“The only real difference between the Democrats and Republicans at this point is that the Democrats believe in big, solvent government and the Republicans believe in an even bigger, insolvent government. ”

“In my view if a Democratic president had Bush’s record, the Republican party would have come close to impeaching him for his adventures in big government, fiscal insanity and foreign policy liberalism. But it swallowed its principles and covered up its differences to keep him (and itself) in power. The consequences are slowly becoming clear. ”

–Andrew Sullivan

Source: Bush’s Triumph Conceals The Great Conservative Crack-up

Three points of view on nomination of Paul Wolfowitz to head World Bank:

Marshall Wittman: While Wolfowitz bears responsibility for the mishandling of the aftermath of the war, he has a world outlook that is fundamentally distinct from Bolton. In truth, Wolfowitz is a humanitarian internationalist in the tradition of Truman, JFK and Scoop. When the DeLays and Lotts excoriated the Clinton Administration on Kosovo, Wolfowitz stood firmly for a humanitarian intervention to prevent genocide. He has demonstrated genuine sympathy for the downtrodden whether they are tsunami victims or the Iraqi marsh Arabs. A few years ago, the Moose witnessed Wolfowitz as the target of hecklers at a pro-Israel rally when he voiced sympathy for the plight of the Palestinians.

Andrew Sullivan: “I’m with David (Brooks) on the assessment of Paul Wolfowitz. I’ve never understood the demonization of this man, whose integrity has always struck me as unimpeachable. He truly is a sincere backer of freedom around the world, has taken many lumps defending that increasingly vindicated principle, and been subjected to the usual obloquy from the reactionary parts of the left. The only moral question that hangs over him is the deployment of torture. I have no idea what his involvement in that shameful chapter of the war has been. But it would go against everything I know about the man to think he would approve. ”

Thomas Barnett: “A short comment on Wolfowitz for World Bank: He does have the background, and he’ll probably do a really good job. He wants to be his own guy, and this is one helluva job for someone with his long career of working with foreign governments. To me, it’s putting in the WB a guy who’s really smart on developing Asia (former ambassador to Indonesia famous for his immersion techniques), and that’s a huge plus right now. Getting all of Asia into the Core is more important than fixing the Middle East in the grand scheme of things–a lot more important. Having someone Bush really trusts in that job is key–a very good sign. It’s yet another amazing turn for a guy with an amazing career. I honestly see it as overwhelmingly positive, understanding the many misgivings many have about him. Comparing him to McNamara is nonsense, really. Two very different people. Wolfowitz is no technocrat, not even a Vulcan. Deep down, he’s far more romantic in his understanding of the world than anyone realizes, in my opinion. He’ll do fine. It’ll be a great choice in the end.”

The National Center for Atmospheric Research reportsthat their computer models show that “globally averaged surface air temperatures would rise about a half degree Celsius (one degree Fahrenheit) and global sea levels would rise another 11 centimeters (4 inches) from thermal expansion alone by 2100″ - the same as occured during the 20th century.

“Many people don’t realize we are committed right now to a significant amount of global warming and sea level rise because of the greenhouse gases we have already put into the atmosphere,” says lead author Gerald Meehl. “Even if we stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations, the climate will continue to warm, and there will be proportionately even more sea level rise. The longer we wait, the more climate change we are committed to in the future.”

The question: having determined that the Kyoto Treaty would be harmful to US interests, what does our leadership feel is a balanced alternative that will protect our economic interests while curbing the pollution we produce?

The budget debate is under way, and as the current Congress makes its decisions on which direction the pork will fly, the fact remains we currenlty spend 12% of our budget on Interest on the National Debt. That is shameful.

I am sure this sounds partisan but the Republicans became the party of choice over 20 years ago. They were the the party of reform; the party of small government; the party of fiscal responsibility. They were “starving the beast”. Bottom line - they control the government and none of this is true.

Resources on Federal Budget and Current Debt:

• National Debt - http://brillig.com/debt_clock/
• White House Office of Management and Budget - http://www.whitehouse.gov/OMB/
• Congressional Budget Office - http://www.cbo.gov/

Author: Phillip Bobbit
Publisher: Anchor (September 9, 2003)
ISBN: 0385721382 available at amazon.com
Read more