Once per week, I consolidate comments I’d posted to recent articles appearing on Yahoo News. I share my views, written as if I actually were the US President. [I’m working on that.] The following were posted between Sept. 19 and today, though appear below in no particular order. As is my usual custom, if I open with a quoted item, that’s from the article itself.
I hope you enjoy all 23 of these mini-essays/comments.
ONE:
“[Commissioner Kelly of the NYPD] says the department is prepared for multiple scenarios and could even take down a plane.” I hope Kelly never has to utter these words to the NTSB:
“I regret the tremendous loss of life following the ‘take down’ [forced crash] of a jet liner which, according to positive intel, was part of a terrorist plan. That intel turned out to be incorrect. Our regrets also for acting as solo operators, not informing national anti-terrorist groups of our capabilities.”
The article noted, “He [Kelly] decided [New York City] couldn’t rely on the [feds]…” HE decided, did he? Wow, that Kelly dude must have an awful lot of power. Wonder where the funding came from to enact what “he decided.”
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“I hope Commissioner Kelly isn’t one of those cowboys who gets us into so much trouble by acting out his fantasies.”
TWO:
“Class warfare isn’t leadership,” House Speaker John Boehner said…
Boehner is about the last one to be talking about leadership. Besides, he’d better be careful about this “class warfare” talk. People might start to get ideas. What the rich are pretending not to understand is, there’s something called “the cost of doing business,” which they’ve been shirking for too long. They derive more benefit from their financial relationship with the US, they should pay their fair share. They are quite proud of their ability to move assets out of this country while conveniently forgetting where they came from.
As a presidential candidate, I support class warfare. I support the 99% (which don’t know we’re at war) vs. the 1% (which has never forgotten this). The beauty of the outcome? We will win without firing a shot.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“The Class Warfare Party will make the Tea Party seem like a Sunday school picnic.”
THREE:
“Obama gave ‘orders to the military to ratchet up the cooperation at every level with Israel.’” And that’s because Rahm Emanuel ordered Obama to do so, relaying those orders from Israel. And today, as his reward for service rendered to not the USA but to Zion, Rahm (son of a former terrorist) is now mayor of my home town.
Why was this sale [of bunker busting bombs] “secretly authorized?” Wasn't Obammer supposed to be the transparency president? I don’t know how long it took you, but it didn’t take me long at all to see right through the transparent president.
“Israel had developed its own bunker-buster technology between 2005 and 2009.” They probably stole it from the US. Remember Jonathan Pollard? Israel has no problem spying on its allies and selling their secrets to our enemies. With “friends” like that, who needs enemies?
I know, I know. It was all because of that nasty concentration camp business during WW2 that makes Israel distrust everybody – even us. I’d like to see a US president call out Israel next time they get caught spying on us, “Concentrate on this: Do it again and we’ll be delivering bunker buster bombs to you (say, at the Dimona nuclear reactor site) – the hard way.”
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“My first act as president – void diplomatic relations with Israel. I won’t sign any bill into law giving Israel one red cent.”
FOUR:
“…Obama promised the Libyan people that the world will stand with them…”
Question: Why is the US president speaking on behalf of “the world,” as if he had been empowered by that world to be its spokesman?
Answer: Obama’s practicing for that day (on behalf of all future US Presidents), when it eventually comes.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“What? You didn’t think Obama promising on behalf of the world was some kind of metaphor, did you?”
FIVE:
“… it would force the Pentagon to revive the draft.”
I knew those basturds were thinking about playing that card. That’s why my written contract (the basis of my run for president in 2012) contains this provision:
“There will be no military draft during my presidency. If Congress enacts a draft, however, I will encourage all draftees to be inducted. Immediately after induction, though, they will be subject to this blanket order: Do not follow any orders from any member of the military except this order from me, your Commander in Chief: ‘Carry on with your civilian lives as if you had never been drafted.”
As President, I would have this power – and Congress couldn’t do anything about it. I refuse to allow the 13th amendment (barring involuntary servitude, of which the draft is an example) to be violated. Sorry, boys, but if you want to play war games, pony up and pay a professional army what it’s worth. You don’t get to snatch US citizens off the street to do your dirty work – not on my watch.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Actually, that very same promise was in my last contract, when I ran in 2008. Violation of that promise will cause me to forfeit my office.”
SIX:
RE: NTC [the anti-Gadaffi forces] attacking Sirte
This quoted section must be a mistake: “…as NATO jets circled overhead, ready to renew air strikes…” Perhaps this is what was meant: “…as NATO jets circled overhead to assure that anti-Gaddafi forces didn’t harm any civilians.”
And I corrected this quote as follows: “Taking Sirte would be a huge boost for the NTC as it tries to establish credibility as a government able [to crush any opposition]…”
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“I’m sure the NTC would love to claim it had national unity, but (hey) they’ll take (as would most central governments) a militarily crushed opposition instead.”
SEVEN:
“… Romney said… illegal immigration is ‘something I will stop if I'm president.’”
OK, fair enough, Mitt. But what exactly would you do? Before you answer, keep this in mind: If we hadn’t looked the other way and allowed a substantial degree of illegal immigration, Mexico would have had a socialist revolution by now. The US served to relieve political pressure by providing economic opportunity to potential revolutionaries; so in that context, we can’t really be talking about “illegal immigration” in anything but a de jure sense.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Grasping the Realpolitik of illegal immigration is hard; spouting sound bites like ‘I will stop [illegal immigration] if I’m president’ is easy.”
EIGHT:
“A move to sell the island [Taiwan] new fighters would have stirred a more vociferous response, but Washington deferred that decision.”
Don’t kid yourself. A lot of our detractors around the world are thinking along these lines: “Since when does the US pass up a chance to make a buck by selling weapons, especially during a time of high unemployment and a bad economy? Maybe it’s time to conclude that China managed to intimidate the US from taking its usual course of action.”
This is huge, perhaps our high watermark.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“There’s way more here than meets the eye.”
“There’s way more here than meets the eye.”
NINE:
"This will help ensure Taiwan maintains the ability to defend its air space…”
What nonsense! We just want to sell jets. It's all about jobs, jobs, jobs and getting reelected.
The day will come when China lays physical claim to Taiwan. When that day comes, there won’t be anything Taiwan could do about it – except capitulate. And there won’t be anything the US should do about it. If Taiwan, Japan, Vietnam, Thailand, even Australia – if any of China’s neighbors want to assure their continued independence from China, they had better band together (and better sooner than later) into an alliance (perhaps including India) – and not count on US intervention.
As your next President, I want to make it clear now that I would not initiate any action to counter a Chinese move against Taiwan. If, however, our Congress should choose to declare war against China, I would carefully look at the circumstances before deciding to lead our forces (as CINC) or resign my office.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Enough of being the policeman of the world.”
“Enough of being the policeman of the world.”
TEN:
TeddA,
You hit the nail on the head when you mentioned ATM. “At the moment” is a good way of saying, “false economy which disregards long-term consequences.” We’ve got to reconfigure our economy so we won’t have to rely on receiving orders for WMD, which is too on-again, off-again to be reliable.
I don’t see how selling jets to Taiwan gives us “some leverage against China.” I would argue the opposite: By selling jets to Taiwan, we lose leverage when we try to complain that China (by upping its military spending) is fueling a local arms race. When China takes Taiwan (which it will), the F-16’s won’t matter; not a single shot will be fired.
I’ll go on the record with this prediction: China will simply overwhelm by isolating Taiwan economically, and launching a campaign to build factories there to show the Taiwanese the benefits of formally becoming part of China. The economic stick is huge and China’s got a pretty big one.
BTW, SEATO no longer exists – it was formally dissolved on June 30, 1977. I think it should be resurrected – but this time, without the US as a member (i.e., puppet master). These nations can, and should, stand on their own two feet. Too many of the countries you call “allies” are really nothing more than client states – there is a difference.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Mark this carefully: The day we decided not to sell F-16’s to Taiwan will be interpreted as a game changer. Diplomats are already quietly muttering dark things about this marking the beginning of a profound decline.”
ELEVEN:
TeddA,
I’ll stick with my earlier point about getting us away from basing our economy, to any significant degree, on the sale of WMD. I’ll also stick with my use of the WMD term – as defined on Wikipedia. Me personally? I would include a high tek jet armed with rockets [like the F-16s we sold to Taiwan] as being in that category.
If we continue to depend on arms sales, then we might reach a point in the future where an influential senator might lobby to sell weapons to someone we really shouldn’t. And that senator wouldn’t care about that – only that his constituents have jobs and/or that his lobbyists continue to contribute to his reelection. I think being a premier seller of weapons to the world is both cynical and counterproductive to many of our foreign policy initiatives. Best to either get out of or reduce that business.
“Carrot-stick” won’t much matter as the US’s influence (and Japan’s) declines and China’s grows by leaps and bounds. And why should China take by force what they can take gradually? They know we’d love them to give us an excuse to whack them, so they won’t go the forceful route. As for Taiwan being bribed or seduced into being absorbed by China, I don’t think ideology will be as much of a factor as pragmatism. As China becomes wealthier, some of its harder edges will smooth down – nobody thinks of China as communistic any longer.
Our initiatives with India will fail due to the fact that China controls the head waters of India’s most vital rivers, which originate in Tibet. And should China decide to divert those waters, there wouldn’t be anything anybody could do about it. China showed amazing foresight in occupying Tibet in the ‘50s knowing full well that water power (fifty years later) would prove decisive. Do we have that kind of foresight? We’ve, instead, become a nation of petty squabblers sorely in need of a drastic reformation.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“I’ve invented a new system of governance which could help that reformation. Google these words: Cross-Sectional Representation Steven Searle.”
TWELVE:
TeddA,
As for my use of the term WMD [in the context of selling F-16s to Taiwan], you’re entitled to your opinion. But I duly note, you opened your piece with “…I suppose that everybody can formulate their own opinion…” Fine, that’s exactly what I did. Others have done that too, notably in the case of those who might think to create a dirty bomb – which really isn’t a nuclear explosive at all. I don’t know where you get the standard of “killing a million or more” – that would seem to be your personal definition. If that be the case, wouldn’t you be as guilty of misuse of the term as I?
I disagree with your assessment that we should sell weapons because “nations are going to buy their weapons from somewhere.” Fine, let them do exactly that. But I hasten to add, there are profound karmic consequences for such a cavalier attitude. If we have to feather our nest with the blood of others (to mix a metaphor), that doesn’t make us very admirable people, does it? And frankly, I don’t care who else is doing it. The sooner we adjust our economy away from the parameters of the Military-Industrial Complex, the more stable and advanced will be that economy.
As for the fate of our weapons in Egypt, the Egyptian man in the street knows very well what those weapons were really for. Balance of power with Israel, which has nukes, had nothing to do with it. The purpose was to enable Mubarak to suppress his own people. And we gave him those weapons with exactly that intention in mind. Somehow, I don’t think those who were brutally suppressed are going to forget that any time soon.
“China has now deployed its own aircraft carrier...” So what? We worry that they have…ONE? Tell me, how do you think we’d like it if China decided to hold joint military maneuvers with Brazil (which fears our designs on the Amazon’s water and their off-shore oil)? What if that one aircraft carrier were in international waters in the Caribbean? What if Chinese troops (welcomed by Brazil or Venezuela) landed in those countries for pre-arranged exercises? We’d be pretty hypocritical to cry foul, wouldn’t we? But we would do exactly that - cry foul.
I’ll be bold here: I don’t think you’ve spoken to many (if any at all) Taiwanese. And you make it seem like they’d all be opposed to reunion with the mainland (I doubt that). That’s an unwarranted exaggeration for effect on your part – but quite transparent.
As for India, their military can’t hold a candle to China’s. And if they would even think of throwing a nuke at China, India would suffer far more in the exchange – and they know this. As for China’s grab of Tibet, we got caught with our pants down and didn’t realize the full import of that loss back in the day. For better or worse, China’s got Tibet for good and no amount of “controversy” is going to change that.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Every empire has its day in the sun and then that sun sets – our experience will not differ from this.”
THIRTEEN:
Chris [Referring to Jews as an ethnicity],
“An” ethnicity? After Jews dispersed all over the world, you’d be pretty hard put to identify any one ethnicity. There are black Jews, Hispanic Jews, German Jews, and Jews from Russia, England…well, from all over. And they all look pretty different from each other.
The faith is the common denominator, but not even that – truth be told. I read an interesting book years ago called “Jew vs. Jew” describing the fight within the Judaic realm to define what it means to be a Jew. Frankly, I wish more Israeli Jews would practice their own faith more (shall we say, religiously?), especially the commandment about “loving the stranger.”
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“And then you have Jews like Netanyahu who are cold-blooded atheists.”
FOURTEEN:
“It was also time for the Palestinians to acknowledge that ‘Israel is the Jewish state,’ [Netanyahu] told the assembly.
(sigh) What would happen if, in the future, the majority of Israel’s citizens converted to Buddhism (could happen, you know)? Would Israel still be “the” Jewish state? I totally oppose anyone designating a country’s official religion. Leads to all kinds of nastiness – just saying.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Why should the Palestinians (or anyone else, for that matter) declare, ‘Israel, now and forever, is a Jewish state?’ What nonsense.”
FIFTEEN:
The 9/11 Commission left too many unanswered questions and gave the appearance of a cover up with its haste and sloppiness. Don’t forget – Bush wanted Henry Kissinger to run the investigation. Kind of tells you where Bush was coming from. But, not to worry, he had that Commission in his back pocket from Day One.
Personally? I think elements within our own government either knew or were complicit. I'd like to thank David Ray Griffin for his sincere attempts to unravel the mysteries of 9/11. He certainly worked harder and with greater integrity than the entire 9/11 Commission itself. And there was certainly nothing in it for him - no boss to please, no agenda to follow.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Our Elite were desperate to get We-the-People in a militant mood. So I wouldn’t put it past them to kill 3,000 Americans to do it.”
SIXTEEN:
Anthony B,
Do you really think Bush would have attacked Iraq if the mood of the country hadn’t been primed for that beforehand? It seems you’re from the school of “we can attack anyone we want even without a pretext or public support.” Perhaps that is so, but politicians would much prefer to snooker We-the-People into going rah-rah for their BS wars, which helped contribute to our “frail economy.”
Remember this, which also contributed to our loss of economic power:
On September 10, 2001 [NOTE: The day before 9/11, the events of which helped bury this outrageous admission]: Rumsfeld held a press conference to disclose that over $2T in Pentagon funds could not be accounted for. Rumsfeld stated: "According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions."
Anthony B, I don’t know what agenda of hatred you’re talking about; but you yourself seem like a hateful little guy to me. I’m just an ordinary man who won’t allow himself to be BS’d.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Frankly, I’m a little tired of hearing from the lazies who never tire of bleating, ‘Love it or leave it.’”
SEVENTEEN:
If elected as the next US President, my first act will be to void diplomatic recognition of Israel; my second, to grant it to Palestine.
Obama made a huge mistake by kissing Israel’s behind on this, when all he should have done was say nothing. He could have simply told our UN delegation to veto the Palestinian bid, without making such a public fuss about this.
The so-called Arab Spring is still a work in progress. We don’t know who will come out on top when Egypt holds its elections, or when the dust finally settles in Libya (some of those “freedom fighters” are al-Qaida – like it or not). All of these people are watching the Leader of the Free World (remember when that meant something?) overexert himself on behalf of the Zionists. When that wasn’t really necessary. Obama did nothing except inspire a new generation of anti-American sentiment, which begets terrorism, which begets US military involvement, which begets more debt…well, you get the idea.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Frankly, I think Obama went overboard to assure himself of a steady flow of Jewish money for his reelection efforts.”
EIGHTEEN:
“Financial analysts … came to the conclusion that the Fed expects the economy to take years to recover.”
An even grimmer possibility? Our best years are behind us; it’s downhill all the way. Since I don’t believe in false modesty, I’ll come right out and say it: “It’s downhill all the way, unless you vote for me.”
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Google these words: pudding face GOP.”
“Google these words: pudding face GOP.”
NINETEEN:
No shortcuts to peace in the Middle East? The "longcuts" (aka "negotiations") haven't worked out at all. Something's got to give.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"If you want a President who isn’t busy promoting Israel’s interests, vote for me. Obama and all of the Pubbers (even Ron Paul) are knocking themselves out to show how rabidly pro-Israel they are. Shame on all of them!”
TWENTY:
“… Netanyahu…vowed to speak ‘the truth’ in New York — ‘the truth of a people that wants peace [but only on our terms and screw everybody else].’”
Here’s the truth that even Netanyahu won’t dare utter in public: “God gave us all of the West Bank, and a lot more, and we will not rest until we formally annex all of it.” But that’s exactly what he’ll say to Obama when they meet privately. First, he’ll throw Obama to the ground, put a knee in his chest, and speak his “truth.” Netanyahu is not a subtle man.
Since Abbas has popular support among his people for his UN overture, why on earth would presidents Sarcophagus and Obama so loudly and publicly urge Abbas to withdraw his bid? They know he won’t back down, since doing so would destroy his at-home credibility. The answer is obvious: Israel has ordered both presidents (and a lot of others) to act so undiplomatically. After all is said and done, Obama will realize it would have been far better to publicly say nothing – and just privately order the US to exercise its veto in the Security Council.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Google these words: GOP pudding face.”
“Google these words: GOP pudding face.”
TWENTY-ONE:
"Class warfare's never created a job," Fleming responded.
Maybe after the 99% win (thereby ending class warfare), we’ll get to test Fleming’s assertion.
People like Fleming whine about too much democracy: “If we had truly representative government, what would stop the masses from voting themselves a raise?”
To which I respond: “We don’t have truly representative government, and we can see that enables the 1% to arrange for bailouts and unlevel the playing field with selective campaign ‘contributions.’”
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“I think Fleming needs to lose his elective office so he can devote more time to his businesses – he seems a bit overextended (shall we say ‘conflicted?’) to me.”
TWENTY-TWO:
“… Perry pledged strong support for Israel…” which means Israel will continue receiving US annual welfare payments to the tune of $3B.
“In per capita terms, the US gives each Israeli a direct subsidy worth about $500 per year” – Mearsheimer & Walt.
“…and [Perry] criticized President Barack Obama for demanding concessions from the Jewish state the Texas governor says emboldened the Palestinians to appeal for U.N. recognition.”
Perry is an ignorant jacka$$. The reason the Palestinians are going to the UN: 30 years after Camp David, “negotiations” with the Zionists have not resulted in an independent Palestine. I am happy to report, though, Perry’s stand with Israel won’t sink him; his attempt (via Executive Order) to force school-age girls in Texas to be immunized against cervical cancer will. [Sorry, Rick, trying to claim now that that was a mistake won’t cut it; men like you don’t make those kinds of mistakes – that was pure, unadulterated control-freak at work all the way.]
What will end up sinking Israel? The Zionists’ failure to obey the commandment to “love the stranger.” But isn’t that the way of all powers? They don’t fall due to external forces so much as to their own personal failings. Que sera, sera.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Perry thinks he can save the US economy, but (unlike Texas) the US isn’t sitting on an ocean of oil.”
TWENTY-THREE:
[This is long (560 words), so I saved it for last.]
MatthewB [regarding US use of the atomic bomb in WW2],
You’re overlooking a critical difference between the USSR and Japan. Japan is a nation consisting of several islands and had no way out. If “divide and conquer” means anything, each of the four major islands could have been offered “surrender or else” terms [instead of the US just deciding to use nukes]. Each of those islands, cut off from the others, was actually one of four very vulnerable nations.
We could have waited (starved) them out – gradually, at first (so they’d see the writing on the wall), but then upping the ante. Or we could have said something like: “If you don’t give up now, we’ll land hundreds of thousands of Chinese and Korean troops on your islands for a little payback for your last 10 years of imperialism.”
So what if Japan did have a “warrior’s code?” If every Japanese was willing to die for his emperor while fighting off Koreans and Chinese, then more power to them for choosing to honor their code. If every Japanese was willing to die of starvation while we gradually (at first) destroyed their crops, then (again) more power to them. But as with any other nationalistic group, you will not find that every member will choose the same options…just saying.
You wrote: “As for the killing of civilians, war was a totally different thing back then…It was decided [by whom?] that if you caused enough terror to civilian populations.” That is blatantly false. Consider these two sources:
This is from the League of Nations, passed unanimously in 1938:
“1) The intentional bombing of civilian populations is illegal;
2) Objectives aimed at from the air must be legitimate military objectives and must be identifiable;
3) Any attack on legitimate military objectives must be carried out in such a way that civilian populations in the neighbourhood are not bombed through negligence”
and........
“An Appeal from FDR issued on September 1, 1939:
The ruthless bombing from the air of civilians in unfortified centers of population … has profoundly shocked the conscience of humanity.…I am therefore addressing this urgent appeal to every government which may be engaged in hostilities publicly to affirm its determination that its armed forces shall in no event, and under no circumstances, undertake the bombardment from the air of civilian populations or of unfortified cities…”
Lastly, you asked a very good question about “why didn’t we use [our possession of] the A-bomb to try to force Russia back into its borders?” We had the bomb, but not many. USSR didn’t test their first till 1949. So the race was on. We knew we couldn’t produce enough atom bombs to really coerce the Soviets, which is why we tried to show how ruthless we could be by nuking Japan. That was our bluff – but only a bluff and the Soviets weren’t cowed by it. They insisted on occupying Eastern Europe because they wanted to be close enough to attack Western Europe if our increasing nuke superiority might start to worry them.
As for me nitpicking your statements, my arguments being weak, and history being on your side, I think anyone who reads your post and mine side-by-side will come to quite a different conclusion.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“I guess I’ll be hearing back from you in about another month?”
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party
“I really do answer personal e-mails sent to me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com . I must be the only candidate for US president who has ever done this. And I’ll continue unless regrettably(?) my campaign gains traction and I can’t fit personal correspondence into an increasingly busy schedule.”
Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com
