Transofmation: The Stakes of the '08 Election...

Some leaders seem to understand the problems of Bush and how much he has missed opportunity to be a great leader (though I would be hard pressed to even consider he had that potential). Check out this article from the AP.

So everyone is catching on to the crucial times in our country's history. It's too bad that no one seemed to realize this when the media nitpicked VP Gore to death in his campaign. But nonetheless we have the what's left. I think anyone who would erase the stain of the Bush and Republican Congress for the last 6 years would be quite a transformation. But let's hear what the candidates themselves describe their transformative leadership:

Democratic Sen. Barack Obama announced he was running for president by declaring, "I want to transform this country."

Republican Mitt Romney launched his candidacy by telling people, "If there ever was a time when innovation and transformation were needed in government, it is now."

And Democrat John Edwards revved up his second presidential bid by offering "transformational change that will strengthen this country," as he phrased it in a recent Associated Press interview.

Well, thanks for AP not really getting into what all these candidates mean by this, but hey not expecting much. It is just heartening to me to see some our presidential
candidates understand the crucial decisions for our country need to be made. It remains to be seen that this idea that we call "centrism" is somehow inherently a virtue. The whole concept of centrism and moderation means little or nothing can be accomplished because the interests involved in making the decision will be diluted and completely ineffective. And then both sides will scramble to attack for another marginally victory, which pretty much explains the last 20 or so years. The biggest problem with Clinton this election cycle aiming to be "centrist" or moderate is that to make necessary changes, she needs to plan to have a willing and enthusiastic Democratic Majority when she comes to office and in fact should expect it. A Republican presidential candidate should want a Republican majority. Though as it now, that is slim, and Mitt Romney is the only one talking about it, and he faces huge challenges to getting even his own nomination.

Point being- transformation means "moderates" or "centrists" or "independents" or whatever fucking name the media and the political bourgeois wants call them, move to one side and create the realignment necessary to take this country in a new direction. It is become obvious that the petty personal politics and crony capitalistic Republican domestic agenda and war-driven imperial foreign policy somehow just didn't stick like it did the last time Republicans cemented a majority around the turn of the last century. Maybe it is because the Democrats made Americans believe and expect more from their government when they came to power in the 30's or maybe the too many people voting... universal suffrage sure is a bitch.

Surely There Were Other Things That Happened This Weekend

I woke up on Saturday morning and flipped through the channels, stopping on the news channels expecting to see some serious news, in part because of the impending second attempt by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) to get a cloture vote through the Senate to allow debate on the Iraq War. However, I was bombarded with stories about Britney Spears' new hairdo (or undo) that I guess the media thought was so much more important.

Then, I came home yesterday evening after running some errands and I turned it to MSNBC to catch the news. Sure enough, it merited attention on three of the four major shows on the network (The exception being Hardball with Chris Matthews.), with Tucker Carlson devoting several minutes to the story, and bringing on Dr. Keith Adlow (who, ironically, was also bald as a cueball) to talk about how this was a signal of a mental breakdown, Keith Olbermann at least waiting until the end of his show, where he usually dumps soft news, aka "stories my producers made me do" and Joe Scarborough taking up about half of his show, but maybe that was because he got an exclusive with the woman who owned the salon where Britney Spears shaved her head because the owner refused to do it. (btw, for some reason, every time I go to the barber, the barber cuts my hair much shorter than I ask, so why is it that this industry can't give people what they want?)

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but haven't there been far worse cries for help from Britney Spears over the last three years? Personally, I think this is tame compared to driving with her son on her lap down the freeway, but I could be wrong. Then again, I think she could have looked much worse without hair. Still, there were a lot of things that happened this weekend that really should have gotten the public's attention. For example, there was the vote on cloture this Saturday, which fell four votes short (although with the improved health of Senator Tim Johnson [D-SD] he may get to 57 soon) and the successful effort by House Democrats on Friday to pass a resolution condemning the escalation of the Iraq War.

Or, if politics isn't your cup of tea (although if it isn't, why are you here?), there is the profoundly shocking story of a man who was mummified because he died while watching TV and no one noticed him for a year, despite the fact that his TV was on the whole time, and his bills and mail were piling up in his mailbox. While this may not seem to be a very important story, it is certainly more important as a symbol of a lack of concern about the community that would allow someone to be dead for over a year without anyone seeming to care enough to check on him.

Comparing Wars

I guess I shouldn't be surprised by this yesterday from the President as he seems to justify his wars (or rather tarnishes the memories of any justifiable wars)through unbelievable analogies. I understand, he's not much into history or reading newspapers, or general intellectual things. So I guess when I read that the Revolutionary war was supposed reflect our current crisis in Iraq (and around the world), I am not completely surprised. But in fairness, let's hear the what the president has to say:

"Today, we're fighting a new war to defend our liberty and our people and our way of life," said Bush, standing in front of Washington's home and above a mostly frozen Potomac River.

"And as we work to advance the cause of freedom around the world, we remember that the father of our country believed that the freedoms we secured in our revolution were not meant for Americans alone."

Wow! I never guessed when we were the "terrorists" fighting a Great Power (Britain) that we would still be the underdogs when we are the Great power fighting a ragtag bunch of Sunnis, Shiites and what have you.

What he is really saying from the very beginning, the American Imperial ideology of "universal" values has never changed... though you can always question whether those patriots who fought for an independent state against the large imperial power of Britain would have it wise to repeat the same mistakes as their adversaries from the Revolutionary War.

Here's a better analogy that somehow the President never uses.

A war based on inconclusive evidence of a nation's involvement in the destruction of an American vessel, and aided by journalists and big media magnates concerned for the well-being of a land's in habitants decide to go to war without to liberate them from their terrible oppresors, which in turn leads to an extensive occupation to fight "insurgents" with a force of around 125,000 troops, resulting the deaths around 4,000 American troops and between 250k and a million natives. That was called the Spanish-American War to liberate the Cubans and the subsequent American-Filipino war . A war purely based on manipulation, lies, greed and imperialism. It was also started President William McKinley, the same fuckin' Republican, Karl Rove wished to immulate with President Bush's administration.

As Mark Twain said in opposition to the mess in the Philipines (though one can argue the stakes were not as high for us internationally):

"We were to relieve them from Spanish tyranny to enable them to set up a government of their own, and we were to stand by and see that it got a fair trial. It was not to be a government according to our ideas, but a government that represented the feeling of the majority of the Filipinos, a government according to Filipino ideas. That would have been a worthy mission for the United States. But now – why, we have got into a mess, a quagmire from which each fresh step renders the difficulty of extrication immensely greater. I'm sure I wish I could see what we were getting out of it, and all it means to us as a nation."