Parodies Lost

Update: Americans See Bush Threat & Concerns Raised About Abuse of Power

[Note:  This is an update from the previous article, below]

A Washington Post-ABC News poll taken the day after news was released of the massive NSA collection of American telephone records showed a majority of Americans supporting the effort. However, a Newsweek web exclusive posted Saturday, May 13th paints a different picture.

In a poll conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International of 1,007 adults aged 18 and older between May 11 and 12 by telephone found very different results. A majority of Americans (53 percent) think the NSA's program "goes too far in invading people's privacy," while 41% believe it's necessary to fight terrorism.

An AP analysis issued late this afternoon asked the question, "Is Bush Overreaching?" Newsweek asks the question, "Has the Bush administration gone too far in expanding the powers of the President to fight terrorism?"

Despite assurances from the president that American's rights are “fiercely protected,” and that “we’re not mining or trolling through the personal lives of innocent Americans,” 57 percent of Americans aren't buying it, agreeing that administration has “gone too far in expanding presidential power.” Thirty-eight percent think the Administration’s actions are appropriate. The poll also found that Bush's popularity continues to linger at the lowest in his presidency, at 35 percent, with Iraq being his biggest problem: 86 percent said Iraq and information revealing the way in which the decision was made to go to war account for most of their low opinion of the president.

In virtually every area, Bush fairs poorly.

• Rising gas prices: 17 percent approve.
• Federal budget deficit: 19 percent approve.
• Immigration policy: 25 percent approve.
• Handling of taxes: 39 percent approve.
• State of the Country: 71 percent are dissatisfied.
• The New Congress: 52 percent want to see Democrats in control vs. 35 percent for Republicans.
• Presidential Race: Half want a Democrat while only 31 percent want a Republican.
• Who can better bring about the changes the country needs: Democrats over Republicans by 53 to 30 percent.

The AP story notes, "President Bush has made broad use of his executive powers: authorizing warrantless wiretaps, collecting telephone records on millions of Americans, holding suspected terrorists overseas without legal protections. His administration even is considering using the military to patrol the U.S. border." Bush has consistently told Congress that he will ignore legislation if he thinks it will "interfere with his constitutional authority."

The technique he's perfected is to issue hundreds of statements when signing bills into law that claiming that he has the right to ignore provisions of the bill he feels interferes with his presidential powers. Because he has not vetoed any bill sent to him, Congress has had no way to challenge these statements where they can be resolved in the courts. This technique is how he has ignored laws requiring him to give reports to Congress about how the Patriot Act is being implemented and about a ban on torture. A number of political analysts have expressed grave concern about his actions.

"The president apparently believes, based on a number of recent statements and policy directives, that anything he approves is automatically legal," said Stephen Cimbala, a Pennsylvania State University professor who studies national security issues. "I do think the president has pushed the envelope," said Georgetown University political scientist Stephen J. Wayne. "He seems so determined for another act of terrorism not to occur on his watch that he has forgotten the constitutional protections that most Americans value as highly as they value their security."

As if things weren't looking bleak enough for the president, it turns out that, by a wide margin, Americans think better of former President Bill Clinton than they do of him. A poll of 1021 adult Americans conducted May 5-7 by Opinion Research Corp. for CNN found that Bush didn't win in a single category: Handling the economy, Clinton beat Bush by a 2 to 1 margin (63 vs. 26 percent); solving the problems of ordinary Americans went to Clinton 62 to 25 percent; foreign affairs, Clinton 56 percent vs. Bush at 32 percent; taxes, Clinton 51 vs. 35 percent; handling national disasters, 51 Clinton, 30 percent Bush; who has divided the country more went to Bush with 59 percent vs. Clinton's 27 percent. Bush can take heart that he and Clinton were statistically tied on two issues: honesty and handling national security.

There seemed to be no good news for the president today.

Technorati Tags: Bush, NSA, phone records, Republicans, privacy, CIA, domestic surveillance, Clinton, gas prices, homeland security, Iraq, terrorism
Add to: | Technorati | Digg | del.icio.us | Yahoo | BlinkList | Spurl | reddit | Furl |

Immigration's Evil Side

This is a true story.  The person trapped in the Kafkaesque world of U.S. Immigration is still in a holding facility so I have to be careful about specifics because I firmly believe the Immigration people will take it out on him should they be able to identify him.

Let's call him Franz, as in Franz Kafka.  Franz is a man in his early 30s from a Western nation who has a green card and has lived in the U.S. for some years.  He is cursed with serious mental problems that are under control when he's taking his medication, but before he was arrested, like many people with this kind of illness, he'd stopped taking them.  He violated a restraining order in a manner not serious enough to warrant arrest, let alone deportment.  But he also began a massive letter and phone campaign to a U.S. government agency about what he perceived to be illegal activity.  At the end, he was demanding $50 billion. 

Was Franz harassing them?  Sure.  Was he a pest?  Absolutely.  Did he at any time, in any way do anything that could be perceived as a threat?  No.  But the agency contacted Immigration, and he was arrested and taken to a holding facility 5 1/2 hours from his home--in the middle of nowhere.  He cannot receive phone calls although he can make them.  He can be visited for 2 hours a week between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m.  The facility is an enormous, concrete garage with cots.  There is no privacy, even in the showers.  He has been there for almost two months and has not once been allowed outside.

Six weeks ago, Franz had his hearing (via video conference!) with Judge Wayne Iskra.  I mention the judge's name because he's the only bright spot in this sordid affair.  In advance of the hearing, the government lawyer agreed with Franz's lawyer to voluntary departure rather than deportation because, she admitted, the government's case was weak to non-existent.  The difference is substantial.  Voluntary departure means he can reapply for admission to the U.S. in the future.  Deportation means sayonara forever.  She also assured his lawyer three times that she had his passport.

Judge Iskra at first comes across as a no-nonsense, firm,  strict judge.  But watching him deal with a number of cases before Franz's came up, I was impressed with his profound respect and patience for the people (all via video conference) awaiting a decision about their status.  He also showed both a willingness to be flexible and a degree of humanity that must be difficult given his job.  Franz's mother had flown over for the hearing, and the judge asked her to sit next to his attorney.  And when the hearing was over, Judge Iskra said he had some work to do and let Franz and his mother continue to use the video conferencing.

The ruling:  Voluntary departure within 8 days.  As Judge Iskra said, "Let's get this young man home as fast as possible so he can get some help."  But he extended it to 30 days just in case the Immigration and Deportment Division couldn't get their act together.  Franz was to stay at the detention center.

His mother had to buy a one-way, open ticket, which she did the next day, and it was given to the Immigration people in charge of departures.  That's when what can only be called the corruption began. 

The government lawyer suddenly couldn't find the passport.  The embassy said they couldn't issue travel papers until they had a firm date.  The Immigration people said they couldn't pick a date until they had the travel papers.  Then the Immigration Nazis decided that Franz was a risk and had to be accompanied by two federal agents even though the judge never ordered that, so he had to wait until agents were available. 

Weeks have gone by.  Franz's lawyer can rarely get in touch with the Immigration goon in charge of the case--even when he goes to his office and sits there.  The 30 days have expired, which means that Immigration can argue that Franz failed to fulfill his obligations and can be deported.

My wife kept telling me that that's what Immigration was trying to do.  I thought her paranoid.  Turns out I was pitifully naive.  His lawyer told me that this is a typical Immigration ploy.  They hate voluntary departures, so they delay the departure beyond the date set by the judge, argue that it's the victim's fault, and deport them.  As they've told the lawyer, they don't care what the judge ordered.  They don't want any of these people in the U.S.

Franz committed no crime.  Everything the judge ordered was delivered immediately.  Franz and however many others the Immigration goons treat this way will go home--eventually--hating the United States because of the actions of a few arrogant bureaucrats with shit for brains.  Most of these people trapped in this chamber of horrors are not criminals, most are decent people who got caught up in the evil side of America's immigration policy.

I don't expect this post to change anything.  I'm seriously considering contacting the media and have talked to Franz's lawyer about it.  But maybe, just maybe, someone will read this and send it to someone who can do something about a system that violates every value we hold dear as a country.

<i>Technorati tags:</i>

<a href=http://technorati.com/tag/Immigration rel="tag">Immigration</a>,

<a href=http://technorati.com/tag/Law rel="tag">Law</a>,

<a href=http://technorati.com/tag/Politics rel="tag">Politics</a>,

<a href=http://technorati.com/tag/Government Corruption rel="tag">Government Corruption</a>

DC Going Dry

It wasn't a dark and stormy night on May 15th.  Unless, of course, you happened to Debra Bolton, energy lawyer, who had had a glass of wine with dinner and was driving home at 12:30 in the morning.  Her headlights were out & one of the district's finest, Police Office Dennis "My Last Name is a Joke" Fair, pulled her over.

She apologized and explained that perhaps the garage attendant--those sneaky bastards--had turned off the automatic lights mechanism.  Although she tested .03 on the Intoxilyzer test--well below the legal limit, WHAM!, she was arrested, handcuffed, thrown in jail, and charged with driving under the affluence of inkahol.

Zero tolerance!  That's the new modus opperandus in D.C.  One sip & your zipped.

Said Officer Fair, "If you get behind the wheel of a car with any measurable amount of alcohol, you will be dealt with in D.C. We have zero tolerance. . . . Anything above .01, we can arrest."

No one's said anything about crack, PCP, acid, mescaline, meth, or heroin, so I guess those are o.k. 

To be fair (yuk, yuk, get it), applied properly, it ain't a bad policy.  Don't measure alcohol level, measure level of impairment.  Personally, I can drink an entire bottle of Jameson's Irish Whiskey & drive with no problem--as long as the car isn't moving. 

Some people can't hold their booze.  Hell, some sober people can't drive. 

I'm very familiar with this policy because a couple of months ago (don't tell the D.C. police,)I got pulled over  for allegedly making a turn when people were in the crosswalk.  One of them was in the gutter, bleeding from multiple stab wounds.  The other was sprawled on the other side of the road, snoring away peaceful, but zero tolerance is becoming a big thing in D.C. 

To make matters worse, I'd left my wallet home.  The police officers couldn't have been more polite and professional.  They asked me if I'd been drinking & I promptly lied and said, yes, I'd been at an Irish wake and had had 2 drinks.  (That's only a partial lie.  In the past hour, I probably had 2 drinks.)  Out of the car, I go, ho ho.  One of the officers starts waving a small flashlight in front of my face, telling me to follow it with my eyes.  I move my head & he calls in reinforcements.

I'm cooked.  Actually, I'm pickled, but I'm hiding it well.  Up comes another officer, struts up and pulls out his flashlight.  With an intensity of concentration I didn't know I possessed, I passed with flying colors.

"You know," he said, "with this little thing, I can tell you exactly how much you had to drink."

I kept my mouth shut.  (By the way, my wife, who had a driver's license, flunked the test.) 

So...after a while, they finally get Virginia to acknowledge I'm not only a resident but have a legal driver's license, the officer gives me a warning, and we drive off....very, very slowly.

Now...this policy makes some sense--if they'd apply it properly and consistently.  I'd had a lot more than two drinks, but it was over a long period & I'd powered down enough greasy food & desert to soak up most of it.  And I wasn't impaired...well, no more than normal.

But poor Debra, she's still fighting her arrest.  Someone should tell Officer Fair about that neat flashlight trick.

War: What the Founding Fathers Intended

Finally, something patriots of all color, stripe, and persuasion should embrace--that is, except for the White House and Congress:  A sensible approach to waging war.  In the upcoming Atlantic Magazine, Leslie Gelb and Anne-Marie Slaughter did something really naive--they looked at the history of America's botched wars from Eisenhower's ill-fated decision to take over from the French in Vietnam(although they rightly note that Kennedy & Johnson turned it into a war) to the Messopotamia (with thanks to John Stewart.) 

And then they really showed how unsophisticated they are--they went back to the Constitution.  You know, that document that lays out which branch of government has the power to do what. 

[They]...understood political accountability, and—as their deliberations in Philadelphia attest—they knew that sending Americans into battle demanded careful reflection and vigorous debate. So they created a simple means of ensuring that debate: in Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution they gave Congress the power to declare war.

How quaint.  Congress that once great deliberative body that has turned into a cauldron of partisan bickering, intolerance, incivility, and complete lack of accountability.  Now, to be fair, they understand the dilemma. 

The problem is that Congress wants power without responsibility. Most legislators fear the political costs of bucking the commander in chief when the nation appears under threat. Others worry that the president's control of vital intelligence places him in a far better position to judge the need for war. The obvious answer is to demand that the information be shared, but here the president can claim that a debate risks spilling secrets to the enemy.

As a result, Congress has often preferred form over substance.

Vietnam, Reagan & Lebanon & Grenada(that was a good one...we really walloped those Cuban janitors armed with brooms), Clinton & Somalia, and Baby Bush & Iraq.

You think we'd learn from history.  Hell, it's not even history.  Anyone over 40 lived through all that. 

The solution is simple.  We, the people, need to elect representatives and presidents of stature and dignity.  Wha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha...choke, sputter, gasping for breath.  Sorry, that was too much even for me.

I recently picked up Sheehan's A Bright & Shining Lie, the story of the early years of Vietnam--can't believe I hadn't read it before.  While there are clear differences with Iraq, there are terrifying similarities. 

Imagine:  An open, honest discussion between the president and congress--not founded on scoring points with voters but making a reasoned decision about sending our young men and women into harm's way.  Gives you goose bumps, doesn't it.   (Or is that hives?)

Oh well...one can dream.

A Pox On All Your Houses

Where have you been, boy?  You haven't posted in ages.

I'll tell you, I'm just fed up.  I've had it with lunatics crawling out of cracks of the foundation of the world--on all sides--liberals, conservatives, libertarians, religious nuts, environmental nuts, health nuts, and walnuts.

Little testy, aren't we?

Testy?  Testy?  I'm French Fried, except some goof ball foodies are telling me that french fries cause cancer.  Of course, they don't tell me that I'd have to eat 10,000 a day for 10,000 days to increase my cancer risk by .000000000001%. 

What moron said "extremism in the pursuit of normalcy is no vice?"

I don't think that's the correct quote. 

Hey, whose blog is this?

Sorry.

It's just getting too easy to make fun of everyone and it isn't as much fun anymore. 

• Big deal, they dumped the head of FEMA today.  How could Bush have appointed him in the first place?  Half the countries in the world are trying to send aid, and these bozos are spending their time trying to focus blame on state and local officials.  One good thing, though--anyone who says racism isn't alive & well in the U.S. is either dead or a racist.  Wonder what Clarence Thomas is thinking right now?
• Our world image has sunk so far, we're like a 3rd world country.  People can't believe we'd let our own citizens wallow in despair.  Foolish foreigners. 
• Iraq?  Are they kidding?  We can't win, we can't leave, the Iraqis are killing each other.  Hell the Palestinians are killing each other.  Afghanistan is a total mess. 
• Health care?  Forget medicare & medicaid.  I know why 45-50 million Americans don't have health insurance--they can't afford it.  We're affluent by anybody's standards, but I'm self-employed & anywhere from 15 to 20% of our monthly budget goes to health care costs!   And that's more than most people make in a month.

Well, there you go, typical liberal whining.

You're right. 

• Enviroids & Health Nazis:  It's still the same old scare and confuse, find that hot button that will cause all the skinny little libs living in terror to write big checks.  Let's put labels on soda because sugar isn't good for you.  ARGGGHHHHH.  The same chemical that's going to give me cancer if I eat a potato chip happens to occur naturally in fruits, vegetables, nuts (no, not the health nuts--the kind that grow on trees) but the health nazis never mention that. 
• Pesticides on food--give me a break.  Better yet, give the American people a break.  There's no risk.  None.  Effectively zero.  Try to tell people that and they get angry.  It's like when they conducted the health studies after Times Beach, Three Mile Island, and Love Canal.  Guess what?  There was no increase of illness.  Response.  Rage, disbelief, lawsuits.  Oh sure, believe your ambulance chasing lawyer with his boxcar of bought and paid for docs who'll confirm anything he wants.
• The Democratic Agenda:  "Hey, guys, we gotta get a consultant to help us talk good like the Republicans do."  No wonder we lose year after year.  Is there a Democrat out there with an original idea.  We've ceded to the compassionate conservatives (talk about an oxymoron) the very values that once made Democrats proud.  That lack of philosophical substance is why John Edwards is going to be the chief justice of the Supreme--God help us--Court.

You mean John...

Hey, it's my blog, beanbag.  that was a joke.

Sorry.  I'm not good at history.

You want more on Democrats and liberals?  Regulate, regulate, regulate...sounds like regurgitate, regurgitate, regurgitate.  Sure, companies and industries have made tons o' mistakes, but the solution is isn't to brand them all devils to gain voter support & campaign contributions and impose idiotic regulations that wind up costing us more money.  Grrrrr.  Has anyone in in the Democratic party ever met or talked with a scientist.  For that matter, has any Republican? 

And just plain old human beings. 

• Parents deny vaccines to their kids because of completely erroneous claims that they can cause autism.  Wait a minute, though.  Whom do they sue when their kids get so sick, they're either permanently injured or they die?  Wow.  Conundrum.
• A poll in 2000 found that 84% of people believe that God performs miracles.  41% believe the Bible is totally accurate.  28% believe witches have real power. 12% of people think Joan of Arc was Noah's wife. 
• Of non high school graduates, 58% believe God created human beings pretty much as we are within the last 10,000 years.  If I were God, I'd be pretty pissed.  Look at us--physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually, we've just barely crawled out of caves.  About half believe in angels & 1/4 in possession by demons.  Gadfry Daniels, let me out of here.

You got any more?

I got tons more.  Wait a minute, who are you and what the hell are you doing on my blog?

Oops...sorry gotta go.

Wait...hey, come back.  Who was that masked man?

The Big Lie in Politics

It's as old as the Republic itself--the big lie.  In fact, it's probably as old as government.  I bet the guys in togas walking into Socrates's cell with a cup of hemlock told him it was a new flavor of Gatorade.  And he probably believed them.

For ages, the administration has been telling us that Iran (which in Farsi means, "the evil empire") was five years away from having THE BOMB.  Oops, seems they were wrong. 

According to the Washington Post, "a major U.S. intelligence review has projected that those nasty Persians are no where near that goal.  According to our own spooks, Iran is 10 years away from being able to make a nuclear bomb.

Contrast that with administration claims offered with no proof.

Does this mean that Iran isn't trying to build one?  Personally, I wouldn't trust them with a book of matches--one of those confiscated by the overzealous airport officials who will let me bring a sharp-pointed fountain pen onto a plane but not a book of matches.  Go figure.

Wouldn't it be sweet if we had an administration that thought the truth was something more than a commodity to be used as a bargaining chip?  It's Democrats & Republicans.  They do their 180 degree spin depending on whether they're in power or not.  It wouldn't be so bad except for the moral outrage that accompanies the latest proclamations. 

Let's see, who's thinking of running in 2008 who would be an honest politician?  Hold on, give me a minute, will you, this isn't easy.  Let me go do some research, & I'll get back to you on this one.

The State of the Union According to Me

My fellow Americans, I come before you today to deliver an unauthorized and unrequested "State of the Union."  It follows no set format.   Anyone seeking a logical flow will be frustrated.  It's my blog & I'll wander if I want to.

It may seem that our government officials were scraped from the underside of the barrel, but a little historical perspective may help.  Throughout our short history, we've elected some of the dumbest, larcenous, and venal people to national, state, and local offices.  They've robbed us blind, destroyed our infrastructures, ignored serious issues, squeezed more swine into barrels, sent young people off to die in stupid wars, allowed outrageous levels of poverty, despair, and hopelessness.

So, don't feel too bad.  It could be worse.  Wait a minute!  Maybe it is worse.  So what, you'd rather live somewhere else? 

Have Americans ever understood what citizenship means?  John Kennedy (speaking of sleazebags who have been reincarnated into heroes) at least had the good sense to proclaim, "Ask not what your country can do for you.  Ask what you can do for your country."   Silly boy.  Ask rich old people to even consider sharing some of their social security welfare with others & they grow apoplectic. 

A good friend of mine (conservative Republican) who's one of the most decent people I've ever met recently said to me, "there's nothing anyone can do to fix the mess this country & world is in, so I'm just going to worry about me & my family & friends."  Out of a sense of hopelessness, she's spun a cocoon around her & hopes to emerge as a butterfly someday and not a gypsy moth.

And everyone hates us!  Well, not everyone.  Tony Blair thinks we're pretty cool.  It's not a new phenomenon although Bush & Co. have taken the hatred to levels never before imagined.  And the weird thing is that I really do believe that Bush believes that spreading democracy is a good thing (Christian democracy, of course.  Muslims, Hindus, Janes, Jews, et. al need not apply.)  But I wouldn't make the same claim about some of the people around him.  For a time when we were dumping billions on the Egyptians (mid- to late 90s), they loved Americans.  Well, except for the terrorists.  They don't love us anymore. 

Even the French hate us, and, contrary to popular opinion, they do remember and are grateful that we saved their butts in two world wars in the last century.  It's just that we treat other countries like vassals, and while their military might is more like military maybe, they're still a proud people & deserve to be treated with respect.

Whoa.  Respect.   The State of the Union has deteriorated to the point where polite discourse means you don't physically beat the crap out of your opponent--anything else is fair game.  Whatever happened to the Golden Rule?  Isn't that a Christian thing?  So how come the right-wing Christians are the least likely to apply the Golden Rule?  And how come the left-wing radicals have twisted it to read, "Do it to others before they do it to you?"

Economically, the state of the union is very confused.  Remember Truman's famous statement, "Somebody find me a one-handed economist so I won't keep getting, 'On the one hand..."  Well, perhaps I paraphrase, but you get the idea.  Economists can't figure out why long-term bond rates are languishing.  They don't understand why the stock market has both feet stuck in very thick mud.  They don't understand the effects of globalization on the U.S. economy.  And I don't understand anything. 

Health care:  Shame on all of us.

Civil Rights:  Shame on all of us.

Environment:  Shame on all of us.

Energy Alternatives:  Shame on the oil companies who just happen to have populated the current administration.  And, of course, shame on us.  Come on, people, SUVs?

Foreign Policy:  Do we have one?

In a nutshell, then, my fellow Americans, is the State of the Union.  The best one can say is, "It's been worse."  Of course, one can also say, "And it could get a lot worse."

I'd leave for Canada, but have you seen their health care system?  And their snow?  And they're too goddamned polite.  So I guess I'm stuck here.  But I'm going to be respectful about it.

In Jameson's Veritas.