I Want to Believe

I want to believe so badly; in a truth beyond our own
hidden and obscured from all but the most sensitive eyes...
-- Fox Mulder, "Closure," The X-Files



I've borrowed this video from friend Tara's blog. It's an amazing testament to the power and appeal of this candidate.

I feel the country has become cynical in the last eight years. We've been classified, separated, and divided. Red State, Blue State. Top 1%, Vanishing Middle Class. It's like a poor pastiche of a Dr. Seuss book.

The economy is in crisis. Each day, the price of oil rises higher and higher while the value of the dollar falls freely. And how do our leaders respond? They give us checks so we can hit the malls to "stimulate" the economy.

Pardon me for asking about the white elephant in the room, but why isn't anyone talking about the biggest drain to the American economy? According to some sources, we are spending roughly $275,000,000 (US) per day. (Or rather, we're racking up "credit card" debt in order to finance these "wars.") How can any economy absorb that kind of reckless spending without some consequences?

In looking at the campaign being run by Senator Clinton, one wonders if she's capable of any authenticity whatsoever. She's changed tactics so many times, that it's really hard to see any message from her as anything but an artfully contrived, Madison Avenue production. (I gotta tell you, I found this spot to be more than a little creepy.)

Were Senator Clinton to ask for my advice, I would suggest that she drop the theatrics (and the histrionics), stop the dirty tricks, and simply run a respectful campaign based on the issues and her plans to address them. Let the voting public choose the candidate with the most thoughtful and effective plans.

Now, I fully realize that each candidate's message is focus-grouped, tested, tweaked, and polished to appeal to the widest possible audience.

Senator Obama, though, is charming, charismatic, and smart. His positions seem to be as nuanced as John Kerry's, but without the qualifying...and confusing...jargon. Senator Obama seems convincingly compassionate in a way that a certain other political candidate never did.

Some have compared the Senator's appeal to that of John F. Kennedy. I can't directly compare the two, in part because I was born weeks after he died. However, I see parallel themes between Kennedy's inaugural address and Senator Obama's stump speeches. In addition, the Senator's recent success is building on itself.

Some talk about Senator Obama's lack of experience. However, Kennedy was a one-term senator before becoming President, as was Abraham Lincoln. Clearly, it's occasionally useful to bring a fresh eye to the problems of governance. Given the shenanigans of the last several years, fresh eyes are more than welcome.

I genuinely hope that Senator Obama is being honest when he speaks of change. I want to believe that change is possible. I want to believe to there are honest politicians who put the country's needs above their own. I want to believe that politicians want to serve the majority of their constituents, not just the elite. I want to believe that rule of law is possible and that companies that break the law fulfilling illegal requests from the government are held to the same standards of Justice that the Watergate co-conspirators were held. I want to believe that these wars can be ended quickly and gracefully. I want to believe that we can tackle the problems of terrorism, unrest, and cultural differences with something other violence and coercion.

I genuinely hope that the American people are tired of being lied to; that they've learned to recognize a steaming pile of rhetoric. I want to believe that we've grown up a little bit during the current Administration.

I do know one thing...if *I* were running for office during this election, I would borrow a phrase from a previous generation and ask, quite simply, "Is the country better off now than it was seven years ago?" If so, vote for the status quo. If not, then look at the leading candidates for change...and let their actions demonstrate the truth of their words.

I want to believe Senator Obama is all he says he is. There is, however, a part of me that is afraid he isn't. I sincerely hope that, should he win the nomination, he senses that cynicism and addresses it.

Video credit: DipDive

On Broken (Political) Promises

Some years ago, our current President promised to be a uniter, not a divider. He promised to restore dignity to the White House. He promised to hold his staffers accountable for illegal actions.

Promises are like eggs...easily broken. If I may be allowed to offend the metaphor, I believe President Bush has not only broken his promises, he's pitched the entire carton to the curb and ground it underfoot, gleefully cackling at his "cleverness."

My darling JP has done a terrific job of collecting responses to the President's commutation of I. Lewis ("Scooter") Libby's prison sentence. Like her, I am completely disgusted by the President's action. While Junior (my pet name for him) may feel Libby's sentence excessive, I wonder about his feelings regarding Valerie Plame's career prospects, which have been seriously compromised because someone in the current administration decided to break the law and play politics with her identity...all because her husband wouldn't sign off on the *wink wink* *nudge nudge* Saddam "bombs-for-oil" blame game.

In trying to research a post that didn't completely rip-off my wife's, I came across this video clip by Keith Olbermann, which accurately captures my disgust and sentiment toward the (second) Bush Presidency at the moment. It's blunt and it's clear that Olbermann is passionate about his feelings. (If you don't want to watch the ten minute video, you can find the transcript here.)

The only thing I would add to Olberman's calls is a reminder that trust is like an egg....easily broken and nearly impossible to rebuild.

Photo credit: Richard Sweet

Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?

We have a new game show in the U.S. It's called "Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader" and features contestants grappling with questions taken from our primary school curriculum. (Quickly Now: How many moons does the planet Mars have? No peeking.)

DD was in the fifth grade when this show debuted, so we watched several episodes. She delighted in knowing answers to questions that JP and I both had forgotten in the years since we were in fifth grade. (In my case, that's been a few years, believe me.)

One of the many things she studied this past year was the composition of the U.S. government. She learned how we have three branches, each designed to check and balance the other so that no single branch takes too much power unto itself.

I was recently reminded of her lessons--and the show--when I read of Vice President Dick Cheney's claims that the Office of the Vice President does not, in fact, belong to the executive branch of the U.S. government and is therefore free from oversight. These claims seem, well, disingenuous coming from one who has served in a variety of capacities in our government.

Sadly, it seems our vice president is not, in fact, smarter than a fifth grader. Either that or he's trying to hide something.

*Sigh* It almost makes me pine for a more innocent time, one where the (then) vice president was unclear on the proper spelling of a certain root vegetable.

Secrets, Lies, and Audiotape

Today, the Central Intelligence Agency released several hundred pages of formerly classified material detailing (among other things) misdeeds and other embarrassing activities made by "The Agency" between 1959 and 1973.

In the tradition of Dave Letterman's "Top 10" lists, here is a summary of the so-called Family Jewels:

8. Tested equipment in Miami prior to a political convention.

7. CIA personnel "swept" the 1968 conventions (and candidates) for listening devices.

6. Loaned equipment to police agencies near Washington D.C. so they handle protests from "dissident elements" rather than the CIA's own guards.

5. Surveilled "newsmen" to identify their sources and other activities to support local police investigations.

4. Illegally confined a Soviet defector for nearly three years.

3. Wiretapped two unidentified newsmen to learn their sources. Most identified.

2. Tried to use the Mafia to assassinate Fidel Castro.

1. We don't know.

That's right! One secret, the first one mentioned in the report, has been kept private. The details appear to have taken two and a half pages, pages that are completely blanked on the online report.

What do you suppose was detailed in those pages? Watergate involvement? The JFK assassination? Tests involving LSD? Remote viewing? Roswell? Some strange combination of these possibilities?

Whatever the final secret, one thing became pretty clear while I was reading the report. The agency's former activities could have been ripped from modern headlines. Illegal detention. Wiretapping of American citizens. Attempted regime change. Monitoring of dissidents and protesters.

It doesn't seem like much has changed in the last 34 years, does it?

One final note. Disclosures like this intrigue historians, political science students, and X-Philes. They generate headlines and water cooler gossip. They're fun to read and ponder. They're flashy; they command attention. I'm sure we'll be hearing about the Castro thing for days.

I do wonder one thing, though. Why was so much information was released at this particular time, especially after so many years of official denials and refusals?

It wouldn't happen to be a transparent attempt to shift attention from more recent acts of questionable legality, would it?

Nah. Our leaders wouldn't do that to us. Would they?

Photo credit: Paul Morse