I don't expect anything I'm about to write to be popular, but as per usual, I honestly don't care. I understand what seems to clear to me based on actual fact seems entirely different to someone else, who, of course, is equally positive they are right, whether they have fact behind them or not.
Now, I have been vocal to some about my reservations on how our President has gone about the business of running our country. I firmly believe that if the day the South Carolina Congressman who called him a liar in open Congress had been bitch-slapped into the next century by our leader, then we would be living in a much different climate. Metaphorically speaking, of course. Literally speaking, we'd still be screwed when it comes to the actual climate. But that's another blog. When Obama chose to remain silent and turn the other cheek to such a shocking display of disrespect, it told the Republicans (and the future Tea Party) all they needed to know. They could control this upstart black man. And they did.
Maybe I am just a sucker for the dark horse, but I read these editorials or read what former friends write and I get so angry at the self-imposed cloud of ignorance. I hear words like "socialist", "Marxist", "Hitler", "dictator" and it makes me want to punch something. I get that all presidents face something very close to this, but this is the only time in history in which a Speaker of the House was permitted to slam a sitting President on national TV after a State of the Union speech. The only time in history a President has been mocked and insulted in open Congress. And by far the only President who has been so thoroughly bootstrapped by the opposing side. People lay the blame at the man's feet but it does not belong there. It belongs at the feet of the Congress and the Republicans who would, and actually have killed bills that were theirs to start with. Yes. Obama has proposed bills almost verbatim to that of Republicans, and they have been shot down, with an insult thrown in for good measure. This is how America "gets things done" now.
What prompted me to write at this moment is the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012. Constitutionalists are lathering themselves up into a libertarian froth over it, and while I could understand why if they were even remotely accurate about their complaints, for the most part, they are not. The NDAA is a bill that is passed every year and has been for 49 years. This year, the controversy is the part that, people believe anyway, gives the President the power to detain anyone he damn well feels like it on even "the flimsiest hint of terrorism" (this was from a Tea Party radio personality Dr. Laura Roth, who is a dingbat). The controversy, to them, is that this includes US citizens. This addition to the NDAA is an obvious response to the US traitor that everyone was so upset about earlier in the year who was "assassinated" (because if you're foreign, it's execution, but if you were born in the US, even if you have disavowed all citizenship, it is an assassination). However, because I like to know the truth and not just be fed things that are designed to make me scared and pliable, I actually looked it up. The actual, 568 page bill.
First off, I want to make clear that while I very much think the Constitution needs to be overhauled and redesigned for the current time period, I am very protective of the right to due process and everything that comes with it. Although, that, too is horribly abused by our citizenry, it is supposed to be our protection against overzealous government agencies. I stress supposed to be. People- even people I deeply respect- see this bill as the end of our civil liberties and the end of civilization as we know it. It's not. Here are the facts.
In 2002, President Bush signed the AUMF, or the Authorization of Military Force, against Iraq (the country that had nothing to do with the terrorist attack, just to be clear). This, along with the Patriot Act, is the background for the new provisions in the NDAA. The problem the people I mention have is the provision in which they think the act allows the President carte blanch when detaining terrorist suspects. Again, this is not the case. First of all, the government has had this power since the Patriot Act was signed. The provision includes US citizens, and that's where things supposedly get hairy. However, this is the exact wording of that provision:
"The NDAA text affirms the President's authority to detain, via the Armed Forces, includes any person "who was part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners," under the law of war, "without trial, until the end of the hostilities authorized by the [AUMF] ..
It goes on to make this point clear:
"Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States"
This is not carte blancheal-Qaeda or Taliban. This is clearly stated. Further, if you are an American citizen who is plotting against America, you are guilty of treason, in which case you have said goodbye to your civil liberties anyway. Also, the penalty is death, usually. It always has been.
What I am personally upset with is that, yet again, the blame gets placed at Obama's feet and he is called a dictator. Here is another fact: Obama did not want this provision included under any circumstances. When it was proposed, he said he would veto it if it reached his desk. The response? Congress said they would not vote on the bill extending unemployment and several other desperately needed programs. They, once again, held American interests hostage to get their way. Our Congress, by definition, are terrorists. They just do not hold guns, they hold pens. So Obama has no choice to agree. But when he signs, he states very clearly he does not agree with this provision. This is what he said at the signing:
"Ultimately, I decided to sign this bill not only because of the critically important services it provides for our forces and their families and the national security programs it authorizes, but also because the Congress revised provisions that otherwise would have jeopardized the safety, security, and liberty of the American people. Moving forward, my Administration will interpret and implement the provisions described below in a manner that best preserves the flexibility on which our safety depends and upholds the values on which this country was founded."
I could expound on this even more, but this is my main point. We, the American people, are to blame. When we vote for a President, it really doesn't matter. Most people don't understand how the Electoral College works, and I honestly wish I didn't, because it depresses me. If you need any further evidence that American is NOT a democracy and never has been, read up on the Electoral College. Suffice it to say, voting for a President makes you feel like you are taking charge of your government, but really it's not up to you. Or me. However, that is not the case when it comes to the Senate and the Congress. We, as a people, really do vote them in. In 2010, the Tea Party invaded the Congress like a Mongolian horde, only with more pillaging. And we allowed that to happen. In 2008, same thing. What no one seems to understand is that the President's power is extremely limited. He can only do what the Congress allows him to do, which is painfully obvious looking back over the past three years. American voters give the Congress that power. And they use it to attack and destroy the fabric of our society, all in the name of good old-fashioned money.
People are afraid. They are terrified. They want someone to blame and because they are sheep, they blame the one person who actually doesn't shoulder most of it. Polls show that Congress has a 16% approval rating, as opposed to Obama's 42%. That is supposed to show that there is some sanity out there somewhere, but all I read or hear about is how Obama has failed in all his promises and has destroyed America (when he inherited a destroyed America) and how they just can't wait for that socialist dictator to go away so we can get down to "fixing America". It is fear that drives the ignorance. No one wants America to turn into a police state, or lose our civil rights, or basically turn into other countries that have done that (and often have better run governments for it, but that's beside the point). We are in no danger of that actually happening, but that is the message these groups are spreading because fear makes people nice and pliable, and makes them vote any way they are told. Which brings me to what I am afraid of.
I am deathly afraid of what the next few years will bring. Fear makes people turn to religion, which in and of itself isn't necessarily negative, but it often leads to overzealous, dangerous religious people taking power, historically speaking. Looking at the GOP potentials, almost all of them do little else but spout about God, and religion, and the moral fiber of America and what they will do to "restore America to morality". I, personally, do not want anyone deciding what is moral and what is not. Because unfortunately, a great deal of our laws reflect a stance on morality. What is right and what is wrong. But these people, some of whom are truly terrifying, think anyone who does not think the way they do is wrong. They want to not only blur the line of separation of church and state, they want to eradicate it. The very thing that led to the founding of our country they want to destroy, and nobody even blinks. Nobody calls foul and waves the Constitution around like a banner at this idea.
I'm afraid because I can see a future in which the corrupt Congress and a zealot President join together and I can see what will happen. I may not agree with a whole lot of Obama's tactics, but he is the only thing standing in the way right now of that happening. The Conservatives and the Republicans have an agenda. Right now, even with his limitations, Obama can still prevent that agenda from being realized. But if we- and by we I mean the Electoral College- elect a President with the same agenda, this country will no longer even slightly resemble the country our Founding Fathers fought for. There will be freedom of religion, in practice even if not by mandate. Social programs in their current form- programs over 60% of us desperately need- will not exist. Immigrants will be deported by the millions and there will be no one to take the jobs they leave behind, because despite what everyone loves to think, illegal immigrants work jobs that none of us would take. Because of this the economy would suffer even more (this has already occurred in Georgia) Abortion would become illegal. Homosexuality would be banned-again in spirit and practice if not by mandate. Health care for the poor would be non-existent. Would the more extreme things happen? For example, would we start lynching people if they were pagans, like me? I don't know. Far worse things have happened here, and not that long ago.
I'm tired, and I've rambled, but I don't care. All I ask if for people to take charge of their own information, and not someone else's version of the truth. Don't be spoonfed someone else's ideas. Don't be afraid because someone else tells you you should be. And, for the love of everything good and holy, stop blaming the wrong people for what is the fault of others.
No comments:
Post a Comment