UNRIGHTEOUS INDIGNATION

All of us tend to get a little peeved when seeing a news item or observing an event that doesn’t sit right with our sensibilities. Fair enough. And our sensabilities may clash with those of our neighbors. Again fair enough. On occasion our perception is sufficient to raise our level of upset to that of righteous indignation.

Then there are those people who go out of their way to find offense. Send a humorous birthday card instead of one proclaiming the celebrant the most wonderful person on Earth? You’ve just made their shit list. Women wearing the same dress to a big gala? Double shit list.

Finally there are those people who find offense not simply to find offense but because they have an agenda. What offends them pales in comparison to true affronts that they ignore. Anything, no matter how petty, innocuous and even well-intentioned, if the action or statement can be construed in a totally negative way these people will be twittering, blogging, or punditing like crazy, intending to raise the ire of their like-minded puppets.

This behavior has been on display by our right wingnuts ever since noon on January 20, 2009. Coincidentally that is the moment when Barack Obama was sworn into office as President. Or maybe not so coincidentally.

There have been the complaints from Fox News and other conservative outlets about Obama’s supposed excess vacations combined with his golf outings detracting from the attention due his high office responsibilities. The problem is, giving credit for accuracy to the numbers they cited, he had taken 115 days off during his first four years. On the other hand, verifiable information on George W. Bush reveals he AVERAGED 120 days of vacation per YEAR.

Yes Obama was presiding over a fitful recovery from recession and some crises in Egypt and Libya and Syria, not to mention his NCAA basketball bracket. But Bush presided over the recession that led to the fitful recovery as well as two wars. Of course his surrogate, Dickie Cheney, was really the one in charge so George’s absences were of no import. But hey, Cheney did find time to shoot a friend in the face.

We are now dealing with Umbrellagate. (While there is cause to object to the suffix of “gate” being used for every scandal, large or small, umbrellas are designed to deflect water.) Yes, the President had the temerity to have a marine hold an umbrella to protect him as he gave a speech. http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/16/obama-breaches-marine-umbrella-protocol/

By the way, The Daily Caller is particularly notable for forensic examioations of non-existent crimes of this nature.

Evidently male marines are forbidden to use umbrellas while on duty.

Yes, the Marines are often forced to get wet while standing outside the White House because they cannot hold an umbrella. Yes, the Marine Corps uniform regulations state a Marine cannot hold an umbrella. But Marine spokesman Capt. Eric Flanagan explained to the Washington Post that, according to Title 10 of the U.S. Code, Marines must “perform such other duties as the President may direct.”

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/05/presidents-umbrella-scandal-folded-it-could-take/65372/

Now those seeking to ensure our national holidays are properly observed…never mind big bellied shirtless males swigging beer while charring hot dogs and chicken breasts…a young lady finds herself needing to perform that horrible and degrading human function of urination (but, hey, wouldn’t ur-i-nation be very apt for the Fourth of July?). Yes, she tweets about it…somehow no triviality of human conduct eludes the twittersphere…but she’s criticized for degradation of our holiday honoring fallen soldiers.

But in this case the peeing young lady is one Lena Dunham who has recently garnered some measure of fame due to a cable TV series.  http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/05/28/lena_dunham_tweets_about_peeing_on_memorial_day_and_conservatives_explode.html

More importantly to offended eyes she also had the gall to produce campaign ads for Obama. That fact alone makes her patriotism suspect to the wingnuts.

So the next time you read of Obama’s “apology tour” remember it never took place, it never left port. He was booked on Carnival after all.

ROMNEY’S WAR

President George W. Bush gave us two wars which have weakened our nation financially, morally and spiritually. Afghanistan was a questionable, at most minimally justifiable, adventure. Iraq  could be placed in the farcical category were it not for the tragic loss of life on both sides, the physical and psychological maiming of our troops, and the obscene destruction of the Iraqi infrastructure to which the corrective action of an even more obscene and corrupt reconstruction was applied.

When violence in post-Saddam Iraq exceeded all the neocons’ predictions, a surge was instituted.

When Barack Obama was elected many of us hoped for a quick exit from both lands but Obama stuck to the timetable for witdrawal from Iraq established by Bush. He continued and expanded the war in Afghanistan with his own surge and promised to end the debacle but no one has confidence that will be done.

Romney’s war? Well he is not yet President, and perhaps may never become Commander in Chief empowering him to wield such awesome, frightening authority. But he stands in a command position in another, possibly equally important war that daily affects the lives of the more than 300 million people within our borders.

He is not commander in chief but is a four star general and many of his fellow brass hats take their marching orders from him or conspire with him on strategy and tactics in aspiring to total conquest.

This war? Why it is the class war waged on the vast majority of Americans. The one in which the rich have been decidedly winning the past thirty years even as they seek to deceive the public by claiming it is they are under siege.

BULLSHIT!

The income and wealth disparity our nation has been undergoing  is getting worse. I have written about this phenomenon previously. https://umoc193.wordpress.com/2010/12/04/wealth-redistribution-its-already-a-reality/

Amidst all the turmoil in the Middle East the past week or so the news that the situation is getting worse has not made waves. But here the L.A. Times reports on  how this gap has grown. http://articles.latimes.com/2012/sep/12/business/la-fi-census-poverty-rate-20120913

Here in America we have become accustomed to going to war without the formal declaration the Constitution demands come from Congress. For a war such as conducted by Romney and his allies, no such formality is mandated or expected.

But the revelation this week of Romney’s verbal strafing of those who do not pay income taxes may be the “declaration” that resolves whether there is a class war or not.

There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it. That that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. And I mean, the president starts off with 48, 49, 48—he starts off with a huge number. These are people who pay no income tax. Forty-seven percent of Americans pay no income tax. So our message of low taxes doesn’t connect. And he’ll be out there talking about tax cuts for the rich. I mean that’s what they sell every four years. And so my job is not to worry about those people—I’ll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/full-transcript-mitt-romney-secret-video

One can consider that statement as his declaration of war or a preliminary announcement on the surge in the war he intends to institute once in office.

What is this surge?  It is his tax proposals which, if enacted, will benefit millionaires far more than the middle and lower classes. It is the desire of him and his second in command, Paul Ryan, to fundamentally change Social Security and Medicare. It is his announced plan to limit funding for Medicaid and SNAP (popularly known as food stamps). It is his intention to repeal the Affordable Care Act even as it becomes more evident day by day that the provisions already in force are having a positive effect on many Americans of lesser means.

Notwithstanding his new campaign rhetoric Romney is not seeking the welfare of 100% of the American people. And while he has many allies, with no draft, many of his fellow millionaires and even some billionaires remain reluctant to enlist in this war.

Even FoxNews knows that a  class war is being waged. But just like the propagandists of World War II they keep defending the wrong side.

So Mitt, it is plain that you are rich and we are not. Yet you seek further conquests which will strip us of the limited resources many of us use to barely get by. But you have shown us also that you want to strip us of our dignity and our humanity.

That is a war in my book.

Then again it may not be a class war for one simple reason. Willard Mitt Romney has no class.

AMERICAN VIGNETTES FOR FLAG DAY

Today, June 14, 2011, is Flag Day across America, when we celebrate the symbol of our country. Certain diehard patriots are sure to assail any attack on the Stars and Stripes and someone somewhere will no doubt again propose a Constitutional amendment to ban flag burning.

Meanwhile millions of citizens will give at least lip service to such proposals while flying the flag outside their homes 24 hours a day, unlit and exposed to all manner of inclement weather. Or they will wear pieces of ill-fitting flag- emulating clothing stretched across ultra-cellulitic tummies or asses violently distorting the familiar image.

And during the summer outdoor concert season which is now upon us, sundry performers, rock, country, rap, punk, will work themselves into sweat-drenched entities who will then produce a large U.S. flag to rhythmic chants of U—S—A, U—S—A from their audience and proceed to enwreathe themselves with the flag,  forever staining the banner.

Perchance these superpatriots could be persuaded to actually read the Flag Code which discourages such vulgur displays of the emblem.

But in any event we too often misdirect our patriotic tendencies towards symbols rather than the substance of what makes, or should make, America great.

Today, for me, there is a confluence of news items or trends that epitomize the never-ending struggle to perfect our still quite experimental Republic.

UNHEALTH CARE

Liberal economist Paul Krugman attempts to negate the idea currently making the rounds that Medicare IS the problem with our health care system when it would be better characterized as a model for improving the system. He makes points such as this:

Indeed, as the economist (and former Reagan adviser) Bruce Bartlett points out, high U.S. private spending on health care, compared with spending in other advanced countries, just about wipes out any benefit we might receive from our relatively low tax burden. So where’s the gain from pushing seniors out of an admittedly expensive system, Medicare, into even more expensive private health insurance?

and this

OK, the obvious question: If Medicare is so much better than private insurance, why didn’t the Affordable Care Act simply extend Medicare to cover everyone?

The answer, of course, was interest-group politics: Given the insurance industry’s power, Medicare for all wasn’t going to pass, so advocates of universal coverage, myself included, were willing to settle for half a loaf. But the fact that it seemed politically necessary to accept a second-best solution for younger Americans is no reason to start dismantling the superior system we have for those 65 and older.

Krugman most certainly does not consider Medicare the IDEAL system, only that it should not be dismantled in favor of a far more untenable private insurance one.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11165/1153443-109-0.stm

I submit that substantial and effective health care for our citizens of all ages is a very patriotic goal. Don’t you agree?

UNCIVIL LIBERTIES

Gun control is a major issue in this peaceful nation of ours. Opponents of any controls on the sale or ownership of firearms form a large, vocal and active lobby to protect their Second Amendment rights, apparently with no exceptions permitted.

Fine, I’m not here to argue that issue. But I question why they, or other groups, are not equally as vehement in objecting to the active assault on other liberties procured by that same Bill of Rights.

In today’s Post-Gazette, Tony Norman, one of my favorite non-syndicated columnists, notes what is happening under President Obama, that perhaps most of us assumed was confined to Patriot Act permissiveness or was simply a trait of the George W. Bush administration. But as the ever-mounting body of evidence proves, power corrupts.

“The Federal Bureau of Investigation is giving significant new powers to its roughly 14,000 agents, allowing them more leeway to search databases, go through household trash or use surveillance teams to scrutinize the lives of people who have attracted their attention.”

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11165/1153514-153-0.stm

 

Pardon me but those seem rather egregious violations of the Fourth Amendment. The only organized group likely to make any noise at all is the ACLU. Unfortunately, that outfit’s very existence and purpose is too often attacked by the unthinking who mistakenly fail to recognize what a patriotic service the ACLU provides.

 

UNCIVIL WAR

 

Goodness knows I’ve railed and railed against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. I’ve questioned their legality, practicality and morality. Lately there has been somewhat of a bipartisan call to immediately end our adventure in Afghanistan (Iraq at least has an agree timetable for total withdrawal next year).

 

This should be an issue in the fore as the preliminary skirmishing for next year’s Presidential election heats up. Last night a number of potential GOP nominees particpated in a debate in New Hampshire. I haven’t found full reportage of the event to be able to link to the particular sound bites I heard on this morning’s news shows, but here is what I heard from two of the debaters about withdrawal from Afghanistan.

 

Mitt Romney gave kind of a roundabout answer and concluded that that decision would be based on consultations with his generals.

 

To his credit, Ron Paul said, in effect, the hell with that, he’s the Commander-In-Chief and it’s his decision and he’d bring all our troops home now. As used to be said on The Family Feud, “Good answer, good answer!”

 

The President is superior to any military man. It is his job to listen to the top brass so far as the actual conduct of a war goes, but it is his job alone to determine when to “pull the plug”.

 

All you patriots, beware of any present or future President who gives an answer that differs from Ron Paul’s.

 

UNNATIONAL PASTIME

 

 Baseball, hot dogs, apple pie, and Chevrolet. All are under attack. Hot dogs and apple pie are calorie and /or additives laden unhealthy parts of the diets of Americans who are already too fat. Chevrolet is part of that socialistic bailout of General Motors, regardless of the fact that company has apparently been restored to health after almost being left for dead.

 

But baseball. BASEBALL. Considered by many sports fans/pundits to be dying, surpassed by the NFL and even, oh my god, Nascar of all things, is alive and well and even flourishing on many levels.

 

TV ratings be damned. The NFL plays once a week and a large part of its interest derives from, if not totally depends on, gambling.

 

If you’re in the “baseball is dead camp”, do you realize that Major league baseball draws more attendance to its stadiums each season than do the NFL, NBA, and NHL do together?. Do you realize that minor league baseball, where potential future stars play in 180 towns ranging from specks on the map to cities as large as Indianapolis and Brooklyn, draws more fans to it games than either the NFL, NBA, or NHL do to theirs?

 

Well, maybe a large number of you live in the Pittsburgh area where the home team, the Pirates, has not had a winning season since 1992. The climax to that season is one of the most gut-wrenching entries in any team’s record book in any sport and will not be regurgitated here (fearing actual regurgitation).

 

The 2011 edition of the Bucs has a record of 32-33 so far this season, unremarkable out of context, but quite surprising within. Several times in this 18 year skein by this time of the season it was evident that, whatever day was scheduled for the last game, the players would be quite available to begin the honing of their golf games the following morning.

 

This year has seen a significant improvement in the performance of the pitching staff, individually and collectively. The hitters have struggled with inconsistency and a notable lack of home run power, but have come through often enough that many fans just believe this team has a “different feel” to it that distinguishes it from previous teams that collapsed into ineptitude in the second half of the season.

 

This Friday will see the Corsairs re-enter the arena of interleague play, for 12 games, where they have proven to be the most-overmatched team in the history of this yearly diversion from over a hundred years of constancy and tradition. So the record two weeks from now will be more indicative of what the final record may look like.

 

But this year the Pirates have a secret weapon. Throughout the season they hold a series of “Skyblasts” on Saturday nights which feature a post-game concert and a great fireworks display. Just this past Saturday Huey Lewis and The News were the musical guests.

 

Huey did an in-game interview with the Bucs announcers and remarked that he had never appeared in PNC Park, the team’s home, previously, and his last Pirate post-game perfromance had been some years earlier.

 

Well, I have not fact-checked this but will dare to make a public proclamation that his last ballgame concert was July 5, 1992 at Three Rivers Stadium which I attended.  Returning to the new venue with the same tenants just shy of 19 years to the day after the last strains of The Power of Love

echoed through the old multi-purpose oval is an omen of monumental import.

 

Just listen to James Earl Jones in Field of Dreams.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hU3a1PDtTYk&feature=related

 

Oh, but ain’t that America for you and me
Ain’t that America somethin’ to see baby

Thank you, John Mellencamp.

 

 

 

 

 

COMMANDER IN CHIEF—OR KILLER IN CHIEF

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States…

Thus begins Article II Section 2 of the United States Constitution. The most important principle gleaned from this language is that of civilian control over our nation’s military power. Remarkably this principle has received universal acceptance among the populace.

Respect for the military itself has wavered to some extent through the years, likely reaching a nadir during the Vietnam War. Though our government set the policy, there was no doubt the influence of military leaders was important in developing and implementing the policy of engagement in Southeast Asia that was folly unfolding before our very eyes.

Though advisors had first been sent to Vietnam by Eisenhower and JFK had expanded their roll, LBJ became the President of record for that war and his legacy is largely based on it. That, in spite of huge accomplishments in civil rights, the beginnings of Medicare, and other successful domestic initiatives that are as praiseworthy as his military adventures are damnable.

Is LBJ the only President to be judged on exercising his authority as Commander in Chief? Certainly not, or I would not have a topic for this blog entry.

FDR is fondly remembered for ushering the country through the Great Depression. But that challenge almost pales in comparison to what he faced in bringing the United States into World War II, culminating in the near victory achieved at the time of his death on April 12, 1945. Failure in that endeavor would have not only detracted from his legacy, but probably would have eradicated the memory of his restoration of the economy.

So today on a lesser scale we have a President with a recent successful military excursion now added to his resume. The editorialists, bloggers and media talking heads are now debating whether the tracking and killing of Osama Bin Laden will elevate the stature of President Barack Obama sufficiently not just for his legacy but, more importantly in the short term, assure his re-election in 2012.

Why is that. Why should his popularity, his survival in the Office, depend on much on this relatively minor exercise of his Commander in Chief powers, no matter how favorable the outcome?

An odd sidelight to this discussion is that, having only a few days prior to the raid on OBL’s hideout fended off a good deal of the birther issue, new polls apparently justify the conclusion that, miraculously, that issue is a now a mere speck on Obama rather than an albatross around his neck.

But the events of last Sunday also resurrected the tale of President Jimmy Carter’s failed rescue mission of the Iranian hostages in 1980, which certainly would have resulted in the deaths of many Iranians. That failure sealed Carter’s fate in his bid for re-election.

At one time we had a President, Woodrow Wilson, who enhanced his bona fides as CIC by “keeping us out of war” and won re-election in 1916. Post WW II, however, especially post Vietnam War, the image of the President suffers unless and until he has some meaure of success militarily, i.e. kills some bad guys.

That factor is even more evident as we elect Presidents with no combat military experience themselves. Ronald Reagan served in WW II but he made propoganda films and never came face to face with either German or Japanese combatants. He loved rattling sabers against the Soviet Union but had to invade tiny Granada lest his desire and capability to go to war be questioned.

George H.W. Bush served more than honorably in that war, but when he declined to drive all the way to Baghdad to oust Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War he was derided as a wimp.

Bill Clinton was excoriated as a “draft dodger” and unworthy to be CIC but deflected some of that criticism by sending troops to Kosovo and Somalia. Because neither of those moves resulted in, or ever COULD have resulted in clear military victories, his CIC legacy is not strong.

George W. Bush is the epitome of a President who took his CIC powers to heart. After starting two wars of dubious merit he then reveled in being a “war President”, though he chose to be so , often proclaiming how much these responsibilities weighed on him, but to this day offering no regrets for the cost of lives in those conflicts.

Most pointedly he did something his dad did not—hunt down and kill Saddam Hussein. Even if the actual execution was due to Iraqi justice, Bush got de facto credit for the death. For better or for worse his legacy will be judged on those wars and the demise of Hussein

So we arrive back at our current CIC who has shown little hesitation employing our forces, from maintaining a presence in Iraq to expanding one in Afghanistan, to firing assorted missles and dropping bombs in Libya Obama already dispelled any notions he was shy about using army, navy and air force to further his policies.

But, like many of his predecessors, Obama has found that his popularity, legacy and foreign policy support gain more traction from killing than from legitimate efforts to maintain peace or from the success of any domestic policy whatsoever.

The President of the United States is Commander in Chief of our armed forces and militias every day of his term(s) in office. But it seems that this power is underappreciated and even criticized and thought unworthy of him until he puts those forces in harms way to kill the bad guys of the moment.

My desire is for my Commander in Chief, no matter who, to demonstrate his, or her, strength as such by being able to maneuver the Ship of State through troubled waters without resort to the extreme use of that power.

I shouldn’t hold my breath, should I?