The Impeachable Hypocrisy Of The Congressional Democrats

061215-D-7203T-182tru

 

I’m proud to be one of the prescient millions who foretold the almost immediate crash and burn of Donald Trump in the White House. If a wink is as good as a nod to a blind man, even the blind could see this coming from the onslaught of winking eyes as far back as the primaries. Make no mistake, Trump will turn the heat up on the Republicans so high they’ll have to doff their ongoing participation in providing cover for him and stand out alone in the cold light of common sense and allow themselves to be blown toward the inevitable: either the impeachment and conviction or the resignation of Donald John Trump, destined to have the shortest tenure in the White House of a tenant (I will not refer to him as the president) who was not forced to leave due to serious illness or death.

But, being the faIr-minded Farlefty that I am, it’s now time to out the Democrats for the partisan, opportunistic hypocrites that they are. Granted, Trump has committed more impeachable offenses in the shortest period of time after moving into the White House than all the other real presidents. But, his treasonous, unethical, and illegal transgressions haven’t cost any lives—so far. Contrast that with the treasonous, unethical and illegal transgressions of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld. They conspired to concoct a lie that would not only result in thousands (and counting) of American troops and the deaths of millions (and counting) Iraqi troops and citizens, and led to the total destabilization of the Persian Gulf, Mediterranean Sea and the Arabian Peninsula regions. They assassinated Saddam Hussein without having a single coherent and workable plan in place on how to fill the governmental vacuum left by his death.

And I said this was all built upon multiple lies, right? And from those lies they started multiple wars, decimating an entire part of the world for their own personal gains and those of their business cronies. Yet, in 2006, with the Democrats once again the controlling majority after winning the midterm elections, Nancy Pelosi made the announcement that impeachment of Bush &n Co. was off the table. The Democrats weren’t even actually in power until January 2007 yet she still kicked the shovel out of all liberals’ hands. And Harry Reid was right there with his foot on the shovel to make sure it remained impotently on the ground.

So, all this public outcry calling for the impeachment of Trump over his dangerously immature, illegal and treasonous activities has a very hollow ring to it. I want the guy out of the White House and relegated to an existence of public disgrace and humiliation, as well as the butt of stand-up comic and late night show host jokes for the rest of his miserable and hopefully less wealthy and connected life. But again, the high crimes and misdemeanors he’s perpetrated up to this point don’t even rise up to the level of the Bush administration outing Valerie Plame as a CIA operative through a Robert Novak column just to wreak revenge on her hubby Joe Wilson. But I digress.

So, save me from all this self-righteous chest thumping of the Democrats (albeit rightfully) demanding Trump’s head on a platter held by Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell. They had and blew their chance at positioning themselves as the sole guardians of the Constitution and safeguarding our democracy and governmental institutions. And following on the heels of the Republicans impeaching Bill Clinton over virtually nothing, they not only wimped out, they sold us out.  Yes, Trump deserves to be both impeached and convicted. But spare us the dramatic posturing and the self-righteous indignation, Democrats. You sound just as phony and self-serving as the Republicans back in 1998-99.

Advertisements

Overthrow Or Kill Assad—Then What?

What frustrates me are people who don’t think things through.  Everyone who is pushing for direct US intervention in Syria against Bashar Hafez al-Assad is guilty of this.  I’ve been guilty as well as advocating a SEAL Team 6-like strike but logically I know it’s impossible. It would be ill-advised also for the reasons I will present.

John Kerry and Barack Obama are treating this like the US should be the stern father figure taking the belt to Assad’s backside for his black deeds so that he promises to “never do it again”.  Well, Assad already has two “fathers”: Russia and China. He does what he does because he has such lenient and supportive dads.

With this attempt to whip of support of the American people for an illegal strike (not sanctioned by the UN) against Syria, John Kerry has become the new Condoleezza Rice and UN Ambassador Samantha Rice is the new John Bolton.  But what the people who don’t think things through are failing to think through: who would fill the political and leadership vacuum if Assad is either sent packing or sent down under? The track record for actual democratically-elected government leaders is none too good throughout the Arab and Islamic states; witness Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia.  In every one of these countries where the leaders were “democratically” elected or put in place by the military, the rulers have been murderous, drug lords, “ex”-military generals, and hard right Muslim leaders.  “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss” indeed.  In every one of these countries the people are still protesting and many dissidents have been imprisoned and/or shot dead.  This same exact scenario will play out in Syria—you can count on it.

So, assuming that Assad is deposed or killed, who will fill that power vacuum? Among the volunteers will most certainly be Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey with the U.S., Russia, and China either duking it out behind the scenes or in the center ring.  Take a look at a map of the Middle East and take note of where Syria is situated and remember that nature abhors a vacuum.  The peremptory overthrow of the Assad regime by outside forces (whether or not the rebels participate in it) will destabilize the region for years, and destabilize is probably too mild a term.  As for Syria—do we need yet another country under its military control—which over and over has been shown in every country where they have installed themselves in power to be just as corrupt and brutal as the corrupt and brutal despots they displaced?

But if by some remote chance power isn’t seized by the military, who will fill the power vacuum? This isn’t a simple case of heroic rebels vs. the Assad regime.  Nope,  within this generic “rebels” designation there are factions upon factions fighting each other: Islamists vs. non-Islamists; Saudi-supported groups vs. anti-Saudis,  Syrian drug lords vs. each other, factions who are seeking outsider support vs. factions who want all outsiders out of the conflict. This is not only a civil war, it’s a turf war; the Jets vs. the Sharks on steroids. The gang we back may not be the gang who wins the war.  It’s Iraq all over again.

So, what are the alternatives? Russia will block any UN military actions voted on by the Security Council, so that’s no good.  So, the US became damn fine in advising or orchestrating regime changes in Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Chile, Argentina, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama, Brazil, Indonesia,  Angola, Turkey, South Vietnam, etc. (for more info on most of these, read Naomi Klein’s classic “The Shock Doctrine”.) so why can’t we use the techniques we perfected to install the good guy into power for once? Train, arm, and fund them just as we did for the likes of Pinochet of Chile and Suharto of Indonesia and many, many other despots globally.

What the US war hawks still don’t get is that instead of just toppling a government, you’ve first have to win the hearts and minds of the people through humanitarian acts.  Don’t just arm rebels with weapons and battle tactics; supply them with food, clean drinking water, clothing, medical supplies, house building materials and heavy equipment.  We’ve got to make ourselves the good guys in the people’s eyes, not the invaders. But being men, this is considered much too expensive and would take way too long in the eyes of Kerry, Obama, McCain (if you can take his eyes away from his video poker games long enough) and the other chairbound warriors.