Bourgeois Deviant

A ripe example would be Rep. Monique Davis and people who agree with her.

See why.

I wonder if she recalls this:

The Constitution of the United States

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Update: Surfing around teh intairwebs, I stumbled upon this article by Sam Harris that is very much in line with the story above. While it is an antecedent, it follows nicely

Labels: Athiesm, Bible thumpers, Constitution, First Amendment, Rapture Crowd, Rep. Monique Davis, Sam Harris

Courtesy of MoveOn.

This should be posted everywhere and played daily to remind people how wrong our country's state of affairs is and who is responsible for them. At the very least, two things are abundantly clear. The situation then is as it was when we began this Iraq War, and it was clearly the wrong thing to do for more reasons than I or the past Mr. Cheney can list. It is also evidence of the hypocrisy and hubris of those in power. This war was not in our national interest and only in the interest of a handful of willfully delusional idealistic plutocrats with no personal blood or treasure to risk.

Mr. Cheney's words then reinforce my belief now that both he and Mr. Bush should be impeached. This is not to say they should be prosecuted for their duplicity, hubris and reckless endangerment our nation. These two men and the sycophants around them have destabilized the balance of power in the United States Government. In the eyes of some, they have come as close to engineering an imperial presidency as we may (hopefully) ever see. It is certainly more so this case and done with less cause than the Lincoln administration, which had cause aplenty.

Again, it is not for ridding us of these two men that we should impeach, however appealing that may be. It is for what they have done to the executive branch. This is a reason that many conservatives can and should support impeachment. Here's why: What Bush and Cheney have done is to forge an entire new set of powers for the executive branch that, if not prosecuted before the end of their term will, in effect, stand as a consent by the Congress and legal precedent as a tool set for the next executive to inherit the office. So, all you so called conservatives out there and your like, if things continue to go the way they are in the '08 Presidential race, a Democrat will be able to do all the things Bush and Cheney have done and little to nothing can be done to stop them. Once precedent is established, it is extremely difficult to overturn. And you won't have the lack of intestinal fortitude and general flaccidity of your party to blame when you cry foul.

Power is the reason for everything in this argument for impeaching Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney. For or against, power and the ability to wield it or keep it in check as the framers of the Constitution wished it is what is at stake. Some days ago, Mr. Edwards was answering questions from the public and impeachment came up. He stated he was against it because of what it did to the national government overall during the Clinton administration. Basically he said it rendered our government ineffective by grinding it to a halt as it concentrated on the proceeding. That is a perfectly good and strong argument when one is arguing against impeaching the chief executive over concealing a marital infidelity that had little to no bearing on the nation aside from tabloid titillation and shallow moral pandering for political gain.

The stakes are higher now. The principles and precedents on which our nation has been built have been trampled upon and that needs to be addressed and remedied. You have to be naive or willfully blind to think that any candidate for president isn't mindful of how the office has changed over the last six years and the powers they could potentially inherit. It is sheer folly to think that any politician would volunteer to give up such power despite how virtuous they might profess to be.

So conservatives, ask yourself if you want a Democrat to be able to do all the things Mr. Bush and his cabal have done. Progressives should be asking if they truly want to right the wrongs of the last two terms. Also, if you were for impeaching Mr. Clinton over wrongly concealing a private sexual transgression, you should be equally, if not more so in favor of impeaching Mr. Bush for putting our country in such peril, on so many levels, in such a deliberate and calculated fashion. If you disagree with the latter, you are, in this blogger's opinion, in the avant-garde in leading the charge that is the United States' hastening decline as a world power and a great, "moral" nation.

Labels: Bush, checks and balances, Cheney, Clinton Administration, Constitution, Impeachment, Iraq, John Edwards, MoveOn.org, presidential powers

For the first time in recent memory, I actually woke up from a bad dream. I don't recall the specifics, but thats not what is important as to why I write this now. What woke me up was the disquieting feeling that my country was unraveling and the world didn't care. In fact, it seemed like the world welcomed it.

Now dreams, direful or otherwise, are seemingly the subconscious mind's attempt to catalog the days events. Mrs. Deviant and BFD went out to see the Grands and left me to my own devices for the weekend. So, what's a 30 something father to do on a Friday night? Go on a news binge of course.

I watched and read a great deal of news content. The News Hour, Washington Week, NOW, TDS, and Bill Moyers. In addition, I read some news from the Times and Post. What stuck with me were George Tenet's book release and the ever brewing Attorney Generals' scandal. The latter was of particular interest to me as I was privy to a private email exchange earlier in the week that left deep impression on me. Though I have no permission to do so, I feel compelled to reprint a few excerpts. The identity of its generator(s) shall remain anonymous. What I viewed last night and the following are responsible for the dreams that woke me.

It is difficult for anyone who believes in truth, facts and government to make sense of this crowd [The Bush Administration] because they do not believe in any of those things. They believe in an ideology; and they have faith in that ideology. You know well the dangers of faith, in anything. Nothing else matters. Anything that does not conform to the ideology either gets warped until it does or ignored.

They are also arrogant: and were allowed to remain so during the 6 years the Republicans controlled Congress. There were no - understand what I said, NO - oversight hearings during all that time. Now, however, there are lots of oversight hearings. Now, the Constitutional system of checks and balances is starting to work. And now it is hard for this crowd to adjust their ideological world to a world where truth, facts and government are valued...

... Yes, it is sad and serious what has happened to the Justice Department. What kind of a statement is it when the President says that he has renewed confidence in the Attorney General "...because he has not committed any crime...."? What kind of a lesson is it when the Attorney General not only uses but abuses the time honored tactic for avoiding a perjury charge, i.e., " I don't remember/I have no recollection, etc."?

The Justice Department leadership has been captured by politicians who surround themselves with young, inexperienced, like-minded, :"baby ideologues", who graduated from Christian focused law schools. And [Gonzales] is right when he says he doesn't know who made various decisions. That is because no ONE person in that circle makes a decision. The circle does: and circles don't leave fingerprints or records. Why should they? It's not just to avoid indictment/impeachment. It's mostly about Group Think according to the ideology. If you are 'with us' fine: if not, you and your views don't count.

The career lawyers at the Department are just waiting it out. What else can they do? If they raise a public protest, they loose their jobs. They are not paid enough to be able to afford that.

On the decision to go to war that Tenet was, seemingly, an integral part of despite his recent and perhaps flaccid disavowal...

... No one in the Executive Branch - or their advisers - had any blood that would be exposed if we went to war. No one ( with one or two exceptions ) in the Congress did, either. Nor did most Americans. The fighting and dying would be done by those in our society who did not know how to register their views. Most of them had enough to do to make ends meet. Their lives, like those of their parents and grandparents, were ones in which they learned how to make the best of what happened TO them. They don't know how to make something ELSE happen to - much less FOR - them.

And why did the decision-makers in both active branches of our government let themselves decide to start a war based on a lie? Because it was the easy thing to do. People were still scared because of 9/11. And no one had the guts to tell the American people that there is no such thing as a risk free society: and that bad things happen not only elsewhere, but also here...

In closing and a statement I wholeheartedly believe to be true:

... Unless we start investing our own well being more closely with our political decisions, we are going to continue to decline as a Nation.

Other people should realize this and quickly.

Bill Moyers asked Jon Stewart if all of his work in examining and parodying the media has made him lose his innocence. His response was that he thought a person lost their innocence the day their first child is born. Not that I was unaware, uncaring or even innocent before, but since becoming a father nine months ago, the depth of my concern and worry about where our country is headed, the nation where my son will grow up, has increased many fold. By necessity, my innocence has become a thing of the past.

Labels: 9/11, Alberto Gonzales, American news media, BFD, Bush Administration, Congress, Constitution, dreams, faith, George Tenet, Hubris, ideological extremists, Jon Stewart, Republicans, War on Terror

I was cruising some of the familiar and friendly bloggosphere and read a fine passage by PK. If you follow the link, he’s talking about conservatives (namely George Will) trying to say that progressives were wrong to oppose the Iraq war despite the mistake that it really is. It’s a good read and worth the time spent.

I took the time to comment about it and got hooked on the concept of blowback. Now, if you are unfamiliar with the term, in the context that I mean to use it, it simply means the unintended consequences of actions taken. This is going to take a while, but bear with me… To broadly generalize, the United States of America meddles in the policy and sovereignty of oil producing Muslim nations. This pisses a great many of the Muslim peoples off. The culture is not inhospitable, but it is xenophobic, for lack of a better term, against outsiders. American presence is seen as imperialistic and, consequently, nationalism in the Muslim nation rises, as does religious fervor.

America doesn’t pay attention to this because its primary concern, its agenda, is to pursue, secure and maintain its interests. The benefit is primary, but the possible detriment to the citizenry is seemingly a distant peripheral. So, smaller groups of people in these Muslim nations get rich as Croesus and run an oppressive style of government that are counter to the culture and wishes of its populace. But this doesn’t matter to America because the goods are being delivered at a favorable price and American citizens can enjoy the highest standard of living the planet have ever witnessed. Cake is abundant and edible as well for the U.S.A.

This status quo goes on for more than 50 years. Five decades plus of profit, opulence, entitlement, oppression and consequential resentment go by. The reaction of the oppressed and/or nationalistic peoples of the Muslim nations grow more intolerant. A figurehead with great wealth rises up and taps into the xenophobic zeitgeist and vows to attack the infidel and reclaim the land that “God” gave them. This guy isn’t necessarily right, but his attitudes are a direct product of implemented policies by his and our countries. Vows to take action are made by him and an infectiously growing number of his supporters.

In keeping with the cultural and religious values of his people, this figurehead operates within the precepts of his religion and his religion’s laws. He is extremely open and clear about goals and objectives. He makes no attempts to hide these or the reasons he pursues them. America takes note. They see this danger, but don’t regard it as a viable threat despite knowing the players and having full knowledge about the extent of their training because earlier American interests warranted us training and supplying them. Hubris maintains arrogance and nothing changes save for closer monitoring of the situation. The American public remain blissfully ignorant.

Jihad is staring America in the face and little is done. A strike is made at the U.S. An unsuccessful but jarring bombing of the WTC crosses the American consciousness. Later, a U.S. naval vessel is hit successfully by suicide bombers and American service men and women die. The sitting President Clinton won’t tolerate the slap given and orders a strike on a target where the figurehead, Osama bin Laden, is reported to be. The intelligence is faulty and a factory is hit, killing many innocents. Ire towards the United States grows in the Muslim world. Jihad is emboldened.

President Clinton favors the use of force to curtail bin Laden’s efforts to strike the U.S. This intention is hampered by a military unwilling to commit. With this conflict of interest, other avenues are not sought to head off the danger that faces America. That is to say that the policies and relationships that have fattened America to its current state of opulence at the expense of other nations that have created dangerous ire are not modified in the slightest because of the desire to maintain the status quo. Lack of sustainability is a fact, but not one anybody chooses to face yet. The wind has decidedly changed but no one can or will take heed of what is blowing our way.

Administrations change and America is now under Bush. A chief executive who was not popularly elected but appointed by the judicial branch. A man who has never left the country and has zero foreign policy experience that willingly chooses to surround himself with people who, for the most part, ascribe to some of the scariest foreign policy ideas this nation has ever known. Then, whilst floundering through the infancy of the G.W. Bush presidency, America gets hit with the world assault/crime ever perpetrated by a foreign power. Nearly 3,000 people lose their lives in a matter of a few hours.

Within 24 hours, we know a great deal and are making plans for retaliation. Afghanistan in our sights, promises are made to capture and/or kill those responsible for attacking us. No one questions why we were hit. No one asks about how this happened beyond the procedural steps made to conduct the attack and the who’s and how’s of its creation and implementation. With blame firmly placed and public sentiment solidly behind the action, retaliation is swift and devastating. It was clearly justified and, for Osama bin Laden’s part, totally expected.

The Taliban falls and some terrorists are captured and/or killed, but not bin Laden. The primary goal is not accomplished, nor will it be. The promise remains unfulfilled and the threat is still present and arguably stronger that it was at the time of the fall of the Twin Towers. All that is given to the American people is the promise that bin Laden will be brought to justice and that the security of America is the primary job and goal of our government. It wasn’t before then?

The jihad against the U.S.A. has been going on for years. America only now fully engages it. Too bad its second leg, Iraq, was the wrong place entirely with no hope of a positive outcome. Still, no one demands a full answer to the obvious question. Why has all this happened? The question has been continually preempted by Bush and his administration with a palatable answer. “They hate our freedom.” This is surely not wrong, but it is also not the right answer. Hating our freedom is peripheral. It is not what caused all this. If they just hated our freedom, you would see more flag burning and effigy hanging. No one asks themselves rationally, what would make people want to kill themselves and thousands of others in a hateful act like 9/11? For someone to offer the rational answer of “our freedom” is folly and the epitome of myopic thinking.

Every attack on the United States of America by Islamic jihadists has been made because America, through its foreign policy and support of some governments over others, has meddled, oppressed and violated the peoples and sovereignty of other countries in some fashion or another. For a nation that espouses the virtues of liberty and freedom, our diplomatic and commercial interests are, at their cores, completely counter to those ideologies. America’s actions are out of step with the ideals by which it was founded and that incongruity is now costing the people of the United States of America blood and treasure over and above what the American citizenry are willing to pay. Is this current war worth all of that?

Again, the crux of it is blowback. Americans are used to a certain lifestyle. In order to sustain that lifestyle, interests and resources are needed. Those needs are fulfilled through rather entrenched policy and actions taken to secure interests in places (i.e. Iraq, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, etc…) that we are not entirely welcome. If you want the shirt off of someone’s back and take it without their consent or fair compensation, expect resentment and a kick to somewhere that will hurt.

With or without our consent, the United States made this situation. So, rather than bickering who is for or against the war, concentrate on accurately identifying the problems. Instead of questioning who supports what and who’s right or wrong in their support and when that was, realize that there is a simple choice to be made. Either endure the blowback of our unsustainable policies as part of the price of maintaining an imperial style republic or change the policies of this nation so as not to oppress foreign peoples and work towards making this nation a self sufficient and continuing example of what our Constitution mandates: a more perfect union that truly establishes justice, insures domestic tranquility, provides for the common defense, promotes the general welfare and secures the blessings of liberty to not only ourselves, but others, and the attainment of a mutual posterity.

Labels: Afghanistan, bin Laden, Blowback, British Invasion, Constitution, Croesus, George Will, god, Hubris, Jihad, liberty, Muslims, President Clinton, Saudi Arabia, security, Taliban, WTC, xenophobia