Your generous
donations help keep
this site running.
Visa/MC/PayPal accepted.
It's been a week of circular logic from the political world.
To begin with, Mitt Romney gave a speech on religion. This speech was brilliantly summed up in a comment to Chris Kelly's recent Huffington Post column:
1. We should all be tolerant of religions, even ones we don't agree with.
2. Secularism/atheism is a religion.
3. Let's all hate on those traitorous, treasonous, blasphemous secularists/atheists!
Welcome back to the weekly roundup of the good, the bad, and the ugly, and (as always) my humble suggestions of things Democrats should say in media interviews this weekend.
Because I've been away for a few weeks, I have to apologize in advance if I've missed something obvious this week (I'm still getting back up to speed on the American political scene). Hopefully I won't have missed too much!
So here we are, with a year and a day to go before the 2008 presidential election. But what will we be talking about next November as we head to the polls?
I know it is supposed to be my job to prognosticate the future by throwing a dart at the wall and loudly proclaiming "This is where we will be!" -- but today I am turning over the prediction business to you instead. Because I am interested in what other people think the momentous issues of next year's election will be, no matter who is left running. So let me know what you think.
Six House members -- three Republicans and three Democrats -- have joined together to introduce legislation strengthening the 1973 War Powers Act which (if successful) could mean a showdown on the separation of powers before the Supreme Court. This showdown may determine once and for all the limits of the president to order American troops into battle.
Of course, I have no idea what chances this new legislation has for passing Congress as a whole, but the astonishing thing is that it is being ignored almost totally by the mainstream media, which is a shame. Because it deserves debating now, while the White House seemingly is preparing the American public for yet another war (this time against Iran).
Senator Chris Dodd wins the inaugural MIDOTW award for showing how Democrats are supposed to behave. He has tossed down the gauntlet on the wiretapping bill working its way through the Senate, and will put a "hold" on any bill which comes out of committee that provides amnesty for telecommunications companies which have broken wiretapping laws in the past by cooperating with Big Brother and just meekly handing over data without a warrant to compel them.
Well done Senator Dodd! The first ever Golden Backbone is yours in a landslide!
Sovereignty (n) -- government free from external control
Is Iraq a truly sovereign state, or is the Maliki government a puppet of America? We may know the answer to this crucial question in a very short time. Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki could show independence from American interests in many ways, some of them decidedly not to President Bush's liking.
Is Basra a lot better than when the British were holed up downtown? Or is it a lot worse? Or is it currently experiencing a lull in violence that will prove to be the calm before the storm of factional Shi'ite war? Or are the Iraqi militias actually working out their differences with agreements rather than bullets?
Of course, this is not Jeffersonian democracy at its finest. It's closer to warlordism than we'd care to admit as a nation. The process is going to be messy and unpleasant, no matter how it works out. And the lessons of Basra likely can't be applied to other parts of Iraq (due to different ethnic and sectarian populations).
But, as I said previously, Basra bears watching. Because there is a larger question to be asked here: If U.S. troops pull out, will Iraq become more or less stable when we're not around to shoot at anymore?
There's a raging debate within the Bush administration, the punditocracy, and the blogosphere about whether or not it is time to bomb Iran. While this conversation scares small children (and other sane people), most of the focus has been on (1) whether President... oh, excuse me... Vice President Cheney truly is moonbat-crazy enough to do so, and (2) whether anyone else in America (including the military) would go along with the idea. But not enough attention is being paid to what happens after we rain death from the skies down on Iran. Which is a shame, because that's what we ignored during the ramp-up to war with Iraq. And we all know how that turned out.
