Little Johnny lifted his neighbor’s motorized tricycle. Pushed it home while no one was looking. He was caught before he could get any joy out of it. When confronted about the theft by his father, the boy declared that it didn’t work anyway. “You see”, dad says, “that’s why you shouldn’t steal!”

The wisdom encompassed in this fatherly advice is currently on display in the debate over torture. Many critics of torture are pointing to its “efficacy problem”. It doesn’t work. Presumably, then, if it did work its use might possibly be justified, or at least something worth arguing.

Then what are we against? Torture itself, or torture in that it demonstrates a lack of efficacy? I’ll leave it to the legal scholars but my guess is that, in all the domestic and international laws and conventions against torture, the prohibition is based on the act itself without regard to its consequences.

In a debate, there are weak strategies and strong strategies. The weak strategy is to look for the easiest point of attack, that of going after the opposition’s weakest debating point. The strong strategy is to attack the opposition’s strongest argument, and show it to be lacking.

Defenders of torture claim that it yields useful information that could not be had by other means. The usefulness of the information is said to be of paramount importance.

It’s a weak strategy when torture critics, lacking the strength of their own conviction, argue against the premise that torture can be useful. Arguing that torture is not useful normalizes the act itself, in the same way that Johnny’s father normalized theft.

The strong strategy for torture critics would be to grant the premise to the other side. Of course torture “works” in any reasonable sense of the word. It produces, on average, the desired effect with a probability greater than zero and less than 100%. That’s why it’s used. Enlightened people are not against it because of its uselessness (or because it may be “misused”) and should not fear facing this.

Torturers have the weaker side of the argument when they say it’s worth torturing someone if it could stave off something worse. We can call this ‘trading certainty for uncertainty’ and I don’t know the extent to which this is frowned upon in the legal tradition, but philosophically I regard it as a trivial idea, easily disposed of.

The only reason this particular torture argument even exists is that the wrong country is involved in it. Should this be happening in the country of a designated enemy, we would be quick to recognize it as an avoidance of state responsibility to hold to international norms and respect the law.

When it comes to prosecuting torture (naturally involving our highest officials), we’re told to look forward, not backward. This is the sentiment of the President, and is somberly echoed throughout the corridors of our institutions and the corporate press. Yet all crimes are in the past. Does this mean a jettisoning of all law enforcement, which cannot prosecute crimes until after they occur?

Perhaps we should say it. We are not a nation of laws. We are a nation that uses law as a tool of the state, and those that act in accordance with the state are clearly above that law.

Like the pre-programmed robots we’ve all become, we’ll celebrate this as a welcome and much-needed change from the reviled Bush-Cheney administration. A step in the right direction, we might even say.

In addition, the Pope of Hope has promised not to torture. Our society is so fuckin’ corrupt that a US president can announce—without shame—a purported plan to say no to committing crimes against humanity. Of course, we view this as “normal” and we foolishly believe him and even praise him.

Obama’s blood brother, Dick Cheney, happily plays his pre-ordained role in this passion play by going on national television and declaring that our (sic) president’s vague pledge to possibly adhere to accepted international law—a pledge more honored in the breach—is making the US less safe.

The pundit patrol gleefully spins into action. You see, what passes for intelligence and insight in America typically involves being handsomely paid to put on a suit and go on TV to debate whether its Obama or his Dick that’s got it right.

This is mental illness in plain view—unabashed, unfettered lunacy not even trying to masquerade as sanity. If we woke up, it would take perhaps 3-5 seconds to recognize this: Obama is a heinous criminal. Cheney is a heinous criminal. The same can be said for the volunteer soldiers and all those who give the orders; the law enforcement types and all those who give the orders; the judges; the professional liars who stock the media ranks; and, of course, all the humans that comprise the power structure of Corporate America.

Since we habitually choose denial instead of rebellion, our willingness to play along at home by, for example, analyzing the subtle nuances that differentiate Obama from his Dick makes us heinous criminals, too. When things are as bad as they are now, there’s more than enough guilt to go around.

Just about everything about US and global culture (e.g. raping the environment, the propaganda machine, avaricious materialism, insatiable military conquest, sexism, homophobia, racism, patriarchy, etc.) adds up to death and destruction. Yet we—the species with the allegedly superior cognitive skills—opt to spend our time getting worked up over Obama debating his Dick.

Joe votes Republican. Joann votes Democrat. Nothing changes.

Jane human loves Sean Hannity. John adores Jon Stewart. The planet remains in peril.

Joann and John think Obama’s plan is the cat’s meow. Joe and Jane agree with Dick. Big picture: It makes no difference at all.

Whatever side we choose in these fabricated conflicts, human society maintains its steady, relentless path toward mass homicide/suicide. If we ever decide to look up from our text screens and video games, we might actually catch the last act.

Until the laws are changed or the power runs out, Mickey Z. can be found on the Web at http://www.mickeyz.net.

The GOP says they are against the Stimulus plan because it has too much pork in it. Remember those Stimulus plans approved by the Republicans when Bush was still in? Up around $2 Trillion and nobody knows where it went? And Paulsen, who was appointed by Bush, says he ain’t telling.

It would appear that the Republicans are hoping the public forgets the Bush record over the last eight years. But I’m going to remind you of it right now.

During the eight years of Bush the Long-term liabilities (that’s deferred debt) of the United States increased approximately $50 Trillion. And the Annual (short term) debt usually referred to as the National Debt increased about $7 Trillion during those eight years. And then there is the matter of the Stimulus passed by the Bush bunch that I just mentioned above, that will ultimately amount to about $3 Trillion.

Those three things bring together total to about $60 trillion. In a comment on one of the blogs last week I noted that 60 trillion is 60,000 Billion, or to put it in perspective if you had that amount to spend, and you began to spend 8 million dollars a day beginning with the day Jesus Christ was born, and you continued to spend that 8 million each day until today, you would have about 2,000 Billion left to spend, or about 170% of what Obama is proposing to spend in all of his Stimulus bills. Now all that happened during the Bush eight years. But that’s just the money.

There’s the approval of torture, spying on you and me, starting wars to profit special interests instead of to protect the country, getting rid of Habeas Corpus, paying of reporters to propagandize (bet you forgot that one already), secret prisons, renditions, lying to the citizens, and even all that doesn’t address the people killed ( over a million ) to appease the profit hungry blood suckers.

You know the NeoCons. And they sacrificed America’s world standing as the beacon of justice, honor, moral dealings, ethical behavior, etc, and ad-infinitum. And still, the GOP faithful support this sewer of an Administration.

For all those reasons above is why I call for the end of the GOP. They have surrendered the moral conscious needed to represent us. What they represented for the past eight years and, it appears, what they still represent is depraved governance. I do not and will not stand for such. I ask all moral people to join my protest and never again vote for a Republican Candidate for office.

All parties that survive the Republican demise will get the message.

This is a valuable heuristic for interpreting the increased chatter we’re picking up – not by NSA and not concerning the evil intentions of “others” against “us” – but the steady drone about possible investigations, commissions, and prosecutions concerning certain elements of, and individuals in, the defunct Bush/Cheney administration by the nascent Obama/Biden administration.

Characteristic of this increased chatter is that it is not coming from establishment outsiders. Almost by definition there is a limiting value on the amount of noise outsiders can create. The impression that the people are free to dissent can be maintained but one hears very little sound from those in the bottom of the pool when the pool is always carefully filled to the top with water. Free to yell, yes. Free to yell where it would have the greatest effect, not so fast.

Accountability chatter is now coming from insiders, from establishment “critics” in the political and media elite. There is this lush opportunity to be seen in the light of eternal truth and justice – as a singular seeker going steadfast wherever the trail leads, wherever the evidence leads – while pretending that the grandstands aren’t full.

How seriously this chatter can be taken may be judged by its tardiness, despite protestations that it is never too late. Later is what it always gets. And it is certainly too late to undo or even mitigate the damage done in this 8-year crime wave.

What we might be talking about is picking off a few dispensable pieces from this gang, the preferred alternative to rocking (in this case, severely) the ship of state. A great crime deserves great measures, and such are being taken reflexively by establishment stewards who do not have to be taught the value of preservation.

We are instructed to keep our gaze ahead, on the task before us, to a future beckoning us. Every establishment statement about accountability is tempered with this disclaimer:

Objects in the mirror are farther than you need concern yourself about.

If this behavior was taking place in another country we would not hesitate to term it a whitewash. We have our own term for it. Transition. As in, a smooth transition.

Such is the resolution when you understand the game, when you approve of it, when you’re one of them, when you’re “with it”.

But see, I know who are those that help “Idiots” defraud us. It is those Party loyalists who put Party first. These are also bad guys. See they’ll vote for their crook “because he’s their crook”. They think that when he stops robbing them, and them includes us, it’s because he has found compassion. The real truth is that the “Party” will quit stealing when there is nothing of value left to steal.

What we need is an Americans first frame of mind. We need to bring to justice, try, and incarcerate those convicted – even if they are “our Party”. The last Political Party to have had a chance to do something good for America is the outgoing one. They need to be punished for not policing themselves, their elected leaders. We need to get rid of that party. We also need to punish the criminals involved, how many and of what party doesn’t matter. To inhibit future criminal activity, all we citizens have to do is punish the wrongdoers. If we impose punishment, those who are planning to continue the corruption will at least have to stop and observe that punishment actually does come. And when it does come, it will be an incentive to those who want to stay out of jail, to discontinue criminal activity.

I said we need to get rid of the outgoing Party, the Republican Party. How do you punish a Party? It is so very simple -don’t ever vote for a Republican Candidate again. That will effectively end the GOP. But it will do more than that. It will send a signal to the Democrats that these coming four years are not their time at the trough. During the next four years we need to be building a Coalition of Independents Party. With 135 of such parties in existence now, representing the majority of the people of America, coming together as a Coalition will be hard to do, but it will result in a Government much more representative of the people.

But for anything to be effective it has to begin. It is up to you and me to get it started. We should start by getting rid of the Republican Party. We have a perfect reason – they enabled the continuance of criminal activity. It is undeniable. Even though it was done to “protect” the Party, it is undeniable that they did provide the cover for the corruption to continue. And at least in this punishment you can have an equal voice with anyone in America, including the President. You have the vote at your disposal. All you have to do is never vote for a Republican Candidate again. Everyone will get the message. If you will pay particular attention, you will notice that the Republicans are already getting the message and they are worried about it. Have you noticed? The Republican leadership realizes how vulnerable they are. We have the opportunity to prove we won’t take it anymore.

If I, a lifelong Republican, can leave the party and call for its demise, why can’t other Republicans? I left the party after Bush’s first year. I could see where it was headed. Yes, getting rid of the Neo-Cons is critical to the party’s survival, but why should anyone think it would happen? Has there not been enough time or opportunity to do that over the last eight years? Every Party in America needs to realize that embracing the Neo-Con faction means certain death for their Party.

I choose the Republican Party as the one to punish simply because they are the last Party to have had the opportunity to govern for the good of America. For no reason other than to chose one Party and use it as an example. For the record I believe that the Democratic Party is just as bad as the Republican Party.

Since the Democrats are now in power, they have a chance to govern for the good of America. Will they? I don’t know, but if we exile the Republicans my thinking is that the Democrats will take notice and at least make an effort to change. Wasn’t that Obama’s promise and the reason he was elected? But if the Democrats don’t shape up, we can replace them just like the Republicans. We will by then have experience in doing it and will have been building a Coalition. We just can’t continue to wait for every four years, continuing to hope for change, yet doing nothing to cause it.

To those defenders of the Republican Party: you are just individuals, who together, continue the enabling of Party corruption. When you defend your party, giving as your reason, that the other party is worse, or that you don’t know about the other Parties, you do nothing to solve the problem. You just prolong it.

What I want to do is solve the problem. I am a supporter of the Independent Populist Party. I chose them from the many sites I visited after leaving the Republicans, looking for a party that promised certain values for the American citizen. I read the “Ten Planks” and “A Populist America” on the Populist Site. I found that the mantra of the Populist is to return to the Constitutional provisions of our Founding Fathers, a belief that I identified with all my life. I would encourage all Party First people to visit Independent sites. You just might discover a Party that places Citizens rights, that’s your rights, in the proper priority.

The time was around April or May and the amount was $300 Billion and it was put in place to help 400,000 people with their mortgages. In July of 08, I sent a letter to my Newspaper entitled “The Mother of All Rip-Offs”

Here it is in its entirety:

The Mother of all rip-offs is about to be fostered on the American public. It’s the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Let me explain. I noticed a pretty young thing on CNN gushing about the bailout for Fannie and Freddie.  She pleasingly says the House just passed a bill, now going to the Senate, to authorize an expenditure of $300 Billion to rescue 400,000 homeowners. More conservative sources say it could reach $100 Billion.

Lets see …  $100 Billion divided by 400,000 Homeowners = $250,000 per rescued homeowner.  Yeah, I could stand a little saving at that rate but wait, there’s more bad news. That money is not going to Homeowners who need help, no its going to the lenders, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who got in trouble because of their shyster loan policies. So Joe taxpayer, that would be you and me, are going to help the fat cats get fatter.  That money is going to the lenders so the stockholders of Freddie and Fannie can get their anticipated stock dividends. CEO Daniel Mudd of Fannie Mae drew $12.2 million last year while his partner in crime, Richard F. Syron of Freddie Mac, drew $19.8 million. Need help with your mortgage?

The in trouble Homeowner, one of the 400,000, is likely to get extended time to help pay their mortgage – did you notice he/she won’t get any of the $250,000 authorized for each one of the 400,000? Just send me my $250,000, my payments will be on time, then there won’t be foreclosures, F & F won’t need money, I’ll buy a Cabin Cruiser and putter up and down the Arkansas, dang, might even pay off my house.

Well it turned out to be $300 Billion after all, so I wrote another (The Big Bailout and the Usual Suspects) to point out that $300 Billion if used to bail out 400,000 people would come to $750,000 for each person bailed out. And that would be if all 400,000 were bailed. But what if less than 400,000 were bailed out? Then the cost of each person bailed out would go higher and higher. I predicted that possibly only 100,000 or so would be recipients of any of the money and that the rest of that money would just “disappear”.

Well yesterday on the House floor, it was reported that in the intervening almost one year, just 13 people have been helped by the $300 Billion. Know what the annual interest on $300 billion is? At 5% it would be 15 Billion dollars. That money was taken from you and me and someone has it. But it’s not us. We get to pay the $15 Billion to someone. We’ve already sacrificed the $300 Billion (we have to pay that too). Are you mad yet? Did you watch Bush’s farewell speech tonight? You Republicans proud of your man?

Would you please go read that paragraph again?

This is why I keep calling for the end of the Republican Party.

By the way they extended the bill. Made some changes they said. Time will tell. By this time next year why almost a hundred people might be helped. Somebody is getting a whopping help. It’s not you and me.