If you watched last night’s debate, you probably saw John McCain claim that he isn’t President Bush. Well, it’s true, they do have different DNA, but here’s the Obama campaign’s response:

The President is currently in Israel. In part, he is there to celebrate the 60th Anniversary of the State of Israel, but in part he is there to help along the Middle East peace process between Israel and the Palestinians. I have no issues with anyone visiting there for either of those reasons, but his true motivations behind the latter of the two reasons is nothing short of despicable. Everyone would like for there to be peace in Israel, but his motivation is quite different from most.

George W. Bush is poised to leave office in January 2009 as one of the worst United States Presidents in history, if not truly the worst. He, along with the help of his cronies (read: Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Karl Rove, et al), has abolished many of the basic constitutional rights we take for granted, has led us in to an unjust quagmire of a war, helped lead oil prices to an all-time high, has greatly abused and extended executive power, has created a devastatingly huge national debt, is leading us in to a recession, and countless other atrocities, many of which should have earned him an impeachment (if only the congress had a spine).

Back on topic, if our President truly did care about establishing peace between the Israelis and Palestinians, he likely would have attempted to negotiate peace sooner than his absolute last year in office (of an eight-year term, none the less) and he probably would have visited Israel more than a total of two times. This is not an attempt on his part of establishing peace in the Middle East. It is an attempt at salvaging the shattered remains of his legacy and hoping he can be remembered for something other than the various failures I listed above. He is desperately hoping that real peace between the Israelis and Palestinians happens before he leaves office, so he can claim responsibility. Whatever the opposite of a Nobel Peace Prize is, he deserves it.

I’m so disgusted with the way that the Libby trial has been run and, moreso, the fact that Bush just commuted his sentence that I’m not even sure how to start this. First and foremost, no one had the balls to actually charge Libby, Cheney, and/or Bush with the charges that should have been filed in relation to the leaking of Valerie Plume’s identity: Treason. Leaking the identity of an undercover operative, ruining her career, and blowing the cover of the entire false company that had been set up to conceal her and her coworkers is no less treasonous today than an American citizen spying for the soviets was during the cold war and should be treated exactly the same way. Whoever was involved, whoever leaked her name, and whoever helped cover it up deserves a treason conviction and nothing else. Here is how treason is defined in United States Code Title 18, Part I, Chapter 115, § 2381:

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

If leaking the identity of an undercover operative and exposing her to our own nation as well as the rest of the world doesn’t qualify as giving our enemies aid, then I’m reading the above law wrong and Libby deserves his commuted sentence. Treason was, however, committed in the leaking of her identify. Libby, Cheney, and probably also Bush deserve a new trial on treason charges and should, once convicted, be immediately removed from office, as per the final part of the above code. This of course, would have probably already happened if the judicial branch of the government weren’t just as corrupt as the executive branch.

I realize that the above fantasy is never actually going to happen due to the aforementioned corruption, so on to Libby’s actual conviction: Four counts of obstruction of justice. Martha Stewart served 5 months in prison for a single count of obstruction and paid a fine of $195,000 for a stock sell-off that only saved her about $45,000. Libby however, was convicted of 4 counts and was fined only $250,000 and sentenced to 30 months in prison for leaking a CIA operative’s identity, ruining her career, and potentially compromising national security – all to get back at her husband, former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, for “talking shit” about the Bush administration in an op-ed that appeared in the New York Times. Based on the severity of the crimes, I’d say that Libby got off easy. At the very least, his sentence was on par with Martha Stewart’s. The President, however, has “concluded that the prison sentence given to Mr. Libby is excessive”. Based on previous convictions of similar charges, this is a ridiculous statement for him to make, as sentence was in fact fair based on the counts he was convicted on. What is even more amazing to me is that in a single sentence Bush was able to use such large words as “concluded” and “excessive”. Three syllable words are tough for him to begin with, but two in one sentence! I’m astonished. It’s almost as if millions of our tax dollars have gone to speech lessons for the President (Conspiracy theory!?).

Hopefully, the next time that charges are brought against a member of the Bush administration, the powers that be will actually make them stick and the perpetrators will get what’s coming to them. I have yet to see corruption like this in my life time and I hope that when this current administration is kicked out or voted out, whichever comes first, that the next administration can begin to fix all of the damage that Bush and his cronies have caused.