Riddle me this...

I watched CNN this morning as they reported on the recent "insurgent" attacks in Mosul a question and a criticism came to mind.

First, when did we start referring to non-military personell who take up arms and use tactics to inspire widespread fear and panic among a populace as insurgents? Between the recent rocket attack or suicide bombing in Mosul and the attacks on Iraqi election officials it seems to me that the "insurgents" act a lot like terrorists.

Before I pose my second question/criticism readers may need a brief history refresher, so first click here, here, and here...

For those of you that didn't want to check out the links they are simply biographies of past American Presidents. Andrew Jackson, Theodore Roosevelt, and Zachary Taylor. All of which served the office with distinction, and all of which were more than simple politicians. Jackson was a veteran and a hero by the time he had taken office( Battle of New Orleans), as was Roosevelt ( Lt. Col. of the Rough Riders) and Taylor spent 40 years in military service and was credited with maintaining the Union during the early rumblings of southern cessesionists.

While listening to the report of Pres. Bush sending his condolences to the families of troops killed in the recent "insurgent" action in Mosul I felt along with sadness for those who were killed a bit of anger and disgust at our modern politicians. I am not harping on Repulicans today, nor Democrats, the President, nor Congress. My complaint is against the whole slew. It is a cry against all that would support a war without ever having known battle. Against those that would send the children, brothers, sisters, fathers, and mothers to die and go to all extent to keep their own uninvolved. How many Senators or Congressmen have family that are in Iraq or Afghanistan? Why was one of the main topics of the recent Presidential election based on trying to prove which candidate actually followed their commitments to the military and which may have been lying about their service? It is a disturbing that this occurs, but perhaps even more disturbing is that we, as a nation, tolerate such behavior. Perhaps, over the last several decades we have been conditioned to accept hypocracy as a form of governing, or perhaps, we have been ground neath the heel of the political aristocracy that we feel that there is no choice, no other option than accept a group of businessmen, bankers, and war mongering cowards as our masters. Unfortunately, the truth may lie in a more mundane region than all this. Perhaps our nation as a whole has grown more apathetic, to pathalogical proportions that undermine the very definition of democracy. How can a people lead their own destiny when we barely lift our faces from the muck of tedium and our own microcosm and are only vaguely aware of the world around us. Perhaps those in offices of power are there because the new ignorant masses have bent our backs to allow their ascension. For a final ort of information to chew and roll around your mental teeth contrast this (or any of the presidential biographies for the last 30 years) with those that have been previously mentioned.

As I close this complaint I leave those of you who have read thus far with a thought from one of the great minds of our day. Not usually known for his political views Albert Einstien once said "All of us who are concerned for peace and triumph of reason and justice must be keenly aware how small an influence reason and honest good will exert upon events in the political field."

Good day.