Friday, January 06, 2006

Why Term Limits?? Jack Abramoff!

Washington is run amok with corruption and people seem to be surprised. Money corrupts and there are PAC's throwing around so much money in Washington, that even the idealists are susceptible. The problem is it costs too much money to become a national politician, and once you're there you're a target for PAC's who pay for influence. For those who think there is no quid pro quo between PAC's and Washington politicians.... you're being naieve.

You want to fix it? Term limits for all elected positions at all levels of government period! Why you ask... moving target. When the PAC's don't know who to pay, and their influence is transient they become ineffective. Once they become ineffective they become obsolete. Also if there are term limits you get at least one good term out of each elected official, because you always have one term where they're not running for reelection.

Abramoff is the tip of a huge iceberg, and those scrambling to divest themselves of any vestige of ties with him are almost comical. I have much more respect for those that have stood up and said, "hey... I did nothing illegal and I'm keeping the money", than I do for those making a pretense of being philanthropic by giving money to charity that was never really theirs to give.

So Jack I know what others seem to not notice; you're not a bad guy, you're one of hundreds of bad guys. However, like Nixon, you made the mistake of getting caught.

Jack... burn them all! No... really!

Monday, January 02, 2006

BUSH Impeachment... finally!!!

Well I almost feel better now. For the first time today I read (online) that there may be serious discussion about impeachment hearings for King George. Yiipppeeee!!!!!

Of course that means that Dick his evil sidekick might have to take over. The Evil Neo-Triumverette might loose a member, but I'm sure they can get another (George Will might work).

It strikes me curious that the Democratic Party has not had any real leadership in the effort to hold George Bush more accountable. After the feeding frenzy that occured from Bill Clinton's extracurricular activities with Monica, you would think they would be chomping at the bit to take a piece of George's hide.

Let's contrast the offenses... Bill Clinton has an extra-marital relationship with an intern and lied about it resulting in impeachment proceedings. The evidence of which was collected under the auspices of an investigation into a land deal gone bad in Arkansas. This foray into the Clinton closet full of panty clad skeletons only took an estimated 80 million taxpayer dollars... of course back then we had a surplus.

George Bush doctored intelligence reports and used them to justify an illegal war, violating international law and committing American troops resulting in the deaths of over 2000 US servicemen and upwards of 100,000 non-combatants. Fortunately for George we don't really recognize the authority of the International Court, so at least he won't have to deal with that inconvenience.

Well I can certainly see why we haven't impeached him! No... really!

Sunday, January 01, 2006

BUSH in review...

What follows is the posted definition for "conservative" as listed on

adj 1: resistant to change [ant: liberal] 2: opposed to liberal reforms 3: avoiding excess; "a conservative estimate" [syn: cautious] 4: unimaginatively conventional; "a colorful character in the buttoned-down, dull-gray world of business"- Newsweek [syn: button-down, buttoned-down] 5: conforming to the standards and conventions of the middle class; "a bourgeois mentality" [syn: bourgeois, materialistic] n : a person who has conservative ideas or opinions [syn: conservativist] [ant: liberal]

If anything typifies the way in which George Bush views the world, I think the first definition says it all. Never let facts or changes in the world around you affect anything so precious as your own opinion. Keep lying to yourself, and the world in general, about your own motivations and sooner or later even you will start to believe it.

Definition number 4 is a pretty good one as well. There are a number of domestic issues which could benefit from an innovative approach and one of those "out of the box" thinking sessions. Fortunately, we won't have to endure any of that from the current administration.

Let's just see which ideas (lies) George is still clinging to with the white knuckled grip of a kid's first ride on the newest "Roller Coaster of Death."

We need to make the tax cuts permanent... I like this approach... I'm going to buy a Ferrari and quit my job... spend it and the revenue will magically appear to pay for it!

We went into Irag because of WMD's... yeah right... that's why a white paper written in 1998 was published on the conservative website prior to the 2000 presidential election (interestingly removed after I went to find it after the invasion of Iraq) stated emphatically that in order to keep America secure we needed to provide a steady source of oil and to do that required a stable Middle East. Just guess what the suggested recipe for success was as proposed by these conservative "thinkers"... that's right... overthrow of Sadaam Hussein and the establishment of a "pro-American" democratic regime in Iraq. Two big ole birds with one giant stone. By the way did you catch that date... YES 1998!!!!

The one I agree with to some extent but will never be done correctly... privatization of some part of Social Security. I think this is an admirable idea on the surface, but the folks in Washington could never agree on the right way to implement it. There is a way... ask me and I'll tell you!

And finally... we need to extend the Patriot Act... into a raging incinerator until the very last vestige of it is erased from the world (oops... sorry my own opinion may have slipped in on that one). Really though... I think before a legislator is allowed to vote on a bill he/she should have to take a test to see if they actually read it. Two things would ensue... 1) Bills would become shorter and more understandable because you should not need a law degree to understand what you're voting on (I refer any dissenters to that opinion to the Constitution), 2) legislators would actually accomplish less (a good thing if you look at what they do now).

Tasking the NSA with spying on American citizens was perfectly within his power and legal. I refer any takers on this one again to the Constitution and that pesky Bill of Rights. There's this whole amedment that talks about this... do tell...

So, while the world continues to change, never fear... George Bush won't let something as trivial as current events, public opinion, or doing the right thing for once, or the US. Constitution get in the way of the Bush plan to rule the world.