I was thinking about the $35 billion the Fed infused into the system today. Some thoughts:

1. My understanding is that the Fed bought securities that were, in reality, home mortgages. In other words, the Fed now has the right to foreclose on homes... Sort of makes the government part of the capitalist system. Is that not a type of socialism?

2. Is this not hypocritical? On the one hand, conservatives believe markets should rule, i.e., if there is a bubble, let it be. On the other hand, if the rich stand to lose some money, it is the Federal Reserve to the rescue. I smell a double standard.

3. $35 billion is a bunch of bucks. Enough to pay for all the children in the nation to have health care. Enough to bring all of our bridges up to par. Enough to fund 3.5 months of Iraq. Could not the money have been put elsewhere? (Although, I guess it is just an investment... and the government will get its money back. On the other hand, isn't investing in infrastructure and children just as important?).

4. What happens when the markets stabilize? When the price of securities go up, will the Fed sell its portfolio at a market rate, or will it take a loss and allow the hedge funds to rake in the profits?

I have seen no blog ask, let alone answer these, questions.

This is delicious irony. Bush fires law and order US Attorneys and the right is carrying his water.

This is yet another example of Bush not being a conservative, but the conservatives supporting him, nevertheless.

Ever since he was elected, I could not understand why conservatives, who claimed the moral and ethical high ground, would support him. There is no question that Bush is not a conservative. What he is, I don't know, but conservative he is not.

So, he fires US attorneys for political reasons. I really did not expect the conservative movement to run away, but it shows, once again, that they are shills, unwilling to hold his feet to the fire.

I challenge them to explain how Bush is any more conservative than Clinton was. Or how having Bush in power is any better, or worse, than having Kerry and Gore as president would have been.

Rove pulled the wool over their collective eyes.

I am a firm believe that the conservative movement, if shown for what it really is, commands a small percentage of the populace (the same, by the way, goes for the liberal movement).

With the exception of its view on sex (intercourse, that is), I think we are really a nation that agrees with the political, economic, and social position of the Catholic church. Were I a believer in Christ being the messiah, I would be a Catholic (or at least a protestant).

I have a new slogan. At least for me.

Two questions:

1. Is anyone else using it (no way I coined the phrase)?

2. Is it any good?

Here it is:

"You can't spell bullshit without Bush"

I can't do polls, so, if you happen to read this, just leave a comment.

Boy, howdy, I am frustrated with President Bush.

The way I see it, we have two choices in Iraq (the same two we had in March 2003). 1) Go balls to the wall, mobilize the entire country to the war effort and kick Iraqi ass and 2) stay out or get out.

Bush is taking half measures. Powell Doctrine? Screw that. Let's do it on the cheap, they will welcome us. Bush is from Mars, everyone else is here on Earth. From day one he has fought with half measures.

Sure, no-one likes a war. But, if Bush had said in February 2003: "We have to win in Iraq. For that reason, I am mobilizing every Guard and Reserve unit we have and reinstituting the draft, and raising taxes" I think the nation would have responded. But, nooooo, he has to fight this half-assed and destroy the budget.

I was mobilized. I went because I felt loyalty to my colleages (I could have resigned much earlier). For what? For nothing.

I don't hate this war. I don't hate that I was mobilized. I don't even hate Bush. I hate that Bush has led an adminstration on what may have been the only path to defeat possible. I don't know why he has done it. I can only assume incompetence.

I just finished reading "Flags Of Our Fathers." It is a poignant and very powerful tribute to the father of the author, James Bradley. John Henry (Doc) Bradley was one of the men in the famous Mount Suribachi photo which played such a part in America's resurgence of patriotism when things looked their darkest during World War II.

Reading this book was painful for me. I have always taken pride in the fact that I was a Corpsman in Vietnam. "Doc" Bradley was the epitome of courage and selflessness that so many equate with that particular military job. I remember my days in Hospital Corps School at Balboa Hospital in San Diego, California. I remember my weapons and survival training at Camp Pendleton. I remember the "old" veterans who taught us. They talked about such courage... About how Navy Corpsmen had more Medals of Honor per capita than any other rating in the military. They worked to build the kind of Esprit De Corps and pride that came so naturally to all the men I knew then.

I've known a lot of United States Marines during my lifetime. They are a special breed. As a rule, they HATE Navy "guys".. But they love Corpsmen as one of their brothers. I can't describe that feeling to anyone who has never experienced it. But nobody respects Marines more than I do.

Corpsmen, as a rule, are compassionate people. Most, like me, chose that work because they were basically non-violent but wanted to serve by helping others. "Doc" Bradley was the gold standard by which all should be judged.

In this wonderfully researched and written book, James Bradley paints a perfect portrait of bravery, selflessness and character. His father's strength and wisdom shines from every page. "Doc" Bradley is smiling down on his son.

That said, I wanted the point of this blog to be how politicians have not changed since time began. About how arrogant and selfish they are. About how corrupt they become when power seeps into their souls. But I'm going to do that blog tomorrow because after reading the first paragraphs, I want this one to be a positive tribute to "Doc" Bradley and all the Corpsmen who have served and sacrificed. I want this one to be a tribute to the United States Marines who served, suffered and died so I could have the freedom to write it. I want this one to be a tribute to all the military people who have served and are serving. Please remember one thing: the men and women who risk all don't make policy. They are the pawns in the monster's chess game.

OK. Foley is creepy. Good thing he resigned.

But, the worst thing about it is that he is a Republican. Republicans claim the morality high ground, "vote for us or you go to hell". They want to defend marraige. They want to put criminals away forever. When they do something, they should face the same. Hang 'em high.

On the other hand, Democrats are more sympathetic. They know everyone has faults and want to forgive and rehabilitate. While a Democrat who stumbles (or gets a blow job in the oval office) should pay, I have more sympathy when they fall.

But, God forbid a Democrat should be a racist or a misogynist. That is their anti-thesis. These Democrats should be voted out of office. So, the Republicans have glee when Gore drives an SUV.

On the other hand, we kind of expect Republicans to be unsympathetic, rascist, women haters. So, when Allen turns out to be a racist, don't be too angry. Sure, he should not be a Senator, but what did we expect.

In other words, when a politician is a hypocrite, it is bothersome. And, Republicans have, to coin a phrase, a bigger cross to bear because they have hoisted themselves on their own petards (wow, two cliches in one sentence).

We have stereotypical views about those in our parties. I truly wish that fundamentalist Christians would live the life that I believe Jesus would like them to live. But, if they are like Bush, I am afraid that is not to be.

OK, I have listed ways we are losing our freedoms and Al Quaeda is winning. It is only fair to show that the free world is coming back.

I received an e-mail the other day reading that British Airways is allowing carry-on luggage again. That is coupled with the TSA announcement that we can carry toothpaste in our carry-on luggage.

Small steps. But, we have to take things where we can get them these days.

We will have won the war on terror, with respect to airlines anyway, when we can get back to the concourses without having a ticket.

Just read the article on how the new HQ for Iraqi policemen is a shambles because it was built poorly, with millions of US dollars.

Let's be clear. We are NOT losing this war because the military is doing everything right. We are losing in spite of it.

Under Rumsfeld, it is true that the military has become smaller. But that does not mean there are fewer Americans (or American-paid workers) on the ground. They just have been outsourced.

I guess it is a debate as to whether the military or the private sector can do things better.

I bet, had the US Army engineering corps (not the Corps of Engineers) been sent in to build the HQ, it would have been constructed well.

I had meant for this to be a periodic series based upon interesting news. But, it is coming fast and furious.

Now, three generals say Rumsfeld is incompetent.

Perhaps the title should be How Bush Is Losing the War on Terror. But, no, I will keep it as is. Nevertheless, since the capture of Baghdad, Bush has continously succeeded in snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Now we learn that the war on Iraq has increased<\b> the danger to the US.