Making the right call....

Way to let the Palestinians have the minimal amount of dignity that goes along with being able to pay their civil servants (and keep the government operating!)

The European Commission, the E.U.'s executive body, agreed Monday to provide $144 million to the Palestinian Authority, designating most of it for social programs and energy bills. About $20 million could be used for salaries.

Let's get this straight: I do not endorse suicide bombers or suicide bombings as a tactic. I do think we need to acknowledge the fact that the Palestinians only wanted change from a corrupt government, they don't necessarily believe that Israel shouldn't exist. It's important that we not let the Palestinians Authority fail and that we not allow the government to fail, because the alternative is much, much worse.

Ideology over sound policy: A day in the life of the executive branch

Here is another great example of Bush appointees politicizing policy that was formerly non-partisan.

A State Department reorganization of analysts involved in preventing the spread of deadly weapons has spawned internal turmoil, with more than half a dozen career employees alleging in interviews that political appointees sought to punish long-term employees whose views they considered suspect.

"views they considered suspect" means "views that didn't agree 100% with the White House"

The career policy people at the State Department didn't want to subscribe to the John Bolton-Dick Cheney-George Bush "greeted as liberators"/"last throes" dementia that passes for foreign policy in the White House, so they had to leave.

Jimmy Carter Gets It Right

The United States reaction to the recent Palestinian elections has been just plain bad policy. First of all, you do not get people to meet you half way by isolating them, as Jimmy points out:

This common commitment to eviscerate the government of elected Hamas officials by punishing private citizens may accomplish this narrow purpose, but the likely results will be to alienate the already oppressed and innocent Palestinians, to incite violence, and to increase the domestic influence and international esteem of Hamas. It will certainly not be an inducement to Hamas or other militants to moderate their policies.

As soon as this election was over, Condi Rice was out there saying that we can't deal with Hamas because they don't recognize Israel's right to exist. You didn't hear the Hamas leaders saying that, you heard Israel and the US reminding the world of that. It seems to me that they realized that policy wasn't going to fly as the ruling party and as long as they didn't start shouting it again, we could work with them until they officially removed it from their party platform, which I believe would have happened in the next year, IF we had done things right. We could have looked for ways to work with the new government by finding things we had in common and while still letting the world know that their stated claims were just plain wrong.

Isolating a group of people is not a good way to get them to come over to your side, the Palestinian people aren't going to give us the benefit of the doubt on this. They are going to look at us as hypocrites for Bush stumping all over the world with his fake democracy-talk then being pissy when his side doesn't win a fair election. We also lose face in the eyes of the Palestinians because we’re supporting the corrupt government they just threw out.

I actually do agree with one of Bush's statements on this;

"It's a wake-up call to the leadership. Obviously, people were not happy with the status quo. And so the elections should open the eyes of the old guard there in the Palestinian territories. The people are demanding honest government. The people want services.”

I’m glad we could agree on something, George. So, recognizing this fact, we are going to cut off all aid to the Palestinians Authority, basically the only revenue they receive, and let their workers go unpaid and their poor go hungry? If Bush really believes this wouldn't the proper policy to be work with government of the people with whom we, in theory, agree?

I think it would serve out best interests to walk with a little more humility and honor the decisions made by the Palestinian people, work with Hamas where we agree and lean on them to change where we differ. I believe if we had taken this path then we could have gotten them to acknowledge the right of Israel to exist within a reasonable amount of time.

Why I'm a Democrat

This week President Bush signed a bill into law that illustrates very well the values that make me a Democrat. The Republicans were fixin' to cut some spending, get back to the fiscal conservatism that hasn't existed in their party since Richard Nixon (or possibly Eisenhower). So what programs do they cut? Medicare, Medicaid and Student Loans. The entire bill will cut $40 billion in spending over 5 years, lets see how that adds up in the grand scheme of things.

-We're expected to run deficits of about $1.3 trillion through 2010.
-The Iraq War has cost us about $241 billion so far. And Bush recently asked for $72.4 billion more for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for 2006. (where are those WMD's? where's Osama?)
-The budget shortfall for this year is expected to be $400 billion
-Bush has proposed a $439 billion dollar defense budget for FY 2007.
-The cost of the Bush tax cuts is $1.7 trillion. And that is assuming they are not extended or made permanent.

So there is a lot of money at the federal level and the United States is in a lot of debt, but instead of really taking on the issue the Republicans choose to take away money from those that need it most, just so they can have a fancy bill signing ceremony with an insulting sign that reads "Controlling Federal Spending." Saying George Bush controls federal spending is like saying Cecil Fielder controlled his wieght. (Oh, and, the bill isn't actually law anyway because the house and Senate passed different versions and the GOP says they aren't going to bother fixing it, since when has the Constitution mattered to these guys anyway?)

So, this is why I'm a Democrat, because the Democratic party would NEVER cut $12 billion in student loans and call it a victory. Bill Clinton brought us into surpluses without screwing the poor and elderly, and he actually did control federal spending and practiced responsible governance. (with or without the fancy Kinko's sign on the signing desk) Those are the values that I appreciate and that is (one of the reasons) I'm a Democrat!

The funny thing is that he is maybe the 4th or 5th most liberal person on the Board of Supervisors

Just the other day, District 11 Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval ensured that he would never be elected to office at the Federal level:

Colmes: The United States should not have a military?

Sandoval: That's correct.

Colmes: Are you kidding me?

Sandoval: The United States should not have a military. All in all, we would be in much, much, much better shape.

Sandoval got invited on to Hannity & Colmes and then gave them everything they could want and more. He was wrong and stupid and he'll never be able to win a higher office with that kind of message, but maybe he was being honest, I don't know.

In San Francisco we view this as "what an idiot, why would you say that even if you believed it?" and I'm sure the Red state folks are just using it as reassurance that the Democratic party has been hijacked by the far left. It just gives me a chuckle.

But the really funny thing, to those that know, is that Gerardo Sandoval would never be considered the most liberal person on the Board of Supes. He would probably come in generously at 3 and conservatively as the 5th most liberal among the 11 Supes.

Maybe he would win the contest for least media saavy, though.