Seeking Redemption and Salvation

Regardless of your faith, nationality, political philosophy, heritage or race, we all need salvation from the horrors so casually inflicted upon mankind by our fellow man. Why do we have the insatiable urge to control, dominate and often destroy other human beings? Why must we see them as so very different from ourselves?

And we ourselves need redemption. If only all the world could search for common understanding, tolerance and peace. We must learn to forgive one another.

His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI spoke with eloquence wisdom and truth today when he said......

"How often relations between individuals, between groups and between peoples are marked not by love but by selfishness, injustice, hatred and violence! These are the scourges of humanity, open and festering in every corner of the planet, although they are often ignored and sometimes deliberately concealed; wounds that torture the souls and bodies of countless of our brothers and sisters."

"They are waiting to be tended and healed by the glorious wounds of our Risen Lord (cf. 1 Pet 2:24-25) and by the solidarity of people who, following in his footsteps, perform deeds of charity in his name, make an active commitment to justice, and spread luminous signs of hope in areas bloodied by conflict and wherever the dignity of the human person continues to be scorned and trampled. It is hoped that these are precisely the places where gestures of moderation and forgiveness will increase! "

"Dear brothers and sisters! Let us allow the light that streams forth from this solemn day to enlighten us; let us open ourselves in sincere trust to the risen Christ, so that his victory over evil and death may also triumph in each one of us, in our families, in our cities and in our nations."

"Let it shine forth in every part of the world. In particular, how can we fail to remember certain African regions, such as Dafur and Somalia, the tormented Middle East, especially the Holy Land, Iraq, Lebanon, and finally Tibet, all of whom I encourage to seek solutions that will safeguard peace and the common good!"

May we all be blessed with the spirit and hope of Easter.

Hillary Clinton, A Neville Chamberlain For Our Time

From Wikipedia:

Arthur Neville Chamberlain (18 March 1869 – 9 November 1940) was a British Conservative politician and Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1937 to 1940.

Chamberlain's legacy is marked by his policy regarding the appeasement of Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany with his signing of the Munich Agreement in 1938, conceding Czechoslovakia to Hitler. In the same year he also gave up the Irish Free State Royal Navy ports.

Chamberlain was forced to resign the premiership on 10 May 1940, after Germany invaded the Netherlands, Belgium and France.

Hillary Clinton's major speech on Iraq scared the bejeezus out of me today. And, as frightening as that speech was, her staff's assertions later that she would follow her insanely aggressive withdrawal plan REGARDLESS of the advice of military leaders OR events on the ground , showed her to be totally unfit to be our Commander in Chief.

Clinton said, in part:

"The most important part of my plan is the first step, to bring our troops home and send the strongest possible message to the Iraqis that they must take responsibly for their own future. No more talk of permanent occupation, no more policing a civil war, no more doing for the Iraqis what they need to be doing for themselves. As president, one of my first official actions will be to convene the Joint Chiefs of Staff, my Secretary of Defense and my National Security Council and direct them to draw up a clear, viable plan to start bringing our troops home within the first 60 days of my taking office. A plan based on my consultation with the military to remove one to two brigades a month, a plan that reduces the risks of attack as they depart."

Clinton's plan would effectively turn one of the world's greatest, richest and most strategic countries over to al-Qaeda, the mortal enemies of the United States and the modern civilized world. And her plan would guarantee an unfettered civil war in Iraq that would likely kill tens of thousands, most especially anyone who ever cooperated with the United States.

Would Clinton actually follow such a stupid and dangerous plan? Clinton might just be playing one-upsmanship with Barrack Obama, whose credentials as an antiwar advocate are better established and more credible.

Still, as the current Iraqi government all but endorsed McCain for President, Clinton is fighting for her Presidential future.

I remain cautiously hopeful that both Clinton and Obama will heed wise counsel and plan for success in the middle east rather than just turn over a budding democracy to the tyranny of Islamic fundamentalism. But, at some point we must actually take the candidates at their word.

The Politics of Association

In the last 24 hours I heard Reverend Jeremiah Wright preach so much I feel like I need to tithe to his church, The Trinity United Church of Christ.

If, by some miracle (pun fully intended), you've missed the multiple replays of the last five years of Wright's sermons, Jeremiah Wright is the pastor of Barrack Obama's church and a man Obama credits for being his inspiration. Reverend Wright married Barrack and his lovely wife Michelle and baptised his children. I'm not going to bother to link to the many dozens of You Tube clips now available; you can easily find them if you actually have missed them.

So as I watched MSNBC, CNN and FOX turn into the Trinity Broadcasting Networks I meditated on the real responsibilities Obama might share for Wright's teaching and preaching.

Last week we watched the media and especially the blogosphere hound John McCain until he finally denounced ultra conservative Pastor John Hagee. And McCain never even attended Hagee's church. But earlier McCain had "welcomed" Hagee's endorsement.

As a Unitarian Universalist I've set through dozens (maybe hundreds) of sermons with which I disagree. Occasionally I've been deeply offended by the preacher. I wouldn't want to be judged by the words of the various ministers of my church. On the other hand, Unitarians have a unique concept, "freedom of the pulpit." Any speaker can speak from any religious (or atheistic or political) perspective.

So here is my view. We are not electing Jeremiah Wright President. I am deeply concerned about some of Wright's statements from the pulpit, but not from a Presidential politics perspective. I'll judge Barrack Obama from by his own words and his own actions, not by those of Reverend Jeremiah Wright.

The battle between Barrack Obama and Hillary Clinton and John McCain is so tight and so intense it's bringing about a battle of details and nuances, relationships and associations instead of ideas and policies. That is tragic.

I was pleased to watch John McCain absolutely refuse to condemn Obama for the words of his pastor last night, in spite of intense pressure from reporters. Sadly, that won't stop MSNBC, CNN and FOX from endless replays and speculations. And it won't stop the Sean Hannity's and Rush Limbaugh's from exploiting Obama's relationship with his minister.

Turning Our Future Over to China

There is news today about actions being taken by the Chinese government in preparation for the 2008 Beijing Olympics that I find so repulsive and sickening that I'm going to bury them deep into this blog entry. I am deeply saddened and totally disgusted.

But this is just another story out of hundreds that raise serious questions about how we, as a people and nation, interact with China. And, in fact, by any reasonable measure, we are turning our entire future over to China.

Ask yourself what is more disturbing: that food products, toys and now prescription medicine coming from China are tainted and poisoning our children and seniors?

Or that virtually 100% of our toys and significant portions of our food products and prescription drugs (not to mention clothes, jewelry, sporting goods, computers, electronics, furniture and housewares) are made in China and imported here?

Do we actually manufacture anything here anymore?

Even more disturbing is that China holds a gigantic portion of our ballooning national debt. If China called in our debt, the United States might be forced into effective bankruptcy and a depression that could last a lifetime.

Everyday we outsource our entire future to China. Now I'm a "free trade" kind of guy. But when you give this much control to a single country, it isn't free trade any more, it's indentured servitude.

I've written extensively that China has the ability to cripple or actually end the genocide in Darfur. China, through massive oil purchases that fund the genocide and a firm Security Council Veto that prevents the rest of the world from stopping the horror, controls the fate of two million people. And China continues to prove they just don't give a damn. Human suffering, rape, murder, torture, starvation? China just doesn't care.

Many people around the world can no longer tolerate China's greed and callous disregard for genocide. Steven Spielberg just resigned as an Artistic Advisor for the 2008 games.

"At this point, my time and energy must be spent not on Olympic ceremonies, but on doing all I can to help bring an end to the unspeakable crimes against humanity that continue to be committed in Darfur," Spielberg explained.

With all this in mind, some might not even find this story important. But to me it's a clear and horrific example of how the Chinese government views every decision: cold, calculating, cruel and with absolutely no compassion.

As these the type of people with whom we should outsource or toys, food, drugs and debt?

What follows is from an investigative report by Simon Perry in the UK's Daily Mail:

Beijing's shocking death camp for cats

Thousands of pet cats in Beijing are being abandoned by their owners and sent to die in secretive government pounds as China mounts an aggressive drive to clean up the capital in preparation for the Olympic Games.

Hundreds of cats a day are being rounded and crammed into cages so small they cannot even turn around.

Then they are trucked to what animal welfare groups describe as death camps on the edges of the city.

The cull of Beijing's estimated 500,000 cat population is certain to provoke international outrage as it comes just over a year after the Chinese were criticised for rounding up and killing stray dogs across the country.

Animal welfare groups in China are already protesting, but their members fear punishment from the authorities.

Officials say people can adopt animals from the 12 cat pounds set up around the city, but welfare groups say they are almost impossible to get inside and believe few cats survive.

One cat lovers' group negotiated the release of 30 pets from one of the compounds in Shahe, north-west Beijing, but said they were in such a pitiful condition that half of them died within days of their release.

"These cats are being left to die. It is very inhumane," said the group's founder Yan Qi, who runs a sanctuary for cats.

A Possible Replacement for Waterboarding

Actually, water boarding is still permitted (for now) since President Bush vetoed the bill that would have outlawed the practice.

But we can be confident that both McCain or Obama will sign such legislation in the future, so we might need a new, tested and proven method to gain information.

Could "Rick Rolling" end up being the ultimate weapon?

Barack Obama is NOT Ready to Be President Today

Another Primary Night and the Wizard opines again.........

Let me be perfectly clear. I believe Barack Obama will someday be President of the United States. And it might still be this year. But I don't think so.

Barack Obama has stumbled badly in the last few days. But, as sharp observers know, Obama's real problems began much earlier. The handwriting appeared on the wall in foreign press reports... from London and later, from Canada.

The American press at first refused to listen. They were so interested in covering the horse race, they neglected to actually look at the condition of the horses. And the American press fell absolutely involve with one candidate. This is always a huge mistake for reporters. Confronted with ugly truths, the American press simply looked the other way.

The blogosphere, however, did not. And eventually the press caught up. And only hours later the Clinton campaign also caught up. And the race for the Democrat nomination began anew.

Tonight as I watched CNN and I watched Paul Begala absolutely destroy Obama at the peak viewing hour, I realized that Begala was right. In order to become President.... in order to be worthy of being President.... Obama must begin to act like a President.

Begala maintained that Obama's staff had let him down. And that Obama's chief economic advisor had effectively betrayed him. But the ultimate failing was Obama himself who didn't quickly fire and replace people who simply were on the wrong page of his campaign.

Perhaps the best outcome for the Democrat Party would be for Obama and Clinton to work out a compromise and partnership. Let Obama accept the Vice President spot and give Democrats and America its Dream ticket.

Nominating Obama before he is ready could be a tragic mistake.

Staying to Help in Iraq

I have the greatest admiration for Bono and Bob Geldof and Mia Farrow and Angelina Jolie and others who are able to transcend politics and move past the demagoguery and actually work constructively to improve the lives of oppressed people around the world.

There are all too many politicians in Washington and sideline commentators around the world for whom victory only means dealing a political defeat to their opposition.

So when Bob Geldof praises George Bush's humanitarian activities in Africa and condemns the media for failing to give President Bush the credit he so richly deserves, I want to cheer. Not because I'm a Bush cheerleader, but because Bob Geldof actually places the welfare of the poor in Africa ABOVE politics!! Geldof has consistently looked for answers and help for Africans, not headlines or political points.

By the way, Geldof's article in this week's TIME MAGAZINE is a must read for everyone: Geldof and Bush: Diary From the Road. But, as usual, I've wondered off track....

Today I want to once again give praise and credit to Angelina Jolie, one of the brightest, most articulate and passionate people working today to help the poor, the oppressed and the forgotten. Jolie's work in Iraq this past week (and the past several years) is magnificent.

In a Washington Post Op-Ed letter today, Jolie recounts the situation in Iraq and her recent visits with both the refugees in Iraq and with U.S. Army General David Petraeus, United Nation's High Commissioner António Guterres, and Iraq Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. Jolie is a woman on a mission and she is succeeding.

Certainly Jolie is no fan of George Bush. She is deeply affected by the suffering of (by Jolie's estimates) over 4.5 million Iraqi refugees. She wants to help these people to return home safely and to rebuild their lives.

More than that, she wants and expects the United States and the United Nations to step up to the plate and provide financial and humanitarian assistance in this effort.

Jolie doesn't endorse the surge, she doesn't endorse the war. Jolie doesn't play politics. But she does recognize both the real situation on the ground and the need for the United States to play a significant role in rebuilding the lives of the people.

I think it's really significant that instead of sitting safely at home and running "General Betray Us" ads in the New York Times, Jolie goes and meets Petraeus and gets the support she needs to increase the humanitarian aid.

I hope you'll read Jolie's entire article: Staying to Help in Iraq

Today's humanitarian crisis in Iraq -- and the potential consequences for our national security -- are great. Can the United States afford to gamble that 4 million or more poor and displaced people, in the heart of Middle East, won't explode in violent desperation, sending the whole region into further disorder? What we cannot afford, in my view, is to squander the progress that has been made. In fact, we should step up our financial and material assistance. UNHCR has appealed for $261 million this year to provide for refugees and internally displaced persons. That is not a small amount of money -- but it is less than the U.S. spends each day to fight the war in Iraq. I would like to call on each of the presidential candidates and congressional leaders to announce a comprehensive refugee plan with a specific timeline and budget as part of their Iraq strategy. As for the question of whether the surge is working, I can only state what I witnessed: U.N. staff and those of non-governmental organizations seem to feel they have the right set of circumstances to attempt to scale up their programs. And when I asked the troops if they wanted to go home as soon as possible, they said that they miss home but feel invested in Iraq. They have lost many friends and want to be a part of the humanitarian progress they now feel is possible. It seems to me that now is the moment to address the humanitarian side of this situation. Without the right support, we could miss an opportunity to do some of the good we always stated we intended to do.

Barack Obama Will Never Leave Iraq

The Wizard gazes into his crystal ball.............

I had the day off from work today and had the opportunity to watch Hardball with Chris Matthews. I still find Matthews to be terribly unfair and his coverage of current political events to be blindly biased. That is a terrible shame, but it's completely beside the point.

My point is the exchange I've just watched today between Republican front runner (and virtually assured nominee) John McCain the Democrat front runner (and presumptive nominee) Barack Obama.

You can read a Associated Press news summary of the cross country debate here: McCain, Obama Tilt Over al-Qaida in Iraq

All my regular readers (and we're now getting several hundred a day courtesy of Blogburst and Little Green Footballs - Welcome Lizards!! Feel free to comment here or there) know that I've simultaneously endorsed BOTH John McCain and Barack Obama.

Regular readers also know I've supported and endorsed the McCain/Bush surge in Iraq and strongly support our continued military presence in Iraq. I believe that even though we should NEVER have invaded Iraq, now that it's done, we must stay and build a free and open democracy in the middle east.

So how can I possibly support and endorse Obama for President? Simple. Barack Obama will never leave Iraq. And the proof comes from today's long distance debate.

John McCain, who will be a real opponent as compared to the weak and timid Hillary Clinton, quickly fired a shot across Obama's bow this morning (from the above sourced AP report)

McCain criticized Obama for saying in Tuesday night's Democratic debate that, after U.S. troops were withdrawn, as president he would act "if al-Qaida is forming a base in Iraq." "I have some news. Al-Qaida is in Iraq. It's called `al-Qaida in Iraq,'" McCain told a crowd in Tyler, Texas, drawing laughter at Obama's expense. He said Obama's statement was "pretty remarkable."

The key element surrounding my confidence that Obama will not abandon Iraq came both in last night's debate with Clinton and in Obama's long distance reply to McCain today.

Obama quickly answered back while campaigning in Ohio. "I do know that al-Qaida is in Iraq and that's why I have said we should continue to strike al-Qaida targets," he told a rally at Ohio State University in Columbus. McCain said he had not watched Tuesday night's Democratic presidential debate but was told of Obama's response when asked if as president he would reserve the right to send U.S. troops back into Iraq to quell an insurrection or civil war. Obama did not say whether he'd send troops but responded: "As commander in chief, I will always reserve the right to make sure that we are looking out for American interests. And if al-Qaida is forming a base in Iraq, then we will have to act in a way that secures the American homeland and our interests abroad." On Wednesday, Obama expanded slightly that he "would always reserve the right to go in and strike al-Qaida if they were in Iraq" without detailing what kind of strike that might be—air, ground or both.

Our choice in November will not be between victory and defeat. There are two excellent candidates running. And Barack Obama is an intelligent man. It is entirely possible, even likely, that he can find a strong and secure negotiated settlement for the middle eastern crisis. But I don't believe he will simply "surrender."

Will the far left wing of American politics feel betrayed? Probably. But their dream of withdrawal is simplistic and naive.

American security will demand Obama take intelligent and measured steps in his withdrawal.

This election will be a good one for America. Voter will be able to chose between two clear choices for our future in Iraq and for the war against Islamic fundamentalism. But the choice will be between two strong leaders.

How Real Investigative Reporting is Done

While The New York Times was wasting four reporters for six months investigating a non-story about John McCain that ultimately cast only the New York paper itself in a negative light, The TIMES OF LONDON was doing real work investigating and now revealing a stunning connection between British~Iraqi billionaire Nadhmi Auchiand and Democrat Presidential Candidate Barrack Obama.

The highly detailed and fact rich TIMES OF LONDON article, complete with time lines and charts, raises serious questions about "loans" of millions of dollars to Obama's campaign and Obama's already questionable purchase of a Chicago Mansion.

The headline story was just released moments ago on the TIMES OF LONDON website. It remains to be seen if the American media, which seems lovestruck with Obama jumps on the story. It will be equally fascinating to see how Hillary Clinton and John McCain react.

Here are some key portions of the story. Please be certain to read the entire story. And, if you have contacts at the New York Times, suggest they study how real reporting is actually done.

A British-Iraqi billionaire lent millions of dollars to Barack Obama's fundraiser just weeks before an imprudent land deal that has returned to haunt the presidential contender, an investigation by The Times discloses. The money transfer raises the question of whether funds from Nadhmi Auchi, one of Britain’s wealthiest men, helped Mr Obama buy his mock Georgian mansion in Chicago. A company related to Mr Auchi, who has a conviction for corruption in France, registered the loan to Mr Obama's bagman Antoin "Tony" Rezko on May 23 2005. Mr Auchi says the loan, through the Panamanian company Fintrade Services SA, was for $3.5 million. Three weeks later, Mr Obama bought a house on the city's South Side while Mr Rezko's wife bought the garden plot next door from the same seller on the same day, June 15. Mr Obama says he never used Mrs Rezko's still-empty lot, which could only be accessed through his property. But he admits he paid his gardener to mow the lawn. Mrs Rezko, whose husband was widely known to be under investigation at the time, went on to sell a 10-foot strip of her property to Mr Obama seven months later so he could enjoy a bigger garden. Mr Obama now admits his involvement in this land deal was a “boneheaded mistake”. Mrs Rezko’s purchase and sale of the land to Mr Obama raises many unanswered questions. It is unclear how Mrs Rezko could have afforded the downpayment of $125,000 and a $500,000 mortgage for the original $625,000 purchase of the garden plot at 5050 South Greenwood Ave. In a sworn statement a year later, Mrs Rezko said she got by on a salary of $37,000 and had $35,000 assets. Mr Rezko told a court he had "no income, negative cash flow, no liquid assets, no unencumbered assets [and] is significantly in arrears on many of his obligations." The house-and-garden deal raised questions about whether Mr Rezko, a property developer and fast-food restauranteur, made it possible for the Obamas to purchase a mansion they could otherwise not afford. Mrs Rezko paid the asking price for the garden but the Obamas bought the house for $1.65 million, - $300,000 less than the asking price. The sellers deny they offered the Obamas a discount on the house because the garden had fetched full price from Mrs Rezko. The spotlight fell on Mr Rezko's ties to Mr Auchi last month when the Chicago businessman was thrown in jail for violating his bail terms by failing to declare a different $3.5 million loan from the British billionaire, made in April 2007. Prosecutors feared Mr Rezko, who travels widely in the Middle East, might flee to a country without an extradition treaty such as his birthplace of Syria. Mr Auchi was convicted of corruption, given a suspended sentence and fined £1.4 million in France in 2003 for his part in the Elf affair, described as the biggest political and corporate scandal in post-war Europe. He, in a statement from his media lawyers, claims he is appealing against the sentence.

The Excellence of Steven Spielberg

I want to thank Steven Spielberg with all my heart. He has exhibited rare courage and extraordinary moral leadership. And he has placed his principles and his concern for mankind above everything else.

Steven Spielberg is already a living legend. The Academy Award winning director's place in history is already assured. However, Spielberg could have capped his career with his opportunity to direct the entire artistic exposition of the 2008 Beijing Olympics. It is a real testament to his skill and craftsmanship to have been chosen by the Chinese government and Chinese Olympic Organization as the Artistic Director.

But Steven Spielberg realized that China is not only failing to condemn the genocide in Darfur, but is actually funding and supporting the mass murder of hundreds of thousands of people.

First Spielberg attempted to put pressure on the Chinese Government through public comments and private negotiations. He became a very vocal critic of China's involvement.

As it became more and more obvious that his pressure was having little effect, Spielberg made the difficult decision to resign his position with the 2008 Olympics

"I find that my conscience will not allow me to continue business as usual," he said in a statement. Steven Spielberg was an artistic adviser to the Chinese Olympic Games "At this point, my time and energy must be spent not on Olympic ceremonies, but on doing all I can to help bring an end to the unspeakable crimes against humanity that continue to be committed in Darfur." More than 200,000 people have been killed and 2.5 million forced from their homes in the five-year conflict between Sudan's Arab-dominated government and Darfur's ethnic African rebels. Human rights activists have accused China of being partly responsible for the trouble in Darfur because of its diplomatic backing of the Sudanese government. Spielberg said: "Sudan's government bears the bulk of the responsibility for these ongoing crimes, but the international community, and particularly China, should be doing more to end the continuing suffering there.

If only Warren Buffett had just one ounce of Spielberg's courage, honor and humanity, perhaps we could finally turn the situation in Dafur around.

Keller's Low Standards are Destroying The New York Times

Under a relentless attack from both conservative and liberal corners alike, The New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller sought refuge in the warm confines of National Public Radio to defend the Time's bizarre decision to run a vague and vapid story attacking John McCain on the front page of the Times, above the fold.

The biggest problem with the story is that it is extremely misleading, implying both an extra marital affair and improper favors given to lobbyists, especially the alleged paramour named in the article, lobbyist Vicki Iseman.

As I discussed last night, the sensational and splashy article actually contained almost no facts. It's all smoke and mirrors and frankly there's damned little smoke.

And while NPR attempted to be fair to Keller in articles and audio interviews this morning, Keller's explanations are as vapid as the article itself. It's hard to defend a story with no basis, and Keller fails miserably in his defense.

Here is Keller's explanation from David Folkenflik's story on the NPR website:

"If, hypothetically, we had established that he had a romantic relationship with a lobbyist — and had done favors for that lobbyist — that would have been a different story," he [Keller] says. But the newspaper was not able to confirm any relationship. Instead, Keller tells NPR that the article that ran Thursday morning provided a slightly different insight into one of the nation's leading candidates for president. "It's not a 'gotcha' story about some kind of quid pro quo," he says. "We don't know if there was a quid or a quo in this case.

In other words, it's an eight year old story about nothing.

And that deserved a feature position above the fold on page one? A breathlessly written gotcha story with no facts? Right next to an unusually large and splashy photo of Barack Obama?

Bill, all you proved today is that you are unfit to make judgements about news stories. I repeat my call for your resignation for the good of the Times.

Bill Keller Needs to Resign

Bill Keller and I share the same last name. To my knowledge we are not related. But even if we were brothers I would still lead the call for his resignation.

Keller, in case you somehow didn't know, is the Executive Editor of The New York Times.

But I'm reasonably certain that you do know that the Times did print a stunningly vague, undocumented and sloppily written hatchet piece slandering John McCain on the front page of this morning's newspaper.

While I can safely leave it to conservative bloggers to defend McCain, it isn't McCain that was damaged today. The real damage was to The New York Times itself.

In running a pointless story designed only to damage the Republican front runner for President, the Times virtually ruined what remained of their already tarnished image.

From Jayson Blair to Judith Miller, the Times has consistently proven it neither challenges its reporters to seek the truth nor does it bother to fact check the obviously sloppy results of lazy and/or politically biased reporting.

This attitude starts at the top. The Executive Editor sets the standards for his editors and reporters to follow. Clearly, a change in leadership is seriously needed at the Times.