Bush Leadership

President Bush will use his new budget to propose cutting the size of the Army Reserve, and the National Guard to their lowest levels in three decades and stripping up to $4 billion from two fighter aircraft programs. This will cut the Reserve from the current allowable 205,000 members to 188,000, the actual number of soldiers at the end of 2005. A similar approach will be taken with the National Guard cutting it from the allowable 350,000 to 333,000, which is also its current level.

The reasons for these moves are obvious, and they aren’t leadership or to save money.

The Reserve and the National Guard are having major recruiting problems due to the constant deployments that are needed for Bush’s so-called war on terrorism. Because of these recruiting problems the army has not been able to fill its needs to authorized levels. That is the real reason for the cutbacks.

The cutback in the development and production of the F-22 fighter is a sign that the president is once again passing the buck. This would take money now planned to spend in 2007, during Bush’s presidency, and putting it off into the next administration. We are not saving money, just moving it. Gratification now and more debt later. Once again he is piling additional debt onto our children and grandchildren. Of course he will, as usual, claim credit for doing something that is actually nothing. You know, like WMDs in Iraq, One Child Left Behind, and Rebuilding New Orleans.

Presidential Arrogance

Dear Editor:

Today in his news conference the president made the statement that the FISA law was passed in 1978 and is no longer relevant. He claimed that the world today is a different place and that law just can’t handle today’s needs. This means that he alone has decided what laws we can live under and that he can sweep aside any law that was passed before his term in office as not being relevant to today’s world.

Who gave him this power? Does this mean that he can override Congress at any time? Has he decided that since the Declaration of Independence was written in 1776 and the Constitution was written in 1789 that they are no longer relevant because he says so? Are we to lose our rights as citizens and human beings because the laws granting them to us were written in a different time?

It is about time for the Congress, the Supreme Court, and the electorate of this country to rise up and put down this arrogant, power grabbing, failed president and put him in his place. We cannot allow a single person to decide which of our laws will be applicable to “today’s world.”

Blame from Rumsfeld

Sect. of Defense Rumsfeld, in remarks meant to counter the reports coming out that the armed forces are overextended, tried to put alot of the blame on the previous administration, which is just like a child would do when being blamed for wrongdoing by his parents.

In an apparent shot at the Democratic Clinton administration, Rumsfeld said a number of components of the armed forces were underfunded during the 1990s, "and there were hollow pieces to it. Today, that's just not the case."

Well, I guess we can thank him and the Bush administration for filling that hollow place. They filled it with over 2,100 American service bodies. Quite an accomplishment.

Bush Statements

Dear Editor:

What are we supposed to believe? Is the present Bush administration honest in its words to the American public? Let’s review just a few:

1-Iraq has WMDs and represents a mortal threat to the United States. We can’t wait for a mushroom cloud over our country.
2-Mission accomplished.
3-The insurgents are in their last throes.
4-The solution for the expected future bankruptcy of Social Security is in privatization.
5-We are not sending suspected terrorists to other countries to be tortured.
6-We had no advance warning that Hurricane Katrina posed such a threat.
7-Good job Brownie.
8-The president has never met Mr. Abramoff.
9-I did not break the law by having the NSA spy on Americans in this country.
10-No one from this administration leaked information on Valerie Plame being an operative of the CIA.
11-Ms. Meirs is fully qualified for the Supreme Court.

And that’s just a few of the public statements that the members of the administration and the president have made to “explain” their actions.

Scary isn’t it? Not as scary as the number of Americans who believe this garbage and are happy to be ruled by King George and Company.

Think I would rather have someone who did not cause harm to America and said, “I did not have sex with that woman.”

Sen. McCain on Energy

Email to Senator John McCain

Senator-

I greatly appreciate and agree with your stated views that the US cannot be held hostaage to foreign oil "whackos" such as Mr. Chavez or the grand poobah of Iran. But talk like this, it seems, is just a rehash of what has been going on for so many long years. Talk such as this (new sources of energy) has been going on since the presidency of Jimmy Carter and the OPEC oil embargo of the seventies. Nothing has been done and all we have is talk, while our importation of oil has increased in volume and percentage of usage.

When will someone like you, who I greatly admire, but don't always agree with, going to come out with firm suggestions and actions to find new sources? And I don't mean raping the Alaskan Wildlife Preserve as Baby Bush wants to do. Talk is cheap, but action in the long run is cheaper.

Bush vs. Our Constitutional Rights

Dear Editor:

On Wednesday President Bush is planning to visit the National Security Agency to bolster his claim that he has the constitutional authority to let intelligence officials listen in on international (or probably domestic too) calls of Americans. He has stated in the past that he will do whatever he deems necessary to “protect” our country against terrorism. But who is going to protect us from him?

Without legal cause or warrant will he next claim authority to open our mail that comes from another country? Will he also claim authority to break, enter, and search our homes because some unidentified person suspects we are not “good” Americans? Furthermore, will he next claim authority to arrest and jail indefinitely anyone who disagrees with his power to protect us from terrorists? Will he trample all over the freedom of the press by closing newspapers that he feels hurt his “war on terror” by reporting the truth? What if he decides that he has the constitutional authority to use the army to suspend the Congress because it will not give him the backing he needs?

Does that all sound extreme and ridiculous? Not according to his thinking and the constitutional powers he claims have precedence and override our laws. Who’s to stop him? Where does it end?

Changing House Ethics

Dear editor:

News Item: House Republicans moved to seize the initiative for ethics reform Tuesday with a comprehensive package of changes, including the banning of privately sponsored travel.

Isn’t that wonderful? Republicans who have had absolute control of the House are coming up with a plan to improve the ethics of that body. These are the same people that have been involved with lobbyists such as Jack Abramoff, involved with and encouraged the “K Street” crowd, have lost their majority leader due to questionable dealings with money and a lobbyist, had an ethics committee that has done nothing for over a year, changed the chairperson of that committee after Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX) was three times sighted for improper ethics, and Rep. Robert Ney (R-OH), chairman of the House Administration Committee, has resigned due to possible connections to admitted felon Abramoff.

Isn’t that wonderful? They are going to clean things up all by themselves. The inmates are running the asylum, and a Band-aid is going to be applied to a wide open, bleeding wound that really needs a complete operation. The sad part? It will change nothing.

Mayor Nagin Speaks to God

Letter to the Washington Post

Dear editor:

I have just read New Orleans' Mayor Ray Nagin's remarks made during the celebration of Martin Luther King's birthday. (Washington Post, Jan 17, 2006: Storms Payback From God)

Has the mayor lost his mind? I lived in New Orleans for six happy years, but would never go there again since Ray Nagin's remarks today. When did God assign Nagin the task of talking for him? Did he call him by phone? Can I get the same service from BellSouth or do I have to use my Sprint service? That man's words have now done more damage to the City of New Orleans than the hurricanes did.

And a "chocolate city?" Who would want to go to a city where the mayor is a racist.

Best for the House Republican Conference

Dear editor:

We keep reading in the newspaper that, because of the Abramoff scandal, changes are being made in Congress for the “good of the House Republican Conference.” That was the reason given by Tom DeLay for permanently stepping down from his leadership role. Statements like that are being used by those who want to replace DeLay in this all important position. Now Rep. Robert Ney, chairman of the powerful House Administration Committee, in temporarily stepping down from that position has stated, "Unfortunately, it has become clear to me in recent days that the false allegations made against me have become a distraction to the important work of the House Republican Conference.” Always the House Republican Conference.

What I would like to know is, when are these elected officials, who were put in Congress by their constituents to serve our country, going to do something that is best for the nation? Doesn’t anybody remember us? Have these so called public servants become so engulfed in re-election, power and money that what is best for the nation isn’t the driving force any more? Then why are they there?

Mr. Bush and New Orleans

Dear Editor:

Today President Bush attended a meeting in New Orleans with small business owners and local government officials, and praised the progress the city is making to rebuild after Hurricane Katrina. “I will tell you, the contrast between when I was last here and today is pretty dramatic," Bush said. "From when I first came here to today, New Orleans is reminding me of the city I used to visit."

The meeting Mr. Bush attended was in the Lower Garden District of the city which saw little or no damage from the ravaging storm. In addition, his motorcade that brought him into the city passed by stately homes that saw little or no damage from Katrina. After seeing through rose colored glasses such a carefully selected part of the city, his remarks were insulting to the displaced businesses and inhabitants of the Big Easy. It would be the same as if he went to Central Park in New York City after the disastrous attack of 9/11 on the World Trade Center and declared, “Gee, I don’t see any damage.”

Bush & Nixon

Dear editor:

Ever since 9/11 President Bush has claimed that everything that he does is “crucial to our national security,” including eavesdropping on U.S. citizens on American soil without the benefit of permission from the special FISA court, as required by law. He is quite blunt in his intentions when he states, “I will continue to do this as long as I am president of the United States.” His belief is that as President and Commander-in-Chief he is authorized to do whatever he deems necessary to protect our freedoms. That notion is nothing more than a repetition of thoughts by the only US President forced to resign his office, Richard M. Nixon, who stated, “When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.” Mr. Nixon learned otherwise, and so should Mr. Bush.

Perhaps Mr. Bush should pay more attention to the words of the respected newsman, Edward R. Murrow, who memorably told us, “We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home.”

Pat Robertson Rides Again

News Item: NORFOLK, Va. - Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson suggested Thursday that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's stroke was divine punishment for "dividing God's land. God considers this land to be his," Robertson said on his TV program "The 700 Club."

Now this money grubbing hater with the large TV following, that claims to be a man of faith, personally claims to know exactly what God’s desire and actions are. He has obviously joined those Palestinians who are celebrating Sharon’s massive stroke, albeit for different reasons.

God punished Sharon? Common sense would say it was his age, weight, stress, and office that were the major causes. Of course it could have happened due to “Intelligent Design.”

How does Robertson get all this knowledge? Maybe he has a special phone that connects to heaven. Should I call BellSouth and ask for the same service? No. Maybe because it would be a long distance call I should contact Sprint and use my cell phone for the connection.

Am I being sacrilegious? No, just trying to add a little humor to the bigoted, asinine, sacrilegious rantings of a so-called religious leader. Wouldn’t hurt if our “born again” president would denounce Mr. Robertson’s statement. But he would be afraid of losing backing from the evangelical right.

Who Me? Of Course Not.

Dear editor:

Isn't it wonderful? The president, congressmen, and senators are falling all over each other returning money that Jack Abramoff gave to their "campaigns." It is hilarious to see this rush to protect themselves (they think) and state publicly that they never did any favors in return for the money. This is political spin at its utmost. The sad part is that they will get away with so much of this and the public will put itself back into its cocoon and these thieves, who sell their constituents down the river, can be re-elected and keep their power. The people be damned.

While this story does not originate with Senator Arlen Spector (R-PA), he did repeat it on C-Span a year or so ago:

A politician is meeting with a prospective contributor and the prospect asks “What will I get if I donate $100?” The politician responds “Good Government.” Then the prospect asks “What will I get if I donate $1,000?” The politician responds “Good Government.” Then the prospect asks “What will I get if I donate $10,000?” The politician responds “Any kind of government you want.”

Sad, but a real danger today.

Immigration

The country is facing a problem with illegal immigration and the good or bad effects it has on us. I have no idea of how to solve this, but some of the "solutions" offered by the president and congress confuse the hell out of me.

In an article today in the Washington Post it is stated that, "Conservative anti-immigration advocates controlled the debate last month in the House, which passed stringent legislation calling for the construction of nearly 700 miles of fence along the Mexican border."

It wasn't that many years ago that President Ronald Reagan, credited with being the leader of conservative Republicans, stood at the Berlin Wall and uttered those famous words, "Mr. Gorbachuv, tear down this wall." Maybe Mr. Bush and the Republicans in Congress ought to read their history books. Remember what happened to the Soviet Union?

What if?

Letter to the New York Times

Dear Editor:

In an article today, Jan. 2nd, by Eric Lichtblau, President Bush is quoted as saying, "The N.S.A. program is a necessary program. I was elected to protect the American people from harm. And on Sept. 11, 2001, our nation was attacked. And after that day, I vowed to use all the resources at my disposal, within the law, to protect the American people, which is what I have been doing and will continue to do."

Mr. Bush has also said recently that he will do all in his power as a wartime president to protect America, including the NSA spying on American citizens without a court warrant, “as long as I am president.” Very commendable and protective, but it begs to bring up the extreme possibilities of ‘what if?’

‘What if’ the president felt that in order to protect Americans it would be necessary to break into people’s homes without a search warrant? ‘What if’ in order to protect America he felt he had the right to do away with trial by jury? ‘What if’ he determined that the Muslim faith was a threat to this country and closed all mosques and did away with the Constitutional provision of freedom of religion? ‘What if’ he and his administration were too important to the “war on terror” and did away with presidential elections in 2008, keeping him in office?

Ridiculous? Off the deep end? Orwellian? Far fetched? I would hope so, but he has claimed the right to do whatever he feels is right, according to his interpretation of the Constitution. He has opened the door to possibilities, and it is frightening that this man has claimed such powers for himself. Does the average American realize how dangerous this thinking is?

2006, A Personal Note

I would like to wish all those who receive my frequent writings and rantings a happy and healthy new year. Here's praying, in a non-sectarian way, we will all be around to celebrate the next one.

To me personally, it is amazing to see the year 2006. Why? Because being born in 1937 (Damn, I'm getting, or have gotten, old) I grew up mentally and emotionally sure that the 21st century was so far in the future that I would never have the opportunity to see it. Most people my age, that I speak to, agree with that thinking. After all, Buck Rogers was a prediction of things to come for our children and grandchildren. People just didn't live that long, or so it seemed. Glad I was wrong.

So here we go into the sixth year of that century I would never see.

The world is a changed place from when I was a child, some of it very good and some of it very bad. Too often our politicians in Washington make me feel like expressing the words of actor Peter Finch in the Academy Award winning 1976 movie Network, "I'm mad as hell and not going to take it any more." That's why I write so much. My computer is the cheapest psychiatrist I can find. And it doesn't talk back or disagree with me. So I'll keep on expressing my opinion.

I thank you for allowing me to bitch on your shoulder, whether you agree with me or not. That's part of the America I love. Anytime you think I've gone off the deep end, or might happen to agree with me, let me know by writing back. Or if you want to share these writings with someone who might be interested, and I hope not offended, please send me their email address and I will add them onto my distribution list. What the hell, the more the merrier.

Anyway, thank you for your patience and once again, a happy, healthy, and I hope, a peaceful new year.