The "C" word

Conservatives did a good job, over decades, using a steady propaganda campaign to make "liberal" a pejorative. They were so successful that we on the left have switched to a new word - progressive. How about turning the tables? If you look at the state of the union, we live in a conservative-created world. First and foremost, conservatives can certainly be branded as hypocrites. They SAY they defend the Consitution, but for the last 7 years it has been under siege by the right. They SAY they're for small government, but the size of the federal government and its subsequent interference in our daily lives have seen exponential growth under the Republican government. They SAY they're compassionate conservatives, but for the last 7 years government has become an advocate for the rich and powerful at the expense of the the middle class and the poor. They SAY they're for limited interference in the affairs of foreign countries, but their misguided dabbling in other countries, including one war that never should have started and the two poorly managed wars, have created the strongest anti-American sentiment in history. They SAY they are the party of fiscal responsibility, yet the "conservative" president is leaving us 9 TRILLION dollars in debt. We have a mean spirited and divided country, low on morale and fearing the future. This is the Bush legacy, but it's also the legacy of the Republican Party and of conservatives in general. Conservatives can't be expected to fix this - they created it. While the current crop of Repulican candidates are distancing themselves from Bush, they are not distancing themselves from his policies. They all support the war, in varying degrees and they all repeat the mantra of "tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts." They are all conservative hypocrites who represent one group and one group only - rich white guys. That's the group that thrived under Bush, and all the "conservative" candidates will make sure that continues.

The Surge President and His Legacy

So Bush "surged" Iraq and got a relative period of calm. It apparently was enough to make us forget that our soldiers are still dying there and that we're still pouring one to two billion dollars per week into that black hole of a war. It's apparently enough for us to put the war on the back burner, and that's a shame. I happen to think that a country at war should have no higher priority than to finish or end that war. Everything else should be a lower priority. What's ironic is that this surge, while it may have reduced violence, has done nothing to improve the infrastructure of Iraq. It has not resulted in progress for the Iraqi "government." The only thing it's done is give Bush the chance to maintain status quo until he leaves office. If he can just surge till January, he will leave a very expensive, relative calm to his successor. If things get worse, it will be the next president's fault. And no matter what the next president does to improve the situation in Iraq, if it's successful, Bush will take credit. So the surge, as far as he's concerned, is the biggest success of his presidency. It has worked so well that he's going to "surge" Afghanistan next. 3,300 marines will not actually be enough to make up the troop shortage there caused by decreased commitment of will and troops by his "coalition of the willing." But he may get the temporary lull in Afghanistan that he got in Iraq that will allow him to say things were getting better when he left office and put him in the same position - blame his successor for subsequent failures, but take credit for future success.
He's taking his lessons from the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan and applying them here at home. He now wants to "surge" our economy. We have 9 trillion dollars of debt directly attributable to the Republican economy. I don't call it the Bush economy because this is the one thing Republicans have always agreed with him on. Cut taxes, even if it means we go broke. In this case, the surge is necessary because, while recessions are part of the normal economic cycle, since this economy was fueled by individual and national debt, few people have the savings we usually have to get us through hard times. Since almost no one has a personal safety net (Americans are debtors, not savers), the government needs to provide it. What I don't get is that no one is pointing out that this is a Republican economy and will be a Republican recession. Once the nominee is decided, I hope he or she points this out. Republicans are all still crying "Tax cuts! Tax cuts!" They support the Bush economic philosophy and even say he didn't go far enough. The last successful fiscal conservative was...Bill Clinton! It took a Democrat to fix the Reagan/Bush Sr. economic mess, and only a Democrat will do what's necessary to fix the looming Bush Jr. economic disaster.
It's not all the Republicans' fault. We Americans have suspended our common sense. We know and have always known that debt is a bad thing. On the individual level, some debt is unavoidable. We need mortgages to finance our homes. Car loans are the only way to get reliable transportation for most of us. But spending beyond our means with accounts at department stores and maxed out credit cards is just STUPID. It's bad for families. It's bad for the economy in the long run, since spending dependent on debt is UNSUSTAINABLE. This is where common sense has been suspended on the individual level. We have let economic "experts" hornswoggle us and convince us that this common sense principle doesn't apply to the government. We're so rich that, as Dick Cheney said, "Deficits don't matter." Well, quit listening to these idiots. The same principle applies - a certain amount of debt is reasonable and sustainable. We need deficit spending in time of war or during recessions, but when the economy is good, we should use that as an opportunity to pay down the debt. This is smart, this is reasonable, this is common sense. The Republicans have used this economic boom fueled by debt, not to pay down the national debt, but to increase it. Unfortunately, Bush is all too willing to use a "surge" rebate to make us feel better in the short term, to give us a little breathing room until he's out of office, at which time he can blame his successor for failures and take credit for any improvements. And people say he's stupid.

Guilty pang of elation

Yesterday I took my oldest son to register and pay for another semester at the local community college. He had applied to go to University of Houston, but his application didn't get considered because of a snafu in the admissions office. Thus, one more semester at home. On one level, I was sorry for him - he so wanted to go back to Houston to be close to his girlfriend, who attends Rice University. Still, when I dropped him off at San Antonio College, I had this brief moment of elation. I smiled at the realization that we would have our son home for one more semester. In a very selfish way, I admit that I am glad.

Obama and Hope

The more I think about the Iowa caucus, the more encouraged I am. That's important for a Texas Democrat. The concept of hope took seed during the last elections. Lots of people don't know it, but two of the seats picked up by the Dems were in Texas. But I watched the national political developements with dismay - would the Democratic Party really choose Hillary Clinton to be our candidate? I like Edwards the best, but Obama is a close second. Now it's beginning to look like Democrats nationwide are thinking the same thing. Time for Democrats to be liberals. Yeah, haul out the "L" word! Make it a party thing - the whole mess in Iraq, the mortgage crisis, inflation and expensive oil, these are all problems created by or exacerbated by Bush with the support of Republican congressmen. We should be able to win with some sort of "don't reward failure" campaign, or, with a more positive spin, "All we are saying, Is give Dems a chance." Then we have to do something unprecedented in recent politics - demonstrate competence. Bring down the national debt, repair our reputation abroad, use our tax dollars responsibly, GET US OUT OF IRAQ, mend the polarization here, reduce the size of our bloated government, help us pay for college and health care. Make this a better country for everyone to live in, instead of pandering to the wealthy and powerful. We won't have to achieve all these goals at once, but we should make progress on all of them. Because the first party to take the White House and Congress, then demonstrate basic competence, will control the country for decades.

The Iowa Caucus

OK, here's my read on the Iowa caucus results: best news - we may not have to settle for Hillary after all; #2 - young voters turned out in strength!!; #3 - Huckabee won in Iowa, but he's unelectable. He's going to polarize Republicans because he's the only one evangelicals can vote for AND he's the one the rest of the party can't vote for; #4 - Romney may not recover, which means McCain is going to be the choice of party die-hards.
So IF (and that's a big IF) the general election comes down to Obama vs. McCain, Obama wins in a landslide. He will also wipe out Huckabee. In other words, I'm beginning to feel something I haven't felt in a long time...HOPE! But I take nothing for granted. If Americans are stupid enough to re-elect Bush, they're dumb enough to put a Republican back in the White House. Young voters, if they get off their butts and vote, will be the best guarantee against that.
What the heck - New Hampshire predictions - I think McCain will win NH, Romney second, and no one else will do much of anything. I think Obama will win for the Dems, with Hillary 2nd and Edwards third.
What to watch for - Hillary has to make some campaign changes. It will be interesting to see what she comes up with. I think she's been using Bill so much that people are getting the feeling she thinks we should vote for her because she's married to him. That won't wash. She's also gotten into the habit of giving politician's answers to every question. She has to start talking to us, even if it means she makes mistakes. That's what Obama, Edwards, and Huckabee do, and it's paying dividends for all of them. Time to get real, Hillary.
I still hope Edwards wins, but I like Obama almost as much. On the Republican side, I hope Huckabee gets the nomination because he's the least electable of all the unelectable Republicans. It's been an interesting political process to watch.