberal spin on a few of his statements, his inaccuracies amounted to little more than not being 100% correct 100% of the time. Cheney on the other hand felt that straight up lying was the best course of action. Even to the extent that he stated "The first time I ever met you (Senator Edwards) was when you walked on the stage tonight." Maybe it's Alzheimer's, but for one reason or another he just couldn't recall two previous occasions when they had met. The first time being at a National Prayer Breakfast on Feb. 1, 2001 where Cheney even acknowledged Edwards among those at the event. The second time was when Edwards had escorted Elizabeth Dole as she was sworn in as North Carolina's other senator on January 8, 2003. Cheney administered the oath.

In respect the GOP claims that Edwards, and Kerry for that matter, voted for the war, then against it. Edwards did vote that "The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate.", in addition to making it clear that going to war was a last resort in the event that all other options had been exhausted and that we must have the support of the United Nations and a broad coalition of allied support. At the time even President Bush had stated that the resolution was not a resolution to go to war. Somehow though they now seem to claim it was an approval to go running across the desert, guns blazing.

To top it all off, the worst part about Cheney's claims to truth regarding himself and Halliburton, where he served as CEO before becoming the Vice President, was when he referred the American Voter to go to "" to check the facts for themselves. "...if you go, for example, to (sic), an independent Web site sponsored by the University of Pennsylvania, you can get the specific details with respect to Halliburton.", stated Cheney. Well that was pretty close. The actual site is and no they don't support his claims about Halliburton. Although it is true that Cheney hasn't personally profited from Halliburton's role in the Iraq war, it would be a safe bet that he is going to have a nice plush CONSULTING position with the company when his term is over.

Unfortunately this being a 1-Round debate between the two candidates, we won't get another chance to see the two of them square off again. This is probably a good thing for the Bush Administration since I doubt Cheney would be able to defend his lies, but also defend the lies he's had to layer upon the existing ones just to save face, which by the way got a real good Bitch-Slapping from Senator Edwards.

Friday, October 01, 2004

Kerry -vs- Bush ....Round 1

Well the first round of debates have ended. First off I'd like to give KUDOS to President Bush on his performance. In the end he managed to stay steadfast and upbeat, which is really something considering he had just got brutally spanked in front of about 50 million viewers. I also send KUDOS to Kerry for a unexpectedly great performance. I was expecting him to be less personable and too analytical about the questions, thus leaving his response a bit long-winded and possibly confusing. On the contrary, he was very clear and concise in his responses. Round 1 goes to Kerry. If you don't believe me then just check out some of the right-wing blogs. Even they were a bit let down by the President's performance.

Bush managed to skirt as many questions a possible by spewing the same Neo-Con rhetoric that he's been doing for the past 4 years. Kerry on the other hand addressed the questions with confidence and clarity often leaving Bush a bit dumbfounded for a response, in which case Bush would start with his whole "The world is safer....We're winning the war on terror." tag lines that have been the primary substance of his campaign bid for re-election.

There are two more head-to-head battles between these two men and the upcoming debate between Cheney and Edwards. It'll be interesting to see what happens in these debates and I'm sure Cheney is going to have to do a lot of dancing around the Halliburton issues.

Current Score: Kerry = 1 ---- Bush = 0