Another Imperative to Ignore?

One of Rudy Gulliani's associates was just revealed to be funding a referendum campaign in California to divide its electoral votes proportionally, rather than cast them in the "winner take all" way it has always been done in every state. The obvious motivation for this campaign was to hand 20 of California's electoral votes to the Republican presidential candidate, presumably Rudy, in the '08 election.

The ruse seems to be stalled or even stopped for now, but it will certainly return at some point, either there or in another state with a large number of electoral votes. States changing their apportionment will eventually turn into a stampede, and it will become a terrible mess that will infuriate and alienate the electorate.

So why not avoid all the pain and preemptively toss the electoral college into the garbage pail where it belongs? That way voters who are in a state's political minority won't be going to the polls just for the exercise anymore. Also, all the sly subterfuge and subversion of the people's will that would result from a hodge-podge conversion would be prevented. And lastly, we could eliminate the recurring aberration of putting into the office someone who actually lost the popular vote. Or we could just keep dancing, which is what we'll most likely do.

'Thugnican family values:

1) Strip-mining the wealth of the middle class
2) Institutionalizing child & slave labor worldwide
3) Depriving the next generation of financial security
4) Disenfranchising all opposition
5) Pushing an economic model that swells poverty while it fetes the few
6) Intimidating and subjugating the press
7) Using our own tax dollars to propagandize us
8) Putting profit ahead of national health and the world's environment
9) Practicing rogue militarism and preemptive war for global hegemony
10) Running government in secret from the back room
11) Trouncing the US Constitution
12) Purveying fear, fear, and more fear
13) Pushing hate 24/7

in short, the values of fascism.

Double Standard for him with the Double Chin

Last week Congress overwhelmingly voted to censor MoveOn for maligning General Patreas and impugning his motives. Next week, will they be equally as likely to censor Rush Limbaugh for tarring all returning soldiers who don't agree with him right down the line on Iraq as "phony soldiers"? Not very probable. Why is that? After all, isn't the public supposed to be in the thrall of the Liberal Media? Weird, huh?

Patently UnFair and Mentally UnBalanced

Chris Wallace asked Hillary Clinton to respond to his claim that Democrats' refusal to vote for further war funding would "leave US troops without protective body armor". The very question turns logic on it's head: voting against funding would in no way shortchange troops in the field but rather FORCE THE PRESIDENT TO BRING THEM HOME, WHERE THEY DON'T NEED UP-ARMORED HUMVEES OR FLACK JACKETS!

Democrats have tried to bring the Iraq debacle to a close by reasonable means such as milestones and phased withdrawal, but the Decider would have none of it, leaving them no other alternative. If the Democrats do ultimately refuse to fund the war and Bush leaves American troops in Iraq anyway, then Chris Wallace should ask Bush at that point, "Why do you care more about your phony-baloney, tough-guy, 'Bring-it-on!' image than about our troops' lives?" But that's not the sort of question you'll ever hear from anyone at Flux News.

What do you call someone who rejects evolution but believes absolutely in social Darwinism? A Republican.

Conservative Media in a Nutshell

Paid-for right wing hacks fuel the anger of hapless people, and while these sad-sacks are pulling their hair and rolling in spasms of vehemence, the rich elites who sign the hacks' checks go on picking these same suckers' pockets. Priceless.

"You Shall Have the Body" (in Court)

The fact I found myself writing to my US Senators asking them to support the "Habeas Corpus Restoration Act of 2007" (S. 185) seemed ludicrously unreal to me. After all, I grew up in the United States of America, not some banana republic where there is no justice, only the law of raw power.

But then everything changed on 9-11. We have since allowed fear-mongering authoritarians to cheat us out of the fundamental protections for which the American Revolution was fought, and which had set our country apart from most of the rest of world for over two hundred years.

Not long ago, some Congressional Republican said that civil liberties don't do you any good if your dead. Great sound bite, but a life without liberty isn't worth living, so where does that leave us?

W's forte: Making Fiends and Infuriating People

The people of Iran, at the time of W's "Axis of Evil" speech, had come to think of their reigning fundamentalist regime as passe. But then along came W, who pointed to Iran as a terrorist state and haven of evil-doers, which forced the Iranian people to rally around their flag just as Americans did around theirs after 9-11. It is human nature to close ranks when attacked, and although the attack in this case was merely a unexpected, belligerent verbal challenge, it served to strengthen the position of Iranian clerics who had heretofore been slipping into irrelevance. A nation that had been reaching outward and westward was insulted and driven to look inward. Heck-of-a-job, W!

As outrageous as it seems, including Iran and North Korea in that speech was not the result of a carefully considered policy decision. It was actually thrown in by W's speechwriter as an afterthought, because things sound better in three's! Iraq was the actual target of the speech, with war being the ultimate goal. The other two countries were maligned just for rhetorical balance. Now that's diplomacy, Texas style!

So to suit the tastes of some hack White House writer, the position of Iran's radical clerics was inadvertently bolstered, and by virtue of the subsequent debacle in Iraq, their power in the region has been magnified beyond anything imaginable at the time. Damn George, you're amazingly inept!

But everyone is entitled to one mistake, right? Then how about a mega-blunder? Anybody notice that Valdimir Putin is reviving the cold war? W says he looked into Putin's eyes and fathomed his soul. Apparently W didn't see as much contempt in there as he'd like to, so he put numerous initiatives in play that have been the diplomatic equivalent of poking Russia in the eye with a stick. Whatever the point of that was, the result is that "Pooty-Poot" has announced Russia will soon resume flying their strategic bombers. Georgie Porgie, you're truly special!

No matter how you try to justify the present health insurance system, the only relevant fact to me is that neither of my grown children has health benefits through work, and neither can afford private insurance. Objectively, this just shouldn't be. Subjectively, I'm boiling mad that this is the case and furious that nothing substantial is being done about it.

The take-away message from General Petraeus' presentation to Congress on Monday, 9/10, is this: we're not leaving Iraq, not ever, not even if we go bankrupt. Unless the troops mutiny, they'll be there for fifty years.

Science News - Plenarian Worms are apparently able to have Epiphanies

This week Al Sharpton took Bungalow Bill O'Reilly to a restaurant in Harlem. Bill had a swell time, and he was awed that the people he met were really just like ordinary, White people in many ways! You could look at this as his having a growth experience, but there's still a downside: if he moves away from dumping on Blacks for a while, he'll just have to make up for it by bashing gays, disparaging women, and dumping on the working poor and immigrants more heavily. It's a very localized epiphany.

Karl Rove's Ideal Democratic Candidate

The first group ever to raise the possibility of Hillary Clinton's running for president were the right wing radio talk show hosts. As soon as the '04 elections were over, they ran on incessantly about it. Of course, it seemed a real possibility even then, but these guys were so out in front with it and so insistent that you have to wonder whether in a perverse way they were campaigning for her. They certainly kept the ball in the air for a long, long time before she announced.

Why would the talk show hosts give so much free publicity to Hillary? Everything they say comes directly from the White House, and (until last Friday) specifically Karl Rove. So if they chattered non-stop about Hillary Clinton, be assured that Rove wasn't pleading with them to stop giving her so much exposure. To the contrary, Karl was most likely directing them to keep her name in the forefront.

Why? First, because Rove wanted whichever Republican who runs in '08 to have Hillary as his opponent. The reason for this, of course, is that so many in the Republican base hate her so fervently that her name on the Democratic ticket would guarantee a massive Republican turnout against her. The fact she's even disliked among many liberal Democrats is so much the better for any Republican candidate's chances.

Rove likes Hillary because he sees she's beatable. But that's not the only reason. The other is this: even if she were to win, that's no great loss in Karl's book because at heart she's actually a Republican. As a youngster she campaigned for Goldwater. She sat on the Wal-Mart board of directors and was known then as "Sam's girl". She's staunchly in favor of faith-based initiatives. She co-sponsored the flag burning amendment with Republican Senator Sam Brownback. She's a Republican! With her, Rove wins either way.

Too Docile to Defend Our Young

Flash: you are not rich and the chances are overwhelming you never will be. (Upward mobility in the US is lower than in most of Europe, and the proportion of the US population that is self-employed is lower too.) You are an employee, not an entrepreneur. You depend on wages, not on the return from your investments. These are the cold, hard facts. Accept reality.

The conclusion is NOT, however, that you are unworthy of a good life. You are decent and deserving, but over the past quarter century you have been bamboozled into believing you are not entitled to live well simply because you are not rich.

Shake that nonsense off, now! DEMAND the following for yourself and your family from candidates at all levels in the upcoming '08 elections:

1) Universal single-payer healthcare, including free basic dental care
2) A living wage, decent housing, and affordable childcare for anyone who works
3) Free higher education for all those with the drive and ability, as well as universally available, high value vocational training

Ditch the self-loathing and stick up for yourself. Europeans have had all the above for so long that they take them for granted. If the cheese-eating surrender monkeys of Old Europe have managed to stand up for themselves, why can't you?

Primal Fear in the Voting Booth

Fear makes you vote Republican. A psychology experiment done over a decade ago showed that when a group of judges were asked to contemplate their own death and their manner of dying, they subsequently handed out fines almost ten times higher than their peers did. People sold on fear will vote for tight control and draconian punishment, i.e., conservatively. The Republican Party has been on to this for a long time, and that's why they flog you with warnings of the "gay agenda", global terrorism, and menacing immigrant hordes before every election.

Also, People vote on the basis of emotion. The recent book, "The Political Brain", documents how voters really are not driven by reasoned self-interest but instead by their feelings. They vote their gut reactions, not their pocketbooks. Democrats have been trying to show the populace how the Democratic Party would govern for their benefit by presenting facts and figures which Republican opponents have been able to sink with curt dismissals like "that's just fuzzy math". Eventually, we find out that the Democratic candidate was right all along, but by then it's too late because the Republican has won and put us deep in hot water.

The Democrats are on the side of the angels. Their platform agrees with the values, goals, interests, and desires of the vast majority of the general population. If Democrats can only learn to stop sounding like corporate accountants on the campaign trail and start selling themselves by appealing to people's basic feelings --which are in perfect alignment with Democratic creed-- maybe then Dems can withstand the deluge of Republican fear-mongering guaranteed to spew up from the sewers before the '08 elections. That's the only way the Democrats can take government back from the robber barons.

The Obedient American

The fact the residents of New Orleans didn't boo the Sociopath In Chief right off the podium on the second anniversary of Katrina just shows how meek and docile the American people are. For all our machismo and guns, we are incapable of standing up for ourselves before wealth and authority. The irony is that the only power these "leaders" have is the power we give them.

It's time to bid "Farewell!" to Alberto G., the best Consigliere a Texas Mafioso could ever ask for..

The more guns floating around, the more shootings there'll be. The more troops on hand, the greater the chance of armed conflict. That's not politics, that's stoichiometry.

All Things UnConsidered

I was listening this week to an interview on NPR regarding the recall of Chinese manufactured toys with Consumer Product Safety Commissioner Nancy Nord. It struck me that she seemed far more concerned with quelling consumers' concerns than with the actual cause of the recall. This seemed odd and made me suspicious, so I looked up her bio. She was appointed by George W. Bush and is the former Director of Consumer Affairs for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

So indeed, she is still doing her old job, just collecting her paychecks from the U.S. Treasury now. I would have liked it if the interviewer had been just a little tough on her, since she was obviously shilling for industry. Alas, that may be too much to expect from the new, fair-and-balanced NPR.

In Gonzales We Trust

Congressional Dem's August 4th capitulated on the government spying bill that replaces FISA Court oversite with Alberto Gonzales' okie-dookie. That makes them Weak on Liberty, never mind Soft on Terror. Our right to privacy is now in the hands of Bush's consigliere. Will these douchebags never tire of holding Bush's coat while he pees on the Constitution?

Infrastructure Fire Sale (note: written prior to the Minnesota bridge collapse)

Government has let the infrastructure become dilapidated over several decades because politicians haven't wanted to raise the taxes required to fix things. Now roads and bridges are in sad shape, but the Federal Highway Administration has a plan to remedy this which is based on the neo-conservative panacea of privatization. The plan is to sell off bridges and highways to corporations, which will run them for profit, charging people whatever the market will bare to use them. Potential buyers are circling the waters, poised to snap roads and bridges up at bargain prices.

Personally, I would prefer the path from home to grandma's house to be in the public domain, not in private hands. But many politicians and voters seem to be comfortable with the idea of taking things like roads and water out of the public domain and placing them in private hands. What makes me shiver seems pleasant and acceptable to them.

Remember the Woody Guthrie song, "This Land is Your Land"? One of Woody's verses didn't make into the school songbooks: "As I was walkin' down the lonesome highway, I saw a sign there, said 'Private Property'. But on the other side, it didn't say nothin'. This land was made for you and me." Well, when the highway is privately owned, both sides might as well say "Private Property". It'll be THEIR land then.

Free Speech and So Much More

Somewhere in the Ohio outback, a teacher who planted an impeachment sign was cited by a cop who thought he belonged to the Thought Police. Too many people seem to view impeachment as an attack on their country, rather than the Constitution's crucial check on a wayword Executive's actions. (In the vernacular, a "President gone wild!")

The irony is that people who react as the policeman did believe they're being patriotic. That's what happens when you equate waving the flag with patriotism but think the Constitution is an encryption only nerds need to decipher. Brings to mind the John Stuart Mill quote, "Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservative."

Why Assholes Run the World and Always Will

In any group of people, most have empathy enough for their companions that they will not take unfair advantage of them, and while anyone might be tempted to cheat if there is no chance of being caught, ostracized, and punished, few will actually stoop --or rise, depending on your value judgement-- to doing it. Few, but always some, and it only takes one.

If an individual has the wits as well as the willingness to put one over on the group, he or she has much to gain. Will alone, without wits, leads to one's downfall when his or her subterfuge is easily discovered by the rest. Nor do wits alone predispose one to take advantage of others. But when wits occur in combination with will, a clever sociopath exists, one who can very easily and successfully betray the trust of the group for personal gain.

Just think of Joseph Stalin. The communist state was based originally on the idea of Rousseau that the individual is pure but the system encourages the individual to exploit his or her neighbors. Marx's extension of this idea was that a system designed to preclude exploiting others would be inherently fair, stable, and moral. Regrettably, the original premiss was backwards: exploitation occurs because of a normal distribution of bad apples who will betray the trust of others, corrupting and undermining any system. Uncle Joe had a field day because the communist system had no immunity to his pathological personality. Contrast this with capitalism, which pits the avidity of one piggie against another, and thereby tends to keep the swine population in check, though most of the time their numbers are too great for comfort.

Over time, the sociopaths (a.k.a., assholes) remain in control. Although each is likely to be found out eventually, there will always be another poised to step into his or her place before much if any time elapses. It pays to cheat as long as cheaters are in a minority compared with those they parasitize. Since we evolved in small groups of perhaps a dozen pairs, one in twenty-four might be the natural occurrence of sociopaths. Regardless of the actual rate, sociopaths will always exist. This can't be helped, it's game theory at work.

Even if the group commits to throwing cheaters into an active volcano, before long a shrewd sociopath will subvert the plan so that anyone who is likely to point him or her out is preemptively tossed onto the lava. Things will suck as long as the sun rises, because assholes will continue to control others through manipulation and lies. We'll just have to try holding the line as mankind always has, by remaining skeptical.

TV news informs the electorate to the same degree that "Dick and Jane" represents literature.

Omerta, Texas Style

Every day Alberto Gonzales remains Attorney General is a screeching reminder to America that he and the other thugs in this administration put fealty to Bush above loyalty to the country.

Sicko

Moore is accused of using cheap tricks, but regardless, the verity of what he's saying comes shining through in this one. There wasn't a lot in it about our unfair and failing medical care system that was really new to me, but the presentation was so powerful and funny it was well worth seeing.

In the end, Sicko goes beyond just establishing that our system is heartless in comparison with other countries'. Moore skillfully forms the larger question: what the hell is wrong with us as a population that we accept this system? Why do we effectively do this to ourselves by letting Big Pharma and the insurance companies shake us down?

He points out that if you have health insurance through work, that makes you a more tractable employee because you don't dare lose that benefit. This makes life easier for your bosses, so it's good for business. This point is driven home in an interview with a retired British Labour politician who says, "People are easiest to control when they're afraid and when they're desperate."

So a lousey medical care system is a huge winner for corporations and the government that serves them: they mine you for money when you're sick, and they make your life so precarious in general you can't muster the nerve to stick up for yourself. An American ex-pat in France says it this way in the film, "In France the government is afraid of the people, but in the States it's the other way around."

The greater message of the film is this: we are a defeated population, cowed by big money and afraid to demand even a basic right like medical care for our children and ourselves. But our poor self-esteem goes even deeper. We believe we're undeserving if we're not rich, so we allow ourselves to be bought off with trinkets. We are willing slaves, fodder to a corporatocracy that has us locked in its Matrix.

I want my kids to see the movie. I want them to act on it: I want them to travel to Europe, and then move there permanently. They have to save themselves. Michael Moore believes we can find the decency and gumption within ourselves to bring about a better democracy. I don't. I think it's too late to change, that the fear mongering and the bread and circus have worked too well.

Give the Heave-ho to the National Dick

Vice President Dick Cheney is behind the power grab to form an imperial presidency. He believes in rule by an elite, sees the Constitution as an impediment to that rule, and has acted accordingly.

In specific terms, he has concocted and promulgated bogus intelligence to successfully embroil us in an unnecessary war. He has repeatedly flouted checks and balances, imperially stating that the rules don't apply to him. He has conducted the country's business behind an impenetrable cloak of secrecy. He has abetted the worst war profiteering in over a century. And in all this, he sees himself as rightous, which means he will not change his mode of operating, and must therefore be removed through impeachment.

The march of the vampires in US Education.

Corporate con artists sell rainbows to naive and disadvantaged kids who are striving to start out their lives with an education, but wind up instead with a useless degree and a crushing debt burden. And the federal government abets the scam by promiscuously backing loans to the con men's sham schools.

Another example of private industry's doing the job better than government can -that is, if you consider the main job to be taking advantage of the vulnerable and crushing their dreams in the process.

TV News: serving up swill with a smile!

I just finished watching ABC World News tonight, July 11, and I'm dumbstruck by what General Petraeus said: the vast majority of attacks on US forces in Iraq are from al Qaeda. This directly contradicts what I have been reading, which is that al Qaeda attacks account for roughly ten percent of US casualties.

If Petraeus is playing loose with the facts, why on earth didn't ABC call him on it? Is he fudging the statistics to lend credence to the administration's claim that al Qaeda will follow us home if US forces are withdrawn? Who can we trust to give us the truth, and not just present a plausible yarn? What purpose does the media serve if it all it does is serve up swill with a smile?

Cheney is off the rails

Cheney has dangerous, unprecedented, and exta-constitutional influence over the Executive Branch. His policies, methods, and actions have been disasterous. Left in place for the remainder of his term, he could wreck the state beyond repair.

Corporate Exploitation the Whole Family can Enjoy

My 25 year old daughter started a new waitressing job where they offered "limited medical" for $115 per month. I'll say it was limited. The surgical benefit was one thousand fifteen hundred dollars per occurance. Obviously, the insurance was nearly worthless, but besides that it was a terribley bad value. And it's being foisted on naive young people who don't make that much to begin with ($2.15 an hour plus tips). Even worse, it leaves them with the impression they have real medical coverage and a false sense of security.

So just to squeeze an extra buck, the corporate chain piles victimization on top lack of medical insurance. This is evil. This sucks. Fuck soulless corporations remaking the world into the Matrix. Fuck vicious conservatives upholding the sancity of profits. Fuck the vampire insurance companies and fuck their shareholders too.

Appeal to my Republican representatives (pissing into the wind for distance)

This isn't the case anymore. Real wages have plummeted and wealth continues to concentrate at the top. This is no longer the America of my parents, in which working hard brought advancement and personal improvement. Instead, it's more the America of my grandparents and great grandparents, one in which life is hardscrabble and UNFAIR.

I understand that the Republican Party has long sought to undue the New Deal, and at this point has succeeded almost completely. The Taft-Hartley Act is ignored and workers are powerless. Past Republican administrations have referred to the non-investing class as "peons", indicating their disdain for working people. Although they speak with more political correctness nowadays, the sentiment hasn't changed. If anything, the position as hardened.

This strategy may fatten the wallets of the powerful in the short run, but history shows that a society based on gross inequality can only be maintained through tyranny.

I have no illusion whatsoever that you will vote for the the Employee Free Choice Act. It is anathema to you. I have to ask though, because I brought children into this world, and it is excruciating to see them relegated to serfdom.

This Land was made for Corporations

Personally, I would like the path from home to grandma's house to be in the public domain, not in private hands. Having to pay a toll to a private concern to travel reminds me of feudalism, and I've never really fancied being a serf. But too many politicians and voters seem to be comfortable with taking things like roads and water out of the public domain and placing them in private hands. What makes me shiver seems pleasant and acceptable to them.

Some of Woody's verses didn't make into the grade school songbook, like "As I was walkin' down the lonesome highway, I saw a sign there, said 'Private Property'. But on the other side, it didn't say nothin'. This land was made for you and me." Well, now the highway is owned too, and it may as well say "Private Property" on both sides of the sign. Freedom's fading.

Bush Punks Country Again!

The "Korea model" of maintaining U.S. forces in Iraq for generations has now been publicly touted by Bush and Tony Snow, and endorsed by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Gen. Raymond Odierno. Obviously, this gives the lie to the Surge being for the purpose of winding down the occupation. We were misled regarding WMD, Saddam and 9-11, and Iran's imaginary attempt to purchase yellow cake, so it's not surprising that we've been punked again.

Got your Creative Destruction for ya, right here!

US corporations are making enormous profits by outsourcing jobs, producing goods overseas with negligible labor costs, then selling them back to the same people they laid off. This is globalization, and to speak against it is to set yourself up to be excoriated by economists as a misguided, befuddled protectionist.

Fine, then let's go full-bore free trade and buy those foreign made goods directly from foreign manufacturers at foreign owned stores. Rather than buy from WalMart, go across the street to H-mart and plop the money you withdrew from savings or a home equity loan down on their counter instead. That's real globalization, cutting out the US corporate middlemen.

Further, make it known to foreign producers that you would be favorably disposed to buy from outlets they might open here. Wouldn't US corporate chiefs and investors howl over that!

The imported shoe would be on the other foot then. This may be passive aggressive, wanting to visit a little creative destruction on those now reaping a bonanza at the cost of US workers' jobs, but it certainly is free trade. Just to be really vindictive, let's outsource economists too.

Freddy and the Dreamers

Ah, Fred Thompson, another stern, hyper-masculine, fundamentalist-friendly, patriotic good old boy. (He's actually a former Washington lawyer-lobbyist who somehow missed out on Vietnam and who's married to a woman four years younger than his daughter from his first marriage, but those are facts, and as such have no validity in the political pantheon.) Looking around to see where investing in a macho, father-like authority figure has gotten us, wouldn't we be at least as well off electing an alumnus of "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" to be president? Might not help, but it sure couldn't hurt.

The Walking Cure

Hey, wanna reduce pollution, save money, get back an hour of time every workday, feel fit, and loose weight? Then stop living ridiculously far from where you work and shop so you can leave your car parked and walk to your destination. Don't know how to manage that? Don't worry, the future price of gas will guide you.

Buttinsky's Dilemma

Three guys are in a one room house. At one end there's a small guy and a big guy, and the smaller guy is holding the bigger guy at bay with a baseball bat he's brandishing. At the far end of the room is the third guy, who's doing his best to ignore the other two. In the basement of this one room house is a gigantic tank filled with oil.

You take it upon yourself to charge into this room and disarm the little guy. The reasons you give for doing this vary broadly, but despite admonitions from family and friends, you go forward. You barge in and attack, trashing the place as you take the little guy's weapon away.

Once you do this you step back amid the debris and wait for a miracle to happen. You wait for the big guy and little guy to embrace and invite the estranged guy into their circle, followed by all of them getting on with the business of selling off the oil downstairs to pay for repairs to the wrecked house.

But that doesn't happen, because the little guy won't accept his new position at the bottom of the heap, and furthermore, he's scared the big guy is going to pound him now that he's disarmed. The little guy is right about this, because the big guy is flexing his muscles and glaring at him, biding his time until you leave so that he can trounce the little guy without interference. Meanwhile, the third guy wishes the room were bigger so he could get farther away from them and you.

What actually happens is the little guy and the big guy go at one another whenever they get the chance, and they take turns lashing out at you. Also, allies of the little guy slip in the open windows at night, and powerful friends of both amass outside, preparing to enter the melee.

What's next? Do you hunker down and continue trying to oversee this eroding stalemate, or do you plead with the neighbors to step in and talk to the two adversaries, possibly allowing you to leave gracefully?

The cost of staying here is adding up. You're becoming weary refereeing this debacle. At home, the kids are sick and there isn't money to pay a doctor. The roof is leaking and the appliances are on the fritz. You've been right-sized out of your job, and the oldest just quit school. You'd like to go home and straighten out your affairs, but you don't want to leave in the middle of this mess because your friends might say you're a quitter. Here's a flash: they already think you're a dope for getting into it, so your prestige is long gone anyway.

But all that oil in the basement is hard to walk away from. Does its value stop your leaving or even asking for help?

Sign of the times

A sizable group within the US population, one that constitutes a swing vote in national elections, is so disenchanted with the free enterprise cornucopia that its members are openly rooting for the end of the world. They have joined the cult and are waiting for Armageddon. People in a functioning society don't act this way.

Sleep tight, boy king

Think of it from the president's perspective. You are a not-too-bright scion of wealth. Every sinecure you've ever held, including the US Presidency, you've been handed by rich allies of your family. You know your limitations, but you see your loyalty to the ruling elite as your strength. Your are able to put your ego aside and defer to wiser, older men from your own class, while you are clever enough to be of service to them by appearing folksy to the peons. Your purpose is to deliver the good will of the non-investing class to the haves and the have-mores.

You can be self-assured and secure in your dealings, because your allegiance is unquestionable and your place in the upper caste is therefore unassailable. Not only do you know which side your bread's buttered on, but you believe to your core that's the side that is entitled to the butter. This is why you can sleep at night and even take a nap in the afternoon as you kill thousands, dismantle working government, and screw millions of working people.

Good coffee has its limits

at starbucks you can buy a packet of coffee for shipment to the soldiers in iraq. fair enough. after you've had your bell rung by an IED, a robust cup of coffee probably can help bring back some clarity. what would be better though would be a collection to provide psychological help to returning vets suffering PTSD and continued care to those suffering the lingering or permanent effects of traumatic brain injury (nearly 20 percent of combat troops have suffered some degree of brain injury) or other devastating wounds. after those needs are addressed, then a free cup of coffee would be just swell.

Republican Party now officially crazy

"For green solutions, Earth needs right turn." -response to an article written by an ass in the Atlanta Journal Constitution

Newt's article was less a defense of the environment than it was a political attack against the left. This is obvious, as it opened with a salvo against liberals, impugning their motives, not just their ideas. He says they THINK they're the only ones who care about saving the environment, not that they AREN'T the only ones. His message is clear: don't listen to them because they are elitist, they think they're better than you. Buy my book instead."

Contrast this to Al Gore's apolitical approach to informing the public about global climate change. Gore isn't making political hay out of a dire situation, just sounding the alarm, presenting the facts, and even suggesting solutions. People in Newt's old camp are responding with ad hominem attacks, following the pattern Newt promoted in the mid-ninties.

Newt's modus operandi is to attach the motives of his opposition rather than addressing their ideas. This is not accidental. A paper distributed to Republican candidates in Newt's era of power instructed them to follow the dictum of Lenin: "In political conflict, the goal is not to refute your opponent's argument, but to wipe him off the face of the earth." Newt himself told candidates to "Go negative early. Stay negative." His is a schoolyard bully's trick, one that I suspect he learned on the receiving end as a child: get the crowd to turn on a hapless target and he or she will be vanquished.

Newt's viciousness aside, the plain fact is that we're in a pickle because we Americans were seduced by cheap gas and abundant coal. We moved to far-flung suburbia, far from our work and where we shop, and now that gas isn't so cheap at the pump anymore we're feeling the pain. We also built huge houses that require vast amounts of coal for electricity to cool the prodigious square footage, the price of which turns out to be pollution induced asthma. You're lucky now if you can buy homeowners insurance in Florida at any cost because the insurance companies are petrified by their potential liability related to severe weather caused by climate change. We're embroiled in the Middle East militarily for the primary purpose of keeping the pipelines open, preferring to sacrifice servicemen and servicewoman over driving smaller cars shorter distances. Even Bush had a slow-burn epipheny and realized that we are addicted to oil.

The market will prevail though. The price at the pump is headed skyward. It will be painful, but we will eventually come to terms with this new energy paradigm. We will do so a lot quicker if we resist the balderdash of has-been political snake oil salesmen who can't seem to relinquish their narcissistic dream of resuscitating their failed political careers.

Good luck on the book sales, Newt. By the way, Tom Delay wants to meet you by the swings after school. He says he's going to kick your ass.

Gimme Just a Little More Time

It's not really that complex, President Bush is committed to keeping troops in Iraq at full strength through the end of his presidency, and because of that he's not going to agree to a troop withdrawal or phase-out proposal from anyone, not a bipartisan commission nor the Democratic Congress. Cut and dry, no ifs, ands, or buts. That's why his administration will tenaciously marshal an array of patriotic sounding arguments against any proposal to end the war, tarring the opposition as unpatriotic and cowardly.

It's worked pretty well so far. It got us into this war and protracted occupation, so it will probably keep us in it for at least another couple of years. By then Iraqi oil will be entirely privately owned by US and British surrogates, and with luck will be flowing at full capacity.

We didn't know

When the administration was laying out its case for invading Iraq, it seemed transparent to me that they were reaching for any excuse to do what they had already decided on. I couldn't understand how people around me could miss the deception. This was a war of choice, not an unavoidable action about to be taken after all other alternatives had been exhausted.

What was obvious then has since been thoroughly documented. Unfortunately, it's a moot point now because Iraq is gutted and will almost certainly never be a whole nation. Hundreds of thousands are dead and chaos reigns there. The US has squandered its wealth and has likely diminished the prospect of well being for its future generations.

So, the question is, were the people I was surrounded by gullible fools, or were they just predisposed to swallow the bogus rationale for an elective war? It's possible that many who bought the obvious lies and misrepresentations were emotionally off balance from the World Trade Towers attack. Their fear and desire for revenge may have blocked their ability to think critically.

This cannot be said for our elected representatives though, especially our Senators. Despite their sophistic claims now that they were buffaloed by the bogus White House narrative about Saddam's ties to 9/11, these are highly intelligent people, people in the know. They can't have bought the absurd claims any more than I did. Less so.

Republicans' dominant reason for voting to give the president war powers was to give life to the neoconservative plan for remaking the Mideast. Warmongering Senate Republicans exploited 9/11 to enter into a discretionary war with Iraq that was to be a kickoff for much bigger things.

Invading Iraq was just the first step toward upsetting the Mideast apple cart and subsequently ushering in an era of democracy there, by which is meant that troublesome regimes would be replaced with new leaders who would be easier to do business with, oil business that is. Saddam Heussain's Iraq was just the low hanging fruit, an easy first pick because no one liked his regime. In theory, starting a war with Iraq would raise less ire in the region than doing so with any other Mideast country. It was the logical place to invade first.

If you think saying this is indulging in tin-foil-hat conspiracy theory, Google "Project for the New American Century" where the neocons set forth their manifesto. Learn there that the plan for invading Iraq and making over the Middle East was publicly stated as early as 1997. See that the signatories included Rumsfeld, Cheney, Perle, and all the other usual suspects, except for George W. Bush, who was then, as now, superfluous.

If Republican senators were sinister, Democratic senators were craven and cynical. Anyone not under the influence of neocon pipe dreams knew the invasion and subsequent occupation would be a disaster, but with the exception of a few noble senators like Kennedy and Feingold and House Representatives like Dennis Kucinich who decried the administration's scam, most Democrats were in hiding, afraid to challenge the king for fear of being turned out of office by their misled constituents. Then too, they were acting passive-aggressively, willing to give Bush-Cheney and the Republican Party enough rope to hang themselves, which they did in November of '06.

The mainstream media acted like the Democrats in that they did not dare make waves. This is tragic, because questioning government is constitutionally the main function of the press in a free society. But in the lead-up to this war the meek msm accepted all the White House's assertions promoting an invasion as if they were holy scripture.

Individually, most members of the press were loathe to put their job on the line by challenging the marketing campaign for the war because they have nice cars, kids in private schools, and mortgages, all of which would be in peril if they actually did their job. Since only a small minority of elected Democrats were bold enough to oppose the march to war on flimsy and contrived grounds, reporters felt justified in shirking their responsibility too. The msm and Democrats together acted like the cowardly lion in the Wizard of Oz.

From the media's corporate perspective, there was no monetary incentive to alienate advertisers by fielding correspondents who would contradict the narrative of a war president.

Coming back to the people I worked with every day, some were such true believers in the Republican Party then that they simply swallowed whole whatever was served up by Limbaugh, et al. For them to so blithely accept the falsehoods required not just partisanship, but a lack of any personal active military experience. The latter protected their ignorance regarding the seriousness of committing people to risk injury or death while placing them in a kill-or-be-killed situation. Further, it insulated them from the enormity of doing so for less than solid and compelling reasons.

Frankly, the people I worked with were managers and professionals, not the sort to ever find themselves in the GI's position: powerless to control his or her own fate and subject to the absolute and seemingly arbitrary rule of military command. Neither are their children apt to become canon fodder. (All hail the volunteer military that spares the children of the economic aristocracy!)

There were some I knew who were neither laptop Napoleons nor Republican good soldiers, but who despite their education lacked the critical thinking necessary to detect the administration's outrageous lies. The key word here is "education", because educated people are more trusting of authority. Jumping through the hoops of academia doesn't foster critical thinking. They spent time undergoing indoctrination as well as absorbing knowledge. After graduating they arrived closer to the top, so they feel less alienated and they are better rewarded by the system. In short, the status quo is good for them so they don't make waves. They have forgotten how to make them, and anyway, they can't swim.

(Although Vietnam War protesters were predominantly college students, the record shows that among the general population the college educated were more inclined to support the war initially, while blue collar workers were more skeptical. Nowadays one might expect those more likely to do the dying, the working class, to be less inclined to support war, but during Vietnam the draft was in effect, so all classes were affected, student deferments aside. Apparently then, working people knew something the more educated didn't.)

Others I knew who successfully ignored the blatancy of the lies emanating from the administration were on the religious right. These people were longing for Armageddon well before 9/11. All they needed to know was that Bush is a born-again, and they would follow him into hell. They exist in a world where dogma is reality, so they naturally did not even care to parse the tripe Dubya was putting out about the need to go to war.

There you have it. Nobody had any idea that the administration was exploiting 9/11 to embark on a discretionary war it was pining for all along. Nobody, it seemed, ever questioned the validity of claims regarding Saddam's connection with al-Qeada, even though they obviously failed the smell test. Everybody is surprised. Many feel betrayed. All are full of shit.

Fixing pottery with a hammer?

US military forces won the Iraq war handily. That "Mission Accomplished" banner, although it shamelessly exploited the military for political advantage, was accurate. The US won the war but has lost the occupation through a lack of planning, blundering by the ideologically driven Coalition Provisional Authority, and a profound and impermeable ignorance regarding the culture and history of the region.

Perhaps because the US military power worked so well in March-April of 2003, the Swaggerer-in-Chief continues to apply his Terminator policy in Iraq. This is nonsensical, and the results are tragic: we have trashed Iraq and we're on the cusp of touching off sectarian war throughout the Mideast region.

We as a nation need to suspend our obsession over prestige, and he needs to set aside his ego and start thinking solely about saving Iraq, whatever that takes. Certainly this would entail going to everyone in the region and saying: "We are not interested in saving face at this point, we truely want to save Iraq. Please help us to spare Iraq's people further suffering." This may or may not succeed, but its chances for ending the misery and horror are far superior to our trying to occupy Iraq like modern day Roman legions.

Unfortunately, the administration's only tool is still a hammer.

Dear Rudy

Since 9-11 the Repubs have done nothing but smash dishes: they bluster and call for wholesale mayhem, but none of it has a damn thing to do with neutralizing terrorists. Leading up to 9-11, the Repubs even turned a deaf ear to specific warnings about terrorist attacks.

So now you're saying Dems will leave us wide open for attack and that only Repubs can save us? That's an unfounded and ludicrous claim, and the only reason you need to use it is because the one time in your life when you didn't appear petty and quarrelsome was post 9-11; and you only looked good then by contrast to the Repub Prez who seemed stunned out of his wits for days.

I'd say get a new shtick, but you're a one-trick-pony, so you'll have to stick with this misrepresentation until you're eliminated in the primaries.

Say 'hi' to Pat Robertson and Bernie for me.

Throw the Bums Out

We were sold on the war via the threat of terrorism, WMDs, and freedom for Iraqis, but those were all marketing strategies employed to bamboozle the public. True Iraq mission: privatize the oil and establish permanent bases to use as a staging ground for invading Iran and Syria, and also to be near to Saudi Arabia when it collapses. We have been out and out lied to by this president and his VP, Bush.

Spying on US citizens has become acceptable under this duo, as has betraying covert CIA agents for political vendetta. Further, FEMA, the CIA, the CDC and practically any government agency you can name have been weakened through inappropriate, inefficient, and uneconomical privatization as well as infiltration by neocon ideologues and parasitic cronies. Witness the politicization of Justice's prosecutors.

The cherry on top is the abrogation of the first amendment ban on establishment of a state religion through funding of the Faith-based Initiative, that thinly veiled bribe to evangelical zealots.

Armageddon, Inc.

Ok, so we in this country use twice as much energy per capita as anyone else on the planet -big deal! So we're changing the weather by slowing the gulf stream -so what! So this could result in the population of entire countries becoming refugees -who cares! So this could lead to mass starvation and upheaval -not interested! So this will lead to extinctions like the polar bear -boo ho!

What's really important is that the same corporations that are in the driver's seat now stay there, and that the same fat cats keep lapping up the cream. If that were to change, it would be a REALLY BIG DEAL to this administration and the Republican Party. Global climate change is just corporations' entry in the cataclysm category, in case Armageddon falls through.

Duke of Oil

Despite all the noble motives they professed, the administration had only two real objectives in invading Iraq: open the oil fields and establish a permanent military presence. Currently the Iraqi oil fields are being de-nationalized and handed over to multinational corporations. Also, we have multiple permanent US bases there as well as a bastion in Baghdad euphemistically referred to as an embassy. In short, the administration has gotten exactly what it wanted and its smokescreen claims as well the oppostion's protestations are all irrelevant. Mission accomplished.

Now if Cheney-Bush can start war with Iran and Syria to gain control of even more oil, all their dreams will have been fulfilled. Then when Saudi Arabia disintegrates, US and British companies will be in perfect position to snap up the last barrels of oil in the Middle East without any further interference from pesky local potentates. (That is, if our banker, China, doesn't mind.)

Manifest Destiny, bitches.

W's Anniversary Copout

The president said on the 4th anniversary of the Iraq invasion that he cannot allow US troops to be withdrawn because then "The terrorists could emerge from the chaos with a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they had in Afghanistan". But they already have safe haven in Pakistan, so they have little need for Iraqi real estate. After all, bin Laden has been living in Pakistan since he slipped out of Tora Bora. Further, al Qaeda are not loved by Iraq's Sunni minority and they're hated by the Shiite majority, so who would they stay with?

Let's face it, W is merely offering excuses to avoid making the hard decision to throw in the towel. Twenty-eight thousand Americans and a million or so Vietnamese died after the administration had already realized the Vietnam war's futility, but the politicians couldn't bring themselves to bear the onus of admitting defeat. That's where W is at now. He just wants to hand it off to the next guy, so he's using any excuse to stall.

On the other hand, if he could start war with Iran, that would make this war moot, which would really get him off the hook. The Iraq study group came back with their recommendation for diplomacy and Bush turned that into an escalation. Continue funding the Iraq war without restrictions and he will absolutely turn it into a war with Iran. If you give this guy an inch he'll take a mile.

Jingoism Displaces Reason

It is tragic that at this stage in the Iraq quagmire the debate in the US is still framed as win versus cut and run. The US military won the war with Iraq in a matter of weeks. What followed was a botched occupation engineered by the inept Coalition Provisional Authority that has culminated in an Iraqi civil war which potentially may flow over the entire Middle East.

We cannot win someone else's civil war, even if we are largely responsible for that war. It's the Hatfields versus the McCoys, and US troops are in the middle of it. If there is a solution, and there may not be one at this point, it is political and diplomatic. Sadly, the Bush Administration knows only gunboat diplomacy and the politics of absolute power.

Iraq's doctors and other professionals have fled the country, leaving only the destitute behind to bear living in unending chaos. Meanwhile in this country, nine million children live without health insurance, and probably triple that number of young adults have none. Our infrastructure is crumbling. The only job growth outside of defense is in waiting tables. Higher education is off the plate for the middle class. We are a debtor nation kept afloat by selling treasury notes to Europe, Japan, and China.

We are making all the moves of an empire in decline, hastening our own downfall with nationalistic slogans and intransigent posturing.

If I didn't have kids I wouldn't give a damn that they're turning this into another Sparta. If I'd known that was the goal, I'd have had a vasectomy.

Ann Coulter, gotta love her (or else she'll call you a nasty name). She was just doing her job as right wing provocateur. Ms Coulter was only employing a more fanciful version of the ad hominem fallacy beloved by the right wing: rather than address issues, toss the personal attack grenade at an opponent. This is easier than assembling a logical argument and reaches people directly on a gut level. It is a low-brow, low road approach that creates confusion and precludes understanding. It's proto-practitioner in twentieth century politics was Newt Gingrich.

The pamphlet "The Art of Political War: How Republicans can Fight to Win" contains this quote: "In political conflicts, the goal is not to refute your opponent's argument, but to wipe him from the face of the earth." Hence, the vehement personnel attacks. By the way, the quote is from Valdimir Lenin, not John Lennon.

Let's get real.

Bone up on the places Attila the Bush will send your kids next: Where's Halliburton?


If we exalt material wealth and individual status above all else, are we not breeding for an uberclass of shrewd sociopaths?

The Robbers who took Social Security

Ok boys and girls, here's a story about how Social Security was robbed, and how the robbers are going to use their robbery to get your vote in the very near future.

Soon, you will be pitted against your elders. You will be told that the aging baby boomers are so numerous and so costly to the system that taking care of them will burden you to the breaking point and even affect your ability to provide for your own small children, their grandchildren.

Given the cost of medical care, there is a grain of truth to this; of course, if something were done to reduce the cost of medical care, then the situation wouldn't be so bad, but that would hurt the insurance and pharmaceutical industries. That would be bad for the robbers, who depend on big companies for election funding and free holiday trips. Certainly, we cannot expect the robbers to offend the insurance industry!

Once there was a man who worked alongside the robbers, but didn't agree with their stealing money from social security. He campaigned on a platform to protect social security, calling for the money to be placed in a "Lock Box" so the robbers couldn't steal it. But the electorate was not yet aware enough of the size of the theft that was taking place or the consequences, so they thought the man's speeches were funny. They didn't understand that a crisis was coming. This delighted the robbers.

Before we go any further, let's talk about how the robbers stole from the Social Security Fund. First, Social Security is a system in which the working people hand over part of their salary to be paid to older people who are no longer young and strong enough to work. People don't seem to mind doing this because they understand that when they get old, younger workers will do the same for them. Besides, the older people paid taxes when they were working that were used to build schools and playgrounds that benefited the working people when they were small, so everything seemed fair and for the good of everyone. This is what is called The Social Contract, which means everyone supports others in their period of need with the expectation they will not be abandoned in their hour of need.

Beginning with a robber named Ronnie, money started to disappear from the Social Security Fund. A man named Greenspan told Robber Ronnie it was ok to remove the money as long as he put an IOU into the box the money was in. Greenspan and Ronnie wanted to do this because they were spending much, much more money than they were taking in -they needed cash fast! This theft was so easy that the next boss after Ronnie, George Bush the Elder, used Social Security as a money machine too. Following him, Slick Willy did the same. Each time they put in their IOU's, which supposedly made taking the money ok, and not really stealing. At least that's what the man named Greenspan kept saying. (He was still around all this time!)

After robber Willie, there was a new man in charge. This man was the son of George Bush the Elder, and this fellow called himself "W". Silly thing to call yourself! Anyway, W robbed Social Security the same as Ronnie, his dad, and Willie had, each time putting an IOU in the box where there had been money. W put most of the money in the pockets of his rich friends by giving them big tax cuts.

But then W did something very strange, he stood up in front of the people and showed them the IOU's and said they were worthless!!! W did not mention that he had written many of the IOU's himself.

So there would be no money to pay for the baby boomers in their old age, because all the IOU's were trash. Too bad for them, because they paid all their working lives to support the elderly, expecting that when they got old others would do the same for them. But W came out and said the money was gone.

You would think that the discovery of the theft -no, the admission of the theft by the latest robber- would make people so mad they would put all the living robbers in jail. That's not what happened though. People just shrugged and blamed faceless Big Government and now they go on just assuming that somehow they will be taken care of when they are old.

The robbers are smart and very, very clever. They know that the baby boomers can't be taken care of because the money is gone, and they are confident they won't be put in jail for taking it. Will they stop there, content to have gotten away with stealing? NO! They say, "Why stop there?" The brazen robbers always reach for more whenever they get away with something because getting away with something makes them bolder.

So now the robbers have another plan. As the burden of paying the baby boomers' Social Security gets bigger and bigger, younger working people will get madder and madder. The robbers will tell the younger working people "Your problem is with these greedy old people who take so much of your salary every week, so vote for us and we will protect you from their greed!" You will believe them and vote for them, and old people will live in poverty as they did in the days before there was Social Security.

The robbers are very smart, and they think you are very stupid.

Echoes of Berlin, 1945

President Cheney declared that Britain's announcing they will withdraw troops from Iraq is a testimony to their success. This goes beyond spin, this rates closer to a communique from the fuehrer bunker.

Right Wing Noise Machine in a Worn Loop

They still keep blathering about the Liberal Media, but Toto has pulled back the curtain and people see them now for the thuggish hucksters they are, still trying to tar anyone who opposes them while they rob, pillage, and plow civilization under.

Wounded Veterans Treated Shamefully --Nothing New

Things have apparently returned to the bad old way. WWI veterans had it so bad they camped out in D.C. in protest. The protesters were forcibly removed by Douglas McArthur. Veterans were so mistreated and so badly used there was even the threat of armed insurrection.

The WWII GI Bill of Rights was a reaction to the way earlier vets had been shortchanged and abused. Now it seems, things are back to the historically usual way of doing business.

Oh Miss, Barefoot and Pregnant, Please

It's suspicious that very many of the same people who defend the unborn and insist a woman carry the fetus to full term also begrudge her a living wage, access to medical care, and affordable child care. I suspect what underlies this contradiction is that they actually have a different agenda: to make the consequences of sexual activity as harsh as possible in order to discourage sexual activity outside of marriage, and perhaps even then primarily for the purpose of procreation.

Supporting this suspicion is the decision by the FDA to deny sale of the morning after pill over the counter. This decision went against a recommendation based on scientific evidence that OTC sale would be safe and effective. Further, because it impedes time-critical access to the medication, it actually increases the likelihood the woman will be in a position to seek abortion. The reason given by the agency was that OTC sales would "promote teenage sex-club activity".

This rationale for denial is really reaching and is obviously ideologically based, but the crucial point is this: it explicitly states the purpose is to preclude sexual activity. The real enemy is the sexual revolution begun in the 60's that was propelled by the introduction of the birth control pill. It's not so much a war for saving the unborn as it's part of the larger culture war. These people do not watch "That 70's Show" and laugh; they seethe.

Waiting for the Abu Ghraib Dividend

Very simply, messed up American kids in the US Army continually beat the crap out of other messed up kids who were imprisoned in Abu Ghraib. We're talking savage beating and testicle-tasering of their kids by our kids. Kind of like a one-sided gang war with Clockwork Orange overtones. And it wasn't just Lindy England!. Gee, wonder if there'll be any blowback from that over time?

The troops are smarter than that

The argument that debating troop escalation in Iraq undermines troop morale sells the troops short. They grew up in a democracy, and they understand debate is integral and essential to our system of government. They aren't dummies who loose resolve just because someone in Congress criticizes their mission. In reality, unless things have changed drastically since the sixties, I doubt the average troop gives any weight whatsoever to what clowns in Washington say.

I'll bet what does effect morale is being sent onto Iraqi streets without armored Humvees or effective body armor. I'll bet learning that VA funding is set to be slashed stings. And reduction in funding for head trauma really has to hurt morale too. Finally, being sent back for three and four tours can't be a big morale booster either.

Attila the Bush on the March Again

EVEN IF IT'S TRUE IRAN MATERIALLY SUPPORTS SHIITE MILITIA IN IRAQ, THAT'S A FART IN A WINDSTORM comparatively, because OVER 90 PERCENT OF ATTACKS COME FROM SUNNI INSURGENTS AND AL-QAEDA, who, if you understand anything about Iraq, you know are on the opposing team.

So, once again it seems the damn-inistration is overstating a threat to start a war. In fact, it looks like their response to Democrats' call to end the Iraq occupation is to render the point moot by getting into an open war with Iran . All hail Attila the Bush and his cabal of laptop Napoleons!

Fascist-Terrorist Merry-go-round

GOP: Anglo-Saxon version of the MOB


Laptop Napoleons

Flaccid, draft-dodging, laptop Napoleons are pushing us toward war with Iran. Time to hit CTRL-ALT DELETE and boot these flabby neo-cons.

The Deceiver

W's medical insurance tax deduction is just another scam, a Trojan horse. It paves the way for employers to drop company-paid medical benefits while failing to do anything for 95% of the 47 million uninsured. It is bogus, a band-aid on a bubo, a typical repugnican ruse. He's the Deceiver; he's the one who deceives.

Dick and his Magic Stomach

VP Dick Cheney is making the talk show circuit, chastising Americans for "not having the stomach for war." This is interesting, since the VP himself did not develop a stomach for war until well after the war of his generation was over with.

 
Point by Point Rebuttal to Liz Cheney's "Retreat Isn't an Option" in the Washington Post

We are at war. The war terminology is misleading and counterproductive. We are in a global struggle against terrorism that will require a much broader spectrum of response based on a subtler understanding of the world than any "bring it on" creed can muster. The war in Iraq ended when the President and your father said "Mission Accomplished", remember? Now it's an open-ended occupation of a country in the throes of an internal, sectarian war, which frankly, was made possible through addled, neo-con post-invasion ineptitude. Your administration sent young and inexperienced Republican Party faithful to fill the ranks of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), rather than qualified experts, and the upshot is chaos.

Quitting helps the terrorists. A price must be paid, no matter when we leave. Leaving will give terrorists a cause to celebrate initially, but that's an inevitably created by a bungled, foolhardy occupation. Your argument that leaving helps them is reminiscent of a drunk who won't leave the bar to put off paying his tab. On the other hand, staying generates new terrorists every single day. (Also keep in mind that until we botched the post-invasion occupation, there were no terrorists in Iraq to speak of.)

Beware the polls. [The people don't want us to loose] Define winning. The only outcome of staying indefinitely is staying indefinitely, perhaps even getting in the middle of a civil war. The genie is out of the bottle and his first act will be to turn half of Iraq into an annex of Iran. If you think any other sort of outcome is possible, please explain what that could be.

Retreat from Iraq hurts us in the broader war. Before the President spit in their eye with his bullshit Axis of Evil rhetoric, Iran's population was coming ever closer to the West. The Boy King's insult had the effect of undermining Iranian moderates and pushing Iran back into the hands of extremist clerics. Cowboy diplomacy is making a regional war inevitable. It has to be scrapped before it brings about Armageddon -assuming you're interested in avoiding that.

By the way, the one country your administration isn't threatening is Pakistan, which is in fact the Oxford University of Terrorism. Also, was allowing Ben Laden to slip out of Tora Bora and escape to Pakistan part of your administration's strategy to win the broader war?

Our soldiers will win if we let them. Armies win or loose a war, and though individual soldiers still may have their hearts in the fight, their generals have stated flatly that there is no military solution, only a political solution offers any hope. As for Democrats failing to support the troops, don't talk so high and mighty. Do you think sending them out in unarmored Humvee's to be targets for IED's and then cutting funding for head trauma is supporting them? Not so much, bitch.

"Me thinks she [he] doth protest too much."

If you're a dyed-in-the-wool heterosexual male and you think (stupidly) that legalizing gay marriage will steer the rest of the male population into Queerdom, what's your beef with that? More nooky for me, I say.

If half the male population were to drop out of competition for women, that would mean my chances of getting lucky with a woman would double. Suddenly, my greasy, balding, pockmarked, jowley, sawed-off visage would look a lot better to the leggy woman at the bar. What's wrong with that, and why would you want to put the kybosh on the deal?

Nope, I think the problem here is that the staunchest anti-gay-marriage men who are so afraid it would mean the end of the world are secretly worried it would mean the end of their world because they are sitting on the fence themselves. They are in reality open to other options. They must be, otherwise, they'd be volunteering to drive the wedding limo.