Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts

Sunday, May 24, 2009

Living with War: Memorial Day 2009

So we're now living in the Era of Change, are we? New president, new vice president, new name for the War in Iraq.

For the past three Memorial Days [2006, 2007, 2008], I've honored the memory of those who have died in the War in Iraq, now known as simply a part of the Overseas Contingency Operation. George Orwell would have been proud of the way the name of the War in Iraq has been changed to lessen the reminder that our young men and women are still dying for no obvious Cause.

Other than the name, has anything changed?

Yes. Its results are increasingly doubleplusungood.

The American death toll in Iraq has now reached 4,300. Since last Memorial Day, another 219 Americans soldiers have died in Iraq. Another 219 American families will never again see their sons and daughters, their fathers and mothers.

We can no longer blame the War in Iraq on George W. Bush's oil tycoon friends or on dastardly Dick Cheney's secret identity as Dr. Strangelove, or on the non-existent WMD's non-possessed by a now long-dead Saddam Hussein or even on our national need for revenge for 9/11 against a country that wasn't involved in those horrific attacks on New York and Washington, D.C.

The responsibility now firmly rests on Barack Obama, who has already waffled on his own timetable for troop withdrawals from Iraq.

As I've said before: Bring 'em home, now!

| | |

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

... And the Great Architect is thus honored

Michael Hoffman's article began reasonably enough, by quoting the New York Times.

His story was a look into last week's Great Flub, when Justice John Roberts misquoted the Presidential Oath while swearing in President Obama.

Was Obama officially president at noon, or not until he actually took the Oath? Or was he not president until he properly repeated the Oath verbatim later? These are interesting questions, though not earthshaking except perhaps from a (now) historical point of view.

Or is there something more sinister going on, he wonders.

The Great Reveal only comes in the final few paragraphs.

Yep, it's a Masonic conspiracy!

Read it here.

And then read the comments following the article. Wingnuts from both sides of the axle have offered up their own conspiratorial tangents.

| | | | | |

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

Are we really a nation that believes in the rule of law?

We hold ourselves to be a nation of laws, but are we? Apparently, it's perfectly okay these days for a government official to off-the-cuff decide which laws will and which laws won't enforced.

Here are a couple of examples where the law apparently means nothing.
  • Under Georgia and federal law, the influenza vaccine is held to be a "dangerous drug" that requires a prescription by a licensed medical doctor. Despite this law, you can get a flu shot just by walking into most any chain pharmacy in the state, and have been able to for years.

    Georgia's Gov. Sonny Perdue (a Freemason, by the way), when asked why this protective law isn't enforced, said that the State wasn't going to be "persnickety" about the law, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported last week.

    "This administration will not call for sanctions against those acting in the best interests of Georgians and in a manner consistent with past practices," he said in a prepared statement. "It is my expectation that health care professionals will act in the best interests of public health and continue prior practices."


  • Former Congressman Bob Barr, who is running for President of the United States as a Libertarian, has filed a lawsuit in Texas demanding that both Senators Barack Obama and John McCain be removed from the Texas ballot because neither candidate met the official filing deadline.

    "The seriousness of this issue is self-evident," the lawsuit states. "The hubris of the major parties has risen to such a level that they do not believe that the election laws of the State of Texas apply to them."
| | | | | |

Sunday, March 23, 2008

After five years in Iraq, has anything been accomplished?

The fifth anniversary of the Fiasco in Iraq passed last week. This "Operation Freedom" once commanded above-the-fold headlines, and was the number one topic in our print, television and Internet news media.

Now, stories from and about Iraq comprise only about three percent of our news.

It isn't sexy or glamorous anymore. It isn't popular anymore. Beating the drums of war doesn't command the respect and inspire the patriotism it did five years ago.

Though "mission accomplished" was declared quite a while back, the Iraq Fiasco has continued, and has now lasted longer than the U.S. Civil War. It has lasted longer than World War I. It has gone on longer than World War II.

The presumptive Republican presidential nominee wants to stay in Iraq another 100 years. The Democratic contenders pander to whatever crowd they are talking to, and have no real plans for war or for peace. The only candidate who would have just ended the war was famously ignored by the media (giving rise to the phrase "You lie like Anderson Cooper").

4,000 Americans have been killed. 30,000 men and women have been severely wounded; these soldiers and their families will deal with the ramifications of their injuries for the rest of their lives, and billions of dollars will be spent on their medical treatment and rehabilitation. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died or been injured, and the Iraqi infrastructure has been blown to bits. The Internet counters continue to roll upwards; the price of the Insanity in Iraq has eclipsed $505,000,000,000 (five hundred five billion dollars) in direct costs.

For what? Tell me, please. What has this War in Iraq accomplished?

Bring 'em home. Now.

| | |

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Six possible futures

The presidential candidate field has cleared quite a bit in the past month or so, and the pundits have all but decided who will be the nominee for the Republicans while milking the Democratic run for all they can.

Who do YOU think will be the next President of the United States? Not who do you support or who do you want or who did you or will you vote for, but who do you think will actually become the next president? There are six probabilities, some admittedly less likely than others, but all are at this moment possibilities.

There are six possible futures for our country. Which path do you think we'll collectively follow?

And what will our lives — personally and as a nation — be like in four years?



| | | | |