The Saric Analysis

The Case for Kosovo: A Body of Justifications for the Recognition of a State

2010-02-11T22:21:00.000-08:00

I'm feeling quite inspired, so let's talk Kosovo. In order to develop a meaningful understanding of the situation, we must first study the historical context Kosovo finds itself in.

Kosovo is a state in the center of the Balkan Peninsula. It is landlocked, bordered by Macedonia on the southeast, Albania on the southwest, Montenegro on the west and Serbia on the north and northeast. It is home to over 2 million inhabitants, the vast majority of whom are ethnic Albanians. It has for hundreds of years formed a constitutive part of neighboring Serbia, namely in the Yugoslav era, where it was an autonomous province of said republic.

The Battle of Kosovo was waged on 15 June 1389 between the Kingdom of Serbia and the Ottoman Empire. The Serbs were completely defeated, and in Serbian culture the defeat they suffered on Kosovo Field has been a defining moment their history and their attitude regarding Kosovo. In the centuries that followed, this once-ethnically Serbian province saw increasing influence from the Islamic world, and Albanians, a predominantly Muslim people, came to be the primary inhabitants of the province. An Albanian culture was fostered, and by the end of WWII ethnic Albanians already comprised nearly 70% of Kosovo's population.

In Yugoslavia, eight primary nationalities (Slovenes, Croats, Bosniaks, Serbs, Montenegrins, Macedonians, Albanians [in Kosovo], and Hungarians [in Vojvodina in Serbia's north]) were held together by the Communist apparatus. This apparatus was heavily dominated by the Serbs, who constituted a plurality of Yugoslavia's population (around 35% in the early 1980's). As a Communist state, it officially declared that all nationalities are equal and subject to equal treatment, placement and rights. Naturally, however, the majority Serbs ended up creating a state where "everyone was equal, yes, but Serbs were a bit more equal." For example, Slovenia and Croatia, who made up only 25% of Yugoslavia's population but generated nearly 60% of its economy, saw their wealth get steered to developing Serbia, which was half as prosperous as Slovenia or Croatia and far below the Yugoslav average. A similar state of affairs was in the Yugoslav National Army (Jugoslavenska Narodna Armija, JNA), where the majority of soldiers and nearly all officers were Serbs. The inequality was brazen and unscrupulous, and as Communism disintegrated across the European continent, Yugoslavia destabilized.

Having been in total domination since the end of WWII, the Serbs were not about to risk losing their authority. With the fall of the Berlin Wall and of the Communist ideology in Europe at the end of the 1980's, ethnic sentiments surged in Yugoslavia. Albanians in Kosovo marched in non-violent protests against the injustices dealt them by the Serb-dominated government. Slobodan Milosevic responded by neutralizing Kosovo's more autonomous status within Serbia, putting it under even more repressive control. When Slovenia and Croatia seceded from the Yugoslav federation in the summer of 1991, followed shortly thereafter by Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina, Yugoslavia as it was once known ceased to exist. The Serbs used their heavily Serbian JNA to attempt to thwart the independence of these nations and their peoples by imposing an outrageously nationalist vision of a "Greater Serbia", ethnically cleansed of non-Serbs, across much of the Western Balkans, at a time when the newly-independent nations' abilities to defend themselves were at an embryonic state. Slovenia and Croatia were invaded in 1991, followed by Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1992. (Macedonia was coincidentally spared due to the deployment of NATO "tripwire" soldiers.) Despite their catastrophic initial advantage in manpower, equipment, and preparedness, the Serbs provoked and fought three wars over the course of four years against unarmed countries and lost them all resoundingly. With the signing of the Dayton Accords in 1995, the messiest conflict, the one in Bosnia-Herzegovina, ended the bloodshed in the Balkans. The mountain of weaponry and nationalism that the Serbs found themselves on ironically caused Serbia to become the smallest it had ever been since the First World War.

Meanwhile, Kosovo had also proclaimed its independence in the early 1990's, but never achieved international recognition. At the same time, a thoroughly battered and humiliated Serbia had awakened to the reality that it is utterly incapable of asserting itself beyond its borders. Milosevic was not about to see a part of Serbia itself also become lost forever. The Serbian government from Belgrade imposed strict, Serb-dominated controls in Kosovo following the abolition of its status as an autonomous province. Kosovo Albanians responded by raising parallel institutions, governed in Kosovo by Kosovars, to ensure some degree of autochthonous rule. Dissatisfied with the Serbian state of affairs in Kosovo, Milosevic once again turned to brutal ethnic cleansing in 1998, displacing hundreds of thousands of ethnic Albanians into neighboring republics and slaughtering thousands of civilians as they once again terrorized an unprepared, army-less state.

The United States and its NATO allies, recalling the recent horrors that took place in the Balkans thanks to destructive Serbian nationalism, gave Milosevic an ultimatum, demanding that Belgrade pull out all its forces from Kosovo or risk getting bombed ruthlessly. Milosevic thought the West was bluffing, even once telling the American ambassador to the UN Richard Holbrooke "Are you suggesting that the US is really crazy enough to bomb Serbia over some little Kosovo?" Holbrooke's responce? "You bet we're crazy enough to do it." And they did; NATO went to war against Serbia, bombing the country incessantly for 78 days. Milosevic and the Serbs surrendered for the 4th time in a decade, and Kosovo became a UN-administered zone soon after.

These are the events that transpired prior to Kosovo's proclamation of independence in Febraury 2008. This backstory may seem lengthy but it is essential in understanding the justification of Kosovo's independence. In the next post I will address precisely the reasons why Kosovo deserves full international recognition.

Preview: Three BlogEssays

2010-02-07T13:48:00.001-08:00

There have been three things I've wished to talk about on this blog, all three political, I think:

1) The case for Kosovo - I plan on outlining all legal rationale why Kosovo's independence should be supported by the international community.

2) Iran, post-Islamic Republic - why the fall of the Islamic Republic, while potentially safer for the West, might do a disservice to Iranians.

3) The war in Iraq: Costs, benefits, and complexities - As the conflict in Iraq beings to gradually wind down to its long-awaited end, I will take a final look at the entire situation, from justification to long-term outcomes :-D

I have a lot to say about these, so stay tuned!

Ivo

Today's Day

2010-02-05T21:50:00.000-08:00

It started off with getting up at 6AM, in time for my linear algebra/calculus lecture every Mon-Wed-Fri at 8AM. Breakfast, emails, shower, shave as usual. Was raining a bit, and it rained quite nicely throughout the day. Whether you like the rain or not, we need it, especially after these past few dry years here in California.

I had a midterm in Dynamics (a specialized study of the area of Physics known as kinematics [stuff that has movement or an absence of movement]). The past week, the Science Library had served as my second home, and with nothing but my mind, my Dynamics book, a dry-erase pen and a home-made PB&J sandwich, I tackled all there was to know for the midterm. I'm glad and relieved to say that I overstudied, and the midterm was more-or-less a breeze. I was expecting to get annihilated, but I knew most everything and I left feeling confident.

German oral exam was a piece of cake. What can I say... Good camaraderie, good fingerfood, and a forum to hone my German skills. Couldn't have thought of a better way to spend that hour of my day, really.

After an In-n-Out burger which I probably would have been better off without, I met with an old friend and (finally) saw "Up In the Air", with George Clooney and Vera Farmiga. What a downer! I mean ultimately it has a positive message, but it uses such a tragically melancholy method of communicating its message... I left the theatre feeling quite battered. Good performance by the two stars, excellent writing, and a highly unique movie all around, however. No bashes here. I just thought it was a bit deprimating (why isn't this lovely word a word in English? ahhh... it means depressing).

This week I had two midterms, and I received the results to the midterm I took last week in Materials Science. I got an 89%, which I am quite proud of. Both of this week's midterms, I feel, went well, as I have already hitherto recounted re: the Dynamics midterm. I applied as a transfer student to UC Berkeley for the Fall 2010 semester, and the place is inhumanely competitive, so any good news I can make on the academic front is a plus. As a student already attending a 4-year university, however, I am quite low on the totem pole for getting accepted, as if I wasn't already unlikely to get in... Oh well. I like UC Irvine as an institution very much, no gripes with the school. I just miss the Bay so very much...

That's about it. The 5th weekend of my 5th quarter at UC Irvine has started nicely. Tomorrow some leisure reading + Dynamics homework, Sunday reading + brunch w/my friend + Super Bowl + MatSci homework. And I still haven't watched this Monday's 24... maybe I'll do that now.

a bit of a reinvention

2009-12-27T18:46:00.000-08:00

Hey reader(s) ;-D

Just wanted to fill you guys in a bit. I think it's evident that President Obama has disillusioned not just me but many like-minded individuals in this country, and I don't feel much of a desire to keep up the "fight" for the things that matter legislatively and politically. We've witnessed that we have minimal impact on our leaders, even without us, without their "foot soldiers", they would be nobodies. The health care debate that took hold during the past six months and how the President handled it alienated me profoundly.

I don't see that my time or efforts are best directed solely on the political front, so I will be changing things up a bit on this blog.

Now it will be a more personal blog. I will just kind of speak my mind, relay the events and observations of the day, and fill you guys in on my life. I will still cover politics, but not exclusively.

Stay tuned!

Obama is a failure. Oh, and I voted for him, so this isn't partisan whining.

2009-09-19T00:23:00.000-07:00

Let's just take a brief look at the presidency of Barack Obama so far:

- Originally proposed a stimulus package that was supposed to be in excess of $1 trillion. It was supposed to focus primarily on spending to help spur the economy, at the time in an utter tail spin, into production and growth. Its primary goal was to invest the money in schools, welfare programs, infrastructure, and the like. Obama allowed the Republicans to water the bill down to $770 billion. He allowed them to change the nature of the bill entirely, from heavily based on spending to 58% spending, 42% tax cuts. (By the way, tax cuts are exactly what exploded the deficit in the first place.) He allowed the Republicans to take money originally intended for schools and infrastructure and direct it into further military spending. The kicker? He allowed 40 loudmouth Republican senators to water down a bill in an effort to make it "bipartisan", and then THIRTY EIGHT OF THOSE FORTY voted against it. Colossal failure. While the stimulus package, it can be argued, prevented the economy from sinking into a recession, it has so far done virtually nothing to get people back to work and projects off of the drawing board.

- Vowed to implement new, strict regulation on banks and lenders, to keep American taxpayers' dollars safe and spent well. Instead, he used taxpayer dollars to buy out the worst assets on the failed or nearly failed banks, so that a few Richie Riches betting on hedge funds could be sure to get paid exorbitant amounts for their bets. It's complicated, I know, but it ended up becoming the taxpayer rewarding irresponsible, reckless CEO's for their bad behavior. And he allowed banks to... get this: self-regulate. For those of you with short-term memory issues, self-regulation brought about the very financial mess that we, the taxpayer, had to end up bailing out Treasury Secy. Timothy Geithner's cronies for. He also acquiesced on numerous concessions that the bankers and the corporatists were clamoring for, most famously the ceiling on salaries and bonuses. Colossal failure. Obama, plain and simple, prostituted the American taxpayer out to the bankers and corporatists, and set a dangerous precedent in the process.

- Has made it openly known that the government-sponsored health insurance proposal for health care reform, also known as the "public option", i.e. the only way to keep prices down, to effectively and fairly insure everybody without presenting the private insurance companies a gift of 50 million new, previously unsubscribed customers, and to promote competition and choice on the national level in the arena of health insurance, is only a small part of the entire reform bill and is non-essential. This was one of the primary reasons that Barack Obama ran for president, one of the primary reasons he was elected, and was truly the cornerstone of his famous promise of "Change". Well, this has been his MOST colossal failure. He did here what he did with the stimulus package: He allowed the Republicans to bash and water-down the bill to the point that it is ineffective, removed ALL of the smartest and most reforming parts of this reform bill, and has gotten ONE sole Republican vote. Again, that is NOT bipartisanship. He lets the Republicans write the bill, and in exchange virtually EVERY Republican in the country STILL refuses to vote for it. Umm, excuse me, whose side is Obama on? Who does such weakness and acquiescence help, if not EXCLUSIVELY the Republicans???

-Withdrew on the US's commitment to defending our NATO allies from [Middle] Eastern foes by scrapping a lean but effective missile defense system and radar system from the Czech Republic and Poland. This proposal, a remnant of the Bush administration, was EXTREMELY popular in the two countries. And of course, Russia's feeling were hurt when the United States, the VICTORS of the Cold War, try and modernize their defenses and the defenses of our allies against the most backward, corrupt, contemptible country in Europe, with an utter disregard for democratic principles, pluralistic values and human rights. The Russkies are sad, and frustrated, and think it is meanie-weanie-poopoo of the US to install a missile shield against them, who have clearly proven themselves to be a volatile threat beyond their borders. (How quickly do some people forget? Invasion of the sovereign nation of Georgia thirteen months ago, anyone????) This time, there are no Republicans running smear ads and threatening Obama's re-election, and Obama STILL acquiesced, this time to the pressure of the most decrepit, backwards, bully regime ON EARTH!!!! Why, President Obama, WHY???? COLOSSAL FAILURE!!!!!

I no longer support President Obama. He has failed too many times, on too wide a variety of issues. Sorry, there are bounds of reason to the support a person can offer a politician. Obama is simply a GROTESQUELY ineffective and poor president. End of story. I say this with no political animosity; I am a liberal and I helped get Barack Obama elected like few others in this country did. So the withdrawal of my support is not a bitter one or a politically charged one. It is one of disappointment and based on performance, an I feel that it is rational, valid, and sound.

The co-op suggestion: Catastrophic compromise

2009-08-16T15:32:00.000-07:00

from the NY Times:
White House Appears Open to Insurance Co-ops

In the ongoing health care debacle, now you see the Democrats willing to agree with the Republicans on what are called "co-ops"; basically, you, me, Uncle Joe and you 2nd cousin get together to form a cooperative, and we compete against the likes of Ætna and Blue Cross in order to get lower costs... come one, please.

I mean, who do they think we are? Maybe I'm just disillusioned; perhaps there really are cretins in this country that think this is a reasonable replacement to publicly-funded health care (single -payer) or government-subsidized health insurance (a public option), and a realistic way of lowering costs.

The whole goal of the blasted Republicans is to take off a pound of flesh from whatever the Democrats put forth. The Democrats started off by presenting a public option, so the Republicans' pound of flesh gets rid of the public option and we get these wonderful co-ops. If the Democrats had started off with single-payer, the compromise would have been the public option. Just goes to show you more inherently flawed planning on the part of the Democrats and more cruel, pro-corporations, pro-insurance, anti-middle-class behavior of the Republicans.

Of course the only true solution to the whole mess is a single-payer, publicly-funded health care system, along the lines of the National Health Service in Great Britain. Anything less is a joke, and a harmful, expensive joke, at that.

My real sentiment on National Health Care

2009-08-15T00:29:00.000-07:00

CALLING ALL CONSERVATIVES!!!!

Read this!

The one so-called "evil" you love to demonize the most, the spectre of "socialized medicine", a.k.a. publicly-funded health care, is exactly the way to go, baby!!! All-inclusive, comprehensive, preventative, paid for from taxes, and entirely free to use when you need it. May your regressively-minded heads explode if you disagree.

To those selfish assholes who say "But it's my money, I worked SO incredibly hard to earn it (from the comfort of your office chair, trading stocks or watching pornography on your boss's dollar when you shoulda been working on that project), why should I ever have to pay for some loser who can't help himself?!?!"

Here's why, you simplisticly-minded sleazebags.

First, lemme start off by saying, the loser that you mention, who couldn't afford to pay for his own health care, yeah, he could be utterly incompetent and have severe issues. He may well be a hindrance for society and, at first glance, easier to ignore than to deal with.

But here's why "sweeping him under the rug" ends up costing even more of your cherished, coveted, greed-driven dollars than to put in place a system to prevent such occurrences from happening.

The "loser" could be a multitude of people. It could be a law-abiding, even educated, man or woman who is thrown one too many curve balls in his life for whatever reason. It can be a LEGAL immigrant who comes to the United States seeking a new life, determined to not only improve his own life but to, as the proverb goes, "while in Rome do as the Romans do," i.e. embody and live by American values to make this country a better place (not to drag it down), but ultimately struggles. It could be whoever...

The government ignores such a person, offering him/her minimal, poorly-conceived assistance that is extremely uninvolved, through a program which is in all likelihood grotesquely underfunded. He then, naturally, becomes more and more hopeless, and resorts to illegitimate activity and an even more self-depricating lifestyle. He turns to drugs to get his mind off of his issues. The dollars he spends to buy the drugs a) were likely obtained in an equally illicit manner, involving robbery or violence, and b) will go to further fund more criminal behavior, sucking more people into its problems.

The man then becomes more dependent, and as the drugs alter his behavior, he ends up leading an even more unhealthy lifestyle, drifting in and out of jail, unable to secure steady employment for himself, unable to nourish or take care of his body, getting weaker and sicker.

He gets found unconscious on a street corner for whatever reason, be it street violence, a drug overdose, or a suicide attempt, and he ends up on life support in an emergency room, by far the most expensive type of medical treatment facility. This ends up costing YOU even more of your precious tax dollars which you have an unhealthy personal paranoid obsession with.

(Before any of you jump to conclusions, uh, NO, the answer to this crisis is NOT the legalization of marijuana. If that angers you, smoke your joint out your ass and get the fuck off my blog.)

The solution is the following: a comprehensive, robust, government-insured preventative health care system. Guess what, Conservative Joey the Schmuck, your all-important tax dollars will be spent FAR LESS this way. It is a simple fact that perhaps as many as fifty countries enjoy better health than we do. Whaddy'a know, they also happen to have some form of government-subsidized health insurance or health care program guaranteeing such great health to all of them.

From infant mortality:
http://www.prb.org/Datafinder/Topic/Bar.aspx?sort=v&order=d&variable=28
http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/wpp2006/WPP2006_Highlights_rev.pdf

to life expectancy:
http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/wpp2006/WPP2006_Highlights_rev.pdf
http://www.prb.org/Datafinder/Topic/Bar.aspx?sort=v&order=d&variable=35

We lag behind so many countries, all while we have the HIGHEST SPENDING per capita for health:
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0934556.html
http://www.globalhealthfacts.org/topic.jsp?i=66

Above lies the proof that we have easily the most inefficient health care system in the modern, industrialized world. Anyone who says that such a status quo is "good" or that we have "the finest health care system of the world" is insulting your intelligence. Jam these facts I just presented to you down their throats until they're blue in the face, if anyone should tell you anything otherwise.

The probable rebuttal "Well, my health care is fine, why should I worry about someone else's???" is equally flawed, and also a bit unnerving, for two reasons.

#1. Your country and your society are not judged by how well YOU do, they're judged by how well the WORST do, how well the MOST disenfranchised do, how the vast median of the country does. To say that is not your concern is to dodge a tough question, because the poor-being of your society's lower classes will have their repercussions on you and your family, my "ruggedly individualist", conservative, regressive friend.

Oh and by the way, this has nothing to do with socialism; this is simple connection of the dots. When these people go from bad to worse, your [now famous] tax dollars go to work where they shouldn't have to in order to deal with these folks, the programs that the money would have otherwise funded wind up getting cut, thereby dealing the population of the country further setbacks, creating more such disenfranchised people, where more of your tax dollars go to waste unnecessarily, and soon the income disparity of this country gets even more lopsided, and, long story short, your well-being and the well-being of those dependent upon you becomes threatened. Take your cries of "liberal!" and "socialism!" somewhere else, I ain't buying it.

It's only "free-market capitalism" when it allows you to make an unreasonable profit on Wall Street; when the other side of this unregulated, overly laissez-faire system comes back and bites you in the ass, i.e. when your house gets robbed by desperate people, or when your Hummer's wheels get stolen, or when your child gets killed crossing the street coming home from school in a hit-and-run accident by a member of the very people whose significane you are seeking to diminish, only THEN do you want to "blunt" capitalism a little bit.

Like I said previously, stick your opportunist, selfish bullshit up one of your orifices, I have no interest in it.

#2. I bet you that the very same people who would say the quoted rebuttal above are, in large part, fundamentalist Christians. The scripture which they love smothering other people with states that Jesus would give his shirt off his back to help someone who has less, some of his own food to eat if he was hungry, to shield from harm, and to provide safety and comfort for. What happened, Mr. Virtue? At church on Sunday when you have to pay the imaginary sky-man for the sins you've accumulated during the week, only THEN do you live by the book of children's fables called the Bible, but when it comes to ACTUALLY being virtuous, when it's YOUR shirt that's coming off your back, then we have a problem in America, eh? To not support a national health system on the basis of it "helping the ones who haven't succeeded" is to be the most un-Christian person one can be.

This is not an attack on Christians as a whole of any denomination, or people of other faiths for that matter. This is an attack on the ones who hide behind their faith in order to lead lives that they know that their Lord and Savior Jesus Christ would disapprove of, and then come to teach the rest of us about morals and values. To those who agree with me in knocking such people, I say you really are virtuous.

Here's is a great interview, the best moment of the entire Michael Moore documentary, SiCKO:

Thanks, President Obama, for failing. That's, of course, exactly why I voted for you in November 2008.

Let it be known that I voted for Hillary in the primaries for a reason.

Good night.
Ivo

Wonderful (and justified) bashing by Cenk Uygur

2009-03-24T19:30:00.001-07:00

Here, Cenk takes on the lowest of the low and the most primitive of the primitive, the crew of RedEye from FOX News Channel. They engage in this unbelievably stupid, unwarranted bashing of Canada, as it seems they've exhausted all relevant domestic issues to converse about, because they see that they basically no longer have the loyalty of anyone representative of anything important in this country.

watch this clip:

These guys is just about the dumbest bunch of unenlightened thugs that have ever operated a news program. First of all, I agree with everything that Cenk said, and with the way he chose to say it, as well.

To be clear, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, or "Mounties" as they are colloquially referred to, are not the only police force of Canada. They are a gendarmerie, a military police, a paramilitary force of sorts, one that has the organization and structure more typical of a wing of the armed forces while residing outside of the armed forces structure, being maintained and operated by the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Canada (it is not particularly useful to compare this structure to the United States law enforcement structure because, among other things, the only real federal police in the US is the FBI, and the primary role of law enforcement is appropriated to the states). The uniforms that one sees them in the vast majority of the time are ceremonial uniforms, just like those of every single other gendarmerie in existence.

Look at the Italian Carabinieri (en. carbiners) - they wear freakin' feathers on their head!

Gendarmeries have wholly different functions from your ordinary police department, and are equipped (and evidently even dressed) accordingly. Police departments more closely resembling American city police departments exist as well (e.g. Vancouver Police Department).

So on that note, RedEye is just way off.

Second of all, NATO is clearly an America-centric alliance. It doesn't say this on paper, but everyone under the sun knows this. We don't have thousands of the best nuclear bombs and thousands of the best fighter jets for no reason; it is in large part our responsibility to defend our NATO allies, and luckily for all of us, America's economy is large enough so that all this defense spending still doesn't contribute to a large percentage of our annual GDP at all (in fact, it is lower than that of many NATO countries). So is Canada shielded by the US? You betch'a. Is that totally fine? You betch'a. Our allies have chosen Western ideology, democracy, and freedom as the way to go, and the US returns the favor by ensuring their security and survival. Totally great plan if you ask me.

Thirdly, whatever the Canucks might be doing or however they might look, their law enforcement earns the country one of the lowest crime rates in the world for both non-violent and violent crimes (a murder there is national news, and while Canada might be smaller than the US, 33 million people is still no small figure). Coincidentally, they also happen to have a lower income inequality, longer life expectancy, higher literacy rates, more efficient and well-maintained infrastructure, higher Human Development Index, quality of life, standard of living, better health care, a higher purchasing power parity, no fewer than 4 cities ranked higher than the highest US city in terms of "best cities to live" rankings, and a host of other cold, hard facts that establishes their internationally recognized stature as the country which, on the whole, offers a better life to its citizens.

But you morons can go ahead with the two-bit jokes regarding Canada's size, climate, accent, and all those other clever, high-level statements.

Hello again!

2009-03-24T19:27:00.000-07:00

Hello once again, loyal readers!

Sorry for the inexcusably long hiatus. I had some difficulties at the university that are straightened out now, and I have one more freed up some time for this blog, which I am so certain that you all are tremendous fans of! [/sarcasm]

But seriously, this marks a return to regular updates and news stories, and more opinionated and intellectual interpretation of the events of the day from your trsuted source for all things important, Ivo Saric and the Saric Analysis.

cheers!
-Ivo

Ra-hm, Ra-hm, Our Emanuel! (Part II)

2008-11-14T11:10:00.000-08:00

Ok, back to Rahm, our Emanuel!

Last time I mentioned his lineage, and his dad who was a known Zionist terrorist. Let's look now at his own achievements.

Born November 29, 1959 in Chicago. 4-times-elected Democratic US Representative from Illinois's 5th district, representing the North Side of Chicago. 4th-ranked Democrat in the House of Representatives, behind Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, and Party Whip Jim Clyburn.

Liberal rating of 90% according to Americans for Democratic Action, the nation's premier liberal rating system.Conservative rating of 4% by the American Conservative Union. So we clearly know which side of the political fence he is on, and I'm glad he's on the side that he's on.

Emanuel has been a proponent of higher regulation in general. He, like many other representatives on both sides of the aisle, spoke in support of the Iraq War in 2002, before later becoming one of its most outspoken and opinionated critics. He supports health care reform, he is fully in favor of a woman's right to choose, and is aligned with the centrist wing of the Democratic Party.

Now to debunk some myths. He is NOT a dual citizen of Israel and the United States; he gave up his Israeli citizenship as a teenager. He did NOT fight in the Israeli Defence Forces ever; he was a civilian volunteer, and all he did was repair brakes on trucks. He is NOT a Zionist or a unconditional supporter of Israel; he is more than willing for the Israelis and Palestinians to come to peace and form two separate, independent states, granted that the Palestinians turn away from terror tactics. This is an extremely cool-headed position to take, and the most rational and realistic. He gets major props in my book for this, as well as for behaving much more maturely than his Congressional colleagues with the Israel question, namely Joe Lieberman (the topic of a future post).

He was a steadfast, decisive tactician as a Clinton adviser during his administration, known for having a record of "getting shit done."

He is a dedicated, tireless, and efficient politician. His allegiance to this country is crystal-clear and unwaivering, and the non-stop work he put in during the financial crises during the past year demonstrated this. He was in the thick of it, sleeves rolled up, with the decision-makers at every step of the way, not letting himself fall into the partisan bickering that so often stalls progress in our country. I gained true, honest admiration of him for this.

I think he is first-rate choice. The ultra-liberals who want to see a world without Israel, and therefore detest anything even remotely Israeli, right or wrong, are morons for thinking that this is possible. They ought to be ashamed of themselves for marginalizing the qualifications of Mr. Emanuel, as he really brings everything to the table that is favorable for the job of White House Chief of Staff: hard-working, efficient, clear, and rational, with clear loyalties.

My final verdict? a big, resounding:

GREAT CHOICE, BARACK!

It is OK to Hate on Mormonism

2008-11-10T20:38:00.000-08:00

California's Proposition 8, a law to ban marriages between people of the same sex, passed on Tuesday's election with a meager margin. This quickly became national and international news, as my home state of California, and more specifically my home region of the San Francisco Bay Area, is one of the most liberal metropolises on the face of the Earth and the unofficial Gay Capital of the world.

To progressives like me and the vast majority of the inhabitants of the San Francisco region, homosexuality, whether we like it or not, is a facet of our daily lives, and we have grown very tolerant and accepting of people of all walks of life, not just our own. As the Founding Fathers said, "all men are created equal," and in my view, marriage is absolutely no exception.

Look, I fundamentally believe that it IS natural to lead a heterosexual existence. Whoever/whatever it was that decided that man should have penis and woman should have a vagina did it with a reason, as penis-on-penis just won't work. However, I am no one to judge who can get married to whom. They can have whatever sexual preferences they want; it harms no one.

Like Cenk says, it is so shameful of that Mormon spokesman to say that gays are being intolerant of religion, after only the Mormons in California fork out $20 million in blatantly false smear ads, saying lies like the law would teach kindergartners about gay marriage, or that under the new law, dogs and moths will be able to get married, or some other stupid shit. If you are gonna be intolerant of others, then at least be prepared when they are intolerant of you.

Logic before Politics

2008-11-08T00:22:00.000-08:00

Here's a clip from Joe Scarborough's old show on MSNBC, Scarborough Country.

For those of you who aren't acquainted with him, Joe is a former Republican US Representative from Florida's 1st District (the Florida Panhandle), during which time he served on the House Armed Services Committee. Today he is a very opinionated conservative pundit on MSNBC. I used to think he was a neo-con sleezebag, unequivocal supporter of the conservative agenda, after having seen him once on Real Time with Bill Maher, during the first few years of the occupation of Iraq. However, as the occupation progressed and the failures of the handling of the war, as well as all of the other totally glorious aspects of the Bush/Cheney administration, became more and more troubling in the psyche of America, Joe showed his true colours, and boy, were we unaffiliated moderates impressed!

Today he has grown to be one of the most vocal opponents of the handling of the Iraq war, and has called out a number of the fallacies of the Bush administration (perhaps his lengthy tenure at the liberally-slanted MSNBC had its effect).

Here we see Scarborough responding to one of Bill O'Reilly's countless bullshit, ultra-partisan claims: Everyone at NBC hates Bush. This really set Joe off his rocker. Listen to what he has to say! Truly one of the most fiercely inspiring, universally appealing deliveries I've ever seen against Bill'o. One can be liberal, one can be conservative, but it is essential that the paramount mindest of ANYONE with regards to politics remains a universal one: logic. Joe very clearly has it, and for that I respect him. Conversely, Bill'o demonsrates his COMPLETE lack thereof, and there is no need to re-assert his utter idiocy; it is self-fulfilling.

Ra-hm, Ra-hm, Our Emanuel! (Part I)

2008-11-07T16:49:00.000-08:00

(yah ok, the title is supposed to sound like the famous refrain from the carol "Hark, the Herald Angels Sing!" Forgive me, for I am Catholic...)

So, there has been some talk about Obama's pick for the White House Chief of Staff, US Representative Rahm Emanuel, a Democrat also from Illinois. He has his own mixed bag of positives and... less-than-positives. So let's get right into it.

First of all, I am of the general opinion that Wikipedia is a slightly non-credible source, so I will try to provide other proof as much as I can.

His father is Jerusalem-born Benjamin Emanuel. Nowadays you won't know of him as being much more than a pediatrician. But in his heyday, he was a proud member of Irgun, a Zionist terrorist organization founded during the British reign over Palestine that lasted until the 1940's and the creation of the modern Jewish state in Palestine. His father participated in the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem. You guys get that? His father killed innocents in the name of Zionism. Is it just me who finds that a little bit disturbing?

He also had this totally non-absurd statement to make upon his son's nomination to the post of White House Chief of Staff:

Obviously he [ Rahm Emanuel ] will influence the president to be pro-Israel. Why wouldn't he be? What is he, an Arab? He's not going to clean the floors of the White House.

.... [As Jack Cafferty would say,] did you get that?

But ok, ok... Rahm Emanuel isn't his dad. We will look at him in greater depth in the next installment.

VICTORY - Barack Obama and Joe Biden

2008-11-07T01:23:00.000-08:00

Here is a video I created and uploaded. There was only one way to describe the magnitude of the result of the United States Presidential Election of November 4, 2008: A fourteen-second-long High Bb of "VITTORIA!" (Italian for VICTORY!)

Rate and comment while your at it, plus subscribe to my channel.

P.S. I'm thinking of creating a YouTube channel for The Saric Analysis, but I don't really have the resources (camera, microphone, set, etc.) to make it look convincing ;-P We'll see how this plays out, and then I will decide. For now, my personal channel will suffice, I believe.

America is Back

2008-11-06T21:55:00.000-08:00

I, as well as I am sure many others are, am still in amazement: Barack Obama has been elected President of the United States of America!

I am very proud of what America has accomplished. The barriers of race have been brought down with a cacophonous boom. A hope that transcends daily political bickering and any economic challenges has once again taken hold over me and the nation, a hope that I have been utterly devoid of for years now!

In Barack Obama and Joe Biden, we have two of the finest public servants in America. Joe Biden IS the best public servant in America, no doubt. He is also one of the most experienced politicians in the country, with a track record of excellence that far overshadows any petty mistakes or gaffs that his opponents have been scraping the bottom of the barrel for. He has been my political hero ever since I was in middle school at the start of the decade, i.e. before he became candidate for the presidency and vice-presidency in 2008... before it became the "in" thing to do. I endorsed Mr. Biden in his bid for the presidency, which wasn't very successful in the primaries, due to being in the company of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. When he won the vice presidency on Tuesday, I was so thrilled that Joe Biden and his lovely wife Jill were going to be Vice President and 2nd Lady of the United states, respectively. And Joe will arguably be the most powerful American abroad, as President Obama will certainly have his plate full at home with the economic mess in the first years...

But the election of Barack Obama to the presidency, even with my love for Joe, is even more astounding, inspiring, and incredible. Here we have a man, with the name Barack Hussein Obama, son of a Kenyan Muslim political refugee, born into a humble background in Kansas and not even having served four full years in the US Senate, who was elected to be the Leader of the Free World with no fewer than 364 electoral votes. States that have been so staunchly red for so long made the switch in resounding numbers: Colorado, Virginia, North Carolina, Indiana, as well as swing states such as Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, and Florida. Do you guys understand the significance of this vote?!? People put aside the racial rigidity that had been present throughout the entirety of the history of the nation to elect the change we all need so much.

Hope is back. America is back. Americans just proved that the American Dream is VERY alive and well. We all just proved that! Anyone can do ANYTHING in America, and I have never been prouder of my country of birth!

Hello!

2008-11-06T12:41:00.000-08:00

Hello world!

I hope to get a popular political blog rolling from here soon!

Stay tuned... :-)