Wednesday, November 29, 2006

Seventeen!

Seventeen! That’s assuming that none of the angels is obese by U.S. Department of Health and Human Services standards and that the pin head has not been hammered into a wider platform than Bureau of Standards tolerances permit. Now that we’ve settled that age old conundrum, maybe we can address the pressing issue on our national agenda: is Iraq now in a civil war?

This morning, Tony Snow can be seen pouring over Webster in a hundred snapshots posted in dozens of newspapers as he rails, “Is not!” The Los Angeles Times, NBC, and a sizeable portion of the media scream back in unison, “Is too!”

Across the country, we’re being treated to a medieval fest to determine for all time just who is responsible for what happens in Iraq. The White House is leading the charge that Iraqis are in charge of their destiny and even Democrats are joining on the side of the president. Carl Levin of Michigan and dozens of others are screaming for air time with their versions of the `Iraqis are going to have to stop the sectarian violence or call a halt to their civil war.’ We gurus of the Middle Ages just haven’t heard enough of these arguments to establish with finality just what kind of a fray we’re in over there.

In today’s Washington Post, Bruce Hoffman of Georgetown University takes this question and dozens of related ones and boils them down into a renaissance style cut through the baloney opinion. We’re in the beginning stages of a national search for `who lost Iraq?’ As we prepare to bug back out of Baghdad, the fig leaf de jour that the president is holding to hide his imperial nakedness is that the elected Iraqi officials are going to have to wind up without a chair when the music stops.

I’m with Carl and the Dems in agreeing with the president. We’ve got to do what we’ve got to do to provide the kid with an escape route. The president’s latest truism is that al Qaeda is behind the sectarian violence (or civil war). I have no idea if that’s correct or not, but is this something the president should be really spouting? Al Qaeda is, according to the president, our mortal enemy and what would a normal person expect from such a source? Mass surrender maybe? The crazy thought that ran through theologically challenged brain was, “Isn’t this kind of like blaming the Nazis for the Battle of the Bulge?” It’s what they do. You have to wipe them out. Or rather, the Iraqis have to kill them all.

It appears that we’re assembling everyone who had anything to do with Iraq – Iraqis, Americans, neocons, Don Rumsfeld, the CIA, Dick Cheney and thousands of others - and organizing them in a huge circle in the Pentagon parking lot. When everyone is posed and pointing in both directions, then from the roof we’ll snap the group shot of who lost Iraq. It’s kind of like the old Miller light beer commercial in which great big former football players traded the shouted bards, “Less filling!” and “Tastes Great!”

But we careful medieval theologians will ponder this for years on end before we get to the `seventeen’ of this great question. Only then will we pronounce the final answer. (But I‘ll let you in on a secret; the answer to who lost Iraq is George Herbert Walker Bush.) President Bush 41 by failing to topple Saddam during the Gulf War laid down an irresistible challenge to George W. Bush. “You can’t top me, ever, twerp!” Daddy made him do it.

You read it here first.

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Friday, November 24, 2006

The Decider's Dubius Decision

Words uttered can never be recalled. If they could, Mel Gibson and Michael Richards would move heaven and earth to change recent events. Actually, we’ve all said things we regret, and, thankfully, with the passage of time and the understanding of those we’ve offended or hurt the impacts have faded. But Richards and Gibson are celebrities and their words went round the world, and they’ll never again be received by their publics in the way they were prior to the transgressions.

Decisions often have similar impact. We ordinary mortals can often move on after making some of our bad decisions and, even if they change our lives, some, even many, bad moves don’t destroy us. But really important decisions made by powerful people can be destructive on their institutions, nations and even the world and by extension destroy them. History and literature are filled with examples going back to the times when deeds and decisions were first recorded.

History seems to be making a comeback in the upper reaches of the government of the U.S. Don Rumsfeld’s last bit public advice was for folks to read history. Leading American generals are now reading the history of Vietnam to seek guidance for our forces in Iraq, and even George Bush may be getting in on the act. The president is famous (or notorious) for not being a reader, but in recent days there have been hints that he’s read – or been briefed – on important events in Southeast Asia during the Vietnam War. Recently, he addressed similarities between the Tet Offensive and our present situation in Iraq.

It is very good that we look to history for lessons that might apply in our circumstances any time we are involved with great ventures, but it’s usually better to do the reading before the deciding. I’m a great fan of history – but not a scholar by any means – and have a healthy respect for what happened in the past as a guide for proposed action. That’s not to say I’m in any way an historicist who sees inevitability in the march of time. In my eighth decade, the world’s experience with Karl Marx’s historicist view of the inevitability of history has lowered the absolutes in this department.

But when big deciders do their thing, the rest of the world better watch out. Hitler, another historicist, decided on war and some sixty million people died. He stuck with his decisions, but in the long run he didn’t have enough resources to win. On the other side of the ocean, Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt made the strategic decisions that ultimately did the Nazis in.

On March 5, 2006, a posting on this blog “The Die is Cast” described one of the most fateful decisions ever made and examined not only the impact of the determination but also the immediate impact of it on the decision maker. Again, I’m an amateur historian so I’m not going spend hours on my references, but as Tricky Dick Nixon used to plead, “Trust me.”

The Die is Cast is a case study of an extraordinary decision, in this case General Dwight Eisenhower’s decision to go forward with the D-Day invasion on June 6, 1944. In short, the invasion was predicated on two major elements: surprise (as to place and time) and on the tides in Normandy. You may recall that a major storm system was battering the coast of France during the days leading up to the narrow window of time when the tides would be appropriate for the landings. If the invasion were to be called off until the next favorable tides some weeks later, the element of surprise might well be lost, and a whole host of logistical problems, including loading up all the men and equipment, that had successfully accomplished might not go nearly as well a second time.

The invasion, perhaps even the war and the future of civilization, hung in the balance. One man alone, Dwight Eisenhower, was charged with the responsibility for the go or no go decision. The story is old, subordinate commanders awaited Ike’s word, Tens of thousands of soldiers, sailors and airmen from the U.S., Great Britain, Canada and other allied nations were fully armed and ready onboard the ships of the greatest armada in human history. Eisenhower was the single most powerful man on the planet that day. Everything depended on his decision.

We all know Ike made the decision, the invasion succeeded, the third front was opened and Hitler’s armies were doomed. But it could have turned out differently had the storm had not abated. But the great and fateful decision was made and the entire venture was no longer in Ike’s hands. Even he could not recall the effort. Once made, on imperfect information like most important decisions, there was no way to undo it. Nine thousand Americans died on the beaches and, had it been a bad one, many more would have succumbed. Yet the switch pulled, Ike was now little more than a powerless observer. But, as I said and as we all know, we won!

So George Bush, that poor student of history, was faced with the decision to send allied forces into Iraq in March of 2003. In the weeks and months leading to the invasion, tens of thousands of troops, many ships, and hundreds of planes made ready to sweep through Iraq and into Baghdad. George Bush always the most powerful man on the planet during his presidency had much of his might focused on one small part of the planet. He alone would make the go/no go decision.

Eisenhower had thought deeply on his responsibility and had even prepared a note to his president and the peoples of the allied nations assuming full responsibility for the failure of the invasion. He knew his role and responsibility and the pros and cons of his decision. He knew that had it been a bad decision that thousands of soldiers and sailors would have died in vain and as would perhaps even more millions of people on the European continent who were waiting for the third front. It was almost certain that had the invasion failed the war would have ended later and with many more deaths. It might have ended with a settlement rather than unconditionally. Ike knew all that as he mulled his choices.

It appears that George Bush did not think long and hard on the consequences of anything but a happy outcome of his great decision. All of the long term implications and possibilities seem not to have been taken into account. The history and sociology of the society about to be invaded appears in retrospect to have been ignored. The most powerful man in the world was about to unleash the most potent force ever assembled. But in his personal hubris, all of the voices being raised in protest of the attack were about to be ignored.

The decision was made; the invasion took place; and Saddam’s government was easily toppled. George Bush’s decision was heralded, “Mission accomplished.”

Not so fast! In the blink of an eye, we became the occupiers of a broken country. George Bush went from being the most powerful man in Iraq to a captive of the situation. His presidency was doomed, and the self proclaimed `decider’ was caught in his own web.

Yes indeed, read that history but on the front end, damn it!

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Monday, November 20, 2006

Murphy's War, ISBN: 1-4241-3781-0

Happy day, my latest novel, Murphy’s War, ISBN: 1-4241-3781-0, is available for order from the online bookstore of Publish America. Visit www.publishamerica.com and click on the bookstore icon and type in my name, William Brennan or the title and you’ll see the new baby ready for your adoption.

The book is also listed on Amazon and the image of the cover can be expanded and viewed there. Unfortunately, it is not yet available for sale there, and the prices of those dealers promising early delivery are very high. The initial sales price offered by Publish America is below that which will be charged on Amazon, Barnes and Noble, and in bookstores; it is really good to go. It may be a few weeks before Publish America can gear up to print and deliver but, guaranteed, it will be worth the short wait.

Murphy’s War is a completely fresh view of the internment of Japanese people living in the Western States during the early months of World War II. The story is unique in that it describes the horrible program from the point of view of government bureaucrats charged with implementing the effort rather than that of the victims. It is a character driven story that examines the life of Thomas Murphy who while coming of age becomes embroiled in this most controversial of programs.

Murphy, a Massachusetts native, is inspired by campaign appearances by Franklin Roosevelt to become one of the president’s `Whiz Kids’. Despite the remoteness of his goal, Murphy becomes a lawyer and obtains a reserve commission in the Judge Advocate General Corps of the Army.

In 1941, Tom is assigned to the Office of the Provost Marshall General – the military police – in Washington, DC and prepares to settle into the routine life of a young army attorney. But immediately he becomes involved in an interagency task force charged with identifying German, Italian and Japanese ethnics suspected of having ties with potential national enemies of the U.S. The task force is developing plans to intern these people should hostilities break out.

Soon after Pearl Harbor, the trap of the interment program is sprung on the task force, and the Provost Marshall General becomes one of the most rabid advocates of removing all ethnic Japanese from the West Coast. Both Tom and Sid Frank, his associate, are appalled. Frank argues so forcefully that he is transferred to the Pacific. Murphy, while suspected of treachery by his superiors, is thought to have been cowed into compliance with the office’s position.

Murphy visits one of the collecting camps in California and is shocked by the conditions. He makes his concerns known and a descending spiral in relations with his superiors begins. He is counseled and once more sent to west where he visits one of the most famous camps, Manzanar. While there, he innocently violates an order to not interact with the Japanese and is horrified by the internment. He is confronted by important army supporters of the program on the West Coast and threatened with court martial for his transgression.

Surprisingly, the reaction back in Washington is quite the opposite and Murphy is courted rather than punished, and he is ordered to give a presentation to key War Department officials on his observations on the West Coast. He protests that he will be unable to make his report on Western military preparations without describing his views on the internment. Every effort is made to browbeat him into making the report, but they come to believe that he is not trustworthy, and Murphy, too, is summarily exiled to the Pacific.

Justice Department officials who served on the task force with Murphy intervene on his behalf. En route, his orders are changed and he is ordered to Hawaii where he is assigned to the Territory’s military district. Delos Emmons, the Commanding General, is one of the true unsung heroes of the internment who has been fighting the notion that all ethnic Japanese should be removed from Hawaii and interned with their mainland counterparts.

In the months following the decisive naval Battle of Midway in June 1942 it becomes increasingly clear that Japanese forces will never be able to mount an attack on the U.S. West Coast and whatever weak intellectual underpinnings for the internment existed after the attack on Pearl Harbor become completely unreasonable and the program is obviously no longer tenable.

Forces opposed to the program ascend within the government and hard line supporters of the program are reassigned. Murphy follows his commanders from Hawaii to California where they assist in dismantling the program. Tom visits Manzanar again. He finds a completely different climate and rides back in a train to San Francisco with a man with whom he interacted during his initial visit. Tom is shocked into awareness that even though the Japanese are being allowed to return home their problems are far from over.

Murphy is sent to Washington to participate in a conference about the end of the program. On the way, he takes home leave and the dilemmas in his personal life are shakily resolved. During the conference, President Roosevelt dies and his role in the internment is considered. The war is winding down, and Murphy’s role in the main plot is resolved.

The secondary plot of his personal life runs in parallel with the primary story. As the book closes, Tom’s future, like most soon to be veterans, is bright, but in the end the reality is that he is a far less dashing figure than he perceived himself to be when the adventure began four years earlier. While changed by his experiences in this sad chapter in American history, Murphy can be seen to be influenced to act morally by the positive echoes of American Transcendentalism that are quietly evident throughout the novel and which have trickled into mainstream Irish American thought over the previous century.

Murphy’s War examines the actions of many of the historic characters involved in this sad episode and praise and blame are apportioned. The casual racial and ethnic prejudices in wartime America are clearly shown, and, for the first time, the reader can see how this travesty came about and how a small group of mean spirited but adroit people acting under cover of national hysteria can precipitate reprehensible actions that would be otherwise unthinkable.

I hope the story sounds intriguing. It was fun to research and is an easy read.

I haven’t advertised anything on this site until today. But today’s the day!

Read Murphy’s War. You’ll be glad you did, so will Wild Bill.

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Thursday, November 16, 2006

It's in the Genes

This is a great day for Wild Bill and his 800 readers. It seems that scientists are close to unraveling the DNA code of the Neanderthals and soon will be able to prove (or not) that some humans are indeed descended from these prehistoric humanoids.

For years, friends (is that the correct term?) have been comparing my stands on many issues to these long gone beings. Thankfully, from now on my answer will be that I’m simply a creature of my genes.

On the other hand, I’ve tossed the term Neanderthal around as a pejorative at some of the obviously low life creatures who cannot grasp the wisdom of the postings on this site. And there are some – more than you pure Homo sapiens will ever know - who persist in attempting to bludgeon the obvious truths of these objective essays. Now I understand; they really are Neanderthals, and I forgive them with unconditional love.

We live in wonderful times.

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Tuesday, November 14, 2006

Consistency is the Hobgoblin...

I’ve been pondering the personal dilemma dropped on me by that eminent wag, Steve Brennan of Ohio: how could I ever support the Democratic nominee for the president in 2008 after beating to death the argument that divided government is vitally important to the nation?

When this ethereal rag began its assault on the Republicans, my former party, all three elective power points – the presidency and both houses of congress – were firmly in the hands of the G.O.P. It was my constant thesis that the executive was grabbing power – excessively and well beyond both the norm and the constitutional limits – from the legislative and judicial branches.

In my last posting, I made light of the problem of divided government but in retrospect it is clearly more than the joke I made of it even though I’m still smarting from the entry wound where the dull blade of failed consistency entered my thorax.

A better answer to the wise guy would have included the word `balance’ as a major element. As blogging is a relatively new enterprise and since I’ve been at it only for a couple of years, my library of postings – forever recorded on the left of this page – goes back only to August 2004, but my friends and I have been debating the issue of division of power since at least the 1974 the constitutional crisis created by the behavior of President Nixon and his operatives in the Watergate scandal. Of course, the question has been one open to consideration and complaint since George Washington rode home to Mount Vernon.

The issue of divided government came up in the seventies when Nixon, as in the present situation, was perceived to have his party members in the Republican controlled congress under his thumb. The abuses of that period were so serious and notorious that Republicans in the congress turned on Nixon – as did even judges who had been appointed by Republican presidents – leading of course to the resignation of the president and criminal conviction of many of his closest associates.

The issue of presidential power enhancement was front and center at that time and among my earliest postings (August 2004) were discussions of the roles of my friends and me in the efforts to better coordinate the delivery of grants to state and local governments. There was also a posting on the minor role I played in the aftermath of Mr. Nixon’s resignation.

The bottom line is that while guilty of overzealous preaching on the benefits of and the need for divided government, my pleadings for such division cannot be made in a vacuum. We voters must balance the obvious benefits of divided government with the nature of the times, the likely tendencies toward abuse of power by one branch over the others, as well as the weight of the merits of the programs and the perceived talent, and character of the candidates. Even while admitting bias toward divided government this should not bind us to voting for a party or candidates whom we believe to be inferior in talent, character, or objectives.

For four years, I’ve been appalled by the preventive Iraq War and all of the abuses of power from the executive. (Surely a recitation of my many laments on these matters is not required here.) I have condemned the president and all of his advisors for leading us into this catastrophic blunder and decried the performance of the Republican congress that enabled the fiasco by failing miserably in its constitutional oversight responsibility.

My small role (I am taking full credit for 0.000001 percent of the responsibility for the Democratic victory in last week’s election – especially in the Virginia senate race, and I have friends who deserve far more.) in kicking the bums out gave me great pleasure and a feeling of successful activism.

It is the duty of voters to elect those who they believe will best further the interests of the United States and its republican form of government. To find myself turning away from a qualified Democrat presidential nominee only because the congress is in the hands of Democrats would be worse than irresponsible; it would be foolish. In 2008, it would be silly for me to vote for a neoconservative who was an aggressive enabler of President Bush’s efforts to remake the Middle East in our own likeness.

It is the role of the government of the United States to preserve protect and defend the people, the interests and the territory of the U.S. from all enemies foreign and domestic. That includes the belief that the government should act in the enlightened self interest of the nation by entering into alliances for collective security.

I remain in the camp of foreign policy realists and believe that the Iraq War represents the worst side of our government. Our government is duty bound to represent the interests of our people and nation and not high sounding ideals that lead us into traps such as Iraq.

Obviously, much of the rhetoric that got us into this mess was simply baloney. The grave mistake of preemption was made for more realistic reasons than those expressed. Clearly, if it were for purely altruistic purposes, we would already be fighting in places like Darfur.

The present administration and its many enablers in Congress have not yet been punished sufficiently for leading us into this horrible situation and for diverting our attention away from those who attacked our homeland. Should one of these enablers be nominated, I wouldn’t hesitate for a moment to vote for the Democratic nominee, the lesser problem – at this time – of division of government not withstanding. In fact, at this moment, my opening is that I’m going to have to be dissuaded from voting for the Democratic nominee.

So there, Ohio smart guy!

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Sunday, November 12, 2006

I Have No Choice

My dear departed mother always bragged about her grandchildren, so cute and so smart. Unfortunately, they believed the old girl and continue to rely on her assessments, never realizing that the she was just the first practitioner in the school of unwarranted self esteem and simply was the earliest of the modern grandmothers, now ubiquitous.

One of those beautiful children – now on the shady side of forty - has the audacity to demand top billing in this blog posting. Steve Brennan of Dublin, Ohio, informed me that it was his terribly sad duty to let me know that I, Wild Bill, will be unable to support the Democratic nominee for president in 2008. It broke the poor lad’s heart to advise me that my own logic and tens of thousands of my own words will make it impossible for me to share in the joy of Hillary, Al or whatever other champion the Democrats choose when the results of the election of 2008 are made known.

Steve, a solid supporter of conservative causes but a convert to Wild Bill’s impeccable logic that only divided government can save the republic, was near tears when pointing out that by my own reckoning that since both Houses of Congress are now solidly in the hands of Democrats, I have no choice but to support Bill Frist, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity or whatever other defender of Intelligent Design is anointed by the GOP to extend its lease on the White House. The choking voice and the sad demeanor made it clear that he could feel my pain.

What’s a wild man to do when faced with mathematically certain logic that he must become a supporter of a Constitutional amendment to prevent flag burning or be charged with being as big a hypocrite as the brilliant lad’s own conservative champions?

I'll begin by explaining to the poor boy that until undivided control of government is a reality there is no mandate for the wild man to fight for division. Obviously, should Hillary, Al or another Democrat take the oath of office on January 20, 2009, at that very instant Wild Bill will begin his paroxysms in favor of divided government. Lincoln Chafee will be called from retirement to run for the Senate from Rhode Island; I’ll demand the retirement of Robert Byrd of West Virginia (provided the present governor is still in office); and the dynamic qualities of Dennis Hastert will be aired far and wide from this blog.

Ma was right, they are so very smart, and I have no choice but to be true to myself as pointed out so solicitously and tragically by my brilliant children.

Stay tuned!

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Friday, November 10, 2006

You Know What's Bothering Me?

I’m having an Andy Rooney moment. You know what I hate: people who compare the occupation of Iraq with those of postwar Germany and Japan.

Smart people, including the incoming Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, the out going guy (what was his name?), and Shotgun Dick Cheney love pulling the wool over the eyes of yahoos like you and me. When we slobs complain that the Iraq War appears endless, they pat us on the head like the morons they think we are and say, “Sonny, it really hasn’t been that long. Why World War II’s been over for more than sixty years and we still have troops stationed in both countries. Case closed you bird brains. How stupid can you be? Leave the thinking to us smart guys you jack asses.”

Who the hell are you kidding, smart boys? We quit occupying Germany and Japan eons ago. Our troops were stationed in Germany to prevent the onslaught of Moscow Pact troops into Western Europe and in Japan to defend against China, the Soviet Union and North Korea.

If you readers of this electronic rag buy into that Germany and Japan line of malarkey from our smart folk betters, please go back to getting your views from the funny papers. These guys and gals in the Bush administration have been gulling us endlessly with this phony baloney.

An even bigger line of bull is that we’re occupying Iraq. We‘re occupying the Green Zone in Baghdad and other enclaves around the country that make up maybe one percent of the countryside; Iraq’s out of control and to really be an army of occupation they’d have send in tens of thousands of additional troops.

Our poor troopers are hanging on by their finger nails. Every time they leave the occupied zones they become targets for not only terrorists but insurgents of all stripes who want us out so they can get on with killing each other.

Let’s hope this Baker/Hamilton crowd can deliver a fig leaf to Dubya so he can get our poor lads and lassies to hell out of harm’s way before we destroy the army, marines national guard and the reserves. Otherwise we’ll be sending fresh targets for the militias for another five years.

On Tuesday, we the people sent a message that we want this fiasco ended. We’ve got two years of holding our collective breathe before we find out if these new pols and Democrat holdovers really got the word. If they've got wax buildup, we’re gonna have to saddle up again and drive them out, too.

Now that’s what’s bugging me an’ Andy.

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Thursday, November 09, 2006

Alert

In the first chance at bi-partisan cooperation, President Bush threw sand in the faces of the Democrats by attempting to get John Bolton confirmed a U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. Mr. Bolton has been serving as U.N. Ambassador under a recess appointment made after a Republican controlled Senate could not muster sufficient support for him. Bolton is one of the most contentious people in the administration, a person for whom even Republican senators have only lukewarm feelings.

Bolton is a neoconservative and was and remains a champion of the invasion of Iraq. He was accused of being a terrible manager who bullied and harassed his staff to the point of being a public spectacle. Mr. Bolton is a partisan Republican, and his nomination flies in the face of the president’s conciliatory words to the incoming leaders of both Democratically controlled chambers of congress.

This eleventh hour nomination which is likely to fail does not bode well for true cooperation between branches of government and makes the President’s opening to the incoming leaders appear false and hollow. Given the timing of the announcement – two days after the election and on the day of Mr. Bush’s lunch with incoming Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi - this nomination looks like a gauntlet being thrown down before the Democrats by the President.

Clearly, this is a bad omen for the next two years. The President has not heard the voices of the people and that is extremely regrettable. The Republicans in the Senate better throw this nomination out the window.

Blog on!

Wild Bill

The Day After The Day After

The sweetest day is the day after the day after the election – if you win. We know! There’s no doubt. We’re not tired. This morning, I wrapped the Washington Post election section about me and wallowed in its excesses. It felt good, really good.

Yesterday was the day for our leaders to make nice. Today, the sniggering about sending the losers to the basement of the Capitol to hold their unattended press conferences crept into winners’ thoughts; woe is them poor survivors. The perks of the majority will be ripped from their hands and, like precious jewels, fondled by the other side – our side, the winning side.

The finger pointing among the losers makes my heart dance. They all have their candidates for defenestration; unfortunately for all of them, it’s another part of the coalition and the blame circles the room like an endless NASCAR race and is terribly sad to watch. My crocodile tears runneth over.

One truly alarming note, they’re all blaming the others for incompetence rather than for the unsoundness of their policies, especially Iraq which did them in. They are blind to the reality of that war, unable to understand that it was the unprovoked attack based on ideas articulated by the neocons that brought them to this low state. Instead they blame Don Rumsfeld for their failure; Don as a perfect scapegoat – a mantle he well deserves - will only help for a few short weeks.

Soon the president and the Dems will have to get down to the business of closing down the calamity in Iraq in some reasonable and face saving way and time. My fear is that the Republicans, egged on by the neocons, will continue to believe that we can impose our national will whenever and wherever we like. If that’s the case, their sentence will be exile for life from Washington, with no possibility of parole.

But all of that’s in the future. My happy time extends at least through next Monday when a couple of my like minded buddies and I will bask again in the brilliant light of victory and toast Nancy, Harry and Jim and our great win one last time.

Imagine, this poor man’s Tom Paine is going to have to stop electronic pamphleteering and attempt to write objectively. Wow! I’ll think about that tomorrow.

But for now, what a day! What a country!

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Monday, November 06, 2006

Tomorrow, it's just a day away

Tomorrow, tomorrow, it’s only a day away!

There’s no more time for convincing. It's time to act and only those who vote can have a say. If you don’t like the Iraq War, if you’re in favor of stem cell research, if you think Intelligent Design is a hoax, if you believe in equitable Social Security reform, vote for the Democrats tomorrow.

I must say that I’ve busted my gut to get to this day. I’ve made almost 300 postings on this blog, the vast majority building to tomorrow’s Election Day, and I’ve made more than a hundred cold calls for Jim Webb for U.S. Senate and for the three Democrat congressional candidates from Northern Virginia.

But I also admit that all this work was against the present incumbents rather than for a positive agenda to take the place of the failed programs I’ve fought so hard. My argument is that those in office must be held accountable for those things they instituted that voters believe to be wrong; I hope you join me in that belief.

I voted for George Bush in 2000 and I suppose for many of the other candidates that I’m working against now for enabling the president to carry out so many things I believe to be bad for the country. I thought that George Bush was exactly the right man to lead us in the aftermath of 9/11, and only when he diverted his attention from the War on Terror and took his eye off of Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda and turned our great power on Iraq instead of following through on those who’d attacked us did I change my mind.

The president screams for the Democrats to state their plan. Frankly, I don’t know if they have one. But I don’t think the president has a viable plan either, and I think that he and his Republican enablers must be driven from office. If the Democrat House and, hopefully, Democrat Senate do not act to rein in the president’s grab for power or if the Democrat presidential candidate cannot articulate a plan for getting us out of Iraq, I’ll be rethinking my position on them come 2008.

Until then, I want only to whip from the halls of Congress these incompetent fools who failed their Constitutional duty to oversee the Executive.

After a rest, I’ll be back in support of Democrats seeking to win the White House on ’08.

I’m tired of the work, but I done my damnedest and still have enough energy to get to the polls tomorrow.

It’s tomorrow, just a day away. Do it! VOTE!!!

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Saturday, November 04, 2006

Pelosi is Coming


Listen my children and you shall hear,
Of the last minute ride of Bush in fear,

To every Bible Belt village and farm---
A cry of defiance with lots of fear,
A voice in the darkness, a knock at the door,
“Pelosi is coming! Pelosi is coming!”

Thus was the last minute ride of Bush in fear.

Of course you knew that Wild Bill could never resist this opportunity, and he sends his apologies to Hank Longfellow.

Three days to go.

You heard the joke that Bush wants Rumsfeld to stay on for the remaining two years of his term? He said that whopper even as he was mixing the hemlock for Don’s lunch next Wednesday. Funny guy that George.

Vote! George is beating the bushes for Christians in fear of stem cells, Chuck Darwin, and same sex couples.

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Thursday, November 02, 2006

Five Days and Counting Down

Just a handful of days remain until the counting commences. This is a fateful election. If both houses of Congress remain in Republican hands, the American people will have spoken; Attacking and occupying Iraq will have been judged the right things to do and to have been handled competently enough.

If there’s no change, Katrina will have been considered to have been handled properly. The President will have been given a green light to revisit his vision on Social Security reform. Stem cell research will not be approved during the next two years. And, according to the president, there’s no reason why Intelligent Design will not have equal access with evolution to the minds of America’s public school students.

If those of us who believe that America’s foreign policy needs a course correction and that the state of our standing in the eyes of the rest of the world is terrible do not prevail to the extent that at least one house is awarded to the Democrats then the present course will have been approved.

Your vote counts. Vote! Ask your neighbors and coworkers to vote. Ask your friends to go to the polls. If you live in a blue state, call a friend in a red state and ask them to vote. This is the most important by-year election since World War II.

Vote and work for change or accept the status quo.

Vote!

Blog on!

Wild Bill