Law enforcement agencies have a high rate of success catching arsonists because they usually return to the scene of their crime often.  Our “arsonist in chief”, George W Bush, flies off this week again to the Middle East in order to pour more oil on the situation.  What reasons would justify picture taking and fancy diners when there is a quagmire in Iraq, raging oil prices, and general ugliness throughout the region is difficult to figure out.  Never the less, our George will celebrate Israel’s 60th birthday party but somehow will not have time to visit with Palestinians. 

Bush appears born to be a poor negotiator.  Instinctively a bully when being a snob won’t get him his way, Bush simply won’t do the heavy lifting to help put the pieces in place in the Middle East.  It has been clear for a long time that the Iraq War was a huge mistake and that getting the bulk of US Troops out was in our national interest.  Unfortunately it is not that easy.

Iraq, as bad as Hussein might have been, was connected to the general stability of the region.  When regime change occurred, it quickly became apparent that forces tending to contain Iran and Syria were not there.  In trying to put a stable framework back together, one immediately comes to the chief “pot hole” in the road to Middle East peace - the Israeli-Palestinian issue.  (Most Middle East literate people knew that before the US invaded Iraq, but that was not included in the “Pearl, Wolfowitz, and Feith” memos).

Bush has had the chance to play the “honest broker” for 5 years following the invasion but apparently his mountain biking has precluded that effort.  This trip he will confirm one more time for all Arabs that Bush has a one sided view of the Middle East and they can forget about any progress while he remains President.  So, the list of those who are counting the days to January 20, 2009 keeps growing.

It must be very difficult for someone like Hillary Clinton to “say it’s over”.  She has run a tough campaign and experienced the glamour of the national spotlight for over a year and half.  She has been the person who was destine to be the Democratic nominee and one who might just become the first woman President.  Her Hillary for President “business” spent lots and lots of money too.  She was the meal ticket for quite a posse.  And now it looks like it is over but she does not seem to be able to “say it’s over”.

What Hillary and her advisors had not counted on was that there would be another candidate whose message would resonate truer and more inspiring than Hillary’s.  Hillary had chosen to be all things to all voters and that simply did not ring true this time around.  This other candidate, Barack Obama, offered voters much of what Hillary promised but packaged it in a hope filled message.  He refused to climb into the gutter and fight preferring to bring the discussion back to higher principles.  But Hillary was no piece of stale bread and as good as Barack appeared, Hillary was still viewed as more capable by many people.  The difference that tilted this race to Barack was mainly new and independent voters who were turned off by the Bush Administration’s as well as Congress’ performances.  Barack preached a message of change and walked the talk.

Either Hillary or Barack would be a far superior President than George W Bush.  But in 2008, only one can be elected and this time it will be Barack Obama.  After all the spent money, all the days on the road, all the small talk, and all the ass kissing for donations, Hillary has no chance via the selection process and it is time to end her campaign on a high and civil note.  It’s time for Hillary to “say it’s over”  

When you read this post’s title you probably expect to read a critique of an integrated set of US Government policies that coherently focus our nation’s efforts towards the Middle East.  You probably expect to read an assessment of our stated goals and our actual achievements.  Your expectations are reasonable but you will not read any of that because the Bush Administration has never had a Middle East Policy. 

Well maybe that is an over statement.  George W Bush’s policy seems to have been what ever Dick Cheney wanted or what ever AIPAC asked or what ever God told George to do.  That is about the same as saying there is no policy.

1. Dick Cheney never met a barrel of oil he did not like.  In his barely disguised attempt to rob Iraq of its oil, he has destabilized the greater Middle East and set the stage for more than doubling the price of a barrel of oil.  How could anything Dick said lead to a sensible policy or one that was congruent with other policies?

2. AIPAC is myopic on Israel and what it narrowly sees as “best” for Israel’s self interest.  Maybe that is proper for AIPAC but it is no basis to build US foreign policy.  US foreign policy is about US national interests, not Israel’s.  US policy needs to recognize and respect the interests of all Middle East countries, not just Israel. 

3. The God that George W Bush speaks to has already been discredited several times.  He told George to deny women the right to their own reproductive health but it was ok for his Government to forget about the newborn.  He told George that it was ok to send American soldiers into another Country and kill their citizens even though those citizens had done nothing to provoke the attack.  He told George it was ok to champion faith based values and to treat gays and lesbians as less than human.

With this type of input it is fair to say that for 8 years the US has been without a Middle East policy and today we have the fruits to show it.  Israel and the Palestinians are still fighting and treating each other with contempt.  Iraq is simply a mess with no short term hope of a peaceful solution.  Lebanon is falling apart.  Iran is expanding their influence without regard to US or UN calls for cooperation.  And Syria plays a non-helpful role sitting strategically next to Lebanon, Iran, Turkey, and Iraq. 

If I am wrong and there was a US policy, what do you think it might have been to have produced these sad results?

In 2004, unbelievably George W Bush won a second term employing a strategy that threw many overboard so that he could rally enough votes to beat a lack luster John Kerry.  Immigrants, especially Mexicans became second class human beings.  They were labeled “criminals” and lumped in with those who rob, rape, and steal.  Gays and lesbians were not even accorded the status of human being and treated as untouchables.  This defies the odds that say 1 in every 11 people is gay or lesbian.  And woman were placed where they belong, barefoot and pregnant.  Common sense did not seem to be necessary.  All that was required was fear and faith in a President who promised everything.

In 2008, the Country now has had 8 years to see incompetence and plain mean spirited intentions do their thing.  The Country is worse off by a huge measure from the Country Bush inhereted and the US standing in the world is rock bottom.  Can the Republicans afford to disown Mexicans, gays/lesbians, or women again?

The path to the Presidency for Barack Obama is the high road.  He needs to focus American on its good virtures and potential for a bright future.  He needs to remind Americans of what needs to change in order for the next generation to have a reasonable expectation of a better life than their parents.  He needs to shift the balance of where political spoils flow and funnel much more into the common wealth like education, roads, bridges, alternate energy, and math/science.

John McCain said this week that “sex trafficking” would be a point of emphasis in his administration.  What did he say?  We already have laws around that issue and it is hardly in the top 50 concerns the Country faces.  Each time McCain brings up something silly like that, Obama needs to ask him a relevant question, like what is your strategy to end the war in Iraq, or how do you plan to bring fiscal and monetary sense to the US Goverment finances?

It looks like the slightly modified phrase normally applied to accedemics, “Publish or Perish”, is now more aptly applied to Bush Administration losers, “Publish or Be Forgotten”.  In today’s Wall Street Journal, you will find to op-ed pieces written by already discredited people.  Your friends, Karl Rove and little Johnny Bolton, write about their favorite subjects in ways that say nothing and suggest ulterior motives.  So much for “fair and balanced”.

Rove writes “It’s Obama, Warts and All” in his Jeykll and Hyde manner.  He would like to make you think he is objective but there is a sound of desperation on how the Republican candidate can pull out the election.  (Unsaid but implied is that John McCain could pull it out with Karl Rove’s help.)  The key to the lack of genuineness is Rove’s reference to Reverend Wright and saying that this would be an important issue (like a wart?).  With Hagee and Robertson in your corner, McCain will need to be careful about opening that can of worms. 

Johnny Bolton writes “Bush’s North Korea Nuclear Abdication” (surprise, surprise) and once again tells us nothing.  Bolton seems to forget that all military means are off the table because he and other like minded neoconservatives committed all of the US military resources to Iraq for a war that was not needed.  Bolton is a “senior fellow” at the American Enterprise Institute and it would appear that his job is to continually stir the mud around North Korea making improved relations with North Korea or its neighbors more difficult.  Bolton seems to miss the point that for both China and Russia, there is no advantage for a nuclear capable North Korea.  I do not give credit to the Bush Administration for a sane policy towards North Korea since they have seemed incapable of forging any sensible foreign policy for any part of the world.  Rather, Bush has no options and both Condi Rice and Robert Gates know how foolish it would be to escalate adversarial relations with North Korea.  It is a shell game where the world knows that there is no peanut under any of the shells Bush is moving around.

John McCain continues to paint himself into a corner.  Yesterday he made a speech that was not needed.  He spoke out on what type of Supreme Court justices he would appoint if he becomes the next President.  Instead of emphasizing moderate qualities based upon the Constitution and relevant interpretations, McCain cited Roberts and Alito as great examples.  It was not necessary for McCain to have cited William O. Douglas as his model but at a time where we need moderation, McCain missed his chance.

Looking at this speech on a larger scale voters can see a clear choice shaping up.  It is will it be “Bush III” or a new course.  McCain already has endorsed the Iraq War and offers no ideas on how to end it.  He has also proposed tax cuts which could create a trillion dollar deficit on a $ 3 trillion budget.  (This would put him on a track to match George W Bush’s dismal record by adding another $ 4 trillion to the national debt in his first term alone.) 

With the election looking like McBush III running against the Democratic candidate, it must really hurt inside the Clinton campaign staff that she could win the Presidency and become the first woman President.  (This reflects how failed the Bush Administration has been.)  Ironically it looks like it will be Barack Obama, the first African American President who will lead the Country beginning on January 20, 2009.

Barack Obama is looking less energetic than 6 months ago.  His speeches, although still honest and well meaning, are less moving and less captivating.  His eyes look a little distant.  And why shouldn’t he when you consider the non-stop nature of this already 18 month long campaign.  But, is Barack tired or disillusioned with our media and the quality of partisan politics?

There is a little worry on either count.  Once President the spot light is on all the time.  The duties of the Office call for the President to work long hours and sacrifice private time (like to ride a bike or visit you home far away from Washington).  And then there are those phone calls at 3 am.  Americans may not want a President that gets tired.

With respect to becoming disillusioned, it is very easy to understand how that can happen, and quite frankly, it would be mystifying if it did not happen.  Spin-meisters, however, will have a field day with that observation and make more of that in preference to talking about real substance. 

Barack now has this issue to deal with.  It would probably be best handled with a return to the positive, energetic speeches he began his campaign with.  He should stick with what is most natural and forget about shots and beer unless he really likes them.  He should state his policy and the objective he seeks and leave it to others to explain how it works and why it will work.  This is the time for the silent Obama supporters to step forward and pick up a piece of the load.   Since Barack can not, by nature, simply look the public in the eye and lie, he needs to keep his message simple and purposeful.  His experts can then go on the talk shows and explain how it works.

There is still a month to go in the primaries and the odds are there will still be two standing.  Late August Democratic convention is a long way off (and it is hard to see how this will end before the convention).  He should take a vacation after the last primary and then come back full of smiles and confidence.  In this election, he appears to be the only candidate that has uncompromised value based objectives for the country.  It would be a shame to lose out on them just because he has become tired or disillusioned.

Young Americans continue to enlist and ship off for a tour (or more) in Iraq.  Young Americans continue to die or have some of their body parts blown away.  The severely wounded and the dead come home and nothing happens.  No one stands up and says enough!

John McCain has warned us that to leave Iraq now will mean a victory for “al Qaeda in Iraq” and near certain havoc in American streets.  But neither John McCain nor anyone in the Bush Administration has a clue how to successfully end the war.  So we keep doing the same things.  The spin-meisters are telling us it is Iran who is causing  the big problems now.  If only Iran would keep its secret arms suppliers in check, Iraq would be peaceful. 

You wonder what these military and Administration people are thinking.  Iraq is a country that has never known democracy and most of its people have been dirt poor since the Babylonians.  Hussein used ruthless measures to keep the Kurds, Sunnis, and Shiites in check, and he kept the oil profits for himself.  Now most of the background unrest in Iraq centers on how to get the most benefit from the oil.  Shiites are fighting amongst themselves for the biggest share, the Kurds are quietly consolidating their position and keeping the Iraqi central Government fractured.  The Sunnis inherantly have less oil given where they live, but they have powerful friends in Syria and Saudi Arabia.  “Al Qaeda in Iraq” is a nusence rather than a real threat.

American foreign policy, of course, missed the real problem in the Middle East when it decided to pick on Iraq.  Bush and friends have now committed the bulk of US Forces to a war that can not be won while the police action in Afghanistan goes undermanned and the options open to dealing with Iran’s behaviors are severely limited. 

The greatest risk is that America, as a whole, is sleeping and seems to think this will take care of itself.  For sure both Democratic Presidential candidates have promised to bring the troops home but there will be screams from the right when that happens.  Without a clear redefinition of American Middle East policy, when the slightest hiccup occurs, the next President may pause.  Instead the American people must come to grips with the unpleasant fact that their Government has screwed up royally and squander America’s precious capital of lives, reputation, money, and time.  America must wake up if we are to learn and have a chance of not repeating this insane behavior again.

Today on the NBC’s Meet the Press show, Tim Russet interviewed Barack Obama.  One more time the viewers needed to waste precious time rehashing the Rev Jeremiah Wright non-issue.   Although this time for only about 20 minutes out of the approximate 50 minutes of interview time was wasted.  The wastefulness of these questions became really clear when finally Russet ask a question about the “summer holiday from gas taxes”.  Obama’s answer spoke volumes about the uniqueness of Obama.

In measured tones, Obama dissected the proposals by McCain and Clinton to discontinue the federal gasoline tax for the summer months, as a means of helping middle class Americans.  Obama proceeded to put into perspective how much savings was available per average American (30 cents per day) and that there was no guarentee that gasoline prices would not mysteriously rise to shallow up the entire 14 cents reduction.  Obama continued to point out that without an offsetting tax that the federal roads projects would go unfunded and more Americans could be put out of work.

On a different subject, Obama carefully avoided getting committed to a “bomb Iran” policy before he was President.  Hillary Clinton’s recent pledge to bomb Iran if they bombed Israel played well with AIPAC and other Israel supporters but is hardly the rhetoric conducive to bringing success to the current nuclear weapons negotiations with Iran.  Obama showed enormous wisdom in picking this course.

From their public speeches, there should be no doubt that John McCain and Hillary Clinton are not going to take crap from anyone or any foreign country.  They talk tough and certainly give the impression of being tough.  Barack Obama is a different story.  He seems reasonable and maybe even “nice”.  The next President will need to be both “tough” and “nice”, and in addition, he or she will need to be “smart” with complicated issues, and be politically courageous to use brains instead of rhetoric.  I hope the Democratic candidate can possess this balance, and I really hope Obama gets the chance to show us he has the total gift.

The British Labor Government was overwhelmingly rebuked in this week’s local elections.  The Conservatives won in a landslide and are positioned to win a Parliament majority when the next general election is held.  For Gordon Brown it is bad news but as the Reverend Jeremiah Wright said, “the chickens are coming home to roost”.

It is just plain difficult to understand why Tony Blair was so enamored with George W Bush and so blind as to not see the folly of regime change.  I would be disappointed to hear that Tony’s motivation was juicy oil and reconstruction contracts that would keep the British economy rolling.  It truely represents a colossal error in judgement on Blairs part to have believed anything “W” said or promised.  Now, it seems that Blair’s successor, Gordon Brown must pay the price.

There are similar indications that Americans are finished with Bush and his crowd.  Some polls, however, still show McCain running fairly well versus either Hillary or Barack.  I would predict that once into the Presidential campaign, following the conventions, the distinction between Bush/Republicans/McCain will be lost and the voters will select a Democrat for the next President and sweep out many Republican incumbents and leave us with a Democratic majority in both Houses.  I just hope the Democrats understand this is less a vote for them, than a vote against Bush and all those who were connected.