trifecta

"You know, I was campaigning in Chicago and somebody asked me, is there ever any time where the budget might have to go into deficit? I said only if we were at war or had a national emergency or were in recession. Little did I realize we'd get the trifecta." —President George W. Bush, Charlotte, North Carolina, Feb. 27, 20021

For some time now, people around the world have been trying to guess Bush's War Trifecta . 2 Afghanistan and Iraq, sure, those are the easy ones. But who will we topple next? Iran? Syria? North Korea? Just as you think you have the sure thing picked out, the deck is again shuffled.

Hopefully, we will never know. Hopefully, Bush and all his monkeys will be voted out of office in 2006 and 2008 (Dare I hope that my own Senator, Senator Allard, one of the five worst senators, goes too?)3

But the building of permanent bases does bring a shadow over these hopes. It's kind of funny that Congress voted against the continuation of the construction for permanent bases in Iraq and cut off funding. 4

However, they did not cut off funding for the war, so I imagine those bases have not seen a loss of money. Ha ha, kind of a left hand, right hand situation, get it?

Now all someone needs to do is stop the expansion of our permanent base in South Korea.

A little recap if you will. Known in South Korea as 6-25, the 1950 war divided the country along the 38th parallel. It is the most heavily fortified border in the world.5 Oddly enough, the war was between a Democracy and a Republic. I guess there are many places where "Democracy" doesn't really mean it.

What was the war about? Who knows?6 And more importantly, how the hell does anyone see North Korea as a threat?

Yeah, I know, they have:

1. a million-man army ready to cross a demilitarized zone just 25 miles from Seoul
2. array of missiles that can reach Japan from a launching site in Taepodong,
3. missiles that could hit Alaska.
4. exports missile parts and know-how. Iran's Shahab-3 missiles, for instance, owe much to North Korean technology

thanks http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_02/b3815043.htm

Oooh, and let's not for get this beauty of TERROR. North Korea counterfeits our money!!!! 7

Okay, they also have some nuclear weapons. But seriously folks, North Korea isn't going to do anything (without immense US provocation and cornering) and everyone knows it.

I mean, why would they bomb Alaska? And run the risk of losing that oil? 8 We have 32,000 troops stationed in South Korea now. We plan to add another 20,000.

Hence, the expansion of the US base in Daechuri. Paying, bribing, bullying and bulldozing the residents away from this suddenly urgent need to flex our muscles for the North.

Really, what it is doing it adding to the Trifecta. The Trifecta of Terrorists, as I like to call it. You see, now that we have alienated the civilians of Afghanistan and Iraq and sent them running to the arms of our worst enemies, we would like to do the same with Korea. Both of them, in fact.

The real problem with the permanent base is that for some reason, South Korea doesn't see their neighbors as their biggest threat. We hold that honor. But perhaps this is true wherever our permanent bases are constructed. Because a weeks worth of protesting in a supposedly democratic nation that ends with suppression, water cannons, barbed wire and over 200 Koreans injured, does not mean a warm welcome for the US troops occupying the new base. Or the country those troops come from. US. 9

~Lila Schow
Because Responsible Citizens Clean Up After Their Government
http://goodusgov.org/

1 http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushism-trifecta.htm
2 http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=trifecta
3 http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4627027,00.html
4 http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/9104/1/321/
5 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12591413/
6 http://www.answers.com/topic/korean-war
7 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4672902.stm
8 http://www.alaskawild.org/campaigns_arctic_oil_more.html
9 http://uk.news.yahoo.com/13052006/323/thousands-south-korea-urge-troops-leave.html

Battered Woman Syndrome

I know a woman named Iraq. Iraq had a really messed up childhood. Man after man breezed through the door, all taking on the role of a father figure. None were good.

There was the controlling, money hungry British guy who insisted on living with them, even after the divorce. That was not fun for Iraq. But then, another man entered the scene and killed the British guy and took his place. He was killed by another guy, and when that guy died, Iraq was stuck with his brother as her "father figure."

Then she hit high school and started dating the jock group. She was with this one guy for a while, but then it was decided that she would be better off with this other dude, Saddam.

A moment's indulgence about this Saddam guy. In middle school, the cops helped him try to kill Iraq's father (the guy who killed that British guy). It didn't work and the cops had to arrest Saddam. But he was a juvie and got out pretty quickly. But Iraq's father at the time, the brother of the dead guy, had Saddam arrested again.

Needless to say, Saddam was pretty pleased with himself once he started dating Iraq. Not only did he get to screw her, but a lot of her daddies as well. Iraq wasn't thinking too clearly at this point, and it can be argued (given how she was raised) that she didn't have much free will.

Regardless of how it happened, she married Saddam. And he beat, tortured and destroyed her soul her for the next twenty-four years. He killed some of her children. He humiliated her. He kept her down so low, she didn't dare ask for help. The few times Iraq tried to get away, Saddam punished her as horribly as he could. He forced her to work and took all her money. He prostituted her to his friends. Yes, Saddam had a great time with Iraq.

You know though, it was a small town. People noticed. They talked. They urged the cops to do something. But the cops wouldn't. They had always liked that Saddam guy. Sure, he could be a loose cannon, but he took care of them. Gassed up their cop cars for free and all that. Anyway, who were they to peek through the curtains of someone else's house? They had their own problems and if they tried to clean up all the failed marriages in town...well, you get the idea.

Until one day there came a BIG MISCOMMUNICATION over a rich neighbor. Saddam thought he could do this one thing. The cops were pretty sure he wouldn't go through with it. But he surprised them and the cops had to put him in his place. As you can imagine, to an abuser such as Saddam, this didn't go over well. He stewed. He got angrier with Iraq. Things got nasty.

The cops tried to pressure him. But he only took it out on Iraq. Then one day, he told the cops he was going to stop cutting them all those favors. The free gas and such. So the cops decided it was time to defend Iraq from her abusive husband.

They called the media and invited them to ride along. They could have just waited until Saddam showed up at work and quietly arrested him by his car. But the cops weren't into that shit. They wanted BIG. LOUD. SHINY. I mean, come on! The sheriff was up for reelection the next year. Finally he could shut up all those busy bodies who'd complained on behalf of Iraq for more than two decades.

Two decades of angry letters from the towns folk really start to pile up.

The sheriff figured this would work to everyone's benefit. Because, you see, though Saddam ran the business, legally it was all in Iraq's name, a gift from her mother that all her daddies hadn't been able to take.

BOOM! They blew the door in. All of the door, actually, windows too. Every SWAT member within a tri-county area rushed into Iraq's home. The beat the shit out of Saddam. Killed some of his kids. Killed some of Iraq's. It's not like anyone cared anyway, besides, the sheriff decided not to keep count of "collateral damage" and such.

Legally, it's still a big mess. The cops didn't have a warrant or anything. Saddam's sitting in jail, throwing his food all over the place and flinging poop at the guards.

But the real tragedy is Iraq. You see, the cops never left her house. They moved in. To protect her, even though her husband was in jail and those bad daddies were long gone. And they didn't turn on any of her services, so basic needs like electricity and water are iffy at best. And all that damage to the house? They just left it. Oh, every now and again some naive cop tries to put a board over the window to keep out the flies. Until he gets busted by the sheriff and made to baby-sit all Iraq's kids.

Jeez, she has a lot too. Didn't that woman have anything better to do? Oh, I guess not, huh?

But without water, sewage, electricity or even some friggen' toys, those kids were really acting up. Sometimes, to make it easier, a few would disappear. It's not like anyone missed them.

So Iraq is all, "thank you very much, I think we'll be fine now." But the cops aren't buying it. The sheriff knows how fucked up Iraq is. She can't take care of herself. She's a looser. I mean really, you think if you gave her a tools and a manual she'd figure out the plumbing? Come on folks, she's a girl for Christ Sake!

The sheriff, who more and more townsfolk are beginning to suspect is really a Monkey, hits upon The Great Idea! Have one of his deputies marry Iraq. Then everything will be right as rain.

Only, that deputy is kind of an ass. He's all saying one thing about empowerment, then doing the other by locking Iraq in her own home while he goes to work in the company she technically owns. And with all this "empowerment" talk and counseling by the townsfolk, Iraq is getting a little bitchy. She doesn't always have dinner ready. She leaves his laundry in a pile on the floor. And she sure as fuck isn't putting out.

The kids get into it. Tie the deputy's shoelaces together, put sugar in his gas tank. Iraq sees this isn't how she wants to live. She hems and haws and kind of asks the deputy for divorce. He bitch-slaps her. It's what she gets, right? Tells her to obey his rules, or else. The beatings start almost immediately. Soon it's hourly that Iraq gets knocked around. Neighbors, kids and even Iraq herself try to fight back. But who do you call in this situation?

The cops? The sheriff?

Iraq is trapped. So she thinks, maybe, just maybe, if I'm a big enough bitch I can at least move him out of the house and onto the lawn. Surely he can't like this? Surely he will get tired and leave?

No, Iraq. I hate to break it to you. The deputy, the sheriff, the cops won't leave you alone. Not until the business is theirs and run into the ground. Good luck with that insurgency though. 'Cause you've got this rich neighbor lady. Iran...now that woman is HOT!!!

~Lila Schow
Because Responsible Citizens Clean Up After Their Government
http://goodusgov.org/

If you're with us you're fucked

I remember after the towers collapsed, Monkey In Charge Bush posed this question. Why does the world hate us so? He had an answer, but it was lame. If you remember it went along the lines of jealousy and hating our freedoms. Could we get any more highschool?

I have a better answer. It comes from this Newsweek story. Once upon a time, an Afghan man sheltered an injured Navy SEAL after the soldier's team had been attacked by the Taliban. In spite of the risks, he provided the SEAL with food, water and shelter. He even helped contact US authorities to evacuate him. Doing this cost him his business, his home and his possessions as neighbors and Taliban gunmen ran him out of town.

How did we repay him? With a new home, protection and gratitude? AS IF!!! We imprisoned and interrogated him for his ties to al Qaeda, of course.

Now tell me again, Monkey. Why do they hate us?

~Lila Schow
Because Responsible Citizens Clean Up After Their Governmenthttp://goodusgov.org/

Bush Plan To Reduce Prices At The Pump

April 25, 2006 President Bush released a plan intended to lower escalating gas prices. The President's Four-Part Plan To Confront High Gasoline Prices Includes:
1. Ensuring That American Consumers Are Treated Fairly At The Gas Pump.
2. Promoting Greater Fuel Efficiency.
3. Boosting Our Supplies Of Crude Oil And Gasoline.

• The President Is Directing EPA Administrator Steve Johnson To Use All His Available Authority To Grant Waivers That Would Relieve Critical Fuel Supply Shortages - As He Did After Last Year's Hurricanes. Under Federal air quality laws, some areas of the country are required to use a fuel blend called reformulated gasoline. This year, we are undergoing a rapid transition in the primary ingredient in reformulated gas - from MTBE to ethanol. State and local officials in the Northeast and in Texas worry that supplies could run low. To ensure that there are not needless restrictions to get gasoline to the pump, the EPA should be able to meet the request of officials seeking to waive local fuel requirements on a temporary basis.
• The President Is Also Directing Administrator Johnson To Bring Together Governors To Form A New Task Force To Confront The Larger Problem Of Too Many Localized Fuel Blends (Boutique Fuels).
• The President Calls On Congress To Allow Refiners To Make Minor Modifications To Their Refineries Without Having To Endure Years Of Delays In The Approval Process, And The President Also Calls On Congress To Simplify And Speed Up The Permitting Process For Refinery Construction And Expansion.
• Congress Needs To Send The President A Bill This Year Authorizing Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) Exploration.

4. Investing In Alternatives To Oil, So That We Can Dramatically Reduce Our Demand For Gasoline. (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/04/20060425-2.html)

I fully support investigating corporate malfeasance, but why relax hard-won environmental standards? Why are Boutique Fuels threatening? Oh, I suppose they are intimidating to the dominating big fuel companies. But I thought our democracy was based in our full embrace of capitalism, and isn’t competition the foundation of all good capitalistic democracies? Uh oh, look-out, here comes the all too familiar “cut bureaucratic red-tape” and “ANWR” debate.

Why the bureaucracy surrounding fuel formulations and refineries? I don’t know anything about these topics, but I can only imagine how greedy business owners would take advantage of lax policies. Do you really want to be breathing the exhaust of vehicles pumped up on rarely tested fuels?

And now, let’s discuss the infamous ANWR. Why do we need to spoil Alaska’s Arctic Refuge for oil that will not solve our current or future energy problems? Senator Leahy asks you to consider the following:

• Recent assessments indicate that the 1002 area of ANWR probably holds roughly 3.2 billion barrels of economically recoverable oil (at ~$22/barrel) (USGS, 1998). By contrast, the United States uses more than 19 million barrels per day (DOE, 2000a), which is about 7 billion barrels per year. Spread over many years of production, ANWR oil would not significantly increase available oil resources, nor would it greatly reduce the need for imported oil.
• Oil production from ANWR would not begin until 7-12 years after Congressional approval (DOE, 2000b), so it would have no effect on current supplies and prices of oil and gasoline.
  The price of oil is determined by the global market. The U.S. produces 9% of the world's oil (DOE, 1999) and holds less than 3% of the world's oil reserves (DOE, 2000c). A small increase in domestic production would not significantly affect the price of oil on the global market, nor would it decrease the price of gasoline or heating oil in the U.S.
• Alaskan oil does not make its way to the Northeast United States. Instead, it is mostly transported to the West Coast or exported to Asia (GAO, 1999). ANWR oil would have no effect on the supply and price of home heating oil in Northeast states like Vermont.
  California generates less than 1% of its electricity from oil (DOE, 2000d). The corresponding number for the Unites States is only 3% (DOE, 2000a). ANWR oil would have no effect on California's ongoing electricity crisis, nor would it significantly affect electricity supplies elsewhere in the U.S.
• The United States uses roughly two-thirds of its petroleum for transportation, primarily in motor vehicles (DOE, 2000a). In the long term, a modest increase in vehicle fuel efficiency could save far more oil than ANWR could ever produce (NRDC, 2001). (http://leahy.senate.gov/issues/environment/anwr.html)

The Cost of Illegal Workers

A 2004 study on illegal immigrants has been appearing in the media outlets this week. The Center of Immigration Studies (CIS) August 2004 "independent, non-partisan and non-profit research" study "The High Cost of Cheap Labor" claims that each year illegal workers cost the US government more than $26 billion in services.

According to CBS 4 News, the study claims the largest expenses were found in "Medicaid, treatment for the uninsured, and food assistance programs, including food stamps and free school lunches."

But as CBS 4 went on to point out, illegal immigrants can't actually access federal aid programs. Therefore the area the US taxpayer spends money on for actual cross-the-borders illegals is medical treatment for the uninsured.

Contrary to what has been portrayed recently in the media and among groups hoping to end illegal immigration, in no state does the percentage of illegals without insurance outnumber the percentage of citizens without insurance.

The CIS study assumes that 2.7 million illegals are without insurance. Estimates show that nearly 44 million US citizens are in the same situation, a situation that lands one out of every six American children in poverty.

So if 2.7 million uninsured illegals cost the US government $1.6 billion a year (CIS estimates that treatment for illegal uninsured is $591 per person) then the 44 million uninsured citizens cost us $27 billion every year. Clearly we have a problem, but not with illegals coming and taking our services.

Lets look again to the other federal expenses associated with illegal immigrants. Medicaid and food assistance programs are included because children of illegals who are born in the US are citizens and have access to these areas of aid. In Colorado alone, Medicaid rolls have grow by 59%, placing a huge burden on taxpayers. Is this due to legal children of illegals?

Wal-Mart led the trend that other huge corporations now take advantage of; "underpaying their employees and using the states to subsidize workers' health care." Yes, business such as Wal-Mart, which turns a profit of $10.5 billion each year, are doing so at your expense. You make up for it with your tax dollars. You line the CEO's pockets when you buy goods from their stores.

Lets look at this Immigration issue for what it really is, Americans. It is always easy to pick out the bottom rung on the social ladder and abuse them. But to blame rising health care costs on the poorest of the poor is little more than victim blaming. Lets get angry at the folks really responsible for this mess. Let's shift our focus to rally and pass legislation to stop this corporate profiteering.

~Lila Schow
Because Responsible Citizens Clean Up After Their Government
http://goodusgov.org/

The Joke of Genocide

Despite publicity from George Clooney, his dad, the entire staff of ER, I Heart Huckabees and a year-old episode of Boston Legal -- Sudan simply does not matter.

Last Sunday, Jodie and I participated in a Boulder rally and march to end the genocide in Darfur. Five hundred of us, so few the event was held on the pseudo-friendly Pearl Street Mall rather than at the State Capital.

The next day, over 75,000 marched for Immigration rights and many more participated in the Day without an Immigrant Boycott. I'll leave immigration issues alone for another day. While I am reassured that so many can come together for human rights, I am bewildered over the lack of concern for human lives.

What is more, Jodie and I found ourselves hard pressed to find anything motivating from the speakers and coordinators of the event. The speeches were the same that we heard the year before. The actions by our government have remained essentially the same. Unmotivated.

I find it ironic that Darfur's genocide began the month before our invasion of Iraq. Our pledges of freedom, democracy and a life without fear have left one nation in a state of civil war. Our denial of any real assistance has left another in the bloody grip of genocide.

And yet, when the images and the history and the urges for action appear on our media, they come delivered by Oprah, not George W. Bush. Whatever hopes we have for those slaughtered by their government are taken from a context in which they could be given the urgency they deserve and placed on fictional scripts, re-enacted by Hollywood actors.

Will this month of Thursday night geno-tainment lead to a mass mobilization for Americans? Or will we be listening to the same tired speakers next year, wondering why it is only 500 of our neighbors have the conscious to care?

~Lila

Because Responsible Citizens Clean Up After Their Government
http://goodusgov.org/