Currently Obamanomics: How Bottom-Up Economic Prosperity Will Replace Trickle-Down Economics (Economics in the Obama Presidency) By John R. Talbott see related

Republicans and Taxes

Politicians and journalists have freely used emotion filled labels to create a bias and stereotype attitudes toward political and economic philosophies as though one or the other is intended to work against the interests of the American People or even go as far as denouncing such a philosophical approach is outright Un-American.   For years politicians seem that they are either Conservative or Liberal.  Now such words as Ideologue or Neocon are becoming more common that are intended to paint a specific image and attitude in the public mind.  During our last campaigning season we saw the reemergence of Socialist and Socialism as if it were synonymous with treason or an insurgency movement to overthrow the Republic as if that were probable or possible.  That is a scenario for a completely new debate, but now we are faced with a financial crisis where recession could easily turn into depression.  There are times when we need to rise above ideology and commit ourselves to a course of action, even if we cannot agree with it in its totality, for the common good of the entire nation.

This discussion reminds me of an assignment that most of us were asked to master in a Middle School Civics Class.  That assignment was to memorize the Preamble to the US Constitution of which we should often remind ourselves.

“We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

The one part of this Preamble which I think each Republican member in the House of Representatives needs to revisit and seriously contemplate is one that is short, simple and underlies the responsibility that he or she has to their constituents.

“To promote the general welfare” to ourselves and our posterity.”

For far too long the Republicans have had one solution to the economic woes of our economy and that is to cut taxes and reduce the expenditures of the Federal Budget.  However, this philosophy of “trickle-down economics” has never worked and I would go as far as saying it has proven to be a complete failure.

Eugene Robinson expressed my feeling more succinctly and to the point in the conclusion of his Op-Ed Column in the Washington Post this morning.

Blind Unanimity

Congressional Republicans

What I've been hearing from Republicans in both the House and Senate has been a kind of attenuated, distorted echo of the economic doctrine that the party has preached, if not always practiced, since the Reagan years. It's perfectly appropriate, of course, to ask whether a specific spending proposal would have the desired stimulative effect; indeed, some items were removed from the stimulus bill for that reason. But underlying the Republican criticism has been a familiar formula: more tax cuts, fewer spending initiatives.

But Americans know that this philosophy has already taken us as far as it could. Americans know that taxes can be cut by only so much before the federal government's effectiveness inevitably suffers. Americans know that spending money doesn't necessarily mean wasting it. Americans know that the economic crisis means that taking the position that government is inherently oppressive, if not fundamentally evil, is now intellectually bankrupt, because government is the only instrument we have in the high-stakes attempt to induce financial and economic recovery.

If Republicans hadn't broken the bank with drunken-sailorish spending during most of George W. Bush's time in the White House, their complaints about the cost of the stimulus package and its impact on future deficits would be more credible. As things stand, we have to let actions speak: absolute solidarity among House Republicans in voting no.

It was a triumph of discipline over reason, of doctrine over observation. There is abundant evidence suggesting that we are in a new political era with new rules and a new lexicon. Those who ignore that evidence will have only themselves to blame if, like the air traffic controllers, they end up losing their jobs.

Dissent is the Highest Form of Patriotism.  ~ Thomas Jefferson

Remember, Be Happy and Be Safe.

Senex Magister

Currently The Soviet-Afghan War: How a Superpower Fought and Lost see related

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

The following Editorial appeared in the Washington Post this morning which immediately caught my attention.  I would have titled it The Afghan Quagmire and find very little with which to disagree in what John Kerry and Robert Gates had to say about continued military action in Afghanistan.  Could a permanent success have been achieved against Al Qaeda and the Taliban if our financial and human resources had not been redirected to Mr. Bush’s War in Iraq?  I have a hard time believing that the political stability which I assume has always been our goal and policy is realistic or achievable then or now.  A quote that I have often used especially in reference to the current conflict in the Middle East is, I am afraid, still applicable and should be appreciated by our policy makers.

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

~ George Santayana, The Life of Reason

The Afghan Challenge

Thursday, January 29, 2009

FOR YEARS, Democrats excoriated the Bush administration for not devoting sufficient resources to Afghanistan. But now that Barack Obama has taken office, some seem to be having second thoughts. "Our original goal was to go in there and take on al-Qaeda. . . . It was not to adopt the 51st state of the United States," said Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), the new chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Mr. Kerry pioneered the Democratic argument to send more troops during his own presidential campaign in 2004. Now he says "the parallels" to Vietnam "just really keep leaping out in so many different ways."

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates seconded that skepticism at a congressional hearing on Tuesday. "If we set ourselves the objective of creating some sort of Central Asian Valhalla over there, we will lose," he said, "because nobody in the world has that kind of time, patience and money, to be honest."

We're happy to agree that Afghanistan should not become the 51st state, or Valhalla -- but we're not sure who or what Mr. Kerry and Mr. Gates have in mind. So far as we know, the American objective in Afghanistan since 2002 has been pretty much what Mr. Gates says it should be: "an Afghan people who do not provide a safe haven for al-Qaeda, who reject the rule of the Taliban and support the legitimate government they have elected and in which they have a stake."

The problem, as Mr. Gates acknowledged, is that meeting that aim necessitates such tasks as stabilizing western Pakistan, rooting out the opium trade, vastly expanding the Afghan army and constructing a workable legal system. That, in turn, will require more money, more troops, many more years of commitment -- and higher American casualties.

"Bottom line is, it's going to be tough, it's going to be difficult, in many ways harder than Iraq," Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) put it to Mr. Gates. "Do you agree with that?" "Yes," the secretary responded.

So why make it sound as if the Obama administration is scaling back U.S. ambitions? Part of this may be pure politics, to assure the antiwar left -- not to mention other Americans -- that the United States is not about to follow Russia and Britain into an Afghan quagmire. Yet the new administration, and supporters such as Mr. Kerry, ought to recognize a greater political need, which is to make clear to the country that the war against terrorism -- whatever it is now called -- did not end on Jan. 20 and that Afghanistan in particular will require years more patience and sacrifice to get right.

The way to avoid a quagmire is not to hold back on U.S. military reinforcements or development aid but to assemble a national civil-military plan that integrates war-fighting with reconstruction and political reconciliation. As Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) points out, such a plan was the foundation of the U.S. recovery in Iraq, but the model has never been applied in Afghanistan. That's largely because the United States must share authority with some 40 allies, many of which place strict limits on what their troops may do, insist on managing their own development programs, or both. The Afghan government of President Hamid Karzai, mired in corruption and increasingly at odds with U.S. commanders, is also not on board.

Afghanistan doesn't need to become the 51st state, but it does need a single, coherent, integrated plan to become a state strong enough to resist the Taliban and al-Qaeda. Creating one will require some aggressive diplomacy and maybe a little political china-breaking. That's something for which the State Department's new envoy to the region, Richard C. Holbrooke, is known. But low-balling the scale of the challenge, or the costs it may incur, won't help.

Currently The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream By Obama Barack see related

“What Does Bipartisan Mean”

Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

Bipartisan is an adjective meaning ‘of, relating to or involving members of two parties; specifically: marked by or involving cooperation, agreement, and compromise between two major political parties.

Yet, we should consider who is a partisan and what partisanship is.

A Partisan is a firm adherent to a party, faction, cause, or person; especially: one exhibiting blind, prejudiced, and unreasoning allegiance.

In a technical sense partisanship is simply the state being a partisan.

What is the importance or even relevance of considering and attempting to understand the meaning of such words on a deeper level and, I suppose, on a political level as well?  Our nation is facing one of the worst financial crisis in our history and the continuing crisis of our military commitment (WAR) in Iraq and Afghanistan.  I admit and realize that there are many well intentioned people who have varying opinions about how and why we find ourselves in such dire situation as we do today.  I am one who is convinced that this day has come because of the ill conceived policies and the inept implementation of those policies over the past eight years.  I also believe that both of these major crises are interrelated.

If you have been following my writing this past week, you probably noticed a common thread/theme or whatever you wish to call it.  First, there is a need to take direct and immediate actions to address the financial strangle hold that a small elite of extremely wealthy individuals have imposed on this country.   I don’t begrudge any business person in this economy earning a reasonable profit that benefits us all in the long run.  However, this wealthy elite I was talking about has created an environment of greed that is both indifferent to how their actions will impact upon the lives of Americans and I would suggest are a greater threat to our National Security than from any foreign source.

The House of Representatives is voting on the President’s Economic Stimulus Bill today.  The partisan political rhetoric that has preceded this vote is nothing new to Washington, but what is new is the fact there is a president who is willing to enter into a dialogue with his opposition in Congress.  Will this dialogue result in bipartisan consensus in Washington?  I seriously doubt it but I believe the bill which will emerge from the Senate, which has always been more collegial and less contentious than the House, will address at least some of the concerns from the opposition.  If there were complete consensus in Washington, it would be the first step to one party rule.  I would suggest partisan political discourse is crucial for any democratic society.

Yet, there is still the question of how should we expect Congress to react to a national crisis such as this one which is threatening an ever increasing number of American families.  I do believe that spending needs to be brought under control, but I also believe it has a lot to do with how we spend our money.  This goes hand in hand with what priorities becomes the basis of the formation of public policy.  This is where a greater degree of consensus does become more critical.  If I had the influence to affect public policy, I would extricate the United States from both Iraq and Afghanistan including a reduction of our financial commitment to both nations.

However, I know this will not happen because there is not a consensus on this issue especially as it relates to Afghanistan and I wrote about that yesterday.  I am also opposed to an open ended policy on tax reduction.  I am not opposed to a restructuring of our tax codes that bring greater equity and justice to how and who supports the government.  Yet, the immediate result in whatever action Congress takes will entail increased deficit spending.  If we want a larger military to protect us, an expanding intelligence network to control terrorism and infrastructure to support domestic commerce, and the list can go on; we have to be willing to pay for those expectations.

Hopefully political partisanship that is devoid of ideological gamesmanship seeking power for its own sake will allow us to achieve a reasonable resolution to the crises we are faced with today.

Senex Magister

Dissent is the Highest Form of Patriotism.  ~ Thomas Jefferson

Currently State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration By James Risen see related

Good Bye, Mr. President

“A Radical or what might seem to a few on the extreme right as a Radical Farewell Essay to George W.”

These are not my words and though I agree with most of it, there are parts that even seem extreme to me but very little.  BUSHFLASH.COM has been one of my favorite sites since the real George W. and the intentional direction that his administration was leading our country began to emerge and made it clear that they were either indifferent to or did not care about the U.S. Constitution.  There is an unresolved debate going on in Washington as to whether individuals who broke the law and violated the rights of Americans should be investigated and prosecuted for crimes that they could possibly or probably be deemed culpable of committing.  These individuals were or are still agents of the government of the United States who claim that they were simply carrying out policy and orders at the direction of their superiors.  This was a claim that was used by many who were charged with crimes at the end of World War II to justify their actions.  There are certain moral imperatives by which any civilized society that believes in the rule of law must be guided.

Senex Magister

Dissent is the Highest Form of Patriotism.  ~ Thomas Jefferson

From:  BUSHFLASH.COM

Ends in three weeks

My fellow Americans and Fellow Citizens of the World

To all of us who have suffered, have been ashamed, have been trodden upon, and have been ignored and humiliated by the criminal administration that has run this country for the past eight years:

To all of us who feared that overt and blatant evil would eclipse the goodness that we know is at the heart and soul of our country:

To all of us who lamented that we had strayed too far from the path, and that we would never again be able to feel proud to be Americans:

To all of us who fought long and hard to keep the flickering and guttering flame of free thought and patriotic dissent alive in the face of corporate media ridicule and death threats from right-wing extremists:

To all who came to this site, and helped keep it alive with donations and encouragement:

After eight years of enduring outrage upon outrage, offense upon offense, crime upon crime, and insult after insult- after years of ceaseless effort, we can at last step into the light of day, and know that while there remains much to be done and much to change, the arc of history has once again been tilted towards justice.

Remember this day- and be proud.

To the human ball of failure and ignorance that has so corrupted this country,

George W. Bush, I have only the following to say:

Don't let the doorknob hit you, where the good lord split you.

You are leaving office as the most unpopular and incompetent president in the history of our nation- this caps off a lifetime of failure that is nothing short of shocking in its utter wretchedness.  As an oilman, you accomplished the impossible, by being unable to locate oil in the Permian basin of Texas. You got your ass handed to you as a congressional candidate.  As owner of a baseball team, you only succeeded at being a willing receptacle for nepotistic greed.  As governor of Texas, you gave New Jersey a boost, as your state became known as having the most polluted air in the nation, along with the most ineffective and lackadaisical government.

You capped off this lifelong parade of failure by screwing the entire country over, and pissing off the entire planet.

I have heard your parting rambles about your legacy, and while it's clear that you really don't give a crap about what the American people thought of you, you've always stated that in some uncertain future, you will be vindicated.

Let me clue you in here, George:  a million years could pass- a thousand administrations could come and go- robots from Alpha Centauri could invade planet earth, and attempt to wipe out the human species. As the last remaining human survivors scratch out an existence in deep caverns, living off of slime mold and rainwater, succumbing to starvation as they witness the extinction of the human species, they will at least take comfort in the fact that you are no longer president.

You will only be remembered as a hated, loathsome figure, and your sole value to future generations will be as an example of gross negligence and incompetence.

You see, George, if it weren't for the horrific damage you have wrought upon the world, you would be a laughable, comedic figure of tragedy- hell- you even failed as a father.  It was only the heroic efforts of your secret security detail that prevented your daughters from becoming a drunken spectacle that would make Paris and Nichole look like a pair of Catholic nuns.

But I will grant you this, George- you have made me a more spiritual person.

You see, I have a problem accepting a purely atheist world view, where a greedy, selfish, callous, mass-murdering, thieving, hateful ass wipes like you will just die of old age (and I so much look forward to that day,) without any punishment for your crimes against your fellow man.

On the other hand, I can't accept your idiotic mega church version of Christianity where you believe as an article of faith that you can commit any crime, and be absolved, because you "Accepted Jesus."

George, if your treasured rapture should happen tomorrow, and you met Jesus face to face, he would turn his back on you, without shedding a tear for your soul, as you plummeted to your everlasting torment.

I am not a Christian, nor a Buddhist, nor a Jew, Hindu, Muslim, Jain, or any other faith, but I cannot sleep well, without the faith that I choose to hold within me that somehow, somewhere; you will receive the justice that you denied so many others.

There will be justice.

But enough about you, George. You are now officially gum on our collective heel.

To the future:

Much to the disappointment of some on the hard left, Obama's administration will not be a left-wing version of Bush's conservative ideological nuthatch.

Bush was incapable of governing properly, because he and his cohorts believed that their adherence to ideology was paramount.  It didn't matter that the policies resulting from this ideology were disastrous- what mattered (and what was used as a measure of success) was orthodoxy and adherence to the ideology, no matter how discredited the ideology became..

If you disagreed with Bush, you officially became an "un-person" as far as he was concerned.

When we elected Obama, we didn't vote to put in a left-wing version of the Bush Bowl.

Two wrongs don't make a right, after all.

Bush has screwed up this country almost beyond recognition, and in order to make sure that Obama's desperately-needed repairs don't turn into political footballs, the moderate right needs to be brought on board.

It sucks supremely that once again, it falls to the liberals to govern like grownups, after an eight-year orgy of radical-right childishness, but those seem to be the breaks.

Oh- and by the way, I also hope the democratic majority in congress doesn't become a mirror image of Bush's post-2002 rubber-stamp republican personality cult.

Two wrongs never make a right, after all.

Obama will be a center-left president, and I'm absolutely cool with that.  He will disappoint, from time to time- he will pursue a few policies that I disagree with, and will certainly make mistakes.

But I trust him. His intelligence is striking, his demeanor cool, his life inspiring, his words eloquent, his vision clear, his flaws openly admitted, and his story so unique to what our country is meant to be.

As I'm shutting down this site, in a few weeks, I am confident that in coming times, the liberal blogosphere will not follow the twisted path forged by sites like WorldNetDaily and Newsmax, and serve as checks to power, rather than an apologist for an abuse of power.

And if you doubt that will be the case, I suggest you do what I did- start your own site, and make your voice heard.  If I can reach millions, you can, too.  When Bushflash was at its height, it got more daily hits than Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck, and Neil Boortz, combined.

Deficit Spending: Good or Bad?

Our former Vice President made it quite clear that deficit spending was not a serious concern but came with the expediency of the needs of government and whatever pressures drove government in that direction.  Yet, President George W. Bush and the then Republican controlled Congress were quick to join this policy shift for a Republican Administration that resulted in probably the greatest expansion in the size of the Federal Government in our history as well as its intrusion into the private lives of American citizens.  The tragedy of 9/11/01 demanded decisive and immediate action by our government and its leadership.  I believe that our action in Afghanistan against the Taliban and El Qaeda was an appropriate and measured response.  However, their Declaration of a War on Terrorism is an action that I have never quite understood and I have referred to it often simply as a ‘nebulous’ act.  Nebulous is an adjective that is often defined as being “hazy, vague, indistinct, or confused: a nebulous recollection of the meeting; a nebulous distinction between pride and conceit”.

The implication is that such a policy that has no sound and reasonable course to make it achievable without a military presence in welcomed and unwelcomed places throughout the world for extended periods of time.  This would be costly and detrimental to both the financial and social health of our society.  However, it is not unreasonable for our government to be vigilant and take such actions that would reduce the threat of terrorism in the world.  We cannot be an International Police Force for the world with the assumption that we possess the wisdom for every society and culture in the world.  We have a value system that has separated the United States from many countries that has made us unique and distinct as well as a ‘Pillar of Hope’ for many deprived and victimized people throughout the world.  That distinction over the past decade and especially during the Bush Administration has become less clear with a deterioration of our prestige and credibility with many nations who should be natural allies.

Was the expenditure of tax dollars in the expansion and reorganization of the Federal Government in the aftermath of the national tragedy of 9/11 necessary or justified?  Was it a threat to our National Security that prompted George Bush’s invasion of Iraq in 2003?  There is another factor which I think is worthy of discussion and debate, and that is why military action in the Middle East has been financed by ‘Supplemental Appropriations’ that were not included in the Federal Budget for any given year?

Where do we go from here?  Should we increase our debtor status to China to continue the misguided policies of our government in Iraq and Afghanistan?  The United States is now facing one of the most severe economic crises in our history and how can a political party that gave George Bush carte blanche in waging a war that we did not pay for but put that burden on our children and grand children and not support to the critical and essential Economic Stimulus Program of President Barack Obama.  There seems to me to be an inherent contradiction when you will assume deficits for war and not for the working people of this nation.

Senex Magister

Dissent is the highest form of Patriotism. ~ Thomas Jefferson