Many have called me a “Bush Basher” or at least accused my commentary on maestrojed.com (formally High Five Friday) dot com of being very anti-Bush. I am not pushing any anti-Bush agenda rather stating things as I see them. To prove this let me take Bush’s side in the following rant (at least for a little while).

I watched President Bush’s prime time address last night on Social Security reform. This is a policy matter that I agree with the President on, I think.

I agree with him because it is obvious the S.S. program is broken. I have no doubt it is going broke and the sooner we deal with the problem the better. As President Bush said last night each year we wait to fix the problem it become billons more expensive to fix. Not to mention it becomes harder for people to make the sacrifices that will be needed. I applaud President Bush for pushing this issue. It is not popular and I imagine politically damaging but it has to been done. At the least President Bush’s ideas will start a discussion on Capital Hill about S.S. reform.

However, I said I agree with the President I think because he never told me once how he wants to fix this problem. He talks about the option to pay into personalized investment accounts. He explains why these accounts are good for the people and I agree. But how does paying money into personalized accounts make the S.S. program more solvent? I want to know the details. I have little doubt that the actual reform package that President Bush is pushing does outline steps to fix the S.S. program. Those details however were omitted from his hour-long address last night. Is it because he is hiding the details? Is it because his speechwriters think that these details would make for a boring speech? Or is it because Washington has little faith that the American public could comprehend such details?

President Bush also talked about a new energy policy for the United States. Again a policy that I agree we need. But how can you propose a long-term energy policy geared towards fixing today’s problems and not mention one single alternative energy initiative? He talked about moving away from fossil fuel dependency and then turned around and his entire policy is focused on coal and natural gas. The only thing he mentioned that was not fossil fuels was nuclear energy. Should the US’s long-term energy policy not look to enhance and utilize safe and renewable alternative sources? Why is there not mention of incentives for hybrid or alternative fuel cars? Science today is finding efficient ways to enhance Solar, Hydro, and Hydrogen energy production. Yet Bush’s energy plans best suggestion is to drill in Alaska and build more natural gas receiving ports. Who is this guy and his administration? Oil tycoons? Oh yeah …. They are.

Congress is being urged to renew the Patriot Act in the name of protecting us from terrorism. Allow me to quote:

“Now is not the time for us to be engaging in unilateral disarmament” on the legal weapons now available for fighting terrorism, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said. He said that some of the most controversial provisions of the Patriot Act have proven invaluable in fighting terrorism”.

Meanwhile, A leader of the Boy Scouts of America has been indicted on charges of possessing child pornography. Now please, please don’t get me wrong. I think this guy is a sick mofo. I would rather see arrests of the people creating the pornography (they are the ones truly hurting these children), but I am glad that people like this dude are accountable under the law and are being caught. However, a detail of his arrest that many may not known is that Smith was arrested not by the Police, FBI, SBI etc. Officials within the Homeland Security Department arrested him.

The President and Congress of the United States are telling us citizens that “a future terrorist attack is not a matter of if, it is a matter of when”. Whenever shortcomings in the US’s security against terrorism are found, a lack of funding and resources is always the first excused cited. We the people allowed the government to create the Department of Homeland Security for the purpose of combating terrorism.

Were we being lied to? Why is Homeland Security diverting their resources away from stopping the next inevitable terrorist attack? Why couldn’t the FBI, SBI, Police or any of the other previously established law enforcement agencies have handled this case?

Apparently, Homeland Security can expand their power without question or accountability, all in the name of terror prevention.

Now the bigger question: Should we, because we are told to be afraid, give up the personal rights and freedoms that the Patriot Act asks us to? Where are the checks and balances of these new laws? Where are the checks and balances on the actions of our terror-focused government? Why does the typical American not care that the government is attempting to take away these rights?

I do not plan on writing about the personal rights and freedoms that the Patriot Act violates and denies. I feel many have discussed that subject, very thoroughly. If you are unfamiliar I strongly urge you to visit HERE.