Reflection on where we are today

I'm in the process of listening to Frank Rich's "The Greatest Story Ever Sold", which is largely a narrative of the Bush (mis-)administration from 9/11 onward and the media coverage (or lack thereof) since then and I just find myself floored not so much at the flood of information about 9/11 and all of the major "war on terror"-related new stories since then, most of which I was already aware of, but the nearly crippling realization of where we have come (or not come)since then, specifically how, even in 2007, to cite one example, we STILL find ourselves bogged down in the Iraq quagmire with no discernible "exit strategy" from our so-called "Commander-in-Chief". In fact, Bush is talking about a continued military presence of several thousand troops that may even be ongoing throughout the remainder of his natural lifetime and likely a substantial chunk of the rest of ours and the Democrats seem unable and/or unwilling to extricate us and/or push for more control over whatever our "mission" in Iraq is at this point. To date, most of the current Democratic Presidential candidates appear to have no firm notions of when we might pull out all or most of our troops.

Another thing that I find apalling, particularly after starting to read Norman Solomon's "War Made Easy", is that there are signs that the Bush (mis-) adminstration is, at least by inches, attempting to push us into accepting a military confrontation with Iran, mostly by pulling out a lot of the same tricks that they used, quite effectively, to get us into Iraq. I don't know if the public is falling for its ploys regarding Iran like they did Iraq, especially since nearly everybody now supports withdrawal from Iraq, but the Bush (mis-)administration does not seem to be any less cautious about exerting military power when it wants to and recent votes and statements by members of Congress, including a lot of Democrats, all but guarantee that there will NOT be a major hue and cry if Bush unleashes a long-rumored bombing campaign on Iran sometime during the remainder of his Presidency regardless of the disaster (on top of disaster) that such an attack would likely unleash upon us.

Finally, I am concerned about the seeming embrace, for political reasons or otherwise, by our Congress of the MCA (and subsequent inability and/or refusal of the Democratic Congress to take a principled stand to repeal it) despite the constitutional disgrace of the suspension of Habeus Corpus for so-called "enemy combatants" and the use of "military tribunals" to prosecute provisions codified by the MCA.

What is most distressing to me is that I can hardly tell that we have a Democratic-controlled Congress and that the legislation coming out of Congress seems to be taking us further and and further away, both morally and ethically, from our country's finest traditions,not the least of which is our reverence for our Constitution, whose abuses by the Bush (mis-)administration have been gradually, if reluctantly, accepted as necessary to prosecute the so-called "war on terror". I know that the Democrats don't have complete power (yet) to get our legislation signed into law but they seem to be failing to even serve as a "check" on the Bush (mis-)administration and are ignoring (at best) or enabling (at worst) the Bush (mis-)administration's worst policies and plans for our country despite having a FULL SIX YEARS of evidence of the Bush (mis-)administration's rank incompetence and overall BAD intentions towards the rest of us.

The river of my tears flows into the canyon of my astonishment at what our nation has become.
Oh yea, no (or very little outcry) by the population.
Dispare, I just feel dispare.

Without greater ratio of democrats to republicans, the dems appear to consider with each vote how that vote will: 1) affect their re-elections prospects in 2008, and 2) affect the election of not only the democratic nominee for president in 2008. The complication of the second dilemma is that many dems have already (and prospectively) given their support to one of their compatriots in the party and worry about casting a vote that will benefit the competing nominee at the expense of their candidate.

I understand the political considerations that go into votes. It just worries (and infuriates) me nonetheless because a vote for a bad policy is still a vote for a bad policy, particularly when it leads to disastrous outcomes and that life and death decisions should be made because they are the right/best/smartest NOT because it will win somebody the most votes. Another thing that I don't get is that most people agree with US, so I don't understand why many members of our party feel like they have to assume a more conservative "Republican-like" position on issues during their campaigns. I realize that the Democrats feel like they have to "puff" up their chests and denounce Move On.org, pontificate against Iran, or support legislation such as the MCA but do they think beyond elections about how denouncing Move On.org could have the effect of censoring/suppressing/discouraging free speech by individuals or similar organizations, how supporting "saber-rattling" resolutions against Iran (or other countries) could lead to military conflict, or how supporting legislation like the MCA could eventually lead to such practices/policies being used against innocent American citizens?