Dear Senator Obama

I hope that you succeed in your campaign to become president.  I was particularly impressed with your commitment to international law as revealed on your website when you affirmed that "As President, I will close Guantanamo, reject the Military Commissions Act, and adhere to the Geneva Conventions."  America's flagrant and blatant dismissal of both American and international law is a foreboding and ominous step backward in the march towards a just and law-biding world.  I wish to pass onto you some of the changes that I believe are necessary to move forward on the question of the rule of law.

Not unexpectedly, it required a major disaster to awaken former Federal Chairman, Alan Greenspan, to the long overdue reality that the free-market, free enterprise economic model fails to trickle down wealth to the poor and near poor but concentrates wealth at the top.

The free market model or Neoliberalism was developed by Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman at the Chicago School of Economics Chicago where it became an axiom that the private sector was the key to long-term economic stability.  Neoliberalism has gradually become the prevailing economic conventional wisdom in the United States and has been foisted on most countries through pressure from the United States or through the IMF and World Bank, America's secret instrument of exploitation.

Apparently 37,276,000 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2007) Americans are not considered to be human, have no value and hence unworthy of any consideration in the formulation of policy.  Just as cats and dogs are regulated by the government for unacceptable behavior but are not the recipients of any government transfers, those living in poverty are perpetually mired in a morass of neglect and indifference by all levels of government who often discover that the only free "public housing tract" (Mumia Abu Jamal) available to them, is prison.

Apparently 37,276,000 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2007) Americans are not considered to be human, have no value and hence unworthy of any consideration in the formulation of policy.  Just as cats and dogs are regulated by the government for unacceptable behavior but are not the recipients of any government transfers, those living in poverty are perpetually mired in a morass of neglect and indifference by all levels of government who often discover that the only free "public housing tract" (Mumia Abu Jamal) available to them, is prison.

Despite the unfortunate fact that presidential debates depend mostly on impressions, images and perceptions, the real purpose, namely the substance of the debating points of each candidate, is unattainable in a medium that has been referred to the "glass teat" or one that encourages us to "amuse ourselves to death".  A careful examination of the memorized answers and retorts to each innocuous question reveals the appalling absurdities of the policies advocated by each candidate.  In addition, the format of the debate and the choice of moderator preclude any real truths surfacing from these artificial exchanges.

George W. Bush is not really that much different from other presidents with respect to his hegemonic ambitions or his proclivity to use force to achieve foreign policy objectives.  Continuing historical patterns, President Bush and all presidents since World War II have committed horrendous crimes against humanity in order to protect and advance American interests under the guise of liberating people from under the jackboot of brutal dictators or communist subversives, bringing democracy to totalitarian states, improving the lives of those who are suffering and eradicating terrorism.

Most Americans now consider Iraq, as was the case in Vietnam, a strategic and lamentable mistake of the American government.  Their perception of these wars is understandable and to be expected given the limited scope of debate in the corporate media.  Stepping beyond the boundaries of public discourse is difficult given their pride in the laudable ideals for which their country stands and their pride America.

In 1960, John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon faced each other in front of television cameras to debate, for the first time, issues important to voters.  The outcome may have been determined more by Nixon's five o'clock shadow and awkward, nervous demeanor than by the content of the debates.  The medium's message was that Nixon had the appearance of a used car salesman and Kennedy that of a charming, witty and trustworthy candidate.