www.nationalview.org and Note From a Madman brought to you by
for your Information Technology needs
owned and operated by Noah "The Madman" Greenberg
This Is What Democracy Looks Like
Today's Note From a Madman
January 6, 2009
Lead, Follow or Get Out of the Way
Lead, follow or get out of the way. So goes the statement which applies to so
many walks of life, but particularly to politics and especially as it stands
today. In just a mere few days and hours (fourteen days and four hours as I
write this), a leader who actually chooses to "lead" will be sworn into office.
Can we wait that long?
Gone forever will be the Bush(43) administration who facilitated such terms as
"Islamo-facists" and statement including, “If we had had specific information as
to the time and place of the (9-11) attacks, we would have moved heaven and
earth to prevent them”.
At least we hope so.
However, standing in the path to our national redemption is the obstacle course
known as the Right Wing. The Righties, who ran our nation off the prosperity
road and into our current depressed embankment, will be led by the likes of Fox
News Channel in the media and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.
Over the past eight Bush-years, we have seen the outgoing administration attempt
to - and succeed in - muddying up the water with issues designed to divide
rather than unite. In their corner sat their allies in both the House of
Representatives and the US Senate for the lion's share of the time.
We've seen issues brought to the forefront which, in the old days, would have
been either dismissed by the fourth estate as nonsensical or had their
supporters in Congress ridiculed for bringing onto the Capital floor. We've seen
some of those Bush-issues blow up in the GOP's collective faces (immigration;
the attempted theft of our Social Security fund; etc.), the worst of them all
was the hijacking of our national government in order to create a bill for a
single person: Terry Schiavo.
There are many left in government who were members of the hijackers of our
nation. Even in its most volatile years, for example, no more than twenty
percent of the US House of Representatives are replaced by the opposing party's
candidate. While Congress itself has a near single-digit approval rating - even
lower than our current, and the worst President we've ever had - our local
Congressional representative is considered by their constituents as "okay".
How many of those left in their cozy Executive Building offices - those with
their million dollar expense accounts, major medical plans and fat pensions -
will decide to lead? How many will follow? And how many will have the common
courtesy and common sense to just get out of the way?
Even with the extremely thin margin of victory by Al Franken in his race against
senator Norm Coleman for Coleman's Senate seat (formerly the seat of the late
Paul Wellstone), the Democrats still don't have a filibuster-proof
super-majority to get things done.
Could that be a good thing? Surely it could if - and it's a BIG IF - those in
the minority GOP decide to negotiate and compromise rather than simply stand in
the way.
There is a faction in the Republican Party which seems to have the philosophy
that no progress and finger-pointing is better than some or any progress at all,
and with enough votes (to prevent the magic number of sixty required to break
the filibuster), they can achieve that lowly goal.
It's called Obstructionism and it may just be the only policy of the GOP while
they're in the minority.
Waiting in the wings are a bunch of Republican Presidential hopefuls led by -
believe it or not - another Bush. With the news that George H. W. Bush would
like to see his next son, the former Governor of Florida, Jeb take a shot at the
White House, making the Democratic majority wait to pass legislation - or not
pass it at all - could be just the medicine the GOP doctors ordered. Since 2001,
when "W" took over, nothing other than lining the pockets of the Bush "base of
haves and have mores" has been done and progress, by any measure, became
stifled.
Politically, nothing could be worse for the GOP than a successful Democratic
agenda, one that puts dollars back into middle class pockets and health care
into the homes and medical offices nationwide.
Who will lead the new GOP? Will it be the likes of McConnell and House Minority
Leader John Boehner or will someone step forward and, in the spirit of
compromise, make their party a part of the solution and not the major part of
the problem?
Conversely, who will follow? Will those in the GOP content enough to collect a
salary, pension and health care benefits not want to rock their "haves and have
more" boat stay silent and blindly follow McConnell, Boehner and their ilk?
It would be better if they all just got out of the way and let those serious
enough about changing the way things are done enact that change.
But they won't do that. They'll stand in the way and scream about "taxi and
spend liberals" and again, try to pull the wool over our collective eyes in time
for 2012.
-Noah Greenberg
And here's some more...
Do you see the Republican strategy on the stimulus evolving? First, they invited
the banks to back their trucks up and take away the money appropriated through
TARP. Even though Congress attached strings, the Republican administration
refuses to enforce the restrictions and, as we heard last week, the banks are
refusing to tell us what they are doing with the public’s money. But, those were
bankers, friends of the administration.
Then, when it came to the car manufacturers, it was the Republicans who led the
charge to demand a plan, and wanted all kinds of restrictions. Believe it or
not, these conservative capitalists actually wanted the Congress to change the
contracts between the companies and the unions. Of course, when the Democrats
proposed legislation last year to change mortgage contracts and require
renegotiations, we heard that contracts are sacrosanct, they are inviolate, the
government simply cannot modify them. Now, it seems that government can do so
when the impact is to fall on unions and on workers and benefit big business.
Now, when Obama is proposing a stimulus package that will put people to work,
the Republicans (Sen. McConnell) insist that they will look at every detail.
They didn’t do that with the TARP – that had to be passed in three days,
remember - so why now?
The goal, I believe is to prolong recovery from the recession so as to position
Obama and the Democrats as incompetent in the 2010 elections. We learned from
Karl Rove and others that the name of the Republican game is winning. Once they
win, then they reward their friends – like banks, investment banks, some but not
all brokerage houses, construction companies like Halliburton, security
companies like Blackwater, etc.
The name of the game is win, and they will accept any cost to the country in
order to win an election. Unfortunately, it takes 61 votes in the Senate to
blunt this strategy, and I don’t think the votes are there. Look for the
stimulus package to die a slow and painful death in a Congress where Democrats
have a majority. Try explaining that to the American people in 2010.
-Anonymous
THE WAR WE’RE IGNORING
by Victoria A. Brownworth
copyright c 2009 Journal-Register Newspapers, Inc.
During the presidential campaign, every candidate was eager to declare his or
her staunch support of Israel. Although some, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton
among them, acknowledged favoring a two-state solution to the ongoing conflict
between Israel and the Palestinians, the bottom line was always that Israel had
the right to defend its borders and the U.S. would retaliate against anyone who
attacked Israel.
That stance has been a fundamental foreign policy position of the U.S. for the
past few decades. The U.S. grants more than $3 billion in military aid to Israel
annually–more than to any other nation. That aid is specifically to maintain a
U.S. presence in the Middle East with the only established democracy in the
region.
That U.S. policy position has not shifted despite the recent war against Gaza
being waged by Israel. Although the international community, including all Arab
nations (including American allies Egypt and Jordan) and the majority of the
European Union (except for Germany), has been uniformly outraged by Israel’s
actions, the U.S. government as well as the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. have
remained steadfast in their support of Israel.
The U.S. has blocked any resolutions against Israel in the U.N. Security Council
which met on Jan. 3 to address the crisis.
On Jan. 4, Vice-President Dick Cheney was equally stalwart in his response when
he spoke with CBS’s Bob Schieffer on “Face the Nation.”
Starting on Dec. 27, Israel launched air strikes against Hamas leaders it
asserted had broken a six-month cease-fire agreement brokered by Egypt.
According to the Israeli government, Hamas was shelling southern Israel–notably
the town of Siderot and its environs–with mortars and rockets.
While the rocket launches had not injured or killed anyone prior to the Israeli
invasion of Gaza, they created a constant sense of panic in Siderot proper and
the surrounding area, with air-raid sirens going off perpetually as, according
to Israeli President Shimon Peres, up to 80 rockets a day were launched at the
town. Cheney told Schieffer that the U.S. would continue to block any U.N.
resolution on the Israeli attack and that the U.S. would not call for a cease
fire at this time. He reiterated the Bush Administration’s position that Israel
has the implicit right to self-defense.
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL), the second-ranking Democrat in the Congress, echoed
Cheney in an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on the Jan. 4 “This
Week.”
Durbin said Israel has the right to defend itself and the U.S. supports those
efforts. Ranking Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) told Stephanopoulos he
agreed with Durbin and added that it was important to remember that Hamas was a
terrorist organization.
This is the pivot of the conflict: Hamas. When Israel withdrew from Gaza in
August 2005, removing all Israeli settlement despite intense opposition from
settlers and many Israelis, the action was supposed to be a major concession to
the Palestinians. The quid pro quo was that they got total control of Gaza while
Israel kept titular control of the West Bank where Israeli settlements were far
more vast and the investment greater. In 2005, the Palestinian Authority led
both the West Bank and Gaza under the leadership of President Mahmoud Abbas.
But then leadership shifted in 2006 in Gaza and Hamas won the elections there.
This split the Palestinian leadership and also effectively made Gaza a rogue
state with regard to the West and Israel. Hamas, which has taken responsibility
for the majority of the suicide bombings in Israel over the past decade and does
not recognize the right of Israel to exist, is considered a terrorist
organization. Hamas is supported and funded by Iran, which also does not
recognize Israel. It is presumed that the weapons being used against Israel by
Hamas have been provided by Iran.
The conflict that arose after the Hamas leadership took power created huge
problems for the Palestinians living in Gaza. Israel continually closed the
border to Gaza and Egypt permanently closed its border, effectively blockading
the small, densely populated country of 1.5 million in an area about 25 miles
long and four miles wide.
Israel denied visas. Supplies–including food, fuel and medicine–were limited.
Work visas were rescinded. Throughout, the shelling and rockets continued, which
reinforced Israel’s use of border blockades.
According to human rights organizations, the situation in Gaza was dire more
than 18 months ago. On January 21, 2008 an illegal entry was blasted into the
border wall between Egypt and Gaza. More than 50,000 Gazans fled into Egypt,
bringing back any and all supplies they could carry. The border opening was
maintained for nearly a week before Egypt began arresting and subduing
Palestinians and the border closed.
It was the circumstances last January that led to an Egyptian-brokered
cease-fire between Israel and Gaza which had been enforced for the past six
months. But when the terms of the agreement were violated–each side says by the
other–Israel began its all-out offensive.
The situation has been changing day to day. After a week of intense air strikes
which killed more than 400 Gazans and injured over 2,000, more than two-thirds
of whom were civilians, Israel began a ground invasion after sundown on Jan. 3.
Former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, leader of the far right Likud
Party, spoke to ABC news on Jan. 4. He insisted that Israel intends to stop the
Hamas shelling of Israel by any means necessary. Netanyahu, who is running to be
Prime Minister again when elections are held in March, is opposed to a two-state
solution and has previously insisted that the Palestinians “must not have a
state” because they cannot be trusted.
On Jan. 4, Israeli forces had fully transected the Gaza strip, effectively
separating Gaza City from the rest of the territory and continuing air and
ground assaults. According to Shimon Peres, Israel intends to rout Hamas from
Gaza and will employ any and all means to do so.
It’s always dicey to suggest that a nation does not know what it is doing when
it claims to be protecting itself, but recent history suggests that like the
U.S. in Iraq, the current Israeli government indeed does not. The war on Gaza is
a tactical, political and humanitarian error of grave proportions.
The invasion of Gaza replicates Israel’s disastrous June 2006 invasion of
Lebanon in which thousands of Lebanese were killed, thousands more injured and
hundreds of thousands forced to flee the country. The shaky democratically
elected government was displaced due to the war, the infrastructure shattered.
In its stead, Hezbollah–which Israel pledged to rout from Lebanon–took control
of the government. Hezbollah has been in power ever since Israel was forced to
withdraw from Lebanon after a six-week war because there was no stomach for
re-occupying Lebanon.
Israel claimed victory, but a series of internal investigations of the IDF
(Israeli Defense Forces) took place soon after Israel’s withdrawal, and scandal
ensued. The war was a huge mistake.
The scene in Gaza looks remarkably–and tragically–like the scene in Lebanon. As
in Lebanon, Israel has refused to allow reporters into Gaza to report from the
front lines. As in Lebanon, three to five civilians are being killed for every
Hamas fighter being taken out. As in Lebanon, international opinion except for
the U.S. is staunchly against Israel. As in Lebanon, Israel will be forced to
either re-occupy or withdraw after a few weeks. And far from having routed the
alleged terrorists–in Lebanon Hezbollah, in Gaza Hamas–Israel will have further
entrenched the very agents it sought to eradicate.
The Bush Administration, as it has with so many foreign and domestic policy
issues, has utterly failed at even attempting to broker peace in the Middle
East. Even America’s own agencies conclude that Mid-East terrorism has increased
exponentially as a result of the U.S. war on Iraq. Under President Bush, the
alliance with Israel has been one in name and dollars only. There was no effort
to broker peace with Lebanon prior to the invasion in 2006. Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice only became involved four weeks into the six-week war.
This time the U.S. cannot drag its heels.
When Barack Obama takes office on Jan. 20, the current crisis–which will no
doubt still be ongoing–will become his problem to address. Hillary Clinton will
not yet be confirmed as Secretary of State, although no opposition to her
appointment is expected. But the lag time will be one of more than a month from
now–enough time for the number of casualties to rise to horrific levels, as in
Lebanon.
The Bush Administration needs to act now–not wait for Obama to take office.
Cheney’s laissez-faire attitude toward the war we’re ignoring cannot and must
not be maintained. Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon and now Gaza–each of these
incursions by the U.S. and Israel has proven disastrous and unwinnable. The
reality is, diplomacy–not military action–is the only answer to the seemingly
insoluble problems in the Middle East. Even our own military has come to that
conclusion.
Collective punishment is never an answer–and that is what is going on in Gaza.
Hamas was elected to lead the Palestinians and they have done a lousy job,
making life for the Palestinians under their rule far worse than it was before.
Hamas would no doubt have been defeated–as would Hezbollah in Lebanon–in the
next election had Israel bided its time.
But instead, the current war has strengthened Hamas’s position and
re-popularized them with the Palestinians as well as Arab nations who were
previously opposed to them. Few question that Hamas leaders are indeed
terrorists–hiding bombs in children’s schools and hospitals is proof enough of
that. But when Israel acts similarly by bombarding those same outposts and
threatening myriad civilians, then it is they who become the bullying power in
the eyes of the world.
The U.S. must show its true solidarity with Israel and broker immediate talks
and demand a cease fire. Continued war in Gaza has no end point as the Lebanon
and Iraq disasters have proven. As long as Gazans are forced to live under
inhumane conditions, their rage will be palpable and felt in Israel first, via
rocket attacks and suicide bombings.
In the past, diplomacy has brought about long stretches of peace and
negotiations. But Israel and Gaza cannot do this for themselves–they have not
been able to thus far. A third party must engage the two nations and the U.S.,
perhaps with Egypt and Jordan, is the obvious choice.
Obama will have to take over whatever diplomatic efforts are begun when he takes
office, but for the Bush Administration to shirk its responsibility at the
eleventh hour is, even by its own perilously low standards, indefensible.
The war in Gaza must stop. A cease-fire must be proposed. Everyone–Hamas, the
Israeli government and the U.S.–must work toward a solution that protects
Israelis and Gazans alike. Without that effort, the killing will just go on
until there is no one on either side left standing.
In response to, "The problem that still persists with Hamas in charge in Gaza is
that they don't speak of Peace - only the destruction of Israel," Ginger H.
writes:
I don't know who said this, but it's true:
"If Palestine laid down its arms, there would be peace.
"If Israel laid down its arms, they would cease to exist."
I don't think anyone who's kept up minimally with this ongoing battle can
disagree with that sentiment.
And in response to, "I am a big supporter of Israel but believe that Israel must
accept terms set up by the International community. Negotiations must take place
but a solution - one that can be enforced - must take precedence. And that
includes both on Israel and Gaza," David McReynolds adds:
On Israel, I am not so strongly a supporter of Israel, but quite critical in
fact. That is distinct from the Israelis. While the government and virtually all
the political leadership is heartbreakingly corrupt, there is a vitality to the
culture which comes across sometimes in cinema. "The Band Visits", a slight
wistful comedy made in Israel about an Egyptian band that gets lost and ends up
at some god-forsaken Israeli city, was touching. "The Bubble", which is
allegedly a gay film but in fact is about Israeli/Palestinian relations, shows
the vitality of the Israeli youth, who oppose the Occupation.
And my "in box" is filled daily with contacts from Israelis who are struggling
to be heard, who protest, who march, who despair.
However I don't think anything will get Israel to actually move (how many
agreements has it simply ignored, such as the ones on the settlements?) until
the US cuts off funding. We are underwriting Israel and as long as Israel knows
it can count on that, the shanda of things like Gaza will continue.
Should both sides make concession? My God, they have to! But will Israel? Not
yet.
In response to, "Oil as a Weapon," Lew Warden opines:
“It’s only about oil!,” was the big Lib battle cry along with “No weapons of
mass destruction,” when Bush (no buddy of mine) embarked on his Iraq venture.
What’s the matter? Getting expensive to keep your back sides warm in Al Gore’s
untimely Winter of Global Warming? All you accomplished was to contribute to our
problems in Iraq and Afghanistan, stiffen the Muslim’s resolve, embolden Bush to
“spend his political capital” on furthering the Republican dream of destroying
Social Security, and divide the nation while the money sharks looted our
national treasury and destroyed our economy with debt.
Now we’ll see how far Obama gets with his and the Dem’s vaunted Afghanistan
plans. No port of entry to unload troops, equipment and supplies. Just airplanes
vulnerable to rocket attacks. Not even any friendly contiguous territory to ease
our logistical problems. India and Pakistan at each other’s throats again. And
Hamas/Iran still playing the “condemn Israel” game with the bodies of the
Palestinian people.
Nice going, boys. You built a bonfire, only now the big winds are going to blow
it out of control. ([‘m wondering if the Reps and the Press will launch an
attack Obama like the Dems and the Press did on Bush in 2005?)
And your bleat about “the international community” is pitiful. You “one world,
one government” idiots cling to the UN like the Scofield Kid’s comment about the
cowboy he had killed in the stinking privy in Clint Eastwood’s classic
“Unforgiven:” “He hung on to his s t like it was money!”
Bon appetite!
Someone, please translate this for me.
Thank you, in advance. -NG
Send your comments to: NationalView@aol.com
-Noah Greenberg