The latest Bushism, from a recent speech he gave has me totally flabbergasted. He says we will not leave Iraq until we have achieved a complete victory. How is that even possible?

Assuming, for the moment, that one actually can go to war on concept, how does one know who has won? Presumably Bush intends to fight until there are no more acts of terrorism. But with terrorism so broadly defined in the Patriot Act, when does he expect to achieve that?

There will always be someone who is unsatisfied with the US government. Some of those people will be so unsatisfied that they will take extreme measures. It seems to me that the President wants to keep fighting then, forever. Because one can’t please everyone all the time.

Protests are part and parcel with democracy. Yet according to the Patriot Act, under its definition of terrorism, a person participating in a mass protest is guilty of terrorism. Does Bush expect that there will come a time when there are no more people willing to exercise their first amendment rights?

Now to the other side of this concept of achieving total victory over terrorism. Terrorism is a crime and should be treated like a crime. You can’t go to war against an idea. This is the same trouble with the war on poverty, which was given up early in its infancy because in capitalism it just isn’t possible to achieve victory conditions, that of having no more people living in poverty. (In order for capitalism to work there must be haves and have-nots.) Since terrorism should be treated like a crime, it doesn’t do any good to send the army after it. There is no territory for it to take and fight over. That is what the army does: fight and take over territory. Crimes on the other hand are prosecuted.

We won’t win a war against terrorism. It just isn’t possible as long as it is considered a war. But by prosecuting vigorously those that take part in terrorism we might just bring it down to tolerable levels.

The Next Revolution: Which Side Do You Want To Be On?

Thomas Jefferson said that what we needed in this country most is a revolution every few years. I agree with him. Take a good look at our country now and you too might think that we are long overdue for one.

The state of politics in this country has gotten so bad that only a fool would think that we need to maintain the status quo. Politicians are regularly bought and their votes are regularly sold. Of course we don’t call the situation like that. Of course not. Instead what is happening is that in return for favorable votes on an issue, a politician can expect a campaign donation. Or at the very least to look away.

What we have instituted in this country is legalized bribery. No one can really expect us to believe that money equals free speech. Yet that is their justification. Campaigns are mostly fundraising nowadays among the rich and powerful and more and more that comes to mean the corporations.

The corporations control so much in this country. And not just this country but many others as well. Laws are written and passed with their consent and advice. Rarely does someone come along and decide to do what is really best for the country. Take a look at one of the most recent examples: Social Security.

According to the President, who is really just a corporate shill, the only way that Social Security can be fixed is to put those massive funds into the stock market. What is forgotten is the reason why Social Security was dreamed up in the first place. Back in the twenties, many corporations also had creative accounting techniques. Many people were encouraged to invest all their savings into the market. Those savings were people’s nest eggs for the future, to retire on. Many people lost everything they had. Not just on day of the stock market crash in 1929. And now we are told that the market is much fairer and more civilized. The only people who stand to make a guaranteed killing are the stock brokers and investment banks. And look who are the chief cheerleaders for fixing the program. That’s right, the stock brokers and the investment banks and other similarly positioned entities.

Look at the FEC’s website and see which companies make their donations around the times that the fix for Social Security is being written up and debated. Groups like the American Bankers Association. They are chomping at the bit for this baby. Imagine suddenly having tons of capital to throw at any idea some idiots throw at you. Then remember the S&L bailout that we the people are still paying for. Worse than a kid in a candy store with the world’s biggest sweet tooth.

What can be done about this shameful situation? Well a revolution is good for starters. And what we should demand for our system of government is clean money campaigns, expand the House of Representatives (at least two hundred more people in there would be nice.) and maybe a constitutional amendment that regulates campaign financing. Give the FEC some real teeth to enforce the law with.

Unfortunately, that is as likely to happen as cows flying over the moon. But we can dream. And sometimes dreams come true.

Finally there is something that the Democrats and the Republicans in Congress can agree on. Neither side is particularly interested in Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court. It's a sign of Bush's political clout dropping.

Speaking of Bush, according to a recent Ipsos poll, there are now a majority of people that want to see impeachment inquiries into the lies Bush told about invading Iraq. If that's true, then we only need to contact our representatives and get them on the ball. You can do so at this web sight: http://www.house.gov/writerep/.

Approval for the Bush administration and the illegal Iraq war (remember Congress didn't declare war, and hasn't done so since 1941.)has sunk to an all time low. It has gotten so bad that the president tried to fake a "townhall meeting" with some soldiers currently in Iraq. The questions were scripted and it was even decided who would ask the questions beforehand. If he is willing to do that, then it begs the question, what else has he faked to maintain support for himself? Is he still lying to us?

There is going to be an investigation into some emails that were posted regarding an imminant attack on the New York subway system. Apparently the wealthy and socially elite recieved information on the subway plot before anyone else did. The feds are saying that there might have been classified information leaked. If so, the FBI might be called in.

Why does so much that the government do have to be classified? Anyone else feel like the government is treating us like children and don't think we can handle a little information some time? This is kind of scary, if you think abouit it. We're not allowed to see information on work that Supreme Court nominees do, we're not allowed to see key parts of the 9/11 report, we're not allowed to see who attended the vice president's energy task force... This is getting to be more than a bit frustrating. Is it the end of open government? From there it is only a couple steps to a dictatorship. Anyone else feel like that's where we are headed?

Only time will tell.

Sometime ago a poll was taken regarding what people think about our government. The poll found out that most people think politicians lie to us, that government does not exist to serve the needs of most people, that instead it serves most corporations and the wealthy elite. The epitomy of our corrupt government, the poster boy, is Tom DeLay, the majority leader in the House of Representatives.

For those who may not know, Tom DeLay is an extreme right-wing Republican from east Texas. In fact if one were to ask him, he would probably admit it and be damned proud of it. His goals in Congress include reducing taxes for the rich and the corporations, getting rid of all government regulations on business, and abolish the EPA.

Recently, Tom DeLay was indicted on felony charges in Texas. In Texas it is against the law to use corporate money to finance an election campaign. For DeLay, this is not surprising behavior. He has demonstrated an anything goes, totally ruthless actions to win elections as well as key votes in Congress.

He has two leadership PACs, both aimed at getting and maintaining Republican majority in the Texas legislature and in Congress. This is where his shell game begins. A business association gave DeLay's PACs $190,000 which he turned over to the Republican National Party. They in turn, on instructions from him, presumabely, donated that money to several key Republican candidates running for the state legislature. That's the nature of the case that the prosecution will have to prove.

DeLay is all about money in politics. He is the reason that we need true campaign finance reform. A good model is in Arizona where a person running for state office can opt in to use state funding. There the person only has to raise money from people in the state, and only small contributions. Then they get matching funds. That is essentially the plan in a nutshell. For more information go to www.publiccampaign.org. They are attempting to reduce the influence of special interests, reduce the amount of time spent fundraising and allowing the person elected to spend more time legislating and voting their conscience.

But that wouldn't work for someone like Tom DeLay. DeLay spends a considerable amount of time raising big bucks from business and the wealthy elite. In fact, if one were a constituent of his, the only way one would get to see him in person or even talk to him on the phone, would be to have made a huge money contribution to him. $10,000 buys a person a group dinner with him. The prices and the level of communication go up from there.

Tom DeLay runs what is known as the K street Project. K street in Washington D.C. is where many lobbyists have their offices. The K street Project is to have the lobbyists only use Republicans for their front people. If one wants to be seen, better pony up the huge cash. But what it gets them is time on the hill writing legislation. That's right, the lobbyists write the bills that they hope will become law. And it goes without saying that the companies and the industries that pay for the lobbying will be the only ones to benefit.

He would deny it of course. Or maybe he is bold enough to say that essentially his vote is bought. Thus it is important to get this corrupt politician out of office. His district is in Sugar Land, Texas. Those who live there, don't vote for him. But if we can't get him out of office that way, then hopefully the prosecution will win their case.

Michael Brown, the former director of FEMA, was grilled by Congress recently on his response to hurricane Katrina. When it came time to accept responsibility for the failures of the agency, he employed the usual tactic used by the members of the Bush administration. He blamed someone else. In this case Governor Blanco of Louisiana and Mayor Nagin of New Orleans.

According to Brown, his biggest mistake was in not realizing that Louisiana was dysfunctional. According to him he was doing a good job. The mess that resulted from Katrina was, again according to him, everyone else's fault but his.

Unfortunately for Michael Brown, that just isn't the case. Sure the state and local governments share some of the blame. But to shove the entire responsibility onto them is patently absurd.

Perhaps Michael Brown didn't understand what the letters stood for. It's a slip up anyone could make, really. Federal Equestrian Management Agency. Kind of explains a lot.

But seriously, why, according to the news reports, did he wait several hours after the storm had hit, to ask his boss if he should do anything? And even then, he was m9ore worried about his image and that of the agency's. It is because of this that he was so reviled.

We can do better. Before "homeland security" became such an in phrase, FEMA was a separate agency answerable only to the president. (Incidentally, am I the only one who thinks "homeland security" sounds really fascist?) The system worked then. If it ain't broke, why fix it?

Our country may never become perfect. It certainly wasn't before little George became president. But that doesn't mean we can't try. Next time someone gets the wild urge to rearrange government, maybe they ought to take a moment for reflection. Sometimes things are just fine as they are.