Government As Soap Opera - When Will The Other Shoe Fall?

The deal that has been made with Syria is so rife with "what ifs" I can't begin to count them.  On that issue I'll say little today other than it was far too easy and the one player who basically has been seldom heard is Syria itself.  As I watch the next episode unfold it will be to see who double crosses who and when.

Meanwhile back at the White House Obama is getting ready to go to Asia.  The pivot that he's been hyping off and on.  Shifting our attention to the next area of the world in which to impose ourselves.  That's a secondary story line. Do you feel the resentment building?  I do.  Especially in those predominantly Muslim countries.

While the cat is away the mice in Congress will parallel it with the upcoming battle for one more continuing resolution to fund the government.  It is like a soap isn't it?  Thirty years running you have the same main characters unless they die from old age and the same story lines.  It's amazing.

Back to the drama.  I'd like to see a change in the story line but fear I won't.  It isn't the time for the Republicans to remain being stupid but I fear they will.  The issue is defunding Obamacare or shut down the government.  Please.  Don't do this.  Get creative.  Yes, Obamacare is a mess. And the President should have learned from the Syria debacle he really needs Congress with him.  But he doesn't learn either.  The problem here is no foreign entity can bail him out of this one. No one will bail us out either if the government shuts down.

The military will be left without pay.  We seniors will be left without our social security checks and the poor without welfare and food stamps. That doesn't even scratch the surface of the total impact it would have on the country.  Remember, the bigger the government, the bigger the impact and we have a doozy.

The President, if he could be realistic for a brief moment, should delay implementation of the entire bill until it's sorted out.  He won't.  Harry Reid and the Democratic obstructionists like Chris van Hollen should resign.  The Tea Party purists should also resign.  Of course they won't.  It's the formula. Same story, 200th episode!

Shutting down the government won't solve anything but will succeed in making the people even more angry than they already are.  Maybe we need to contact our congressional delegations with the verve we did in opposing a military strike in Syria.  This time tell them to grow up, work together and get this budget mess straightened out.

While they're at it they should consider changing a few rules about how they do business.  It is flat out wrong when one individual be it John Boehner, Harry Reid or Barack Obama can prevent legislation from being debated or moved forward or enforced on personal whim.

If they find dictatorship so attractive I'm sure Syria or Russia would indulge them.

Op-Eds And Spin

Have you been following the flap over Putin's op-ed piece  in the NY Times? The one where he takes Obama to task for just about everything and makes himself out to be the greatest being ever to take an interest in the happenings in the Middle East?

Considering everything he said, most of what seems to irritate the pundits is the last paragraph where he in no uncertain terms parrots what Obama has said before, that we are not an exceptional people.  In many respects I can't disagree with what he sees because our exceptionalism has gotten lost in petty politics and those we've elected to engage in them.  In that arena we certainly are exceptional! On too many levels!

The next most irritating thing about the article was that the Times printed it. Frankly, I'm glad they did and that they were correct in so doing. We as Americans need to be aware of the propaganda  about us that is being spewed by the likes of Putin.  How else will we gain any insight into how others view us.  If what he says makes you angry, consider why.

The New York Post has even printed a tutorial for you. They've taken his piece and translated it into far more likely intent. It isn't flattering to say the least.

It's interesting to me that an American PR firm, Ketchem, has Russia as a client and makes an exceptional amount of money as such.  It's also true that Putin is not fluent in English and no doubt had help in polishing what he wanted to say.  It's discomforting in some way that an American company could make the villain look so darn good.

Having had a career in PR I can say Putin's piece is PR spin at it's best. And even though it's a spoof of sorts, the New York Post's piece nails the truth. Both have done Americans a public service.  Now, read them! And think about it.

The Waiting Game

There was nothing in Obama' speech last night that came as a surprise.  Actually it was a rehash of what has been said before.

So where does it leave us?  As an insignificant entity whose leader abdicated our position as leader of the free world.  Instead we are now bowing to the dictates of Russia whatever they may be.

Military action has been delayed which is what the President wanted even though he wasn't going to have much say in it anyway. However, it hasn't necessarily been avoided because we'll be jumping through the same hoops when Iran is ready to go nuke.  With even less support than we have at present.

The worst part of it is Assad will go unpunished because Russia will protect him.  That wasn't the President's intent either though I have yet to figure out why. Assad still has his chemical weapons.  Removing them will take months if not years and who can trust Syria to give them all up? And who can guarantee he won't use them again while all the "negotiations" are going on?

So what has our bluster left in it's wake?  A demoralized Free Syrian Army who most likely would have been the good guys at the beginning.  Now there is so much al Qaeda infiltration into rebel ranks we haven't a clue who is a safe bet.

We have ancient, historic Christian communities being destroyed by these rebels and the citizens who refuse to embrace Islam being beheaded.  Are chemical weapons worse?

We have Assad left unchecked to carry on with his civil war.  That's an oxymoron isn't it? Civil War? Russia will keep him well armed and those caught in the cross fire will continue to die.

Meanwhile our people will meet with Russia's people and try to sort things out. To suit Russia and Syria and the U.N. will wait to see which way the wind blows before coming up with their own resolution.

Meanwhile, the country that should be dictating the terms for the surrender of WMDs, the U.S.,  is sitting, begging and rolling over to Putin's commands.  Will he even throw us a bone?  I doubt it.

Tony Blair was chastised for being Bush's poodle.  What does that make Obama to Putin?  Maybe a chihuahua?  Well, at least he's got the ears for it.

Don't Pop The Champagne Corks Just Yet

You could almost hear the collective sighs of relief when Vladimir Putin seized on an off hand remark by John Kerry and ran with it. That Syria give up it's chemical weapons, ingredients, etc. to the international community to eventually be destroyed.  Standing alone it is a noble endeavor.  But it does not stand alone.

Why do I think ole Vlad has something more up his sleeve than one upping our President one more time?  Because I don't trust him.  Because I don't trust Assad.  Nor am I thrilled with the competency of the U.N. And because this isn't as easy an undertaking as the media are making it seem.  The big factor is there is a civil war going on in Syria. I hardly think Assad is going to neglect it while he gives up his chemical weapons.

I am going to listen to the President tonight with a great deal of interest.  I, as many others, think he sees this as his out.  Again, it isn't that easy.  Of course the Russians have to bring forth their proposal.  Like the watchdogs are going to be and what demands he will make on the U.S.

Then there's how they're going to get the weapons out of Syria amid a war and how they will verify all have been removed amid a war.  No easy task.

I suggest the President set a deadline for the proposal in the very near term or this could drag out until the desert freezes over.  He should never, ever take military action off the table.  He does, however, need to learn how to use it judiciously.  He's been given a reprieve on that one.

There are nearly as many caveats to the Russian proposal as to the President's call for missile strikes.  A best case scenario would be a discussion with the American people as to what the new wrinkles are that this proposal has brought to the table.  And that the President doesn't try to claim the idea as his own and try to make himself into the visionary statesman that he is not.

No doubt I will have a few things to say tomorrow.  It ain't over 'til the fat lady sings and at the moment there isn't a lady in sight - fat or otherwise.

The Process As Part Of The Problem

Listening to the should we or shouldn't we arguments as to whether or not to strike Syria is gut wrenching.  I do understand the argument that Assad should be punished, meaningfully, for using chemical weapons.

I also understand the reluctance to aide the opposition since, regardless of what John Kerry says, we're really not all that sure who the good guys are.  If there are any.  We do know that they're not going to like us no matter what we do.

I still maintain that the time for successful intervention is long passed and whether we engage in a full fledged war, a shot across the bow or somewhere in between we're going to come out on the short end.

However, we are contemplating military action of some sort.  In listening to Diane Feinstein, D-CA, chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, I thought it strange she emphasized that she was very constituently oriented.  Isn't she supposed to be? But then we know how few that have been in Congress as long as she has actually are.

More than that however, she admitted that the negative response she has received about any military intervention  is causing her consternation. Then she went on to caveat that with the fact the public doesn't know what she does. To be precise, "But you see, then they don't know what I know.  They haven't heard what I've heard."

Why not?  Everyone knows we intercept communication from every one every where.  That's no longer a secret.  What should we not be privy to when the President is contemplating taking us into the abyss of military action?  Let us decide with clarity rather than guilt or fear.  Leave that to the President.  He's so good at it.

What could be more childish than the way this is being handled.  "It's not my fault, it's yours!"  "I know something you don't know." And so it goes. But we're talking about war.  Lives.  Obscene amounts of money we don't have to spare.

One more thing to bear in mind.  Nine eleven is but 5 days away. Last year we had Benghazi.  The entire truth of that matter has yet to be told.  Do we want to add Syria to the mix?