7 posts tagged “washington”
As we prepare to celebrate America’s Independence Day, it feels fitting to look at our nation’s capital.
‘No taxation without representation’ may have been the rallying cry of the American Revolution but more than 200 years later, Washington, DC’s residents pay federal taxes but have no voting members in Congress. To add insult to injury, Congress can take control of the city whenever it wants.
Article One of the US Constitution created the capital:
“To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; (http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/freedom/constitution/text.html)
It is important to note that the nation’s capital is a ‘district’ not a state. This distinction is important because the founding fathers did not want to give any one state the preferential treatment it might receive if it were located in a state and because they wanted the federal government to have full control over its security. George Washington selected the location and picked the spot the closest to Mt. Vernon, his home. In 1790 the name was changed from ‘Territory of Columbia’ to ‘District of Columbia’ and named for Washington.
District residents were not permitted to vote in presidential elections (and could not until 1961, when the 23rd Amendment to the Constitution was ratified) but that doesn’t mean they liked it. Congress began meeting there in 1800 and local protests about the lack of representation followed. Congress retained full control of the city until 1973 when it passed the ‘District of Columbia Home Rule Act’ that created a city council and allowed the city to elect its mayor. That has not stopped Congress from taking over the city whenever it wants.
So what can be done? It’s a quandary for sure. Any change to the District’s status would have to be done via a Constitutional Amendment, and that seems unlikely. The proposals have included; giving the residential areas to Maryland or Virginia and leaving only the federal building as ‘DC;’ creating a Congressional District in Utah and one for DC; statehood (before you think it’s too small, it has more residents than at least one state); or making it a federal territory that would not require residents to pay federal taxes.
Personally, I am not sure what the correct or best answer is. I do know that while the people who wrote the Constitution did not want every point of view or opinion to be represented, they expected voters to be. Now, a lot has happened since we ratified the Constitution and created DC. Senators are elected directly. We have expanded dramatically (when Thomas Jefferson completed the Louisiana Purchase for $15 million, he didn’t think his decision was Constitutional), women can vote, slavery has been abolished and the largest federal government building (the Pentagon) is not in the capital city but across the river in Virginia.
I read a lot from people who feel disenfranchised because their Congressperson or Senators don’t vote the way they want them to and while I sympathize, they at least have three people in the legislative branch to whom they can complain.
How funny would their version of the show cops be?
If you have a chance, this site is fun. It's based in Washington, DC and has some fun people/commentary. Check it out! www.crunchland.com
For as long as I can remember, if it was Sunday it was Meet the Press. It is the oldest, and most profitable, show on television. Its host, Tim Russert, died yesterday after collapsing on the set. When I read that I assumed I read it wrong and it still seems completely impossible. I met him once and kind of pissed him off. I attended a party for the show and when I got there he was talking to fans and colleagues on a receiving line. Well, I don't wait in line to meet anyone and waited until that was over to introduce myself. He was done talking to people he didn't know and let me know it. I told him that my mother and watched the show each week and it was our 'family time.' He liked that and warmed up to me. His roots were legendary and as Andrea Mitchell said, "we all know more about Buffalo than we ever thought we would know.' Additionally, he loved sports and was on the board for baseball's Hall of Fame. One MTP producer recommended I talk to him about baseball in the green room.
As a number of networks go into their second day of "Remembering Tim Russert" it might be easy to be bored of him and his life. That is unfortunate because his contribution to the American experience will not be easy to exceed. He asked politicians tough, but fair, questions. A lot of people may have dismissed his style of 'gotcha interviewing' -- and lest you think you will get away with saying something on camera, if he asked you about it, he also had footage. It forced people to confront their own statements. Dick Cheney got pretty good at denying things he had said and done. He was able to keep his show fresh and relevant when other shows could not. I watched it because I learned something new every week.
So tomorrow morning will suck.
So many lies, so little time.
The common view among many people is that all politicians lie. Campaign promises are meaningless because ‘we all know politicians lie and will say anything to get elected.’ I do not believe either is true and think our entire system is based on listening to what candidates say and expecting them to follow through. I understand that governing differs from campaigning and that once privy to inside information; the responsible thing to do may be revise one’s approach or position in response to the new information. I believe our justice system works in a similar way, if new information becomes available after a trial, a person convicted of a crime can use that to get a new trial, for instance.
Having said that, it is very important to note when a politician changes their stance on an issue once they get into office and when they do not. Governor George W. Bush ran a very good campaign in 2000 and was very clear about some of the things he would do once he got into office so I will start there. Not with his lies but with things he said he would do. Off the top of my head there are two areas where I disagree with him but appreciate his honesty: drilling in the arctic and abortion. He said we needed the oil and supported legislation to drill in , environmentalists were angry but he did say he supported the idea. He has opposed abortion since day one. Kudos for keeping your word. Oh, in case anyone cares, I refer to GWB as Dubya because my personal favorite nickname (rat-f*&$er would probably not go over well).
But what else? Now, the person who wanted proof did not specify if I could include other members of Dubya’s team so I will still with him. During the 2000 campaign, the charter plan was named “Responsibility One,” because this administration was going to ‘restore honor to the White House.’ I don’t think it was needed but in that spirit, what has he done? It is my opinion that he has done nothing to make the White House look more honest or be more honest. Why do I think that? Going chronologically would take me too long so I will just go topic by topic. I won’t get to all of them but I will get to as many as I can.
CIA Leak: This administration has been very strict when it comes to what information they disclose, the current scandal surrounding the eight US Attorneys proves that, so it seems ironic that one high ranking member of the W. team was found guilty of leaking the name of a covert CIA operative. It should be clear that if the President himself leaked the name it would not be a crime because any sitting president can declassify anything they want. In 2004 when asked if he would fire anyone involved in the leak, he said he would. He didn’t. (source: http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/cialeak.html) This may not seem like a big deal because Scooter Libby did resign but it is because when he leaked her name, and if you can prove to me there was any reason that wasn’t political to do so, please go for it, he exposed her and all her contacts. There is a reason why is it a crime to do this. You may wonder why Patrick Fitzgerald did not indict Libby for that; my understanding of that law is that it is very difficult to prove. I don’t know many people who really believe Libby acted on his own rather he was told to do so by Vice President Cheney. According to books listed later in this post, the VP was really angry about Joe Wilson and wanted to discredit him any way he could.
Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda & Saddam Hussein: In December 2001, Dubya had a press conference where he was asked about bin Laden, whether he was a threat and what actions the was going to take to get him. The response was that he did not know where bin Laden was but that he would be found and ‘brought to justice.’ http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/12/20011228-1.html). I don’t need to prove we never caught bin Laden but later Dubya changed his tune and remarked, “I do not know where he is, he is not important and is not our priority” (sorry I no longer have a link for that, I did have a White House link but that has been removed). In his defense, some of his original statements were, “Bring it on” and that bin Laden “is wanted ‘dead or alive.” He later recanted, saying his tough talk may have sent the wrong message and made matters worse for our military around the world.
A more important lie was that there was a link between the terrorist group and Saddam Hussein. He said this, “Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda” during his State of the Union (SOTU) Address in January 2003 (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html). He repeated it the next day in , “He is a danger not only to countries in the region, but as I explained last night, because of al Qaeda connections” (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030129-2.html). This Bush Administration repeated there was a connection often. VP Cheney said it a number of times on different TV shows, such as Meet the Press. I do not have poll numbers on this but anecdotally, I would guess that most Americans thought there was a connection between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein. No proof of that has ever been found. Moreover, Osama bin Laden hated Hussein because of the secular nature of his government. Hussein was a bad man for sure but women had more rights under his government than they do in other countries in the area – including our ally, . Much of what I am saying here has also been published in different books, including but not limited to: Hubris: The Inside Story of Spin, Scandal, and the Selling of the Iraq War , by Michael Isikoff (Author), David Corn (Author) – http://www.amazon.com/Hubris-Inside-Story-Scandal-Selling/dp/030734682X/ref=sr_1_1/002-8156637-3173631?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1176320685&sr=8-1; State of Denial: Bush at War, Part III by Bob Woodward (Author) – http://www.amazon.com/State-Denial-Bush-War-Part/dp/0743272234/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/002-8156637-3173631?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1176321051&sr=1-1
The war, before and during with a pit stop at after in between: It is really hard to know where to start with this. Paul O’Neill, this administration’s first Treasury Secretary appeared on 60 Minutes, “From the very beginning, there was a conviction, that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he needed to go,” says O’Neill, who adds that going after Saddam was topic "A" 10 days after the inauguration - eight months before Sept. 11.” (http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5510.htm). This is important because, if true, colors everything they said about . I have no idea why getting rid of Hussein was so important to Dubya, some people think if he wasn’t so focused on Iraq that 9/11 could have been prevented but I am not one of them, but I also don’t think the government planned it so if anyone reads this and feels the need to send me links to sites with video or other ‘proof’ that the WTC were blown up by US, the UN is about to take over the US with black helicopters or any other conspiracies – please don’t). http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040329/scheer
Pre-war intelligence, sketchy at best. According to the books above, Dubya began planning the war years before he got permission from Congress to do it. At the SOTU mentioned above, Dubya said, “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from .” Former Ambassador Joe Wilson was sent there to investigate the claim and found no evidence to support it. They admitted this was false and George Tenet, CIA Director quit over it. How do I know he was lying – look at the above books. They assert that the White House was almost desperate to find evidence against Hussein. No one in the intelligence community believed this and some asked the White House to remove this sentence from the speech but Dubya himself put it back in. Oh, and as for the claim that had ‘weapons of mass destruction’, none have been found and the evidence they ever existed is sketchy at BEST. PS. Your military was decimated by a global super-power but you have really dangerous weapons, do you use them when the same super-power attacks or do you let them come in and kill you? I am no military expert but I would use them if I had them. http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040329/scheer
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!!!! In May 2003, Dubya flew onto an aircraft carrier and announced that the war was over and did it in front of a huge banner that read “Mission Accomplished.” http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/10/28/mission.accomplished/
Among other things I have done, Presidential advance is one of them and I do not need a link or anything else to know the White House was full of crap when they said they were not responsible. Advance people plan every aspect of events like that and no backdrop goes without approval from the White House. An event like that would have had the top people working on it. Not only did they lie about the banner, the banner itself was a lie. Since we are still there, clearly the mission has NOT been accomplished.
To be continued…
Let's Go Mets!
To hell with you George Will, Shea Stadium is AWESOME and the DH is an abomination against all that is good and holy in the world.
Crash Davis said it best (Kevin Costner in Bull Durham), "I believe there ought to be a Constitutional Amendment outlawing Astroturf and the designated hitter." Truer words were never spoken. Ever.
There are few things closer to my heart than politics but sports is one of them. My favorites to watch are baseball, football and tennis. I can watch baseball or tennis on the Internet. While my heart belongs to the Mets, I went to Opening Day at RFK in Washington, DC and saw the Nationals. It seemed wrong that the nation's capitol didn't have a baseball team. It IS the American pastime after-all. The poor Nats lost 9-2 but not too much was expected of them. My onlt real complaint was they need more ATMs.
Last year was hard at the end. Good news: The Mets made it farther than most teams. Bad news: Scott Spezio kicked some ass. I have to admit that as much as I wanted my team to win -- the whole 1986-2006 thing would have been awesome but we lost to a team with more heart. And I am as ok with that as I possibly can.
My first words, I think, were Maybe next year. So now I can say, Maybe this year. The team looks good and I am optimistic. Of course, it is APRIL.
You gotta believe!
News Flash! Media finally cares that President Bush’s lies have been bad for country, planet
Two speeches, two presidents, two political parties and what a difference a political party makes.
Anyone awake and alive during the Clinton Administration remembers the eight words that got him into trouble (I did not have sex with that woman). Sent the GOP, who had been trying to get him out of office since before he moved into (former Congressman Bob Barr wondered aloud how they could oust him should the impeachment not work). Once the allegations became pubic during an investigation into some of the ’ investments, a feeding frenzy began. Never mind the charges levied had nothing to do with the original issue being investigated, EIGHT words nearly brought down one of the most popular presidents of the century. And it subjected us all to a media circus 24/7 for years.
As luck would have it, his successor experienced a similar problem. Dubya also lied during his 2003 State of the Union Address to a joint session of Congress (it is a crime to lie to Congress) about his case for a war against . Later when criticized about his statement the White House press office was astounded anyone would worry so much about 16 small words. This was repeated, a lot. They whined – it was only 16 words. Of course they were “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” None of that turned out to be true. Some people tried to get the word out that this was false and the White House respose was to discredit them anyway they could. Their methods are known now, they ‘outed’ a covert CIA operative, which ended her career, put countless people at risk and hurt our ability to gather intelligence. The concern about Saddam's nuclear program is one of the reasons we rushed to war. Remember Iraq was no threat to us, our allies or its neighbors, destroyed any goodwill generated by the 9/11 tragedy and created more terrorists than we can catch. Most experts agreed the US had NO IDEA HOW TO RECONSTRUCT IRAQ. I attended a number of hearing in at NGOs, think tanks and before Congress and was struck by how many people shared that view AND SUPPORTED THE WAR. It felt like everyone knew a train wreck was about to happen and rather than try to stop it, they cheered it on.
As we enter the fifth year of this war – whose supporters said would be swift, take few troops, incur few casualties, there would be little or no insurgency and Saddam would have ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction” – we know THOSE THINGS WERE WRONG. WE ALSO KNOW THE PEOPLE WHO PUSHED THOSE IDEAS KNEW THEY WERE FALSE BUT THEY SENT OUR MEN AND WOMEN IN TO DIE ANYWAY. Not to mention the scores of injured Americans and tens of thousands of Iraqis. Of course, VP Dick Cheney has made a ton of money (is that too cynical?).
So here we are in a war we cannot win. Dubya has not given us any idea what victory will be. At this point, I think it is just that there are no more American troops in a country where we are not wanted and our miliatary has started the rebuilding process. The problem is that these people lie so much and about so many things that we have turned into that proverbial frog in the boiling water. The temperature was raised so slowly that he didn’t notice he was being boiled to death and no one notices when they lie. At most the new elicits a yawn. Maybe. If that.
Until today.
Today all that changed when the press finally wrote up a full summary outlining all the failures, lies and incompetence of the Dubya White House and called for many high-ranking officials to be impeached or fired.
GOTCHA! APRIL FOOLS DAY! NO ONE CARES ANYMORE TODAY THAN YESTERDAY ABOUT ANYTHING THEY DO.
One wonders, does George W. Bush have to shoot someone himself for people to notice he sucks?
