The Mitt Romney discussion has made me very unhappy with the US tax code and Congress in general. Why should millionaire Mitt Romney pay a 15% tax rate, while poorer working people pay a significantely higher percentage? Paul O'Neill, former Secretary of Treasury, was just on Bloomberg Surveillance Midday, and said that the tax code is "unworthy" of the US.
Why do rich people hate America so much that they refuse to support it? And why does Congress accede to their wishes? Money! It just shows how corrupt the Congress is. Laws are up for sale to the highest bidder.
It's sad that all those graves in Arlington Cemetery were for nothing. America has become unjust and undemocratic. We are becoming the old Soviet Union or Nazi Germany, or something else equally bad. We have a department called "Homeland" Security, which sounds like it is straight out of Nazi Germany. Since when is "homeland" a good American word? The first thing Wikipedia says about "heimat" is that it is a German concept that has no simple English translation, although it is often expressed as "homeland." Wikipedia says, "Heimat is a German concept." I doubt that George Washington or Thomas Jefferson ever used the word "homeland," although I haven't researched it. (Searching the Washington papers in the Library of Congress, it appears to be used once, in a footnote by the editor about a Dutchman whom Washington knew.)
At the moment, I am inclined to support no candidate from a major party, Democratic or Republican, because I believe both parties are corrupt. One of the few politicians I support at the moment is Elizabeth Warren. Obama and the Democrats lost my vote when he threw her under the bus after she had worked tirelessly for the consumer protection bureau. Jamie Dimon, his fellow bank CEOs, their lawyers, their lobbyists, and their money, blocked her appointment.
This is a sad state of affairs, and you are part of it.
I hope that I won't go to jail under PIPA or SOPA for quoting from Wikipedia. Although maybe today is like the day back in 1846 when Henry Thoreau went to jail for refusing to pay his poll tax, leading to his seminal work on "Civil Disobedience." It's better to be in jail than to support a corrupt government.
Note: I am a Vietnam veteran (Army artillery) and a retired Foreign Service officer. My grandfather, a veteran of World War I, is buried in Arlington Cemetery. My father was a veteran of World War II and the Korean War.
We need a country that is more concerned about honor than money.
Friday, January 20, 2012
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
How Do We Stop the Iranian Bomb?
The Republican candidates, except for Ron Paul, are all hot and bothered about stopping Iran from getting the atomic bomb. But they never mention Israel's bomb. And they pretty much ignore Pakistan's bomb, and India's bomb. And they never mention America's bombs, Russia's bombs, China's bombs, Britain's bombs, etc. The responsible way to stop Iran would be to have a genuine, functioning non-proliferation regime, not one full of loopholes for any country determined to stay outside the regime.
The main impetus behind Iran's drive to build a bomb is Israel's bomb. It's not clear that the Iranians actually have a dedicated bomb development program, but it is clear that they want a nuclear infrastructure that would allow them to build a bomb in a relatively short time, if they decided that they needed one. And why would they need one, probably because they felt threatened by Israel. Of course, Israel feels threatened by Iran. But the cold war was basically about mutual threats between the US and Russia, and we both survived, so far.
If we were serious, about getting Iran to back off of its nuclear program, we all have to get serious about nuclear arms. The US and Russia both have to seriously disarm. Israel, Pakistan, and the rest have to give up their nuclear programs. George Bush actually increased cooperation with India's civil nuclear program, despite is military nuclear program, a step undermining non-proliferation globally, although it may have made sense bilaterally.
If the US were to invade Iran to shut down its nuclear program, by rights it should also invade Israel, Pakistan, North Korea, India, and other problem countries. Arguably, the older nuclear powers, the US and Russia, are grandfathered under the regime, although they are theoretically obligated to disarm, too.
The main impetus behind Iran's drive to build a bomb is Israel's bomb. It's not clear that the Iranians actually have a dedicated bomb development program, but it is clear that they want a nuclear infrastructure that would allow them to build a bomb in a relatively short time, if they decided that they needed one. And why would they need one, probably because they felt threatened by Israel. Of course, Israel feels threatened by Iran. But the cold war was basically about mutual threats between the US and Russia, and we both survived, so far.
If we were serious, about getting Iran to back off of its nuclear program, we all have to get serious about nuclear arms. The US and Russia both have to seriously disarm. Israel, Pakistan, and the rest have to give up their nuclear programs. George Bush actually increased cooperation with India's civil nuclear program, despite is military nuclear program, a step undermining non-proliferation globally, although it may have made sense bilaterally.
If the US were to invade Iran to shut down its nuclear program, by rights it should also invade Israel, Pakistan, North Korea, India, and other problem countries. Arguably, the older nuclear powers, the US and Russia, are grandfathered under the regime, although they are theoretically obligated to disarm, too.
Newt Gave Up on America
Newt Gingrich gave up on America when he shut down the government in 1995. A great country would not give up and quit. I'm still mad because it affected me directly. First, while I was assigned to the American Embassy in Warsaw to run the Maria Sklodowska Curie fund, named in honor Nobel Prize winner Marie Curie, the Republicans stopped funding it after two or three years, although we had signed a agreement with Poland to fund it for five years. A great country would honor its promises. So, don't count on the Republicans, especially Newt, to honor any promises, whether to pay interest on the national debt, make Social Security payments, or pay soldiers' salaries.
I was in the process of transferring from Poland to Italy at the State Department's request when Newt shut the government down. The US Embassy in Rome furloughed me, along with most employees, but it left me with no place to live. All my worldly possessions were in storage or in my car getting ready to leave Warsaw for Rome in one hour when they called and said, "Don't leave." But my wife and I had no place to stay in Warsaw. It worked out, but no thanks to Newt. The government should not send people to foreign countries and then abandon them. Newt is totally irresponsible. The idea that he might be President is deeply disturbing.
I was in the process of transferring from Poland to Italy at the State Department's request when Newt shut the government down. The US Embassy in Rome furloughed me, along with most employees, but it left me with no place to live. All my worldly possessions were in storage or in my car getting ready to leave Warsaw for Rome in one hour when they called and said, "Don't leave." But my wife and I had no place to stay in Warsaw. It worked out, but no thanks to Newt. The government should not send people to foreign countries and then abandon them. Newt is totally irresponsible. The idea that he might be President is deeply disturbing.
Romney and Jobs
Most of the debate about whether Romney created jobs at Bain Capital misses the point. Of course, businesses succeed and fail. Some jobs will be created, some eliminated. The questions is whether Romney cared about jobs, or just about maximizing profits. For example, if it cost Bain $1,000 to keep a job that paid $25,000 to some long-term employee, would Romney do it? That question has not been asked, but I think the answer is no. That is a legitimate position, a purely Darwinian capitalist view. But do you want the government to approach the jobs issue the same way? I don't think so. The government should take a more humanitarian approach to jobs. And businesses could, too.
In some cases, businesses fail because the men who started them don't have the heart to fire people who have been with them for years, although the company's hard times require it. The Mitt Romneys of the world can come in and do it because they are heartless. And they end up preserving some jobs, just not all of them.
But what is Romneys view of the importance of jobs versus profits? We don't know, and probably never will, because Romney seems to have no permanent views on anything.
I think Romney's income taxes may be revealing, if he releases them. He probably benefitted from all the tax breaks for rich people, particularly those in investment activities, that the lobbyists have gotten passed over the years, thanks to huge donations from rich people. They can afford huge payments to lobbyists and campaign contributions to politicians, because the resulting tax breaks save them obscene amounts of money. I'm guessing Mitt benefited enormously. It will be even worse if it turns out that he is hiding income by putting assets in the Cayman Islands, or some other tax haven.
In some cases, businesses fail because the men who started them don't have the heart to fire people who have been with them for years, although the company's hard times require it. The Mitt Romneys of the world can come in and do it because they are heartless. And they end up preserving some jobs, just not all of them.
But what is Romneys view of the importance of jobs versus profits? We don't know, and probably never will, because Romney seems to have no permanent views on anything.
I think Romney's income taxes may be revealing, if he releases them. He probably benefitted from all the tax breaks for rich people, particularly those in investment activities, that the lobbyists have gotten passed over the years, thanks to huge donations from rich people. They can afford huge payments to lobbyists and campaign contributions to politicians, because the resulting tax breaks save them obscene amounts of money. I'm guessing Mitt benefited enormously. It will be even worse if it turns out that he is hiding income by putting assets in the Cayman Islands, or some other tax haven.
Obama Abandons Democratic Party
Obama's proposal to break up the Commerce Department is just another example of his kowtowing to the Republicans and abandoning Democratic party ideals. Government needs reorganization, but breaking up a long existing cabinet department is not the way to start. The Republicans probably want him to eliminate EPA or Education, and he thinks it is smart to hit Commerce instead, but it's still a recipe for disaster. The Department of Homeland Security has been a disaster. The country is no safer than when the agencies in Homeland Security were under different cabinet departments, but it has been a great financial boon for private contractors, most of whom have Congress under their thumb through their lobbyists and campaign contributions. It's government welfare for rich contractors.
Obama is a worthless coward. People make a big deal of his approving the raid on Osama bin Laden and continued drone strikes, but in both cases he was just saying yes to hardliners in the military and intelligence communities. Closing Guantanamo would take guts, and he won't do it, because he doesn't have the guts. Elizabeth Warren makes him look like a little crybaby. It's no wonder he didn't want her anywhere near him; the comparison is devastating.
Obama is a worthless coward. People make a big deal of his approving the raid on Osama bin Laden and continued drone strikes, but in both cases he was just saying yes to hardliners in the military and intelligence communities. Closing Guantanamo would take guts, and he won't do it, because he doesn't have the guts. Elizabeth Warren makes him look like a little crybaby. It's no wonder he didn't want her anywhere near him; the comparison is devastating.
Sunday, January 08, 2012
Republican Primary as Reality Show
The Republican primaries are basically a reality show. The candidates are more like the housewives of Orange County than commanders in chief. That’s why somebody who was just promoting a book, Herman Cain, came to be one of the leading contenders, if only for a few weeks The debates and campaign speeches have been in general uneducated and banal, except for Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman, who have espoused reasonable positions, although I may not agree with them. I think Ron Paul is wrong in his opposition to the Fed, but he is right that we are in serious economic trouble. I think Huntsman is right on most important issues -- economic and foreign policy -- but too conservative on social issues like abortion and gun rights. But Romney is campaigning as if he were a California housewife. He may be the most intelligent housewife, but just a housewife nevertheless. The others -- Santorum, Gingrich, Perry -- are good at puffery, but just full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. Republican voters are not voting for a commander in chief but just on who is going to be voted off the island.
USAA and the Decline of the American Military
I’m a big fan of USAA insurance, but I think it’s significant that USAA now needs to advertise, when previously it tried to limit policyholders rather than attracting them. In the old days USAA insurance was only available to military officers. Because of patriotism and the draft, a lot of excellent people became military officers. Many of them did not become career officers, but left after their initial period of service to return to civilian life, where they often became successful businessmen, lawyers, doctors, and other prosperous members of society.
Vietnam destroyed respect for the American military, but because of the draft during the first part of the war, there were still a lot of good people who became officers. With the end of the draft and rising disrespect of the military, particularly by “good” families, fewer and fewer people who were destined to become community leaders served as officers. As a result USAA’s pool of excellent customers has been shrinking. Now, instead of having a favorable opinion of former officers, Americans tend to have an unfavorable opinion, making it more difficult for former officers to rise to prominence in the civilian community.
As an example, look at recent Presidential elections. The last military officer to serve as President was George H. W. Bush. He was defeated for his second term by Clinton, who avoided service in Vietnam. Clinton defeated Bob Dole, a World War II hero, to win his second term. Al Gore, Clinton’s Vice President, served in Vietnam, probably because as the son of a senator, he inherited a now antiquated family tradition of national service. When he ran for President, however, he was defeated by George W. Bush, who did not inherit his father’s tradition of national service, and who avoided service in Vietnam by joining the Alabama National Guard, where he seldom did anything, even in Alabama. For his next term Bush ran against Sen. John Kerry, who served in Vietnam and was awarded a Purple Heart medal. The Republican Swift Boat veterans ridiculed Kerry’s service, in what to me was the most egregious attack on veterans by a major political party. In order to win Bush a second term, the Republicans defamed all veterans by attacking Kerry for being a veteran. In a turnaround, the Republicans nominated a veteran, war hero John McCain, in the next election. McCain was defeated by Obama, who is not a veteran but is too young to have been influenced by Vietnam and the draft. Although he did not serve in Vietnam, Bush II was probably eligible for USAA insurance under their old rules, although none of the other Presidents would have been.
The Presidential elections illustrate how Americans have turned against those who serve in their country’s military. The result has been a significant downgrading of the USAA customer base, from leaders of American communities to those relegated to a lower social and economic status because of their service in the military.
Vietnam destroyed respect for the American military, but because of the draft during the first part of the war, there were still a lot of good people who became officers. With the end of the draft and rising disrespect of the military, particularly by “good” families, fewer and fewer people who were destined to become community leaders served as officers. As a result USAA’s pool of excellent customers has been shrinking. Now, instead of having a favorable opinion of former officers, Americans tend to have an unfavorable opinion, making it more difficult for former officers to rise to prominence in the civilian community.
As an example, look at recent Presidential elections. The last military officer to serve as President was George H. W. Bush. He was defeated for his second term by Clinton, who avoided service in Vietnam. Clinton defeated Bob Dole, a World War II hero, to win his second term. Al Gore, Clinton’s Vice President, served in Vietnam, probably because as the son of a senator, he inherited a now antiquated family tradition of national service. When he ran for President, however, he was defeated by George W. Bush, who did not inherit his father’s tradition of national service, and who avoided service in Vietnam by joining the Alabama National Guard, where he seldom did anything, even in Alabama. For his next term Bush ran against Sen. John Kerry, who served in Vietnam and was awarded a Purple Heart medal. The Republican Swift Boat veterans ridiculed Kerry’s service, in what to me was the most egregious attack on veterans by a major political party. In order to win Bush a second term, the Republicans defamed all veterans by attacking Kerry for being a veteran. In a turnaround, the Republicans nominated a veteran, war hero John McCain, in the next election. McCain was defeated by Obama, who is not a veteran but is too young to have been influenced by Vietnam and the draft. Although he did not serve in Vietnam, Bush II was probably eligible for USAA insurance under their old rules, although none of the other Presidents would have been.
The Presidential elections illustrate how Americans have turned against those who serve in their country’s military. The result has been a significant downgrading of the USAA customer base, from leaders of American communities to those relegated to a lower social and economic status because of their service in the military.
Wednesday, January 04, 2012
Predictable Iowa
There was nothing interesting about the Iowa caucuses. Mitt Romney got more or less his expected 25%. Rick Santorum was the not-Romney candidate of the moment, and got about the same vote. Ron Paul got the votes he was expected to get, high for a non-mainstream candidate, but not enough to make him mainstream. If the vote had been held 10 days earlier, the not-Romney vote would have gone to Newt Gingrich. If it had been 20 days earlier, the non-Romney vote would have gone to Herman Cain.
Mitt was smart to move the non-Mitt vote to Santorum instead of Gingrich, because Santorum will be a weaker challenger. But none of the non-Mitts really had much support of their own.
What a waste of time, energy, and money! And how discouraging to think that this is how Americans elect a President.
Mitt was smart to move the non-Mitt vote to Santorum instead of Gingrich, because Santorum will be a weaker challenger. But none of the non-Mitts really had much support of their own.
What a waste of time, energy, and money! And how discouraging to think that this is how Americans elect a President.
Iowa Caucuses
Based on the results I have heard, a tie between Romney and Santorum, the Iowa caucuses appear to be an enormous waste of time. If they contribute anything to the Presidential election, it just shows how broken our electoral system is. Part of the problem is due to the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, basically making it legal for rich people to buy an election. And part of the problem appears to be that the Republican Party is dysfunctional, offering such lousy candidates, and that Republicans in Iowa are idiots, turning out to vote for such incompetents. Poor America!
Friday, December 30, 2011
Obama's Failure on Consumer Protection
After failing to nominate Elizabeth Warren to head the new consumer protection agency, Obama proposed Cordry. See this Vanity Fair article on Warrren. However, when the Senate blocked Cordry with some filibuster trick, Obama just accepted it. He has obviously been bought by the big banks and other financial interests. Obama should at least have made a stink. He's been quiet as a mouse, hoping the public will forget and the Wall Street money will keep rolling in. The average person has no one to stand up for him, except Elizabeth Warren, whom Obama has thrown to the wolves.
Friday, December 02, 2011
Jews Need to Clean Up Their Act
In Boomerang, Michael Lewis points out the absence of Jews in the German financial community. We all know why this is so. But the problem now is that the American financial community is largely led by Jews, and it turns out to be corrupt, while the gentile German banking community turns out to be largely honest, if gullible. Not all Jews are dishonest, but events like this tend to reinforce unfavorable stereotypes of Jews. If Jews want to overcome these "Shylock" stereotypes, they need to clean up their act. Unfortunately they are dragging America down into the gutter with themselves.
Women Leaders
At this moment in the financial crisis, the only people I trust are women:
Elizabeth Warren,
Christine Legarde, and
Angela Merkel.
When Barney Frank was discussing his legacy on PBS yesterday, one the things he emphasized was the consumer protection provisions of the Dodd-Frank law. Elizabeth Warren was largely responsible for that, and then when push came to shove, Obama abandoned her, clearly as a result of pressure from the crooks on Wall Street, led by Jamie Dimon of Chase Bank.
Christine Legarde did a good job as French Finance Minister and is currently sorely missed as France tries to deal with the European financial crisis. However, she will be able to help as head of the IMF. I trust her to do the right thing more than I did her disgraced predecessor, Dominique Strauss-Kahn.
Angela Merkel gets a lot of bad press from financial journalists and commentators, in part because they see her Germanic honesty as a rebuke to American dishonesty. People seldom mention that she is from the old East Germany, and grew up in conditions far different from the prosperous unified Germany that she now leads. She, more than others, remembers the trials and sacrifices that West Germany undertook to unify with East Germany. When they look at the sacrifices they are being called on to make for Greece, et al, the Germans can say, "Been there; done that." However, before the sacrifices were for fellow Germans; now the sacrifices are for countries and peoples with whom the Germans share much less. Although Europe needs to be saved, Merkel is right not to have Germany commit suicide to save its poorer partners.
Elizabeth Warren,
Christine Legarde, and
Angela Merkel.
When Barney Frank was discussing his legacy on PBS yesterday, one the things he emphasized was the consumer protection provisions of the Dodd-Frank law. Elizabeth Warren was largely responsible for that, and then when push came to shove, Obama abandoned her, clearly as a result of pressure from the crooks on Wall Street, led by Jamie Dimon of Chase Bank.
Christine Legarde did a good job as French Finance Minister and is currently sorely missed as France tries to deal with the European financial crisis. However, she will be able to help as head of the IMF. I trust her to do the right thing more than I did her disgraced predecessor, Dominique Strauss-Kahn.
Angela Merkel gets a lot of bad press from financial journalists and commentators, in part because they see her Germanic honesty as a rebuke to American dishonesty. People seldom mention that she is from the old East Germany, and grew up in conditions far different from the prosperous unified Germany that she now leads. She, more than others, remembers the trials and sacrifices that West Germany undertook to unify with East Germany. When they look at the sacrifices they are being called on to make for Greece, et al, the Germans can say, "Been there; done that." However, before the sacrifices were for fellow Germans; now the sacrifices are for countries and peoples with whom the Germans share much less. Although Europe needs to be saved, Merkel is right not to have Germany commit suicide to save its poorer partners.
Germany More Moral Than America
I just finished reading Michael Lewis' chapter in Boomerang about Germany. His theme for Germany is "clean on the outside, dirty on the inside." But much of what turns out to be dirty on the inside is America's subprime mortgage debt, which was sold by unscrupulous American bankers to honest, trusting German bankers. In many ways it is the most damning portrait of the American banking system that I have read of the books I have read about the economic crisis. According to Lewis, the Germans were honest; the Americans were dishonest. It makes be less forgiving toward American bankers. I am now more inclined to believe that the crisis was not something that just happened, but it was caused by Americans who knew that they were doing bad things. I now think that somebody needs to go to jail, along the lines of the "Daily Show" last night, complaining that Martha Stewart went to jail for something that was absolutely nothing compared to what the big shots on Wall Street did, none of whom has gone to jail. It illustrates that America has become a third rate country where you can buy your way out of jail by bribing the President and members of Congress with political contributions.
Wednesday, November 09, 2011
More Welfare for Millionaires
The Denver Post has had an excellent series on tax breaks for corporations. These breaks were supposed to encourage businesses to move into poor areas called enterprise zones, but eventually enterprise zones covered most of the state and just constituted another tax break for almost any corporation doing business in Colorado, in some cases giving tax breaks to corporations that eliminated jobs, rather than creating them.
This is also an example of the "beggar thy neighbor" policies pursued by many government jurisdictions, from nations to cities. One of the big Republican arguments for lower business taxes is that other nations have lower taxes; if we don't match their low rates, all companies will leave the US, they say. Within the US, companies move to the states with the lowest business taxes. Most big companies incorporate in Delaware because it has the most lenient laws governing corporations. In the Denver area, the Aurora suburb is bidding to take the annual stock show away from Denver proper by offering all kinds of tax advantages to it and the Gaylord hotel chain which would build a new hotel near the stock show grounds.
All of this takes money away from basic activities that governments perform, from defense to education to building and maintaining roads. Colorado just voted down a small increase in taxes for education, but it has millions to subsidize big corporations in "enterprise zones," or to get the stock show to move ten miles out of town.
This is also an example of the "beggar thy neighbor" policies pursued by many government jurisdictions, from nations to cities. One of the big Republican arguments for lower business taxes is that other nations have lower taxes; if we don't match their low rates, all companies will leave the US, they say. Within the US, companies move to the states with the lowest business taxes. Most big companies incorporate in Delaware because it has the most lenient laws governing corporations. In the Denver area, the Aurora suburb is bidding to take the annual stock show away from Denver proper by offering all kinds of tax advantages to it and the Gaylord hotel chain which would build a new hotel near the stock show grounds.
All of this takes money away from basic activities that governments perform, from defense to education to building and maintaining roads. Colorado just voted down a small increase in taxes for education, but it has millions to subsidize big corporations in "enterprise zones," or to get the stock show to move ten miles out of town.
Wednesday, November 02, 2011
Rich Doctors Are America's Problem
This op-ed by David Brooks says that the largest proportion of the richest 1% of Americans are doctors. He says 16% of the wealthiest are doctors, compared with 8% being lawyers, for example. That's why health care costs are going through the roof, why Medicare is out of control, etc.
He doesn't break down the doctors' incomes, but it's pretty well known that the richest doctors are the specialists, the heart guys, the bone guys, etc. Many of them getting rich on Medicare because old people have heart attacks, broken hips, etc. The general practitioners, who keep people healthy, rather than repairing them after they are sick, don't make nearly as much.
It's a system where the rewards are misallocated, and that threatens to destroy the whole American economy.
He doesn't break down the doctors' incomes, but it's pretty well known that the richest doctors are the specialists, the heart guys, the bone guys, etc. Many of them getting rich on Medicare because old people have heart attacks, broken hips, etc. The general practitioners, who keep people healthy, rather than repairing them after they are sick, don't make nearly as much.
It's a system where the rewards are misallocated, and that threatens to destroy the whole American economy.
Thursday, October 13, 2011
Another Congressional Letter
I hope that you saw "Morning Joe" this morning on MSNBC. In case you did not, here is a link:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/#44886865
They discussed Warren Buffett's release of his income tax. It shows he is correct that rich people who make most of their money from investments pay a lower percentage of their income in taxes than much poorer working people do. This country clearly hates people who work for a living, just like it claims to love veterans, but then won't give them a job when they come home from Iraq or Afghanistan. As a Vietnam veteran, I know that anybody who fights for this country for any but the most patriotic reasons is a fool. This country will kiss you on the lips while the TV cameras are on, and then stab you in the back when they go off. No one representing me in Congress is a veteran. When Senator John Kerry ran for President, George W. Bush's huge political apparatus "Swift Boat Veterans" reviled him (and every other Vietnam veteran) because Kerry was a veteran, Bush was not a real veteran. He spent the war getting drunk and becoming an alcoholic in the Alabama National Guard. Then after 9/11 he sent many National Guard troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, despite the fact that the National Guard has been his refuge from combat.
The best part of the "Morning Joe" clip above is the presentation by former Obama automotive czar Steve Rattner, which shows how badly income in the US has skewed toward the rich in the last few years. This is a corrupt government. Democrats and Republicans have betrayed the American people, by selling themselves to the wealthiest one percent. I have not joined the Occupy Wall Street protesters, but I am mad, too. This is a failed government run by cowardly, incompetent or evil people. The corrupt characters in HBO's "Boardwalk Empire" would be right at home in today's Washington.
On veterans again, I am very disappointed that the Army's Walter Reed Hospital has been closed and wounded Army soldiers transferred to Bethesda Naval Hospital. People like you don't understand that the Army and Navy are different. Or you probably don't care. But the Army and Navy have different cultures and traditions. It is truly insensitive to take someone who has spent five or ten years in the Army, and then when he gets badly wounded, to add to his problems by putting him in a Navy environment. No wonder so many of our troops have mental problems. But you don't care; you saved some millionaire ten dollars on his taxes.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/#44886865
They discussed Warren Buffett's release of his income tax. It shows he is correct that rich people who make most of their money from investments pay a lower percentage of their income in taxes than much poorer working people do. This country clearly hates people who work for a living, just like it claims to love veterans, but then won't give them a job when they come home from Iraq or Afghanistan. As a Vietnam veteran, I know that anybody who fights for this country for any but the most patriotic reasons is a fool. This country will kiss you on the lips while the TV cameras are on, and then stab you in the back when they go off. No one representing me in Congress is a veteran. When Senator John Kerry ran for President, George W. Bush's huge political apparatus "Swift Boat Veterans" reviled him (and every other Vietnam veteran) because Kerry was a veteran, Bush was not a real veteran. He spent the war getting drunk and becoming an alcoholic in the Alabama National Guard. Then after 9/11 he sent many National Guard troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, despite the fact that the National Guard has been his refuge from combat.
The best part of the "Morning Joe" clip above is the presentation by former Obama automotive czar Steve Rattner, which shows how badly income in the US has skewed toward the rich in the last few years. This is a corrupt government. Democrats and Republicans have betrayed the American people, by selling themselves to the wealthiest one percent. I have not joined the Occupy Wall Street protesters, but I am mad, too. This is a failed government run by cowardly, incompetent or evil people. The corrupt characters in HBO's "Boardwalk Empire" would be right at home in today's Washington.
On veterans again, I am very disappointed that the Army's Walter Reed Hospital has been closed and wounded Army soldiers transferred to Bethesda Naval Hospital. People like you don't understand that the Army and Navy are different. Or you probably don't care. But the Army and Navy have different cultures and traditions. It is truly insensitive to take someone who has spent five or ten years in the Army, and then when he gets badly wounded, to add to his problems by putting him in a Navy environment. No wonder so many of our troops have mental problems. But you don't care; you saved some millionaire ten dollars on his taxes.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Killing American Citizens
The US should only kill an American citizen when he poses an immediate threat of deadly harm and there is no other way to stop him. I am not sure that these conditions were met in the recent assassinations of American citizens Anwar al-Awlaki and Samir Khan.
According to the press, Awlaki encouraged other Americans to kill their fellow citizens and to oppose the US government, but it's not clear that he personally killed any Americans, or anybody else, for that matter. He was more an accessory to murder than a murderer. Secondly, its not clear that there was no other way to stop him than to kill him by remote control drone. That may have been the easiest way to kill him, but not the only way.
I think there should at least have been an effort to take him prisoner and return him to the US. I also think we should have tried to capture and return Osama bin Laden. The problem is that the US legal system is unable to deal with terrorists, because Americans are so afraid of them. Guantanamo should have been closed years ago, but Americans are afraid of the men there. There was some talk of a terrorist trial in Kentucky, and Sen. Mitch McConnell almost had a fit he was so scared. This is a man who refused to fight in Vietnam, and got his patron, Sen. John Sherman Cooper, to help get him out of military service during the war, although officially he got a medical discharge.
These legal niceties are what our troops are supposed to be fighting to protect, but we are afraid to apply them. In many ways Osama bin Laden won, because people like Barak Obama and Mitch McConnell are afraid to stand up for them. Of course, the real cowards were George W. Bush, who spent the Vietnam War becoming a drunkard in the Alabama National Guard, and Dick Cheney, who avoided service by churning out babies. These are men who liked running the country, but had no concept of what it was to serve the country. They were missing in action on 9/11. Bush flew away to Nebraska or somewhere, and Cheney retreated to a spider hole under the White House.
According to the press, Awlaki encouraged other Americans to kill their fellow citizens and to oppose the US government, but it's not clear that he personally killed any Americans, or anybody else, for that matter. He was more an accessory to murder than a murderer. Secondly, its not clear that there was no other way to stop him than to kill him by remote control drone. That may have been the easiest way to kill him, but not the only way.
I think there should at least have been an effort to take him prisoner and return him to the US. I also think we should have tried to capture and return Osama bin Laden. The problem is that the US legal system is unable to deal with terrorists, because Americans are so afraid of them. Guantanamo should have been closed years ago, but Americans are afraid of the men there. There was some talk of a terrorist trial in Kentucky, and Sen. Mitch McConnell almost had a fit he was so scared. This is a man who refused to fight in Vietnam, and got his patron, Sen. John Sherman Cooper, to help get him out of military service during the war, although officially he got a medical discharge.
These legal niceties are what our troops are supposed to be fighting to protect, but we are afraid to apply them. In many ways Osama bin Laden won, because people like Barak Obama and Mitch McConnell are afraid to stand up for them. Of course, the real cowards were George W. Bush, who spent the Vietnam War becoming a drunkard in the Alabama National Guard, and Dick Cheney, who avoided service by churning out babies. These are men who liked running the country, but had no concept of what it was to serve the country. They were missing in action on 9/11. Bush flew away to Nebraska or somewhere, and Cheney retreated to a spider hole under the White House.
Monday, October 10, 2011
State Slouches Toward Failure in Iraq
Recent articles in the NYT and WP paint a pretty discouraging picture of the State Department's future role in Iraq. A serving Foreign Service officer has written a book about what a failure State's past activities have been, "We Meant Well: How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People." He also published an op-ed in the NYT, which says, "Iraq is still plagued by corruption, sectarianism and violence. And ... I don’t have much faith that the department can turn things around."
Meanwhile, the WP reported on the huge undertaking that the State Department is committing itself to by taking over in Iraq where the military is leaving off. After downsizing from hundreds of thousands of US military troops, about 50,000 remain in Iraq. Their functions will supposedly soon be taken on by the State Department Foreign Service. According to Wikipedia, there are about 15,000 Foreign Service officers total, staffing over 200 American embassies and consulates, as well as the State Department in Washington. Thus, the only way the State Department can even hope to cope with this mess is by hiring tens of thousands of contractors. The idea that State can manage tens of thousands of contractors, when according to the book mentioned above, it can't even manage the small scale programs it was running with its own officers , is ludicrous. Hillary Clinton is being the good soldier by taking on the mess left behind by the military, but it is bound to impact negatively on what in other countries is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. State's expertise is political and economic analysis, not program management. The military managed not to lose in Iraq (at least not yet), but it is leaving a mess. The op-ed above says:
It's possible that nobody really expects this to work. Maybe it's just a cover for the US to pull its military out of Iraq. But State will be left with egg on its face. And Iraq will still be a mess.
I don't think the US is serious about helping Iraq, especially when I look back at my experience in Poland after the fall of Communism. Newt Gingrich and the Republicans, with the cooperation of Bill Clinton and company, basically told the Poles, "You're on your own, unless there is some money-making deal we can line up an American company to get in on." Poland came out okay, but I think it's because the EU became Poland's Marshall Plan. America basically dumped Poland, but Western Europe came through. Maybe Turkey or China (or Iran) will come through for the Iraqis.
Meanwhile, the WP reported on the huge undertaking that the State Department is committing itself to by taking over in Iraq where the military is leaving off. After downsizing from hundreds of thousands of US military troops, about 50,000 remain in Iraq. Their functions will supposedly soon be taken on by the State Department Foreign Service. According to Wikipedia, there are about 15,000 Foreign Service officers total, staffing over 200 American embassies and consulates, as well as the State Department in Washington. Thus, the only way the State Department can even hope to cope with this mess is by hiring tens of thousands of contractors. The idea that State can manage tens of thousands of contractors, when according to the book mentioned above, it can't even manage the small scale programs it was running with its own officers , is ludicrous. Hillary Clinton is being the good soldier by taking on the mess left behind by the military, but it is bound to impact negatively on what in other countries is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. State's expertise is political and economic analysis, not program management. The military managed not to lose in Iraq (at least not yet), but it is leaving a mess. The op-ed above says:
When my team tried to give away fruit tree seedlings to replant ruined orchards, a farmer spat on the ground and said, “You killed my son and now you are giving me a tree?”and
One Iraqi I met observed that the United States had sponsored expensive art shows in his neighborhood three years in a row, but did nothing about the lack of functioning sewers, electricity and running water. “It is like I am standing naked in a room with a big hat on my head,” he told me. “Everyone comes in and puts ribbons on my hat, but no one seems to notice that I am naked.”The WP compares the Iraq undertaking to the Marshall Plan, but after World War II, the US had clearly won. There was little danger of Americans being assassinated in Paris. The French and other Western Europeans still had competent bureaucrats to administer the American aid. Before the war, Western Europe had been more or less on a par with the US politically and economically. They shared similar cultures. None of that is true in Iraq.
It's possible that nobody really expects this to work. Maybe it's just a cover for the US to pull its military out of Iraq. But State will be left with egg on its face. And Iraq will still be a mess.
I don't think the US is serious about helping Iraq, especially when I look back at my experience in Poland after the fall of Communism. Newt Gingrich and the Republicans, with the cooperation of Bill Clinton and company, basically told the Poles, "You're on your own, unless there is some money-making deal we can line up an American company to get in on." Poland came out okay, but I think it's because the EU became Poland's Marshall Plan. America basically dumped Poland, but Western Europe came through. Maybe Turkey or China (or Iran) will come through for the Iraqis.
Monday, September 26, 2011
Why I Left the Foreign Service V
North Korean Nuclear Proliferation Issues. One of my responsibilities in Rome was maintaining a dialogue with Italy and the EU on North Korean nuclear issues, in particular the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO). During the six months more or less that I was in Rome, Italy held the presidency of the European Union, so that our dialogue was on sort of a double basis, one dialogue as the US to Italy, and the other as US to EU. At that time the US was part of KEDO and had promised funding for proliferation resistant light water reactors for North Korea, and in the interim, funding for fuel oil to North Korea to generate electricity by conventional power plants. As part of the Gingrich/Republican budget cuts, the US did not appropriate funding for its part of the fuel oil. Therefore to prevent the US from breaching its agreement with North and South Korea and Japan, part of my job was to go hat in hand to the Italians and ask them bilaterally, or as the head of the EU, to help make up the difference between what the US had appropriated and what it owed under the agreement.
I had just gone through a similar situation in Warsaw when the US cut off funding for our joint science cooperation program years before the agreement was to expire. Once again, I was in the position of saying that the US would not fulfill its international agreements. I always did what I was told, but I was not a happy camper. I did not like representing an America that was a deadbeat dad, that made promises and then didn't fulfill them. I don't remember where I left this matter. The Italians were somewhat horrified that the US might default, and thus legally entitle North Korea to resume its proliferating ways. But I don't recall that they said definitely that they would help. I think we were only asking for about $2 million.
But I didn't like it. If I had wanted to do this kind of thing, I could have become a criminal lawyer or a bankruptcy lawyer. I wanted to be a diplomat for the greatest nation on earth; I didn't want to be like Hitler's German diplomats negotiating the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. The American government was too corrupt and dishonest for me, and so I left.
Helms-Burton and Children's Visas. Another nail in coffin of my career came late in my stay in Rome. I was at a reception for a satellite launching, celebrating a satellite that the US was going to launch for Italy. The launch did not take place as scheduled, but that wasn't the issue. At the reception I struck up a conversation with a man who worked on communications satellites for the Italian phone company. He said something like, "You must really hate me to deny a visa to Disney World to my daughter, just because I work for the Italian phone company." I was taken aback and asked him what had happened. He said his daughter had been denied a US visa under the Helms-Burton Act because the Italian phone company had some tenuous connection to Cuba through its cooperation with the Mexican phone company. Later I went and talked to the head of the consular section in Rome, and it sounded like this was indeed the case.
Unfortunately it reminded me of some books I had read when I first joined the Foreign Service. One of my friends from law school had been reading them, and said they had quite a lot about the Foreign Service. They were "The Winds of War," and "War and Remembrance" by Herman Wouk. They are a fictional account of several families, some American military officers and diplomats, and one a Jewish family living in Europe. A Jewish mother and child are trying to get out of Europe and go to Palestine, soon to become Israel, but she can't leave without a visa (shades of "Casablanca"). The German embassy in Rome is willing to give the mother a visa, but not her child. It was just too close to what America was doing to this Italian engineer. Punishing children for the crimes of their fathers is not something I am enthusiastic about, especially when the father's crime is just working for a company that has some weak connection to Cuba. I think by the time this happened, I had already decided to retire, but this made me glad that I had.
This was not Ronald Reagan's "shining city on a hill."
I had just gone through a similar situation in Warsaw when the US cut off funding for our joint science cooperation program years before the agreement was to expire. Once again, I was in the position of saying that the US would not fulfill its international agreements. I always did what I was told, but I was not a happy camper. I did not like representing an America that was a deadbeat dad, that made promises and then didn't fulfill them. I don't remember where I left this matter. The Italians were somewhat horrified that the US might default, and thus legally entitle North Korea to resume its proliferating ways. But I don't recall that they said definitely that they would help. I think we were only asking for about $2 million.
But I didn't like it. If I had wanted to do this kind of thing, I could have become a criminal lawyer or a bankruptcy lawyer. I wanted to be a diplomat for the greatest nation on earth; I didn't want to be like Hitler's German diplomats negotiating the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. The American government was too corrupt and dishonest for me, and so I left.
Helms-Burton and Children's Visas. Another nail in coffin of my career came late in my stay in Rome. I was at a reception for a satellite launching, celebrating a satellite that the US was going to launch for Italy. The launch did not take place as scheduled, but that wasn't the issue. At the reception I struck up a conversation with a man who worked on communications satellites for the Italian phone company. He said something like, "You must really hate me to deny a visa to Disney World to my daughter, just because I work for the Italian phone company." I was taken aback and asked him what had happened. He said his daughter had been denied a US visa under the Helms-Burton Act because the Italian phone company had some tenuous connection to Cuba through its cooperation with the Mexican phone company. Later I went and talked to the head of the consular section in Rome, and it sounded like this was indeed the case.
Unfortunately it reminded me of some books I had read when I first joined the Foreign Service. One of my friends from law school had been reading them, and said they had quite a lot about the Foreign Service. They were "The Winds of War," and "War and Remembrance" by Herman Wouk. They are a fictional account of several families, some American military officers and diplomats, and one a Jewish family living in Europe. A Jewish mother and child are trying to get out of Europe and go to Palestine, soon to become Israel, but she can't leave without a visa (shades of "Casablanca"). The German embassy in Rome is willing to give the mother a visa, but not her child. It was just too close to what America was doing to this Italian engineer. Punishing children for the crimes of their fathers is not something I am enthusiastic about, especially when the father's crime is just working for a company that has some weak connection to Cuba. I think by the time this happened, I had already decided to retire, but this made me glad that I had.
This was not Ronald Reagan's "shining city on a hill."
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Why I Left the Foreign Service IV
Unwelcoming Reception in Rome. When I agreed to go from Warsaw to Rome, Embassy Rome said that they had an apartment for me. They said that I could not have my predecessor's apartment, which frankly I found a little odd, but I thought, "Okay, they say they have a nice apartment, and it's Rome." When we arrived, however, after our contretemps with the government shutdown leaving Warsaw, it turned out that the embassy had given the apartment that they had promised to me to a DEA agent. I was a little ticked, because I thought that the State Department, which ran the administration for the embassy, should have given a little break to one of its own officers, and told the DEA agent that this apartment was allocated and that he would have to wait for the next apartment. That was my first clue that something was amiss in Rome. It took months for the embassy to find us an apartment. Meanwhile we camped out in temporary housing in an apartment house that the embassy had for people assigned temporarily to Rome to do short-term jobs.
In addition, between by predecessor's departure and my arrival, the embassy had redesigned the science office suite. The way they had set it up, all of my assistant's visitors had to pass through my office to get to her office. The doors should have been arranged so that her visitors could enter her office directly from the reception area. I don't know what the suite had looked like before, but by the time I got there, the construction was completed.
Most importantly, the embassy did not want me. I had not realized that my assignment by the State Department was the result of a fight between the Embassy and the State Department headquarters in Washington. The previous Science Counselor had been a friend of the Ambassador's. He had been a political appointee in Ambassador Bartholomew's office, when Bartholomew had been an Under Secretary of State, and had traveled to Rome, when Bartholomew as assigned to Rome. However, the time he could serve as a political appointee, a Schedule C employee, ran out, and the State Department would not let him stay longer. I presume there was a big fight between the Embassy and Washington to try to get permission for him to stay. When that failed, the Embassy apparently decided that it wanted a particular Civil Service employee in Washington to replace him. The Foreign Service tries to look after its own, and apparently tried to block a Civil Service employee from taking a plum Foreign Service position in Rome. Thus, the call out of the blue to me in Warsaw asking if I would be willing to go to Rome. But after I arrived, it became clear that the Embassy had not given up and still wanted to get rid of me and get the Civil Service employee. Making my life difficult by not finding housing, for example, was part of that strategy. The Ambassador succeeded. I retired, and I think the State Department relented and approved the Civil Service employee as my replacement.
I guess I sound pretty weak in this description, not fighting the Embassy harder, but in my defense, ever since I didn't fight the draft and agreed to go into the Army and off to Vietnam, my desire was to serve my country, not to have my country serve me. I was willing to put up with hardships that were imposed by external forces, like the North Vietnamese Army, or living and working at an embassy in a poor country with few amenities. But I was not willing to accept hardships or mistreatment that were imposed by the American Government itself, in the government shutdown, or by the unwelcoming reception in Rome. It was not the government that I volunteered to serve.
I should add that in contrast to the unwelcoming official reception in Rome, several of the officers there were personally very welcoming, from the Deputy Chief of Mission (the #2 in the Embassy) to my assistant, who got furloughed when I got un-furloughed in order to travel from Warsaw to Rome during the shutdown.
In addition, between by predecessor's departure and my arrival, the embassy had redesigned the science office suite. The way they had set it up, all of my assistant's visitors had to pass through my office to get to her office. The doors should have been arranged so that her visitors could enter her office directly from the reception area. I don't know what the suite had looked like before, but by the time I got there, the construction was completed.
Most importantly, the embassy did not want me. I had not realized that my assignment by the State Department was the result of a fight between the Embassy and the State Department headquarters in Washington. The previous Science Counselor had been a friend of the Ambassador's. He had been a political appointee in Ambassador Bartholomew's office, when Bartholomew had been an Under Secretary of State, and had traveled to Rome, when Bartholomew as assigned to Rome. However, the time he could serve as a political appointee, a Schedule C employee, ran out, and the State Department would not let him stay longer. I presume there was a big fight between the Embassy and Washington to try to get permission for him to stay. When that failed, the Embassy apparently decided that it wanted a particular Civil Service employee in Washington to replace him. The Foreign Service tries to look after its own, and apparently tried to block a Civil Service employee from taking a plum Foreign Service position in Rome. Thus, the call out of the blue to me in Warsaw asking if I would be willing to go to Rome. But after I arrived, it became clear that the Embassy had not given up and still wanted to get rid of me and get the Civil Service employee. Making my life difficult by not finding housing, for example, was part of that strategy. The Ambassador succeeded. I retired, and I think the State Department relented and approved the Civil Service employee as my replacement.
I guess I sound pretty weak in this description, not fighting the Embassy harder, but in my defense, ever since I didn't fight the draft and agreed to go into the Army and off to Vietnam, my desire was to serve my country, not to have my country serve me. I was willing to put up with hardships that were imposed by external forces, like the North Vietnamese Army, or living and working at an embassy in a poor country with few amenities. But I was not willing to accept hardships or mistreatment that were imposed by the American Government itself, in the government shutdown, or by the unwelcoming reception in Rome. It was not the government that I volunteered to serve.
I should add that in contrast to the unwelcoming official reception in Rome, several of the officers there were personally very welcoming, from the Deputy Chief of Mission (the #2 in the Embassy) to my assistant, who got furloughed when I got un-furloughed in order to travel from Warsaw to Rome during the shutdown.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)