Mountain Climber (not Sir Edmond) Hillary meets the Obama-ble Showman

From Wayne Howard (by permission)--
For the first time in many years the Democratic Party is suffering from an embarrassment of riches. Two, count ‘em, two competent candidates for becoming the party’s standard bearer for the 2008 presidential election. Now, all the Democrats have to do is to figure out how to keep from shooting themselves in the proverbial foot and handing the country over to four more years of failed economic theories (supply-side economics, trickle-down etc.) and a, quite frankly, scary foreign policy that envisions American soldiers in Iraq for the next century with the opening of yet another war against Iran.

Hillary, in her struggle up the mountain of American male political dominance should not lose sight of the fact that she and Barak Obama are, after all, on the same side. They both have connections in the U.S. Senate (and House of Representatives) and experience with the ins and outs of the legislative process. Their positions on the issues are not that far apart, differing mainly in the details. When her opponent’s supporters try to imply that a woman might not be strong enough for the position in a time of war she can readily point to strong female heads of state that were successful during crises ( Indira Gandhi, Maggie Thatcher, Golda Mier).

Obama brings a somewhat more youthful outlook and an exciting articulation of the basic ideals on which the United States of America was founded. He has the words and the delivery to move and excite people down to their cores. Consequently, he draws huge crowds (Hillary draws big crowds, but his are bigger) and has been accused of being a showman without substance. But, oratorical gifts are significant when it comes to leading a large diverse nation like the U.S.A. He has also shown a knack for surrounding himself with highly qualified people to advise him on policy issues in the course of his campaign.

Finally, both camps should avoid convention “dirty” tricks. For example, seating delegates from Michigan and Florida at the convention. The respective state parties knew the rules beforehand and flouted them, thinking, no doubt, that the national party wouldn’t enforce the rules. The voters in those states have a right to be angry, but they should direct the force of their ire, not at the candidates, but at the state party officials that sold them that bill of goods in the first place.

Hillary the mountain climber and the Obama-ble showman. Either would be a welcome relief to the agony of the last eight years. With either the American People can’t lose. Unless…

The Neglected Site

I knew it had been a while since I'd posted anything to this site, but I didn't realize what a long time it had been, until I looked over my previous postings and found that almost a whole year has gone by without a peep from me. I will endeavour to correct this by making a concerted effort to do some regular writing here in addition to the other projects I currently have going, so look for some new stuff soon.

Where are you, Eliot Ness?

As this Fourth of July has ground to a close, I had the sense that our country had become a part of a late 1950's crime drama. This complete with characters that would do a Mafia family proud: Dick "The Enforcer" Cheney, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, "W". The episode begins when Scooter lies under oath to cover the goings-on in the Enforcer's fiefdom and is convicted of perjury. The Enforcer tells him not to worry because he'll never have to serve any jail time since the appeals will drag on till after the elections and then W will pardon him just before leaving office. But the tough-on-crime judge appointed by W seemed to think that Scooter should start serving his sentence before the appeals process had run its course. Did Scooter threaten to squeal if he had to do jail time? Was that why W commuted the jail time in the sentence? What do the Enforcer and W have to hide? Where is Eliot Ness when you need him?

Reducing the High Cost of Health Care

The following are some thoughts on things that might be done to reduce the current high cost of health care:

1. Increase the number of medical schools throughout the country. This would increase the number of doctors and should help to lower costs.

2. Subsidize the costs of a medical education. Most medical students incur large debts in the form of student loans which forces them into high-priced specialties in order to pay off the debt.

3. Reforming malpractice insurance so that premiums are not excessive (some specialists have left their practices because of these costs).

4. Subsidize technology (medical imaging, specialized surgical tools etc.)

The high cost of medical care is complex and will not have a single solution, but it's something we need to start thinking about.

Paris Hilton and Britney Spears -- Secret Agents

Highly placed unnamed sources revealed today that Paris Hilton and Britney Spears are in fact undercover CIA agents whose assignment has been to divert the attention of the American people from the war in Iraq. Their declining effectiveness in spite of the increasingly extreme measures employed to accomplish their mission is most likely what led to their "outing".

The offices of the President and the Vice President have to date made no comment on this developing story.

"W" Redux

Today's news reports actually sent a shiver down my spine, the kind of feeling that mother would have said was "someone walking on your grave." George W.'s response to the criticism of his "new" Iraq policy seems to be a stepping up of the anti Iran rhetoric which eeriely resembles the weeks leading up to the current fiasco in Iraq. I have the uneasy feeling that "W" is laying the PR groundwork for blaming the potential failure of his "surge" on Iranian agents. And then what, conduct a preemptive war against Iran?

Big Brother George and the Cheny Waterworks

George Bush's Orwellian administration continues to demonstrate its total disreguard for the Constitution of the United States of America and the basic human values that should be a part of how we conduct ourselves, whether at war of at peace. Tony Snow assures everyone that the Vice President, Dick Cheny, was not referring to waterboarding when he talked about dunking detainees to extract information. Is the administration afraid to let the VP speak for himself? As the fictional lawyer, Perry Mason, might have said, "This is not best evidence. Unless Tony Snow is a mind reader, he cannot know what the VP meant or didn't mean."

So if it's not waterboarding they're talking about, what kind of dunking did they mean? I don't think anyone actually believes that the person being interrogated would be placed in a dunk tank(the kind found at fairs and other events) and that if he refused to talk the interrogator would throw baseballs at the target until a lucky hit plunged the victim into the water.

So now we have the spectacle of Big Brother George saying that we don't condone torture or use it, but we will use it if we think that we need to ( signing statement). Doublespeak, doublethink, and total incompetence while life imitates art.