President-Elect's Delegation Enters

Those escorting Barack Obama have entered.

Vice--President-Elect Enters

Joseph Biden, beaming in the sunlight, enters waving to enthusiastic cheers.

G. W. Bush Comes On Camera

Looking no more Presidential than he ever did, slightly smirking, G. W. Bush, the installed President walks the hall toward the Capitol Steps.

Fanfares Announce Ex-Presidents

It is good to see the Ex-Presidents, Carter and Clinton. The Clintons get a much warmer welcome than the others.

I don't believe the Founding Fathers would particularly approve of these fanfares. The trumpeteer has a banner under his horn which looks like a royal banner. Is this pomp or pomposity?

The grandeur of the buildings is wonderful and the good cheer of the people is heart-warming.

Various Officials Enter

Senators, members of the Supreme Court have entered.

The former Vice-Presidents are now entering. It is good to see Walter and Joan Mondale and Al and Tipper Gore.

Arriving at the Capitol

The Presidential Motorcade has arrived at the Capitol. Laura Bush and Michelle Obama have walked into the Capitol. Joseph Biden has exited his vehicle. Richard Cheney's wheel-chair has been seen.

Historically Low Approval Ratings

G.W. Bush, installed in the Oval Office by the Supreme Court, leaves office with an historically low approval rating of twenty-two percent, reports the media this morning.

Crowds Scream Their Delight

Crowds along the motorcade route are not only cheering but screaming, much the same as they do for Jay Leno or Ellen.

Blogging the Inaugural

No matter the outcome of any lawsuits today's events in Washington are historic. I am glad to be able to write about the inauguration of Barack Obama as the 44th President of the United States. --

The principles of the day are leaving the White House. The First Lady and up-coming First Lady have already left. Vice-President Cheney has been wheeled out in his wheel-chair. And moments ago G.W. Bush and Barack Obama have now left and are arriving at the Capitol.

It is a momentous event, yet one senses these are real people living out what is ordinary for them.

The Evolution of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

"A true revolution of values will lay hand on the world order and say of war, 'This way of settling differences is not just.' This business of burning human beings with napalm, of filling our nation's homes with orphans and widows, of injecting poisonous drugs of hate into the veins of peoples normally humane, of sending men home from dark and bloody battlefields physically handicapped and psychologically deranged, cannot be reconciled with wisdom, justice, and love."


So said the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. on April 4, 1967, at the Riverside Church in New York City, exactly one year before his assassination in Memphis. This speech condemning the Viet Nam War is at least as amazing as the "I Have a Dream" speech of August 1963. In one sense it is more amazing because of the wrenching debate then raging in the nation regarding that horrible and unjust war, a war for which the United States has never apologized.

And in this speech Dr. King speaks about economics as the great oppressor in America.

Neither of these topics is preferred by today's commentators on the life of Dr. King. Yet, the 1967 speech is part of his legacy just as much as the earlier speech.

I am very happy to commend the speech referenced here to you. Simply click on the title above or cut and paste the link below.


http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkatimetobreaksilence.htm

Needed: a New "New Deal"

As the country readies for the inauguration of Barack Obama as President of the United States (whether he is truly qualified or not), the nation faces certain choices regarding its future. If I may be brief on this particular occasion, what is needed is an effort along the lines of the New Deal as put forward by Franklin Roosevelt in 1933 and later. Another way of putting it is We need a mixed economy, not an unfettered capitalist "globalized" economy. We must fight with all our might against the globalized financial system as it has come to be.

An Interesting Exchange of E-Mails

I have received an important e-mail inquiry regarding the lawsuit filed by Philip Berg, Esq., the former Attorney General of Pennsylvania. What follows is my response to my correspondent's letter. Because I am in a hurry and have not gotten the person's permission I am omitting the writer's questions. But essentially I am being asked to explain why I care about this issue, whether I am a closet conservative, and whether the ends justify the means. These are legitimate questions and deserve a response. I thought my wider blog audience also deserved and would enjoy reading my response.

(There are other reasons for my position which go beyond the answers to the questions asked. There are questions of legitimacy and national sovereignty, as well.)

Here then is the letter I wrote to my dear friend.


+++++++++++

Thanks for your e-mail. I understand your questions and I welcome them. It is only natural to have questions about this subject. Also, it is easy to misunderstand my position, so since you have asked I am glad to try to answer your questions somewhat.

I voted for Dennis Kucinich and championed him even after he dropped out of the running in 2004 and again last year. When it became clear Kucinich was not going to win the nomination in 2008, I did in fact root for Hillary Clinton for several reasons: 1) She won the popular vote in the primaries; 2) She began giving a very effective populist message in the late primaries as opposed to her earlier approach; 3) I felt having a woman as President could do the country good; and 4) I felt she was more experienced than Barack Obama.

I reject the labels of liberal and conservative as used by the mainstream media. They are virtually meaningless. For instance, to care about the environment is actually a conservative position. We even speak of "conserving" natural resources. I oppose casino gambling; some would call that a conservative position. But I am for unions and against the power of large corporations and the profit motive. Many would call these "liberal" positions, but to me they are just common sense. So, I don't consider myself "conservative" or "liberal", but I don't mind being called a leftist.

As for Mr. Obama, I am very happy an African-American was able to win both the popular vote and the Electoral College vote....

The suits being filed against Mr. Obama (and there are several by different people) have nothing to do with him as a person or even his policies or his accomplishments. They have to do with his qualifications to be President under the Constitution. Unfortunately, it has become fashionable to denigrate the Constitution, either through words or actions or both. I didn't write the Constitution. But it does say that a person, in order to be President, must be a "natural-born citizen" of the United States (not "naturalized"). There is a difference. Thus, if Hillary Clinton were not natural-born or Kucinich or whoever, it wouldn't matter. Any person must meet this requirement (along with a couple of others) in order to serve as President.

I have spent considerable time investigating this matter, and while I cannot claim to be an expert, there is serious enough doubt in my mind about Mr. Obama's citizenship status to believe, at the least, those bringing suit deserve their day in court. So far, this has been denied them, with the active help of those representing Mr. Obama. This raises red flags for me. If he can prove his case why is he not able to produce a simple vault birth certificate [something ordinary Americans are asked to do every day]?

There may be some validity to the point that because the country is in a crisis such fine points don't matter. Yet, I strongly believe we cannot simply pick and choose which parts of the Constitution to uphold. And, as I say, upholding the Constitution has suddenly become this very challenging thing to do. Yet, I really feel I have no other option.

Certainly there is much more which can be said about this. But I believe the points I have made above explain my position rather well without the need to continue the explanation.

You are free to disagree, of course. But if you plan to argue that the Constitution is not important, I confess I am at a loss to know what else to say.


Thanks again for your questions.


Sincerely,

(signed)

Reclaiming History

One of these days perhaps I will subtitle this web log the Book Blog, for many posts have something to do with books. And so it is the case tonight.

I have written earlier of the book I continue to read -- Reclaiming History by Vincent Bugliosi. I am now in the chapter on Oswald killer, Jack Ruby.

The great value of this book is the tremendous amount of honest research behind it. But just as important is the mind behind the book, that of perhaps the premiere prosecutor in America. The interesting thing to see is how this famed prosecutor, author of Helter Skelter goes about exonerating people right and left even as he bears in on Lee Harvey Oswald as the sole killer of John F. Kennedy, thirty-fifth President of the United States.

And what a terrific national service this book is in laying to rest the various and sundry claims of other assassins and co-conspirators. If we can have one less pernicious mystery surrounding this country so much the better.

I still have about three hundred pages to go, having already perused 1100 pages! One day soon I plan to be able to say I have completed Bugliosi's 1400-page masterwork. Just don't plan to quiz me on all its details!

The Limits of Power

Last year Henry Holt and Company published The Limits of Power by Andrew Bacevich, professor at Boston University and former member of the U.S. Army (achieving the rank of colonel). The library has given me three weeks to read the book; obviously someone else wants to read it as well.

The premise of the book seems to be that the United States cannot afford the de facto Empire created by American financial control backed by a world-wide military. While this is not a new thesis, the book appeared at a time when U.S. citizens had become inured to news from Iraq and had come to seemingly accept American occupation of that country.

I am still early in the book and will doubtless have more to say about it later. For now I can say with confidence that this is an important book with rational, fact-based arguments which any thoughtful American would do well to carefully consider.

World to Celebrate 200th Birthday of Charles Darwin

According to The World Almanac, February 12, 2009, marks the 200th anniversary of the birth of Charles Darwin. (Darwin thus shares an exact birth date with Abraham Lincoln.) The 150th anniversary of Darwin's On the Origin of Species will occur on November 24, 2009. Here is a quote from this monumental work:

It is interesting to contemplate an entangled bank, clothed with many plants of many kinds, with birds singing on the bushes, with various insects flitting about, and with worms crawling through the damp earth, and to reflect that these elaborately constructed forms, so different from each other, and dependent on each other in so complex a manner, have all been produced by laws acting around us.

-- Charles Darwin,
On the Origin of Species , 1859