THE WONDER OF IT ALL
Ladies and Gentlemen, may I call your attention to the center ring, where many political wonders await you. For example, "I wonder what the hell happened to Howard Dean in Iowa." "I wonder who this John Edwards guy is." "I wonder why George Bush and his friends are so afraid that gays might marry." "I wonder what color the current terror alert is, and what that color even means." There are so many wonders in the wonderful world of politics there aren't enough hours in the year to explore them all. The best we can do is fly by them, stunt pilot-style, so strap in and get the camera ready.
"I wonder if George Dubya means it this time when he acts like a compassionate conservative when he clearly only used it as an election ploy last time."
Good eye. Yep, that was Dubya we just passed, and yep indeed, he was standing pretty close to the center again. It's hard to believe he could remember where it was, until you look at the recon photos and see that he left a trail of thousand dollar bills in 2000 so he could find his way back from the right, just in time to fool more people into voting for him. With the help of his Republican House and Senate, he's been pirating Democratic issues, most shockingly Medicare, which is being set up for a future gutting. It's going to be fun watching this guy try to convince Americans that he's suddenly caring about people more than corporations, for no apparent reason. Other than the fact that it's an election year. He's clearly courting the "undecided" voters who are concerned about things Democrats are concerned about. Get to them before the Dems can and you get the edge. Our best hope is that even the most gullible voter will actually know and understand the old "fool me once, shame on you" saying.
"I wonder if the situation in Iraq will calm down now that we're giving them free elections."
Even if we get out of Iraq tomorrow and let them do whatever they want, the situation there will probably never "calm down" because they have so many factions wanting so many different styles of leadership, from American-style democracy to theocracy. Betcha anything they aren't going to like these "free elections" we're "giving them," though, because that's not what they are. We're saddling them with a caucus system that will elect a parliament, and then that parliament will select the top leaders as opposed to the one citizen = one vote system the people really want.
Leaders of several Iraqi factions are concerned that there won't be a place for them at the table, and you know, they're probably right. Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, a Shia cleric with enormous clout, is pretty sure he's not wanted at that table, so he's not waiting for the invitation. Instead, he's calling for direct elections by the end of June. At first this call was met with complete indifference, and so he made another little call, this time for demonstrations. Amazing how many people can jam themselves into the streets before buildings topple.
Amazing, too, how the tough-guy United States faction (we might as well admit we're just another Iraqi faction at this point, only we want the head of the table) has suddenly backed off. Now we're asking the U.N. for help with Ali Sistani out of one side of our mouths while telling Ali Sistani, through the press, that we're taking another look at the plans and we're not ruling anything out. When I say "our mouths," I mean the lips of Paul Bremmer as manipulated by George Bush being handled by whomever it is that day. The lips say hey, the caucuses are for your own good because the infrastructure of Iraq is so messed up (how dat happen?) free elections just aren't feasible in the immediate future. Then again, it's tough to argue with 100,000 angry protestors. Oh well. It's a lose/lose situation. Democracy in Iraq will be a miracle, should it survive. We can't wave a few tanks and make it be so.
"I wonder why, all of a sudden, Howard Dean isn't 'THE MAN'."
It's quite possible he never truly was. It's possible the press just told us he was after his campaign manager did some nifty Internet tricks to create the illusion of an unbeatable candidate. If Dean had never made public appearances, it might have been a workable deal, but the guy blows his stack in a way that makes you wonder... no, makes you almost certain what the outcome would have been had he been the guy with his thumb over the button, waiting for Khrushchev to blink in 1962 as we faced off with Russia over the Cuban missile crisis. "Nasty temper" isn't high on most people's shopping lists for presidential candidates. Am I talking about the now-famous "Iowa Screech" in which he stabbed his finger in the air and yelled off the names of the states he would travel to next? No, because that wasn't a big hairy deal. I'm talking about the guy who turns red in the face and attacks anyone who points out a major mistake he's made. The guy who would spend half his campaign apologizing for earlier remarks except he doesn't see what's wrong with most of them. He had some good ideas, but that's lost in the dust now. Is his candidacy over after his distant 3rd place finish in Iowa? Not necessarily, but his myth certainly is. Without that, there might not be a candidacy worth speaking of. OR he might make a huge comeback. This is politics. Anything can happen. (Well, almost anything. I really don't expect to be saying "President Kucinich" anytime soon. If I do, then I will remove the "almost" and say that, yes, absolutely anything can happen.)
"I wonder if Michael Jackson can get a fair trial."
I keep wondering why news shows would dare tout their content as "hard news" and then spend an entire hour on Michael Jackson. The obvious follow-up joke is in bad taste and will not appear in this column. It should be about this much space and nothing more, because after that it's news for celebrity stalkers.
"I wonder if Fox News is 'Fair and Balanced' like they claim to be."
Oh, certainly. Why? Why wouldn't you just assume so because the slogan says so? What's wrong with you people?
"I wonder if there will be new jobs around here soon."
Depends on what you do, how low you're willing to go, or how lucky you get, but if you're waiting for the miracle the Bushies seem to be talking about lately, don't. Try to make things happen rather than hold your breath and tread water, because we are indeed in - yes, you've heard this term a lot lately for a good reason - a jobless recovery. There's a big huge description of this, but the bottom line is there's more money at the top of the economic pyramid, but it isn't translating to new jobs. A brand new republican talking point trumpets the drop in unemployment from 5.9% to 5.7%, but they don't mention the fact that this is largely due to the 255,000 folks who threw in the towel and stopped looking for work because, guess what, there isn't any in their towns. Words you're not likely to hear from the lips of a Bush Republican: "Labor Underutilization." That's a column heading the Board of Labor has for keeping track of people who have given up trying to find work and people who can only get part-time hours but need full-time to make ends meet. Put these people together with the ones that are officially recognized as "unemployed" and what do you get? A realistic figure of 9.9%. And that, my friends, is what's really going on in America. Might as well have the facts in front of you, right?
"I wonder why I'm not hearing a lot about Hackergate."
Because the White House, Congress, Senate, Supreme Court, and the Press are controlled by the Bushies, and there doesn't seem to be much we can do about it. It's a dark era for truth, justice and the American way. What's Hackergate? Just a little bit of bad behavior the Boston Globe reported on January 22nd. Because it was uncovered through the investigative journalism of one newspaper, nobody else is willing to touch it yet, but it will become an issue, whether the right wing press wants it to or not. They'd tell on their own mothers if it'd sell papers. Back to Hackergate.
Apparently, Republican staff members of the US Senate Judiciary Committee have known about and exploited a computer glitch in the Judiciary Committee file server, which is shared by both parties, since spring of 2002. They found they could access Democratic Party memos without having to use a password, and that meant they could spy on the other side, know what they were planning, know how they intended to fight key battles. Especially important to the GOP was information on how the Dems intended to fight Judicial nominees. The Democrats, bless their pointy little heads, made it clear in some of the memos that liberal interest groups had far more influence over which nominees would meet with filibusters than they should have, and these memos were leaked to the right-wing press. Not too bright, really, since arrogant assholes like Robert Novak aired them out and helped the GOP folks get caught. It's still early, but so far most in the GOP aren't doing much about it, and the people with the power and the responsibility to do something about it are playing dumb. If you want to help those people see the urgency, if you want to tell them you're watching, the Democratic Party website has a petition set up for you. Doesn't cost you a dime, just asks for a moment of your time. There's power in numbers, even now. This is a perfect time to start demanding the return of fair play.
"I wonder if Hackergate could possibly turn into an important issue."
Sign the petition. If the obstructionists at the top are forced to let an investigation go forward, good things will come of it. Why? Because there's already some interesting things in evidence, including the server from the office of Senate majority leader Bill Frist (R-Tennessee), more than half a dozen computers belonging to Republicans, and "several desktop hard drives," according to the Boston Globe article. Even the Secret Service is involved in the investigation. Now I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing. Are they Republican when the President is a Republican? I picture Odd Job mindlessly defending Goldfinger to the end. Still, "The Secret Service is involved in the investigation" sounds mighty official, doesn't it? More on this in later columns.
"I wonder if too much is made of Halliburton."
Yeah, I've heard that. Vice President Cheney was the CEO until he decided to run for his current office. In theory, he walked away from the company a retired man, ties severed. How interesting, then, that his old company should be handed an extremely lucrative contract for rebuilding post-war Iraq, a contract they never had to bid on and never faced competition on. Eyebrows raised, but everyone was reminded that Uncle Dick had walked away a retired man long ago. No reason it would matter to him if Halliburton got that contract. Then we found out they were ripping off taxpayers for gas they were buying in Kuwait to deliver in Iraq. It was an astronomical overcharge, and on top of that, they were reselling it in Iraq. But Uncle Dicky, now, why would it matter to him if Halliburton made any profits? He'd retired. Now we're hearing of more illegal activity in the company involving kickbacks, and hey, who's surprised? Uncle Dick's surprised, and angry, as it turns out. He's finally talking to the press. Ranting, more like, insisting that this is just partisan politics, just the other guys trying to make hay, and that not only did he not manipulate the system to get that no-bid contract for his old company, he wouldn't have a clue how to go about doing so. (Puuuuhleeeze!) And why would he, anyway? Really, now. Why would he?
"I wonder if Vice President Cheney's 433,000 stock options become more valuable when Halliburton does well."
Let's ask him. Anyone out there own a polygraph?