Man up and take the blame.

Sometimes I think polictics is like a soap opera where all the comments each one makes is usually scripted and predictable. Take the recent noise coming from Florida and Michigan politicos about the poor people in their state not getting their vote counted. What their not mentioning is the fact that they caused the problem in the first place by moving their primaries to early. Did they really think they would get anything worthwhile from the national politicos running for president. Can you really trust anybody that runs for president? Other than George Washington I can't name a single one who I would buy a used car from.
Yes and this isn't in dispute: they were told by the national organizations who whether you think their should be a national organization or not are still running things - don't do it because your vote won't count. Life usually has consequences when you do something you are not supposed to do. Would you really like to live in a world where their is no consequences. You can be sure none of the local politicians will take the blame for this one. But that is just what they deserved. We live in a country where nobody likes to take the blame and if they do they usually like to give most of the blame to somebody or something else - the devil made me do it- doesn't he always.
Yesterday, I heard our Governor say he thought if was unfair that the voters won't have their votes counted. He wanted the national democrats to pay for that. Talk about a lot of nerve and he even said it with a strait face in an academy award performance. When the reporter told him a re-vote would be a big economic boom to Florida he said he wasn't concerned and wasn't going to spend the money. I heard and I don't know if this is true, that the whole move up the primary nonsense in Florida started with the republican leadership in Florida and that the Democrats went along with the stupidity.
I live in Florida and I am unhappy that my vote won't count. I just hope that some day my vote will count toward getting rid of my local politicos who caused this problem. If we do have some kind of a re-vote in this state I hope those politicians and their friends will man up and pay the money to correct the situation they and they alone caused. Voting isn't cheap and neither is a decent democracy.
If the Florida and Michigan politics get the DNC to pay for a re due election we will always have the same problem 4 years from now when we have another set of primaries. Get rewarded for breaking the rules will only bring a rush of me-to states into doing the same thing.

Let's Legalize Corruption

Many people in this county, me included, have lost faith in our political leadership. Who are the leaders serving? If they are not serving the voters than whom are they serving? I don’t think the average voter can answer that question.
Some times Politian’s are so blatant that most people can figure it out. Take the senior senator from Alaska - Ted Stevens. He wants to spend millions of tax payer dollars to build a bridge to an island where about 40 people live. Does anyone think that he is only concerned about those people? Who would benefits from such a misuse of money? The first answer is easy: all the construction trades and owners who filled his campaign coffers and did other things like help him rebuild his house. A less obvious answer would be what kind of future development would take place on that island and who would benefit (just like in Watergate you have to follow the money.) My only gripe is that the citizens of Alaska who keep voting for this guy should be footing the bill. I don’t live in Alaska, why should I pay for such nonsense.
Another example is a lot harder to prove. Eliot Spitzer, the Governor of New York wants to give illegal aliens (he refers to them as hard working immigrants and anyone who says different is a racist.) a driver’s license. It would take to long to go into the bad implications of such an act, but I would like to mention one thing. In New York State in order to register to vote all you need is a driver’s license. I would like to mention something about New York State. For decades the state assembly has always been democrat led. For decades the Senate has always been Republican led. Republicans and Democrats have taken their turns as Governor and finally, Eliot Spitzer is a Democrat. What would happen if thousands of illegal alien decided that voter fraud was their ticket to getting them permanent residence? Guess who they would vote for, would if be a Democrat or Republican. In NY they have a law that states that you have to be a citizen in order to vote. Why would Eliot Spitzer the chief person to represent the law in New York do something to make enforcing that law impossible? Who does Eliot Spitzer really represent, I don’t know do you?
Our politicians spend a lot of money to get elected. People give them a lot of money to get elected. People including the average citizen want something in return for their investment. Politicians know this and they know the penalty for offending their big backers, they don’t get reelected. As all of us know politicians need money to craft their image into something that is phony but will still get them elected. They need the money to demonize their opponent while making themselves look like a true patriot. If you doubt this look at George Bush Jrs’ first primary campaign again John McCain. Bush Jr. was a guy who made sure he wasn’t in Vietnam, a place where he could have gotten his head blown off. He did, according to newspaper reports, party a lot during this period which can be dangerous especially if you run red lights. His opponent John McCain not only served his country in a time of war but was a prisoner of war. I doubt if very few of us would have held up under torture the way he did and still kept their dignity. Yet who did the voters think was weak on national defense and as we know in this country anybody who is weak on national defense never gets elected.
I believe most politicians think the voters are pretty stupid and can be easily manipulated. I don’t the average citizen is that stupid but clearly the average citizen is not paying attention to what is going on. Clearly you have to pay a lot of attention and even then you may not catch everything. Worse, a lot of people don’t vote- especially in the local elections. In Fort Piece they are having an important election in December to elect the next Mayor. Fort Piece is in a pivotal time in its develop and this election will produce someone who will move us forward or take us back, yet according to a recent newspaper article only 22% of the voters vote in local elections. Even people who vote often vote for a personality and don’t really listen to the answers these people give to people who interview them. At a minimum voters should be listening to shows like “Meet the Press” The questions on Meet the Press are always well research but seldom do the politicians ever answer the question. Usually they will go on about something else that always demonizes their opponent. The guy asking the questions always lets them get away with it because if he gave them the full interrogation they deserve he would never get anyone on his show and would be out of a job. You have to pay attention to what they are not saying and why are they evading the answer.
So if the average politician is representing someone other than the voters and the voters don’t want to get involve enough to find out whose going to throw them the greater amount of bread crumbs, what is the only alternative.
I like to call my plan legalized corruption. The idea behind this plan is to allow unlimited money contributions to each candidate. Also get rid of their salaries and fat perks, let the people who brought them pay for everything. The only rule the candidates have to follow is they have to disclose who is giving them the money and they have to state that any political decisions they make will be based on who gives them the most money. We already know this is going on but at least we won’t have to listen to phony statements by the candidates about how they are only here for Joe Citizen and not some moneyed interest. Normally we would think that only filthy rich billionaires would be the big contributors, but in this plan filthy rich unions and citizen groups could also play a part.
How would this plan work, you ask? Let’s say candidate X and Y and Z are running for a house seat that would cover the area around Lake Okeechobee and the city of Fort Pierce (no such area, I know).
Candidate X gets his money from the international mud runners association of America. He has promised them if he gets elected that he or she will generate legislation that would drain Lake Okeechobee so they could make one gigantic mud running track so that the group could run grand prix mud racing. In addition he is getting money from a consortium of fast food outlets and cheapie motels that would ring the former lake with appropriate tourist venues that would give much needed jobs to the area. The most controversial part of this plan is that they need to detonate a nuclear bomb six miles below the surface in order to have enough space to drain the water. Some Liberal do-gooder groups think this might taint the water. FissionsRUS the company blowing everything up has assured the candidate that its technicians will test the water and find it to be clean as spring lake water. Local developers are excited about this plan because all the developers who are contributing to candidate X (which is pretty much everyone) will get free water to build more lakes in their developments (snowbirds love this kind of stuff.) As a sop to the few liberals in the areas he is also getting money from a group that wants to stage a mudtistic art fiesta. Candidate X isn’t getting any money from groups looking to get rich off of Fort Pierce but he has promised the locals there that they will get discount tickets to all the mud racing events.
Candidate Y on the other hand doesn’t have the grandiose plans of Candidate X. He gets his money from the sugar growers who simply need an area to dump their waste into. Being a concerned republican he also gets money from a private company that specializes in running cities (The Company doesn’t have a Robocop, but they are pretty close to creating one.) They want to get rid of the mayor and city commissioners of Fort Pierce and turn the city into an urban version of Disney land. No more private boats in the marina, they need to be converted to private rides for the tourists. He wants to liberalize the eminent domain laws: pretty radical stuff for a conservative.
Candidate Z is a decent hard working individual who won't take graft and wants to do a lot of good stuff for the people in this area. Unfortunately someone snap a picture of him crying at a Barbara Striesand concert and after that the blogs were full of posts about him being gay. Candidate Z has since dropped out of the race.
Obviously you as a voter have a difficult choice but at least you know what each candidate will do once they get elected. You can break your promises to voters, especially if you make vague promises but people who give you a lot of money don’t let you get off with vague promises and they are not the sort people you want to cross.
How much of this I actually believe or don’t believe is not the point. The point is the present political system doesn’t elect people we would want to buy a used car from. I have spent a lifetime observing unions, associations and the political system and one thing is pretty clear with few exceptions: all these groups reflect the member’s interest or lack of interest. If you don’t care enough to make your leaders accountable the only thing your leaders will care about is themselves. Or your leaders may talk a good game but what’s the gap between their promises and what they actually deliver on. No political payoff left behind; unfortunately that is often the truth.

McCain flies over the question

In early June I received a letter from John McCain. He had a lot more to say than John Edwards but everything in his letter was his usual talking points. Send in more troops but stay the course. As usual he states, "we will face potentially catastrophic consequences if we fail." He is probably right but after several thousand troops have died and billions wasted on the war, what are the only possible outcomes. Either a partitioned country or Iran becoming the real power in the country. Do we need any more Americans to die for either kind of outcome. Oh yes for our elected officials in the next election most will be worrying about their own,"potentially catastophic consequences"(loosing their own priviledge feeding spot at the public trough.)
I had a lot of respect for Senator McCain when he was maverick trying to make government more responsible and efficient. However since he started talking like George Bush I have to wonder about him and I don't know why he thinks he will get elected.
I also admired his courage and conviction as a prisoner of war. Don't know if I could have showed the guts that he did. But he was a pilot that dropped bombs on people. It's hard to know the real effect of what you are doing from several thousand feet up. It's a lot different on the ground where if you kill a mother and child you're going to have to look at their faces from close up. On the ground you get to see hate and determination up close and personal and it looks like Iraq has as much of that as Vietnam did during that war.

Form letter from John Edwards

Around April 16th I received a letter from John Edwards. He dodged my question but he did state, "We must all restore America's moral leadership in the world, starting with the war in Iraq." What does that mean I guess it could mean whatever your want it to mean. To Edwards credit he did say his vote to authorize the invasion of Iraq was a mistake, but has he really learned from the Iraq fiasco. He seemes like another candidate who wants to be the leader of the free world. Personnaly I'm looking for a candidate who wants some other country to lead the world(Send in the Chinese troops, they want to be a big deal, let them earn it the hard way). Don't know about you but I haven't made a dime from having a leader of the free world. But the question I'm going to ask you Mr Edwards is if you are the commander and chief of all our troops are you going to get a service haircut or are you still going to get a $300 haircut. What do you get for your $300 bucks?
If you want the full talking points.
http://www.hempictures.com/John%20Edwards.htm

Presidential Candidates, please respond

I sent letters to the following people upon advise that political people would be more inclined to respond if they received a letter rather than an email.
Current Senators: Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Christopher Dodd, Sam Brownback and Chuck Hagel. Some of these senators I think Chuck Hagel and Brownback may have already dropped out. I really don't understand why senators run for president they can talk a lot and they do, but can they run a county.
Current Representatives: Dennis Kucinich( I was really surprised that he didn't respond to my letter.) , Ron Paul( thought he would also respond.)
Governor: Bill Richardson. I have to laugh when Hillary Clinton talks about having more experience than Barack Obama because so does everyone else. If she ever gets elected I hope she makes Richardson VP so at least someone knows what their doing. I may end up voting for her. My decision will probably be based on my least baggage rule.
Ex Whatevers: Mitt Romney, Rudy Giulliani, Mike Gravel, John Cox and Duncan Hunter.
I was hoping that some of the candidates who were doing poorly in the poll would respond and eventually the ones doing good would respond to the charges made by the ones doing poorly. Dennis you missed your chance for some more exposure.

Looking for an answer

Of course I didn't expect anyone to answer the question, at least without a lot of proding. But I was disappointed that my local congressman didn't respond after he promised to respond to all his constituents-shame-shame. Two predsidential candidates did respond and I will make separate posts about the talking points letters I received from them.

3/26/2007
To: Senator Mel Martinez, Senator Bill Nelson and Congressman Tim Mahoney.

From: Citizen (X)
I want to talk about the Iraq war but only as a prelude to the larger question: under what conditions should we invade another country if that country hasn't done something to justify an invasion (i.e. Pearl Harbor, 9-11). The implication is under what conditions we can say a specific government needs to be changed.
I am sending this letter to all my federal elective officials but I am also sending out letters to all the presidential candidates and every news outlet I can think of. I know someone is going to respond and I will print their letter at my website (www.hempictures.com) and send a copy of their response to the media. I'm not asking them to explain why they voted (the ones that did) or didn't vote for the war. I'm asking them to step up to the plate and at least pretend they are a statesman and put themselves on record by stating under what conditions we should be invading a county and what are the sacrifices the American people and not a small group of Americans(our soldiers and their families) have to pay for that invasion.
George Bush jr. and his neo con cronies were right about one thing, we can't let terrorists live in their little fantasy world to plots their stupid attacks on humanity like they were doing in Afghanistan. If you don't want someone leaving a suitcase nuke bomb in one of our major cities then you have to keep these guys on the run and fearful of someone pounding their door down at three in the morning. If George Bush jr. had been able to give enough resources to the Afghan war because he didn't invade Iraq, Bin Laden would have been dead by now and a lot of the people involved in heroin would have had to find a new source for smack. Yes, there still would have been terrorists still plotting to kill Americans but on a lower level and the terrorists leaders would absolutely know that if they went too far America would go after them and the country that harbored them.
One could go on and on about how George Bush jr. invaded a country under fall pretenses and mismanaged the war to such extents that the only choices left are horrible or bad. Yes, jr. helped make the Iranians the big power in the area. Was that his definition of victory in Iraq? After the Gulf war when Bush Sr. got a lot Iraq's killed by urging a regime chance and doing nothing to help the Iraq's the Iranians also sat back and let their fellow Shiite brothers get slaughtered, nobody has asked the question why. Surely at that point the Iranians could have easily toppled Saddam's government and would have had a justified reason for taking action. Something to think about as our soldier’s die over there.
When we leave as we most certainly will before the 2008 presidential elections the Shiites will get their revenge and wipe out a huge chunk of the Sunnis after they kick out all of the international news outfits. Forget about moderate Shiites saving the Sunnis, thanks to Jr., most of the moderates are either dead or have left the country. The only people left in Iraq are the fearful and the people they fear. Nobody is going to mess with the Shiites because again thanks to Jr., their Iranians buddies will be the big power in the area because we put the Shiites in power when we got rid of Saddam. I don’t think it is a coincidence that most of the Shiite leaders lived in exile in Iran during Saddam’s time in power. But that is nothing compared to a terrorist religious leader (do you know who?) who according to news reports gets his funding from Iran and has several of his people in the government.
In the end Iraq will become a partitioned country with the Shiites dependent on Iran, the Sunnis dependent on Syria and Saudi Arabia and the Kurds dependent on the United States. The Shiites will get the oil in the south, the Kurds will get the oil in the north and the Sunnis will get to know the Arab version of a popular expression that explains how the world works: Payback is a bitch baby. Yes, oil is the only thing we the Iraqi government, the insurgent and the terrorists consider sacred. Ever wonder why those nutty terrorists haven’t destroyed the oil fields. I only have a superficial knowledge of world affairs so if I can grasp the fact that the Shiites are never going to give the Sunnis nothing more than impotent power because of what the Sunnis in power did to them why couldn't the Bush jr. administration know what was going to happen? This is another county the Europeans created and profited on and we tried to do the same thing only to be stuck with the mess. Both the Republicans and Democrats are trying to blame each other for this disaster. In a moral world anybody who voted for or instigated this mess should have fallen on their sword for going along with what they probably knew was wrong. You don't need to be a big time Harvard political analyst to know what was going to happen. The average citizen doesn’t pay attention to these things until it is too late, that is why we pay taxes to support a government that does.
Certainly one book could never explain what George Bush Jr. has done to our country by invading Iraq. No it would take a "Lord of the Rings" trilogy to explain that. The world will probably never know why Jr. invaded Iraq. The frightening thing is it may be only because Saddam Hussein tried to have his father assassinated. Aside from the soldiers who died or became mentally or physically destroyed and the families who had to share the sorrows and burden of such a useless war we have all the people who George Bush jr. made fools of: specifically his own party and yes, thanks to George Bush jr. and their own stupidity the Republican party is now going to assume its' rightful place in politics as a second tier party- yes the rich and the loony's on the religious right need someone to represent them. Let's also not forget the media who climbed into bed(Oh I meant to say imbedded.) with the President in order to boost their ratings and the various world leaders who climbed on the George Bush jr. freedom express and who are now or going to be forgettable footnotes to their countries history. And don't forget the Democrat party, whose bumbling and lack of leadership skills let him get elected both times. And lastly don't forget the American people who believed a used car salesman only years later to find out they brought a lemon. And yes, I have to live with the fact that even though I didn't vote for jr. either time, the second time I knew what direction he was taken the country and I should have done something to see he didn't get reelected. Nobody wants to say thousands of lives from the best army in the world have been wasted in a venture as futile as “The Charge of the Light Brigade”, at a cost of billions of dollars thrown down a sinkhole of corruption, but I ask you: what has the average citizen gotten out of this adventure. "Mission Accomplished", I don't think so.
Iraq is only one misadventure out of many others. I ask what the average citizen has gotten out of all these invasions. I remember the Vietnam War when our leaders gave us the domino theory: if we don't stop them in Vietnam those bloodthirsty and godless commies are going to start landing on the shores of California. Yes, over 50,000 of our soldiers died and millions more lives were destroyed and I am still waiting for those godless commies to invade our shores. Some of our exalted leaders say there is no connection between Vietnam and the Iraq war. If they were in Vietnam like congressman Murtha instead of using political connections and money to keep them home safe and sound, they would have seen a connection and realized we had no business then as well as now to be in the middle of a civil war unless we want to turn the place into a parking lot. I didn't go to Vietnam because I enlisted in the Army when I became 18 and was out before the buildup began. Because the draft was in effect and we didn't have an all volunteer army for leaders of the free world to use as mercenaries, I didn't have to worry about some clever official like Rumsfield (Remember how brilliant our government told us he was and how lucky we were to have him as secretary of war.) back door drafting me to Vietnam a couple of years later. If that had happened there is a good chance this letter wouldn’t be written because I would be dead. I know rich people always make a lot of money from these types of wars, but what does the average citizen get out of other people having their lives destroyed? I would certainly like our elected officials to answer that question with clear and concrete facts I can understand. I am not a graduate of a privileged private school so vague concepts like fighting over there instead of here which can’t be proven either way are beyond my limited understanding of the world.
Remember sending troops to Lebanon, Haiti, Somalia, Vietnam, Kuwait and South Korea (All right maybe not South Korea; I was able to buy a Hyundai). Remember not sending troops to Iran, Syria, Cuba, Zimbabwe, and most importantly Sudan and Rwanda. Why did we put our forces in one country but not another country and who really benefited by all this activity, surely it wasn't the average citizen.
I believe there has to be a point where we shouldn't tolerate what a country is doing. In short if a country is doing one of the things listed below than a regime change or new direction for that regime is needed. Unlike our political leadership (both parties) I don't see any benefits to being the leaders of the free world and the world's only remaining superpower. I also believe America shouldn't be the world's police force. Right now our forces are all over the world. And I would certainly like to know, how many, where and most importantly-why. What are we going to do if North Korea decides this is the best time to invade South Korea?
The answer to that question and when to invade another country won’t be answered by the United States alone. No, sad to say, these questions won’t be answered until Russia and China get a little more democracy and stop following policies that are shortsighted but won't benefit them in the long run. I would even go further, let the Chinese become the world leaders, let them send in the troops and let their troops get killed or have their lives destroyed, let the rest of the world hate them. Urge them to build a world trade center so some terrorists can blow it up. The Chinese along with the rest of the world have gotten a free ride because they have been content to play back seat driver and let us play leader of the free world, let someone else lead. I am sure our average citizen can see some benefit to that.
Eventually the Chinese along with the Russians are going to realize that if they don't want someone leaving a suitcase nuke bomb in one of their cities then at least for some of the things listen below they are going to assume responsibility and put their soldiers at risk. As we have found out in Iraq only the most powerful countries working together can put enough forces into a country to achieve their objectives. Invading a country is ugly business not a Bush jr. PR event, first you crush them then you build them up, in-between a lot of people get killed or thrown in prison. I'm not saying force our style of democracy to a country. I am saying keep doing any of the things listed below and there will be a regime change. I realize there are a lot of other nasty things a country can do to its’ citizens but those listed below are the things that will affect another country and/or are things that shouldn’t be tolerated. It is one thing to say a country is doing something bad and it is another to say we will sacrifice our soldiers and do something about it. All the things listed below are equally important:
1. We will not tolerate a country that slaughters their citizens such as happened in Sudan and Rwanda. I think we have reached the point when we shouldn't tolerate that type of behavior. If Bush had sent the troops into Sudan most Americans would have backed him and would have understood the reason for sending in troops. But he didn’t, I guess Sudan doesn't have oil and poor rural people being slaughtered don’t generate much PR. It is much easier to hide behind a useless organization like the UN. It would be interesting if someone could add up the amount of press time given to Anna Nicole Smith and compare that with the amount of time given to Darfur. If it wasn't for people like George Clooney the amount of coverage would be even less.
2. We will not tolerate a country that harbors terrorists (Afghanistan, Pakistan) or supplies money and support to them (Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Iran). Unfortunately terrorists won't leave us alone. We can't afford to let them have their little fantasy world where they can train and live the good life in-between killing women and children. The Bush jr. group was also right about another thing: doing nothing while the terrorists killed our soldiers, kidnaps our civilians and blew up our buildings did not encourage them to achieve their aims through the political process. When we invaded Afghanistan they finally got the message. Our leaders like to tell us we haven’t had a large scale terrorist attack because we invaded Iraq. If most of the terrorists’ leaders who attacked us were in Afghanistan, shouldn’t that be the main reason?
3. We will not tolerate another country that decides to develop nuclear power as a weapon. Countries that already have nuclear power as a weapon, including the United States, have to be monitored. Terrorists leaders aren't concerned with how many people they kill they are only concerned with their own safety. If they get their hands on a suitcase nuke bomb they will use it if they think they can get away with it. Don't ever confuse them with the morons charged with exploding the bomb. And it doesn’t take much brainpower to figure out that any scumbag country that thinks they can get away with it will supply those terrorists with a nuke bomb.
4. We will not tolerate countries (Afghanistan, Columbia, Mexico) that either won't or can't stop the exporting of drugs to any country. It's not only that drugs are evil, but the other stuff that goes with it such as supporting corruption, terrorists activities, murder and the collapse of a society are just wrong. We have a lot of people in this country that buy and sell drugs and we need to change people and our culture of addiction or put them in jail, but first we need to go after those countries that make their living from our weakness.
None of these things will take place until China and Russia change; while we are waiting we need to put our money into protecting ourselves. A secure border would be a good start. Until then let some other country put their troops at risk around the world. Maybe if someone told me in concrete provable facts why we need to be the only world police then maybe I will change my tune. I see rich companies like Halliburton and energy producers making money, but what has the average citizen made out of our government’s policies. Getting cheap clothes made by slave labor in China and other places doesn't compensate for destroying our manufacturing base and with that most of our middle class. I think the average citizen who has to work for a living understands in a very personal way the end result of such policies.
Citizen (X) is very interested in what you have to say.
Richard Hemingway. Web site: www.22fishermanswharf.com
Email: richard@hempictures.com