SENSE AND NONSENSE -THE ABUSE OF POWER AND POWER POLITICS
From the editor: It is not the power of government that voters need to fear. It is the ABUSE of that power that must be feared and stopped. The abuses of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rove are well-known. It is a travesty that current Democratic congressional leaders in both the house and senate have not initiated impeachment proceedings against the most abusive political quartet in our nation’s history. Starting with violations of our own laws on torture as well as violations of international bans on torture, these four war criminals have led the most costly and blatant raid on our national treasury ever witnessed by our country. Add to these criminal acts, illegal invasions of privacy in violation of the U.S. Constitution, there is enough concrete, public evidence to not only impeach, but to convict these four men.
But, the reality is that there will be no impeachment or even challenges of these enormous abuses. The alternative is to protest and prevent future abuses through the ballot box. The importance of next November’s presidential election is of paramount importance. However, it will be just as important to increase the Democratic control of the House by at least 15 seats and increase Democratic control of the Senate by 9 nine seats so that the Senate becomes filibuster-proof.
It is amazing to me that when Republicans controlled the House and the Senate, the Democratic minority wilted under the threat of Republican leaders invoking the “nuclear option” to prevent filibusters by the Democrats. The “nuclear option” in essence meant that the Republican leadership was threatening to reduce the number of Senators needed to stop a filibuster from the current 60-member rule to 51 votes. The term “nuclear option” was coined by Trent Lott meaning the Senate would abolish Senate Rule 22 by “blowing it up.” It was a bluff from the very beginning, but the Democratic minority did not have the courage to call Bill Frist’s bluff. It was clearly a bluff, since the Republicans knew that the same option would be available to Democrats if they won the Senate in 2006. Now that Republicans are in the minority -- albeit narrowly -- the Democratic majority remains spineless.
As voters, it is up to us to establish a filibuster-proof Democratic Senate. It is obvious at this point that congress is full of followers rather than leaders. The congressional races in 2008 are at least as important as the presidential race. The current focus is on the Democratic race for the nomination -- and rightly so. However, if the race for President obscures the importance of the congressional races in 2008, the nation is at risk of dealing with continuing abuses of power by a stacked Supreme Court and federal court system coupled with an ineffective United States Senate and House of Representatives. The current abuses of governmental power must be stopped, but a Democratic president will not be able to stop it without the help of a filibuster-proof Senate and a Democratic House of Representatives with enough votes to overcome the so-called “Blue-Dog” Democrats (conservative Democratic representatives in the House who still vote with the Republican minority.)
The Compass Society Newsletter
Maynard Chapman, Editor
THE COST OF THE IRAQ WAR
From the editor: The cost of the Iraq war now exceeds $1 trillion and is headed quickly toward $2 trillion. And when the cost of the war’s aftermath is added in, the total cost will probably exceed $5 trillion (Some economists estimate $7 trillion.) The difficulty with these numbers is that no one can relate to a trillion dollars -- much less $5 or $7 trillion. Although it is difficult to illustrate the scale of $1 trillion, it is revealing to compute how long it would take an average person to spend that amount of money.
If one individual spends $1,000 every second of the day, that individual would have to continue spending at that rate for 317 years to reach $1 trillion in expenditures. Here is the math involved in this computation.
There are 360 seconds in one hour (60 seconds x 60 minutes = 360)
There are 8,640 seconds in one day (360 seconds x 24 hours = 8,640)
There are 3,153,600 seconds in one year. (8,640 seconds x 365 days = 3,153,600)
If an individual spends $1,000 every second for one year, that individual would spend $3,153,600,000 billion in that year.
$3,153,600,000 x 317 years equals $999,691,200,000 billion. An individual who worked for 317 years to spend $1 trillion by spending $1,000 every second for those 317 years, would still fall $308 million short of his or her goal.
But our “esteemed” unilateralist president has managed to spend more than $1 trillion in just FIVE years -- and that is just on the Iraq war. That doesn’t include natural disasters such as Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. And the real tragedy is that future generations will be left with the bill.
On February 4, 2008, Bush submitted a 2009 federal budget of $3.1 trillion for congressional review and approval. It is the first $3 trillion budget in our nation’s history. And Republican presidential candidate John McCain has said it would be acceptable to stay in Iraq for 50 or even 100 years as long as we win. In the meantime, his military victory -- even if that was possible -- would destroy our republic, our military, our national defense, and our infrastructure financially.
THE “EXPERIENCE” VS. “JUDGMENT” DEBATE
From the editor:Next Tuesday, Mar. 4, is now the most important primary/caucus date in the Democratic race for the presidency. Senators Clinton and McCain are touting experience as the most important credential a candidate can claim, and Sen. Obama says good “judgment” trumps “experience.” How about a candidate who can claim both credentials -- experience and good judgment to go along with it?
Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney both have years and years of experience, but these two experienced war criminals have done more to jeopardize national security through pre-emptive warfare and over-extension of military resources than any previous national defense team serving our country.
Experience is no guarantee that the country will be served well. And both Democratic candidates are untested on the experience side of the ledger and their judgment can certainly be challenged. Sen. Clinton voted for the Iraq war and also voted more recently to declare certain Iranian military units as “terrorists.” Sen. Obama, on the other hand, voted for the Tort Reform Act that protects large corporations from being sued.
The best standard by which to judge a presidential candidate is to look at the people from whom he or she will seek advice and expertise.
Following are excerpts from a Chicago Tribune article published Sept. 17, 2007. The article, written by reporter Mike Dorning, carried the following headline: “Obama’s policy team loaded with all-stars.” The sub-head reads, “Criticized by some as lean on experience, the Democrat (Obama) has drawn a huge circle of advisers with expertise honed in the circles of power.”
From the Chicago Tribune:
“On foreign policy alone, some 200 experts are providing the Obama campaign with assistance of some sort, arranged into 20 subgroups. On the domestic front, more than 500 policy experts are contributing ideas, campaign aides said.”
“Senior advisers include heavy hitters from the administration of President Bill Clinton, husband of Obama’s primary rival.”
“Anthony Lake, Clinton’s original national security adviser, is helping coordinate foreign policy. So is Susan Rice, a Clinton assistant secretary of state and protégé of Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. Eric Holder, a former deputy attorney general, is among those providing expertise on legal policy.”
“But the makeup of the group, and the way in which Obama deliberates with its members, offers a window into how he might operate as president. Many of them surely would graduate to influential roles in an Obama administration. Their discussions of the broad range of issues a presidential candidate must address provide an early if imperfect drill for decision-making in the Oval Office.”
“Among the early additions to his circle was Samantha Power, a Harvard professor who wrote a Pulitzer Prize-winning book criticizing U.S. historical failures to act against genocides. She took a leave from her faculty position to help the new senator with foreign policy and remains an influential adviser.”
“Sarah Sewall, a Harvard Kennedy School professor and former Clinton Defense Department official who wrote the introduction to the University of Chicago edition of the new counterinsurgency manual Gen. David Petraeus revised for the military, is advising on counterinsurgency strategy.”
PLAGIARIZED AND PROUD OF IT
From the editor:F If the common campaign theme of “We Want Change” in both the Obama and Clinton campaigns sounds familiar, it might be because the theme was first suggested by The Compass Newsletter more than two years ago. In the Feb. 10, 2006, edition of The Compass, we announced the “WE WANT CHANGE” project. The lead article in that issue contained the following project outline:
I. DEMOCRATS STAND FOR:
1. Long-term National Security
2. Protecting Working Families
3. Restoring Fiscal Sanity
4. A Rational Foreign Policy
5. A Clean & Safe Environment
6. Affordable Health Care for Every U.S. Citizen
7. Election Reform - Public Financing of Elections
8. Education Reform - Opportunity for Every Child
II. STAY ON MESSAGE
1. Focus on Facts
2. Peace in the Middle East is a Priority
3. Civil Liberties are Constitutional
4. Corporate Greed is Killing the Consumer
5. Where Do Tax Dollars Actually Go?
III. ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK
1. He lied, He spied, and I cried, “I Want Change!”
2. The Gospel of Wealth
3. The Only Thing We Have to Fear is Propaganda
4. Fight Back with Rapid Response Team
5. Bush Loves Secrecy
IV. AWAKEN THE SLEEPING GIANT
1. Give a Voice to the Voiceless
2. Church Leaders, Speak Up!
3. Listen to Local Concerns
4. Use the Internet for Fund Raising
5. Fight Fear Mongering with Courage
V. BE POLITICALLY SMART
1. No more Naders
2. Defend the Candidates
3. Dump “Triangulation”
4. Sink the Swift Boat
VI. TURNOUT IS THE KEY
1. Organize Block by Block
2. Minorities Unite
3. Retirees Unite
4. Students Unite
5. Workers Unite
6. Christians, Jews, Muslims Unite
VII. DEMAND AN HONEST ELECTION
1. Insist Upon a Paper Trail
2. Beware of Automation
3. Lessons Learned from 2000
4. An Army of Poll Watchers
5. Exit Polls and Final Results
The Compass Society Newsletter
Maynard Chapman, Editor
Copyright © 2008, The Compass Society
