US President’s weekly Yahoo News updates

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 Aug. 28 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 21 of these mini-essays/comments.

ONE:

When I saw the headline – "Turkey says it will challenge Gaza blockade" – I thought the Turkish navy was going to try to bust the [Israeli] blockade. Whew…glad that wasn’t the case.

“He said the Turks apparently intended to raise tensions with Israel for its own reasons.” Let me guess: “Because we’re Jewish.” [Hey, if all else fails, trot out that old excuse.]

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Actually, it’s because they’re Zionists which means ‘Never having to say you’re sorry.’”

TWO:

There’s no way the GOP will do anything that will help Obama win in 2012. And that includes sabotaging jobs/recovery programs (by pretending to offer alternatives) which might lower the unemployment rate.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“The GOP knows if the jobless rate sinks below 7% by October 2012, they won’t win the White House. Therefore…”

THREE:

[This is in response to former German chancellor Gerhard Schroeder talking about how the EU might evolve, when he said: "We will have to give up national sovereignty."]

There are two steps for achieving a United States of Europe or, as I prefer calling it, simply “Europe.”

ONE: Totally integrate the armed forces of all member states. That is, no longer allow a separate German Army, a British Navy, an Italian Army, etc.

TWO: Disband all national legislative assemblies.

THREE: Replace those assemblies with one mega assembly whose members are elected from Cross-Sections. Each Cross-Section will be created by compiling a master list of every eligible voter in Europe and dividing that list into 500 Cross-Sections, each containing an equal number of voters randomly-selected from that master list.

Each Rep, when compared to any other Rep, will have the same ratio of rich vs. poor, Catholic vs. Protestant, and Frenchmen, Germans, Italians, etc. Therefore, legislators won’t have to worry about trying to appease constituents living in one particular area or who happen to be of one dominant religious persuasion.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“I developed Cross-Sectional Representation in 1976 (the Bicentennial) as a replacement Constitution for the US. Wouldn’t it be ironic if Europe adopted CSR first?”

FOUR:

"Never has there been in Israel a committee that held an open and serious discourse with thousands of citizens." – Netanyaju. Hmm…that speaks volumes of the level of democracy in the (so-called) only democracy in the Middle East.

Somehow, I can’t manage to conjure up much sympathy for the Israeli social justice protestors. They kvetch against the cost of living, skyrocketing rentals, rising poverty rates. But, really, the only “social justice” at issue here is for the Jewish (esp middle class) citizens of Israel. If increasing the number of illegal settlements in the West Bank would lower their cost of living, the protestors would say “Right on.” But they wouldn’t think twice of the impact that would have on the Palestinians living there.

As for protestors pitching a tent city in Tel Aviv, where’s the IDF? Why isn’t the military clearing out these squatters, maybe roughing them up a little in the jailhouse to “teach” them a lesson? IDF  would have done exactly that had Palestinians in the West Bank tried squatting in the settlements? Oh, well, I guess “social justice” applies only to me and mine, and not to you and yours – especially if you’re not Jewish.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“These protestors are going to have to man up by realizing the truth: Israel is not a democracy – it is a de facto theocracy, complete with the attendant costs and limitations. Love it or leave it.”

FIVE:

[This is in response to the US ambassador [Mr. Crocker] in Kabul claiming the US must stay in Afghanistan or risk more attacks.]

“…as expensive as this has been in blood and treasure, it has cost a lot less than 9/11 did."

What about the cost in terms of our lost prestige and dishonorable conduct (waterboarding, WMD, special rendition)? I hope Crocker isn’t only considering our costs in Afghanistan, for we would not have entered Iraq (which was and still is being) costly enough without the 9/11 pretext.

[Crocker] described building a stable Afghanistan as "the ultimate guarantee that there will not be another 9/11."

B*llsh*t! There are no guarantees of any kind in life. What tree is this guy living in? All we’re doing by staying in Afghanistan is making the Taliban stronger. If we leave and Taliban ends up (re)seizing power, they will find it harder to govern a country than to resist imperialists. Besides, why limit our nation-building to creating a “stable Afghanistan?” I’m sure Somalia will need to be dealt with, not to mention those recently “liberated” countries of North Africa.

NOTE: Fighters in Afghanistan (thanks to US “funding” for their training) are becoming a stream of rebels fanning out to Libya, Algeria, and Egypt (surprise!). How much will we end up fighting those insurgents? Will we end up finding out it would have been much cheaper (read: cost-effective) just to pull out now?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Ryan Crocker = career diplomat = now serving in Afghanistan. Tell me, are you really that surprised he’s spouting this nonsense? There are times when well-meaning patriots become our worst enemy – worst than the Taliban.”

SIX:

[This is in response to an article about a proposed public policy change in Germany.]

“…policy is likely to be increasingly hijacked by incumbent firms hostile to competition from start-ups.” Translation: Policy will always be determined by the interests of the haves vs. the have nots.

“Some politicians resist reform because they are captive to interest groups.” Uh, huh. And, as I’ve posted numerous times before, the only way to bust out of this captivity is to rewrite your constitutions so as to allow for Cross-Sectional Representation. Just google these words for more details: Cross-Sectional Representation Searle.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“We can’t afford to dick around anymore; the time to reform is NOW.”

SEVEN:

“…and it remains a stain on the record of the American intelligence services that they cooperated with these very abusive intelligence services [like the one in Libya under Gadaffi]."

“A stain,” you say? US intel doesn’t see it that way at all. They see it as “intel, as well as politics, makes strange bedfellows.” And they congratulate themselves for their ability to tap in to unlikely sources of cooperation. But I must disagree with that “strange bedfellows” claim. More accurate would be: “Birds of a feather flock together.”

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“As for that horse manure about CIA asking Libya to respect al-Sadiq’s human rights, they were laughing so hard, they could barely see straight enough to type those words.”

EIGHT:

I cheat at Sudoku. I solve as many squares as I logically can. Then I’ll find a 3x3 with two squares, not on the same row or column (that’s important), missing (for instance) a 1 and a 4, those being the only possibilities for those 2 squares which I mark with a small “reminder” pencil dot. It doesn’t matter if there are other unsolved squares within that 3x3. After I arbitrarily assign that 1 & 4, writing those numerals smaller than those in squares I’d already solved, I proceed to try to solve the remainder of the puzzle using my meager repertoire of techniques. If I reach a point where I’ve broken a rule (e.g., two 6’s in the same row), then I’ll erase all my mini digits, reverse the 1 & the 4 in the original 3x3, and proceed to solve the puzzle. This has worked for me 90% of the time with puzzles I’d struggled with for hours.

NINE:

“…withdrawal of the smog regulation [by Obama] was a good first step toward removing obstacles that are blocking business growth.”

Business doesn’t seem to understand (1) the concept of “the cost of doing business,” and (2) if we continue removing health-related “obstacles” to business growth, we won’t have anyone left alive to buy their products.

“…the science behind its initial decision needed to be updated, and a new standard would be issued in 2013.” Why issue a new standard in 2013? We need to be really, really, really sure we’ll have good science backing this, so let’s wait till (oh) 2025 – being sure to check with the lobbyists first to see if that would be too soon.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Businesses and their lobbyists are waging war against the United States. Even if ‘only’ using pollution as a weapon, wouldn’t this qualify as treason?”

TEN:

"By Saturday, if there are no peaceful indications for implementing this, we will decide this matter militarily. We do not wish to do so but we cannot wait longer," Mustafa Abdel Jalil…

Dear Mustafa, you cannot wait any longer? Pray tell, what’s the rush? Do you think NATO will level Sirte simply if you ask? Who knows what NATO is capable of (since it seems they cannot even keep their word), but I certainly hope not this.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Say, Mustafa, you wouldn’t happen to have an Enemies List you're trying to cross names off of, would you?”

ELEVEN:

“[Dominique Strauss-Kahn] apologized to the institution's staff…”

If he didn’t do anything wrong, why did he apologize? Unless of course his “apology” wasn’t sincere. Then it wouldn’t matter if it referred to any particular incident.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Or maybe it was a politician's apology rendered in advance for something he plans to do, as in ‘I’m sorry to have to do this but…’”

TWELVE:

@ Britt & IMHO,

Actually, it would appear you’re both wrong. I checked this article from France 24 International News, which had this to say: “Strauss-Kahn told staff he had come to ‘apologize to those who have been hurt’ by the scandal, and said he was sorry that the sensational case had had a negative impact on the IMF, according to a Fund employee at the meeting.”

Sounds a bit too indirect and self-removed for my taste.

He could have said, should have said, but didn’t: “I apologize for my personal misconduct and lack of judgment. What I did was wrong and I promise never to do anything like this again.” [That promise should be part of any apology.] Of course, since he’s still in the States, he couldn’t publicly add, “I paid $50 for a blowjob, which was a violation of my sacred marriage vows and…[well, you get the idea].”

DSK’s legal staff “indicated” [I love that word] that had this case gone to trial, DSK would claim the sex was consensual. Maybe it was as “consensual” as $50 (guessing at the amount here) would buy. But still, soliciting for prostitution is illegal in NYC, so admitting he paid for sex could have been used against him, even if the rape charge was taken off the table.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“I wish someone at the IMF listening to his statement would have yelled out, ‘Stop with the weenie, man up, and give us a real apology.”

THIRTEEN:

"People are the most important ingredient in life," Bachmann [who recently snagged a book deal, her book scheduled to come out in November] said.

So that’s what we are, eh? Ingredients? Maybe she wasn’t really born here. Maybe she was born where cannibalism is practiced (hence, human “ingredients” being important). I demand to see her birth certificate : )  If, however, she meant to say, “People are the most important aspect of my life,” I’d have to ask where God fits in. Probably a bit above being “obedient” to her husband.

I wonder if her contract with the publisher has a secret clause: “You can’t drop out of the race until at least 2 months after publication.” Of course, if her poll numbers don’t stop sliding, that won’t matter.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“My ‘book’ is on line and it’s free.  Just google my name.”

FOURTEEN:

@ Michael,

You say, our problem is that we are not adhering to the Constitution. That must mean we have a Constitution that can be easily circumvented and not adhered to. How is that possible with such a flawless document? Let me turn this around and ask you: “How can we change things so the Constitution isn’t so easily ignored?”

Why do you claim it’s “simply ridiculous” to start all over again? We Americans are an innovative bunch of trailblazers unafraid to face the future and change if we have to. [If we refuse to change, we'll become extinct.] Why do we insist on clinging to that which no longer serves us? To that which is doing us far more harm than good.  I’ll tell you what is “simply ridiculous”: To refuse to consider alternatives while the Ship of State is sinking.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Google my name for a more detailed description of my proposed changes, especially concerning Cross-Sectional Representation.”

FIFTEEN:

“Rebels have been converging from the east and west on Sirte…to battle Gadhafi loyalists.”

And of course NATO will bomb the rebels to prevent them from harming innocent civilians in Sirte. Riighhtt! [Somehow, "you're either for us or against us" will fit into this unfolding chapter.]

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“There’s a special place in h*ll for Obama, Cameron, and Sarkozy for their undeclared war on Libya.”

SIXTEEN:

“The American people have done everything they can” – candidate for US President, Michele Bachmann.

No they haven’t, not even close. Karmically speaking, we get exactly the kind of government we deserve. The culture of corruption in DC was aided and abetted by the American people who kept voting Dem/Pub/Dem/Pub…ad nauseum.  And they STILL won’t seriously consider voting for independents because they’re too stuck on Brand names. This lockstep stuff has got to stop or we’re seriously fewecked.

Irene might have been an Act of God but far be it from someone as mean-spirited and self-loving as Bachmann to figure out what that means. It’s hard to divine (pun intended) the meaning of natural phenomenon but I’ll give it shot:

Irene and that earthquake were the products of karma. Sure, DC felt the quake but the karmic retribution was greatest at the exact spot where the quake occurred. And the most direct recipient was the earth itself – yes, the earth has good and bad karma. Other direct recipients were the people who died or whose lives were impacted by either event. People who try to glean the will of God from natural events will always end up frustrated, since it’s not His will being manifested – it’s a product of the combined karma of a lot of players.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Even God [one of many such Gods] suffers/benefits from karmic retribution/reward and will continue to do so until He attains enlightenment and becomes a Buddha."

SEVENTEEN:

[My response is to this quote, furnished by Itiswhatitis.]

"Hold on, my friends, to the Constitution and to the Republic for which it stands. Miracles do not cluster and what has happened once in 6,000 years, may not happen again. Hold on to the Constitution, for if the American Constitution should fail, there will be anarchy throughout the world."

- Daniel Webster (1782-1852), US Senator

@ Itiswhatitis

Daniel Webster was an unrepentant blowhard with a very large opinion of himself. The only way there will be “anarchy throughout the world” is if the world abandons God. The US Constitution has nothing to do with any impending international breakdown.

The real danger lies, not in the Constitution failing, but in We-the-People failing as spiritual (especially, honest) human beings. Constitutions come and go, and there’s always room for improvement. Anyone who thinks otherwise is hopelessly stuck in the past. “American – forget not your proud heritage – that of innovator and trailblazer” – Steven Searle.

"[Daniel Webster] was a thoroughgoing elitist, and he reveled in it," says Robert Vincent Remini, Daniel Webster: The Man And His Time (Norton, 2009) p 352; also pp. 429, 636 [source: Wikipedia article on DW].

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“I don’t give a rat’s behind what Daniel Webster thought. I’d much rather hear, in his/her own words, what Itiswhatitis thinks.”

EIGHTEEN:

@ K

ONE: I won’t sink to your level by name-calling (REF: “idiot”); I’ll just respond to your points.

TWO: ALL of us – those of at least average intelligence – “know more than the Founding Fathers.” There’s no way they could have known what the average school child [now] knows.

THREE:  Yes, they created a unique system – but not one that should be expected to live forever (even if laden with amendments).

FOUR: Why don’t you admit it can be replaced and not merely amended? The Preamble states, “We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union… do ordain and establish this Constitution…” If We had the right to “form a more perfect union” back in the day, We have the right to form an even more perfect union” now & may do so by ordaining and establishing a replacement Constitution. Isn’t that what we innovative Americans are all about – ever in search of perfection?

FIVE:  You’re only guessing in your last sentence – “probably just ideas.” When people over-generalize, they run the risk of overlooking some genuinely good options. My concept of Cross-Sectional Representation has not been “proven to fail.” What is proving to fail is our outdated Law of the Land mostly upheld by unthinking, sentimental, “loyal” Americans – the kind of whom it is said, “With friends like them, the country doesn’t need enemies.

SIX: I take it you’re in favor of legislative gridlock and the anti-democratic Senate filibuster rule, which are slowly grinding this country to a halt.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“I can’t help but be awestruck by your ‘open’ mind.”

NINETEEN:

[These last three entries are responses to AWFULLLLLL.]

AWFULLLLLL wrote, “Do you believe that life begins at conception?”

Maybe the key question should be: When do you believe the soul enters the unborn's body? Can't remember my source on this, but many Japanese (Shintoists?) believe the soul enters 4 months after conception. Therefore, abortion prior to 4 months hasn't destroyed a soul, though it has destroyed a life.

I can feel the pain on both sides of the pro-Choice divide. Maybe we need a constitutional amendment outlawing (most) abortions. But that amendment should also include this provision: “Any woman leaving the US [vacation, business, whatever] must submit to a pregnancy test before leaving. If she’s pregnant, she must either still be pregnant when she returns or have her newborn babe in arms.”

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“I find it hard to encourage anti-abortion legislation knowing how easy it is for the wealthy to simply cross the border to fix their ‘problems.’ Actually, they cross the border to fix a lot of their other problems as well, but that’s for another post on another day.”

TWENTY:

[These last three entries are responses to AWFULLLLLL.]

AWFULLLLLL,

When you wrote, “Sounds like a political answer,” were you referring to my words concerning the amendment I suggested? I’m kind of surprised you didn’t respond to that – the silence was deafening.

As for, “Scientifically the point of conception is the only non-arbitrary point!”… That depends. If someone “knows” [and I would rank religious “knowledge” as no better or worse than scientific “knowledge”] that the soul doesn’t enter the body until 4 months after conception, then there wouldn’t be anything “arbitrary” at all concerning the decision of a woman to abort prior to 4 months. “No harm [to a soul], no foul” as the old saying goes.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“This isn't an easy issue, which is exactly why I would tend to favor each individual woman making her own choice. The wealthy would only do that anyway, so why discriminate against the poor?”

TWENTY-ONE:

[These last three entries are responses to AWFULLLLLL.]

AWFULLLLLL,

If you don’t want to amend the Constitution, you may be missing your best chance to impose your moral view (which I’m sure you feel is the correct view) on the country at large. And frankly I don’t see why you would choose to decline this perhaps historic opportunity.

Your argument may indeed be moral, but if it is to be more than just “your [theoretical] argument” (instead of a means to change the law of the land), you’ll have to take some kind of political action. Otherwise, the status quo (Roe vs. Wade) will prevail. Remember what they say about enough good men doing nothing.

I have already commented on my belief: “…I would tend to favor each individual woman making her own choice.” But to expand on that: As a Buddhist, I believe each soul reincarnates at particular times, which are a direct consequence of its karma. If a fetus is aborted, that death is not permanent (as, say, the Christians believe) since it can later be reincarnated (born) to different parents. If a fetus loses its life, that’s a product of its karma but not the end of the world. However, by losing that life, its negative karma has been reduced to a point which would allow for birth under more favorable circumstances in the future.

As far as when the soul enters the body, I really don’t know nor have I any belief. But that’s irrelevant to whether I think a woman has a right to abort before the third trimester.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“If you really think it would be murderous to abort (say) within a month of conception, then you’ve got to get political to eliminate that state of affairs. Merely being moral isn’t good enough; merely being moral, when you could do more than sit on your hands, would make you an accomplice to this kind of murder, would it not?”

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party

“I strongly suspect Yahoo News! routinely censors my posts or isolates them somehow so as not to be available to the general public, but there’s not much I can do about that.”

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

US President’s weekly Yahoo! News updates

[NOTE: No, I am not really the US President. However, by acting the way I think he should act and saying the things I think he should say, perhaps that could change.]

Once per week, I share comments I’d posted to articles appearing on Yahoo News. These were posted between May 29 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.

Posted on Yahoo! News

ONE:

[This is my comment on an article concerning the A-12 stealth spy plane, which featured a photo of that craft taken on the infamous Area 51 military base sometime in the 1960’s. The caption stated that the motionless plane, hovering upside-down maybe ten feet off the ground without any visible means of support, was being “radar-tested.]

"Radar testing?" What bull! Any meaningful "radar testing" takes place while the plane is in flight - that is, if you can see it with your eyes but can't see it on the radar screen, it passes! Anyway, there is no crane holding that plane up - it's levitating. You might call the A-12 a "gift" from above...from "waaay above." We got that kind of technology, back in '63, from the same place the Nazis got theirs. Check out Jim Marrs' intriguing book, The Rise of the Fourth Reich."

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"Careful, gentlemen, when you make deals with the devil, he'll want his due. Tell me, how much are we really in hock for the gifts we were 'given?'"

TWO:

"...cyberattack could result in real-world military retaliation, although analysts say it could be difficult to detect its origin with full accuracy."

We wouldn't even bother to try for anything near "full accuracy." We'd just lash out...you know...based on how we usually react to crises. The anarchists of the 21st century (or our own Black Ops) will go for that cyberattack ... fully hoping for that "real-world military retaliation." Nothing's more pitiful than seeing a blinded giant lashing out, so we'd better get our act together real fast.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"I mean our ethical act - we've got enough of the other stuff."

THREE:

[The article I’m commenting on here was covering a rocket attack by a rival tribe, which ended up wounding Yemen’s president.]

Gee, I wonder where they got the rockets. Maybe on some future date we'll be asking, "Gee, I wonder where they got the mini drones."

Ah, the mini's...Private developers in the US are field testing drones that aren't much bigger than model airplanes with small bombs (2 -10 lbs) strapped underneath. These can be piloted via GPS or by remote control by an operator viewing thru an on-board mini-cam. At first the Pentagon thought: “Great, this will be a quickie way for patrols in Afghanistan to hit targets on their own without having to wait for an airstrike.”

But…this will turn out to be a disaster of the first order, when (as will be inevitable) our enemies buy, bribe, or steal this technology. Case in point: Israel has been lucky so far that rockets launched by Hamas haven't had state of the art guidance systems. But now we have a game changer. These mini drones can target something as small as (say) a school bus. But they can’t be stopped by the missile shield Israel’s trying to install with US help. [Talk about flying under the radar!] What next, in this ever-escalating war of smart technologies?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“This is where Been-Jammin’ Knittin’-Yahoo is badly miscalculating. He thinks there is no new thing under the sun, which will allow Israel to continue running roughshod over the West Bank.”

FOUR:

The operation was aimed at putting "additional pressure on the Gadhafi forces who continue to threaten the civilian population," he said.”

Question: Those “Gadhafi forces who continue to threaten the civilian population” couldn’t also be those very same forces claimed (by this article) to be “trying to hide in populated areas.” Let me emphasize, “trying to hide.” Doesn’t sound to me like they were threatening the civilian population, unless of course by simply being there they were (by NATO definition) threatening the civilian population.

Libyan civilians aren’t the only ones being threatened. British and French civilians, who are being ruthlessly lied to by their governments, are also being threatened. When those governments operate outside the rule of law, they become outlaw governments. Are the civilians of France and Britain okay with that?

Good citizens, here’s what’s really happening: Your countries’ elites are reveling in a power-induced drunkenness so they can relive the bygone days of empire. It felt good back then to bomb the hell out of the heathens; feels pretty good now. But beware: Those “heathens” have long memories.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“We are so addicted to instant gratification, we simply couldn’t wait for events to unfold gradually and under the watchful eye of Libya’s Arab and African neighbors. The Mighty White Man just had to, once again, stick his nose where it doesn’t belong. ‘Protecting civilians” indeed. How many more lies will you accept from your leaders? How much ‘tolerance’ for mayhem do you have?”

FIVE:

"His killing would likely be seen as a huge achievement in the United States ..." [This had to do with a US drone missile strike killing a high-level leader of al Qaeda.]

Mark those words carefully. If that's our idea of a "huge achievement," no wonder we're losing this war.

But that's been one of our weaknesses when fighting insurgents. We tend to think, "If we knock off their leaders, our job will be 90% done." Well, that couldn't have worked during our little adventure in Vietnam. The soldiers who beat us back then weren't famous Mr. Big types. They were a lot of determined though mostly anonymous men.

Our fixation with leader-killing has roots similar to our fixation with celebrities (Dancing with the Stars, anybody?) or (if you happen to be English) with royalty. Think about it this way, “If your willingness to fight for your cause evaporates because your leadership has been killed, that cause couldn’t have been worth the risk of your life in the first place.”

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Maybe part of the problem is with the people who remotely control those drones. They don’t really risk their lives for their cause, now do they?”

SIX:

“Egypt, for instance, has used the U.S.-supplied funds to replace aging Soviet-supplied equipment with [US made equipment]. So Egypt ends up with weapons — but the money actually goes to U.S. firms and helps create U.S. jobs.”

The money “actually” goes to U.S. firms – which means taxpayer dollars have been funneled to our homegrown Merchants of Death for 30 years, which (almost as an afterthought) “helps create U.S. jobs.” This is nothing more than welfare for arms merchants and creates the kind of jobs we would be better off not creating. If an honest, even-level-playing-field type of economy can’t “create” a job, that job doesn’t deserve to come into being

This is how the Egyptian man in the street views all that weaponry we’ve been providing, mostly to Mubarak. He’d been using that to help suppress his own people! And you’d better believe that man in the street knows this. Think of all the love our money has bought us – NOT! Egypt doesn’t have any enemies that justified us arming them to the teeth. Israel? Only if Egypt starts something. Libya? Never a threat. The Sudan? Give me a break.

Jimmy Carter and every succeeding president has been playing us for fools for 30 years – by giving Egypt (AND Israel) billions annually. Those presidents – every single one of them – were de facto traitors by turning untold millions of Muslims against us for being (again) Merchants of Death.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“No real and sustainable economic recovery could nor should be dependent on arms sales.”

SEVEN:

[This comment is my response to “TomS” who challenged my comment (immediately above).]

@ TomS, Are you trying to say it's alright with you that our taxpayer dollars are being used as welfare payments to our Merchants of Death? That if we don't do this, some other country will? That kind of ethic sounds like a pretty horrible basis for a country's morality. Come to think of it, using that kind of ethic contributed to the downfall of the USSR. As for China? Remains to be seen. As for the US? Remains to be seen.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"Ethics are important - there, I said it. Somebody has to."

EIGHT:

Don't expect Romney to explain how he intends to "fix things." After all, we didn't ask candidate Obama anything even remotely resembling such a hard question. So why pick on Mitt?

If the Pubbers end up giving the nomination to MR (or to anybody else for that matter), it will simply be because it's considered bad form to not even field a candidate. Mitt will lose. But unlike other potential GOP nominees, who would also lose, Mitt won’t suffer grievously – he has a personal fortune to fall back on and no political career to nurture. As for any personal expenses he might incur, not to worry - some way, somehow, he'll be reimbursed. Not in any [publicly] accountable way, to be sure, but a lot of our so-called "public life" really works exactly like that.

As long as Mitt mouths the right platitudes, the Pubber Base will be satisfied. Or as satisfied as that cranky lot will ever be. Though sooner or later, he'll have to confront what a lot of folks consider the 'strangeness of being a Mormon' - he'll not be able to song and dance his way around that one. As long as Mitt doesn’t panic, seem evasive, or claim “Americans aren’t voting for a Preacher in Chief, they’re voting for a CINC,” he’ll do just fine.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“If Obama managed to survive his religious test, so will Mitt – unless he reacts badly if a reporter asks to see his underwear.”

NINE:

Why on earth would anybody care what George Will thinks? Why should even George himself care? [And, no George, that question about Palin doesn't "answer itself" - if you want to make the point, you'll have to work a little harder than that.]

As for Palin being entrustable with the nuclear football, who would have thought (and why?) Obama should have been so entrusted? What does one have to do, in Will's mind, to be "ready" to handle the nukeball?

All of this is actually moot, though, since no US president will ever be (nor has ever been) entrusted with that kind of power. People are fools who think otherwise. Think about it…there’s too much at stake to allow one man (actually, it’s supposed to be two) the option of dropping the big one. The beauty of this is, none of the presidents ever caught on to this: If a US nuke ever gets launched, no president will have anything to do with it.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Think about it this way: If a newly-elected president said to his aide “Get that thing [the nukeball] away from me – I want nothing to do with it,” do you really think we couldn’t walk into Armageddon if the [real] Powers-that-Be so decreed?”

TEN:

"...hundreds of millions of dollars backed by frozen assets of Gadhafi's regime."

Wait a minute. Freezing assets is one thing. But is Italy about to seize those assets? By what right? Sounds like blatant theft to me. How can the international banking system be trusted if one nation can just take what belongs to another?

Italy has in effect declared war on Libya. This recent outpouring of Italian support surely sound like acts of war. So I guess Italy shouldn’t be surprised if Libya retaliates – directly (somehow) against Italy...on Italian soil (are they truly ready for this?).

Since the rebels are so keen that Gadhafi relinquish power, maybe he should turn the tables by asking: “If I leave, how will you [the rebel leadership] determine who or what ends up being in charge? For example, will you call for elections? Can anybody run for office? Could I run for office?!! Suppose I am reelected, do you rebel all over again or do you support me?”

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“Not only is NATO violating its mandate (as any child can see), but not enough people are asking pretty basic questions.”

ELEVEN:

"After previous denials by military officials..." [that Egyptian security forces subjected female prisoners to “virginity checks”].

Why deny what was done? Are they not proud of doing their duty for the good of the state? Surely there must be some kind of military medal in this for the "testers." Let's see, the citation could read, "For courage above and beyond....while in the act of probing enemy territory."

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"If asked to do something you wouldn't want widely known, DON'T DO IT."

TWELVE:

@ Murray... You claim, "And Israel would never use a nuclear weapon except in self defense. Everyone knows that."

Well, I for one, don't "know that." Perhaps by "self defense" you include Ye Olde Pre-emptive strike based on speculation and exaggerated intel? Sorry, but that's not my idea of self-defense. Perhaps what Israel really needs, besides some occasional minister stoking the fires by spouting off his big bazoo, is more prayer. Couldn't hurt.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"No good can come from putting greater faith in nukes than in your Lord."

THIRTEEN:

 “the progress and stability the EU sought in the Arab world would depend on an improved relationship between religions there.”

Is that so? Is that what the … EU … wants? If so, would it matter at all what the locals might want? Or will those same locals start to feel the heavy hand of EU politically-correct colonialism at work in their homelands?

“European Union leaders assured senior religious figures on Monday they would defend the freedom of belief in the Middle East…” Good men and women, it is not your place to “defend the freedom of belief in the Middle East.”

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“The EU has enough problems of its own which these leaders should be attending to – such as, how on earth did the EU get sucked into the US scheme of Libyan regime change?”

FOURTEEN:

QUOTE: Obama hailed Dempsey as "one of our nation's respected and combat-tested [huh????] generals. :UNQUOTE.

Please, somebody correct me if I’m wrong, but I have failed to find any evidence that General Dempsey ever saw a single day in combat. Yeah, he had “led” troops as their headquarters commander, but that’s not the same thing. I wonder if this guy had ever been shot at or even had gunfire directed toward his general vicinity.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“You know, one of the reasons we engage in these strategically-unimportant (and expensive) wars is to give desk-jockeys a chance to ‘earn’ some medals. Looks good on the resume. Just saying.”

FIFTEEN:

[This recent story concerned one man single-handedly fighting off 30 Taliban in Afghanistan. Frankly, I found this story unbelievable for two very good reasons (though there were others based on the telling of the story itself): In war time, truth is always the first casualty; the folks on the home front need heroes to glorify. If, however, Corporal Dipprasad Pun of the [Nepalese] Royal Gurkha Rifles really did this deed, one has to wonder how he wasn’t awarded the highest medal for valor – the Victoria Cross. Here’s the link to the news story itself:\

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/865068-gurkha-soldier-honoured-by-queen-after-killing-30-taliban ]

I wish the entire cast of "The Expendables" could have sat down and watched a video of Pun's actions, with a narrator telling them, "THIS is how it's done."

On a more serious note: I wonder what motivates Pun. Does he have any thoughts on the politics of this war? Is he a willing member of an army who places total trust in his Queen that she is doing the right thing? Or what?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"These private motivators are as much of what makes a man as is his physical courage. Without asking about these, then we'd be saying we don't care much about him as an individual - only as an example of courage and good fortune."

SIXTEEN:

"In recent days, [2008 presidential candidate Edwards’] legal team also argued that the secret spending was designed to hide the affair from his wife, Elizabeth, who died of cancer in December, and not to aid his campaign."

Let me see if I understand this: Two wealthy supporters (note the word “supporters”) dished out all this money so that Edwards could “hide the affair from his wife?” Their “support” had nothing to do with protecting Edwards’ image which, if sullied, would have sunk his bid for the White House?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“If a former FEC chairman could actually have the balls to say (which he did say) the payments did not violate the law, that shows where he’s coming from – and challenges that body’s credibility.”

SEVENTEEN:

RULE #1: Don't trust any of the Dem/Pubs. Only by voting for independents will we free ourselves from political party infighting.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

"Join the New American Revolution: Declare your independence by voting for independents. There is no other way."

EIGHTEEN:

@Miriam, This is precisely how we lose our liberty to the whims of ever expanding executive power. To wit:

The 2002 Resolution included these words [emphasis mine]: “The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States AS HE DETERMINES to be necessary and appropriate…”

As for the 2001 Authorization [per Wikipedia, again with my emphasis]: ‘The authorization granted the President the authority to use all "necessary and appropriate force" against those whom He DETERMINED "planned, authorized, committed or aided" the September 11th attacks.’

Suppose the President had decided to use nuclear weapons against (say) three mountain hideouts (just to be sure we "got him"], one of which (though not knowing which one] was where he “knew” Bin Laden was hiding. Since the Authorization allowed all “necessary and appropriate force” as determined by the president, nukes and overkill wouldn’t have been taken off the table. I have a problem with that, and so should have Congress.

And finally we have this, from the Constitution: “The Congress shall have power to…declare war.” It doesn’t say Congress shall have power to grant “authorizations” or “resolutions” – for neither is a declaration of war. Basically, by allowing the president to make sole determination, the Congress passed the buck. Personally, that’s not why I vote for my Congressman – to be a buckpasser.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012

“We’re still very primitive when it comes to worshipping a strongman and letting him have his way, be it some tinhorn dictator or our own president. We can’t seem to just say NO.”

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party

“Just for once, I’d like to see some type of cataclysmic world-changing political event take place that would be too overwhelming for the news media censors to spin, minimize, or cover up. Come to think of it, my campaign for the US presidency could become such an event. Stay tuned.”

Contract me a bpa_cinc@yahoo.com