The Primary Election Campaign Season - The Democrats

We live in the 24-hour news cycle. When I first had this post in mind, Osama Bin Laden (HVT 1) had just released another videotape. The Democrats met in Miami and debated for a Spanish-speaking audience. Before his debate appearance, Barack Obama was the guest at a star-studded event out in LaLa Land, with the Queen of All Media, Oprah Winfrey presiding. General David Petraeus was about to release his report, and along with Ambassador Ryan Crocker, about to brief Congress. The long-awaited September Report.

But my, if you blink you miss it. And I blinked. A week later we're dealing with the aftermath of the president's address to the nation, of Moveon.org's ad in The Times, and the Democrats still virtually impotent on stopping the war.

***

Let's go back in time. OBL released a videotape last week and the punditry revolved around, obviously, whom this helps and hurts. It helps the Democrats, they said, because the American people would ask, Why after six years and two wars, is Osama Bin Laden still at large? On the other side of the argument, some thought that it helped the Republicans, since one could always bring out the "terror" card--as crass a political tool there is--and remind the American people (or American voters since that's all that the parties care about) that OBL is still at large, that Al-Qaeda is still plotting, and if we leave Iraq, Al-Qaeda will find a new worldwide headquarters to operate out of. This in a nutshell are the arguments that both parties have posited. All in all though, this is once again, the 24-hour news cycle. It played over the weekend into the sixth anniversary, and then quickly forgotten. This isn't the tape that Osama Bin Laden released last we saw him before the 2004 Election, which contrary to his aim, helped the president at the end cruise towards re-election. And he's not helping out the Democrats that much this time either. His rhetoric, some observers say, is straight out of the Democratic Party's talking point. And of course, the tangents he went out on, and taking his beard on a "Just-For-Men" ride, drew ridicule towards the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. He spoke about global warming, and the Democrats' inability to end the war. He talked about the looming mortgage crisis, and a became a pundit in world affairs. Bob Baer wrote an article in Time questioning Bin Laden's relevance, and at the end concluded that OBL "would be better off staying put in his cave and keeping his mouth shut."

Meanwhile in Miami, the Democrats met at the University of Miami's Bank United Center--site of the first presidential debate in 2004. There, in a debate sponsored by Univision, the Democrats tried to go beyond the war in Iraq and Immigration, but also talked about health care, education, economy, etc, and other issues to an extremely friendly crowd. The love fest ended when the moderators, Jorge Ramos and Maria Elena Salinas, asked Sens. Clinton, Obama, and Dodd, why they voted to build a 12-foot wall alongside the U.S.-Mexican border. This drew some jeers from the crowd, and the trio responded that while they support broad immigrant rights, they also believe border security is a must. This gave an opening to the only Latino running for president, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, who gave one of his two token quotes of the night: "If you're going to build a 12-foot wall, you know what's going to happen," he said. "A lot of 13-foot ladders." (The other quote given by Richardon was an attack on Univision itself: "I'm disappointed today that 43 million Latinos in this country -- for them not to hear one of their own speak Spanish, is unfortunate. In other words, Univision is promoting English-only in this debate.") Aside from that, the debate was pretty much standard and went along as expected. Univision did call out the Republicans at the end, and pointed out that John McCain had been the only Republican to RSVP for the event. Speaking of M.I.A. candidates, Joe Biden didn't bother showing up at the debate, saying that he had a scheduling conflict--even though he was originally supposed to be present at the event. Segway this into the first question posed by Salinas to the candidates: Are you taking a political risk by appearing at a Spanish-network debate? All said No. And how much they loved Hispanics. And putting all political calculations aside, they were right. The people who were going to be upset about such an event taking place were probably not going to vote for the Democrats either way. The same can not be true of Republicans, and the blowback they may face if they indeed participate in such a debate. At the same time, Republicans are going to need to figure out finally that they'll need Hispanics to win elections. Demographics are going that way, and what Hispanics see as a habitual demonization of Hispanics by the Republican Party is going to backfire--never mind that McCain and Bush take more Hispanic-friendly positions than many Democrats. Bush partly won his presidential elections because of Hispanic votes, garnering the most Hispanic votes for any Republican Presidential Candidate ever. Rudy Giuliani is going to lose quite a number of votes from more Mainstream Hispanics, he's been campaigning on an Anti-New York City stand (partly because many Republicans accuse the mayor of allowing NYC of being a "sanctuary city), appearances in Hialeah notwithstanding. And that's the problem with many of the candidates on both sides. The primaries, as always is a two-step dance: go to your base, and then return to the center for the General Election. The problem today is that the base is so far out there now, that returning to the center for the General Election campaign will be a hard-fought movement for the candidates. All in all though, the debate was very good for the Democrats. They've got their message out there to the fastest growing electoral group in the country--and growing faster still with Voter Registration drives propelled in part by a lack of Immigration reform in this congress. To say nothing of the argument that Univision put out there this past week stating that it is the most-watched television network in the country, beating CBS, ABC, FOX, and NBC, among viewers 18-34 . Of course, once again, demographics need to come into account. Univision's viewers are notoriously young, when compared to the Big Four English-speaking networks. The median age for Hispanics in America is 27. Univision is going to be a potent political force next year more than any other. The Wall Street Journal has taken note of this, and has already begun a campaign of including Univision among the other paragons of the Liberal Media, claiming Univision is biased and "features some of the most unbalanced political news coverage on television."

***

This week in the war at home...

Gen. David Petraeus issued his long-awaited report to Congress, something that the punditry had looked forward to all summer, and at the end, the gist of it was...wait six more months.

This wasn't good for the Democrats. OBL was right--the Democrat's can't and won't stop the war. And the American people agree with this...and are mad. Due to ignorance and apathy of the political system, many Americans believed that voting in the Democrats during the Mid-Terms was going to put an immediate end to the war. Obviously that wasn't going to happen. The Democrat's won't stop the war and won't cut off funding. The President went prime time on Thursday and announced "Return on Success" as the new slogan. The punditry went against him, and consider himself living more and more in Bush world. With him being the only inhabitant of it. But he doesn't care. He announced a troop withdrawal, even though it was supposed to happen either way, and launched on another tirade on why we're in Iraq and why we need to stay there until success...whatever that is.

And the Democrats had another bad week. You know next year's election is the Democrats to lose. So much so that Newt Gingrich recently said that the chances are 80-20 that the Democrats are going to win the presidential election. Albeit that may just be him playing the game of raising expectations. But the Democrats, it seems are going out of their way to lose. This may be a little early, but you know, it's not their fault. Say what you want about Rove and White House's political operation, but they've put the Democrats in a position that there's no win-win for the candidates on Iraq. This has increased the battle between Clinton and Obama, with Obama attacking Clinton for being for the war in the beginning, and Clinton attacking Obama for doing nothing to end the war once he got there, in fact he's voted for funding and against any deadlines. The Clinton Camp has remarked that it's easy for Obama to state that he's always been against the war, but now that he's in a leading position, he's doing nothing for the sake of political expediency; they sarcastically say that's a real "profile in courage." The war between both camps has deepened so much that there's a fight over campaign staff, with Obama personnel being "warned that if Hillary wins the nomination their disloyalty will be remembered."

After Bush's must-not-see-TV moment on Thursday night, Edwards bought 2 minutes of airtime on MSNBC calling for a withdrawal from Iraq. The piece was supposed to come immediately after Bush's but due to punditry, and MSNBC having to make time for Matthews and Olbermann and Williams and Russert, the speech didn't air until 9:50 Eastern, almost 30 minutes after Bush said "God Bless America." Edwards tried his very best to look presidential and dare I say it...he sort of did?

The big blunder that the Democrats allowed to happen this week was MoveOn.Org, yeah they're back. They put out a full-page ad in The Times calling General David Petraeus, General "Betray Us." This sort of attack on a military man was uncalled for. Even Frank Rich said that this was a dumb move to have allowed happen. The only winner here was MoveOn, who's going to see their email distribution lists grow.

And the only big loser here, again, was Hillary Clinton. This set up a scenario where Rudy Giuliani came out swinging hard and denouncing Clinton for not denouncing the ad. This is setting up the sort of campaign that we'll see next year, if indeed Clinton and Giuliani become their respective party's nominees for president.

***

Let's do some quick Democrat strategy and horse-race...

In national polls, Clinton is clearly establishing her role as presumptive nominee status, as she's beating Obama, 43-24 in averages. Edwards eight points behind Obama, and Richardson polling at around 3.

Let's do the primaries. Again Clinton is leading everywhere except fighting hard in Iowa, where Edwards' populist message is really resonating and Edwards is only 2 points behind Clinton, 26-24, with Obama close at 21. Clinton's going to win the New Hampshire primary, where she's beating Obama 36-19, with Edwards coming in at third with 15. In South Carolina, again Clinton beating Obama, 35-23, with next-door-neighbor Edwards coming in at third with 14. In Florida and California Clinton's up by 20; in Michigan she's up by fifteen.

Hillary Rodham Clinton is the presumptive Democrat nominee for President of the United States.

Obama, even though he's doing splendidly well raising money--and as I said before, has Oprah's blessings and backing--needs to have a better showing in South Carolina, and needs to beat Edwards in Iowa for his candidacy to still be alive. If Edwards wins Iowa, this starts shaking up the race for the front runner, since Edwards, straight off an Iowa win can come in and be the comeback kid in New Hampshire.

But Clinton's going to do well, she's running a heck of a campaign, and has the brightest people on her staff--to say nothing of the fact that she's married to the smartest Democratic strategist alive.


And that's why more and more we're moving away from the Primary Election Campaign Season and already thinking in General Election terms. The Gen.'s March Progress Report will come at a time where we'll know who'll be the nominees, and if all goes according to plan, it will be Hillary sweeping the primaries, and Giuliani, while stuck in a more fluid environment, mounting a national primary strategy to capture the nomination.

And that's why The Times' Maureen Dowd, a.k.a. The Cobra, wrote today that Rudy's "the only man in the field tough enough to slap around a woman."

Past Thoughts on September 11th

In a previous online life, I kept a Live Journal (handle: livefrom). Commemorating today's sixth anniversary of September 11, 2001, I post entries I wrote to commemorate the second, fourth, and fifth anniversaries of that day. They are in reverse chronological order.

***

"9/12" Written: September 12, 2006

Five years ago we all woke up to a different world. A world reshaped by unspeakable horror and death, a world sickened with the cruel manifestation of terror.

We hugged and cried and came together. And we thought about what we had witnessed the previous day. There were no words. The World Trade Center, symbols of American economic might, were no more. The Pentagon, headquarters of the most powerful military to ever walk the face of this earth, was attacked, and part of it destroyed.

Thousands of innocents were ruthlessly murdered.

The streets of Heaven were too crowded with Angels that night.

And a terrorist organization engaged in an Act of War with the United States.

Always remember that: They attacked us first.

What is the aim of terrorism? It is not to murder, to kill. Even though they will willingly accept if not welcome collateral deaths. The aim of terrorism is to strike terror. It's as simple as that. The aim of terrorism is to develop psychological terror and a state of continued fear in citizens. It is at the end a political tool. Terror and fear in the citizenry will lead to questioning the strengths of government institutions. These institutions are the components of a democratic government. Sans institutions, we see the devolution of the state into one of anarchy and chaos. Once again, institutions are the backbone. Losing faith—questioning the ability of government to keep you safe, questioning the ability of government to function—will give terrorism a victory.

Terrorism lives off of terror. In order to defeat terrorism, you need to defeat terror and fear.

Many commentators accuse the Administration of not asking Americans to sacrifice for this war. We got tax cuts and told to live life as if nothing had happened. Indeed there was a subtle sacrifice asked: returning to normal to show terrorism that we will not live in terror, that we will not live in fear. Of course, that was impossible. But we had to show strength, if not, at least the perception of it. Yes, we can't carry our hair gels on airplanes anymore, but you know what, we still fly. Yes, we're warned about visiting corners of the earth where being an American can cause personal harm, but you know what, we still go. We do these things because we are not afraid. And we watch our American Idol, and we take note of what Paris Hilton is doing, and we worry about Natalie Holloway. And we return to a degree of normality.

We live in what Gore Vidal calls, the United States of Amnesia. And while many consider it a bad thing I don't. It is in the very essence of America, in our very composition, the fact that we have the ability to move on. Move on and look towards the future.

In the United States of Amnesia, we engrain whatever popular culture is prevalent and run with it. In the United States of Amnesia we follow trends and fads and stick to them until black is the new white. In the United States of Amnesia we bicker and fight between groups—be them your friends, or political parties—but we know that all is well, that at the end, we're still civil and we still talk to each other. A disagreement among friends is nothing bad. In the United States of Amnesia we worry about making end's meet and about the latest feud at our jobs, and about whether or not our kids are receiving the best education possible and the best health care possible. Citizens of the United States of Amnesia have enough personal problems and worries, and it's difficult to look beyond the micro-anxieties to focus on the macro-anxieties.

Countries, much like people, undergo existential anxieties of meaninglessness at times. What is our purpose? Why are we doing what we do? And in a healthy democracy we elect people to worry and to have anxieties for the country itself. We rely on institutions to function as they should. We rely on people who man those institutions to do the best they can for the country and its citizens. So not all is lost. Citizens of the U.S.A. may have a lot of personal problems, but the problems facing the nation are always accounted for, and taken care of.

We elect our Presidents on the grounds that they'll take care of everything. That foreign policy is under wraps. We elect them because we would like to almost hear them say, "Hey, you know that situation in the Middle East, you know about what's going on in that country that you can't find on a map? Don't worry about it; I'm taking care of business." And we want to believe them, because we want to continue living the lives that we live. There's too many things that are going on in the world, and in our democracy, we can't expect everyone to have an informed opinion on say, favored trade nation status with China, or on arms disarmament accords. It just won't happen. And that's not a bad thing. An informed citizenry is the backbone of a vibrant democracy. But that's the ideal never the reality.

So what do we get from all of this. That by believing that we have returned to a state of normality, that by acting it, and showing it to friend and foe alike, we start believing that we have returned to normal. Perception is more powerful than reality. Irreality is more important than reality. At the end, what we have to do is feign faith. We feign faith in our government and our institutions. We know it's not the best, we know it's plagued with problems, but we continue to believe in it. Believing is key.

And that's a way to defeat terror.

We feign faith. That doesn't mean that we lose the ability to question our government. Discourse is essential in democracy. But we need to have confidence in our government. At the end, Republican and Democrat, Conservative and Liberal, while we all have our disagreements, we all have the same goal, making this country better. And we inch towards that goal everyday, little by little. That's America.

***

We lost faith in Iraq. Americans overwhelmingly disapprove of intervention in Iraq. We have lost close to 2,000 American soldiers, and yes, thousands of innocent Iraqis have died—not only at the hands of the insurgency, but also at the hands of American soldiers. And we have to live with it.

Many don't know why we're in Iraq. It is a fact that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with the attacks on 9/11. No one disputes that.

But it's a war on Terrorism. And Saddam Hussein was an advocate of terror.

Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11 but Saddam Hussein did have ties with Al-Qaeda.

Please follow this. Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11 but Saddam Hussein did have ties with Al-Qaeda. They're not the same things. They're two distinct components, two different matters.

And while there was an intelligence failure, everyone from CIA on up to Saddam Hussein believed that Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction, the casus belli that the Administration gave was that Saddam Hussein posed a danger to the United States. Indeed given the chance, Hussein would've jumped on developing weapons program and endanger the U.S. and our interests in the region. Make no mistake about it: the world is a much safer place without Saddam Hussein in power.

And make no mistake about it. Saddam Hussein was a backer of terrorism. For years he gave sanctuary to terrorists, such as Abu Nidal, who was the mastermind of over 100 operations between the 1970's into the 90's. Such operations included wounding the Israeli ambassador to Great Britain, triggering the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982, three airline hijackings, one airline bombing, attacking a tourist cruise ship, and numerous car bombs. And Saddam Hussein gave Abu Nidal sanctuary from 1999 when he was kicked out of Libya to 2002, when Saddam Hussein feared his growing prominence and ordered him killed. Before that, he lived in an upscale Baghdad neighborhood, in a villa owned by the Mukhabarat—the Iraqi Secret Police.

American Intelligence can't confirm nor deny the report picked up by Czech intelligence that Mohammed Atta, leader of the 9/11 hijackers, met with Abu Amin, an Iraqi intelligence agent.

Some will also say that Saddam Hussein hated Al-Qaeda. That too is true. But remember, relations between these people are always love-hate. At the end they all need each other. And that doesn't negate the fact that Hussein would support Al-Qaeda in its attacks on America.

Hussein was a danger. And now he's no more because he's imprisoned in an Iraqi jail, awaiting judgment from the very same people from which he pillaged basic human rights.

But the conduct of the war. The Powell doctrine of overwhelming force wasn't followed, but rather the strategy was of deploying a relatively light 130,000-strong expeditionary force. There was something that occurred in the conduct of the war which turned the public against it. The public could not accept American soldiers dying in a desert.

The political atmosphere was such that it became popular to call for a complete withdrawal of American soldiers. No one likes war. FDR, before launching World War II, in one of his fireside chats uttered with strong force, words that should always resonate in the mind of an American president before he deploys American soldiers into battle: "I hate War." I think at the very end we all do. This president has said so himself.

But they're necessary. And like President Bush said last night, we are in a state of war. A war against terror, a war, like Bush said, for the very survival of civilization.

Almost one hundred years ago, the pragmatist thinker, Randolph Bourne wrote an influential essay entitled, The Experimental Life. In it he stressed that while many have their lives somewhat pre-ordained, and that there's this template, this roadmap that these people follow, it is not pragmatic to live this way. Rather he calls for living the experimental life. In short, it's adapting to the changing circumstances, to the changing environments, and learning from mistakes. That nothing's set in stone, and that you have to be able to quickly adapt and change. As an example, he wrote of a General who has his armies lined up in a certain closed formation, and sending them marching directly head-on to the enemy. The enemy knowing that this specific General is fond of this formation launches a guerilla campaign to attack the formation by the sides. Therefore if the General doesn't adapt to the new guerilla-style war, he will surely lose the war—even if his army is stronger and superior.

That is what is occurring today in Iraq. We need to adapt and change. This army wasn't ready for the insurgency campaign, for the urban desert warfare that is transpiring in Iraq. They weren't ready for IED's, and weren't ready to battle the enemy unseen.

That doesn't mean that we can't change. We still have time. We need to adapt. But we can't give up.

Iraq is the central front on the war on Terrorism. Terrorists have gone to Iraq to do battle with the United States and we must fight back. If we lose Iraq, we lose everything.

Why do we fight? That question was asked to Sen. John McCain. His response: "Because it's the right thing to do."

History does indeed repeat itself. And the Domino theory is back. We let Iraq fall, what does that say to Hamid Karzai in Afghanistan who is building up the country after years of ruthless rule from the Taliban? Women can now walk freely through Afghanistan and attend schools. That was never possible under Taliban rule. But if we lose Iraq, it'll embolden the Taliban to come back. If we lose Iraq, what does that say to Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan who gets death threats everyday for supporting us, and has his own intelligence apparatus undermining him? If we lose Iraq, what does that say to the Al-Saud house in Saudi Arabia, who, for better or worse, are our allies in the War on Terror? The coalition against terror crumbles.

Al-Qaeda is a terrorist organization. And yes, they did cause unspeakable mayhem on September 11th. But also remember, at its most basic, they're the gang that can't shoot straight. It took them years to finally succeed, albeit when they did in fact succeed, they did so with gusto. But they're a third-rate organization. And we can not allow them to win. And they win every time we are in fear of them. Yes they pose a threat, but don't let them scare you. Let them instill in you determination. One needs to be determined to fight them and finish them off.

Osama Bin Laden has said that, "All that we have to do, is to send two mujahedeen to the farthest point east to raise a piece of cloth on which is written Al-Qaeda, in order to make the Generals race there to cause America to suffer human, economic, and political losses."

Now he's not a nuisance, like John Kerry said, and he's certainly not irrelevant. But we shouldn't allow him to make us live in terror, in fear. That's when they win.

***

Thomas Friedman has written of the juxtaposition between 11/9 and 9/11. On 11/9/1989, the Berlin Wall came down. On 9/11/2001, the World Trade Center came down. One brought about a renewed sense of hope. The other brought about a renewed sense of horror.

We need to return to the world of 11/9 and we do this by being hopeful again.

President Clinton: "I still believe in a place called Hope."

We need to export Hope again. The United States has always done a great job at exporting Hope. Without Hope, life wouldn't be worth living.

We export Hope by negating fear. We export Hope by helping others around the world.

The U.S. today remains the shining City on a Hill as President Reagan called it. We need the United States to return to be the Beacon of Light in a world full of shadows.

And that's how you win this war. It's ideological. And it's hope over fear. Liberty over repression. Freedom over tyranny.

And when we're able to get to this point, we'll make sure that the deaths of all who died on 9/11, and in Afghanistan, and in Iraq, wouldn't have been in vain.


Without hope there is no freedom.

Joy cometh in the morning, scripture tells us.


I'm Yasser Navarrete

"On September 11" Written: September 11, 2005

September 11, 2001. A date unlike any other in the long course of American history.

In the midst of a Tragedy in America we remember another American Tragedy.

The events were surreal. We were watching it on television and we couldn't believe it. The World Trade Center attacked and fell and then it was no more. The Pentagon—the headquarters of the most powerful military ever to walk the face of this earth—attacked. US military personnel dead. Another high jacked airplane still in the air. The White House evacuated. The Vice-President taken to a secure bunker. The Speaker of the United States House of Representatives and the President Pro Tempore of the United States Senate both taken to secured locations outside Washington D.C., with the sole purpose of maintaining continuity of government. The President of the United States aboard Air Force One, Air Force One under an F-16 Fighter Jet Military Escort. And thousands of people walking across the bridge trying to get out of Lower Manhattan with soot on their faces and tears in their eyes.

And then, on that same day, someone took the picture above. Three firefighters propping up the American flag. The famous scene harkens to that military victory in Iwo Jima. Endurance provided that victory on September 11th.

Four years down the road a lot has changed. You know I just took a few seconds to think about the previous sentence: Four years down the road a lot has changed. I'm not sure that that's entirely true. While life does go on, and while we once again have a sense of normalcy, in most of our mind's we still fear the day when we turn on the television and we witness another devastating attack on America. It's not a question of If, but rather of When? But nothing has changed. The MTV Generation continues to watch the VMA's and the who-shot-who soap opera surrounding it; they continue to watch Cribs and Room Raiders and continue to take their cultural cues from convicted felons. There's an unreal reality that my generation has succumbed to.

But then it's not just my generation. It's everyone. Civics has become a subject that no one cares about. History has become a subject that no one learned about. Politics has become a subject that no one thinks about. And that has created an ignorant people, oblivious to their surroundings.

As a student of history, what's even more amazing is the lack of sacrifice. The American Revolution, the War of 1812, the Civil War, the First World War, the Second World War, all required magnificent sacrifices for the cause, from food rationing to over-production. We don't have that now. The closest we do is gas at $3.00 a gallon. But that's not really a sacrifice. Everyone thinks it is but it isn't. We once again live in Dewey's era of Conspicuous Consumption. And those that are making the sacrifices are those my age, dying. Then again it's hypocritical. I'm not making any sacrifices either. Maybe that's why I've felt so badly lately and donated a substantial amount of money. One that I never thought I ever would. And maybe my lack of sacrifice is made up for the fact of acknowledging what is taking place. Knowing what is taking place. If 90% of Life is just showing up, then I showed up. I showed up to the table of knowledge, awareness and discussion. I'm not out there reading Teen People.

There were memorial services across the nation this morning.

"You're still our hero, please keep watching over us," Elizabeth Ahearn said to her brother, fire lieutenant Brian Ahearn.

"Donald, there's not a day that goes by that we don't think about you," a sobbing Suzanne Gavagan Mascitis said to her brother, Donald Richard Gavagan, Jr., a 35-year-old bond trading firm employee.

"Kenny, your legacy of teacher, mentor, leader and coach did not die with you four years ago, but rather found new life and will live on forever," said Marie Cox, to her brother, Kenneth Phelan, a firefighter and father of four.

The Personification of Victims.

And yet I return to a topic I've written about many times on this Journal. About the Firefighters and the Police who ran into the Towers to try to save people. They ran into the Fire. Ran into the Fire. The Streets of Heaven are too crowded with Angels. And they were ordinary men and women, ordinary fathers and mothers, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters. Ordinary people with extraordinary wills. Ordinary people that became American Heroes. And these are the times for American Heroes. And we do remember their sacrifice and their suffering. Along with those who have died in far-off wars. That's the least that we, who haven't sacrificed enough, must do. Remember and honor those who have sacrificed it all.

I'm Yasser Navarrete

"September 11" Written: September 11, 2003

This is Today, Thursday, September 11th, 2003...yet one will never forget Tuesday, September 11th, 2001. It's been two years since that horrendous day, but it seems as if the events occurred just yesterday.

Over the last two years, many people have died. 2,800 in the World Trade Center complex alone. 250+ American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Many people have been left alone, yet found a place. The people who have died did not have to: they were someone's mother, and someone's father, someone's son and someone's daughter.

Yet, Osama Bin Laden just issued a tape calling for an increase in Jihad, and more attacks to come.

Yet, Saddam Hussein and his Weapons of Mass Destruction - which we know exist because we gave it to him in the 80's - are AWOL.

Yet, America moves ahead. Not with fear, but with courage. We are aware, and no longer oblivious. We want to go back to normal. But there is no "normal" anymore. We've been a reactive society since our founding, and for the first time we want to become proactive. We want to save lives, and end terror. We want peace, not war... and we'll have peace even if we have to go to war for it.

But regardless, two years ago, many people lost somebody when their time wasn't up. Memories are all they have now. And a future is rooted in the hope that they may see each other again.

To the Brave Firefighters of the city of New York who went inside the buildings when everyone else was going out...

To the Port Authority and NYPD officers who perished while trying to provide calm...

To the innocent men, women, and children who thought that September 11, 2001 was just going to be like any other day...

Your death was not in vain and never forgotten. Your memory lives on. You were a testament to the greatness of America.

And now we await the third anniversary of the attacks. In the last one we went through a war, now through another... What will happen next?

IN MEMORIAM

***

Soon: The Primary Election Campaign Season—The Democrats

September 11th

Another Tuesday morning in September.



2974.

The Primary Election Campaign Season--The Republicans

It used to be that Labor Day signified the beginning of the General Election Campaign season. Of the election year.

Now, with Presidential Politics beginning earlier, and with this president being more and more a lame-duck everyday, Labor Day 2007 launches the Primary Election Campaign Season.

And as a sign of how much of a lame-duck the president is, apparently, he doesn't plan on being in the country much next year, as his replacements are vying for his job.

But it's starting to look like a campaign...

Fred Thompson gave his anti-climactic announcement that he's in on "The Tonight Show," while his opponents were debating in New Hampshire. The Honeymoon that the media gave him just three or four months ago is over. Indeed, what the media giveth, the media taketh away. Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan opined in the Wall Street Journal that his entering the race and using Jay Leno's stage was "rude" and she begged to ask the question: "Who are you? And the reason you're running for president would be...?" Others have already characterized him as lazy and detach. On George Stephanopoulos' show George Wil, Cokie Roberts, and Sam Donaldson were piling on him non-stop. What took you so long? And why did you even show up? And then again, these allusions to him being the "Next Reagan." By the time the media's done with him he'll be the Anti-Reagan. On Saturday the Washingon Post put out a column listing Thompson's insider bona-fides. Apparently he's more of a Washington Insider than Hillary Clinton, and the plethora of senators running in both parties. And he's lazy. The pundits can't stress that enough. Thompson trying retail politics is not a nice thing to see. And there's this feeling that he doesn't really want it. Ronald Reagan, before running successfully in 1980 ran in 1976, and before that was a chief executive as Governor of California. It seems to many that Thompson is doing it just to fill in a void.

I could just see a Lloyd Bentsen moment occuring in a Republican Debate with one of the candidates turning to Thompson and telling him: "Senator, I served with Dutch Reagan. I knew Dutch Reagan. Dutch Reagan was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Dutch Reagan!" And that'll be the end of him.

Going back to what the media giveth, the media taketh away: a month ago, they were declaring McCain's candidacy on life-support. Yesterday, David Broder wrote an article in the Washington Post entitled, "McCain Finds His Footing." And he ends the column with juxtaposing how well McCain does at Retail Politics. Remember he beat Dubya in New Hampshire in 2000. And Broder advises Thompson to pick up a thing or do from McCain. This type of media mention, which of course was then regurgitated on the Sunday talkies, can propel McCain to be the anti-Thompson. And with Thompson currently in second place, McCain can quickly push ahead, especially if he ends strong in New Hampshire.

In National Polls, Romney has lost some traction and McCain and Romney are currently in a statistical dead heat for third place. If Thompson falters, which is likely, we'll see the Battle for New Hampshire play out between Giuliani, McCain, and Romney. Here Romney has a 12 point lead over Giuliani, and Giuliani, a 5 point lead over McCain, but this can all change soon, and all change fast. Especially when we get back from Iowa where Romney is clearly in the lead there. I believe that Giuliani and McCain will quickly change their modus operandi and switch over to NH since Iowa is lost, and they'll probably leave Thompson to battle Romney there, since he plays better in the Mid-West than he does in the Northeast. Appearances on "Law and Order" notwithstanding...

In an interesting sidenote. The Florida GOP Primary has Giuliani leading, with Thompson ten points behind, and once again Romney and McCain tied for third.

No wonder Romney was the first to disavow any connections with the shoe-tapper...

Soon: The Democrats.

On Politics and History...Part II

Part II of II...

Why is History important?

Because it tells us where we’ve been, and it provides a glimpse of where we’re going.
At the end of the day, I’m extremely optimistic. Putting aside the logical rationality inherent in a historian’s work, we’re still moving forward. Progress is being achieved. This is the historical continuum of humankind. This is the march of time.

History allows us to become detached of irrational emotion, and look at the grander scheme of things. Irrational emotionality hurts us as a civilization. A thorough understanding of history encapsulates us from that nuisance.

The nature of the historical beast is of course, that it takes time for history to be concurred upon. For a paradigm to be established, much consensus first needs to take place. At the same time, paradigm shifts, in a somewhat Kuhnian intuition do exist. That’s why revisionism is omnipresent. And that’s why history is fluid. Winston Churchill said that “History is written by the victors,” and he’s right about that. Myth sometimes becomes history.

There’s also much disagreement on how to think about History. A linear construct of history follows our logical quest for cause-and-effect. Cyclical constructs of history, while important, sometimes take on moralist overtones. The Renaissance and Enlightenment historians looked down upon the Dark Ages, and saw themselves as New Rome. In some quarters, American historians today see themselves as the New Britain, etc. Such group think may be dangerous in trying to understand nuances and significant interpretations in a historical study.

Nevertheless, I do believe that history is teleological. In this I agree with Hegel. Hegel believed that the end-result was “civilization,” I believe it is more like liberal democracy.

***

This brings us to the present. I believe that historians will consider Bush not the worst president in history, but not the greatest either. He’ll be alright. People are too passionate, and their views too myopic. When you look at where America is today—it’s not in that bad of a shape. We haven’t been attacked since September 11th; our democracy and our republic remains strong, naysayers aside; our economy is relatively strong, in terms of growth and record low unemployment. And for better or worse, we’re remaking the world in our image. This is hegemony. But the remake takes time. It always has.

We went into Iraq in March 2003, it is September 2007, and people are expecting liberal democracy and the respect of human rights and freedoms to be ubiquitous in that country. Such an accelerated transformation has never taken place. History, progress, our teleological end takes time.

The Magna Carta was signed by King John in 1215. From then on, it took almost half a millennia for the Glorious Revolution of 1688 to bring about the nascent modern English parliamentary democracy. Never since then has a British monarch commanded Absolute Power. Another two hundred years, during the reign of Queen Victoria, for the monarchy to become more symbolic than political, this achieved through a series of reforms in the Commons, which curbed the power of the monarch and the House of Lord. Almost another hundred until the end of empire. Which leads us to today, and the British Monarch, Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith (Dei Gratia Britanniarum Regnorumque Suorum Ceterorum Regina, Consortionis Populorum Princeps, Fidei Defensor), delivers a State Opening of Parliament that’s written by her Prime Minister—even though it’s still Her Majesty’s Government. This took almost 800 years.

Even America took awhile. Not until the third president of the United States ushered in Jeffersonian Democracy that the electorate was expanded. Before then, it was only the elite white male landowners whom controlled the electoral process. Even Jeffersonian Democracy was somewhat undemocratic, since during that time, a one-party system was entrenched in America. In the latter half of the 1820’s (fifty years since Independence, forty since the Bill of Rights), did Jacksonian Democracy take hold. A two-party system grew, electorate was expanded to include all white male adults, and more elected officers were commissioned. Of course, another forty before slaves were freed and technically given suffrage rights (even though because of the tragedy of Jim Crow, it took one hundred years for the promise to come to fruition). Not until 1920 did women get the right to vote. And all of that being said, there is still widespread chronic disenfranchisement in the political system. And of course, we might still not succeed, and still fall, like the Romans. In my gut, as I said before, I believe that this is all teleological. But who knows. It just might not be.

***

In short, there’s been crimes and injustices committed against certain groups throughout history. There have been events that have taken centuries to unfold before a dream becomes a reality. There’s many x factors in play when it comes to the conduct and study of history. And it takes an informed citizenry to take all these factors into play. At the end of the day, one must decide whether history is linear or cyclical, teleological or not.

And learning about the history of not only your country, but also your world, can you form a fuller, more colorful picture of progress, of the old human struggle and its fruits together.

And that’s moving forward in it of itself.