Jon Stewart Hit the Nail on the Head

Last night watching Jon Stewart, I just about sprayed my glass of water all over the room, as he lampooned our MSM and what they said Michelle Obama had to do in her speech, such as "show that she loves America." Of course, because she is a Democrat, she has to prove that, since everyone knows that Republicans love America. But then Stewart hit the ball out of the park when he said, "they just hate half the people in it" or something to that effect. Damn, that was good.

Arizona Hillbilly- My Musical Tribute to McCain

To the tune of "The Beverly Hillbillies".

Now a listen to a story bout a guy named John McCain,
A maverick turned conservative he turned out rather lame,
He’s running now for President to be another Bush,
But I’m just hoping Jonny fails and lands upon his tush,
Dairy-airy that is,

Now election’s coming soon and Jon he hasn’t got a mate,
He’s hoping who he picks will somehow save him from his fate,
I hope he picks the guy who just like Jon he likes to flip,
You know of whom I’m talking bout that pretty boy named Mitt,
Black gold, texas tea, (or is that brylcream)

(Banjos)

Now economics isn’t something Jonny likes to do,
And thinks that he is middle class with problems just like you,
He’s married to an heiress with whom he cheated on his wife,
Another moral Christian who is ardently pro-life,
Amen, brutha John

Now John he is a warrior and he wants to start some wars,
He’ll bomb Iran and Russia while diplomacy he ignores,
He’ll tap his buddy Lieberman to run the D. O. D.,
And all the foes of Israel we will fight to set them free,
Of their oil that is


Now John once was a gentleman with high-minded ideals,
He tried to curb corruption and those backroom shady deals,
But running now for President he’s had to plug his nose,
He needs the kind of people who employ the Karl Roves,
Swindlers that is,

(Banjos)

So now it’s time to say goodbye to Jonny and his quest,
I hope these next four years that Jonny gets a lot of rest,
With four more years of Bush we’ll all be living in a tent,
And that is why Obama needs to be our President.

Ya’ll vote for Obama now, ya hear.

Famous last words from John McCain

From his interview with Jay Leno, "I respect Barack Obama" and "I want to run a respectful campaign". Good luck bucko. You've employed the most heinous and nasty team to further your campaign. The smear campaign that I predict from McCain's surrogates will be unprecedented. It will be interesting to see if this "public minded" McCain will refute his surrogates. Also, McCain was asked by Jay Leno,"how many houses he owned", and he deflected the answer with his desire to keep people in their homes. McCain has become a tragic stooge for those he used to oppose. His desire for power has overcome his instincts for basic goodness. There was John McCain who was willing to be a maverik and serve the public, but that maverik is long gone. He has sold his soul to the same corporate sponsors that bought the so-called moderate George W. Bush.

John McSame has sold his soul for the "ring of power". The "straight talk express" has become the "same talk express." He now represents a continuation of the worst legacy our nation ever experienced. If John McCain had remained the John McCain of 2000, I might actually support a Republican for President. As it stands eight years later, I question the sanity of anyone who would support such as a defector from reason and straight talk. McCain has sold his soul, and I mourn the loss of that soul. But anyone who votes for McCain must wonder, "what does he actually believe?" Personally, I can't tell you. But that uncertainty swamps any ideas that Barack Obama may have broken bread with, gasp, moslems.

McCain would be a disaster for this country. Do I agree with Obama on many key issues? The answer is no. But I fear our Republic cannot survive another authoritarian conservative President. And McCain is that President.

Michelle "freeking" Obama

All I can say is wow! What a great address from a future first lady. She seemed to talk from her heart about those things important to her. Michelle Obama is smart, and has opinions. Personally I like a first lady with opinions. Eleanor Roosevelt pushed Franklin to address issues he was uncomfortable dealing with for political reasons. And let's compare her to McCain's first lady. A woman who cheated with McCain with McCain's first wife, disfigured and disabled by a car accident. There is an intellectual depth about Michelle Obama that I respect, but more than that, she appears to have a soul and heart. To her credit, I think she touched alot of people. And ya know, admittedly, I am a sucker for kids. I have a 18 month old myself and keep in mind, that seeing those kids act as naturally as they did, was very effective.

A very nice night for the Obamas.

Thoughts on Joe Biden

Admittedly, I endorsed Joe Biden for President before the Iowa Caucuses. Certainly, it wasn't because he voted in favor of allowing Bush to invade Iraq, it was despite that fact. On a broad range of issues, I have found Joe Biden to be a thoughtful and articulate U.S. Senator. He and Chris Dodd seemed to me to be the most experienced and well-grounded candidates and I picked Biden.

Geographically, Joe Biden doesn't add that much to the ticket, as I would expect for Obama to win, that Delaware should be considered a given. Perhaps Biden has some traction in western Pennsylvania and northern Virginia, but even that is mere speculation. What Biden does provide, is an intelligent and competent individual who could take over the Presidency if Obama should suffer a fate like JFK. At Biden's age, it would be ludicrous to assume that after eight years of an Obama administration that he would be the favorite for the Democratic nomination. Biden is selected on the basis of his ability to be an excellent Vice President. What this signifies, is that Obama wants competent individuals in his administration, and he's starting out with his V.P.

Biden, a nice choice.

Open Season on Dems and Liberals I Suppose

After a right-wing lunatic went on a rampage at a Unitarian church, I was hopeful that would be the last of the senseless violence. However, sad news today, as the Arkansas Democratic Chair has been shot and killed. I know people's passions can get pretty worked up over politics, but come on people. I'm sure it is too early to know why this lunatic did what he did, but it wouldn't surprise me if he felt he was doing his patriotic duty. Sigh....

ABC News and the Drumbeats for War

Glenn Greenwald has a priceless post today at Salon.com outlining the culpability of ABC News in providing false information that helped along the drumbeats of war against Iraq. The story deals with the suicide of the lead suspect in the anthrax case, an individual who worked for the federal government at Ft. Detrick in Maryland where he had access to anthrax. Going back to the time of the anthrax attacks, ABC News Brian Ross had as his big news story, that the anthrax had traces of bentonite in it which was consistent with anthrax used in Saddam Hussein's Iraq. This was one of the first linkages of Saddam Hussein to the 9/11 series of attacks. This information turned out to be false. The only persons who would have known whether bentonite had been found in the anthrax, would have been the very same set of experts who worked at Ft. Detrick, the source of the anthrax.

Brian Ross said he heard it from 3-4 sources and it was a big scoop at the time. However, in the interests of hindsight, Brian Ross of ABC News either manufactured the bentonite idea, or he was duped by one or more individuals who wanted to create a link between the anthrax attacks and Saddam Hussein. I can't think of a third plausible explanation. So Greenwald, to his credit begs the question, "why protect your sources now?" They clearly lied to Brian Ross and since the anthrax attack was a criminal violation, doesn't Brian Ross have a responsibility to release what information he knows. If the individual(s) responsible used him as a member of the press to acheive political objectives out of this criminal act, is not Brian Ross an accessory?

I asked that question of Brian Ross from ABC News's website and am not anticipating a response. This is a unique case, The very individual who through a terrorist attack on the United States, and tried to implicate islamic extremists in the attack, may have also contacted the press in order to implicate Iraq itself. That a federal government employee could foment war through a terrorist attack on the United States with the goal of implicating a country that had nothing to do with it, is hard to fathom, but it appears to be the most plausible explanation to what happened. And ABC News and Brian Ross need to come clean on this thing fast, or they should not be trusted as a reliable news source.

Thoughts on Obama's Trip

The last couple of days, I had the misfortune of lying in a hospital dealing with a recurring staph infection I seem to get about every other year. Unfortunately, the only news cable network available was the "Fair and Balanced" one. Not being able to get my fix of liberal slanted news, I went ahead and listened to the propaganda coming in from nutjob land regarding Obama's trip. It was interesting to me that so many of John McCain's talking points seem to be the same talking points emphasized on Faux, but I'm sure that was just a coincidence.

Here's a few of my oservations regarding that trip:

1- The Iraqi people and their leader Maliki, would not only be able to work with an Obama administration, they might actually prefer one.

2- The war in Afganistan is going much worse than the Bush Administration has led on, and that more effort may be needed in that country.

3- The claim by the McCain campaign that an Obama presidency would potentially cripple Israel is unfounded, and in fact, counter-intuitive to everyone except the most radical right-wing jewish factions.

4- Obama'a reception in Europe shows that Europeans are still hopeful and desireful for effective American leadership, but the kind of leadership that that brought them the Marshall Plan and Nato, not the unilateralism of George W. Bush,

The spin from the McCain camp was that this sort of trip was premature. I disagree. This kind of trip was essential. It is important to let the other countries of the world know, that the nightmare that was the Bush administration was an abberation, and not representative of what they can expect from our government.

WHether we like it or not, we are still the world's only superpower. Though much of that power has been dissipated and misused, the U.S. is still the major player internationally. How we play our cards influences the well-being of other countries. Our stands and our practices on human rights affects the parameters that other regimes, rogue or otherwise, may limit themselves by.

Each nation of the world values their sovereignty, but also recognizes that effective leadership, which can provide stability and prosperity, is in their sovereign self-interest. That leadership was lacking during the Bush administration. Leadership is about convincing others to come along. Part of convincing people to come along is employing intelligent and moral policies. Bush took the role, "if you won't come along, I'll do it myself." And the result was an illegal war, illegal torture, illegal detainments, illegal spying on American citizens, as well as the citizens of these sovereign countries without oversight and without justification.

One thing to consider as well, is which Presidential candidate can work with other nations the best to resolve the many challenges we have as a planet? Obama, making his trip to meet with foreign countries signified the importance he perceives of these relationships. We as a nation benefit by having a President who can not only appropriately perceive and promote America's best interests, but work with others to acheive those interests and find common ground. McCain's criticism of Obama for this trip seems like a "whaaaa, I wish I thought of this" and a "whaaaa, I why doesn't the world want a continuation of John W. McBush?"

Obama's trip sought to spread hope to the world, that the United States has not abandoned it's core values permanently, that a change of course is on the way, dependent upon the wishes of the American public. In this regard, this election isn't a mandate on the Bush administration. It is a mandate on whether the American people can be trusted, to be true to the values they preach, and to their own political system they market to the world. That we are a nation of laws and values, and not just a rogue nation willing to use it's power as it sees fit.

American people, the world is watching. They want to know "who are you, and can you be trusted." In November, we'll find out if they can.

Management Perspectives and the Utah Legislature

About a month ago, I attended some seminars on fraud and loss, and management effectiveness. A recurring theme was "tone at the top" of organization and how it influenced the organization and determined whether that organization was effective or ineffective. Top effective management teams are:

Transparent
Open
Trusting
Communicative
Supportive
Ethically upstanding
Collaborative
Positive
Concerned
Fair
Balanced

Within that context, I began to look at Utah's Legislature and asked myself, whether they would qualify as an effective team. Admittedly, they aren't the executive branch, but serve as a legislative body. But my own perception, is that there are many areas regarding "transparency", "open", "fair", "balanced", "positive", etc. where the legislature in general looks pretty dysfunctional, not-withstanding the obvious one, "ethically upstanding." What characteristics would you hope to find, in an effective legislative body?

What I Expect Out of a Utah Democrat

I expect that a Democratic Utah official will be responsive to the public. Wayne Owens, as a Utah Congressman insisted that his staff be responsive, even to those who called him every name in the book. I had a great deal of respect for Wayne Owens and considered him a personal friend. Rep. Jim Matheson? He's no Wayne Owens. I have yet to hear his justification for his FISA capitulation. As a leader in the blue-belly coalition of Democratic appeasers of Bush misbehavior, I would have atleast welcomed a non-sensical and easily refuted response like I got from the Obama people.

But here is a man whom I've had a history with. I've donated money to, I've carried bumperstickers for, I've defended him from criticism from my more liberal friends, and I have received no response. No explanation. Nothing to suggest that he is engaged with Utah's citizens. Has he drank the kool-aid like Hatch, Bennett, Bishop and Cannon, and decided that Utahns are irrelevant? That an inquiry from a Utahn is not worthy of a response because, well, what matters is what goes on in the beltway, not on the 453 UTA bus coming in from Tooele?

Plainly, I'm at a loss. No one, on either side of the aisle, can coherently and convincingly explain why they decided to obliterate the spirit of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The dearth of a response is an indictment against the political culture we live in. I expect such indifference from Republicans. But I hold Democrats to a higher standard. If I am going to share a bed with you, I expect you to brush your teeth and take a shower. As it is, I'm plugging my nose.

There Went Lunch- Courtesy of the Utah Republican Party

from their website at http://www.utgop.org I just read the following under "We Are Republicans Because",

"Liberty"

"We are a law abiding Party and support the rule of law."

At the end, they say,

"Join with the Republican Party as we promote and defend these principles and values."

I need a shower.

Enlightenment Thinking and the Role of the Individual

Over at One Utah, Glenden Brown wrote a post on the influence of “the enlightenment” on the thinking of our nation’s founders and upon the establishment of a Democratic Republic which grants rights to the individual. Last night, I was listening to flute concertos by Carl Philip Emmanuel Bach (CPE Bach), an enlightenment composer and I contemplated the significant differences between his musical style and that of his illustrious father, Johann Sebastian Bach (JS Bach).

JS Bach is admittedly my favorite composer. His music has a lot of power, which is derived from a rational mix of structure, harmony and an amazing technical understanding of how notes relate to each other. JS Bach through his music, sought to glorify God, and to speak through the idiom of music, the power, knowledge, and mystery of an all-powerful and all-knowing God.

CPE Bach was greatly influenced by the music of his father, and borrowed from his father’s music liberally during his long career, first in Berlin and later in Hamburg. But what is interesting and striking, is the differences in the musical language and the differences in the goals of his music relative to his father’s. Like his father, CPE Bach wrote religious music. In fact, I would rank his “Die Auferstehung und himmelfahrt jesu” as probably one of the ten best oratorios of the 18th Century. But the portrayal of God is strikingly different from father to son. The mysterious and powerful God of JS Bach, is replaced by a God that is more human, and humane. The God of JS Bach is to be revered and feared. The God of CPE Bach is one you’d have a beer with. Much of this is the result of the enlightenment thinking that influenced CPE Bach in the intellectual circles he gravitated towards in Hamburg.

The musical language of CPE Bach sought to internally examine the soul of man. His language reflected the “empfindsamer Stil” or “sensitive style” and the focus of his music is human emotion and understanding. The role and value of the individual is central to CPE Bach’s music and is also the focus of enlightenment thinking. Enlightenment thinkers such as Rousseau, Locke, Hume, Hutcheson, Voltaire etal., placed value on being true to oneself and to the power of reason. This line of thinking is what inspired the likes of Jefferson, Madison, Paine, Franklin and others who helped found our nation. Instead of a nation where God had granted powers to the king, our nation was created with the notion that God had granted inalienable rights to the individual.

Individual liberty, enshrined in the secular, rational, thinking of enlightenment philosophy was a dramatic break from the past. It created an optimistic view of humanity that focused on human potential, not on human failings. It subordinated the government to the individual, not the individual to the government. And though you could argue that America was and continued to be a predominantly “Christian nation”, it was also a nation predominated by a Christianity in flux. The powerful medieval God was being replaced by a more personal God. And as Christians argue that man is created in the image of God, I would argue that man creates God in his own image. And as humanity became more rational and humane, so did the Christian God of the time.

And if you want to understand which direction we are going as a nation, we increasingly see a re-emergence of the medieval God that subordinated individual liberty to the whims of the state. The gains Americans made via the enlightenment are being rolled back. The question is whether the train is stoppable at this point. I’m hopeful that it is.

Giving Credit When It's Due to Morgan Bowen

Admittedly, I was very irritated at the FISA capitulation. I harangued unmercifully our own beloved Rep. Jim Matheson, Speaker Pelosi, Stoney Hoyer and Barack Obama. What I never really did in one of my posts was give adequate kudos to Morgan Bowen for speaking out on that issue. This was not an issue that had alot of upside with Utah voters. I had a difficult time finding much discussion of the bill on SLTRIB, DESNEWS, KSL or any other local news source. But I found it significant that Morgan Bowen became knowledgable on the subject, and recognized the gravity of what was happening. And he did what statesmen do, he spoke out and put himself on the record, that Constitutional principles mean something to him.

I first met Morgan Bowen at my county convention. I was deeply impressed not only with his knowledge, but his passion for the principled positions I believe Utahns can embrace if they cut through the clutter of soundbites and flag-waving. The breadth of his knowledge was matched with a determination to use that knowledge to better our Republic and I have the utmost respect for individuals willing to invest their time to our political process and to provide voters with a sound choice.

So, much belated kudos to Morgan Bowen for speaking out about the importance of preserving our rights under the fourth amendment. As the election progresses, I will do what I can to help Morgan Bowen get elected. I don't have alot of money to contribute this year, but what I have budgeted for Congressional races, the vast majority will go to the Bowen campaign and a special thanks to Jim Matheson for simplifying my contribution budget.

Are We To Be Governed by Laws? Or Men?

The recent FISA capitulation by the legislative branch represents just a glimpse into a wider arching problem that is confronting our U.S. Constitutional framework and how it has been subterfuged by the Bush Administration. I've had government officials tell me over and over again, "it's the law, if you want the law changed, go through the process to change it." We as citizens don't get to pick and choose which laws we obey. In theory, government officials in the executive branch don't get to pick and choose which laws they enforce. Admittedly, they often have to prioritize where to place their limited enforcement resources, but there should never be this presumption, that the law doesn't apply to them.

Enter the Bush Administration, the greatest challenge to Constitutional government we may have ever had as a republic. What is compelling and alarming, is the pattern of lawbreaking without accountability you see in the Bush II era. Violations of FISA surveillance laws is just the tip of the iceberg. Violations by the Bush Administration of torture laws, international treaties such as the Geneva Conventions, illegal detainments, and perhaps most interestingly, "signing statements" indicating which parts of legislation the executive deems worthy of imperial consideration. Bush has vetoed relatively few pieces of legislation. The reason, he has declared through "signing statements", that he alone gets to determine what is effectively, the law of the land.

The blatant and pervasive contempt for the rule of law, would have been harshly addressed just a generation ago. Republicans and Democrats would have for the most part discarded partisan divisions in order to preserve the rule of law. In today's partisan environment, Republicans in lock-step fashion block Democrats from preserving the rule of law, knowing that enough Democrats will be cowed by fear of enflaming the authoritarian conservative masses, to play with them.

This contempt for the rule of law is why I am not afraid to criticize Democrats when they empower those who would abuse the rule of law. Failure to do so, puts me on par with Republicans, who reject the rule of law when a Republican is in power, but use it as a blunt force weapon if a Democrat should hold office.

What it comes down to, is respect for the law. Our loyalties must be to the law, not to those who govern us and certainly not to their party offiliation or political philosophy. If we disagree with the law, we have recourse to change it. But when we shred the most basic fabric that holds a Constitutional society together, we are exposed to an amoral world, where power rules over principle, and we are vulnerable to those who would exercise power over us. The degree to which we have descended down an authoritarian path, is shocking. And when liberal bloggers such as myself are shrugged off as "extremist malcontents", I know for a fact, our Republic is in danger.

Sorry to preach.

Stunned I am- Unlawful Surveillance Made Lawful

I guess I should have seen the writing on the wall. Naively thinking that our Congress and Senate would fulfill their Constitutional role to act as a balance against an unchecked imperial presidency. In the Republican party, where are the Howard Baker's? Where are the Bill Cohen's? And among Democrats, why is it that that only 25 Democrats willing to stand up to the Bush Administration and defend our Constitutional values.

And whenever I hear our brave Utah Senators talk about defending the Constitution, we need to remind them that when it was hanging by a thread, they bore their scissors and cut away. And Obama showed a glimpse into who he really is, which is someone who covets power enough to compromise on principle.

Hatch and Bennett- Support the Rule of Law

Let's see some noise among the Republican bloggers who support the Fourth Amendment and believe in the rule of law. I already know both Hatch and Bennett, and my opinion generally does not matter to them. Perhaps it does to liberty loving Republicans.

Today, the vote for telecom amnesty goes before the United States Senate. Sen. Hatch and Bennett will show whether they blindly support a corrupt president who spied on Americans without oversight in violation of the law. And they will show that the rule of law means nothing to them, because we can just retro-actively legalize those who broke the law.

So to my Republican friends, I lay the challenge before you. If you support the FISA bill going before the Senate, justify and defend that support. If you oppose the bill, speak up to your Republican U.S. Senators Orrin Hatch and Robert Bennett. I'm counting on you.

Two Hundred and Thirty Years Later, Who are we?

As we celebrate Indepence Day, I ask the question, "who are we?" I am well aware of what we were. I have studiously studied history and my mentor J.D. Williams told me to embrace and appreciate the uniqueness that it is to be an "American." Our country was much influenced by enlightenment thinking from the 18th and 19th century. The wisdom of Rousseau, Locke, Hume, Hutchison, Voltaire and Klopstock enabled a colony subservient to monarchy to break free of this constraint and devise a system of government that was accountable to the people, but constrained by the Constitution. Individauls became important, with inalienable rights, not wardens of the state or Dukedom. Certainly, our founders feared rash actions, and wanted to suppress the pashions of public opinion. David Miller in his fine blog has done a wonderful job of analyzing the "federalist papers" and examining what our founders had in mind.

But life today, seems to be dominated by fear. The attacks on 9/11, created an environment where Americans gave unprecedented powers to the executive branch under the guise of protecting us. Many Americans, magnified the Al Qaeda victory over us on 9/11 by discarding the Constitutional provisions that provided for oversight of the Executive Branch. Republicans in lock-step, and Democrats fearing appearing soft on terrorism, surrendered without condition freedoms that many of us took for granted.

Let me put it plainly. Every liberty we surrender in our quest for better security is an appeasement to Al Qaeda. Every freedom we give up tells Al Qaeda, "uncle."

Listen, I am not willing to say uncle to a bunch of uber-religious morons like Al Qaeda. But the adminstration of George W. Bush has done nothing but emboldended the religious fanatics I despise. Bush is incompetent on many levels. But his handling on the war on terror will be used for generations regards a "not what to do" warning.

Admittedly, I supported the surge, and showed a certain confidence in Gen. Petraeus, Sec. of Defense Gates and others. Not because I supported the invasion of Iraq, which I didn't, but because we are actually there, and we now have a responsibility to the Iraqi people to give them a fighting chance to secure a better life. The positions I've taken are not popular with liberals or conservatives, but are based upon my own analysis.

BTW, I hope everyone enjoys the 4th of July and contemplates upon what is the best things that have made our Republic a remarkable experiment.

Incumbents Going Down

The election yesterday will hopefully be a portent of things to come in ways Republicans can't imagine. Three Republican County Commissioners, two Republican house members and a long-termed Republican Congressman all went down to defeat. Admittedly, Chaffetz isn't the brightest star in the galaxy, in fact, after watching him debate Chris Cannon, I've concluded he's barely a meteor. But voters were restless and ready for change. The question will be in Utah, does that desire for change include voting for more Democrats and restoring accountability to our government? At this point, I don't know. Chaffetz postured himself as a more pure right-wing ideologue, and that message resonated with the Republicans who vote in that district. So Chris Cannon isn't conservative enough for that district? If that is the case, the collective lobotomy of the people of that district is likely irreparable. However, I'm still holding out hope, that the people of Utah, and the people of this country are hungry for appropriate changes, which includes electing more Democrats.

I guess we'll see in November.

The Assault on Reason- A Book Review

This book by Al Gore is a masterpiece. Gore begins to put together a case for what went wrong and why in our Republic. He starts with the decline in discourse and reason within our nation. The evolution of television and radio as news mediums are discussed at length in Gore’s book, in that those mediums are one-way and non-interactive. He attributes much of the troubles we face in our Republic to the relative decline of the print media, which requires more of the reader than just to be entertained.

At that point, Gore gets out a scalpel and dissects the many missteps of the Bush Administration. And thankfully, he does a thorough and persuasive job of it. He contrasts the role the Republic’s founders had for the Presidency with the unilateral, unaccountable, and highly secretive administration of George W. Bush. He pulls no punches and articulates the degree to which this administration has violated the law , dismembered the U.S. Constitution, pursued aggressive pre-emptive war, engaged in the promotion of torture and illegal detainment of people without recourse, sought world domination rather than cooperation, etc.

Gore doesn’t pull any punches on a complicit Republican Congress, and on Democrats who have also bathed in the same sewage infested waters. Gore also goes into just how the pervasive use of fear was used to encourage Americans to give up more and more of their personal liberties in the name of national security. Replacing reason with fear rarely results in good policies and Gore contrasts rightly how America’s great leaders have in the past sought to help America’s citizens overcome their fears with resolve, not to magnify them in a callous and corrupt way to grasp additional powers.

Gore goes on to articulate the conservative assault on an independent judiciary and its implications for our Republic. Reading the book at the same time as watching a 5-4 vote on habeaus corpus underscored Gore’s point, and how fragile and at risk our Constitution is currently. You can tell that Gore has a deep affection for the judiciary and the role they play in preventing abuse of power. He also has a deep appreciation for the brave members of the judiciary and legislative branch that stepped in during Watergate to reign in an imperial President, and laments the lack of current will to do the same in our current Congress.

Gore does touch on one of his most favorite topics, climate change, and likens the role played by Exxon/Mobil with the Tobacco Company propagandists who so successfully argued the lack of link between tobacco smoke and cancer despite the overwhelming evidence.

Surprisingly, much about Gore’s book is hopeful. What Gore ultimately argues for is not agreement with Al Gore, but open and free discussion and careful reasoning. Gore’s solution isn’t more politics, but more discussion between leaders and the public. He sees the internet, blogs, and other modern communication means as positive developments which have the potential to help us undo the damage the Bush Administration has done to our Republic. He also plugs his own current project "CurrentTV."

Gore’s optimism in the face of the rise of American conservative authoritarianism is the kind of hopeful thing you expect from our leaders. Gore showed that he still is a force to be reckoned in our national debate about the future of our country. The fact that a former Vice President and a man who nearly ascended to the Presidency has so articulately addressed our most pressing national crises is refreshing and overdue.

And the Winner Is?

Everyone who didn't have the last name Clinton, could see the writing on the wall. Hillary's monumental sense of entitlement may have shown that she is a fighter, but it also showed how little political savvy she has. The only rational explanation for her behavior, is that she wished to harm Barak Obama's campaign in hopes that she would defeat an aged President McCain in 2012. Atleast that is my take.

There have been several things that have puzzled me with the latter stages of the nomination process.

1)Why do people give a rat's patootie what someone's religious leader has to say on something? We willingingly accept people who believe that there was a worldwide flood, who believe a Godman born to a virgin saves people from the sin committed by some ancient ancestor. Let's listen to what the candidates claim they believe, not focus on what the religious nuts they've hanged with believe.

2)What do blue collar whites and hispanics see in Hillary that they don't in Obama? This was and is a puzzling phenoma I haven't figured out. Is racism among the so-called blue-collar Reagan democrats so pronounced that our Republic isn't ready for a person who is 50% of African descent? And what message resonated with hispanics with Hillary. I truly would welcome some enlightenment there, because on that one, I have no clue.

3)Hillary is no gentleman. No really. There was a gentleman's agreement that candidates would take their names off of the Michigan ballot. Gentleman's agreements don't apply to Hillary, because I suppose, she's no gentleman. But she wants a full delegation sat in proportion to the votes of this illegal primary. And don't get me started on Florida.

4)And being first lady makes you a foreign policy expert? I'm assuming that if John McCain gets elected, we can look forward to Laura Bush being our next Secretary of State. Sure.

5)I never realized just how polarized we are. Barak Obama talks about a new type of inclusive politics. He's got his work cut out for him. I'm guilty of it too. It's us against them. Out politically charged social apparatus both in the media and in cyber-space creates alot of heat, and little light. Changing the focus of our collective energy as a country will be a difficult thing to accomplish.

As a finishing note, I'm encouraged to know that the reign of error that is the legacy of George W. Bush is coming to an end. McCain doesn't appear to be much better, but I really don't know what he believes. He's changed his tune many times. But I can't believe that he could be worse than George W. Bush. I don't know too many people who would be.

Of the things I am most proud, I can say emphatically, that I had the honor twice in my lifetime, of voting against George W. Bush. And I look forward to voting for Barak Obama in November.