What a jackass, part 2

I'm not a particularly political person. Hell, the first time I ever voted in an election was in 2004, and although I knew it was futile, I wanted the right to be able to complain about Bush for four years and at least feel righteous about it beacuse I didn't vote for him.

And for those who did: I hope you enjoy what you've done, electing a man who is not only is probably too stupid to tie his shoes without help, but pigheadedly stubborn in that stupidity. Stupid AND stubborn? Not a good combination.

Speaking of combinations, this current bout of frustration in the leadership of our country springs from the combination of a couple of things I read this morning.

WASHINGTON - President Bush said Thursday Iran may pose the greatest challenge to the United States and diplomacy to thwart the Islamic nation's nuclear program must prevail to avoid confrontation.

In a 49-page national security report, the president reaffirmed the strike-first, or pre-emptive policy he first outlined in 2002. Diplomacy is the U.S. preference in halting the spread of nuclear and other heinous weapons, Bush said.

"If necessary, however, under long-standing principles of self-defense, we do not rule out the use of force before attacks occur — even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy's attack," Bush wrote.

"When the consequences of an attack with weapons of mass destruction are potentially so devastating, we cannot afford to stand idly by as grave dangers materialize. ... The place of pre-emption in our national security strategy remains the same."

So basically he's advocating attacking a country that's done nothing? That maybe possibly someday might do something? And once again he trots one of the two pillars of his tenure in office: "weapons of mass destruction". (The other being the "war on terror, the most useless war since the "war on drugs".) Haven't we already invaded one sovereign nation under the false pretenses of weapons of mass destruction. Now, I'm not saying Iraq wasn't a mass of trouble that maybe needed a little fixing, but to lie to a country, and in fact the world, about your reason for doing it is bad form in my opinion. And I believe it was a lie, I believe at the time we knew there weren't any. I find it hard to believe that the country with probably the largest and most widespread intelligence network fucked that one up so bad. "We are invading Iraq because of their weapons of mass destruction..........ooops, they don't have any." Uh-huh.

Now, of course the textbook reply to this might be: "America is the greatest country in the world. Love it or leave it." And you know what, it is the greatest country in the world. On paper. But I'm getting increasingly disillusioned with a country based on freedom---freedom of choice, of speech, "we hold these truths to be self-evident"---that is run by a regime that ssems to have no problem denying those rights to others.

I find this line to be especially interesting: Diplomacy is the U.S. preference in halting the spread of nuclear and other heinous weapons, Bush said. Mainly because we have the bomb. We haev it, but you can't. Only us. Not that I'd like to see more of this stuff around, but this smacks more of bully-ism than anything else.

OK, you know what, terrorists get their hands on a bomb. I can see them using it againt the U.S. But a sovereign nation? Or for that matter state sponsored terrorism? Well how stupid would a country (Iran in this instnace), have to be to try something like that? An example that would be like me holding a steak knife and facing off against Jason Vorhees with his trusty machete. The only question in how that confrontation would turn out would be if I would end up beheaded or impaled? Either way, I lose.

I'm not a pollyanna. Although I do believe that you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar, I also believe in walk softly and carry a big stick. But when it all turns to vinegar and you're not walking softly, but stomping around in steel-toed workboots swining that big stick, well then I have problems with that.

And we haven't even gotten to part two yet. (Sorry, that this is turning out to be a long one.)

Aside from our disasterous foreign policy, there are our domestic issues. How can you reasonably police your neighbors if your own house isn't in order. Now, I'm not going to run down a list of all the ills that ail us. We'd be here forever. But I will say that I believe that the first step to healing most things is education. And not so much the education of those running the country, but those that someday will. I believe that there has to be a long view in place here, that most issues can not be solved in one liftime, that there is no quick fix. But that with education, they can be fixed eventually. We pass on to our children our beliefs, our opinions and tendencies, and if those things are wrong---racism, for example---then all we've done is passed those on to the next generation.

Everything I read seems to indicate that while we've spent $250 billion on the Iraq war, (a war that while I belive we cannot in good conscience now drop out of, will in the eyes of history be viewed as our next Vietnam), that the budget for education drops or is cut back. And our deficit is what now? I forget the number, but I know it's a record.

In "The War on Our Children" (In These Times, December 19, 2005), Representative Pete Stark(D-California) writes that the Iraq War and the tax breaks given to the wealthiest Americans have placed almost impossible hurdles in front of our children. Since 2002, nearly 7,000 Head Start slots for low-income families have been cut. The next targets are poor mothers with children under six years old. These mothers would have to double their work hours from 20 to 40 hours to remain eligible for vocational training, yet not gain the $10.5 billion needed for the additional childcare. When children reach school age they will be subjected to No Child Left Behind, which has shortchanged public schools by $40 billion as of June, 2005. If they reach college, students could be forced to pay an additional $5,800 for college. The U.S. has spent $250 billion for the Iraq War and will give American millionaires an average tax break of $41, 574 in 2006. These funding priorities may be costing American students their futures.

Information like this seems to indicate that education, or the opportunity for it will be shrinking. Which, in my mind, leads to more clouds in the future and less silver linings.

In closing, if it wasn't so cold up there, I'd move to Montreal.