When it comes to national security, nothing is as good as to see the current Vice President taking on the former. Both have taken radical paths and shape our country in their reign of “power”, (they should not be having any power according to our constitution other than to break a tie in the Senate).

I am going to be unabashed and state that I am never in the same boat with VP Cheney when it comes to this. To me, he is an absolute failure when it comes to national security. Whilst, it could be President Bush that should ultimately get most of the blame, it is VP Cheney that still is backing the disastrous policies of the last administration and many would still claim that a lot of those orders would go all the way up to VP Dick Cheney.

The rot of our national Security seems to come from the fact that our Vice President never seems to know what military protocols are. He has got no idea at all and it is he that is having a “tenuous relationship with reality”.

For example, he thinks that the only way we can get intelligence out of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay is by torture, or his excuse of a term, Enhanced Interrogation Techniques. It is from this that “intelligence” was gained that led to the Iraq war where thousands of our troops died. So doesn’t that prove that that those techniques do not work?

He often claims that President Obama is taking away methods to interrogate terrorists in a ticking time bomb situation. Well, had he had served the army instead of chickening out, he would have known what the rules of Engagement are. If there is any justified perception of hostility, action can be taken. So he is wrong again on that.

Even if he thinks that perverse logic is true, why need to hold them for so many years. Why not execute them for their crimes already? Why is it that we are paying Al Qaeda personnel to be given food for so many years? Does he not know that by keeping them in for so long risks hostage situations in the future demanding their releases? (E.g. Recently, Israel released hundreds of prisoners in return for mere proof that one of their soldier is alive).

Now coming to VP Bide. Should he have said that another 9/11 would not be likely? He better do! We never want to hear that another 9/11 is inevitable! However, more important is his actions rather than his words. We had a Christmas miracle with the “underwear bomber”. That is the most that we should tolerate.

Lastly, I am very pleased that the current administration is going after Al Qaeda and is having some good results. But at the end of the day, America wants Osama bin Laden’s head. With his head, we can have the symbolic victory that the world is looking for. So until then, we are not there yet…

The Iraq War Inquiry Report is an investigation that is going on right now in the UK. It is a huge report that is trying to learn lessons that led to the Iraq War. Whilst this is just an inquiry, would it mean that British Courts would have the right to charge President Bush and other members based on the findings of this report?

This inquiry is really taking the cake. First, there is the notion that former British Prime Minister Tony Blair said that he was still certain that he did a right thing to go to war despite there being no weapons of mass destruction! Wow! While in think that it is an awfully dim of him to say that and that he is just covering his own behind, you got to admit that he has some balls for saying what he said!

Secondly, this inquiry has access to so many reports that are hidden from the media and the public. In other words, they would have more access to the facts than most of us! I really am amazed that this is allowed! How can a system be worthy of the people’s trust if it is done in the shadows? Do they really think that a website is sufficient?

Next is the slip and the hints given by the Inquiry members. There is the hint given out that British officials knew that President Bush was going to invade Iraq regardless of there being full compliance of UN weapon inspectors. What the hell? I do believe that this is true, but that does not mean that it is. Where are the dots that drew this conclusions? Again, can they please show this evidence, please!

Coming back to the hypothetical question that I raised; I would be very uncomfortable that the foreign courts have the ability to put our President or ex-Presidents on trial for acts they committed. This could be open to abuse in the future. What is this was Iran or Libya that tried our President in absentia? Are we going to sit down on our laurels then?

Lets face it. The only reason that this can be a consideration is because President Bush was a pathetic and a failure of a President. The world hated him and many Americans do too. Why did they not launch investigations into whether President Clinton should have gone to jail for lying or whether President Reagan be charged for the Iran Contra affair? Because those Presidents were well loved by the American people.

I do understand the other end of the argument too. I do get it that we should charge people like former Liberian President Charles Taylor and I fully support Nuremberg style cases; but I still feel that there should be a distance. Maybe, only the international body should have the right to bear down on these kinds of special cases?

To end it off, there is no point of having an inquiry when we are not going to learn from it. We still have not learn we cannot get intelligence by torture! It was from Guantanamo Bay that the “intelligence” of WMD came about. Had we allowed the our Intelligence agencies to do their jobs the way they normally do, thousands of our troops would have been alive today!

President Obama intends to recycle the TARP profits to convert the savings into “tax-cuts” for small businesses and other infrastructure projects. The tax cuts would be a disastrous mistake and it would be something that would be just adding to the debt that we have.

Let me make this clear, these kind tax cuts would not mean anything to the middle class or the small businesses. I am not saying that I would not appreciate a tax cut, but the fact is, we got so many things to pay for that we do not feel the tax cuts effect at all. It is not like the millions that we would save if we were rich.

To prove my controversial statements above, I would like to point you guys to one example. As part of the Economic Recovery Act, the stimulus package, more than $250 billion dollars was set aside for tax cuts for the lower and upper middle class. How many of the recipients do you think would experience a reprieve or appreciated tax cut? Even today, many years after President Clinton cut taxes for the lower income bracket, people are still asking : Where was my tax cut, President Clinton?

The tax cut does not seem real at all. But what would be real is the debt it brings along with it. Should President Obama carry out his plan to convert the TARP funds to tax cuts, we would see the President cut half a trillion dollars worth of taxes. This half a trillion dollars spent, I am sorry to say, is just a waste of money.

The $200 billion could have been used to pay off the debt; we need to do that. That could have brought the deficit for this year down from $1.4 trillion to $1.2 trillion. It could have meant billions of dollars worth of interest being saved.

Many would bring us back to President’s Reagan presidency to claim that tax cuts would work, less would associate themselves with President Bush’s policies. Yes it worked, at a cost of a trillion 1980 US$! That is when the problem of debt really started in America.

If there is a further need to stimulate the economy, the many can be used in better ways. The money can be invested in infrastructure. This can be used to ensure that all our buildings and bridges are save. Lets build levies all around flood prone areas.

We can invest the money in education. Our kids are falling behind the rest of the world. While there would be people out there that blame the government, I disagree. The countries that have excellent results as of late are China, Hong Kong, Japan,Singapore and South Korea. The governments of these countries are very involved with their systems, so should we. We should meritocratize our system.

We can use the money to develop green energy. It can be seed money to help new green businesses start up. I am sure many would be interested in starting up a green business today especially with the ridiculously rebates that the government is offering in the ACES bill. This would make us very much less dependent on foreign oil.

Use it for these stuff, but please do not use it on tax cuts. It is not beneficial at all. It would just increase the debt! My preference is to use it to lower the debt that we owe China…

Related articles by Zemanta

• Obama’s Job Speech With Elbows (swampland.blogs.time.com)
• Obama using grab-bag approach to fight recession (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Stimulus III (online.wsj.com)
• U.S. needs to `spend our way out of recession’ (thestar.com)
• Obama touts tax breaks to boost small biz hiring (money.cnn.com)
• Obama announces job creation plan (news.bbc.co.uk)
• McGurn: My Big Fat Government Takeover (online.wsj.com)
• Is the fiscal stimulus really “temporary”? (gregmankiw.blogspot.com)
• White House: 650,000 jobs in new stimulus report (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Helpful, But Not Nearly Bold Enough (dailykos.com)

What a stunner! A long time Republican Senator, Arlen Specter has jumped ship and is now caucusing with the Democrats. This infuriated the right wing and the Republicans and has also stunned the Democrats, many who have made his part of their sworn enemy list.

There area many angles to this story. Firstly, there is the most obvious aspect of the numerical shift in the Senate. With the case in Minnesota that most would agree would go in favor of the clown Al Franken, this would mean that there are 60 Democrats and her allies in the 100 person Senate.

This is a step closer to stopping any filibuster moves by the Republicans. That is still pending with the Minnesota debacle and the fact that not all Democrats would vote together. It is still the votes of 60 individuals.

That brings about another play to this situation. Would there be a 60 vote automatically? After all as a Republican, Specter only voted with his party 48% of the time. That is less than half. He also voted with the Democrats less than half the time ( the rest he abstained or was not there). So what kind of record would he bring to the Democrats?

There are already a lot of Democrats that are called Conserva-Dems. They are Democrats that are mildly conservative on either social issues or, more likely, financial issues. These people are not popular with the far-left base in the Democratic party. These include people like Rachael Maddow and Keith Olbermann of MSNBC. They are not happy that a person that did not support the Presidential budget is now on their side.

This also speaks of the dilution of the Democratic party right now. To be fair, this dilution began during the President Clinton years and accelerated under President Bush’s second term. No more are there the agenda of establishing abortion as a recognized legality in America. No more talk of participating in the culture wars. Ironically, the Democrats have now created the President Reagan’s “big tent” for different thoughts.

There are still some bad seeds, like those that wanted to kick Independent Senator Joe Lieberman out of the Democratic Caucus for supporting Senator McCain in the Primaries. However, the speed at which that that fire was put out suggested that the Democrats were going all out on reaching this big tent mentality.

That is also the reason that they are winning so many election so far. The Republicans are wanting to go more and more right. For all these loses, many of them said that the reason that they were losing is because they have “abandoned the principles of right wing ideology.” They are basically saying good riddance to Arlen Specter. Rush Limbaugh, viewed by many to be leading the Republican party, told him to take Senator McCain and Miss McCain with him. Are you kidding?

The Republicans must go back to pre- President Bush 2 era common sense. They should be in the capable hands of people like Senator McCain, Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice, Chuck Hagel or even the first President Bush. They must get rid of their Sarah Palins and Michelle Bachmans as soon as possible. America needs that as there need be check and balances to an rampaging Democratic party.

Yet another perspective would be the personal reasons that got this defection in place. He was very straight forward in telling that he was 20% behind his Republican rival for the election in Pennsylvania. He would not have survived as a politician as the Republican base has shifted to the far right and he has not. That to me was the biggest reason that the move took place, though all factors mentioned earlier led to this.

To tie it all up, Senator Specter himself is not a person that is the stereotype Republican. For one, he is pro choice. He takes a step back from gun legislation and is a supporter in fighting climate change. So he himself is a person that is more independent rather than a Republican or a Democrat.

To round it all up, I think that the Republicans lost but the Democrats need not necessarily have won. There is also the sense that the politician that is Senator Specter has been exposed. His re-election would very much depend on President Obama’s approval rating during his campaign. If it is good, Specter stays, else I do not think that he would survive for much longer.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Adam Green: Would You Help a Progressive Challenger to Specter? (huffingtonpost.com)