In my previous blog I inserted a book report on the "Rise Of The Vulcans". I feel that this gives a good description of where the key players in Bush's administration have come from. Another book that I found interesting was called "Bush's Brain". This book may have a hidden agenda but I think it is true in many respects.

During the 2002 presidential primaries Karl Rove & Company did a real smear job on John McCain. In spite of that, once Bush was elected McCain threw his support behind Bush. Although it is obvious that he disagrees with many of Bush's policies McCain has remained a true Republican and a good soldier and makes positive statements about Bush's policies. Although this is perplexing it seems apparent that McCain has presidential aspirations in 2008. His strategy appears to include not alienating the large corporate element that has supported Bush from his own support.

It is interesting to speculate who might run with McCain in the next presidential election. It would be my preference if Colin Powell were to accept that position. Condolesa Rice is another possibility, but not one of my choice. In the meantime we are going through the debate about defining an endpoint for the mess in Iraq. Obviously an abrupt withdrawal and subsequent Civil War is not a good scenario. So far the debate has been polarized and no feasible plan put forth. The important thing right now is that the current strategy for the war is being questioned. Hopefully putting light on the subject will bring forth a more coherent plan.

Since much of the discussion that occurs today goes back to whether or not the war was justified. It continues to bring out some of the old saws as such as weapons of mass destruction, chemical weapons, tie to Al Qaeda, the promotion of terrorism throughout the world etc. etc. I think that the subject of weapons of mass destruction is very weak in the sense that considering the decrepit nature of the Hussein regime it is highly unlikely that any sophisticated nuclear device would be forthcoming. Secondly even if weapons of a nuclear type were to be developed there was no feasible way that it could be delivered outside of Iraq. Iraq has no Air Force capable of delivering something like that. So to me that is a very weak argument. The subject of chemical weapons development appears to have been based on very questionable information from a source dubbed "Curveball". The German intelligence agency is on record as disclaiming any credibility for this source citing he was an unstable personality and they put little or no credence in what he had to say. Nonetheless the Bush administration's need for information that bolstered their purposes exploited it, much to the embarrassment of Colin Powell.

One of the things that is becoming very obvious in discussions regarding postwar planning is that the Bush administration has little or no understanding of the nature of the people of the Middle East. again misinformation was apparently supplied that indicated the Iraqi people would greet an American invasion with rose petals and parades. That proved also to be entirely faults. Even today conflicting polls indicate the Iraqi people, in general, would like the Americans to leave. Some however, say that is not the case and that the Iraqi people want the Americans to stay to maintain the so-called peace. Obviously there is no peace and although many people say let's mention the progress that has been made instead of concentrating on the mayhem that is being committed daily and we'll get a better picture of what's going on there. Much hope is being placed on the tentative steps being taken to form an Iraqi government. It is very problematical that any hastily conceived Iraqi government will be able to establish the law and order that is necessary to bring peace to that area. Obviously the Sunni element which had enjoyed favorable treatment under Hussein is not going to capitulate easily. If in some manner an arrangement is made that satisfies the Sunni's so much the better, how likely that is to happen is yet to be seen.

In attempting to get a clear picture of what might be close to the reality of the situation I find the talking heads, the expert panel's, the various commentaries, all seemed to be attempts to spin the topical bits of information to bolster a point of view. I'd delight to find a book by an objective, knowledgeable, readable author that might lend credible insight to this mess of a situation. If anyone has suggestions I'd appreciate them.

Book Review submitted to library.

Title: Rise of The Vulcans

Author: James Mann

Who are the Vulcans? They are an inner circle of advisers to G. W. Bush who, over decades in some cases, have a long shared experience in government dating back to Nixon, Ford, Reagan and the first Bush administration.

Because they have been working together in a variety of governmental positions, both high and low, for so long a time, they adopted the name of “Vulcans“, after the Roman god of fire, the forge and metalwork. Donald Rumsfeld’s careers started as a congressional representatives from his home state of Illinois. He brought in a protégé, Richard Cheney. Colin Powell’s start was in the ROTC in college and he rose through the Army’s ranked quickly. Richard Armitage also started with the military at Annapolis and distinguished himself during three tours of duty in Vietnam. Paul Wolfowitz and Condoleeza Rice were academics whose interests and expertise brought them to the attention of governmental and political leaders.

The book “Rise Of The Vulcans” gives a very good account of the backgrounds of these people. Their interest in government, their egos, and their abilities are demonstrated. This book is well documented with footnotes and attributions.

From Cold War detente under Kissinger in the ‘70s to the present posture of “preemptive war” under Bush is a fascinating saga. The current administration’s adventure is problematic. The unilateralist reliance on superpower military might is a departure from previous administrations. The book describes how these attitudinal change came about. I felt that a glaring omission was the large part played by Carl Rove, as the political adviser, and Bush’s heavy reliance on Karen Hughes, in his decision-making.

For a controversially elected President, with no strong mandate, a promise of “compassionate conservatism”, and “NO nation building“, Bush has taken the country into dangerous and expensive territory. How the current tumultuous situation plays out is yet to be seen.

Contempletive 

I'm new to the blogger scene but would like to participate. There are many things going on these days that I have strong opinions about. I wish to get them out and responded to. I have no delusions about my being omniscient or that the basis for my opinions are from totally unbiased sources. It is very difficult to know nowadays. I try to determine the validity of information and test it by what I call "the ring of truth".

The issues of the day are discussed or commented on by "spin" specialists. They seldom have the "ring of truth".
Partisan "talking points" come across like so many parrots squaking. In this category I place "entertainers" Rush Limbaugh and G.Gordon Liddy. Sean Hannity also has the typical razzmatazz music and gravely sounding side voices that can be extremely rude and uncouth.

For years I have decried the damage caused by the liberal influence in our schools, laws, churches, and media.
I consider myself a conservative and have voted Republican most of the time until the Bushes came along.
The candidacy of John McCain gave me hope but his star was shot down by the dirty tricks of Karl Rove. It appeared to me that the "big money interests" had decided George W. Bush would be a good front man for their purposes and subsequently backed him strongly. The manner in which he was injected (not really elected) into the Presidency was not a proud moment in our history. Since Bush has been head of the administration, with his reliance on V.P. Richard Cheney, he has assembled a group of syncophants who he loyally backs, and gives medal to regardless of the quality of their services. The hopes of the big money interests have not been misplaced. Their bet has paid off handsomely.

Now I decry the damage done by this administration. Very important, for me, is the degradation of the environment. The changes in laws, the disregard for existing laws, the skirting of laws by executive order, are all done in the name of "helping the economy". That translates into relaxing pollution regulations because requiring adherence to the stipulated standards would weaken the bottom line of the polluters. No consideration is given the deleterious effects on peoples health or the environmental impact.

The secretive nature of policy decisions is abhorent to our democratic process. The energy plan (and its secret planning) was anathema to the needs of the country at this time. My understanding is that "conservation" was a bad word. Cheney made the classic remark, widely repeated, that"conservation may be a personal virtue but has no place in an energy policy". Today they are eating those totally idiotic words.

The tax giveaways and the continuing effort to make them permanent when the deficit is skyrocking in the face of natural catastrophies and war debts is unconscionable. Add to that the totally irresponsible inclusion of billions of pork in the budget and we have a picture of dysfunctional government and legislation.

Of course the total mindlessness of the Iraq war is a puzzle to me. How the country got suckered into it is
the lingering question of doctored intelligence. This will eventually be sorted out I hope. The spinelessness of our elected representatives in allowing themselves to be stampeded into granting war powers to the President is finally being brought into focus. At long last some have found the backbone to speak out.

Well, that should suffice for an introduction. If anyone reads this and wishes to comment pro or con I will welcome the opportunity to discuss things in a gentlemanly manner.