I support the troops ... because I was one. I know who they are. I respect them. For the most part, "our troops" are young Americans, even some immigrants, who truly love this Country and don the uniform believing their effort and, potentially, their sacrifice is the price of freedom .... not only for themselves, but for the continued greatness of this Country that we love.

Bush is the Commander in Chief. Bush therefore bears responsibility for his decisions as CIC. Bush committed a huge tactical and strategic mistake by invading Iraq and he did so for reasons that were either a) based on gross incompetence; or b) intentionally recklessness. In either event, he should be relieved of command.

I was a Republican, but I'm voting straight Democrat. That doesn't mean I will ALWAYS be a Democrat. It only means I reserve the right to exercise my choice and vote from time to time for the person or party I think best suited for the job of managing my country. After all, I AM AN AMERICAN first and foremost and certainly above any affiliation to a single political party. I may vote Repubican again one day, but not until they Clean up the party!

Bush lied about WMD. They purposely confused the difference between the War on Terror and a war with Iraq. Those are two different issues.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09

"We should replay that interview as often as possible," chortled Republican strategist Nelson Warfield on Tuesday. "In this election there's been a lot of worry among Republicans about whether our base is motivated and is going to turn out to vote," Warfield said. "Nothing motivates the Republican base more than some puffy pontification from Bill Clinton. When he has a little fit on TV, it reminds us of the future that awaits if the Democrats should ever win another national election."

***
They wouldn't try to blame Clinton for 9/11 just to piss him off? This guy is openly ringing pavlov's bell, so confident is he that his "base" is so well trained to hate Clinton (that's right, to HATE a U.S. President) that they will turn out to vote Republican no matter how utterly terrible the current Administration...the executive, the senate and the congress ... all Republican controlled for six years .... turn out to be.

From an earlier blog entry, I suggested that oil companies donate their record profits to our war effort, establishing a benefits trust for the men and women in uniform who have and continue to make the real sacrifices on the ground in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. What better way to say this is not an oil war than to donate these profits to those who have done more than merely invest in oil.
Jen suggested I create an online petition, which I delayed until now.
If you wish to read/sign, click here:

http://new.petitiononline.com/cgi-bin/create_petition.cgi

As Exxon/Mobil celebrates unprecedented profits from last year, indeed, setting a record for U.S. Corporate profits in a single year (exceeding $30B), I think American's should call on the beneficiaries of these dividends to donate them to our war effort, either by paying off some of the huge debt we've incurred in the Iraq war or by establishing a trust for Veteran's benefits.

What better way to say "This is NOT an oil war" than to donate the profits from an unstable oil market to those who have risked (and lost) life and limb in Iraq and Afghanistan.

One year's profits is a paltry thing to ask in comparison to the risks we ask our young men and women in uniform to take on our behalf.  One year's profits, a small dent in the 401K portfolio, is miniscule by comparison and, frankly, it's the least we can do.

This is an essay I wrote just before the Iraq war started and after a debate with Howard Bloom, in which we discussed the idea that the Iraq invasion would degrade into religious polarization and widespread warfare.  These are just some thoughts I had on the importance of religious tolerance and the key role that FREEDOM of/from religion MUST play in any ordered democracy.

Those with whom I've shared this essay have encouraged me to post it.  Since this is the only place I post my writings, I leave it to you to comment, pass on, shoot down or .... whatever.

Thoughts on the history of Religion:  Its Evolution and Relevance to our Constitution

I've never felt worse than when I make a mistake or do something so stupid that my daughter looks at me like she's disapointed and expected better of me. That kind of look cuts me to the core because I love her and, fundamentally, I know when she's right.   And the truth is, whenever that happens, I double my efforts to live up to her expectations.  Everyone makes a mistake, I guess, but as they say, only fools repeat them. 

I feel that the anti-American sentiment growing like a weed throughout the world is very similar. It's been my experience (in Saudi, Egypt, Somalia, Germany, Mexico, Canada) that most people, in most countries, historically admired the U.S., if not in detail, at least in principle.  And by that I mean they fundamentally appreciate the signifcance of a country based on self-determination, where everyone is supposed to have a voice and the government is supposed to be comprised of the people, working for the people, guaranteeing "inalienable" basic human rights and freedoms that many may never enjoy. 

So less than 48 hours after shooting his hunting buddy, the media reports Cheney has been "cleared" in the hunting accident that wounded his buddy.  Now, shit happens, I get it.  An accident is an accident, I get it. 

But what I don't get is how Cheney can be "cleared" so quickly.  What I don't get is how the white house has already started to recast the incident as something other than Cheney's negligence with a firearm.  Already this morning I have heard justifications including that it was Wittington's fault becasue Cheney didn't know he was there, and that Wittington was not "shot" he was merely "sprayed with buckshot" with a "pellet gun."  The white house has started making jokes about it, probably to defuse the media storm that hit yesterday over the 18 our coverup and failure to report.

That is apparently the question and the dems seem lost on strategy.... or, er.. at least I'm lost on their strategy.

First question:  should there be a strategy?  Many (Kerry and Kennedy among them) think Alito's record on civil rights and sexual discrimination will, given the Roberts nomination and a perceived "new majority of right-mindedness", tilt the balance of power so far to the right that this Court will now overturn the right to choose, further limit the fourth and fourteenth amendments, expand the government's power to do what it wants without telling us, etc. etc. etc.  Some heady issues, no doubt.  But Harry Reid is apparently unimpressed with the quality of the debate and the evidence... at least not enought to risk "the nuclear option."  Perhaps "culture of corruption" doesn't include this nominee?