The Blog of Damocles

The Chronicles of Aaron Employed

My Photo
Name:
Location: Singers Glen, Virginia, United States

Wednesday, May 31, 2006

Meet the new boss

Here’s what some people are saying about the new Treasury Sec. – “Paulson has largely supported the Bush administration's fiscal decisions, he has sharply veered from the White House's position on global warming, calling on the government to take "urgent" action to curb greenhouse gas emissions. But it is still unclear whether the administration will actually listen to Paulson's dissenting opinions. "The Bush administration will want someone to toe their line," said Gavin Friend at Commerzbank AG in London. The Washington Post today notes that Paulson is "not likely to change the administration's policy." It remains uncertain whether Paulson will be "a wise steward of taxpayer dollars," or just another salesman for White House's economic policies.” Center for American Progress

 

And an interesting article on slate… http://www.slate.com/id/2142640/

 

Tuesday, May 30, 2006

Parity

So Harry Reid took boxing tickets from the Nev. gaming commission in what looks to be an attempt to curry legislative favor from the Democratic Leader. Wm. Jefferson is giving a new meaning to cold-hard-cash - which apparently was the ill-gotten gain of some Nigerian work deal. These are bad, certainly they look bad, esp. Mr. Jefferson's deal.

I'm all for investigating this stuff on both sides of the isle, and prosecuting the heck out of those that break the law. It seems that our short memory of the past is allowing us to forget the others that came before; Cunningham, Ney (Ahhh Abramoff), Cheney, Frist, Lott.... and the list goes on.

It gives a whole new meaning to the term "Congressional Oversight". Who's watching the watchers?

Dancing Fools



OK, guess which one is the Yale prof., the Episcopal Priest (in training), the Presbyterian Minister, and the Blogger, and the Soap Maker.

Friday, May 26, 2006

Let's hear it for ennui

The Washington Post reported over this weekend that even in formerly secure Republican areas (like in some districts of southern VA) legislators are looking at the possibility that they may be defeated. One can only hope so.   The reported cause of this is apparently a nationalization of the idea of “republicanism” and identifying it with a particularly unsuccessful Bush administration.  Finally perhaps the frustration over the economy, the war, the governmental and business corruption, the social security collapse, the failure of FEMA, the loss of civil rights enshrined in law, and the loss of civil rights in extra legal action, the tax breaks for the wealthy, and the inherent racism and isolationism of the administration is finally going to show itself in an election.

 

We’ll see…

Questionable Motives.... on both sides

Washington Post opinion blogger Ruth Marcus today notes how the dems are beginning to show up with the likes of Joel Osteen (Pelosi), T.D. Jakes (Clyburn) and *gasp* Pat Robertson (the Deaniac himself). Although I appreciate that Dems need to reach out to evangelicals, and that their welcoming of these power players represents a certain small re-jiggering of the priorities of the "moral majority" - I still am rather dubious about the motives here.
1. Dems should not abandon their choice platform for a variety of very good reasons that probably run counter to most Christian teachings (especially when filtered through some of these mega-preachers).
2. Christians, in general, are not entirely stupid - and although I call myself both Democrat and Christian I realize that most do not fall into both those categories. Therefore I'm sure that there will be a certain amout of "they're just pandering to the right" talk among the "flock".
So, what should be done differently?
I actually think, with some reservation, that the Wallis, Bono, Warren liberal evangelical (or Catholic as it were) social policy approach is working. As the Democratic leadership they should be appealing to the people, primarily, not the leaders. Isn't that the historical base of the democrats anyway - why should they avoid that populist approach?

The Code

First of all let me say that The DaVinci Code is a fun read. It is certainly no great work of literature, in fact it is rather poorly written and the style is at best referred to as "a good beach read". Furthermore, the characters in all of Brown's books are largely based on the same group of types; the smart iconoclast hero, the sexy and smart accomplice, the brilliant evil antagonist and his loyal followers (who tend to do the dirtywork, like Silas in The Code). So if you've read one, and like the story you can get it rehashed in Angels and Demons, Digital Fortress, etc.
I haven't seen the movie, but I'm sure it falls into that rather light and fluffy summer entertainment we have so long come to realize as our release from the heavier works of winter (such as Friends with Money). There are mixed reviews, but it is probably tolerable, if not taken too seriously.
Of course if you want facts about church history, you probably should avoid both book and movie. For a review of the factual problems you can get it here.

Fitter, Happier, More Productive..... (5/16 on xanga)

In addition to Bush's middle of the road ridiculous immigration speach last night, Rove-vader spoke at the American Enterprise Institute about the coming election. Rove made all sorts of ridiculous and wildly irrelevant statements, but the most egregious were about the economy. The Washington Post had one of the better reviews of what he said:
"Most astonishingly, Rove tried to make the case that Bush's tax cuts actually left the rich paying more. Everyone knows the Bush cuts in levies on dividends, capital gains and inheritances overwhelmingly benefited the wealthy. But here was Rove playing class politics by arguing that the wealthy now pay a larger share of total income taxes than they did before Bush.
This is statistical flimflam, of course. It leaves out payroll taxes, which hit most Americans the hardest. And the wealthy are paying more of the total share of income taxes, even though their rates are much lower, because their share of national income has gone up. Rove's numbers actually prove the rich are getting richer." E.J. Dionne in the Post today.

Cheney Reignites the Cold War

In a speech in Vilnius, Lithuania Dead Eye Dick accused Russia of using their oil and gas as "tools of intimidation or blackmail." (according to the NY Times) He further accused Russian of restricting the rights of it's population:
"In many areas of civil society — from religion and the news media, to advocacy groups and political parties — the government has unfairly and improperly restricted the rights of her people."

Now whether or not these accusations contain a grain of truth is somewhat irrelevant. I believe that Cheney is probably right about Russia's behavior. However, what is relevant here is that Cheney represents an administration that has consistently badgered many countries (Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and the various -stans) over oil and gas. But if we really want to get into what is inconsistent in his statements we could approach the irony of an administration who sponsored the USA PARTRIOT Act, hired Tony Snow as spokesperson, paid media mouthpieces for their support (of education policies etc.), supported the rise of the K street project, and has spied on US citizens using the NSA saying anything about another government restricting the rights of "her people".

In the worst of all possible situations, and for the most paranoid of those among the thoughtful Cheney's tirade may be a roundabout method of funding large defense projects. What? How? Well, the logic goes like this, we currently fund a military industrial complex centered around fighting the Cold War (consider the F-22 fighter plane, the Sea Wolf Submarine, large blue water "stealth" destroyers, nuclear bunker-busters, missile defense etc). This military industrial complex (and their lobbyists) does not approve of the War in Iraq as the current asymmetric fight does not imply the need for larger weapons systems but rather for more cross-cultural training and more feet on the ground. By encouraging Russia and China to ally, Cheney resets the stage for another Cold-War scenario - basically the renewed danger of a Major Theater War (MTW), and therefore increased "defense" industry spending.

Sickening isn't it?

In lighter and somewhat bizarre news, in what Slate.com is calling Nappaquiddick Patrick Kennedy, congressman from RI - and from my experience of living in the "fine" state, a general idiot, crashed his car into a barrier in front of Congress. He claimed he had not been drinking, only taking Ambien (prescribed) and thought he had a vote to attend. This was at 2:45am.

Sputtering Resentment

That's right... sputtering...So in order to pay for the laughably inadequate $100 rebate that Congress was offering to U.S. Taxpayers (even Congress realizes that there are so many immigrant workers that saying Americans would be fiscally dangerous) Congress was going to reorganize the way accounting was done in the oil industry to raise taxes. Of course the oil industry lobby jumped all over this like a sugar addled child on a trampoline. Now even I can see a problem with rearranging the way inventories are kept in order to raise revenue. First, of all it creates a paperwork bottleneck in the government and in industry. Secondly, it causes a whole new system to be put in place at the back end of all oil production (the cost of which is covered by whom, you may ask.... well ask not for whom the gas bell tolls, it tolls for thee). Thirdly, and this is hi-larious, the Republicans were in essence charging the gas companies a fee to pay for votes, despite high gas prices - the result of which would be higher gas prices.The fall back plan, announced by Frist is..... .oh, boy..... to pay for the $100 (which does not even fill up the tank of some SUV's) by drilling in ANWAR. So we're paying for a rebate by giving oil companies more money? Reprehensible, irresponsible and unconscionable - the new Republican motto.On a more reasonable course, CT, ME, MA, NJ, NM, OR, RI, VT, New York City and the District of Columbia are suing the federal government to raise CAFE standards for SUVs - finally.

Various misfortunes (posted 4/28 on xanga)


Ken Lay spars with lawyers, and blames everyone for the fall of ENRON - well everyone but he and Skilling, at least.Suicide bombers hit the International Peacekeeping forces in the Sinai (no casualties other than the bombers), two days after the bombing in Dahab. NPR is reporting that over 25,000 documents from the National Archive have been reclassified. (somewhere between 24-36% of which was not necessary)Reps and Dems are still lobbing issue grenades back and forth at one another, what today brings is yet to be seen: immigration, gasoline prices, CIA leaking, CIA rendition all are showing up on the radar (what happened to Rummy's impending resignation?).And will Rummy court-marshall the generals?:Article 88 of the military code of justice:Any commissioned officer [and, under Article 2, this includes any retired officer] who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present, shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.Oh and Ford is teaming up with TerraPass to sell carbon credits with their SUVs..... and the world goes huh? Apparently Ford will continue to make the bigg'uns and we'll help people assuage their guilt (only over the environment, not safety - yet) with a little PR.

Election watch 2006-8

Buried in the NY Times was a short little article about how the religious right is organizing once again around the issue of Gay Marriage. Now, it would seem that there would be other things that as people of faith they could organize around... say increasing levels of poverty, violence, disease, etc. But these things would not fit within the generally Republican prioritites that certain people want to support. In other words, it's a political ploy to unify a base on an issue that Republicans still hold message control over. Despite the extremely minimal impact this issue actually has compared to .... oh say, foreign and domestic poverty, the war(s), foreign policy (Israel, Iran, North Korea - remember them, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Mexico, Venezuela, etc.) , medicare, social security, joblessness, rising energy costs, falling educational standards, the astronomically large deficit, AIDS, debt relief, and let us not speak of the Rummy/Condi/Cheney axis of evil.
So if you highlight a minor issue in order to cover up a multitude of sins, does that make the religious right as complicit in lying to the American people as the politicians authoring the schemes?
Yes.
In other news, my college roomates (and spouses) may have stepped into the river Lethe and forgotten that the "Harvard of the Midwest, Evangelical, Protestant, Non-affliated Schools located in Illinois" moniker was just a joke. So let's see, two Professors (one soon to be at Yale Divinity School), one impending Priest, one minister and director of a camp, and one who apparently is selling their small run-out-of-the-basement business (cha-ching) to some large conglomerate.
Meanwhile I still am ensuring the curve by working at a wine shop.... and blathering on a rarely read website.

Rummygate 2006 (posted 4/12/06 at xanga site)

Rummywatch, day 1912
As we look ahead to November elections here are the likely options: (Projections assume a non-strategy by the opposing party)
Republicans stick by Rummy and a select number of generals loyal to the administration, and develop a media strategy about the "victories of Iraq", ignoring what Dems. are saying. - Projection Republicans loose many house seats, and possibly the majority it both houses.
Democrats focus on Rummy from now until November, beating what may be a dead horse by mid September. - Projection, Democrats still gain seats but do not claim a majority in the house, although the Senate may revert to Democratic control.
Republicans lobby for the removal of Rummy, (decision resting with Pres.). If removed Reps. usurp message control of the Rummy issue, claim moral relevancy and marginalize Democrats once more. Projection, Dems still gain in House, but claim leadership of neither Senate or House.
Democrats complain about Rummy, but focus rather on the cost of the war, the state of the economy (including high gas prices see today's NY Times - FOX News was also reporting over the Easter/Passover Holiday that Dems were "keeping gas prices high" for political reasons.. and if you believe that I've got some land to sell you....), and healthcare (esp. for retirees). Projection, Dems appear weak on security issues - but strong on domestic policy, possibly pick up the Senate, but not the House.
So... what will happen. I'm betting on the last plan.

The military option - or accepting Christ as your own personal weapon....

So apparently the Bush war making machine is looking ahead to the next stage of the "Long-War" as they are now exploring the military option in Iran. To say that this would be disasterous is merely most egregious understatement ever. Iran for its part understands that this is mere political maneuvering to force nuclear monitors back into Iran (they hope, as do we).
Bush, of course, denies that the military option is being explored.
"The doctrine of prevention is to work together to prevent the Iranians from having a nuclear weapon," Mr. Bush said after being asked whether the United States would allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons. "I know here in Washington prevention means force; it doesn't mean force, necessarily. In this case, it means diplomacy." (Jim Rutenberg, NY TIMES http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/11/world/middleeast/11prexy.html?th&emc=th )
This denial is despite the fact that Seymour Hersh reported that the Joint Chiefs of Staff (these folks might be consider THE RELIABLE SOURCE if ever there was one) were trying to remove a nuclear option in Iran from the table - and considering resigning if it wasn't removed. (The New Yorker, http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060417fa_fact ) The very idea of nuclear prevention is nuts, I think Fred Kaplan of Slate put it best:
"Pre-emptive war—attacking a country to keep it from attacking us or an ally—is sometimes justifiable. Preventive war—attacking a country to keep it from developing a capability to attack an ally sometime in the future—almost never is. And preventive war waged with nuclear weapons is (not to put too fine a spin on it) crazy." (http://www.slate.com/id/2139610/?nav=tap3)

Bad Omens

"I'm the decider, and I decide what's best" - our President, Mr. English.
With the election season well and truly upon us (at least for those of you in states where seats might be contested) I begin to wonder about issues of political subterfuge. Certainly Rummygate will most likely be resolved by early June with 1) stirring military pronouncements of his worth or 2) his replacement and scapegoating in order to refocus on the upcoming election. What appears to be more worrisome is the media circus surrounding the release of the film United 93.
This film, about the flight that crashed in PA on 9/11 (for those of you living on another planet for the past 5 years, you lucky bums), seems to me more political ploy than cathartic exploration. Due for release on April 28th and produced by Universal Studios (at least it's not FOX) the film depicts what were no-doubt heroic actions by the passengers of the "fourth flight". The picture's website (www.united93movie.com) is an interesting combination of half-tone distinctly arabic sounding background music, airplane photo-montages, and subtle pixelshaded text reading "Never Forget". Throughout the documentation on the film are supporting quotes from family members of those who were on the flight that day. That sort of endorsement is hard to argue with (but I will).
The film is shot in real time - giving everyone a "cinema veritae" experience of the fear and chaos that probably happened. Fear, chaos, and hate..... Boy doesn't that sound like a particular line of reasoning about terrorism/Iraq/immigration policy/"gay marriage".....
I'm afraid that this film will serve as a rallying call to the Republican base, to "Stand United" (gosh what is United paying for this film anyway?). More than a rallying call for political purposes however, the impression is that the film is a rallying call for those who see the continuation of the war in Iraq as the heroic struggle to bring the fight to the terrorists - in fact the implication is that this sort of action (in Iraq) is one of heroism at all levels President to Private. I would assert that this implication is intentional as the producer is known for sponsoring "superheroic" movies with Nietzsche-esque Ubermensch characters (Hellboy, Tombraider, TimeCop, Die Hard 2, Predator 2, etc.)
But those are just my thoughts, I'd say I'll write more after I see the film - but I'm not sure I will see the film at all.

Is U.S. foreign policy encouraging sectarian violence worldwide?

Recent attacks at Shiite shrines in Iraq seem to be the latest in a long line of indicators that that country is devolving into Civil War along sectarian lines. With the announcement that a Sunni shrine in Pakistan was attacked by two apparent suicide bombers it now appears that the U.S. may be outsourcing terrorism throughout the Muslim world. The fact that the U.S. policy seems to us to be non-partisan does not, in fact, mean that elsewhere. We support the Shia government in Iraq marginally (and Kurds who are Sunni, more so) and are at the same time working to undermine the government in Iran (Shia). All of this working at apparent cross-purposes may only be undermining whatever credibility we still have. The larger issue though is that with each sectarian attack anywhere we increase the likelihood of sectarian violence everywhere. The flattening of the information world means that motivation, coordination, and reprisals are easier to manage on a global scale, than on a local one - where pesky and inquisitive police may get in the way. The surprise factor is the primary weapon of these fighters, and that factor is greatly amplified if the availability of targets grows from local or even national to global.

A grand strategy to address terrorism is needed - but the strategy that we've been using not only fails to address the root causes of terrorism, it actually contributes to those root causes.

Shelfari: Book reviews on your book blog