Some Thoughts on Elections

I'd like to preface this by saying that the following are the personal views of this blogger. Personally, I don't trust that either party is good for the United States and no matter who we vote in, things will be the same in Washington. They all talk the talk we want to hear and then they cut and run. That is, get a check cut for them and they run with it to the bank. Or they cut off from their constituents and run away from responsibility. Or they cut off from their constituents and run again for office. You get my point. Oh well. What follows will seem like a total waste of time and absolutely contradictory from my little spiel above.


There are going to be midterm elections in November and there are many issues that will play a part in how people vote. I'me going to offer some thoughts on some of the issues that will play a part this November.

TERRORISM AND NATIONAL SECURITY
1. The No-Fly List
The No-Fly List, instituted after 9/11, was supposed to be a comprehensive list of people who should not be allowed to fly on airplanes and anyone with a name matching a person on that list should be taken out and questioned (legally of course, what ever that means to the current administration). Guess what. It doesn't work and there are serious problems.
If you have seen Sixty Minutes lately, you would have known that the government isn't doing a good job with that list and how to implement it.
It's supposed to be updated. Nope. Dead hijackers from 9/11 are still on that list. The official reason is that someone might assume those names and well, we really don't know if they are dead or not. This is coming from the person who was responsible for updating the list. Um...I think that if you are in a plane and you smash it into a building and the results are near-total incineration, it's safe to assume that they are dead. Unless they are immortal and have fast-regeneration powers, there is little chance they are alive. The British bombers who were recently arrested weren't on the list. And they were being investigated for an entire year. And it was compiled in a random way. Known terrorists are not on the list because it might be a breach of national security. They might find out and not fly on airplanes because of that. Um, Bin Laden survived so long because he AVOIDS getting caught. Go figure out that logic.
Oh, by the way, the airlines are only given a list of names. The official government list has date of births included and other relevant information like pictures. So if you happen to have a name on the list, be prepared to wait for six hours until you can prove you are NOT a suspected terrorist.
Why aren't these pieces of relevant information given to the guys working at the airport? National security. Yes, national security. The same reason why we have the list. Supposedly, the information is "TOP SECRET" and the airline people don't have sufficient clearance. The terrorists might find out they are on the list. So, national security says we have the list, but we can't help the nice airport people out because national security says that it would be a breach of national security to put in date of birth and a damn picture. OK...and I thought that the IRS code made no sense. This takes the cake.
2. Classifying Documents
This also makes no sense. Stuff that was in textbooks is now considered top secret. Again, it's for national security reasons. Anyone with a library card or an Internet connection can find formerly top secret information. Go figure out that logic. Hell, they still have World War I battle plans that are still top secret. Don't want the terrorists to find out how we'e going to liberate Europe in 1918. It might give them an unfair advantage.
Wait. Anyone can figure out top secret plans just by looking at non-clasified documents. They've done this in the fifties. It's how the Soviets knew which persons were people of interest. They just looked at Washington DC phonebooks, Who's Who, and other publically available information. Hell, a group of college professors involved in statistics deduced stuff so well about the Department of Defense's budget and military plans, that it matched the official plans in every single aspect.
3. The Blame Game on North Korea and 9/11 and Everywhere Else
Which party can make the United States safer? Don't believe the ads you see on television or the news. It's all BS. That's it. Neither party can. Unless they work together to solve the problems with real solutions instead of trying to make the other party look bad.
Who's to blame for 9/11? Both parties are. The CIA gave weapons and training to the mujahadeen in the 1980s because the Soviet Union was bad and an enemy of an enemy was a friend. Oddly enough, the mujahadeen became Al Qaeda and the Taliban. After the attacks on the US embassies, the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993, and the USS Cole attack, Al Qaeda claimed responsibility. Not enough was done back in the Clinton years. When G.W. Bush took over, don't you think that those previous attacks were enough to make a person think that Al Qaeda really hated the US? That something should have been done? Guess it took 9/11 to do something about the situation. Not good enough.
The CIA and FBI hate eachother. They couldn't work together to stop the threat. Hell, both intelligence agencies tried to work as little as possible with translating Arabic so they could get more money. That shows a level of competence we can trust on.
Who is to blame for the current situation in North Korea? Again, everyone is to blame. Neither side did enough. We appeased North Korea before and gave them the rights to have nuclear reactors AND we ignored them later. They actually had WMDs and we ignored them. Did nothing and invaded Iraq based on a gross misapplication of faulty intelligence.
4. Intelligence Gathering
You've probably heard about the tussle over how we can gather intelligence from suspected Al Qaeda members or from terrorists in general. The current White House administration wants to give the CIA some leeway. After all, sometimes the situation requires some more forceful methods. And to make sure it is legal, we will define what is legal or not. The President will decide what's good or not depending on the situation.
Hey, a few hits will do them good. That's fine. Simulated drowning? Well, it worked before and these are terrorists. How about sleep deprivation? What about simulated sex. Barking attack dogs? It just depends. And it can be perfectly legal as long as the President decides so. Geneva Conventions don't apply. Abu Graib was an unfortunate but disgusting mistake.
The terrorists are using reprehensible methods when they behead people and mistreat them by beating them, but when Americans use simulated drowning, sleep deprivation and other similar methods, it's OK since we are "civilized" people. It's a battle of saving the free world of democracy from the Islamofascists.
On a related note, we don't need to bother about giving them habeas corpus, the chance to show that they aren't guilty and they have not commited a crime. Why would we want to give suspected terrorists that right? They don't deserve it. Tell that to the unfortunate Canadian citizen who wasn't a terrorist, extraorinarily rendered to Syria for interrogation, and was beaten for an entire year. Oops, we made a mistake. Go back home and don't tell anyone. Isn't that what civilized people do?
Either way, both parties will skew the facts to suit their needs, thereby making little if any progress on solving such problems. In the end, the people lose and the politicians win.
Now, based upon everything, which party can make the US safer?

TAXES
People don't want to pay taxes. It's a given. President G.W. Bush knows this fact and so he gave people tax cuts and the refunds. Did you really prosper from these actions? Odds are, you didn't. Guess what. All the real benefits went to the extremely rich.
The estate tax. Everyone talks about this. Guess what? It doesn't apply to you unless your net worth is at least a million dollars, if not more. Are you worth a million dollars? I'm thinking you're not. It only applies to 1.5 percent of the population. The super-rich people making at least six-figures every single year. Joe Schmoe ain't making that much.
In fact, all of the tax cuts that are good for the US citizens only apply if you define "citizen" as "those who fall in the uppermost tax brackets, namely those making at least six-figures every year in taxable income."
When was the last time you saw a person living in a trailer park doing itemized deductions like paying property taxes on their house? Or for that matter, a middle-class citizen taking itemized deductions on business expenses? Owner occupied housing tax subsidies cost $157 billion each year. If you happen to own two houses, you can get a deduction on the second house also. They're all great subsidies costing tax payers hundreds of billions of dollars. Most of the money is going to the rich, not the average person.
Anytime the government or anyone says that the Bush Tax Cuts are good for the nation, seriously ask yourself who is benefiting from them. The chances are high that you're not benefiting at all. After all, the more money you have, the more influence you have in the political world.

SOCIAL SECURITY
You're all probably thinking that the taxes you pay for Social Security is kept safe from the greedy palms of the government. It's put in the Social Security Trust Fund and kept separate so when you retire, you can take your portion out. yeah right. Welcome back to planet Earth.
Guess what. Once it reaches Washington DC, it's indistinguishable from all the other cash the government gets. If Congress needs a billion dollars to pay from a day in Afghanistan and Iraq, poof, it's gone. Basically, it is an IOU. The government will "promise" to pay it later.
You might be wondering why the government comes up with different numbers for the budget deficit/surplus. Now you know wy. It plays the numbers game with the money it has. That's why the budget deficit this year changed from 470 billion to only 320 billion. Your Social Security taxes helped make up the difference.
In a related note, the national debt is about 8.6 trillion dollars. Most of it is IOUs to Social Security, Treasury Bills and Bonds, and other assorted ephemera. The US government is like a consumer with a massive debt, but worse. It was 5.6 trillion G.W. took over and it is now the number today. Oddly enough, it coincided with the tax cuts and refunds mentioned earlier. In March of this year, the ceiling was raised to 9 trillion and that will be reached very soon. Once 9 trillion is reached, it's either raise the ceiling or have government shut down. Don't you all feel better about your future and the future for unknown generations years later? I guess not.

To sum, what am I trying to say? Choose wisely and get informed. The best weapon is knowledge. Get involved and vote.


That's all for now.