CHAPTER THIRTEEN

NOVEMBER 7, 2006 ELECTIONS

In summarizing the George W. Bush administration’s efficacy since taking office in 2000, the few domestic issues addressed were income tax cuts for the wealthy and $7 billion in tax cuts for the oil industry. He also devised one of the most confusing, costly drug plans for the elderly. The Constitution left education to the various states, but he thought up the policy of “no child left behind” which teachers deplore and describe as a method to pass tests, but not how to develop the ability to think and analyze, the very goal for all education
His foreign policy has been disastrous. The war against terrorism approved by Congress was supported by most world governments who sympathized with the terrible act of September 11, 2001 which caused the loss of 3,000 civilians and destruction of the World Trade Center in New York. American and UN forces were successfully eradicating al Qaeda forces in Afghanistan, when suddenly George W. Bush decided to invade Iraq. The reason was to find their weapons of mass destruction (which did not exist). He changed the reason to depose Saddam Hussein and “bring him to justice” which was achieved when an Iraqi tribunal sentenced Hussein and his half-brother to death.
Bush then stated the goal was to “bring democracy to Iraq.” He has yet to be challenged in the courts as to whether the Constitution provides this power to the presidency.
More than 3,000 American troops have been killed and thousands injured in what is now the fifth year of war. In the civil war between sectarian Shiites and Sunnis which evolved in this new democracy, soldiers and Iraqi civilians are killed every day by car bombs and suicide bombers throughout Baghdad and other cities.
Nuclear proliferation in Iran and North Korea, adds to the number of nations who already have such weapons. While Iran claims it is for domestic use, there is no doubt they mean it to be for the destruction of Israel and possibly against the western world. North Korea already has tested its nuclear capability.
A glimmer of hope arises for those of us who have been demoralized, frustrated and inexpressibly saddened by the misery and hatred unleashed by the actions of the worst president in the history of the United States.
The November election made it clear that U.S. voters, albeit not a record number participating, want an end to the war in Iraq and control by Republicans, as notorious as the “do nothing Congress’ of Truman years.
On December 7, 2006 Senators from California, Maryland and Washington were begging for the passing of a bill to save agriculture in their states and throughout the country. Losses were in billions of dollars because the illegal Mexican immigration issue prevented finding labor to harvest their crops. All three pointed out how the entire economy is affected by this loss. Consumers seeking change to healthier diets face higher prices for produce, due to the reduced supply. More food is imported than exported, adding to the enormous U.S trade deficit. They recited a list of domestic bills of great importance which this Republican Congress refused to bring to a vote.

IRAQ STUDY GROUP
After the November 7th elections, President Bush apparently realized that the people were against continuing war in Iraq. He chose to ignore the low 30 percent approval ratings of his actions for over a year. He decided to ask his father’s key staff to form an advisory committee for a solution to the disaster in Iraq. He fired Donald Rumsfeld, the controversial Defense Secretary and replaced him with Robert Gates, former CIA director in both Bush-41 and Bill Clinton administrations.
The sobriquets “steadfast,” “war president,” “decider” which George W. Bush applies to himself are manifestations of an inexplicable stubbornness to “stay the course,” in an ill-conceived war to depose one man, Saddam Hussein of Iraq. As the situation worsened he was asked if he consulted with his father, former president George H.W. Bush who accomplished his mission in Iraq to force Hussein to withdraw from Kuwait. Bush-43 said he consulted with the Father of his faith.
Despite the “thumping” (the word Bush used in the loss of control of the Senate and House on November 7), Bush-43 persists in his proclamation that troops will not leave Iraq until they have done the job. “The job” has yet to be clearly defined.
On December 6, 2006: the group comprised of five Republicans and five Democrats, former Secretary of State James Baker, former Congressmen Lee Hamilton, Alan Simpson, Charles Robb, Lawrence Eagleburger, William Perry, former presidential advisors, Edwin Meese, Leon Panella, Vernon Jordan; and, former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, announced their plan.
Chairman, James Baker said, “We do not recommend to stay the course. In our opinion, that approach is no longer viable. The situation is grave and deteriorating.”
The panel agreed unanimously on every one of the 79 issues they are proposing to Bush-43. Emphasis is on the hardship Iraqis are suffering; attacks continue at an alarming rate, economic development is not working and U.S. influence is diminishing. The cost in American lives is over 2,900 and 21,000 wounded. Four-hundred billion dollars has been spent to depose Saddam Hussein and to “bring democracy to Iraq.” The cost to continue the war is expected to reach $2 trillion.
The policy change is for Iraqis to govern, sustain and defend themselves. New approaches are to move combat troops out and for Iraq to initiate prompt national conciliation; immediate diplomatic efforts to benefit the region including Iran, Syria, Egypt, gulf states, U.N. Security Council, and the European Union as a support group for stability in Iraq. Thus far, the U.S. president refuses to talk to Iran until they agree to give up their nuclear capability. Lee Hamilton said, “You cannot look at this area of the world and pick and choose among the countries that you're going to deal with. Everything in the Middle East is connected to everything else.”
The study group said the partition of Iraqis is not an option, with no explanation as to why. With daily bombings, the continuing slaughter of the population is at its worst. U.S. General Abizaid agrees and said the Sunni territory would turn into a haven for al Qaeda.
Is it possible this could be a blessing? Would it not be better to be able to find them within the Sunni region and take concentrated military action to capture or eradicate them?
The Shiites and Kurds would have their own autonomous regions and the oil fields would be separate from the three sects. Oil production and distribution of profits could be controlled by elected officials from each of the new territories. Where there have been inter-marriages, there should be a choice of residency. Over a million Iraqis have already chosen to move to Syria and Jordan, despite lack of jobs and unaccustomed financial hardship because they are desperate for the safety of their families.
There would be the hope that with a taste of autonomy and shared wealth, perhaps attitudes would change, so that Iraq might be unified in the future.
President Bush’s somewhat lukewarm response after his meeting with the panel, was, “This report will give us all an opportunity to find common ground for the good of the country.” He says he will act in a “timely” fashion which is predicted by his spokesman, Tony Snow to be sometime in January, 2007. The panel acknowledges that the word, “victory” does not appear in the document because their goal is to avoid catastrophe, not winning.
There is no alternative if the president chooses to ignore their advice. It is clear that the priority of the president and his supporters, including Senator McCain, is to “win,” not to end the violence and save lives in the middle-east. There is a strong feeling that more troops will be deployed in Iraq, not withdrawn.
One wonders what the president is thinking when no matter what questions are asked by the media, he responds with the same “I am not going to pull troops out until the job is done.” Then he tries to clarify his position with odd remarks, such as, “we find ourselves in a war,” as though he has just discovered that a war is in progress. Does that mean he doesn’t know or remember he started that war?
There is no doubt that the president is letting us know he read the first part of the study, as he repeats, “The policy change is for Iraqis to govern, sustain and defend themselves.” These words have become the mantra for staff members who might be questioned by the media. There is no doubt that he intends to continue this deadly struggle despite the will of the people
When they reconvene in January, Congress needed to determine its true role as lawmakers, and as overseers of the executive branch. Thus far they are becoming the masters of compromise.
They must revise the electoral process. New law to limit amounts spent on campaigns which should be federally funded would eradicate obligations to individuals and lobbyists, precluding bribery and corruption.
Terms of office for Congress should also be limited as they are in the presidency, for a true balance of power. An option could be an amendment to permit re-election after an interim of two or three terms out of office. It is clear that our founding fathers did not intend for the country to be ruled by career politicians. Senator Byrd at age 90, his more than fifty years in office does not represent a democratic system of government.
Rules of Congress must change so that members are present to hear debates and know the bills that are presented for legislation. Their $165,000 yearly salaries for one and a half days in Washington during the brief time in session, is a travesty to hard-working minimum wage people.
Former House Republican majority leader Dick Armey said, “Republicans became more interested in saving the majority than in making good policy.” * The oath to serve in Congress should be changed so that their primary loyalty is to the country while serving their term, not their party.
Most important is that they remove the practice of adding “pork” to bills that are unrelated to a proposed new law.
They should reduce their very generous pensions and benefits at least until they practice fiscal responsibility, and until all Americans have equal opportunity of education and health care.
Another Republican presidency in 2008 will assure the continuance of the Republican partisanship. These past seven years have been government by a dictatorship rather than a democracy.
A battle is being waged in the House to end the war in Iraq. Not all Republicans continue to support the president's new strategy of sending more troops to Iraq, which is now in progress despite the panel's report, and the opinion of seventy percent of the people. Their goal repeated endlessly, is to "win", but not to save lives.
After almost five months of posturing, the Democratic Congress, with some Republicans agreeing, 51-46, will submit a bill to the president, Tuesday, May 1, 2007 to end the war in Iraq and begin withdrawal of troops. They have set dates for the Iraqi government to take over. Complete withdrawal of American troops is designated for the beginning of 2008. The president vetoed the bill. It is unlikely that there will be enough votes to overcome the president's veto. This "democracy" is badly damaged.