Name this Tune

Sometimes it's hard to encapsulate what one thinks and feels with just a few simple words, as in a Title. I've tried to find some words that jumped to mind when I decided to write what I think and feel about this particular thing. I've struggled to find a title for it other than thing, but without success.

And so I ask you, dear readers, to suggest a name for this post.

A few weeks ago Hillary appointed Sandy Berger to her team of campaign advisers. If I'm not mistaken Berger is a former member of President Clinton's cabinet, whose security clearance was suspended when it came to light that he played fast and loose with his access to secure information.

I wrote about it then expecting that Hillary would be pilloried for rewarding a crony. I said then that I took no pleasure in writing about this, worried that the Dems can still snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. I continue to be fearful that the GOP will somehow snatch victory from the jaws of defeat.

To my astonishment more than my consternation her opponents gave her a free pass. On the surface it seemed to be a slam dunk for the GOPhers, or at least her Dem opponents.

Is it possible that a sense of decency, even forgiveness, surfaced and embraced Hillary's detractors?

Personally, Sandy Burger doesn't come across to me as a criminal or burglar, and I suspect that he made a stupid mistake; perhaps even deluding himself that he would be admired and rewarded for his assiduous pursuit of stuff he thought his patrons desired. Perhaps he believed that by having access to and using secure stuff he was just working harder, working at home, demonstrating his dedication and loyalty to those he thought, however naively, held in mind the best interests of the people, the country and the Constitution.

The name, Sandy Berger, has disappeared from the scene, at least to the extent that one might look for his name in the Main Stream Media or what I call the Fifth Estate, the Web Log Media.

I have no quarrel with Sandy Berger. I am neither his advocate nor detractor.

And I am not pointing my accusatory finger at either political party.

My quarrel is with the so-called Main Stream Media. The problem with that kind of quarrel is that it is about tilting with windmills, as Don Quixote demonstrated and so taught us.

I am no longer surprised by the MSM compliant, if not hinged heel, whoreish behavior.

I'm concerned about what forces are at work when information which most of us would call significant, disappears from both our view and hearing?

The Hillary/Burger thing is likely not all that significant. But the simple fact that it got suppressed so quickly and easily, without anyone complaining and drawing attention to what happened, scares the shit out of me.

Kilroy-60

I just saw that Kilroy-60 provided a link to my blog on his Carnival post at Gonzo-Fear and Loathing.

This is to thank him for that and also to tell all that he is a really neat guy. I tend to think well of folks who think well of me.

Lighthouse Keeper

Hillary and Berger

A week ago I thought Hillary would be pilloried for the addition to her team of Sandy Berger.
A tsunami that didn't develop.

Frankly I'm at least surprised. Neither party's candidates did anything with it. It had a brief life on Fox News, but then nothing.

In my earlier blog I wrote that it gave me no pleasure to write about it; and that anything the Dems do to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory is at least worriesome.

I must have missed something. If anyone reads this and knows what I don't I hope you will enlighten me.

Lighthouse Keeper

Hillary and the Company She Keeps

Hillary might have really blown it. The news that she's put Sandy Berger on her team will no doubt result in howls and hollers from the right. Frankly, I believe she deserves the opprobrium. Sandy Berger is known as one who made illegal use of documents, and has had his security clearance suspended. Clinton's judgement will be and should be suspect in putting him on her team.

Even if she now relieves him of any position and influence on her campaign, and makes a public statement to that effect, the damage is done.

I take no pleasure in my view on this. I prefer Obama, but anything the Dems do which can result in snatching defeat from the jaws of victory is at least disheartening.

Lighthouse Keeper

Helen Thomas Speaks for Me

Helen Thomas of Hearst Newspapers has a piece dated Oct 4 which can be found on Truthout.org

It's called The Democrats Who Enable Bush. She points to the three Dem front runners dodging a question about what they will do by the end of their first term to get us out of Iraq.

She sites Pelosi as knuckling under to political pressure by deleting from a funding bill language that would have required Bush to get approval from Congress for action against Iran.

She concludes by asking the question: "So where do the voters go who are sick of the Iraq debacle?"

I'm one of those voters.

Lighthouse Keeper

As Good As It Gets, For Now

How many nights does one go to bed having witnessed the Red Sox winning in the ninth, the second game of the ALDS, resulting in their leading that series 2-0; and also witnessing the Yankee's losing in extra innings in their ALDS, falling behind 0-2?



Lighthouse Keeper

"Conservative": From Admiration to Scorn; Adjective to Noun

David Brooks, New York Times columnist, has a piece in the Times today entitled The Republican Collapse.

He observes how the Republican party has moved from what he calls Republican by Temperament to Republican by Creed.

He writes about what he sees as the changes in the GOP which led to my own decision to change my voter registration from Republican to Independent.



The first definition of the word "conservative" in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary is "preservative".

Enough said tonight. Stay tuned.

Lighthouse Keeper

For Shame!

Mikhail Gorbachev spoke to a group in Kentucky last night in which he said "The World is facing a global political crisis". He made his comments to the Global Issues Forum at the Kentucky Center for the Arts, arguing that today's leaders need to reach mutual understandings about issues rather than using force to impose their will on one another.

Here we have a former top dog of the Communist Party, head of the former USSR, who is a Nobel Peace Prize winner. It's at least embarrassing, if not horrifying, to admit that this man is to be admired, and our own President is thought by many, including this writer, to be a shameless war criminal.

What, Me Worry? Take it Easy!

My own take on what's going on in the campaign for president is that no one, not the candidates nor their supporters, should feel either good or bad, upbeat or downbeat at this point in the so-called race.

Consider who is excited and involved at this point. Is it the voting public? I doubt it. Not yet. So why is the media so full of campaign "news"?

As usual, if you don't understand something follow the money. Who is making money at this point in the "race". It's those who want us to get worked up about the "race" right now. The candidates themselves, to bring in contributions, and the Main Stream Media, the same folks who hyped the news to get us worked up about the "threat" from Iraq, and now want to get us worked up about the "threat" from Iran.

No, I'm not claiming a conspiracy unless you believe that competition for the almighty dollar is a conspiracy. The key word here is "competition". If there is anything in common among all the players in the Main Stream Media it is the market, the public, the audience, the consumers of news, the buyers of newspapers, magazines, and newsletters, and their counterparts who go to the Internet for their news.

The media wants to sell us their conveyances of news, whether it's newspapers, magazines, newsletters or websites. They know that controversy, shock, horror and fear grab the attention of the public. "Extra, extra; read all about it" was not about obits, weddings and recipes.

But Tim Russert, George Steph', Chris Mathews, Chris Wallace, Bob Shieffer, Hannity and Colmes, Bill O'Reilly, et al are doing what they can to hype the start and first turn of the race, the first few games of the baseball, football, basketball, etc. seasons because they have to, to make money for their employers. They like to point to polls which are supposed to indicate the public's preferences. But the real polls they pay attention to are the TV ratings of their programs, the size of their subscriber base and the number of "hits" on their websites.

This time around the campaign for president started shortly after the last one. Instead of having three plus years of government by and for the people, we have one year or less, and three years or more of campaigning for the next election. As a result we are denied the chance to evaluate those in power on their actual performance over several years, and instead we are inundated by their claims of competence, ideology, experience and negative statements and accusations against those of their own political party. Then they expect the public to forget all of that and rally around just one of them as the savior.

Is it any wonder that the public is dubious, if not cynical at this stage of the game, or more accurately, this stage of the season. Not everyone in Red Sox Nation is charged up from March to October. Most folks get involved, if and when they do, toward the end of the regular season, and into the playoffs. That's when they pay attention.

The Red Sox led the American League East Division by 12 games early on in the season, and 14 plus games over the hated Yankees. They ended up winning the division by two games, but it felt closer than that. One of the Dems seems to have an early and reportedly insurmountable lead in the Democrat division or league in the game of politics. May it will be a wire to wire win, but it's too early to tell.

The real "Deciders" aren't yet paying attention. It's a bit early to proclaim victory. We haven't even got to political mid season and the All Star Game yet.

Lighthouse Keeper