Baby its cold outside. Indeed a fierce blizzard is raging in Washington, and it’s unlikely to end before mid-January.
The White House press corps is spitting mad at Tony Snow for his dodging and pleas of nolo contendere on all questions involving Iraq. “I don’t know,” is the answer de jour by this hubris filled wind bag. Snow came to rescue Bush not to bury him, or so the mouth that roars nothing but ignorance once proclaimed.
The silver tongued hero of the neocons was to provide our ever eloquent president with an English translator. All that was lacking in Washington was a spokesperson who could translate Bushisms into the plain speak of the American people, and the administration would be on its way to winning the war on terror and transforming the Middle East into a land of milk and honey where the lion and the lamb could lie down together in peace and harmony.
But Washington is a land of snow jobs – everything from the Rumsfeldian snow flakes falling gently over the Pentagon to the howling blizzard of `I don’t knows’ roaring from the White House Press Room.
Only now are some – certainly not all – of the neoconservatives beginning to fathom that if things are going right and you’re riding a good horse even Wild Bill would make a great press secretary but if you’re in a tar pit aboard a swayback nag, even Winston Churchill couldn’t bullshit his way out.
Look around Tony; you’re in deep and dark stuff and that horse... And all that slick restating of `I don’t know’ is nothing but a tony snow job.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Everything's Great - I Quit
I feel particularly optimistic today, so I’m resigning from the Democratic Party. That may seem strange as I worked so hard to defeat the Republicans, but, truly, I’ve held myself out as a person beholden to no party and of the center.
Obviously, at this moment I’m likely to support the Democrat in the ’08 run for the roses, but, if they dive to the left or do anything really crazy in trying to clean up the mess created by Bush and his neoconservative Svengalis, no one should be surprised if there’s a change in my registration.
The Republicans are doing a great job of imploding without any more assistance from me, so I’ll just watch as the self destruction much like the war that caused it accelerates. My fear is that the Democrats will see this administration weakness as the voice of the people telling them to take a left turn; that will be my signal to attempt to bolster the morale of the cloth coat Republicans with whom I parted company when Bush showed he’d lost his way and was listening to the hard right neocons and the evangelicals.
By the way, I’m a big time Democrat who gets `Dear Bill’ emails from all the party big shots. I’m sure that I’m the only one in America who receives such personal notes, but I’m not going to write back and tell them of my likely defection, and, right now, I’m counting on them for some real oversight of these jackasses who’ve taken the country in such dangerous directions.
This is a very antsy time, and I certainly don’t have a clue as to how to get out of Iraq and set the ship of state on the right course. While I was desperate for us not to go into Iraq, I have no idea on how to get us out in a somewhat whole fashion.
But I feel good about the direction of America today. The old bulls of the Republican Party have drawn a line in the sand that stands for no more neocon adventurism. The most serious of our defense and foreign policy intellectuals are thinking of ways to end this fiasco without blowing up the planet, and virtually all serious thinkers are working to curb the mess without further wrecking our standing in the world.
There are only two important people – and they’re both real factors – George W. Bush and John McCain who are still looking for victory in Iraq. Even Joe Lieberman is in a run silent run deep mode.
All in all, I’m looking for a Christmas message from Bush that may include both `mission accomplished’ and a new direction that heads us toward the egress.
Happy holidays to all!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Obviously, at this moment I’m likely to support the Democrat in the ’08 run for the roses, but, if they dive to the left or do anything really crazy in trying to clean up the mess created by Bush and his neoconservative Svengalis, no one should be surprised if there’s a change in my registration.
The Republicans are doing a great job of imploding without any more assistance from me, so I’ll just watch as the self destruction much like the war that caused it accelerates. My fear is that the Democrats will see this administration weakness as the voice of the people telling them to take a left turn; that will be my signal to attempt to bolster the morale of the cloth coat Republicans with whom I parted company when Bush showed he’d lost his way and was listening to the hard right neocons and the evangelicals.
By the way, I’m a big time Democrat who gets `Dear Bill’ emails from all the party big shots. I’m sure that I’m the only one in America who receives such personal notes, but I’m not going to write back and tell them of my likely defection, and, right now, I’m counting on them for some real oversight of these jackasses who’ve taken the country in such dangerous directions.
This is a very antsy time, and I certainly don’t have a clue as to how to get out of Iraq and set the ship of state on the right course. While I was desperate for us not to go into Iraq, I have no idea on how to get us out in a somewhat whole fashion.
But I feel good about the direction of America today. The old bulls of the Republican Party have drawn a line in the sand that stands for no more neocon adventurism. The most serious of our defense and foreign policy intellectuals are thinking of ways to end this fiasco without blowing up the planet, and virtually all serious thinkers are working to curb the mess without further wrecking our standing in the world.
There are only two important people – and they’re both real factors – George W. Bush and John McCain who are still looking for victory in Iraq. Even Joe Lieberman is in a run silent run deep mode.
All in all, I’m looking for a Christmas message from Bush that may include both `mission accomplished’ and a new direction that heads us toward the egress.
Happy holidays to all!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Thursday, December 07, 2006
The Birds Are Singing
The birds are singing, ten of ‘em. Canaries play two roles, they sing and they croak.
As we carelessly drove the ponies down into the deep, deep mine, we paid no attention to the horrible conditions of the walls, ceiling, or air. As we found ourselves facing an endless seam of soft coal that was crumbling about us and as the timbers and bulkheads groaned and creaked, with no other alternatives, we called for the canaries.
Ten old birds to the rescue. “Get the hell out!” is their unanimous refrain.
These birds are scared to death. Sure, Lee Hamilton can work with anybody, and Jim Baker can fake it. Sandra Day O’Connor is a civilized person. Senators Robb and Simpson were never partisan crazies, and the same goes for all but two of the other members. Ed Meese is a real Republican and Leon Panetta is a fire breathing Democrat.
That Meese and Panetta can agree on 79 points and not withhold their approval of a single finding is both wonderful but really, really scary. The air in this mine is bad, really bad, toxic. If these two partisans join hands it’s not for their parties; it’s for America.
Already, the cries that this map to the mine mouth isn’t realistic are being heard from both sides – those that want to stay the course and those that want to cut and run. I admit – and the members do too – the commission has created a corridor of mirrors within the smoky air.
But it’s time to board the carts and whip the crap out of those ponies in the direction being pointed out by the canaries. There’s little time for face saving or for better ways. All aboard! The birds are beginning to cough.
The Congress better damn well start acting like an oversight committee and the partisan sniping better be held to a minimum. This America we’re talking about, not Republican or Democratic platform planks. Both parties better buy in and kick some executive butt.
The air’s bad, and it’s time to face the truth. We’re in way too deep. Our exit strategy is on the table. It ain’t what we’d like – none of us, but the walls are creaking. Get with it or get the hell out of the way; otherwise the next phase will really be like Vietnam.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
As we carelessly drove the ponies down into the deep, deep mine, we paid no attention to the horrible conditions of the walls, ceiling, or air. As we found ourselves facing an endless seam of soft coal that was crumbling about us and as the timbers and bulkheads groaned and creaked, with no other alternatives, we called for the canaries.
Ten old birds to the rescue. “Get the hell out!” is their unanimous refrain.
These birds are scared to death. Sure, Lee Hamilton can work with anybody, and Jim Baker can fake it. Sandra Day O’Connor is a civilized person. Senators Robb and Simpson were never partisan crazies, and the same goes for all but two of the other members. Ed Meese is a real Republican and Leon Panetta is a fire breathing Democrat.
That Meese and Panetta can agree on 79 points and not withhold their approval of a single finding is both wonderful but really, really scary. The air in this mine is bad, really bad, toxic. If these two partisans join hands it’s not for their parties; it’s for America.
Already, the cries that this map to the mine mouth isn’t realistic are being heard from both sides – those that want to stay the course and those that want to cut and run. I admit – and the members do too – the commission has created a corridor of mirrors within the smoky air.
But it’s time to board the carts and whip the crap out of those ponies in the direction being pointed out by the canaries. There’s little time for face saving or for better ways. All aboard! The birds are beginning to cough.
The Congress better damn well start acting like an oversight committee and the partisan sniping better be held to a minimum. This America we’re talking about, not Republican or Democratic platform planks. Both parties better buy in and kick some executive butt.
The air’s bad, and it’s time to face the truth. We’re in way too deep. Our exit strategy is on the table. It ain’t what we’d like – none of us, but the walls are creaking. Get with it or get the hell out of the way; otherwise the next phase will really be like Vietnam.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Who Cares?
The media abounds with stories about George W. Bush’s place in history. His decision to attack Iraq has historical tongues wagging about whether he is the worst president in American history or perhaps just the worst since Richard Nixon. James Buchanan has been plucked from the dustbin of history, vacuumed off, and held out as the absolute bottom of the barrel – until maybe now. Other commentators have resurrected such presidential luminaries as Herbert Hoover and Andrew Johnson to parade their stuff in the contest for the bottom.
This must be very difficult on Mr. Bush and even more so on Laura and Barney. It can’t be nice to read bout yourself as bracketed with the most incompetent people ever to occupy the White House or to learn that your husband is a total moron – or worse. What does the loyal staff do when they pick up the papers in the morning and find front page comparisons with Bush’s forty-two predecessors – and find him wanting against all of them?
Were I on staff, my reaction would be very swift; let Barney use the Post and Times for whatever he has to do and tell Laura that the paper people skipped the White House this morning. But every day? That would be tough on even the most dedicated of lackeys and sycophants.
In thinking about the problem, I figured out the bottom line; it doesn’t matter. So you’re the worst in history; who cares? Do you really think that Jimmy Buchanan, or Herb Hoover, or Dick Nixon wake up each day on their clouds or – heaven forbid – spits and try to explain themselves to their neighbors? Are you kidding? They’re definitely cool – or hot – with their situations. Although there may be some thoughts of readjustment as they ponder George’s predicament.
And just who cares what so called `presidential experts’ care. They were wrong about Harry Truman and they could be wrong about forty-three, and while I don’t think they are, who cares what a loser like me thinks anyway?
I’ve known and met dozens of people with names like Lincoln, Buchanan, Grant, and I’ve bought vacuum cleaners called Hoover, and I’m sure many of you have too. It has never crossed my mind to ask the Lincoln if he was descended from Abraham. Do you think I’d open up with Buchanan with, “What the hell was that bozo great, great, great uncle of yours doing asleep at the switch when the country was going to hell?”
Would you get in a Lincoln automobile and ask the owner if his vehicle was manufactured by relatives of our late great president? Of course you wouldn’t.
What it really boils down to is that except for a few of the very top guys – maybe Washington, Lincoln and Roosevelt (the second guy) – nobody even knows who was president before Bill Clinton. Golly, our intrepid reporters have dig out obscure Ph. Ds just to get the list of the president’s anyway.
So George and Laura and Barney should relax. Look at it this way; has anyone ever been able to even read through the list of names of Egyptian pharos without falling asleep? And except for Rammer and Tut, whoever heard of even one other of them? And there were some very incompetent people on that list – and good ones too; had to be.
The same goes for the Kings of England or the list of the Popes. Their only use today is as substitutes for counting sheep by these same over educated characters who are saying George is the worst. Maybe George should be asking who these jerks are. Could they be the worst evaluators of presidents? Maybe Barney would like to pee on some of their books. Who knows? Who cares?
So be cool George and all you worry warts in the White House. After we get out the mess you’ve created, you can go off and join Jimmy Buchanan in a pinochle game and never be disturbed until some phony baloney Ph. D comes rummaging around to see who’s winning. Even then, who cares?
Blog on!
Wild Bill
This must be very difficult on Mr. Bush and even more so on Laura and Barney. It can’t be nice to read bout yourself as bracketed with the most incompetent people ever to occupy the White House or to learn that your husband is a total moron – or worse. What does the loyal staff do when they pick up the papers in the morning and find front page comparisons with Bush’s forty-two predecessors – and find him wanting against all of them?
Were I on staff, my reaction would be very swift; let Barney use the Post and Times for whatever he has to do and tell Laura that the paper people skipped the White House this morning. But every day? That would be tough on even the most dedicated of lackeys and sycophants.
In thinking about the problem, I figured out the bottom line; it doesn’t matter. So you’re the worst in history; who cares? Do you really think that Jimmy Buchanan, or Herb Hoover, or Dick Nixon wake up each day on their clouds or – heaven forbid – spits and try to explain themselves to their neighbors? Are you kidding? They’re definitely cool – or hot – with their situations. Although there may be some thoughts of readjustment as they ponder George’s predicament.
And just who cares what so called `presidential experts’ care. They were wrong about Harry Truman and they could be wrong about forty-three, and while I don’t think they are, who cares what a loser like me thinks anyway?
I’ve known and met dozens of people with names like Lincoln, Buchanan, Grant, and I’ve bought vacuum cleaners called Hoover, and I’m sure many of you have too. It has never crossed my mind to ask the Lincoln if he was descended from Abraham. Do you think I’d open up with Buchanan with, “What the hell was that bozo great, great, great uncle of yours doing asleep at the switch when the country was going to hell?”
Would you get in a Lincoln automobile and ask the owner if his vehicle was manufactured by relatives of our late great president? Of course you wouldn’t.
What it really boils down to is that except for a few of the very top guys – maybe Washington, Lincoln and Roosevelt (the second guy) – nobody even knows who was president before Bill Clinton. Golly, our intrepid reporters have dig out obscure Ph. Ds just to get the list of the president’s anyway.
So George and Laura and Barney should relax. Look at it this way; has anyone ever been able to even read through the list of names of Egyptian pharos without falling asleep? And except for Rammer and Tut, whoever heard of even one other of them? And there were some very incompetent people on that list – and good ones too; had to be.
The same goes for the Kings of England or the list of the Popes. Their only use today is as substitutes for counting sheep by these same over educated characters who are saying George is the worst. Maybe George should be asking who these jerks are. Could they be the worst evaluators of presidents? Maybe Barney would like to pee on some of their books. Who knows? Who cares?
So be cool George and all you worry warts in the White House. After we get out the mess you’ve created, you can go off and join Jimmy Buchanan in a pinochle game and never be disturbed until some phony baloney Ph. D comes rummaging around to see who’s winning. Even then, who cares?
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
It's Morning in America
An article (A Virtual Chalkboard For Budding NFL Fans) in today’s Washington Post describes how millions of mostly young males in the U.S. are becoming expert in the Xs and Os of professional football. The number of people who can glance at a defensive set on their TV screens has expanded exponentially as a result of `Madden NFL’ a video game. This phenomenon is worthy of front page coverage by one of the nation’s leading papers.
In my Andy Rooney moments, I wonder if this is a good thing – a really good thing. Millions of kids are spending hundreds of millions of hours to be able to tell at a glance what only John Madden and Bill Belichek used to know. But there’s an obvious upside to this, instead of only dozens of people being able to break down tapes for NFL teams, there is a developing cadre of millions of potential candidates. On the other hand, since this is highly desirable work, the wage rates will soon plummet to minimum wage levels.
It’s a great world we live in. We’ve come a long way since Classical Civilization when the government provided circus for the masses. Today, the private sector in the form of Madden NFL and its thousands of counterparts and the NFL itself and its pro sports and college competitors deliver circus right into the homes of the consumers. Not only that but those who feel compelled to really attend the circus must compete to buy high priced tickets to many sold out venues in order to be part of the show.
There’s an even better side to this situation. Young people can be passionate about things and are willing to toil for long hours and pay big money to learn what used to be the province of an ascetic priesthood of coaches. Bill Belichek apprenticed at his father's knee and honed his skills for years just to get the chance to intern for nothing with other experts. Now his life’s learning and that of other equally qualified clergymen of the Church of the NFL is available to the masses. So instead of just dozens of boys wasting their time in hopes of coaching the Packers, millions can aspire to be fired losing in the great zero sum game. So while they exercise only their thumbs and their noggins and cannot ever hope to play and get hurt running up huge medical bills, they will all be qualified to coach the Cowboys.
Even better, among the millions of youngsters learning Madden NFL there are tens of thousands who otherwise might have gone bad, and these will have no time for mugging old farts like me or working part time to support illicit drug habits. And they’re not driving cars while they play – I hope – and therefore the roads are safer.
And they say there’s a decline in Western Civilization. Give me a break!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
In my Andy Rooney moments, I wonder if this is a good thing – a really good thing. Millions of kids are spending hundreds of millions of hours to be able to tell at a glance what only John Madden and Bill Belichek used to know. But there’s an obvious upside to this, instead of only dozens of people being able to break down tapes for NFL teams, there is a developing cadre of millions of potential candidates. On the other hand, since this is highly desirable work, the wage rates will soon plummet to minimum wage levels.
It’s a great world we live in. We’ve come a long way since Classical Civilization when the government provided circus for the masses. Today, the private sector in the form of Madden NFL and its thousands of counterparts and the NFL itself and its pro sports and college competitors deliver circus right into the homes of the consumers. Not only that but those who feel compelled to really attend the circus must compete to buy high priced tickets to many sold out venues in order to be part of the show.
There’s an even better side to this situation. Young people can be passionate about things and are willing to toil for long hours and pay big money to learn what used to be the province of an ascetic priesthood of coaches. Bill Belichek apprenticed at his father's knee and honed his skills for years just to get the chance to intern for nothing with other experts. Now his life’s learning and that of other equally qualified clergymen of the Church of the NFL is available to the masses. So instead of just dozens of boys wasting their time in hopes of coaching the Packers, millions can aspire to be fired losing in the great zero sum game. So while they exercise only their thumbs and their noggins and cannot ever hope to play and get hurt running up huge medical bills, they will all be qualified to coach the Cowboys.
Even better, among the millions of youngsters learning Madden NFL there are tens of thousands who otherwise might have gone bad, and these will have no time for mugging old farts like me or working part time to support illicit drug habits. And they’re not driving cars while they play – I hope – and therefore the roads are safer.
And they say there’s a decline in Western Civilization. Give me a break!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Monday, December 04, 2006
It Never Happened
An examination of possible Republican directions as we move toward the 2008 election leads me to conclude that the Iraq War – as I understood it – was nothing but a figment of my overactive imagination. In checking my mirror for signs that I might have morphed into a cockroach but finding only the usual gray stubble, I wondered, could it have been that it was only a nightmare? But the morning paper still reports that our troops are being blown to bits, but it is equally clear that only George Bush, Dick Cheney, and Don Rumsfeld got the troops into harms way.
The neoconservatives were obviously betrayed by the big three. Rummy never followed the script of sending in enough troops or setting up a real national democracy. It’s obvious from a review of the Doug Feith conspiracy papers (on which the Cheney charges of treason against those of us opposed to the fiasco were based) stating that there was an al Qaeda operative in every Baathist office in Baghdad, so we should have had enough troops to arrest every government employee in the country. Never happened.
The real conservatives said all along that the Powell Doctrine of overwhelming force was not followed, so we can’t blame them. Never happened.
The evangelicals were merely supporting the president in pursuing a war of values. How can you doubt that there were a whole heck of a lot of evil people in Iraq and killing a million of them and letting God sort them out was very good thing, so we can’t blame the evangelicals; there really were lions eating the good folks. Never happened.
Obviously, no Republicans – other than Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld – are responsible for what happened, so now that our sinuses have been cleared by last month’s, why can’t we just move on?
Sure, almost all of the Republicans – and a lot of wimpy Democrats - voted to let Bush handle Saddam, but, like I said, they thought he’d do it right. And he didn’t, so how can we hold them responsible? Never happened.
Damn, they reduced my taxes by sixty bucks and up to a thou on the rest of you in the middle class. Why can’t you thank them? Real wages fell, but, hell, the economy’s growing and we should be cheering as the stars like the Waltons pocket their billions. In the Great Depression when we were all broke and out of work, didn’t we love it when the silver screen showed the winners? Why can’t we just cheer The Donald and make him our surrogate in the winner’s circle?
Looks to me like I’m a bad sport; instead of saying we’ve got punish those people who enabled all these fiascos, I should be looking beyond Bush and giving the Republicans the benefit of the doubt in 2008. They are not going to nominate a guy named Bush. Heck, Jeb may not run for eight years now. You know they’re the party of small government and reduced spending. If it hadn’t been for George Bush, you’d have seen. They’re the party of the little guy; golly, if you’re a small farmer worth only eight or ten million bucks and being subsidized by the Department of Agriculture, they’re all for you and your family. Can’t we just let bygones be bygones?
It was Bush – and Cheney and Rumsfeld – who did it. Don’t blame us; we’ve got some small government candidates we want you to consider in ’08, and we’ll build you a bridge to nowhere while we’re at it.
Maybe I was dreaming. Maybe all those people who six months ago were calling us cutters and runners and who have now turned on Bush really weren’t responsible for any of this mess. Right! Never happened.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
The neoconservatives were obviously betrayed by the big three. Rummy never followed the script of sending in enough troops or setting up a real national democracy. It’s obvious from a review of the Doug Feith conspiracy papers (on which the Cheney charges of treason against those of us opposed to the fiasco were based) stating that there was an al Qaeda operative in every Baathist office in Baghdad, so we should have had enough troops to arrest every government employee in the country. Never happened.
The real conservatives said all along that the Powell Doctrine of overwhelming force was not followed, so we can’t blame them. Never happened.
The evangelicals were merely supporting the president in pursuing a war of values. How can you doubt that there were a whole heck of a lot of evil people in Iraq and killing a million of them and letting God sort them out was very good thing, so we can’t blame the evangelicals; there really were lions eating the good folks. Never happened.
Obviously, no Republicans – other than Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld – are responsible for what happened, so now that our sinuses have been cleared by last month’s, why can’t we just move on?
Sure, almost all of the Republicans – and a lot of wimpy Democrats - voted to let Bush handle Saddam, but, like I said, they thought he’d do it right. And he didn’t, so how can we hold them responsible? Never happened.
Damn, they reduced my taxes by sixty bucks and up to a thou on the rest of you in the middle class. Why can’t you thank them? Real wages fell, but, hell, the economy’s growing and we should be cheering as the stars like the Waltons pocket their billions. In the Great Depression when we were all broke and out of work, didn’t we love it when the silver screen showed the winners? Why can’t we just cheer The Donald and make him our surrogate in the winner’s circle?
Looks to me like I’m a bad sport; instead of saying we’ve got punish those people who enabled all these fiascos, I should be looking beyond Bush and giving the Republicans the benefit of the doubt in 2008. They are not going to nominate a guy named Bush. Heck, Jeb may not run for eight years now. You know they’re the party of small government and reduced spending. If it hadn’t been for George Bush, you’d have seen. They’re the party of the little guy; golly, if you’re a small farmer worth only eight or ten million bucks and being subsidized by the Department of Agriculture, they’re all for you and your family. Can’t we just let bygones be bygones?
It was Bush – and Cheney and Rumsfeld – who did it. Don’t blame us; we’ve got some small government candidates we want you to consider in ’08, and we’ll build you a bridge to nowhere while we’re at it.
Maybe I was dreaming. Maybe all those people who six months ago were calling us cutters and runners and who have now turned on Bush really weren’t responsible for any of this mess. Right! Never happened.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Sunday, December 03, 2006
Rest Easy
They say there is never any good news. This column from today’s Washington Post puts that canard to rest. This is one of the most touching stories I have ever read and couldn’t wait to share it.
The author, Marc Fisher, is a columnist for the Metro Section of the Post. This such an extraodinary piece that I can't believe that it wasn't placed in the Main news or Outlook sections.
I know I'm building this up but assure you that the subject is heroic and the presentation perfect.
Wild Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
By Marc Fisher
Sunday, December 3, 2006; Page C01
E very year for more than a decade, at the height of the season, Morrill Worcester would pack up a truckload of his Christmas wreaths and head down from Maine to Arlington National Cemetery. Without fanfare, he and a dozen or so volunteers would lay red-bowed wreaths on a few thousand headstones of fallen Americans.
There was no publicity. No crowds gathered. The gesture was one man's private duty, born of a trip to Washington he won as a 12-year-old paperboy. Of all the monuments and memorials he saw, it was the visit to Arlington that stuck with him -- the majesty and mystery, the sadness and the pride, the sight of all those neat rows of government-issue white headstones.
Years later, after he had started his Christmas products business, at the crunch point of one season Worcester asked some men who were building his new factory to find some wreaths and buy them for him.
They went a bit overboard: When Worcester heard that he was the proud owner of 4,000 wreaths that couldn't possibly be sold by Christmas, he called a friend who owned a trucking company, contacted his senator in Washington and, two weeks before Christmas 1992, was at Arlington, laying wreaths.
It seemed like the right thing to do. So he continued the ritual each year, honoring those who had died so that he and other Americans might live as they saw fit.
Then, a few months ago, the e-mails started. Maybe you got one: a heart-wrenching yet elegant image of Worcester's wreaths, each adorned with a simple red ribbon, resting in front of seemingly endless rows of identical gravestones on a snowy day at Arlington. Beneath the photo, a few lines of poetry:
"Rest easy, sleep well my brothers.
Know the line has held, your job is done.
Rest easy, sleep well . . . "
And then just a paragraph about Worcester's annual pilgrimage.
The e-mail became an Internet phenomenon, forwarded so many times that the professional skeptics who spend their time checking out urban legends at Snopes.com mounted an investigation. Sure enough, this was the real deal.
A week from today, Worcester will leave Columbia Falls, Maine, to lead the trailer full of wreaths down the coast. This time, it won't be just the trucker, Worcester and his wife, Karen. This time, there'll be an escort of a couple hundred Patriot Guard Riders, a national group of motorcyclists who take it upon themselves to display their respect for fallen service members.
This time, Worcester and friends won't barrel down the interstate; they're taking the slow road, Route 1, so that more motorcyclists -- perhaps thousands more -- might join the caravan.
This time, the wreath-laying won't be a private affair. Instead of the 10 or 12 volunteers who had been rounded up in past years by Wayne Hanson, a retired federal law enforcement officer who lives in Springfield, at least 500 people will be ready to help lay the wreaths Dec. 14 -- and maybe many more.
Morrill Worcester, who never served in the military, said of the wreath-laying project he started: "This is the least we can do." (By Gregory Rec -- Portland Press Herald)
Raw Fisher
Post Blog:
Get metro columnist Marc Fisher many times a day.
Live Online
Thursday, Nov. 16, 11:45 a.m. ET:Potomac Confidential
Thursday, Nov. 16, 11:45 a.m. ET:Potomac Confidential
Thursday, Nov. 9, Noon ET:Potomac Confidential
Transcript:Campaign 2006: Local Races
Transcript:Potomac Confidential
More Stories
Who's Blogging?
Read what bloggers are saying about this article.
Below The Beltway
Full List of Blogs (1 links) »
Most Blogged About Articles
On washingtonpost.com | On the web
Save & Share Article What's This?
DiggGoogle
del.icio.usYahoo!
RedditFacebook
There will be a busload of school kids from Skowhegan, Maine, a Civil Air Patrol unit from up that way and all manner of Washington-area volunteers, too.
They're still calling, every day. "It's the e-mail that did this," says Hanson, 62, an Army veteran of the Vietnam War. He got involved with the wreaths in 1993, when Worcester sought help from the Maine State Society, a Falls Church-based group of transplants. "I had a man call from Iraq, a civilian contractor who got his company to give him R&R so he could come back and lay a wreath."
Every year, the superintendent of the cemetery assigns the wreath brigade to a different part of the grounds. Last year, the volunteers completed their circuit of the cemetery, and this Christmas, they start all over again.
Every year, Worcester makes certain to reserve a few wreaths for the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, the John and Robert Kennedy gravesites, the memorial to the USS Maine and the resting place of Sen. Edmund Muskie of Maine.
Even as his personal ritual morphs into something much larger, Worcester, 56, wants to ensure that its original purpose remains. "It's just my way to say thank you," he says. "I've got a lot to be thankful for." When he started Worcester Wreaths in 1971, he sold 500 wreaths. This year, that number will top 500,000, mostly to the Maine-based retailer L.L. Bean.
This time of year, the wreath company employs more than 600 people in Harrington, about 45 miles up the coast from Bar Harbor.
Worcester has always returned the checks that people send him. The wreath-laying is his personal statement: "This is the least we can do."
Everyone connected with the wreath project takes pains to note that it has nothing to do with politics, nothing to do with anyone's opinion about Iraq or terrorism.
"It's just a way to pay respect," Hanson says. "When I came home from Vietnam, well, it wasn't the best time to be in the military, or to be coming home. But this -- it brings tears to my eyes to see 5,000 wreaths laid out across those white government headstones. You can't think about anything but that ultimate sacrifice these people made to give us our freedom."
This year, the interest in Worcester's project has exploded to the point that he had to find some way to extend the tribute, so he has launched http://wreathsacrossamerica.org, a Web site that coordinates similar rituals at more than 200 military cemeteries around the country.
"The veterans are going to get their due," says Worcester, who never served in the military. "It's going to be quite something."
E-mail:marcfisher@washpost.com
Blog!
Wild Bill
The author, Marc Fisher, is a columnist for the Metro Section of the Post. This such an extraodinary piece that I can't believe that it wasn't placed in the Main news or Outlook sections.
I know I'm building this up but assure you that the subject is heroic and the presentation perfect.
Wild Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
By Marc Fisher
Sunday, December 3, 2006; Page C01
E very year for more than a decade, at the height of the season, Morrill Worcester would pack up a truckload of his Christmas wreaths and head down from Maine to Arlington National Cemetery. Without fanfare, he and a dozen or so volunteers would lay red-bowed wreaths on a few thousand headstones of fallen Americans.
There was no publicity. No crowds gathered. The gesture was one man's private duty, born of a trip to Washington he won as a 12-year-old paperboy. Of all the monuments and memorials he saw, it was the visit to Arlington that stuck with him -- the majesty and mystery, the sadness and the pride, the sight of all those neat rows of government-issue white headstones.
Years later, after he had started his Christmas products business, at the crunch point of one season Worcester asked some men who were building his new factory to find some wreaths and buy them for him.
They went a bit overboard: When Worcester heard that he was the proud owner of 4,000 wreaths that couldn't possibly be sold by Christmas, he called a friend who owned a trucking company, contacted his senator in Washington and, two weeks before Christmas 1992, was at Arlington, laying wreaths.
It seemed like the right thing to do. So he continued the ritual each year, honoring those who had died so that he and other Americans might live as they saw fit.
Then, a few months ago, the e-mails started. Maybe you got one: a heart-wrenching yet elegant image of Worcester's wreaths, each adorned with a simple red ribbon, resting in front of seemingly endless rows of identical gravestones on a snowy day at Arlington. Beneath the photo, a few lines of poetry:
"Rest easy, sleep well my brothers.
Know the line has held, your job is done.
Rest easy, sleep well . . . "
And then just a paragraph about Worcester's annual pilgrimage.
The e-mail became an Internet phenomenon, forwarded so many times that the professional skeptics who spend their time checking out urban legends at Snopes.com mounted an investigation. Sure enough, this was the real deal.
A week from today, Worcester will leave Columbia Falls, Maine, to lead the trailer full of wreaths down the coast. This time, it won't be just the trucker, Worcester and his wife, Karen. This time, there'll be an escort of a couple hundred Patriot Guard Riders, a national group of motorcyclists who take it upon themselves to display their respect for fallen service members.
This time, Worcester and friends won't barrel down the interstate; they're taking the slow road, Route 1, so that more motorcyclists -- perhaps thousands more -- might join the caravan.
This time, the wreath-laying won't be a private affair. Instead of the 10 or 12 volunteers who had been rounded up in past years by Wayne Hanson, a retired federal law enforcement officer who lives in Springfield, at least 500 people will be ready to help lay the wreaths Dec. 14 -- and maybe many more.
Morrill Worcester, who never served in the military, said of the wreath-laying project he started: "This is the least we can do." (By Gregory Rec -- Portland Press Herald)
Raw Fisher
Post Blog:
Get metro columnist Marc Fisher many times a day.
Live Online
Thursday, Nov. 16, 11:45 a.m. ET:Potomac Confidential
Thursday, Nov. 16, 11:45 a.m. ET:Potomac Confidential
Thursday, Nov. 9, Noon ET:Potomac Confidential
Transcript:Campaign 2006: Local Races
Transcript:Potomac Confidential
More Stories
Who's Blogging?
Read what bloggers are saying about this article.
Below The Beltway
Full List of Blogs (1 links) »
Most Blogged About Articles
On washingtonpost.com | On the web
Save & Share Article What's This?
DiggGoogle
del.icio.usYahoo!
RedditFacebook
There will be a busload of school kids from Skowhegan, Maine, a Civil Air Patrol unit from up that way and all manner of Washington-area volunteers, too.
They're still calling, every day. "It's the e-mail that did this," says Hanson, 62, an Army veteran of the Vietnam War. He got involved with the wreaths in 1993, when Worcester sought help from the Maine State Society, a Falls Church-based group of transplants. "I had a man call from Iraq, a civilian contractor who got his company to give him R&R so he could come back and lay a wreath."
Every year, the superintendent of the cemetery assigns the wreath brigade to a different part of the grounds. Last year, the volunteers completed their circuit of the cemetery, and this Christmas, they start all over again.
Every year, Worcester makes certain to reserve a few wreaths for the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, the John and Robert Kennedy gravesites, the memorial to the USS Maine and the resting place of Sen. Edmund Muskie of Maine.
Even as his personal ritual morphs into something much larger, Worcester, 56, wants to ensure that its original purpose remains. "It's just my way to say thank you," he says. "I've got a lot to be thankful for." When he started Worcester Wreaths in 1971, he sold 500 wreaths. This year, that number will top 500,000, mostly to the Maine-based retailer L.L. Bean.
This time of year, the wreath company employs more than 600 people in Harrington, about 45 miles up the coast from Bar Harbor.
Worcester has always returned the checks that people send him. The wreath-laying is his personal statement: "This is the least we can do."
Everyone connected with the wreath project takes pains to note that it has nothing to do with politics, nothing to do with anyone's opinion about Iraq or terrorism.
"It's just a way to pay respect," Hanson says. "When I came home from Vietnam, well, it wasn't the best time to be in the military, or to be coming home. But this -- it brings tears to my eyes to see 5,000 wreaths laid out across those white government headstones. You can't think about anything but that ultimate sacrifice these people made to give us our freedom."
This year, the interest in Worcester's project has exploded to the point that he had to find some way to extend the tribute, so he has launched http://wreathsacrossamerica.org, a Web site that coordinates similar rituals at more than 200 military cemeteries around the country.
"The veterans are going to get their due," says Worcester, who never served in the military. "It's going to be quite something."
E-mail:marcfisher@washpost.com
Blog!
Wild Bill
Saturday, December 02, 2006
James Webb, U.S. Senator-elect
I supported the candidacy of James Webb for United States Senator from Virginia. I worked for his election, harder than some but not nearly as diligently as others. I’m happy that he won. But something happened this week that is very bothersome.
Jim Webb was invited to the White House for a reception for incoming members of congress. As a newly elected senator to be, Mr. Webb would be one of the stars of the show. Reports of the event indicate that Jim appeared to make a point of avoiding the host, the President of the United States.
During the course of the reception, it is reported that the president made a point of finding and engaging Mr. Webb and that Mr. Webb reacted in a manner that was reported to be unusual, if not confrontational. Mr. Webb is reported to have avoided having his picture taken with his host and in making smart remarks about that.
The president asked about Mr. Webb’s son who is serving in Iraq, and Webb is reported to have responded with something akin to, “That’s between my son and me.”
Naturally, a food fight of that nature was reported in the press, and I among many was shocked by Mr. Webb’s performance. George Will opined that the senator-elect’s performance was boorish, and I – again among many – agreed.
Many of Webb’s supporters rushed to his defense with such arguments as that it was about time someone shook the hypocrisy out of politics and told the emperor that his fig leaf had been dropped or that Webb’s campaign was based on straight talk and that anything else would have been phony.
Mr. Webb, in my view, was right on target during his campaign when he denounced the Iraq War. His views and mine were almost exactly the same on the most important issue – and as far as I can see on many others that were addressed in the election. Despite having been a long time Republican, Mr. Webb made himself available to the Democrats to run against George Allen, primarily because of his rejection of the invasion of Iraq and the new course of the larger war on terror being pursued by George Bush.
I was a registered Republican in 2000 and voted for Bush. Like Webb, I broke with Mr. Bush and the Republicans when the war on terror lost its focus by shifting away from Afghanistan, its Taliban rulers who were harboring al Qaeda, and the terrorists themselves who were planning and training in that country.
My disgust with the president and his congressional enablers was as palpable as that of Jim Webb, and I became an avowed critic of the president and his war. While having zero knowledge of Webb’s evolution, when I found out he was running and his policy positions, I was very pleased since I had trod virtually the same path.
My break with Bush and the Republicans was eased by my view that in the president I had voted for a `uniter not a divider’ but had been sorely disappointed to learn that I was just plain wrong in this. Mr. Bush had turned out to be the worst kind of partisan, and I was going to look for candidates who would restore some sense of civility to government. During the campaign I came to believe that Jim Webb was such a person. While he pulled no punches in his opposition to the war, his interaction with his opponent, Senator Allen, was always civil, far more honest, and almost devoid of the mud being thrown at him.
Many of the people defending Mr. Webb for his alleged faux pas are those from the liberal part of the coalition that elected him. Many of these same people were angered by the heat of the charges by Senator Allen, and they were the ones calling for civility.
Mr. Webb is obviously far more conservative than the left wing of the Democratic Party. He and many others recruited to be candidates by the Democrats were far more centrist than the hard core, and this was acknowledged by virtually everyone associated with the campaign.
I am a Democrat – now – and far more centrist than the vast majority of his Northern Virginia supporters. Almost every analysis that I have perused since the election leads me to conclude that Mr. Webb’s narrow victory was based on votes garnered from Democrat centrists, moderate Republicans, and independents.
I am convinced that Mr. Webb made gross mistake in attending the function at the White House with the intent of avoiding the host and in responding badly to a very civil question concerning the well being of his son. Obviously, it is acceptable to say things in the course of a campaign that are not appropriate in the home of a political opponent. If Mr. Webb cannot abide the person of George Bush, he should not have attended the reception. His absence would not have created nearly the stir as his performance.
I continue to support Senator elect Webb and wish him well. He is a man of significant intellect and is far more honest in thought than most people in public life. But if there are many more repeats of the performance at his first White House reception, the narrow victory that came with the building of a coalition built on civility as well as policy positions will quickly erode.
I am angrier with Webb’s overzealous supporters who have the gall to encourage such behavior than with the senator elect who should be given room to back down gracefully. Their partisanship is showing, and they ought to realize that the great victory by their candidate – and mine – was built on far more than bad manners and incivility.
There, I feel better. I hope we can move on.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Jim Webb was invited to the White House for a reception for incoming members of congress. As a newly elected senator to be, Mr. Webb would be one of the stars of the show. Reports of the event indicate that Jim appeared to make a point of avoiding the host, the President of the United States.
During the course of the reception, it is reported that the president made a point of finding and engaging Mr. Webb and that Mr. Webb reacted in a manner that was reported to be unusual, if not confrontational. Mr. Webb is reported to have avoided having his picture taken with his host and in making smart remarks about that.
The president asked about Mr. Webb’s son who is serving in Iraq, and Webb is reported to have responded with something akin to, “That’s between my son and me.”
Naturally, a food fight of that nature was reported in the press, and I among many was shocked by Mr. Webb’s performance. George Will opined that the senator-elect’s performance was boorish, and I – again among many – agreed.
Many of Webb’s supporters rushed to his defense with such arguments as that it was about time someone shook the hypocrisy out of politics and told the emperor that his fig leaf had been dropped or that Webb’s campaign was based on straight talk and that anything else would have been phony.
Mr. Webb, in my view, was right on target during his campaign when he denounced the Iraq War. His views and mine were almost exactly the same on the most important issue – and as far as I can see on many others that were addressed in the election. Despite having been a long time Republican, Mr. Webb made himself available to the Democrats to run against George Allen, primarily because of his rejection of the invasion of Iraq and the new course of the larger war on terror being pursued by George Bush.
I was a registered Republican in 2000 and voted for Bush. Like Webb, I broke with Mr. Bush and the Republicans when the war on terror lost its focus by shifting away from Afghanistan, its Taliban rulers who were harboring al Qaeda, and the terrorists themselves who were planning and training in that country.
My disgust with the president and his congressional enablers was as palpable as that of Jim Webb, and I became an avowed critic of the president and his war. While having zero knowledge of Webb’s evolution, when I found out he was running and his policy positions, I was very pleased since I had trod virtually the same path.
My break with Bush and the Republicans was eased by my view that in the president I had voted for a `uniter not a divider’ but had been sorely disappointed to learn that I was just plain wrong in this. Mr. Bush had turned out to be the worst kind of partisan, and I was going to look for candidates who would restore some sense of civility to government. During the campaign I came to believe that Jim Webb was such a person. While he pulled no punches in his opposition to the war, his interaction with his opponent, Senator Allen, was always civil, far more honest, and almost devoid of the mud being thrown at him.
Many of the people defending Mr. Webb for his alleged faux pas are those from the liberal part of the coalition that elected him. Many of these same people were angered by the heat of the charges by Senator Allen, and they were the ones calling for civility.
Mr. Webb is obviously far more conservative than the left wing of the Democratic Party. He and many others recruited to be candidates by the Democrats were far more centrist than the hard core, and this was acknowledged by virtually everyone associated with the campaign.
I am a Democrat – now – and far more centrist than the vast majority of his Northern Virginia supporters. Almost every analysis that I have perused since the election leads me to conclude that Mr. Webb’s narrow victory was based on votes garnered from Democrat centrists, moderate Republicans, and independents.
I am convinced that Mr. Webb made gross mistake in attending the function at the White House with the intent of avoiding the host and in responding badly to a very civil question concerning the well being of his son. Obviously, it is acceptable to say things in the course of a campaign that are not appropriate in the home of a political opponent. If Mr. Webb cannot abide the person of George Bush, he should not have attended the reception. His absence would not have created nearly the stir as his performance.
I continue to support Senator elect Webb and wish him well. He is a man of significant intellect and is far more honest in thought than most people in public life. But if there are many more repeats of the performance at his first White House reception, the narrow victory that came with the building of a coalition built on civility as well as policy positions will quickly erode.
I am angrier with Webb’s overzealous supporters who have the gall to encourage such behavior than with the senator elect who should be given room to back down gracefully. Their partisanship is showing, and they ought to realize that the great victory by their candidate – and mine – was built on far more than bad manners and incivility.
There, I feel better. I hope we can move on.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)