Waterboarding and Torture, Cheney should demonstrate it's use.

"Waterboarding...consists of immobilizing the victim on his or her back with the head inclined downwards, and then pouring water over the face and into the breathing passages. By forcing suffocation and inhalation of water, the subject experiences drowning and is caused to believe they are about to die." It has been used in the Spanish Inquisition and the Khmer Rouge. During World War II, it was used by Nazi Gestapo and Japanese Kempeitai. It was outlawed by U.S. generals during the the Vietnam War, with a U.S. Soldier recieving a courtmartial for waterboarding a North Vietnamese POW. John McCain, former Republican candidate for president and no stranger to torture, has described it as "very exquisite torture." A book that described its use during the French war in Algeria was banned in France because it included a first hand account that included:

"The rag was rapidly soaked. Water flowed everywhere: in my mouth, in my nose, all over my face. But for a while I could still breathe in some small gulps of air. I tried, by contracting my throat, to take in as little water as possible and to resist suffocation by keeping air in my lungs for as long as I could. But I couldn't hold on for more than a few moments. I had the impression of drowning, and a terrible agony, that of death itself, took possession of me. In spite of myself, all the muscles of my body struggled uselessly to save me from suffocation. In spite of myself, the fingers of my hands shook uncontrollably. "That's it! He's going to talk," said a voice. The water stopped and they took away the rag. I was able to breathe. In the gloom, I saw the lieutenants and the captain, who, with a cigarette between his lips, was hitting my stomach with his fist to make me throw out the water I had swallowed"

In spite of this long history of use as torture, Dick Cheney maintains a position that waterboarding is not torture. Further, he and his lawyers have provided legal justifications for using waterboarding. And further claim that it is the same waterboarding that is used for resistance training as a part of SERE, a Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape training program for military special operations units. However, Jesse Ventura, former Navy SEAL and governor of Minnesota has described the waterboarding he experienced as "torture...It's drowning. It is no good."

Of course Cheney, who happens to have never served in the military because he dodged the draft in order to flunk out of Yale, maintains that waterboarding is necessary to protect the lives of U.S. citizens and servicemen. He likes to ignore that he, along with Condoleeza Rice and Donald Rumsfeld, tried to use waterboarding as a means of establishing a link between Iraq and Al Qaeda, a non-existent link that resulted in a war that cost the lives of thousands of U.S. Warfighters.

If Cheney really wants to make the case that waterboarding is not torture, there is one avenue that remains conspicuously ignored. A demonstration for the American people. To really make his point, Cheney should have it demonstrated on himself, since it results in no extreme physical or mental pain or suffering. I would recommend that the proceedure be overlooked by experienced experts such as John McCain, Jesse Ventura, and SERE Psychologists who can ensure that the waterboarding is authentic. Given his dedication to protecting the lives of American citizens, this is a very small request of Mr. Cheney.

What I'm Reading 5.21.09: Closing Gitmo

Obama defends plan to close Guantanamo Prison. By William Branigin, Washington Post
It's obvious that Guantanamo needs to close. It's closure is a linchpin of foreign relations with countries like Palestine, Pakistan, and Iran. Obama will need a more clear plan for closing the prison including where to place detainees before requesting funds from Congress. Maybe he should be considering U.S. territories like Puerto Rico or Samoa. Very well isolated areas with mostly Christian populations.

Obama-Lite Steele fizzles as Republicans fold. By Margaret Carlson, Bloomberg
Steele is an odd figure for a part chair. He spends perhaps a bit too much time in the spotlight and probably carries an inflated opinion of his role. I honestly think that he is trying to be the Republican Obama, but he has so far not been successful in raising money, getting Republicans elected, or growing the party. Carlson's scathing treatment is, unfortunately, right on.

Rush Limbaugh resigns post as Republican leader? David Knowles, Politics Daily
Republicans really need to take a stand on Rush and stick to it. He is emblematic of a policy of "no." He offers no solutions, is an incendiary blowhard who does nothing but apply poor logic to protect his own fragile ego while blasting out half-baked criticisms of people who are actually contributing to the process from his ivory tower sequestered radio studio. He's been a cancer on the country and the Republican party. I'm with Wanda Sykes, I hope he gets sick and dies a slow death.

Coming to your garage: Le car. By David Harsanyi
Harsanyi sounds like a petulant child. There's no reason to believe that cars with less emissions and better mileage will be terrible cars. It's also the direction that Detroit will have to go anyway. Trucks and SUVs are getting slaughtered by the Prius, a small car that is very successful and happens to be a good car. It's not the government that is mandating smaller, more efficient cars, it's the market, which Harsanyi apparently knows nothing about. And his scenario about a Republican bailing out Detroit is moot, it already happened and his name was George W. Bush.

RNC = Rush-Newt-Cheney? Don't make me laugh. By Karl, Hot Air
Of course the Democrats are going to try to make Cheney, Gingrich, and Limbaugh the faces of the Republican party. They are very unpopular figures who can't seem to shut their mouth. Cheney alone seems to be intent on painting the Republican party as being pro-torture. The conservative media (Fox News) plays right along by deifying these polarizing figures. As long as the party can't learn some humility and start listening to the people rather than telling them that they are immoral, they are going to be irrelevant, which is why Obama has more difficulties with unruly Congress than any kind of real Republican opposition.

What I'm Reading 5.20.09: A new republican alternative for health care

An Alternative to Obamacare. By Tom Coburn, Richard Burr, Paul Ryan, and Devin Nunes, RCP
The plan is interesting, if not fully fleshed out. The Republican congressmen co-opt some traditionally Democratic ideas including industry regulation. The plan doesn't seem to lay out much of what they plan to do to reduce health care costs. I'll be interested to see how the plan develops.

Dissecting the Republican health care plan (Part I). By Ezra Klein, Washington Post
Klein seems to be dead on in his analysis. The Republican party seems to be coming to the center a little in hopes of giving citizens what they really want, solutions to their problems. This could be a sign of future negotiated health care bill somewhere between this Republican bill and Obamacare.

Republican Newt Gingrich calls for Democratic Speaker Nancy Pelosi to resign. By Huma Khan and Jonathan Karl, ABC News
First of all, if Gingrich really wants to be involved, he should run for office again. Aside from that, his opinion that the CIA was damaged by accusations of deception is ridiculous. It's the CIA, accusing them of deception is like accusing a poker player of bluffing, it's what they do. We know for a fact that the CIA has lied to Congress in the past.

Birmingham police beating video: Officers to be disciplined for beating unconscious man. By Carol Robinson, Birmingham News
The man had just flown out of a car that flipped over, he could have easily died. Those cops could be charged with attempted murder. I've worked with a lot of cops in my career and the majority know that it is essential that they maintain professionalism if they want the community to work with them. Videos of 5 white cops beating a half-dead black man with weapons and then trying to cover it up are not going to accomplish that.

What I'm Reading 5.19.09: Major Bipartisan Successes for Obama

Banner day for Obama, he's showing that Democrats and Republicans really can find common ground.

Automakers, Obama announce mileage, pollution plan. Associated Press
A real feather in the cap of both the most popular Democrat (Obama) and arguably the most popular Republican (Schwarzenegger). It's truly amazing that he was able to get Democrats, Republicans, and even automakers on board for this plan. The only real losers are the oil companies and I'm sure everyone will feel very sorry for them.

Senate passes bill to restrict credit card practices. By David Stout, NYT
The bill passed 90-5, meaning almost universal approval across both parties. Definitely a big victory for Obama, but also for the Republican Party showing that they aren't just a "no" machine. the bill itself is a no-brainer, with even the downside (a possible decrease in the availability of consumer credit) being a probable upside by controlling inflation following the deflation we're experiencing with the bursting of the credit bubble.

Obama, Netanyahu discuss U.S.-Israeli disagreements. CNN
It's nearling impossible for Irael to negotiate a two-state solution with the Palestinians when they are in conflict regarding their own leadership. Israel and the U.S. could support the Palestinian Authority in their struggle for power against Hamas in exchange for a two-state agreement. But Hamas is very popular with Palestinians in Gaza, so the destruction of Hamas is not a likely solution. Regardless, Obama seems to strike a nice even tone of supporting Israel withough giving away the store.

How the war on drugs has damaged our society

In a recent interview with the Wall Street Journal, Obama’s new drug czar Gil Kerlikowske stated that he would end the practice of using the terminology of the "War on Drugs" started by Richard Nixon nearly 40 years ago when he founded the DEA. The policy is a a no-brainer, roundly hailed as the right way to go, but after 3 decades of a politicized public health problem, the system has done much more harm than done. It has spent billions of tax dollars and served little purpose other than to make our streets more violent, over-crowded our prisons and done almost nothing to curb the drug trade in our country.

The war on drugs may have been started by Nixon in 1971, but one of the most influential moments in the drug enforcement movement was in 1986, when Ronald Reagan signed into law legislation that instituted mandatory minimum sentences for drug offences. The legislation was accompanies by a rash of similar state-level legislation by politicians desiring to foster an image of being "tough on crime." The legislation had the effect of forcing judges to sentence drug offenders, including those found to be in possession of controlled substances, to mandatory prison terms. The effect was a massive explosion in the prison population. States were ill-equiped to handle this massive increase in prisoners, which led to increased budgets for corrections and a scramble to build more prisons. Which crippled the ability of states to fund other programs including education. The decline of education systems resulted in an ironic cycle, as high school graduates saw fewer professional options and were more likely to resort to crime. To date, the spending on corrections has continued to have an adverse affect on education spending, in 2007 corrections spending in California surpassed education for the first time and showed no sign of slowing.

In the prisons, the overcrowding had dramatic consequences on prison life. What had formerly been moderately dangerous incarceration systems had transformed into a veritable warzone of simple assaults, sexual assaults, and murder. Non-violent drug offenders, many in prison for possession for marijuana were now exposed to massive amount of violence as well as becoming victims of violence themselves. Over time, these non-violent offenders became violent as a result of their exposure and victimization. They also learned to be real criminals by being absorbed into prison culture, including prison gangs and a mentoring system that focuses on commiting crime and avoiding authorities. They can also be exposed to a variety of hard drugs, with no prospects for the future, there is little to stop them from experimenting with whatever they can get their hands on. Through years of conditioning, these non-violent drug offenders enter prison as harmless stoners and come out as hardened criminals and addicts, practically destined to eventually return to the prison system.

Drug policy is an excellent example of how policy in a single area can have dramatic effect on society at large. Legislation aimed at drug abuse, also politicized to foster "tough on crime" positions, have ended up tripling our prison populations, leveraging and bankrupting state budgets, compromising the education system, and making criminals more violent.This area of policy needs dramatic overhaul with the focus on mandating drug rehabilitation and reducing prison populations.

What I'm Reading 5.18.09

Text of Obama's Notre Dame Speech, WSJ
Obama is always a great speaker and he makes some excellent points. One issue underlying this event is the question of whether Notre Dame should have invited Obama in the first place. I think that it was important that they did. On all issues, it is important to listen most to those with whom you disagree. It is the only way understand different perspectives and work toward resolution. Those that protested the speech don't want to hear what Obama has to say, they are threatened by contrary ideas. And that is contrary to American values of free speech.

The year for health care. San Francisco Chronicle
The article layouts out some of the goals and obstacles to getting health care passed. It brings up the excellent point that Obama will have to be personally involved in the writing of the bill or risk losing control of the bill to far-left nutbags in Congress. I think it will also be important to bring some Republican voices to the table to include things like Tort reform and other methods to reduce health care costs. Let's hope that something gets pushed through, Obamacare may not be perfect, but it's quite a bit better than what we have now.

Lesbian leading committee could weaken values, GOP chief warns. By Michael R. Wickline, Arkansas Democrat Gazette
Fair treatment and equal opportunity for all U.S. citizens is at the heart of what it means to be American. It is disappointing to see these relics of intolerance still advocating for naked discrimination. His party should put a muzzle on him or else he should be censured by the state legislature. It is also a blow to the GOP on social issues, the party definitely doesn't need a George Wallace-type figure grabbing headlines. Wallace was a Democrat by the way.

What I'm Reading 5.17.09: Steele Suffering from Foot-in-Mouth Syndrome

It's a Michael Steele special today.

Yes It's that Bad for the GOP. By Chuck Todd, NBC News
Effectively lays out the GOP's current position. Similar to my previous blog, but also calls attention to Republican deficiencies among minorities, the young, the college educated, and the suburban. All growing groups that will field even more voters in future elections. I would also add that they have a disadvantage with women voters.

White House Laughs at GOP Idea to Call Democrats "Socialists." By Jimmy Orr, Christian Science Monitor
Apparently, so is Michael Steele, on Meet the Press today he distanced himself from the RNC resolution that moved to rename the Democratic Party.

RNC Chief: Gay Marriage will Burden Small Business. Associated Press
I would have liked to hear Steele talk about this also. The problem he describes is true of straight marriage as much as it is true about Gay marriage. Perhaps Mr. Steele would like to resolve this problem by eliminating marriage all together.

RNC Boss: Democrats want to take away Gun Rights. Associated Press
He's careful to say "Democrats" rather than "Obama," the NRA tried that already, and it was a lie. I don't know why the Republican Party feels the need to kiss the ass of people that will vote Republican no matter what and their willingness to engage in bald-face lies to try to tear down Obama certainly do not inspire trust.

Tim Kaine and Michael Steele on Meet the Press: Stark Differences Between Party Chairs

Michael Steele seems flustered and backpedals like a quarterback facing a blitz. He disagrees with Cheney about taking Rush Limbaugh over Colin Powell, but he refuses to call it disagreement. He takes back what he said about denying support to Republicans that participated in the stimulus plan because he knows that Charlie Crist has an excellent chance of winning Mel Martinez' Senate seat. A seat that the Republican Party absolutely cannot afford to lose. He refuses to divulge his opinion of whether or not waterboarding is torture, leading one to think that he thinks that it is torture, but doesn't want to upset the party establishment. Overall, as he fidgets uncomfortably in his chair and rambles non-stop as an attempt to control the dialogue, he seems flustered, unsure, and his arguments half-baked. Lost in this tempest of discomfort, is one area where he is right, the matter of a Supreme Court appointment. It is true that judges should be nominated, and confirmed, based on their ability to objectively interpret the letter of the law. Empathy should not play a part, it's the job of Congress to be empathetic in creating legislation that will enrich the lives of its citizens. Unfortunately, he fumbles the ball by essentially saying that he doesn't want minorities' situations to be taken into consideration in a court of law. Ignoring the fact that white males can be the recipient of empathy also.

Through it all Tim Kaine sits relaxed, taking his turn to toss out Democratic talking points, refuting Steele's arguments and expertly manipulating the conversation and his political counterpart. More than once he shuts Steele up by placing his hand gently on Steele's forearm. When discussing Nancy Pelosi and whether she knew about waterboarding, he gets Steele to admit that he is glad the practice is ended and nearly gets him to admit that it is torture. On the subject of abortion, he draws a clear line between reducing the the number of abortions, and criminalizing abortion as a women's health issue. He appears poised, thoughtful, and calm in the face of Steele's chaotic bluster.

I wonder whether Michael Steele is a poor choice to be RNC chairman. Whether he is not up to the job, or whether he is a capable man doing the best that he can in an impossible position. Beneath that questioning, there's the cynical wonder of whether the RNC pushed him into the position because they needed a minority face for the party like they did with Bobby Jindal, whose response following the president's address of a joint session of Congress was an unmitigated disaster. Steele doesn't seem to have a direction to go and as a result he goes no where. He attacks moderate Republican Senators for their voting record, then he states he wants a more inclusive party. He says he wants a clean break from the past and to take the party in a new direction, but he refuses to criticize mistakes made by the previous administration. It's enough to make me think that the old guard of the Republican Party (Cheney, Rove, Gingrich) are still pulling the strings.

The Party as a whole must recognize that in order to move forward, they are going to have to refute the policies of the previous administration. And attacking their record of deficit spending is not enough. The first leading Republican to stand up and say "Waterboarding absolutely is torture, it was a mistake and I agree with President Obama's decision to end the practice and also with his decision not to criminalize this policy position" gets a cookie.

Voters Wants Moderates, The GOP Says "No"

Sen. Arlen Specter’s defection to the Democratic Party is emblematic of the American people’s shift away from the Republican Party. In a time in which the percentage of the population that identify as “Democrat” has increased to 41% while Republicans have stayed put around 32%, and independents have decreased to 27% , it’s apparent that the Republicans are losing the fight for the middle. In some polls, the number of voters self-reporting as Republicans is as low as 20%. What the party needs to recognize is that they are practically throwing that fight. By concentrating on their social conservative, religious base, they are alienating the political moderates of the country, who are then gravitating to a Democratic party that seems to have finally found a solid message behind a leader with the political trifecta of being intelligent, eloquent, and charismatic. While it may be true that Arlen Specter’s defection may have been motivated more by self-interest and likelihood of re-election, it doesn’t change the fact that the Republican Party put him in the position in which political moderates in their state are handling the Republican Party and its positions like a poisonous snake. His chances of winning a primary against Pat Toomey may have been poor, but the chances of either Toomey or Specter beating a Democratic challenger in the increasingly blue state of Pennsylvania, with a popular Democratic Governor and President, are even worse. I’m sure that the prospect of a nasty primary battle for the chance to get trounced in the general election was quite unattractive to Sen. Specter.

This is an ongoing trend with the Republican Party. The Club for Growth has been systematically targeting and eliminating moderates from the party, it’s a miracle that John McCain hasn’t come under fire. The result has typically been that moderate Republicans have lost primary battles, only to see general elections lost to the Democrats. Other moderate Republicans like Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins could be vulnerable to the same kind of attack, and there is already speculation that they could be the next to switch parties. Perhaps the most disturbing trend is that by and large, even after the humiliating PR disaster of the defection of a Senator that could hand the opposition a filibuster-proof majority, the Republican Party has refused any wrongdoing. Party leadership, including RNC Chairman Michael Steele, places all the blame on Senator Specter. There is no indication that more Republican moderates won’t come under fire or that anything in the party is going to change.

The fundamental problem with the approach of the Republican Party is their misread and misunderstanding of the American public at large. With the residual leadership of figures like Rush Limbaugh, Dick Cheney and Karl Rove, the party is still dedicating to lobbing “socialist” charges like it’s 1954, not recognizing that the for the last decade the American public has seen religious fanaticism (e.g. Al Qaeda) as the primary threat in the world and that the communism just doesn’t have the same weight that it once had. These older political figures are still influenced by their formative years with the Korean War, Castro, and Joe McCarthy. They don’t realize that to evoke fear of religious fanaticism and then become the party of the religious right is self-defeating. The Republican Party needs new leadership that is in touch with the American people today and tomorrow. All political parties need to think four, eight, twelve years in the future. By attacking moderate politicians in the party, they are alienating moderates across the country, and independents tend to be moderates.

Republicans like Steve Schmidt and Meghan McCain have taken a great deal of political risk by advocating for change in the party’s social agenda and smart Senators like Lindsey Graham have preached the need for a more inclusive party. The bottom line is that Obama and the Democrats won a mandate from the people because the majority of the country wants the policies on which Obama ran. They also continue to attack Obama on all fronts, refusing to recognize that he is the most popular president since FDR. It is the most fundamental strategy to attack your opponent’s weak points, and the Democratic Party's weak point is definitely not Obama. It makes more sense to draw attention to the far left fringe of the party. Despite claims on the right, Obama is a moderate, his careful balancing act (refusing to nationalize the banks, reopening terror tribunals, even his his health care plan is more conservative than Hillarycare), places him to the right of the Democratic Party. So when Republicans call him extremely liberal, it serves to make them look like they are coming from the extreme right. It also makes sense to stop routinely casting ineffectual “no” votes, it would be more productive for the party and the country for Republicans to engage in a bipartisan effort to shape the implementation of these policies to ensure that they are effective. Democrats will be happy to work with a group of rational Republicans in order to demonstrate their bipartisanship. The Republican Party should co-opt parts of the Democratic agenda, and take credit for any success while shifting the blame for any failures.

The country needs the Republican Party, the Democratic Party can definitely swing too far to the left and we need the balance and stabilizing influence of the right. As long as they remain completely ineffectual, the country will suffer.

What I'm Reading 5.15.09

Here's a list of compelling articles that are shaping my thoughts today. It doesn't mean that I agree with what they said, but I'm reading these things and thinking about them.

Health Costs are the Real Deficit Threat. By Peter Orzag, WSJ
This is one of the biggest problems facing our country today. Write to your Congressman or Senator to get involved. We need bipartisan action to make sure health care really works.

Health Care Leader Say Obama Overstated Their Promise to Control Costs. By Robert Pear, NYT
It's a mistake for the medical industry to backpedal. The administration was responding favorably to a 1.5% cut in growth of health care costs when what we really need is a complete end to growth and cost cutting. The health care industry made those concessions in the first place because they were worried about Congress instituting regulations that would force their costs down. Now, since they are incapable of self-regulating, the backlash is going to call for more federal regulation of the health care industry.

The Sacrifice Gap. By Mike Murphy, Time
Some absolutely idiotic crap in this article. He tries to call out Obama but his claims are fairly empty. In one article he says that "Big Labor is making no sacrifices" and then later discusses the concessions made by the UAW, which seems like a sacrifice from Big Labor to me. His other claims are similarly vapid considering that we are less than 4 months into the term and there have been other priorities. One shining gem of idiocy, he calls for an oppressive new gas tax to motivate people to buy more fuel efficient cars. As if skyrocketing energy costs didn't contribute enough mortgage defaults over the past few years. The GOP seriously needs to get their head straight.

Hurting, Not Dead, GOP Is Working Up Alternative Ideas. By Mort Kondrake, Roll Call
This is part of what the GOP needs. Their message is off, we are in a recession due to massive deflation caused by the crash of the credit markets. Assuming that we aren't building another credit bubble, inflation will fill the gap caused by all that deflation, but with increased savings rather than debt. Additionally, cutting all non-defense spending will result in massive unemployment in a recession. You cut costs during economic prosperity when the market can absorb the losses. In the end though, the GOP needs their own ideas, to get involved by shaping legislation rather than throwing stones from the outside, and to be philosophically inclusive with their message. The best thing that they can do is get a Republican to work with the Democrats on writing Obama's health care bill, making it bipartisan by focusing on common ground of reducing health care costs. Despite having recently been marginalized and a rash of bad policy proposals, the country needs the GOP as much as it needs the Democratic Party.

Market-Based Solution to Health Care? Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is

Republicans, like Democrats, have some good ideas and some bad ideas on reforming health care in America. I'll address some Republican ideas here, but I'll discuss the Democratic ones also in a follow-up tomorrow. The good ideas include equalizing the tax benefit for individually purchased and work-place provided insurance, reducing health care costs, and improving transparency within the system. The bad ones involve looking for market-based solutions to the health care problem.

Mitt Romney, John McCain, and many other Republicans have proposed health care solutions that rely on opening up the market across state lines as a way of encouraging competition. Of course this would have the appearance of increasing competition between insurance companies, but states would suffer a decreased capacity to regulate. Unless this is accompanied by a significant increase in federal regulations, something that McCain's plan seems to omit entirely, it would lead to all insurance companies consolidating in a state with lax regulations (like the credit card companies in Delaware) and amount to a massive deregulation of the insurance market.

There's nothing wrong with competition. In fact, incentivizing insurance companies and health care providers to compete is a good idea, but it's not enough on it's own. Even if competition across state lines did occur, it would be a total mess. Insurance companies negotiate reduced prices with health care providers, which is why HMOs and PPOs require or encourage you to go to doctors that are in their network. By purchasing insurance from a company based in Florida, a person in Washington will always be out of network and the health care costs to the consumer would sky rocket. Of course the insurance company would love being able to rake in premiums and never pay anything out. I've seen this first hand when contractors that I worked with received health insurance through their employer, who was based in New Jersey.

All forms of insurance are quite similar to gambling with a much less fun payoff. You pay your premiums every month and if you need medical attention, you cash in. Insurance companies should be thought of like casinos, they are going to try to stack the odds in such a way to maximize their profits. Like casinos, they need regulation to ensure that they aren't stacking the deck unfairly.

But their is an underlying hypocracy to their proposal. All of these political figures argue against nationalized health care, but they don't seem to have a problem participating in it. Members of Congress are part of a government supplied health care system that shields them from heavy costs. In effect, this is socialized health care, but they don't seem to mind when it's covering their families. Pat Buchanan argued that government provide health care would result in "bureaucrats deciding what care each of us shall receive, when we may receive it, and whether we even ought to have it." He seems totally out of touch with the fact that we already have that through insurance companies.

But of course politicians are out of touch, they aren't buying insurance on the open market like they are telling the rest of us to do. In effect, they are telling us "do what we say, not what we do. "All members of Congress that are advocating a market-based solution should put their money where there mouth is and cancel their government-provide health care, opt out of medicare, and buy insurance on the open market.

What I'm Reading 5/14/09

Here's a list of compelling articles that are shaping my thoughts today. It doesn't mean that I agree with what they said, but I'm reading these things and thinking about them.

Obama's Conservatism May Not be Good Enough. By Martin Wolf
Wolf lets the cat out of the bag by acknowledging that Obama is surprisingly conservative. Of course anyone really paying attention would know that based on his refusal to nationalize the banks, his calls for public service and personal responsibility and even his calls to reduce the number of abortions.

McCain Backs Obama on Blocking Abuse Photos. New York Times
I've always liked McCain and it was sad to see him getting tossed around by his party during the campaign. In the end, McCain is better as a statesman than a politician and has served as one of the most bipartisan senators following the election. His praise for Obama is striking coming from a top level Republican, but he is right, now is not the time for releasing these photos. The administration should take steps to end prisoner abuse, for the good of US soldiers as well as the prisoners, and release the photos once stability is established. Committing atrocities are a major predictor/cause of PTSD.


Congress and Waterboarding by Karl Rove
"Hello Kettle? This is the Pot....you're black." Rove seems to be trying to shift the focus and the blame, but in the end the elephant in the room is that the administration in which he was a participant engaged in torture. His argument amounts to "The Democrats didn't do enough to stop us" and it's just ridiculous, not to mention that it seems to tacitly admit to wrongdoing. He wants to paint Pelosi as a hypocrite, but it's better to be a hypocrite than a torturer. They would do better to shut up and let the issue die.

Obama Calls for Credit Card Industry Reform by Jonathan Weisman, WSJ
Finally! Credit card abuses are a major contributor to our current economic crisis as more consumers leveraged themselves and became unable to pay their bills or participate as consumers. Also, flooding the market with cheap credit with hidden fees caused major inflation followed by deflation when the credit bubble burst.

What I'm Reading 5.13.09

Here's a list of compelling articles that are shaping my thoughts today. It doesn't mean that I agree with what they said, but I'm reading these things and thinking about them.

What Repulicans should do Pat Buchanan
"....the end goal of Obamacare is the same end goal as Hillarycare: nationalization, bureaucrats deciding what care each of us shall receive, when we may receive it, and whether we even ought to have it."
We already have bureaucrats telling us that, they are called HMOs. Ironically, they were supposed to be a way to keep health care costs down by running health care like a business.

Old Faithful of Nonsense Eugene Robinson
Cheney is doing two things: Keeping the issue of torture in the forefront of the news (not good for Republicans), Making the most unpopular figure in American politics the face of the Republican party (not good for Republicans). He needs to swallow his pride, take a dose or reality, and shut up or make his points through a proxy.


Pelosi to Obama: Health Care Bill by August USA Today
Time to get involved. Do what you can to make sure this bill is crafted and implemented properly.

Government Can't Solve Our Health Care Problems Mitt Romney
Despite the title, Romney lists some government actions that can help fix health care. My favorite: "Provide citizens with information about the cost and quality of providers and the effectiveness of alternative treatments. This transparency, when it's combined with a meaningful personal financial incentive, will help health care work more like a consumer market."

While I don't think that the health care industry will ever act like a true market (you can't treat life-saving medical treatment like buying a TV or sending a package), some of Romney's ideas are good and deserve consideration.

Of Publius, Centinel and Pyrrho (about this blog)

Publius and Centinel were two figures that shaped our nation. Publius was the pen name of Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay in the Federalist papers in which they argued in favor of ratification of our Constitution. Centinel was the pen name of Samuel Bryan, who wrote in opposition to the Constitution in response to fears of a large government and the danger of tyrrany that it involved. These groups became known as the Federalists (Publius) and the Anti-Federalists (Centinel). It was through the reasoned collaboration and negotiation between these two parties that the Constitution that we have now was formed.

These two camps can be likened to the political parties that we have today. Publius' argument for a powerful central government can be likened to the Democrats and their argument for a larger role of government in our lives. Centinel's argument for state rights and protection from government can be likened to the Republicans. However, unlike our founding fathers, our current political parties rarely come together and cooperate and negotiate to frame pieces of legislation. That is why I took the name of Pyrrho.

Pyrrho was a Greek philosopher and the father of skepticism. He believed that for every argument, there is an equally valid argument in opposition. This makes him the perfect moderator between these two camps. I invite people of all political and social backgrounds to come together in reasoned discourse about the problems we face in society so that we can together forge real solutions. However, this blog will not tolerate personal (ad hominem) attacks, only well thought out positions please.

As far as my political views. I am a political moderate in that I am a fiscal conservative but a social liberal. I believe in minimizing government waste, reduced spending, and the power of the consumer market; however, I believe that some government intervention is necessary. I also believe in equal rights for all, the separation of state and religion, and limited government intervention in our lives.