Office of the Independent Blogger

Fred Kaplan, one of my favorites, is writing about the UN’s recent resolution for a cease-fire and occupation in Lebanon. He wonders out loud whether or not it’ll work (possible, but difficult), and then says that there’s one major problem: if this doesn’t work, it could “collapse” the Security Council of the UN. I disagree: while the Lebanon resolution sets firm principles on the table, this sort of declaration is nothing new for the Council. In fact, I’d say the only major affect this could have is if the UN succeeds at maintaining peace in Israel. Otherwise, if it fails that is, it’s business as usual. Maybe Republicans in America will be surlier when someone proposes UN Intervention, but they’re surly as is, so surely there’s little over which to worry.

As far as business as usual goes, Bush is all for smaller government, and it shows!

A provision tucked in a federal defense bill would allow the president to take control of a state’s National Guard, without the governor’s consent. The bipartisan National Governors Association is right to object to this attack on state authority. Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, a Republican, said the provision violates “200 years of American history” and is part of a larger federal effort to make states no more than “satellites of the national government.” The U.S. government has had the power to federalize Guard troops during emergencies, ranging from enforcing desegregation laws to responding to natural disasters. But the House-passed version of the National Defense Authorization Act broadens that power beyond comfort. The legislation gives the president the right to take control when there is “a serious natural or man-made disaster, accident, or catastrophe.” This language, which is not in the Senate version of the bill, should be rejected when a conference committee finalizes the bill next month.

Even if it gets rejected, it’s amazing what the President will try for. He’s working under a principle my friend Wesley told me about, regarding women: “if you ask out every woman you know and meet, you’re bound to find a ton of willing women.” I’d imagine that George Bush figures, “If I reach for every bit of power I can get, I’m bound to receive more than I got.” For shame.

Given that I absolutely despise French Aristocrats and philosophers, it is strange that I am reading the works of the Marquis de Sade, and it is stranger still because I have no sexual desire that could be classified as sadistic. I am reading his overall-disgusting works because I am curious about what they entail, exactly, that keep them banned in French society even to this day. But, enough about that. I found it strange in an other-worldly sort-of way when I saw John Dickerson’s latest column in Slate about President Bush.

On his summer vacation in Crawford, Texas, George Bush read Albert Camus’ novel The Stranger. I’m not sure what to make of this. It’s usually college freshmen who suddenly take up the French existentialist’s slim volume, and then usually to impress some literature major with wavy hair. Perhaps it was an act of glasnost: Bush has spent much of his presidency dismissing the French, so now he reads one of the country’s literary heroes and goes public about it. But in Crawford? The president and his aides have long characterized the town as the kind of sensible place where anyone caught reading heady foreign literature-philosophy would be driven to the county line. Maybe that’s the idea—challenge the prevailing stereotype about the president’s favorite place and his intellect?

I call bullshit. In the 2000 campaign, Bush claimed to have read a biography of Dean Acheson, but when asked, knew nothing about him. His aides tell incoming workers that the President “doesn’t read much,” and he can’t be bothered to read memos (Price of Loyalty, Paul O’Neill). You’re telling me that the world’s most powerful dunce has all of a sudden gained a literary edge? I might buy it if, say, his wife were upset with him, threatened to cut off his sex life if he didn’t read a book of her choosing, but I doubt it. Oh, sure, there are rumors that the President has cheated on his wife (this President, not the past Presidents that we know cheated on his wives), but I don’t buy it. George Bush strikes me as the type of man who’d see his wife reading in bed, say, “Whachoo need books for? Iss time for some nighttime!” while snatching the book and taking command.

In other words, I think the President is severely challenged intellectually, incapable of tellling the truth, and has symptoms of misogyny.

Slate, today, didn’t just serve as catalyst for a discussion about George Bush’s sex life and pea brain, but also gives us a brilliant analysis of Leftist Trends in the Democratic Party. With the Lieberman pantsing in Connecticut, I have already heard rumblings for more Conservative types that the Democratic Party is becoming George McGovern’s People’s Republic yet again (if it ever truly was, considering that most Democrats didn’t even vote for him in 1972), but Michael Tomasky discredits that.

Hold on to your hats, folks. Next month, the peacenik, McGovernite, appeasement-happy Democratic voters of yet another state are primed to take out another pro-war senator! Yes, that’s right: Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., who voted for the October 2002 Iraq war resolution, is fighting for her political life against intraparty challenger Hong Tran, a public-service attorney from the state who backs “the quick withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq” and ups the ante by arguing that Cantwell, after serving as George W. Bush’s handmaiden on Iraq, has now “proudly cosponsored legislation with Republican Senator Rick Santorum (R.-Pa.) that lays the groundwork for military intervention in Iran.” Private polls put Tran within striking distance, and my sources in Olympia contend that we may well see a replay of what just happened in Connecticut.

Is the Democratic Party out to immolate itself? Is there no end to this contagion? There’s one problem with the above scenario. It isn’t true. Yes, Cantwell is a real senator; yes, she voted for the war (the Iran bit is news to me). Yes, Hong Tran, a woman of Vietnamese-American extraction, is a real person of apparent accomplishment, and she is indeed running against Cantwell chiefly on an anti-war platform. But there are no “private polls” that put Tran “within striking distance,” and I have no “sources in Olympia.” It’s all but certain that Cantwell will waltz to renomination. On Aug. 6 the Seattle Times ran a profile of the “quixotic” challenger that reported Tran had raised a mere $18,000 from just 20 donors. “Confidence, Tran doesn’t lack,” reporter Alex Fryer concluded. “It’s money and support that seem a little thin.”

I think by now you’ve caught my point. At this minute, eight Democratic Senate incumbents who voted in favor of the Iraq resolution are seeking re-election: Cantwell, Hillary Clinton (N.Y.), Dianne Feinstein (Calif.), Ben Nelson (Neb.), Bill Nelson (Fla.), Tom Carper (Del.), Herb Kohl (Wis.), and of course Joe Lieberman (Conn.), now as an independent. And of those eight, exactly one—Lieberman—faced or is facing a serious primary challenge because of the war. Remember the shock you felt back in June when Dianne Feinstein was defeated by that lefty nutjob in California? Or the fervid chants of “Bring Them Home!” ringing out from the Omaha night when Ben Nelson lost to his anti-war challenger? Didn’t think so. That’s because Feinstein won renomination with 87 percent of the vote, and Nelson didn’t even face an opponent.

Now, while it’s true that these candidates haven’t faced serious Liberal opposition, it’s also true that they all have significant war-chests, financially. Still, I agree with the thrust of the piece, but I’ll wait until 2008 to declare which direction the Party is going in, but I will note this: the Democratic candidate in 2008 is likely to be anti-Iraq War, or anti-continuation of it, at least, probably a “Peace with Honor” sort like Richard Nixon (Hillary Clinton?). It’s important to note that the Democratic Party isn’t moving to the Left on anything but Iraq, and on Iraq, the country is moving Left, in case you haven’t read the polls.

On an entirely different note (from politics to War), the cease-fire’s in effect in Lebanon, and aid to that country is coming slow because of all the destroyed roads. Bush claims Israel defeated Hezbollah, while Hezbollah takes responsibility for Israel’s “defeat.” I think they should all go to their knees and pray for forgiveness.

For anyone wondering what the title means, click away to your heart’s content, and figure it out.

Israel says it’s fine with the cease-fire proposed and passed by the UN yesterday, but in the last hours before it comes into effect, the fighting has escalated dramatically. Tomorrow, we’ll see what happens, but with Lebanon playing it coy and keeping their cards to themselves, and Israel continuing to provoke and be provoked by Hezbollah, there’s no reason to jump and celebrate before the fact.

I’d like to take this entry as an opportunity to welcome Mahmoud Ahmaniac to the blogosphere, as Israel’s President has taken to blogging. On it, Ahmaniac is running a poll asking if Israel and America are intent on starting a third World War. I am told from secret sources that his next survey will ask, Do You Think I’m Sexy and the final one will be, Am I Sexier than the Infidels?

Seriously, is there a bigger egomaniac than Ahmaniac? Hell, another thing: what’s with these Dictators in Cyberspace? Kim Jung Il spends his time downloading Hollywood movies and porn, and Ahmaniac is asking people a question that will receive obvious answers from his fanatics in Tehran. I’m assuming that there aren’t a ton of people in Iran with Internet access, which makes this that much more of a stupid stunt. An attention whore with bipolar disorder runs Iran; a pervert with a butch hairstyle runs North Korea.

I’ve always maintained that Iran is a dangerous dog down the block, but that, as of now, we’re best suited through diplomacy, because when the day comes that Ahmaniac begins biting, we’re going to need the credibility that talks give us. Until that day comes, the correct course is diplomacy and containment, but, I say, it gets harder and harder to advocate that when he does such obnoxious things as to make a restrained fellow like me want to punch his dishonest face.

Good news: Israel will halt its offensive in Lebanon on Monday. So it has been said, and so we shall see.

This entry will be brief, and its subject is the adventure in politics that Bob Novak’s latest column is. It gives a rundown of a handful of political situations, from a secretive House member running a shadowy and under-fire campaign for the Senate to two Activists who Connecticut Democrats fear will sink them in the Senate. Even better, it ends with a Republican who once wrote, “For Freedom’s Sake, Eliminate Social Security!”

It couldn’t be a more complete article if it outed a CIA Agent.

Actually, it’s an interesting look at a few of the tighter races in politics today, and it can give you a better understanding of politics today. Take Sharon Marie Renier, mentioned in the article as an opponent to a Conservative Republican in Michigan. She’s running a campaign that is in debt, and so she doesn’t have any cash to battle with. It’s sad how that works, isn’t it?

The United States and France have agreed on a UN Resolution, and it’ll be voted on today. Read more here, but don’t get your hopes up. Whatever the result of the vote, any and all events from here on out will vary depending on Israel and Hezbollah. Because of this, it’s best to cool your coup and drink your soup, as Israel is already preparing an expanded offensive. You see? Wait and see.

In a bizarre turn, an artist has sculpted a model of Hillary Clinton’s bust, and says he hopes it “sparks a discussion” about sex. It’s kind of funny that Clinton and Katherine Harris are the sexiest women in politics today. Hey, I had a crush on the Senator from New York when I was younger, and that, my friends, is the most ridiculous story of the day! Except for this.

The world’s wealthiest nations have come under scathing criticism for their inaction after billionaire Bill Gates made a new pledge this week to spend $500 million on the global fight against HIV and AIDS. “When the richest man on earth provides such generous support, the risk is that some donor governments may mistakenly think they are now off the hook,” says Joanne Carter, legislative director of RESULTS, a U.S.-based advocacy group. Carter and other activists associated with a number of public advocacy groups say the Gates pledge must be seen as a challenge to wealthy countries, most of whom have failed to match their words with deeds. “We will never break the back of AIDS, tuberculosis (TB), and malaria without robust increases in donor government support,” says Carter, noting that even with Gates’ hefty donation, the Global Fund to Fight AIDS is currently short of the funds it needs to achieve its targets.

I think it’s wonderful of Gates to provide such funding for AIDS research. I think it’s awful that that’s what it takes in today’s day and age, whereby big governments with large pockets won’t spend money on humanitarian and medical ventures in the rest of the world. Whether it’s AIDS funding or money for waterholes, whether it be support to stop a genocide, even, the UN and large governments can’t quite be counted on.

The United States has repeated its demand that rebel groups in Darfur quit killing each other. Washington also said a strong and mobile UN peacekeeping force must be in the Sudanese region by October 1 to make them stop such attacks. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack on Thursday condemned the violence and said a peace deal reached in May holds the key to solving the three-year-old problem. McCormack said the United States condemns the violence that is killing civilians including humanitarian workers.

He demanded that rebel groups abide by the peace accord and a ceasefire negotiated in N’Djamena, Chad’s capital, and cooperate with peacekeepers of the African Union. He said, however, the peacekeepers have tried hard, but “the situation has evolved and become much more complex and difficult.” “Consequently, a UN peacekeeping force must deploy without delay. Only a large, robust, mobile, and fast-reacting UN force is capable of stopping the violence and protecting innocent lives” and bringing general peace and security under the peace agreement. “The African Union has consistently called for transition to a UN operation without delay.”

It’s embarrassing to me that this is still going on. From AIDS research, to stopping a genocide, to intervening in Lebanon, Bush’s government has been a bust in ways that a future-Clinton Presidency, a Gore Presidency, a Democrat Presidency, wouldn’t be.

Tactically, the 9/11 Attacks were planned impressively by al-Qaeda, as they didn’t do much but take what we already had and flip it. It didn’t take a ton of weapons, just simple boxcutters. It didn’t take much money, just living expenses. It was an extremely well-planned attack, but, after it, I was under the impression that barring a terrible mistake by law-enforcement, our concerns over airplanes being hijacked or bombed could be soothed. After reading this news story, I’m not so sure.

Terrorists planned to concoct an “explosive cocktail” using MP3 players and sports drinks to blow up as many as 10 jetliners bound for the United States, authorities said Thursday. U.S. intelligence officials said the plotters hoped to stage a dry run by Friday, The Associated Press reported. The actual attack would have followed days later, the officials told AP. A senior congressional source said it is believed the plotters planned to mix a British sports drink with a gel-like substance to make an explosive that they would possibly trigger with an MP3 player or cell phone. The sports drink could be combined with a peroxide-based paste to form a potent “explosive cocktail,” if properly done, said a U.S. counterterrorism official.

I’m not entirely sure what to make of this. Scientifically it’s possible, although I’m not so sure it’s feasible in practice. That is to say, that it’d be easy to do. Operational. Guess it’s something that the big boys in Washington and personnel in airlines’ll have to deal with, although it isn’t the only problem had by the Department of Transportation.

A laptop computer used by the Department of Transportation to combat fraud was stolen in Doral last month, putting the sensitive personal information of almost 133,000 Florida residents at risk of the criminal activity the agency was trying to guard against. Social Security numbers, birth dates and addresses were on the laptop assigned to a special agent in the Miami office when it was stolen from a government-owned vehicle on July 27, acting Inspector General Todd Zinser wrote Gov. Bush in a letter on Wednesday.

So, get this. The laptop was stolen from the agent’s car while he ate lunch. Brilliant. I do hope that the FBI, CIA, and DHS crew are better at protecting their protectables than the Department of Transportation is. This is embarrassing.

Apparently, Mike Wallace will be airing an interview with Iran’s President this Sunday, and I’ll be watching it. Until then, there’s an excerpt released, and it’s quite the excerpt.

“But please give him this message, sir: Those who refuse to accept an invitation will not have a good ending or fate. You see that his approval rating is dropping every day. Hatred vis-à-vis the president is increasing every day around the world. For a ruler, this is the worst message that he could receive. Rulers and heads of government at the end of their office must leave the office holding their heads high.”

Clearly he has no understanding of Democracy. A ruler can leave with his head held low as the public shrieks at him, if that is what must happen. Popularity doesn’t mean anything, and I’m astounded that Mahmoud would say it does. Even more incredible is the following, however:

Ahmadinejad also accuses the U.S. of “talking down” to Iran, saying that Bush “believes that his power emanates from his nuclear warhead arsenals. The time of the bomb is in the past, it’s behind us. Today is the era of thoughts, dialogue and cultural exchanges.” Where does the “death to Israel” part come in, I wonder? Oh, right, that kind of cultural exchange.

Right.

If I may, I’d like to announce the unveiling of my poetry. I’ve posted a ton of it on the page just linked, as I have written a ton and figured I’d share.

I have a couple of thoughts: first, Joe Lieberman lost his primary battle in Connecticut, and he is, barring a successful run as an independent, at an end to his Senatorial career. I’m sad to see it, as I never liked his opponent and always liked Joe, but it happened, and it’s time to put up the speechbook. However, there is an orchestrated campaign currently to “unseat” Joe Lieberman from his current committee seats, and I have a major problem with this. Until his opponent is sworn in, Joe is a Senator, and deserves to be treated as such. Lieberman will always have my respect and admiration. I do think his attempts to win as an independent are misguided, but at the same time, I’d vote for him. If he wins, good. If not, it’s still all right. If he causes a Republican to win the state of Connecticut, that’s fine by me, too. Lieberman has every right to run, and every reason to want to settle the score with Lamont. If he’d like to take the fight to the entire state, rather than just the people in the Party, I can’t say I blame him, and I wish him every bit of luck. He’ll certainly need it!

In the Middle East, the Israeli Cabinet has okayed a deeper invasion of Lebanon, and the White House has too, presumably. As I have been with this entire War at every stage, I am disappointed, but that’s to be expected when this President is involved.

Here in Illinois, the Tribune reports that there are serious problems in regulating Doctors, but the Department in charge of this says, naturally, that the problems aren’t serious, just minor. Of course they’d say that. Personally, whenever I hear of this sort of thing, I wonder why the state doesn’t have a better centralized database. It can’t possibly be that hard to create a network of computers, can it? No reason for this sort of thing to happen regarding doctors.

The FDA made an interesting announcement recently, and I’ve got a few thoughts.

The Food and Drug Administration on Wednesday said it has formed an internal task force to focus on the use of nanotechnology materials in drugs, medical instruments, and other products regulated by the agency. “As this exciting new area of science develops, FDA must be positioned to address both health promotion and protection challenges that it may present,” the agency’s acting commissioner, Andrew von Eschenbach, said in a statement. “Through this task force, we are leveraging our expertise and resources to guide the science and technology in the development of nanotechnology-based applications.”

I’m not sure what the purpose of this task force is. The FDA’s job is to regulate; it isn’t in their line of duty to create new medicines or innovate technology, is it? Does this then mean that, before this task force was assembled, the FDA didn’t have a panel that focused on nanotechnology? If so, that’s crying incompetence, but I’ll be writing the FDA in a moment with my questions, and if they answer, I’ll post it here. If they don’t, then we can make assumptions.

On an apolitical, final note, a truckful of penguins flipped over and they died. Sad day.

If I have one, just one, embarrassing-but-other-people-say-it’s-adorable-habit, it’s The Seal Clap. When something hilarious is said, or something clever done, I’ve been known to clap a couple of times like a seal. When I was younger, I wrote a story entitled Drunk Penguin and it was set in Arctic Ice City, with the villain being Seal E. Despite my casting of a seal as villain, I hold no ill will toward seals, and like George Bush seeks to save the whales, I seek to save the seals. I’d heard, before, about people “clubbing” baby seals to death, but I never realized how widespread it was — or how much brutality seals face from “hunters” — until a friend contacted me about it.

Take this story, for instance, about seals being clubbed brutally in Namibia, and the practice of slaughtering seals goes on even in Canada. I’m no PETA-ninite, and I am not a vegetarian. I just think that there are certain things that are simply wrong, and the pictures at this site are disturbing, and I’m not the only one who thinks so: in 1972, fur taken from clubbed Cape seals was made illegal in the United States, and the practice banned. For all of Canada’s positives, in this regard, it is backward. Just goes to show that Liberalism in governments worldwide comes in all sorts of packages.

If you’d care to have updates on the fight for protection of Seals, go on ahead and join the group and myself. It’s absolutely disgusting. Absolutely.