The Georgian-Russian Conflict

I'm no foreign policy expert, but here is how I access the current situation: If South Ossetia wanted independence from Georgia, for whatever reason, Georgia should have looked more seriously into the request instead of just dismissing it.  Secondly, if the Russian rebels in South Ossetia were attacking the mainland of Georgia, Georgia did have a right to defend itself and it's people. Thirdly, Russia had no reason whatsoever to interject themselves in this essentially civil dispute.  Russia should not have sent troops into Georgian territory.  This aggressive act by Russia really needs to be a turning point in regards to the U.S. foreign policy towards Russia and Putin.  Too long has George Bush appeased Putin.  Putin has one goal in mind: returning Russia to it's Cold War power status.  

I have long held the opinion that Iraq, Iran, and North Korea are not the most dangerous countries to the U.S. and the western world.  Pakistan and Russia are.  Pakistan because it has nuclear weapons that could unfortunately fall in to the hands of terrorists and Russia for its complete disregard for basic human rights and it's authoritarian nature.  

Let me be clear: I do not advocate the U.S. getting involved in this dispute between Russia and Georgia. We should mind our own business.  What I do advocate, however, is the U.S. getting tougher with Russia in regards to diplomacy and our foreign policy.  Russia is not our enemy, but they sure as hell aren't our friends.  We need to have some "straight talk" with Russia and let them know, in the strongest terms, that the U.S. does not, in any way, condone it's policies, either domestically or internationally.  In many ways, Putin has been testing to see how far he can push the envelope with the U.S. and western Europe.  It is about time we push back.  

"He Will Make Cheney Look Like Gandhi"

Spread the word, this is a must watch for every American voter:

Television Journalists and Their Big Push

We all remember how, during the primary season, T.V. journalists piled on Senator Clinton everyday and promoted Senator Obama non-stop.  On the Republican side, they treated Senator McCain and his flip flops with kid gloves.

 

I mentioned during that period of time that if Obama received the Democratic nomination, in time,  journalists would turn on him and promote McCain in the general election.  Well, it is already starting to happen.  They are now promoting a so called rift between Senator Clinton, her husband, and Obama.  They are even saying that Senator Clinton wants her name to be placed in nomination at the convention, although that is pure speculation.  Mike Barnicle, while guest hosting MSNBC's Hardball on 8/7, devoted some time on the subject with 3 guests.  Their tone was that Senator Clinton was going to make demands and split or hurt the party.  What they all failed to report and/or mention is that Senator Clinton herself said that she would work for party unity at the convention and, in fact, campaigned for Senator Obama this week.

 

Journalists will continue to plant the seed that their pronouncements are fact in an effort to create and distract from the actual news on the subject.  They are showing their ass again in trying to manipulate the general election vote in McCain's favor.   Anything to hurt Sen. Obama or portray the Democratic Party weak in any way will be what journalists continue to portray until November.  Hopefully the American people wise up and do their own research in order to inform themselves since journalists can no longer be trusted to do so.  

Campaign Finance Reform Made Easy

Since we are in the middle of a Presidential campaign and fundraising is still going on by both candidates, lets talk about reform:

 

Senator Obama, after securing the Democratic nomination, informed the Democratic National Committee not to accept any campaign contributions from lobbyists or special interest groups --- a good move for the American people and for politics in general.  However, individual Democrats running for office can still accept campaign contributions from those groups and that has to be changed if true reform is to ever be accomplished.  

Senator McCain, the Republican candidate, on the other hand, does receive contributions from lobbyists and special interest groups and has had representatives of those groups on his campaign staff.  

To complete the circle on the Democratic side, every Democrat in Congress should announce that they will not accept any campaign contributions from lobbyists or special interest groups and will use public financing starting now.  No tricks, no gimmicks, no loopholes --- just plain old fashion common sense that no court can strike down and where the people can get an honest shake.  At the same time, the Democrats should announce that those groups will be seen by them on the same basis they see the average taxpayer.  Access to elected officials should be the same for everyone. 

 

The practice of taking trips with special interest groups or using their planes and lodging also has to stop.  If a trip is necessary, it can be taken by the elected official and his aids.  No special interest people allowed.  The average American would not mind the government picking up the tab if the fact finding trip is necessary.

 

Elected officials would tell you this is naive thinking and it would not work.  But of course it would work if elected officials had the backbone and character to stand up and be counted.  It is very simple: stand up for the American people; no legislation and/or debate is required.  The Democrats in Congress should adopt this approach and change the game while letting the Republican brand die with the present corrupt system of special interest.

Quick Reaction to Edwards Affair

So, John Edwards admited to having an affair in 2006.  I've heard the reaction of those in the media, of David Bonier, former Edwards campaign manager, and of bloggers from the right and left.  My reaction: Who cares?  Who cares what someone does in their personal life unless they make that aspect of their personal life into a public issue (i.e. Vitter and Craig)?  Who cares about an affair that someone had who hasn't held elected office since 2005 and is not running for office currently?  Why is this such a big story when there are so many issues that matter so much more?  

The media is covering this story non-stop.  It is ridiculous.  Why not inform the American people about where the Presidential candidates stand on the issues instead?  What is this affair story doing to advance the much needed conversation among Americans of all backgrounds about the future of this country?  Nothing, nothing at all.  

For once, I wish the media would leave these tabloid stories to the tabloids. There is nothing wrong with the media pointing out the hypocrisies of  David Vitter and Larry Craig, or the illegal doings of Elliot Spitzer, but this John Edwards story has none of that.  John Edwards is not a hypocrite; he never put himself and his morals on a pedestal while criticizing those of others and, of course, Edwards did nothing illegal.  

Too often we let politicians' personal lives get in the way of what they do for the country.  Some of our best Presidents have been lacking in the morality department --- Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Clinton, etc.  And the Presidents who arguably have been the most moral --- Nixon and Bush --- have turned out to be two of the worst Presidents in American history.  The bottom line is this: we elect politicians to better this country and to advance the issues we care about.  We do not elect them for their morality.  John Edwards was a politician, a great one at that.  He served the people of North Carolina well and advanced the issues they cared about.  He then went on to represent and become a strong voice for the hard working men and women of America in this campaign season.  John Edwards tried and succeeded in many of those ways, both as a Senator and a Presidential candidate.  That is what should be discussed when we talk about John Edwards --- not this man's personal life.   

This Just About Says It All

credit to Steve Greenberg

The Dream Scenario

As highly unlikely as it is, the first thing that came in my mind when it was announced that Bill Clinton would speak before the Vice-Presidential nominee at the Democratic convention was that maybe, just maybe, Hillary Clinton would be announced by her husband as the Vice-Presidential nominee at the end of his speech.  As I said, it's highly unlikely, but a man can dream can't he?  I wouldn't give it more than a 5% chance of happening at this point, but if Obama hasn't announced his VP by the start of the convention, then I would say the chances of a surprise Hillary VP announcement by Bill on Wednesday night rise sharply.

Now many commentators rightfully point out that Hillary is slated to speak on Tuesday night and if she was going to be the VP, or was even in serious consideration, her speaking slot would not be announced until much closer to the convention when a final VP choice was made.  But could this be a ruse by the Obama campaign to keep the media speculating and focused on everybody but Hillary for VP?  Secondly, it stuck me as odd that Obama would want the Clintons to take up two out of the four nights of the convention.  Let's face it, unless the VP is Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton is mostly likely going to overshadow anyone who speaks after him and will suck up at least some of the attention that a VP address would normally receive from the media.   It seems that Obama would only risk two nights of Clinton if it was to advance a larger cause --- party unity and a simply beautifully orchestrated surprise.  Plus, would Barack add insult to injury by having Bill Clinton speak and possible introduce a VP that is not his wife?  Also, it is important to look back at history for some context.  It's not unheard of that a politician can speak twice at a national convention --- George Bush did it back in 1980.  

Again, I am not projecting that this is going to happen; I am just outlining some reasons that it could happen.  Plus, can you imagine what the crowd reaction would be at the DNC --- Bill Clinton gives a great address on the values of the Democratic Party, he begins to walk off stage, then at the last second, he turns around, goes back to the mic, and says, "Oh, and by the way, I forgot one thing: the next Vice-President of the United States of America, Senator Hillary Clinton."  I get chills up my spine just thinking of such a moment.  Surely I shouldn't get my hopes up, but it's announcements like the one today that keep that hope --- as small as it might be --- alive inside me and alive inside those other 18 million Americans who supported Hillary Clinton for President.  

You Read It Here First --- Obama's Energy Plan

Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee for president, spoke in Michigan on August 4 and outlined what his and America's energy policy would be if he is elected president.  Much of what he said was outlined here first on Politidose in posts dated May 5, July 4, and July 31.

 

Renewable energy instead of our dependence on oil and gas; fuel efficient automobiles, and etc.  The greening of America would produce new industries, create new jobs that pay well and reverse the environmental problems that are piling up on us today.  A $1000 energy rebate to the people to help with rising fuel costs.  Tax credit of $7000 to purchase fuel efficient automobiles and etc.  All of that has already been written about here.  

 

Senator Obama rightly threw down the gauntlet.  America has to change its energy policy and its use of energy as we know it and start now.  The country can not wait any longer; time is running out and action is needed.  To erase any doubts that America can accomplish these goals, Obama reminded the people of President Kennedy's pledge to put an American on the moon when the doubters asked, "How can we do that?".

 

Obama's comprehensive energy plan is a positive and bold step towards the greening of America.  The people should embrace his sensible and practical approach to our energy problems. I would suggest that people read his entire speech on the subject.

Need Some Extra Cash?

As this economy is surely taking a toll on all of us, I just want to share with you a great website I found called Cashcrate.  It is 100% legit and you can make real money easily.  All you have do is complete surveys.  Just give your address and Cashcrate will send you a check the next month.  A survey takes about 1 to 3 minutes to complete and they pay anywhere from $.25 to $5.00 a piece.  Here's a tip: give a fake phone number and an email account you don't use often.  I have not had any problems, but I don't like giving out phone numbers and I don't want to start getting a ton of spam mail.  

Click here to sign up or click the banner on the front page of POLITIDOSE.  Good luck!

(And of course, if you are fortunate enough to be financially secure, you could complete a few surveys and donate your earnings to Barack Obama, the DNC, or one of the great Democratic candidates running in your home state.)

Road to Victory: Jeanne Shaheen (New Hampshire)