Dec. 10, 2002 - 21:19 MST

THE WONDERING JEW

Tither

Dear Diary,

I don't have much to write in you tonight, my mind is muggy like a hot summer's day just before a thunderstorm when nothing stirs, no breath of air wafts by and all stand and watch the sky press down while the sweat rolls off eyebrows and down the ribs.

Seems like Mr. Bush is shaking his cabinet up and also seems like he is determined to jump-start our economy by another round of tax cuts or make permanent the ones that were supposed to be temporary. You know the ones I mean Dear Dairy, the ones that benefited the corporations and the rich. - - - So let it Snow, let it Snow, let it Snow. What rumbles around about tax cuts for the biggies does not put money to spend in the consumer's pocket or jump-start the economy, especially for the six per cent of consumers who are out of work. And it seems that all the tax break did for the biggies was to let them steal more from the businesses they headed and the stockholders and wiping out retirement savings as well as putting people out of work. Why do I have the feeling that what doesn't blow, sucks ?

Cokie and Steven V. Roberts headline their column, "Bush seems to be reluctant to take yes for an answer." They say in part, "But still, we have to wonder whether Bush and his surrogates are being completely candid. They've left plenty of hints that in their hearts, they do not want the U.N. resolution to work, they don't want Baghdad to cooperate, and they don't want to put off a military operation that would drive Saddam from power." Cokie and Steven note, that under pressure Bush, "Shifted gears and decided to utilize the United Nations for purely political reasons." Seems that we would lose support of what allies we have if the US acts on its own out side of U.N. resolutions. Steven and Cokie say, "This shift in tactics was accompanied by a shift in rhetoric. War became a 'last resort' in all presidential statements and 'regime change' was shelved as a goal in favor of 'disarmament.' But pardon our suspicions, it all sounds like a new coat of paint on an old policy, a veneer of flexibility slapped over a cold determination to force Saddam out, once and for all." Steven and Cokie go on to say "In the end, the president might not have any choice. Saddam might well resort to his treacherous and deceitful self, making war inevitable. But if Saddam does give Bush a choice, if he does sincerely try to comply with the U.N. resolution, then the president owes it to world -- and to the soldiers and civilians who could die in Iraq -- to consider taking yes for an answer."

The Denver Post has an editorial in the News this morning titled, "Indians deserve justice." In part is mentioned that, "The Supreme Court heard a pair of cases that could prove whether the federal government will honor or break its promises to modern day Indians. In one case, the U.S. department of Interior had signed away coal-mining rights on the Navajo reservation, leaving the tribe with just 20 percent of the resource's value. The case involved a back-room deal struck between the coal company and a high level government official." (Who was that guy ?) "So the feds O.K'd a contract contrary to the Indians' interests without telling the Indians the full story. Understandably, the Navajos want Uncle sam to pony up for the lost income. The Navajo reservation straddles Arizona, Utah and New Mexico."

In the other case, "the government so badly bungled the management of a historic site -- Fort Apache -- in Arizona that today it is of little value as a tourist attraction. Yet the struggling White Mountain Apache tribe needs the tourist revenue, particularly because much of its other main resource, timber, went up in smoke during last summer's forest fires.

Then comes the Big Deal the suit against the Government on the trust fund case wherein the Indians want a proper accounting involving billions of dollars owed the Indians over more than a century.

The editorial comes to the point, "However, the cases are related in a broader moral and public-policy sense. All ultimately ask the same question: Will America in the 21st century deal with Indians honorably, or will our country continue to treat its first inhabitants with the shabby disregard that hallmarked earlier, shameful eras."

Seems that our government folks have already admitted that they don't know from boo about how to account for the trust fund accounts. So I wonder as the Denver Post and many other people and organizations, will the Indians again get the short end of the stick without even an apology ?

Maybe the government wants to bat a hundred perent and let the Indians scramble in the dry, desert dust trying to survive. Anyhow Dear Diary, In thinking things over my mind wanders from hither to Tither . . . . . . . . .

Blog