June 7, 2005
Unsolicited Advice to The Class of 2005
My son, Christopher, graduated from college this Spring. As I sat there in the stands looking down on a sea of black hats and gowns, I felt a strange mixture of nostalgia and dread. Of course I was proud of my son for accomplishing something I did not. (I didn't just flunk out of any college.. I flunked out of JUNIOR college. That was 1965 and, being the genius I was at the time, I lost my student deferment and my sorry ass landed itself in Marine Corps boot camp as the Vietnam War was heating up. This was an IQ test, and I flunked it.)
I was very proud of Chris, and relieved. History tends to repeat itself, so another unpopular war is once again lurching along getting kids my kid's age killed. So I was greatly relieved Chris had a diploma in hand rather than enlistment papers.
Then I started thinking about what changes those kids down there were about to experience. After four or five years of idyllic campus life, where professors were careful not to say anything that might bruise egos, erode self-esteem, crush dreams or dampen enthusiasm, these kids were about to enter an environment where all that's called a "a day at the office."
I did it all and so did his mother. We both had our careers and raised two boys. It was a frustrating, furious, sometimes frightening, and absolutely fabulous 35 years. Now retired, my days at the office are behind me, (Free at last, free at last, thank God almighty, I am free at last.)
Recalling those three decades of work and family, ups and downs, victories and loses, disappointments followed by elation, shit before the Shinola, I felt a mixture of envy and exhaustion as I watched the young grads take their diplomas and walk, skip or dance back to their seats. I know, at least in broad strokes, what lays in front of them, and it's at once awful and awesome. They are cursed and blessed -- captives of the immutable laws of Yin & Yang.
A quarter century from now they will each know if their lives were a success of something less. I learned a few things along the way -- all the hard way -- I want to share with Chris and his 2005 classmates. Chances are they will still have to learn them the same way I did, because my father also tried -- with little success -- to give me a clue too. Still it's my final job as a father to try, so here we go. Chris, pay attention. (And sit up straight or you will grow up crooked, and don't crack your knuckles or you will get arthritis, and then you'll be sorry..)
14 Rules of Life for Grads
Rule 1:
Be suspicious of all hard-and-fast and rules, including the ones that follow.
Rule 2:
There is no single path to success -- there are many -- millions in fact.
Rule 3:
Paths to success are always unmarked, but you will greatly improve your chances by avoiding well-traveled paths.
Rule 4:
There are no formulas for making money. Anyone peddling such a formula is just selling a scheme he/she purchased from someone else. Whatever they call it or however they describe it, that IS the formula -- the whole formula.
Rule 5:
You will always succeed if you pursue your dreams, but only if you pursue them with genuine passion and vigor.
Rule 6:
Never use money as your measure of success, but personal satisfaction. If you are happy and engaged in an endeavor, sufficient amounts of money will follow as a byproduct.
Rule 7:
Integrity is your most valuable asset. Never do anything you know is wrong or that makes you feel uneasy - not for anyone, not to anyone, at any time, for any reason. Period. (There are no exceptions to this rule.)
Rule 8:
Corporations are not your friends or benefactors. They are filling stations on the road of life. Companies are where, in return for your hard work, you are allowed to fill up on knowledge, contacts and money before moving further on down the road, hopefully to bigger and better things.
Rule 9:
Never let fear stop you. Anything worth achieving requires risk -- risk of the unknown, risk of failure, risk of success. Fear is the parking brake of life. If you want to go anywhere you have to release it.
Rule 10:
The same goes for worry. Worrying is like a rocking chair: You do a lot of work but it doesn't get you anywhere. When worry strikes stop and immediately deal with it. The cure is simple and certain: 1) Visualize the worst possible outcome. 2) Decide what you will do to survive if such an outcome should it occur. 3) You're done. Now get back out there.
Rule 11:
Then there's chronic unhappiness. This is life's red warning light. DO NOT IGNORE IT. When it flashes pull over and stop. Identify the cause and do whatever it takes to make that light go out before proceeding. Unhappiness is a cancer of habit. Get rid of it early or it'll rule your life.
Rule 12:
In all matters involving spending money, trust neither your heart nor your head. They are both world-class yes-men. They will often tell you what you want to hear rather than what you need to know. Trust only your calculator. Do the numbers and heed their heartless wisdom. (The same applies to human financial advice. Your calculator is the best financial advisor you will ever meet. If you don't lie to your calculator, it will never lie to you.)
Rule 13:
Life is serious business, so find yourself a good business partner. You can succeed alone, but it's a lot harder, and nowhere near as much fun. With the right life-partner you will not only help each other succeed but will share the most wonderful adventures life has to offer. (And what fun is an unshared adventure, anyway?)
Rule 14:
Choosing a life-partner is the easy part. Maintaining that partnership will be one of your life's great tests -- a test of character -- both yours and your partner's. If your partnership lasts you will reap a reward only those who have achieved it can know. Suffice it to say it's more than worth the trip. If you achieve it you will consider your partnership the most precious possession of your lives, because it is nothing less than that.
So there you are kids. Take it, or leave it.
Good luck to the rest of the Class of 2005. I wish we were turning the nation and the world over to you in better shape. But then they were both a mess when we got them handed to us too.
Let's see how you do.
Wednesday, June 08, 2005
Tuesday, June 07, 2005
June 6, 2005
Is It Time To Run A Ticket?
It’s an old Will Rogers joke; “I don’t belong to an organized political party. I’m a Democrat.”
I never thought it was terribly funny and find it even less so now – not because it’s an untrue slur on my party, but because it’s true. Democrats have lost their groove. If the Democratic Party were a company analysts would say it lost brand recognition. This happened in part because it failed to adjust to changing demographics and market conditions. The Democratic Party brand was allowed to fragment and fade, even as its only competitor, the Republican Party, grabbed a growing market share.
In less than a decade the party of the common man, which since the Great Depression enjoyed mass-market appeal, dwindled to a niche player. Republicans, once the stogy Oldsmobile of national politics, built mass appeal. Today Republicans are the political equivalent of Microsoft/Intel to Democrats Apple Computer party. It was the triumph of marketing, style over substance, form over function.
Every day I get email from fellow progressives desperately floating names of Democrats who might be able to win office in the next general election. It;s an exercise in desperation and it entirely misses the point. The Democrat Pary has become so many things; it has become nothing in particular. And just putting up another pretty face or good-talker is not going to bring the Democratic Party back into the mainstream. No, this time it will take something revolutionary.
What Democrats need is nothing less than a product re-launch. In the last general election Dems hung their hopes on “ABB,” Anybody But Bush -- and we know how well that worked. This time those same geniuses at the DNC are hoping that by the time 08 rolls around voters will be so sick of Bush and his party they will vote Democrat by default.
It won’t work. I don’t care if they resurrect JFK, it still won’t work. Consumers no longer know what they are voting for when they vote for a Democrat. The party’s old knee-jerk labor and minority voters are largely gone. Big labor has been decimated by it’s own corruption, globalization and cheap illegal workers. Welfare reform meant Democrats could no longer buy minority votes with government handouts and programs.
So Democrat politicians have spent the last few years desperately trying to find new political footing, issues they can peddle for votes. It became every man and woman for themself, and the Balkanization of the Democratic Party. As a result the Democratic Party is now all over the political map. If you like the war in Iraq you have your Hillary or Liberman. If you hate the war in Iraq you can vote for Harkin, Biden and (belatedly) Kerry. Do you like your politics conservative? Then you can vote for members of Democratic Leadership Council. If you're married to gay politics you have Barney Frank. And, if you are to the right of the Dick Cheney you can get your fix from Zell Miller.
It's reached a point now that voters no longer have a clue what they would get if they elected a Democrat President.
Which is why I believe the time is ripe for Democrats to revitalize their brand with a revolutonary campaign in 2008. Instead of running an individual for President, they should assemble and run a ticket. Instead of asking voters to trust a single candidate, they should assemble a complete ticket, President, Vice President, a complete cabinet as well as key appointee posts like SEC and FCC commissioners, etc.
This ticket would not run on personal qualities of the individuals involved, but on a hardcopy platform. And not the kind of phony platforms both parties put forth now. (If traditional party platforms were subject to Federal Trade Commission rules both parties would have been locked up for false advertising decades ago.) No, The Ticket’s platform would be detailed and real. It would outline exactly what voters could expect if The Ticket won office. It would spell out exactly what they would do on environmental, social, fiscal and international affairs. So this time voters would not be voting for the people, but the platform, a platform every voter could hold, read, keep and hold The Ticket accountable for if elected.
I understand that we have a primary process to select candidates for President. And that process has, traditionally, focused on choosing individuals. But there is no law that says that a group of Dems could not create an entire administration-in-waiting instead, a ticket headed by a presidential candidate of their choosing. Then a vote for that person would be a vote for The Ticket - and, more importantly, its detailed platform.
Such a scheme would not preclude individual Dems from running in the primaries too. In fact, I hope they do. Hillary, Kerry, Biden. Let ‘em run as individual candidates. The Ticket's candidates will be selling their platform while individual candidates try to sell their personal qualities, real or imagined. Democrat voters could then choose between voting for the folks who come bearing a blueprint for change or for another pig in a poke individual candidate.
Running a ticket would not only solve the Democrats branding problem, but would have fringe benefits for an electoral process that has devolved into a something less than a scholarly debate on critical issues. Confronted by The Ticket’s detailed policies, opponents would be forced to debate those issues instead of personalities. Swift Boaters and their ilk would find little appetite for personal attacks as voters ponder The Ticket’s platform and look to the other side for thoughtful responses. The politics of personal destruction, used so effectively by the GOP, would find very little traction against the clearly defined policies of a blue ribbon ticket.
Imagine what a terrific general election that would be! A campaign in which an entire would-be administration canvassed the country selling their platform to voters!
Would such a ticket please every Democrat/liberal/progressive? Hardly. There will always be purists on the right and left who demand everything they want. I call these folks the Masada Democrats. They would rather jump off a cliff than give an inch on pet issues. But The Ticket could reassure enough former Democrats (like the Reagan Dems and those suckered to the GOP by so-called “value” issues,) to put the party back in the running. With the Supreme Court up for grabs, the environment in decline, and economy a hollow hulk just waiting to be blown over by the first major shock, a carefully assembled ticket that not only promised change, but described it would be – well, just the ticket. I can almost hear the refrain now, "I'm voting The Ticket this time."
Before you dismiss this idea out of hand, take a moment to try and imagine it. Imagine the impact it could have! Come on; let’s visualize it for a moment. I am going to put together a pretend Ticket. But don’t yell at me if I pick people you don’t like. This is just for pretend. Okay? I only want to put some flesh on this idea so it’s easier to imagine. Remember, the whole idea of The Ticket is that it’s not about the people as much as it is about a clearly stated platform that they would run on. And this is no time for us to be meek. The state of our union is critical, so it’s time to think big, and time for America's intellectual, political and business heavyweights to put aside their personal egos and ambitions and step up to the plate -- time to do their patriotic duty.
So here we go:
The Save-America-as-We-Knew-It Ticket
* President: George Mitchell
* Vice President: John Edwards
* Secretary of State: Richard Holbrook
* Attorney General: Elliot Spitzer
* Sec. of Defense: John McCain
* EPA: Al Gore
* Commerce: Warren Buffet
* Interior: Gov. Bill Richardson
* Treasury: Robert Rubin
* HHS: Donna Shalala
* Ambassador to the UN: Bill Clinton
* FCC Commissioner: Bill Moyers
* Homeland Security: Lee Hamilton
Okay, you get the idea. The Ticket would run as a unified candidate. A vote for Mitchell for President, for example, would be a vote for The Ticket – the whole ticket. A ticket with a plan – no, not just a plan … a contract. One might call it, a “contract with America.”
It’s an old Will Rogers joke; “I don’t belong to an organized political party. I’m a Democrat.”
I never thought it was terribly funny and find it even less so now – not because it’s an untrue slur on my party, but because it’s true. Democrats have lost their groove. If the Democratic Party were a company analysts would say it lost brand recognition. This happened in part because it failed to adjust to changing demographics and market conditions. The Democratic Party brand was allowed to fragment and fade, even as its only competitor, the Republican Party, grabbed a growing market share.
In less than a decade the party of the common man, which since the Great Depression enjoyed mass-market appeal, dwindled to a niche player. Republicans, once the stogy Oldsmobile of national politics, built mass appeal. Today Republicans are the political equivalent of Microsoft/Intel to Democrats Apple Computer party. It was the triumph of marketing, style over substance, form over function.
Every day I get email from fellow progressives desperately floating names of Democrats who might be able to win office in the next general election. It;s an exercise in desperation and it entirely misses the point. The Democrat Pary has become so many things; it has become nothing in particular. And just putting up another pretty face or good-talker is not going to bring the Democratic Party back into the mainstream. No, this time it will take something revolutionary.
What Democrats need is nothing less than a product re-launch. In the last general election Dems hung their hopes on “ABB,” Anybody But Bush -- and we know how well that worked. This time those same geniuses at the DNC are hoping that by the time 08 rolls around voters will be so sick of Bush and his party they will vote Democrat by default.
It won’t work. I don’t care if they resurrect JFK, it still won’t work. Consumers no longer know what they are voting for when they vote for a Democrat. The party’s old knee-jerk labor and minority voters are largely gone. Big labor has been decimated by it’s own corruption, globalization and cheap illegal workers. Welfare reform meant Democrats could no longer buy minority votes with government handouts and programs.
So Democrat politicians have spent the last few years desperately trying to find new political footing, issues they can peddle for votes. It became every man and woman for themself, and the Balkanization of the Democratic Party. As a result the Democratic Party is now all over the political map. If you like the war in Iraq you have your Hillary or Liberman. If you hate the war in Iraq you can vote for Harkin, Biden and (belatedly) Kerry. Do you like your politics conservative? Then you can vote for members of Democratic Leadership Council. If you're married to gay politics you have Barney Frank. And, if you are to the right of the Dick Cheney you can get your fix from Zell Miller.
It's reached a point now that voters no longer have a clue what they would get if they elected a Democrat President.
Which is why I believe the time is ripe for Democrats to revitalize their brand with a revolutonary campaign in 2008. Instead of running an individual for President, they should assemble and run a ticket. Instead of asking voters to trust a single candidate, they should assemble a complete ticket, President, Vice President, a complete cabinet as well as key appointee posts like SEC and FCC commissioners, etc.
This ticket would not run on personal qualities of the individuals involved, but on a hardcopy platform. And not the kind of phony platforms both parties put forth now. (If traditional party platforms were subject to Federal Trade Commission rules both parties would have been locked up for false advertising decades ago.) No, The Ticket’s platform would be detailed and real. It would outline exactly what voters could expect if The Ticket won office. It would spell out exactly what they would do on environmental, social, fiscal and international affairs. So this time voters would not be voting for the people, but the platform, a platform every voter could hold, read, keep and hold The Ticket accountable for if elected.
I understand that we have a primary process to select candidates for President. And that process has, traditionally, focused on choosing individuals. But there is no law that says that a group of Dems could not create an entire administration-in-waiting instead, a ticket headed by a presidential candidate of their choosing. Then a vote for that person would be a vote for The Ticket - and, more importantly, its detailed platform.
Such a scheme would not preclude individual Dems from running in the primaries too. In fact, I hope they do. Hillary, Kerry, Biden. Let ‘em run as individual candidates. The Ticket's candidates will be selling their platform while individual candidates try to sell their personal qualities, real or imagined. Democrat voters could then choose between voting for the folks who come bearing a blueprint for change or for another pig in a poke individual candidate.
Running a ticket would not only solve the Democrats branding problem, but would have fringe benefits for an electoral process that has devolved into a something less than a scholarly debate on critical issues. Confronted by The Ticket’s detailed policies, opponents would be forced to debate those issues instead of personalities. Swift Boaters and their ilk would find little appetite for personal attacks as voters ponder The Ticket’s platform and look to the other side for thoughtful responses. The politics of personal destruction, used so effectively by the GOP, would find very little traction against the clearly defined policies of a blue ribbon ticket.
Imagine what a terrific general election that would be! A campaign in which an entire would-be administration canvassed the country selling their platform to voters!
Would such a ticket please every Democrat/liberal/progressive? Hardly. There will always be purists on the right and left who demand everything they want. I call these folks the Masada Democrats. They would rather jump off a cliff than give an inch on pet issues. But The Ticket could reassure enough former Democrats (like the Reagan Dems and those suckered to the GOP by so-called “value” issues,) to put the party back in the running. With the Supreme Court up for grabs, the environment in decline, and economy a hollow hulk just waiting to be blown over by the first major shock, a carefully assembled ticket that not only promised change, but described it would be – well, just the ticket. I can almost hear the refrain now, "I'm voting The Ticket this time."
Before you dismiss this idea out of hand, take a moment to try and imagine it. Imagine the impact it could have! Come on; let’s visualize it for a moment. I am going to put together a pretend Ticket. But don’t yell at me if I pick people you don’t like. This is just for pretend. Okay? I only want to put some flesh on this idea so it’s easier to imagine. Remember, the whole idea of The Ticket is that it’s not about the people as much as it is about a clearly stated platform that they would run on. And this is no time for us to be meek. The state of our union is critical, so it’s time to think big, and time for America's intellectual, political and business heavyweights to put aside their personal egos and ambitions and step up to the plate -- time to do their patriotic duty.
So here we go:
The Save-America-as-We-Knew-It Ticket
* President: George Mitchell
* Vice President: John Edwards
* Secretary of State: Richard Holbrook
* Attorney General: Elliot Spitzer
* Sec. of Defense: John McCain
* EPA: Al Gore
* Commerce: Warren Buffet
* Interior: Gov. Bill Richardson
* Treasury: Robert Rubin
* HHS: Donna Shalala
* Ambassador to the UN: Bill Clinton
* FCC Commissioner: Bill Moyers
* Homeland Security: Lee Hamilton
Okay, you get the idea. The Ticket would run as a unified candidate. A vote for Mitchell for President, for example, would be a vote for The Ticket – the whole ticket. A ticket with a plan – no, not just a plan … a contract. One might call it, a “contract with America.”
Friday, June 03, 2005
June 3, 2005
Worthy of Reflection?
President Bush looked a bit flummoxed when asked what he thought of Mark Felt (AKA, Deep Throat.) “I want to read about it, learn more,” Bush responded. It was not as much what he said that spoke volumes, as it was his body and face language. “Deer in the headlights,” comes the closest to capturing the look.
Over at the Pentagon another top administration official, Don Rumsfeld, didn't have to "learn more." As a Nixon appointee, Rumsfeld had a front-row seat for Watergate. In fact, that’s when Rumsfeld learned the dangers of breaking laws on a leaky ship. That explains why as Defense Secretary now he lords over a virtually hermetically sealed agency.
Asked what he thought of Mark Felt, Rumsfeld brushed the question aside, “I’m not in a judgmental mood today,” he said.
Hmmm, a Bush official in a non-judgmental mood? I don’t exactly believe that; but fine, don’t judge. Then how about reflecting a bit?
Reflect on what? Well, for starters, abuse of power. And abuse of office. How about the dangers of blinding hubris and arrogance? What about reflecting on lists of citizen-enemies, gnawing paranoia, witch-hunts, plumbers, domestic surveillance and, of course, war.
The similarities between the administrations of Richard Nixon and George W. Bush are striking, and worthy of reflection.
Both administrations suffered from:
* An unpopular war begun and continued on false premises.
* An obsession with controlling information and plugging leaks.
* Worldwide condemnation of the conduct of its armed forces, including documented allegations of atrocities.
* Distrust of a free press, which it saw as a hostile and often unpatriotic force.
* A habit of cloaking itself in godly purity and patriotism, while repeatedly lying to it’s own citizens about the great matters of the time – matters of life and death, war and peace, prosperity and poverty.
* A pattern of using the power of office to reward supporters and savage its detractors.
That was the Richard Nixon administration. And it’s all here again under George W. Bush. The only difference is there appears to be no Mark Felts left in government, no one working deep in the bowels of this administration who knows the truth and cares enough about America to risk all, as Felt did. Someone with the goods – the real goods – on Iraq, the real goods on Cheney’s energy task force; the real goods on Gitmo and torture and who authorized it; the real goods on secret US-funded detention facilities scattered around the world where the Geneva Convention is violated in the name of democracy every day, every hour; the real goods on growing domestic surveillance that too often now crosses the line; the real goods on illegal taxpayer-funded domestic propaganda operations to manipulate and discredit the media -- the real goods on all that, and who knows how much more.
Where is our Deep Throat? Will he/she surface in time, this time? Will the same motivations finally convince someone to say, "Enough!" Felt stepped up to the plate when it became clear to him that the Nixon gang had pretty much neutralized legal systems of checks and balances. They had the FBI in their pocket. They had the CIA working to make sure the FBI stayed in that pocket. They fired the special prosecutor, Archibald Cox, the second they learned he was going to conduct a real investigation. So, Felt stepped out of the shadows and gave Woodward ad Bernstein the real goods, and he helped save America.
But this administration has managed to keep its dirty little secrets secret. You have to know there are dozens of highly place career government employees who know the truth, the whole truth. Apparently none of them are Mark Felts. Instead, when faced with the choice of risking their generous government pension or leaving America’s soul at risk, they are sticking to their pensions.
I am not in the reporting business any more, but when I was there were still a few Mark Felts in government. Thanks to them, I and other investigative journalists were able to unravel which government officials and elected politicians facilitated and then profited from the savings-and-loan scandal. We were able to lift the lid off what Ronald Reagan was really up to in what came to be known as the Iran/Contra scandal. Even though he ended up getting away scott free, at least history will know the truth.
There is nothing complicated or mysterious about becoming a Deep Throat. It’s really quite simple. Sometimes the information would come to me in large manila envelopes with no return address, stuffed with copies of classified State Department and Justice Department cables. Sometimes it was a phone call: “You might be interested in a civil suit just filed in Denver. There are names in it you will recognize.” Sometimes it was a just name and phone number scribbled on a napkin during an otherwise unremarkable lunch with a mid-level bureaucrat. That’s all it takes -- a conscience, a respect for the rule of law, a bit of moral outrage and a dash of courage.
Deep Throats don’t give reporters their stories. Putting it all together is the reporter’s job. But what Deep Throats provide is invaluable – it's often just the end of the right thread. Felt provided just that, the end of a thread two reporters latched onto and began following. When they lost that thread he put it back in their hands.
There’s a lot of angst in newsrooms today about using sources like Felt – anonymous sources – but they are critical to the process of keeping a free and informed. An uniformed populace soon becomes a misinformed populace and inevitably a misled populace. Lies that go unmasked are a cancer, not just on the Presidency, but also on democracy itself.
Where are you, Deep Throat? To quote Simon & Garfunkle -- "Where have you gone? A lonely nation turns it eyes to you.
President Bush looked a bit flummoxed when asked what he thought of Mark Felt (AKA, Deep Throat.) “I want to read about it, learn more,” Bush responded. It was not as much what he said that spoke volumes, as it was his body and face language. “Deer in the headlights,” comes the closest to capturing the look.
Over at the Pentagon another top administration official, Don Rumsfeld, didn't have to "learn more." As a Nixon appointee, Rumsfeld had a front-row seat for Watergate. In fact, that’s when Rumsfeld learned the dangers of breaking laws on a leaky ship. That explains why as Defense Secretary now he lords over a virtually hermetically sealed agency.
Asked what he thought of Mark Felt, Rumsfeld brushed the question aside, “I’m not in a judgmental mood today,” he said.
Hmmm, a Bush official in a non-judgmental mood? I don’t exactly believe that; but fine, don’t judge. Then how about reflecting a bit?
Reflect on what? Well, for starters, abuse of power. And abuse of office. How about the dangers of blinding hubris and arrogance? What about reflecting on lists of citizen-enemies, gnawing paranoia, witch-hunts, plumbers, domestic surveillance and, of course, war.
The similarities between the administrations of Richard Nixon and George W. Bush are striking, and worthy of reflection.
Both administrations suffered from:
* An unpopular war begun and continued on false premises.
* An obsession with controlling information and plugging leaks.
* Worldwide condemnation of the conduct of its armed forces, including documented allegations of atrocities.
* Distrust of a free press, which it saw as a hostile and often unpatriotic force.
* A habit of cloaking itself in godly purity and patriotism, while repeatedly lying to it’s own citizens about the great matters of the time – matters of life and death, war and peace, prosperity and poverty.
* A pattern of using the power of office to reward supporters and savage its detractors.
That was the Richard Nixon administration. And it’s all here again under George W. Bush. The only difference is there appears to be no Mark Felts left in government, no one working deep in the bowels of this administration who knows the truth and cares enough about America to risk all, as Felt did. Someone with the goods – the real goods – on Iraq, the real goods on Cheney’s energy task force; the real goods on Gitmo and torture and who authorized it; the real goods on secret US-funded detention facilities scattered around the world where the Geneva Convention is violated in the name of democracy every day, every hour; the real goods on growing domestic surveillance that too often now crosses the line; the real goods on illegal taxpayer-funded domestic propaganda operations to manipulate and discredit the media -- the real goods on all that, and who knows how much more.
Where is our Deep Throat? Will he/she surface in time, this time? Will the same motivations finally convince someone to say, "Enough!" Felt stepped up to the plate when it became clear to him that the Nixon gang had pretty much neutralized legal systems of checks and balances. They had the FBI in their pocket. They had the CIA working to make sure the FBI stayed in that pocket. They fired the special prosecutor, Archibald Cox, the second they learned he was going to conduct a real investigation. So, Felt stepped out of the shadows and gave Woodward ad Bernstein the real goods, and he helped save America.
But this administration has managed to keep its dirty little secrets secret. You have to know there are dozens of highly place career government employees who know the truth, the whole truth. Apparently none of them are Mark Felts. Instead, when faced with the choice of risking their generous government pension or leaving America’s soul at risk, they are sticking to their pensions.
I am not in the reporting business any more, but when I was there were still a few Mark Felts in government. Thanks to them, I and other investigative journalists were able to unravel which government officials and elected politicians facilitated and then profited from the savings-and-loan scandal. We were able to lift the lid off what Ronald Reagan was really up to in what came to be known as the Iran/Contra scandal. Even though he ended up getting away scott free, at least history will know the truth.
There is nothing complicated or mysterious about becoming a Deep Throat. It’s really quite simple. Sometimes the information would come to me in large manila envelopes with no return address, stuffed with copies of classified State Department and Justice Department cables. Sometimes it was a phone call: “You might be interested in a civil suit just filed in Denver. There are names in it you will recognize.” Sometimes it was a just name and phone number scribbled on a napkin during an otherwise unremarkable lunch with a mid-level bureaucrat. That’s all it takes -- a conscience, a respect for the rule of law, a bit of moral outrage and a dash of courage.
Deep Throats don’t give reporters their stories. Putting it all together is the reporter’s job. But what Deep Throats provide is invaluable – it's often just the end of the right thread. Felt provided just that, the end of a thread two reporters latched onto and began following. When they lost that thread he put it back in their hands.
There’s a lot of angst in newsrooms today about using sources like Felt – anonymous sources – but they are critical to the process of keeping a free and informed. An uniformed populace soon becomes a misinformed populace and inevitably a misled populace. Lies that go unmasked are a cancer, not just on the Presidency, but also on democracy itself.
Where are you, Deep Throat? To quote Simon & Garfunkle -- "Where have you gone? A lonely nation turns it eyes to you.
Thursday, June 02, 2005
June 1, 2005
Europeans to Muslim Immigration:
"Non, Nee, Who Needs It?"
I got in trouble yesterday with my knee-jerk liberal readers by bashing Hillary –(one reader called me a male chauvinist pig!) So, while nursing those wounds I might as well keep making trouble today and take my lumps all at once. Today I will be called a racist and anti-Muslim. This is shaping up as my “political incorrectness week.” I say what others dare not… I’m not brave, just retired and have nothing to lose..
So, here I go….
The United States of Europe, the E.U., is proving a hard sell to average Europeans. The British have never much cared for the idea. But the French, at least French officials have pushed hard for it, arguing that only a united Europe could compete in with the industrial and military power of the US.
But those dreams went up in smoke this week as French voters resoundingly turned down the proposed E.U. constitution. The Dutch will be the next to say “nee.”
What’s happened? Why have average Europeans turned sour on the idea?
In a word – immigration. Well, not any kind of immigration, specifically Muslim immigration. That too is a change. Europeans had been like folks in California who, though they clucked their tongues about growing illegal immigration, are delighted to hire cheap illegal workers from south of the boarder to clean their houses and cut their lawns. For Europeans that source of cheap, and often skilled, labor has flowed largely from Muslim countries.
The French in particular have absorbed huge numbers of Moroccan and Algerians, a legacy of their imperial past. So too have the British and the Dutch and to a lesser degree, Germany. For decades all went well. Then 9/11 happened. When those Arab-piloted planes destroyed 3000 lives and a hunk of lower Manhattan, they also destroyed something few noticed at the time -- the E.U.
It did not happen overnight; in fact it kind of kind of snuck up Europeans. The Germans were first shocked to discover that much of the early planning for 9/11 took place in Hamburg. Then Spain learned that some of the last minute plans were hatched in right in downtown Madrid.
The French started looking around too only to discover that their Arab immigrant community was crawling with bin Laden supporters. The 9/11 attacks energized radical Muslims in France and the became openly militant in not only their anti-western beliefs but recruitment as well. The French government tried to staunch this militancy by banning religious garb at schools, not because Christians and Jews were causing trouble, but because Muslims were wearing using traditional Islamic gear the same way American gangs use gang colors – as way of identifying sympathic followers and thumbing thier nose at the "enemy" by saying in effect, “we’re here, we hate everything you stand for, whatya going to do about it?”
Europeans citizens themselves began to notice, as if for the first time, just how many Arabs were now living among them. They also took note that there seemed only two kinds of immigrant Muslims: Those that openly voiced support for radical Islam’s brand of anti-West, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic views, and those who simply said nothing about it, one way or the other. Was this silence complicit agreement with Islamic terrorism? Or was it the silence of fear -- fear of their own enemy within? Either way it was not a comforting silence.
Then came the vicious train bombings in Madrid, a wake up call to all Europeans that they too were on radical Islam’s hit list.
Slowly the politically correct mantra, “Islam is a peaceful religion,” was eroded by Muslims themselves.
Newsweek's story that the Koran might have been mistreated by American soldiers, and what happens? Muslims in Pakistan riot and kill 15 other Muslims. That sent this message to westerners: “When infidels piss off Allah someone is gonna die, and if we can’t get our hands on a western we’ll kill one another.”
The Dutch got their first taste of radical Islam last August when a Dutch-Moroccan assassinated Dutch filmmaker, Theo Van Gogh. Van Gogh’s sin was making the film, "Submission," which he made with a Dutch politician who had renounced the Islamic faith of her birth.
“Dutch terrorist expert Edwin Bkker — who works for the Netherlands Institute for International Relations, the Clingendael Institute — also claims the Netherlands is relatively low down on the list of countries that faced the "wrath of Islam". Other factors, however, play a role, such as the willingness of the local Muslim population to support terrorist attacks. This is important in light of the fact the Dutch secret service AIVD said last year that at least 100 Islamic extremists are active in the country. Recent political concern in The Hague has also been expressed about the recruiting of Dutch Islamic youth for Jihad, meaning holy war....Furthermore, Colyn said terrorists could view the Netherlands as a "judicial paradise" due to the acquittals at the end of 2002 and mid-2003 of a group of terrorists ..." (Full Story)
Here’s what European voters were saying this week when millions voted “no” on the E.U. constitution: Unreconstructed, unreformed Islam is NOT a peaceful religion, at least not the way it is currently being taught to its masses. Instead it is a xenophobic, homophobic, misogynistic, uncompromising artifact of the mankind’s brutal past. Its followers allow no distinction between secular and Islamic law. While mouthing respect for diversity Islam condemns and vilifies all things non-Islamic. While mouthing “respect for women,” it denies almost all the liberties afforded to Muslim men. And, infidels are fair game.
It’s become clear to Europeans that accommodating large numbers of poor and poorly educated Muslims is just asking for trouble. Suddenly that cheap labor has become potentially very expensive. Muslims immigrants are proving too unruly, too unreasonable and too destructive for modern, secular societies to accommodate, at least in large numbers.
That’s the emotion Europeans acted upon this week when they voted no on an E.U. constitution, a constitution that among other things liberalized immigration policies across E.U. member countries. Voters understood that among those E.U. members would eventually be Turkey – the gateway of the Muslim world into Europe. When that happened it would mean lots more Muslims coming to Western Europe, an image that scared voters already worried about the Muslims living among them.
Is this just further evidence of white European racism? Sure, some of that is always part of any anti-immigration movement. But it’s not why so many voted no. It’s may be the politically correct thing to do, to chalk the E.U.’s demise on racists, but it again lets the real culprits – radical Muslims -- off the hook – turning the victimizers into victims. This isn't about religion. It's about pathological Islamic-driven aberrant, anti-social behavior. It’s crazy-person behavior and we all have to stop making excuses for it.
And its long past time Muslims start carrying more of the weight on this issue than have been forced to do to date. Muslims have to do some serious housecleaning of their own, and soon. Because, fellow infidels, if you want to meet real racism, real prejudice -- industrial-strength, undiluted and unembarrassed prejucice -- say hello to radical Islam.
The simple truth is that it's Muslim behavior itself is that's the driving force behind growing anti-Muslim paranoia. And, it’s not just their misbehavior when in the West, but evidence that, even when among their own, they can't behave like responsible, critical thinking adults.
KABUL, Afghanistan, June 1 - A suicide bomber set off a powerful explosion today at a funeral ceremony in a mosque in the southern city of Kandahar, killing at least 19 people, among them the Kabul police chief…. The governor of Kandahar, Gul Agha Shirzai, told reporters that the suicide bomber's body had been found and that he was a member of Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda network. "We have found documents on his body that show he was an Arab," Mr. Shirzai said, The Associated Press reported. (Full Story)
The real story here is not the E.U. vote. That’s just a commonsense reaction to what’s going on. But it’s a warning Muslims worldwide should consider far more a threat to them than all George W. Bush’s planes and troops combined. Because there will be -- can not be -- a military solution to Islamic terrorism. Only Muslims themselves can put a stop to such aberrant religious misbehavior. The trouble is, so far anyway, they seem disinclined to do so.
There are really only two logical outcomes to this saga, and neither involves military agression from the West but passive agressive actions that will be far more damaging to the Muslim world in the long run. If this behavior continues unabatted much longer Muslim nations who refuse to modernize Islamic teachings will find themselves facing international isolation. Europeans have begun this process and if it continues Muslims will eventually find themselves virtual prisoners within their self-imposed, 12th century Islamic theme park nations. Visas to study and work in the West will dry up. Trade will be stifled as Western nations treat every shipment form an Arab nation as a potential national security threat. The Arab world will become a backwater of history.
The best outcome for Muslims -- not to mention the rest of us -- would be for Muslim nations take a clue from Martin Luther and produce their own reformist principles bringing Islam into step with modern times. Rules that require that all Mosques and all Mullahs must toe the line and knock off teaching hate, or else. That would be start. It will take a while for those whose minds have already been poisoned by radical Islamic hate to die off. But they need to begin, and soon.
In 1949 Justice Robert Jackson noted that, while the US Constitution grants citizens a wealth of personal and political rights, it was not intended as a a "suicide pact." For it to work everyone had to follow some common sense rules. The same goes for such valued Western concepts as political and religious freedom. These too are not suicide pacts. Compliance with some basic commonsense rules is required in order to keep the whole thing from devolving into a giant ideological/religious food fight.
At the top of that list is respect for other’s beliefs. It’s a key and indispensable concept to the survival and prosperity of any modern, pluralistic society – that is except when those beliefs include justifying murder and mayhem within that society. That crosses the line. That kind of religious bullyism breaks the contract and those that follow such a course should expect to be abscessed off from the rest of the body politic.
I think that is not an unreasonable line to draw. But the world is still waiting to see Muslims in large numbers show the slightest willingness to draw that line, and draw it in an unambiguous, non-word-mincing and convincing way. So far they are still at the "wink, wink, nod, nod stage," when it comes to condemning radical Islamic terrorism.
Until they do draw that line Muslims should not act surprised if they are met with growing suspicion, increased profiling and just generally a cold shoulder from the rest of us.
Now, how much trouble am I in for that?
Quote of the Day
Fair & Balanced?
“Even we at Fox News manage to get some lefties on the air occasionally, and often let them finish their sentences before we club them to death and feed the scraps to Karl Rove and Bill O'Reilly. And those who hate us can take solace in the fact that they aren't subsidizing Bill's bombast; we payers of the BBC license fee don't enjoy that peace of mind. Fox News is, after all, a private channel and our presenters are quite open about where they stand on particular stories. That's our appeal. People watch us because they know what they are getting. The Beeb's (BBC’s) institutionalized leftism would be easier to tolerate if the corporation was a little more honest about it.”
(Fox News London Bureau Chief, Scott Norvell, in the May 20 Wall St. Journal, Europe)
"Non, Nee, Who Needs It?"
I got in trouble yesterday with my knee-jerk liberal readers by bashing Hillary –(one reader called me a male chauvinist pig!) So, while nursing those wounds I might as well keep making trouble today and take my lumps all at once. Today I will be called a racist and anti-Muslim. This is shaping up as my “political incorrectness week.” I say what others dare not… I’m not brave, just retired and have nothing to lose..
So, here I go….
The United States of Europe, the E.U., is proving a hard sell to average Europeans. The British have never much cared for the idea. But the French, at least French officials have pushed hard for it, arguing that only a united Europe could compete in with the industrial and military power of the US.
But those dreams went up in smoke this week as French voters resoundingly turned down the proposed E.U. constitution. The Dutch will be the next to say “nee.”
What’s happened? Why have average Europeans turned sour on the idea?
In a word – immigration. Well, not any kind of immigration, specifically Muslim immigration. That too is a change. Europeans had been like folks in California who, though they clucked their tongues about growing illegal immigration, are delighted to hire cheap illegal workers from south of the boarder to clean their houses and cut their lawns. For Europeans that source of cheap, and often skilled, labor has flowed largely from Muslim countries.
The French in particular have absorbed huge numbers of Moroccan and Algerians, a legacy of their imperial past. So too have the British and the Dutch and to a lesser degree, Germany. For decades all went well. Then 9/11 happened. When those Arab-piloted planes destroyed 3000 lives and a hunk of lower Manhattan, they also destroyed something few noticed at the time -- the E.U.
It did not happen overnight; in fact it kind of kind of snuck up Europeans. The Germans were first shocked to discover that much of the early planning for 9/11 took place in Hamburg. Then Spain learned that some of the last minute plans were hatched in right in downtown Madrid.
The French started looking around too only to discover that their Arab immigrant community was crawling with bin Laden supporters. The 9/11 attacks energized radical Muslims in France and the became openly militant in not only their anti-western beliefs but recruitment as well. The French government tried to staunch this militancy by banning religious garb at schools, not because Christians and Jews were causing trouble, but because Muslims were wearing using traditional Islamic gear the same way American gangs use gang colors – as way of identifying sympathic followers and thumbing thier nose at the "enemy" by saying in effect, “we’re here, we hate everything you stand for, whatya going to do about it?”
Europeans citizens themselves began to notice, as if for the first time, just how many Arabs were now living among them. They also took note that there seemed only two kinds of immigrant Muslims: Those that openly voiced support for radical Islam’s brand of anti-West, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic views, and those who simply said nothing about it, one way or the other. Was this silence complicit agreement with Islamic terrorism? Or was it the silence of fear -- fear of their own enemy within? Either way it was not a comforting silence.
Then came the vicious train bombings in Madrid, a wake up call to all Europeans that they too were on radical Islam’s hit list.
Slowly the politically correct mantra, “Islam is a peaceful religion,” was eroded by Muslims themselves.
Newsweek's story that the Koran might have been mistreated by American soldiers, and what happens? Muslims in Pakistan riot and kill 15 other Muslims. That sent this message to westerners: “When infidels piss off Allah someone is gonna die, and if we can’t get our hands on a western we’ll kill one another.”
The Dutch got their first taste of radical Islam last August when a Dutch-Moroccan assassinated Dutch filmmaker, Theo Van Gogh. Van Gogh’s sin was making the film, "Submission," which he made with a Dutch politician who had renounced the Islamic faith of her birth.
“Dutch terrorist expert Edwin Bkker — who works for the Netherlands Institute for International Relations, the Clingendael Institute — also claims the Netherlands is relatively low down on the list of countries that faced the "wrath of Islam". Other factors, however, play a role, such as the willingness of the local Muslim population to support terrorist attacks. This is important in light of the fact the Dutch secret service AIVD said last year that at least 100 Islamic extremists are active in the country. Recent political concern in The Hague has also been expressed about the recruiting of Dutch Islamic youth for Jihad, meaning holy war....Furthermore, Colyn said terrorists could view the Netherlands as a "judicial paradise" due to the acquittals at the end of 2002 and mid-2003 of a group of terrorists ..." (Full Story)
Here’s what European voters were saying this week when millions voted “no” on the E.U. constitution: Unreconstructed, unreformed Islam is NOT a peaceful religion, at least not the way it is currently being taught to its masses. Instead it is a xenophobic, homophobic, misogynistic, uncompromising artifact of the mankind’s brutal past. Its followers allow no distinction between secular and Islamic law. While mouthing respect for diversity Islam condemns and vilifies all things non-Islamic. While mouthing “respect for women,” it denies almost all the liberties afforded to Muslim men. And, infidels are fair game.
It’s become clear to Europeans that accommodating large numbers of poor and poorly educated Muslims is just asking for trouble. Suddenly that cheap labor has become potentially very expensive. Muslims immigrants are proving too unruly, too unreasonable and too destructive for modern, secular societies to accommodate, at least in large numbers.
That’s the emotion Europeans acted upon this week when they voted no on an E.U. constitution, a constitution that among other things liberalized immigration policies across E.U. member countries. Voters understood that among those E.U. members would eventually be Turkey – the gateway of the Muslim world into Europe. When that happened it would mean lots more Muslims coming to Western Europe, an image that scared voters already worried about the Muslims living among them.
Is this just further evidence of white European racism? Sure, some of that is always part of any anti-immigration movement. But it’s not why so many voted no. It’s may be the politically correct thing to do, to chalk the E.U.’s demise on racists, but it again lets the real culprits – radical Muslims -- off the hook – turning the victimizers into victims. This isn't about religion. It's about pathological Islamic-driven aberrant, anti-social behavior. It’s crazy-person behavior and we all have to stop making excuses for it.
And its long past time Muslims start carrying more of the weight on this issue than have been forced to do to date. Muslims have to do some serious housecleaning of their own, and soon. Because, fellow infidels, if you want to meet real racism, real prejudice -- industrial-strength, undiluted and unembarrassed prejucice -- say hello to radical Islam.
The simple truth is that it's Muslim behavior itself is that's the driving force behind growing anti-Muslim paranoia. And, it’s not just their misbehavior when in the West, but evidence that, even when among their own, they can't behave like responsible, critical thinking adults.
KABUL, Afghanistan, June 1 - A suicide bomber set off a powerful explosion today at a funeral ceremony in a mosque in the southern city of Kandahar, killing at least 19 people, among them the Kabul police chief…. The governor of Kandahar, Gul Agha Shirzai, told reporters that the suicide bomber's body had been found and that he was a member of Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda network. "We have found documents on his body that show he was an Arab," Mr. Shirzai said, The Associated Press reported. (Full Story)
The real story here is not the E.U. vote. That’s just a commonsense reaction to what’s going on. But it’s a warning Muslims worldwide should consider far more a threat to them than all George W. Bush’s planes and troops combined. Because there will be -- can not be -- a military solution to Islamic terrorism. Only Muslims themselves can put a stop to such aberrant religious misbehavior. The trouble is, so far anyway, they seem disinclined to do so.
There are really only two logical outcomes to this saga, and neither involves military agression from the West but passive agressive actions that will be far more damaging to the Muslim world in the long run. If this behavior continues unabatted much longer Muslim nations who refuse to modernize Islamic teachings will find themselves facing international isolation. Europeans have begun this process and if it continues Muslims will eventually find themselves virtual prisoners within their self-imposed, 12th century Islamic theme park nations. Visas to study and work in the West will dry up. Trade will be stifled as Western nations treat every shipment form an Arab nation as a potential national security threat. The Arab world will become a backwater of history.
The best outcome for Muslims -- not to mention the rest of us -- would be for Muslim nations take a clue from Martin Luther and produce their own reformist principles bringing Islam into step with modern times. Rules that require that all Mosques and all Mullahs must toe the line and knock off teaching hate, or else. That would be start. It will take a while for those whose minds have already been poisoned by radical Islamic hate to die off. But they need to begin, and soon.
In 1949 Justice Robert Jackson noted that, while the US Constitution grants citizens a wealth of personal and political rights, it was not intended as a a "suicide pact." For it to work everyone had to follow some common sense rules. The same goes for such valued Western concepts as political and religious freedom. These too are not suicide pacts. Compliance with some basic commonsense rules is required in order to keep the whole thing from devolving into a giant ideological/religious food fight.
At the top of that list is respect for other’s beliefs. It’s a key and indispensable concept to the survival and prosperity of any modern, pluralistic society – that is except when those beliefs include justifying murder and mayhem within that society. That crosses the line. That kind of religious bullyism breaks the contract and those that follow such a course should expect to be abscessed off from the rest of the body politic.
I think that is not an unreasonable line to draw. But the world is still waiting to see Muslims in large numbers show the slightest willingness to draw that line, and draw it in an unambiguous, non-word-mincing and convincing way. So far they are still at the "wink, wink, nod, nod stage," when it comes to condemning radical Islamic terrorism.
Until they do draw that line Muslims should not act surprised if they are met with growing suspicion, increased profiling and just generally a cold shoulder from the rest of us.
Now, how much trouble am I in for that?
Quote of the Day
Fair & Balanced?
“Even we at Fox News manage to get some lefties on the air occasionally, and often let them finish their sentences before we club them to death and feed the scraps to Karl Rove and Bill O'Reilly. And those who hate us can take solace in the fact that they aren't subsidizing Bill's bombast; we payers of the BBC license fee don't enjoy that peace of mind. Fox News is, after all, a private channel and our presenters are quite open about where they stand on particular stories. That's our appeal. People watch us because they know what they are getting. The Beeb's (BBC’s) institutionalized leftism would be easier to tolerate if the corporation was a little more honest about it.”
(Fox News London Bureau Chief, Scott Norvell, in the May 20 Wall St. Journal, Europe)
Wednesday, June 01, 2005
May 31, 2005
May 31, 2005
Version 2.0
I heard two jaw-droppingly silly things over the weekend. They were:
1) Laura Bush for President
2) Hillary Clinton for President
While neither suggestion is silly because both are women, they are nonetheless both silly, though for very different reasons.
The Laura Bush endorsement came from the venomous lips of Dick Cheney’s wife, Lynn.
“If we are talking about a Bush dynasty, then let’s have Laura run for President,” Lynn Cheney said on Larry King. Her husband nodded in agreement.
Right. A Stepford Wife becomes leader of the free world and Commander-in-Chief of the world’s only superpower. Not likely.
Even the most delusional, power-drunk Republicans wouldn’t do something that dumb. Laura ain’t exactly Margaret Thatcher. Hell, she isn’t even an Eva Peron or Imelda Marcos. She’s a librarian.
Lynn Cheney’s remark was simply part in an orchestrated effort by Bushites to elevate Laura to the level of Nancy Reagan. There’s a history here. Those not familiar with the Reagan/Bush clan feud may find this hard to understand. But these two political dynasties have hated each other from the get go. The Bush’s were considered and treated as second-class nobles by the Reagans. For example, in 8 years in office VP George H Bush and Second Lady, Barbara were never once invited to dinner at the White House with Ronny and Nancy. Not once.
Now with their days at the White House ticking down the Bushites are working feverously to remake Laura. They sent her to the Middle East to sooth growing hatred of America and to be seen making nice to Muslims. Imagine that. The world has not seen anything that silly and condesending since Ronald Reagan flew a chocolate cake and signed Christian Bible to the Ayatollah Khomenei.
Remember when Nancy Reagan took on drugs? (“Just say no to drugs.”) Well Laura is one-upping Nancy. Laura as America’s new “anti- street gang tsar.” (“Just say no to joining a street gang”) So now Laura is getting down in the Hood with the Homeboys and talking straight shit about street gangs. Oh, you betchya.
Enough about Laura. She is no Nancy Reagan, and for that alone she should feel fulfilled.
Hillary for President of The United States of America?
Jesus H. Christ -- what the hell are top Dems doing playing footsy with Hillary? Do Democrats have a secret death pact we don’t know about? If they want to lose a third general election in a row, go ahead, run Hillary for President of the United States of America.
The reasons not to do such a thing are obvious to anyone not drinking the Clintonite Kool-Aid. Let me list just the ones that roll off the top of my not-so-bright head:
* Hillary Moonies cite recent polls that show that likely Democrat voters would vote for Hillary if she ran. Yes, this is true -- but why? The answer is not reassuring. It is because the less voters see and hear of Hillary the more they like her. Which means the converse is true as well. Just get her out on the national campaign trail, on the news every night, in dozens of ads on TV, and in nationally televised debates and watch those poll numbers plummet. I will bet my first born on it. Hillary grates on people. Maybe that’s unfair. But it still true.
* Hillary has triangulated herself into irrelevance with her hawkish support for the war in Iraq. She did this in order to show she could be tough, just like a man. All she really proved was that she could be a conniving politician, just like men.
* All’s fair in Love, War and Politics. So expect all that Kenneth Star variety crap about the Clintons to make a big comeback. Yes, I know that Starr and his Dark Side minions failed to prove most of the allegations against the Clintons. But the Clinton’s own sloppy ethics provided the very fuel on which the Vast Right-wing Conspiracy ran. If Hillary runs for President the Swift Boat Veterans will be back in a new form, but in full form. They will pound her relentlessly. Unfair? You bet. Go tell it to John Kerry. Just don’t pick a candidate with that kind of target tattooed on her backside. If you want to revitalize the Right, just run Hillary for President.
* Finally there’s Bill. Imagine Bill as First Husband, rambling around the East Wing of the White House with nothing but time on his hands. How long would it be – days, weeks a month or two – before the stories started of White House maids getting made? That’s not just a possibility, or a even a probability. It’s a certainty. Then the nation and the world will be again treated to four years of, "Live From the White House -- The Jerry Springer Show! "
I could go on because there are lots more reasons not to encourage Hillary to run for President. Just say no to Hillary in '08!
Look, I loved Clinton’s domestic policies. Hell, I profited from them. They were the best years of my life, financially. They were the best years of the nation had seen in decades. The trouble was that Bill Clinton is not one person, but three.
1) There's Bill the Brilliant, who balanced the federal budget, built a giant surplus that could have been used to repair Social Security, reformed welfare and kept us out of stupid-ass wars.
2) Then there's Bill the Self-induligent, who could not resist exploiting the aphrodisiac of power on female targets of opportunity. The Bill that played with the truth, like a cat plays with a mouse. The Bill who faced the world on TV as the bad little boy making lame excuses after being caught red-handed misbehaving. “I was wrong but...." It's always "but" with the Clintons.
3) Finally -- and more the point of this piece -- there’s Bill/Hillary – the package deal. They are co-dependants and mutual enablers. Bill has been President, and Hillary is not a bit interested in vying against Laura Bush and Nancy Reagan for the top slot at the former First Lady Hall of Fame. She wants to be President, America’s first woman President. Even serial marital infidelity, exposed in fine detail to the entire world, could not break the bonds of this union. It's a Bonnie and Clyde qaulity relationship – Bill & Hillary vs. (Fill in the blank.) Right or wrong, they will go down together, fighting. And they always attract a fight.
As I said, I loved the policies, but by the time the Clinton’s eight years were up I was so glad to see them leave. I was exhausted, as were millions of other Americans. Clinton fatigue. Bill and Hillary bring too much baggage along with them. They just wear us out.
Memo to Democrats:
So, don’t do it. I understand why you are tempted. A lot of you top Dems are members of the Clinton White House diaspora. You got that first taste of power during your days in the Clinton administration. And it was something else --like sticking your tongue into a 220v socket, the rush of your life, and you miss it. Oh how you miss it. Now, like Gollum -- you want it back, your “Precious.” And you figure that the car that got you there the first time might be able to get you back again. That’s why you are furiously squirting starter fluid into the old Clinton jalopy.
Also you are still listening to the wrong people – like political consultant (and habitual loser,) Bob Schrum. I suspect that Karl Rove keeps a photo of Schrum in his bible and prays for his health every night. Why do you even let the guy in the building? He, and those of his ilk in the Party are the political equivalent of Typhoid Mary. Get rid of them and bring in grassroots people from outside DC. Unlike Schrum et al, they actually know what’s going on out here.
Instead of wasting time on Hillary the Democrat party, or what’s left of it, should be searching right now for inspirational candidates. By the time the ’08 general election rolls around Bush’s policies will have created such ruin, pain and embarrassment that voters will be starved for a real statesman. Someone who can do for post-Bush America what Roosevelt did for the Post-Hoover America.
I don’t know who that might be. But the party might want to dip back into it’s past, since there are so few Democrats in power today that inspire more than a groan. Former senators George Mitchell and Sam Nunn come to mind. Diane Feinstein. Even Gary Hart who has, since his lap-dance with Donna Rice, has become one of the world’s top experts on international and domestic terrorism.
There must be others who can rise to this critical occasion. After all, we have nothing less than a nation to save.
But, if the best the Democratic Party has to offer voters in ’08 turns out to be Hillary, then they deserve to lose – again.
Version 2.0
I heard two jaw-droppingly silly things over the weekend. They were:
1) Laura Bush for President
2) Hillary Clinton for President
While neither suggestion is silly because both are women, they are nonetheless both silly, though for very different reasons.
The Laura Bush endorsement came from the venomous lips of Dick Cheney’s wife, Lynn.
“If we are talking about a Bush dynasty, then let’s have Laura run for President,” Lynn Cheney said on Larry King. Her husband nodded in agreement.
Right. A Stepford Wife becomes leader of the free world and Commander-in-Chief of the world’s only superpower. Not likely.
Even the most delusional, power-drunk Republicans wouldn’t do something that dumb. Laura ain’t exactly Margaret Thatcher. Hell, she isn’t even an Eva Peron or Imelda Marcos. She’s a librarian.
Lynn Cheney’s remark was simply part in an orchestrated effort by Bushites to elevate Laura to the level of Nancy Reagan. There’s a history here. Those not familiar with the Reagan/Bush clan feud may find this hard to understand. But these two political dynasties have hated each other from the get go. The Bush’s were considered and treated as second-class nobles by the Reagans. For example, in 8 years in office VP George H Bush and Second Lady, Barbara were never once invited to dinner at the White House with Ronny and Nancy. Not once.
Now with their days at the White House ticking down the Bushites are working feverously to remake Laura. They sent her to the Middle East to sooth growing hatred of America and to be seen making nice to Muslims. Imagine that. The world has not seen anything that silly and condesending since Ronald Reagan flew a chocolate cake and signed Christian Bible to the Ayatollah Khomenei.
Remember when Nancy Reagan took on drugs? (“Just say no to drugs.”) Well Laura is one-upping Nancy. Laura as America’s new “anti- street gang tsar.” (“Just say no to joining a street gang”) So now Laura is getting down in the Hood with the Homeboys and talking straight shit about street gangs. Oh, you betchya.
Enough about Laura. She is no Nancy Reagan, and for that alone she should feel fulfilled.
Hillary for President of The United States of America?
Jesus H. Christ -- what the hell are top Dems doing playing footsy with Hillary? Do Democrats have a secret death pact we don’t know about? If they want to lose a third general election in a row, go ahead, run Hillary for President of the United States of America.
The reasons not to do such a thing are obvious to anyone not drinking the Clintonite Kool-Aid. Let me list just the ones that roll off the top of my not-so-bright head:
* Hillary Moonies cite recent polls that show that likely Democrat voters would vote for Hillary if she ran. Yes, this is true -- but why? The answer is not reassuring. It is because the less voters see and hear of Hillary the more they like her. Which means the converse is true as well. Just get her out on the national campaign trail, on the news every night, in dozens of ads on TV, and in nationally televised debates and watch those poll numbers plummet. I will bet my first born on it. Hillary grates on people. Maybe that’s unfair. But it still true.
* Hillary has triangulated herself into irrelevance with her hawkish support for the war in Iraq. She did this in order to show she could be tough, just like a man. All she really proved was that she could be a conniving politician, just like men.
* All’s fair in Love, War and Politics. So expect all that Kenneth Star variety crap about the Clintons to make a big comeback. Yes, I know that Starr and his Dark Side minions failed to prove most of the allegations against the Clintons. But the Clinton’s own sloppy ethics provided the very fuel on which the Vast Right-wing Conspiracy ran. If Hillary runs for President the Swift Boat Veterans will be back in a new form, but in full form. They will pound her relentlessly. Unfair? You bet. Go tell it to John Kerry. Just don’t pick a candidate with that kind of target tattooed on her backside. If you want to revitalize the Right, just run Hillary for President.
* Finally there’s Bill. Imagine Bill as First Husband, rambling around the East Wing of the White House with nothing but time on his hands. How long would it be – days, weeks a month or two – before the stories started of White House maids getting made? That’s not just a possibility, or a even a probability. It’s a certainty. Then the nation and the world will be again treated to four years of, "Live From the White House -- The Jerry Springer Show! "
I could go on because there are lots more reasons not to encourage Hillary to run for President. Just say no to Hillary in '08!
Look, I loved Clinton’s domestic policies. Hell, I profited from them. They were the best years of my life, financially. They were the best years of the nation had seen in decades. The trouble was that Bill Clinton is not one person, but three.
1) There's Bill the Brilliant, who balanced the federal budget, built a giant surplus that could have been used to repair Social Security, reformed welfare and kept us out of stupid-ass wars.
2) Then there's Bill the Self-induligent, who could not resist exploiting the aphrodisiac of power on female targets of opportunity. The Bill that played with the truth, like a cat plays with a mouse. The Bill who faced the world on TV as the bad little boy making lame excuses after being caught red-handed misbehaving. “I was wrong but...." It's always "but" with the Clintons.
3) Finally -- and more the point of this piece -- there’s Bill/Hillary – the package deal. They are co-dependants and mutual enablers. Bill has been President, and Hillary is not a bit interested in vying against Laura Bush and Nancy Reagan for the top slot at the former First Lady Hall of Fame. She wants to be President, America’s first woman President. Even serial marital infidelity, exposed in fine detail to the entire world, could not break the bonds of this union. It's a Bonnie and Clyde qaulity relationship – Bill & Hillary vs. (Fill in the blank.) Right or wrong, they will go down together, fighting. And they always attract a fight.
As I said, I loved the policies, but by the time the Clinton’s eight years were up I was so glad to see them leave. I was exhausted, as were millions of other Americans. Clinton fatigue. Bill and Hillary bring too much baggage along with them. They just wear us out.
Memo to Democrats:
So, don’t do it. I understand why you are tempted. A lot of you top Dems are members of the Clinton White House diaspora. You got that first taste of power during your days in the Clinton administration. And it was something else --like sticking your tongue into a 220v socket, the rush of your life, and you miss it. Oh how you miss it. Now, like Gollum -- you want it back, your “Precious.” And you figure that the car that got you there the first time might be able to get you back again. That’s why you are furiously squirting starter fluid into the old Clinton jalopy.
Also you are still listening to the wrong people – like political consultant (and habitual loser,) Bob Schrum. I suspect that Karl Rove keeps a photo of Schrum in his bible and prays for his health every night. Why do you even let the guy in the building? He, and those of his ilk in the Party are the political equivalent of Typhoid Mary. Get rid of them and bring in grassroots people from outside DC. Unlike Schrum et al, they actually know what’s going on out here.
Instead of wasting time on Hillary the Democrat party, or what’s left of it, should be searching right now for inspirational candidates. By the time the ’08 general election rolls around Bush’s policies will have created such ruin, pain and embarrassment that voters will be starved for a real statesman. Someone who can do for post-Bush America what Roosevelt did for the Post-Hoover America.
I don’t know who that might be. But the party might want to dip back into it’s past, since there are so few Democrats in power today that inspire more than a groan. Former senators George Mitchell and Sam Nunn come to mind. Diane Feinstein. Even Gary Hart who has, since his lap-dance with Donna Rice, has become one of the world’s top experts on international and domestic terrorism.
There must be others who can rise to this critical occasion. After all, we have nothing less than a nation to save.
But, if the best the Democratic Party has to offer voters in ’08 turns out to be Hillary, then they deserve to lose – again.
Tuesday, May 31, 2005
May, 26, 2005
May 27, 2005
“We cannot forever hide the truth about ourselves, from ourselves.”
Senator John McCain
Vietnam War protestors (myself included) used to say we "lived in the belly of the beast.” It was more than just lefty rhetoric. It was a visceral feeling. Especially during the early years of that mortal sin of a war, because so few objected.
Even as ten thousand miles away American napalm burned villages and people, and U.S.-made Agent Orange transformed lush jungles into barren moonscapes, life here went on as normal. The “Burgers Sold” sign at local MacDonald’s ticked away like a racecar’s odometer. The American middleclass was still flush from the go-go 50’s and 60’s. Suburbs were booming. Shopping centers were all the rage. Detroit rolled out 14 years worth of flashy new chrome-encrusted models without missing a beat, and we Americans gobbled them right up.
Only Americans can get away such a feat – to lay waste to one part of the world without paying a noticeable price at home. Military experts proudly call that “projecting power,” the ability to “fight them on their soil rather than our own.”
Now, I’m not arguing in favor of fighting them on our soil instead. My point is that, when we project our power in ways that violate the very principles America claims to stand for, we pay a price. Even though we are spared destroyed cities, dead civilians and constant explosions and gunfire, we pay a price. We paid that price during the Vietnam War, and we are paying it again now.
So, what’s this price we are paying? Money? Sure Iraq is costing us more this year than it would cost to fix Medicare, but that’s not the worst of it. Money can be printed. What we are losing – once again – is America – the original America. Not the America of the Neocon “do as we say, not as we do,” Orwellian democracy posers, but the America we know from our history books. The America described in our constitution and Bill of Rights. The America the world once considered the gold standard of honesty, integrity, due process, and personal freedom, The America that was Democracy’s Mecca.
Back in the 70’s I used to get letters from Europeans asking how the America they thought they knew could do the things it was doing in Vietnam. And why the American people did not rise up and throw the bums in charge out on their asses. They wanted me to explain how the country that established the Nuremberg rules, could so casually allow it’s own leaders and soldiers to break those very principles, and with absolute impunity. Why, they asked, were German officials held liable for the atrocities their policies unleashed on others and not American officials?
I had no good answer back then, and now that I am getting the same kind of letters from Europeans I have no good answer now. Here are just two recent letters:
Dear Editor,
I'm just one of those millions of Brits who are absolutely horrified and revolted at what the US has become. I can see no distinction whatsoever between the Bush administration and any other vicious, fascist organisation from any period in 20th century history. My heart goes out to all of you in your seemingly impossible struggle to tear your Democracy back from the bloodstained claws of the vile monsters who have calculatedly imprisoned you in your own society.
That twisted logic is worthy of Goebbels, Stalin or the Ayatollahs. The hatred and invective towards Liberals in the USA is chilling. Read your histories of the propaganda methods of the National Socialist Party in pre-war Germany to see some chilling parallels.
I'm old enough to remember watching news broadcasts of the inspirational campus demonstrations, which did so much to get you out of Vietnam. Those students had guts, courage and a single-minded conviction that puts contemporary Americans to shame. What the hell has happened to your young people? Do they believe in ANYTHING now apart from their mindless selves?
Peter Riches
London
And this letter for a citizen of our northern neighbor, Canada.
Steve,
All my life I've been impregnated with American culture. Now at 59 I am trying to understand what's happening in this great country of yours. I tried to speak to an American friend about it but I've not been yet been satisfied with the answers I got.
So what's happened to the American intellectuals? Why are they so silent on what's been happening? All my life I've met Americans and went out of my way, to speak with them, if they were around as tourists. My European friends as well as my Canadian feel by experience that most of the people we've met from the US are, for the most part, ignorant about the world in general. Why is that? Could you help us out a little?
Thank you so much,
Cheers from St Tite Québec
Marck
Please notice, as I did, that these are not angry letters. They are sad letters. They are not demanding “death to America,” but recovery. They want the America they had always admired, back. They miss the warm, reassuring glow of that light on the distant horizon oppressed peoples once fixated upon during their darkest hours. As long as it shown, hope survived. That light has dimmed, and for many, disappeared. They want it lit again.
Instead, yesterday Amnesty Internation waded in it's report listing America as one of the world's worst violators of human rights.
"When the U.S. government calls upon foreign leaders to bring to justice those who commit or authorize human rights violations in their own countries, why should those foreign leaders listen?" Dr. Schulz said. "And if the U.S. government does not abide by the same standards of justice, what shred of moral authority will we retain to pressure other governments to diminish abuses?
"It's far past time for President Bush to prove that he is not covering up the misdeeds of senior officials and political cronies who designed and authorized these nefarious interrogation policies," he said. "So Congress must appoint a truly impartial and independent commission to investigate the masterminds of the atrocious human rights violations at Abu Ghraib and other detention centers, and President Bush should use the power of his office to press Congress to do so." (Full Story)
Ah, but our foreign friends can expect little help from Americans. Here, in the belly of the beast, life once again is perking right along as normal. Iraq is far away, too far to hear the thud of bombs, the screams of the wounded or the wails of the grieving -- too far away for Americans to experience the air filled with the smell of blood drying on hot pavement. Too far away to see Iraqi mothers waiting to see if their children make it home from school alive, or wrapped in a blanket.
But never mind all that. Here, in America, life is good.
So, what will it be for lunch today? I had a steak sandwich and big-ass slice of pie yesterday. I better have a chef’s salad today. Eating like that way everyday can kill a person, you know.
Have a nice day.
“We cannot forever hide the truth about ourselves, from ourselves.”
Senator John McCain
Vietnam War protestors (myself included) used to say we "lived in the belly of the beast.” It was more than just lefty rhetoric. It was a visceral feeling. Especially during the early years of that mortal sin of a war, because so few objected.
Even as ten thousand miles away American napalm burned villages and people, and U.S.-made Agent Orange transformed lush jungles into barren moonscapes, life here went on as normal. The “Burgers Sold” sign at local MacDonald’s ticked away like a racecar’s odometer. The American middleclass was still flush from the go-go 50’s and 60’s. Suburbs were booming. Shopping centers were all the rage. Detroit rolled out 14 years worth of flashy new chrome-encrusted models without missing a beat, and we Americans gobbled them right up.
Only Americans can get away such a feat – to lay waste to one part of the world without paying a noticeable price at home. Military experts proudly call that “projecting power,” the ability to “fight them on their soil rather than our own.”
Now, I’m not arguing in favor of fighting them on our soil instead. My point is that, when we project our power in ways that violate the very principles America claims to stand for, we pay a price. Even though we are spared destroyed cities, dead civilians and constant explosions and gunfire, we pay a price. We paid that price during the Vietnam War, and we are paying it again now.
So, what’s this price we are paying? Money? Sure Iraq is costing us more this year than it would cost to fix Medicare, but that’s not the worst of it. Money can be printed. What we are losing – once again – is America – the original America. Not the America of the Neocon “do as we say, not as we do,” Orwellian democracy posers, but the America we know from our history books. The America described in our constitution and Bill of Rights. The America the world once considered the gold standard of honesty, integrity, due process, and personal freedom, The America that was Democracy’s Mecca.
Back in the 70’s I used to get letters from Europeans asking how the America they thought they knew could do the things it was doing in Vietnam. And why the American people did not rise up and throw the bums in charge out on their asses. They wanted me to explain how the country that established the Nuremberg rules, could so casually allow it’s own leaders and soldiers to break those very principles, and with absolute impunity. Why, they asked, were German officials held liable for the atrocities their policies unleashed on others and not American officials?
I had no good answer back then, and now that I am getting the same kind of letters from Europeans I have no good answer now. Here are just two recent letters:
Dear Editor,
I'm just one of those millions of Brits who are absolutely horrified and revolted at what the US has become. I can see no distinction whatsoever between the Bush administration and any other vicious, fascist organisation from any period in 20th century history. My heart goes out to all of you in your seemingly impossible struggle to tear your Democracy back from the bloodstained claws of the vile monsters who have calculatedly imprisoned you in your own society.
That twisted logic is worthy of Goebbels, Stalin or the Ayatollahs. The hatred and invective towards Liberals in the USA is chilling. Read your histories of the propaganda methods of the National Socialist Party in pre-war Germany to see some chilling parallels.
I'm old enough to remember watching news broadcasts of the inspirational campus demonstrations, which did so much to get you out of Vietnam. Those students had guts, courage and a single-minded conviction that puts contemporary Americans to shame. What the hell has happened to your young people? Do they believe in ANYTHING now apart from their mindless selves?
Peter Riches
London
And this letter for a citizen of our northern neighbor, Canada.
Steve,
All my life I've been impregnated with American culture. Now at 59 I am trying to understand what's happening in this great country of yours. I tried to speak to an American friend about it but I've not been yet been satisfied with the answers I got.
So what's happened to the American intellectuals? Why are they so silent on what's been happening? All my life I've met Americans and went out of my way, to speak with them, if they were around as tourists. My European friends as well as my Canadian feel by experience that most of the people we've met from the US are, for the most part, ignorant about the world in general. Why is that? Could you help us out a little?
Thank you so much,
Cheers from St Tite Québec
Marck
Please notice, as I did, that these are not angry letters. They are sad letters. They are not demanding “death to America,” but recovery. They want the America they had always admired, back. They miss the warm, reassuring glow of that light on the distant horizon oppressed peoples once fixated upon during their darkest hours. As long as it shown, hope survived. That light has dimmed, and for many, disappeared. They want it lit again.
Instead, yesterday Amnesty Internation waded in it's report listing America as one of the world's worst violators of human rights.
"When the U.S. government calls upon foreign leaders to bring to justice those who commit or authorize human rights violations in their own countries, why should those foreign leaders listen?" Dr. Schulz said. "And if the U.S. government does not abide by the same standards of justice, what shred of moral authority will we retain to pressure other governments to diminish abuses?
"It's far past time for President Bush to prove that he is not covering up the misdeeds of senior officials and political cronies who designed and authorized these nefarious interrogation policies," he said. "So Congress must appoint a truly impartial and independent commission to investigate the masterminds of the atrocious human rights violations at Abu Ghraib and other detention centers, and President Bush should use the power of his office to press Congress to do so." (Full Story)
Ah, but our foreign friends can expect little help from Americans. Here, in the belly of the beast, life once again is perking right along as normal. Iraq is far away, too far to hear the thud of bombs, the screams of the wounded or the wails of the grieving -- too far away for Americans to experience the air filled with the smell of blood drying on hot pavement. Too far away to see Iraqi mothers waiting to see if their children make it home from school alive, or wrapped in a blanket.
But never mind all that. Here, in America, life is good.
So, what will it be for lunch today? I had a steak sandwich and big-ass slice of pie yesterday. I better have a chef’s salad today. Eating like that way everyday can kill a person, you know.
Have a nice day.
Thursday, May 26, 2005
May 25, 2005
You Get Burned
For months I have been warning right-wing Republicans who were pandering to the fundamentalist Christian right that they were playing with fire. I reminded them that history teaches an unambiguous lesson on this to anyone willing to listen. That lesson is this: You can never satisfy religious fundamentalists. Never.
Every time one of these so-called “culture wars’ breaks out, the progression of events is exactly the same. The process, which works itself out over a matter of years, goes like this:
* The march of social reform and science inevitably offends/threatens rigid religious constituencies.
* Fundamentalists cry foul, claim they are being discriminated against and/or persecuted and start raising hell.
* They get noticed. Conservative politicians smell opportunity and reach out to cultivate these up-for-grabs voters.
* With that political support fundamentalists win a few rounds and the first rules/laws reflecting early fundamentalist demands are enacted.
* Relative moderates among the fundamentalist forces are assuaged by this and fall silent.
* That leaves the staunchest and least flexible fundamentalists in charge of the newly empowered movement.
* That first taste of blood sends them into frenzy like chicken-killing dogs. They push for more and more draconian rules.
* Eventually they even start scaring the conservative politicians who once supported them. One by one conservative politicians peel off voting against fundamentalist positions.
* Hell hath no fury like a fundamentalist scorned. Now they turn their holy fury against their former supporters.
And so it has come to pass.
“This Senate agreement represents a complete bailout and betrayal by a cabal of Republicans and a great victory for united Democrats… We share the disappointment, outrage and sense of abandonment felt by millions of conservative Americans who helped put Republicans in power last November. I am certain that these voters will remember both Democrats and Republicans who betrayed their trust." (Dr. James Dobson, Focus on the Family)
Well, I tried to warn you Republicans. You thought it was going to be so easy, even risk free. And, I have to admit, it worked -- for while, anyway. You rallied the Christian soldiers and helped them dust of and swing the Crusader’s Sword for Christ. And you won a few battles.
Now you get to feel the backside of that sword.
You see, there is nothing simple about fundamentalist movements. They are not a single block, but complicated, layered affairs. The first layers are made up of not-entirely unreasonable people, which give the movement a degree of credibility and sympathy. These folks voice modest concerns, gripes that are usually fairly easy to address.
But the next layer is tougher, as is every layer thereafter. And, once in for dime, you're in for a dollar. Trying to get out is like trying to leave a street gang -- you are going to get one hell of a beating, at the very least. So you hang in, even as the demands got nuttier and nuttier. Layer by layer you tried to stay friends with your fundamentalist “base.” But as each of these layers was revealed, their demands became increasingly unreasonable -- until they became downright frightening.
Just as the Taliban represented the core layer of the Islamic fundamentalist movement, James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Gary Baurer, et al, represent the core layers of the Christian fundamentalist movement. (Which is why I believe it is accurate to refer to them as America’s “Christian Taliban.”)
Now you conservatives have a real Frankenstein monster of your own creation on your hands, don’t you? And it bites.
After five years with George W. Bush in power, fundamentalists bagged a number of victories, particularly on family planning issues. For example, fundamentalist "faith-based charities" now get goverment money to teach high school kids condoms don’t work. Not because condoms actually don’t work; they do. And it's not condoms these folks are really against. In fact, I will put hard cash on the table to back my bet that most of these pious wing-nuts use condoms themselves…assuming they get lucky.
No, they oppose condoms because most religious fundamentalists have “issues” about all things sexual. A LOT of issues. A few years on a shrink’s couch would do them a world of good. But no, instead they want the rest of us to share in their repressed, tight-ass, Donny & Marie Osmond, homophobic, misogynistic hangups.
And the minute they don’t get their way, they melt down. Today they are ever so pissed at some of the very conservative politicians who handed them those early victories. They are mad that only three of the seven conservative judges will get approved because of the filibuster deal – nearly half a loaf, but not nearly enough for them. Because, you see, they don’t want to participate in society; they want to run it.
Yesterday the inevitable finally happened. After losing two big ones -- the filibuster compromise and fetal stem-cell research – fundamentalist leaders went ballistic and issued fatwas against the conservatives who abandoned them.
But, not all is lost yet. They still have one big fish in their net, the President. George W. tried to calm his Christian insurgent base by assuring them that he will veto the bill allowing the use of eggs from fertility clinics that would otherwise be destroyed for stem-cell research. Why would Bush do this when polls show that 60% of Americans support the measure?
Here’s why.
(From Slate Magazine)
Dobson….proselytized hard for Bush this last year, organizing huge stadium rallies and using his radio program to warn his 7 million American listeners that not to vote would be a sin. Dobson may have delivered Bush his victories in Ohio and Florida. (Full story)
I could be wrong, but I feel we are seeing is the beginning of the end of the Christian Right as an irresistible force in DC. I think this might be the case because, as other Republicans watch Christian wing-nuts trash their colleagues who voted for compromise on the filibuster and voted to allow science to continue its march forward, they will think to themselves, “Shit, there but for the grace of James Dobson go I.”
So, for the next few months anyway, expect the Christian Right to react pretty much the same way the Catholic Church did in the 13th Century when politicians, actors and just ordinary folk refused to toe God’s line. They will circle the wagons and send out their enforcers:
In 1233, Pope Gregory IX established the papal Inquisition, dispatching Dominican friars to conduct inquests… When an inquisitor arrived, a month of grace was allowed to all who wished to confess to heresy and to recant… After the period of grace, persons accused of heresy that had not abjured were brought to trial. …The trials were conducted secretly in the presence of a representative of the bishop…Torture of the accused and his witnesses soon became customary and notorious, despite the long-standing papal condemnation of torture. Pope Innocent IV ultimately permitted torture in cases of heresy. Most trials resulted in a guilty verdict...(From Encyclopedia.com)
Flakes Honor “Snow Flakes”
Did you catch that little televised dog and pony show yesterday? Bush, Tom DeLay and others of that ilk gathered infertile couples that had children by “adopting” unused embryos from fertility clinics.
Bush dubbed such children, “Snow Flakes.”
I am sure each one of those kids is an absolute delight. But that show had no bearing whatsoever to the fetal stem cell debate. What Bush’s Orwellian PR mavens were trying to do was create the impression that unused eggs at fertility clinics are not unwanted eggs. The truth of course is very different, as it almost always is with this administration. The fact remains that, for every frozen embryo “adopted” by an infertile couple, thousands more flushed down the drain or incinerated every year. It may be millions.
But the Snow Flakes affair yesterday is more evidence of the influence of Dobson and his group, Focus on the Family. And, once those little embryos hit the ground as full term humans, Dr. Dobson has parenting advice for their parents: whomp them, early and often. In 1977 Dobson authored the parenting book, Dare to Discipline, a denunciation of permissive parenting that tried to rehabilitate the practice of spanking. So, beware precious little Snow Flakes -- Dobson’s book sold 2 million copies. (What’s in your parent’s bookshelf?)
Dobson did make an observation in one of his books that I agree with entirely. “Evil has a way of overreaching."
And so it has come to pass. Amen.
Speaking of Evil
LONDON, May 25 (Reuters) -- Four years after the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington, human rights are in retreat worldwide and the United States bears most responsibility, rights watchdog Amnesty International said on Wednesday. (Full Story)
Since the US seems incapable, and/or unwilling, to hold American officials responsible for these violations, Amnesty International is encouraging other nations to do so. It could be that someday we will see a French or German court indict Bush administration officials for torture and other violations of the Geneva accords.
For months I have been warning right-wing Republicans who were pandering to the fundamentalist Christian right that they were playing with fire. I reminded them that history teaches an unambiguous lesson on this to anyone willing to listen. That lesson is this: You can never satisfy religious fundamentalists. Never.
Every time one of these so-called “culture wars’ breaks out, the progression of events is exactly the same. The process, which works itself out over a matter of years, goes like this:
* The march of social reform and science inevitably offends/threatens rigid religious constituencies.
* Fundamentalists cry foul, claim they are being discriminated against and/or persecuted and start raising hell.
* They get noticed. Conservative politicians smell opportunity and reach out to cultivate these up-for-grabs voters.
* With that political support fundamentalists win a few rounds and the first rules/laws reflecting early fundamentalist demands are enacted.
* Relative moderates among the fundamentalist forces are assuaged by this and fall silent.
* That leaves the staunchest and least flexible fundamentalists in charge of the newly empowered movement.
* That first taste of blood sends them into frenzy like chicken-killing dogs. They push for more and more draconian rules.
* Eventually they even start scaring the conservative politicians who once supported them. One by one conservative politicians peel off voting against fundamentalist positions.
* Hell hath no fury like a fundamentalist scorned. Now they turn their holy fury against their former supporters.
And so it has come to pass.
“This Senate agreement represents a complete bailout and betrayal by a cabal of Republicans and a great victory for united Democrats… We share the disappointment, outrage and sense of abandonment felt by millions of conservative Americans who helped put Republicans in power last November. I am certain that these voters will remember both Democrats and Republicans who betrayed their trust." (Dr. James Dobson, Focus on the Family)
Well, I tried to warn you Republicans. You thought it was going to be so easy, even risk free. And, I have to admit, it worked -- for while, anyway. You rallied the Christian soldiers and helped them dust of and swing the Crusader’s Sword for Christ. And you won a few battles.
Now you get to feel the backside of that sword.
You see, there is nothing simple about fundamentalist movements. They are not a single block, but complicated, layered affairs. The first layers are made up of not-entirely unreasonable people, which give the movement a degree of credibility and sympathy. These folks voice modest concerns, gripes that are usually fairly easy to address.
But the next layer is tougher, as is every layer thereafter. And, once in for dime, you're in for a dollar. Trying to get out is like trying to leave a street gang -- you are going to get one hell of a beating, at the very least. So you hang in, even as the demands got nuttier and nuttier. Layer by layer you tried to stay friends with your fundamentalist “base.” But as each of these layers was revealed, their demands became increasingly unreasonable -- until they became downright frightening.
Just as the Taliban represented the core layer of the Islamic fundamentalist movement, James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Gary Baurer, et al, represent the core layers of the Christian fundamentalist movement. (Which is why I believe it is accurate to refer to them as America’s “Christian Taliban.”)
Now you conservatives have a real Frankenstein monster of your own creation on your hands, don’t you? And it bites.
After five years with George W. Bush in power, fundamentalists bagged a number of victories, particularly on family planning issues. For example, fundamentalist "faith-based charities" now get goverment money to teach high school kids condoms don’t work. Not because condoms actually don’t work; they do. And it's not condoms these folks are really against. In fact, I will put hard cash on the table to back my bet that most of these pious wing-nuts use condoms themselves…assuming they get lucky.
No, they oppose condoms because most religious fundamentalists have “issues” about all things sexual. A LOT of issues. A few years on a shrink’s couch would do them a world of good. But no, instead they want the rest of us to share in their repressed, tight-ass, Donny & Marie Osmond, homophobic, misogynistic hangups.
And the minute they don’t get their way, they melt down. Today they are ever so pissed at some of the very conservative politicians who handed them those early victories. They are mad that only three of the seven conservative judges will get approved because of the filibuster deal – nearly half a loaf, but not nearly enough for them. Because, you see, they don’t want to participate in society; they want to run it.
Yesterday the inevitable finally happened. After losing two big ones -- the filibuster compromise and fetal stem-cell research – fundamentalist leaders went ballistic and issued fatwas against the conservatives who abandoned them.
But, not all is lost yet. They still have one big fish in their net, the President. George W. tried to calm his Christian insurgent base by assuring them that he will veto the bill allowing the use of eggs from fertility clinics that would otherwise be destroyed for stem-cell research. Why would Bush do this when polls show that 60% of Americans support the measure?
Here’s why.
(From Slate Magazine)
Dobson….proselytized hard for Bush this last year, organizing huge stadium rallies and using his radio program to warn his 7 million American listeners that not to vote would be a sin. Dobson may have delivered Bush his victories in Ohio and Florida. (Full story)
I could be wrong, but I feel we are seeing is the beginning of the end of the Christian Right as an irresistible force in DC. I think this might be the case because, as other Republicans watch Christian wing-nuts trash their colleagues who voted for compromise on the filibuster and voted to allow science to continue its march forward, they will think to themselves, “Shit, there but for the grace of James Dobson go I.”
So, for the next few months anyway, expect the Christian Right to react pretty much the same way the Catholic Church did in the 13th Century when politicians, actors and just ordinary folk refused to toe God’s line. They will circle the wagons and send out their enforcers:
In 1233, Pope Gregory IX established the papal Inquisition, dispatching Dominican friars to conduct inquests… When an inquisitor arrived, a month of grace was allowed to all who wished to confess to heresy and to recant… After the period of grace, persons accused of heresy that had not abjured were brought to trial. …The trials were conducted secretly in the presence of a representative of the bishop…Torture of the accused and his witnesses soon became customary and notorious, despite the long-standing papal condemnation of torture. Pope Innocent IV ultimately permitted torture in cases of heresy. Most trials resulted in a guilty verdict...(From Encyclopedia.com)
Flakes Honor “Snow Flakes”
Did you catch that little televised dog and pony show yesterday? Bush, Tom DeLay and others of that ilk gathered infertile couples that had children by “adopting” unused embryos from fertility clinics.
Bush dubbed such children, “Snow Flakes.”
I am sure each one of those kids is an absolute delight. But that show had no bearing whatsoever to the fetal stem cell debate. What Bush’s Orwellian PR mavens were trying to do was create the impression that unused eggs at fertility clinics are not unwanted eggs. The truth of course is very different, as it almost always is with this administration. The fact remains that, for every frozen embryo “adopted” by an infertile couple, thousands more flushed down the drain or incinerated every year. It may be millions.
But the Snow Flakes affair yesterday is more evidence of the influence of Dobson and his group, Focus on the Family. And, once those little embryos hit the ground as full term humans, Dr. Dobson has parenting advice for their parents: whomp them, early and often. In 1977 Dobson authored the parenting book, Dare to Discipline, a denunciation of permissive parenting that tried to rehabilitate the practice of spanking. So, beware precious little Snow Flakes -- Dobson’s book sold 2 million copies. (What’s in your parent’s bookshelf?)
Dobson did make an observation in one of his books that I agree with entirely. “Evil has a way of overreaching."
And so it has come to pass. Amen.
Speaking of Evil
LONDON, May 25 (Reuters) -- Four years after the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington, human rights are in retreat worldwide and the United States bears most responsibility, rights watchdog Amnesty International said on Wednesday. (Full Story)
Since the US seems incapable, and/or unwilling, to hold American officials responsible for these violations, Amnesty International is encouraging other nations to do so. It could be that someday we will see a French or German court indict Bush administration officials for torture and other violations of the Geneva accords.
Wednesday, May 25, 2005
May 24, 2005
Stems & Seeds
Some days I feel like I am living in the middle of the 19th century. While the human race faces daunting challenges of the present and near future, we waste time arguing matters that should by now only be discussed in history class.
Today’s back-to-the-future issue is fetal stem cell research. No one in his or her right mind would consider a zygote a human being. But then, whenever you try to mix religious beliefs with science and public policy, you end up with out-of-mind experiences. And that’s just what we have here.
The religious right – backed by the President and rightwing members of Congress – believe that using a zygote to create and then harvest fetal stem cells is tantamount to murder.
(I am purposely using the medical term “zygote” rather than “fertilized human egg” or “embryo,” not because I fear use of those terms would undercut my argument but because it is more appropriate.)
The kind of research being done now in South Korea does not use fertilized human eggs. Instead they use an egg that has had its original DNA removed and replaced with DNA harvested from a different person. That’s right, Dr. Dobson, no sperm was involved. Therefore calling the South Korean-creations “fertilized eggs” or even “embryos” is not entirely accurate. But they are, unarguably, zygotes.
Sorry for having to waste youR time with such obvious details, but whenever dealing with religious zealots you have to nail every detail down for them. It’s not that they are stupid, just confused. Terribly confused. Dangerously confused. Arrogantly confused.
Anyway, the President and his fundamentalist supporters say that using zygotes to harvest potentially life-saving fetal stem cells is wrong.
("Destroying life to save life is wrong" - President Bush says. Not to muddy the waters but, didn't he justify destroying lives in Iraq on the grounds it would save lives from WMD? Executing criminals saves lives too, according to Bush. Hmmmm... But destroying a zygote to save full-term humans is wrong. I'm confused.)
Things get even more confusing when you try to balance this anti-fetal stem cell position with the religious right's silence on fertility clinics. These self-proclaimed "prolifers" are also self-proclaimed “pro-family” folks who apparently have absolutely no problem with fertility clinics. This very strange since the stock-in-trade of fertility clinics is to create zygotes that really ARE fertilized human eggs, embryos. No doubt about it. Those little buggers are the real deal. And these clinics create them by the millions, because the failure rate of in vitro fertilization is so high they create many times more embryos than they will ever need.
So, what do these for-profit IVF clinics they do with embryos they don’t use? Well, first they thrust these "little“people” into vats of liquid nitrogen and freeze the holy bajeebers out of them. They leave them there shivering in this frozen hell, wearing nothing by their genes, until someone decides they don’t need them any longer. Then they thaw them out, and “take them for a ride,” – a one-way ride.
“The approaches of the 175 clinics that did dispose of extra embryos varied in the extreme. Some handed the tiny ball of cells over to the couple or individual to take home, whereas some incinerated them as biological waste. Of the clinics that incinerated the embryos, four required the presence of the couple while twenty-five clinics forbade it. Seven clinics even said a prayer during disposal in a quasi-funeral, according to Arthur Caplan, a co-author of the study from the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia.” (More)
So, let’s review. Using fetal stem cell research from artificially created zygotes is a sin -- abortion by any other name. But destroying honest-to-god embryos for profit by fertility clinics is not an issue with the religious right.
The reason IVF is not a political issue is, of course, money. Fertility clinics are insanely profitable. Fetal stem cells may or may not become a profitable business some day, but right now no real fetal stem cell business lobby is writing check on The Hill. Fertility clinics and the companies that own them are. And we are talking big money.
"On average, a patient gets pregnant only one out of three times, so many patients try IVF repeatedly. Each attempt costs anywhere from $4,000 to $18,000 for doctors' fees, plus thousands more for drugs to stimulate the woman's ovaries to produce eggs. Because patients are willing to invest that kind of money in treatments that didn't exist a few years ago - and because about ten percent of American couples have trouble conceiving - infertility is an estimated $2 billion industry annually in the United States. Pharmaceutical companies are investing millions in fertility-related drugs. Clinic management corporations traded on Wall Street are in the business of making a profit on infertility treatment for investors. Brokers are charging fees to help couples find egg donors and surrogate mothers. And the number of U.S. clinics offering IVF has been racing upward since the mid-1980s, to about 330 today." (More)
Ah, so there you have it. The real reason fertility clinics that really DO “kill” embryos by the millions are okay, but that it’s wrong to use artificially created zygotes for fetal stem cell research.
Memo to Democrats: The next opportunity you have to attach a rider to a bill attach one that says consistency requires that if fetal stem cell research is restricted because “its wrong to destroy life,” then fertility clinics should not be allowed to create any embryos that will later be destroyed. Such a law would affectively put fertility clinics out of business, of course. But such a law would be the only logical application of fundamentalists’ own argument. Either that argument is valid in all cases, or it’s not. Which is it? Force them to confront the internal inconsistencies in their own argument. They hate that, because there are so many.
When Bush Policies Hit Home
I have a first-hand tale to tell you today that illustrates an earlier point I made: that Bush’s economic policies have been nothing more or less than a direct transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.
I know a single mother, now in her early 50’s. She has a son who was born severely brain-damaged. While he is now in his early 20’s he has the mental abilities of an infant, or less. She could have institutionalized him, at great cost to Medicare and Medicaid. Instead she chose to raise and care for him at home. Medicare paid her a monthly stipend that was less than half what it would have cost the government to care for her son in a facility.
All went well form two decades. Then George W. Bush and his merry band of “let-them-eat-cakers slashed Medicaid. Last month Medicaid looped $600 a month off her son's care allowance. She had already been barely able to make ends meet, and losing that $600-a-month was the final straw. She fell behind in her bills, the phone company cut off her service and now she is being evicted from her home because she can no longer afford the Bay Area's high rents. I have no idea where this poor woman and her son will end up now.
I believe an air-tight case can be made that this woman’s $600 a month is now ending up in some wealthy person’s family trust in the form of Bush tax relief. If you want to prove me wrong, go ahead. I’d love to hear it. So would she.
Just In: Protestors Clog DC Streets for Second Week
I firmly believe that only that kind of headline can now turn the Red Tide. So, will some group that has national standing and membership (hello Moveon.org) please begin organizing that kind of protest right now. It will be the only hope the day Bush sends his Supreme Court nominees to The Hill?
Please. Please - get on with it. Once the Bushites get that ball rolling it will be too late to organize protests large enough and sustained enough to make a difference. So let's start now.
I live in California, but I will happily buy a plane ticket and join such protests, and stay for a long as it takes to put an end to this madness. And I am certain there are millions like me around the country just waiting for someone with the organization, money and skill give us a way to participate again in our democracy. (BTW - The Christian Right knows how to do this, which is why they keep winning.)
So, Moveon.org here's a clue -- cutsey TV commercials alone are not going to win this war. It’s time to hit the street again.
Some days I feel like I am living in the middle of the 19th century. While the human race faces daunting challenges of the present and near future, we waste time arguing matters that should by now only be discussed in history class.
Today’s back-to-the-future issue is fetal stem cell research. No one in his or her right mind would consider a zygote a human being. But then, whenever you try to mix religious beliefs with science and public policy, you end up with out-of-mind experiences. And that’s just what we have here.
The religious right – backed by the President and rightwing members of Congress – believe that using a zygote to create and then harvest fetal stem cells is tantamount to murder.
(I am purposely using the medical term “zygote” rather than “fertilized human egg” or “embryo,” not because I fear use of those terms would undercut my argument but because it is more appropriate.)
The kind of research being done now in South Korea does not use fertilized human eggs. Instead they use an egg that has had its original DNA removed and replaced with DNA harvested from a different person. That’s right, Dr. Dobson, no sperm was involved. Therefore calling the South Korean-creations “fertilized eggs” or even “embryos” is not entirely accurate. But they are, unarguably, zygotes.
Sorry for having to waste youR time with such obvious details, but whenever dealing with religious zealots you have to nail every detail down for them. It’s not that they are stupid, just confused. Terribly confused. Dangerously confused. Arrogantly confused.
Anyway, the President and his fundamentalist supporters say that using zygotes to harvest potentially life-saving fetal stem cells is wrong.
("Destroying life to save life is wrong" - President Bush says. Not to muddy the waters but, didn't he justify destroying lives in Iraq on the grounds it would save lives from WMD? Executing criminals saves lives too, according to Bush. Hmmmm... But destroying a zygote to save full-term humans is wrong. I'm confused.)
Things get even more confusing when you try to balance this anti-fetal stem cell position with the religious right's silence on fertility clinics. These self-proclaimed "prolifers" are also self-proclaimed “pro-family” folks who apparently have absolutely no problem with fertility clinics. This very strange since the stock-in-trade of fertility clinics is to create zygotes that really ARE fertilized human eggs, embryos. No doubt about it. Those little buggers are the real deal. And these clinics create them by the millions, because the failure rate of in vitro fertilization is so high they create many times more embryos than they will ever need.
So, what do these for-profit IVF clinics they do with embryos they don’t use? Well, first they thrust these "little“people” into vats of liquid nitrogen and freeze the holy bajeebers out of them. They leave them there shivering in this frozen hell, wearing nothing by their genes, until someone decides they don’t need them any longer. Then they thaw them out, and “take them for a ride,” – a one-way ride.
“The approaches of the 175 clinics that did dispose of extra embryos varied in the extreme. Some handed the tiny ball of cells over to the couple or individual to take home, whereas some incinerated them as biological waste. Of the clinics that incinerated the embryos, four required the presence of the couple while twenty-five clinics forbade it. Seven clinics even said a prayer during disposal in a quasi-funeral, according to Arthur Caplan, a co-author of the study from the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia.” (More)
So, let’s review. Using fetal stem cell research from artificially created zygotes is a sin -- abortion by any other name. But destroying honest-to-god embryos for profit by fertility clinics is not an issue with the religious right.
The reason IVF is not a political issue is, of course, money. Fertility clinics are insanely profitable. Fetal stem cells may or may not become a profitable business some day, but right now no real fetal stem cell business lobby is writing check on The Hill. Fertility clinics and the companies that own them are. And we are talking big money.
"On average, a patient gets pregnant only one out of three times, so many patients try IVF repeatedly. Each attempt costs anywhere from $4,000 to $18,000 for doctors' fees, plus thousands more for drugs to stimulate the woman's ovaries to produce eggs. Because patients are willing to invest that kind of money in treatments that didn't exist a few years ago - and because about ten percent of American couples have trouble conceiving - infertility is an estimated $2 billion industry annually in the United States. Pharmaceutical companies are investing millions in fertility-related drugs. Clinic management corporations traded on Wall Street are in the business of making a profit on infertility treatment for investors. Brokers are charging fees to help couples find egg donors and surrogate mothers. And the number of U.S. clinics offering IVF has been racing upward since the mid-1980s, to about 330 today." (More)
Ah, so there you have it. The real reason fertility clinics that really DO “kill” embryos by the millions are okay, but that it’s wrong to use artificially created zygotes for fetal stem cell research.
Memo to Democrats: The next opportunity you have to attach a rider to a bill attach one that says consistency requires that if fetal stem cell research is restricted because “its wrong to destroy life,” then fertility clinics should not be allowed to create any embryos that will later be destroyed. Such a law would affectively put fertility clinics out of business, of course. But such a law would be the only logical application of fundamentalists’ own argument. Either that argument is valid in all cases, or it’s not. Which is it? Force them to confront the internal inconsistencies in their own argument. They hate that, because there are so many.
When Bush Policies Hit Home
I have a first-hand tale to tell you today that illustrates an earlier point I made: that Bush’s economic policies have been nothing more or less than a direct transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.
I know a single mother, now in her early 50’s. She has a son who was born severely brain-damaged. While he is now in his early 20’s he has the mental abilities of an infant, or less. She could have institutionalized him, at great cost to Medicare and Medicaid. Instead she chose to raise and care for him at home. Medicare paid her a monthly stipend that was less than half what it would have cost the government to care for her son in a facility.
All went well form two decades. Then George W. Bush and his merry band of “let-them-eat-cakers slashed Medicaid. Last month Medicaid looped $600 a month off her son's care allowance. She had already been barely able to make ends meet, and losing that $600-a-month was the final straw. She fell behind in her bills, the phone company cut off her service and now she is being evicted from her home because she can no longer afford the Bay Area's high rents. I have no idea where this poor woman and her son will end up now.
I believe an air-tight case can be made that this woman’s $600 a month is now ending up in some wealthy person’s family trust in the form of Bush tax relief. If you want to prove me wrong, go ahead. I’d love to hear it. So would she.
Just In: Protestors Clog DC Streets for Second Week
I firmly believe that only that kind of headline can now turn the Red Tide. So, will some group that has national standing and membership (hello Moveon.org) please begin organizing that kind of protest right now. It will be the only hope the day Bush sends his Supreme Court nominees to The Hill?
Please. Please - get on with it. Once the Bushites get that ball rolling it will be too late to organize protests large enough and sustained enough to make a difference. So let's start now.
I live in California, but I will happily buy a plane ticket and join such protests, and stay for a long as it takes to put an end to this madness. And I am certain there are millions like me around the country just waiting for someone with the organization, money and skill give us a way to participate again in our democracy. (BTW - The Christian Right knows how to do this, which is why they keep winning.)
So, Moveon.org here's a clue -- cutsey TV commercials alone are not going to win this war. It’s time to hit the street again.
Tuesday, May 24, 2005
May 23, 2004
Is Bush The Worst President
EVER?
A couple of observant readers pointed me to History News Network’s web site this weekend. They pointed out I could stop my search for someone qualified to answer the question, “Is George W. Bush the worst President of the United State, ever, because it’s been done.
HNN surveyed 415 historians and, without hanging chads or un-auditable electronic voting machines, the answer is at hand. Yes. Yes he certainly is:
Quotes from historians contributing the History News Network poll:
“Although previous presidents have led the nation into ill-advised wars, no predecessor managed to turn America into an unprovoked aggressor. No predecessor so thoroughly managed to confirm the impressions of those who already hated America. No predecessor so effectively convinced such a wide range of world opinion that America is an imperialist threat to world peace. I don 't think that you can do much worse than that.”
“Bush is horrendous; there is no comparison with previous presidents, most of whom have been bad.”
“He is blatantly a puppet for corporate interests, who care only about their own greed and have no sense of civic responsibility or community service. He lies, constantly and often, seemingly without control, and he lied about his invasion into a sovereign country, again for corporate interests; many people have died and been maimed, and that has been lied about too. He grandstands and mugs in a shameful manner, befitting a snake oil salesman, not a statesman. He does not think, process, or speak well, and is emotionally immature due to, among other things, his lack of recovery from substance abuse. The term is "dry drunk". He is an abject embarrassment/pariah overseas; the rest of the world hates him . . . . . He is, by far, the most irresponsible, unethical, inexcusable occupant of our formerly highest office in the land that there has ever been.”
“George W. Bush's presidency is the pernicious enemy of American freedom, compassion, and community; of world peace; and of life itself as it has evolved for millennia on large sections of the planet. The worst president ever? Let history judge him.”
“This president is unique in his failures.”
Then the historians were asked, if he is the worst, in what areas is he the worst since..... Open the envelope please! And the loser is....
* In terms of economic damage, Bush is the worst since Reagan.
* In terms of imperialism, the worst since T. Roosevelt.
* In terms of dishonesty in government he is the worst since Nixon.
* In terms of affable incompetence the worst since Harding.
* In terms of corruption the worst since Grant.
* In terms of general lassitude and cluelessness, the worst since Coolidge.
* In terms of personal dishonesty, the worst since Clinton.
* In terms of religious arrogance, the worst since Wilson.”
So folks, there you we are. Now we know he really IS the worst president of this country, ever. Now what do we do with that information? A good start would be for Democrats in Congress to enter the HNN poll into the Congressional Record. That way future historians will know we not only elected this guy twice, but did nothing about it after it confirming that we had turned America over to an certified incompetent. That way all three evil-doers will get the credit they deserve from history -- George W. Bush, those that elected him twice, and the rest of us, who wrung our hands about it but never get off our pompous, Levi drapped, liberal asses to fill the streets in protest.
Which brings me to this interesting quote from 1955 – exactly 50 years ago:
"What no one seemed to notice. . . was the ever widening gap. . .between the government and the people. . . And it became always wider. . . the whole process of its coming into being, was above all diverting, it provided an excuse not to think for people who did not want to think anyway . . . (it) gave us some dreadful, fundamental things to think about . . .and kept us so busy with continuous changes and 'crises' and so fascinated . . . by the machinations of the 'national enemies,' without and within, that we had no time to think about these dreadful things that were growing, little by little, all around us. . . Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, 'regretted,' that unless one understood what the whole thing was in principle, what all these 'little measures'. . . must some day lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing. . . .Each act. . . is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for one great shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join you in resisting somehow. You don't want to act, or even talk, alone. . . you don't want to 'go out of your way to make trouble.' . . .But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes. That's the difficulty. The forms are all there, all untouched, all reassuring, the houses, the shops, the jobs, the mealtimes, the visits, the concerts, the cinema, the holidays. But the spirit, which you never noticed because you made the lifelong mistake of identifying it with the forms, is changed. Now you live in a world of hate and fear, and the people who hate and fear do not even know it themselves, when everyone is transformed, no one is transformed. . . .You have accepted things you would not have accepted five years ago, a year ago, things your father. . . could never have imagined."
---From Milton Mayer, They Thought They Were Free, The Germans, 1938-45 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1955)
EVER?
A couple of observant readers pointed me to History News Network’s web site this weekend. They pointed out I could stop my search for someone qualified to answer the question, “Is George W. Bush the worst President of the United State, ever, because it’s been done.
HNN surveyed 415 historians and, without hanging chads or un-auditable electronic voting machines, the answer is at hand. Yes. Yes he certainly is:
Quotes from historians contributing the History News Network poll:
“Although previous presidents have led the nation into ill-advised wars, no predecessor managed to turn America into an unprovoked aggressor. No predecessor so thoroughly managed to confirm the impressions of those who already hated America. No predecessor so effectively convinced such a wide range of world opinion that America is an imperialist threat to world peace. I don 't think that you can do much worse than that.”
“Bush is horrendous; there is no comparison with previous presidents, most of whom have been bad.”
“He is blatantly a puppet for corporate interests, who care only about their own greed and have no sense of civic responsibility or community service. He lies, constantly and often, seemingly without control, and he lied about his invasion into a sovereign country, again for corporate interests; many people have died and been maimed, and that has been lied about too. He grandstands and mugs in a shameful manner, befitting a snake oil salesman, not a statesman. He does not think, process, or speak well, and is emotionally immature due to, among other things, his lack of recovery from substance abuse. The term is "dry drunk". He is an abject embarrassment/pariah overseas; the rest of the world hates him . . . . . He is, by far, the most irresponsible, unethical, inexcusable occupant of our formerly highest office in the land that there has ever been.”
“George W. Bush's presidency is the pernicious enemy of American freedom, compassion, and community; of world peace; and of life itself as it has evolved for millennia on large sections of the planet. The worst president ever? Let history judge him.”
“This president is unique in his failures.”
Then the historians were asked, if he is the worst, in what areas is he the worst since..... Open the envelope please! And the loser is....
* In terms of economic damage, Bush is the worst since Reagan.
* In terms of imperialism, the worst since T. Roosevelt.
* In terms of dishonesty in government he is the worst since Nixon.
* In terms of affable incompetence the worst since Harding.
* In terms of corruption the worst since Grant.
* In terms of general lassitude and cluelessness, the worst since Coolidge.
* In terms of personal dishonesty, the worst since Clinton.
* In terms of religious arrogance, the worst since Wilson.”
So folks, there you we are. Now we know he really IS the worst president of this country, ever. Now what do we do with that information? A good start would be for Democrats in Congress to enter the HNN poll into the Congressional Record. That way future historians will know we not only elected this guy twice, but did nothing about it after it confirming that we had turned America over to an certified incompetent. That way all three evil-doers will get the credit they deserve from history -- George W. Bush, those that elected him twice, and the rest of us, who wrung our hands about it but never get off our pompous, Levi drapped, liberal asses to fill the streets in protest.
Which brings me to this interesting quote from 1955 – exactly 50 years ago:
"What no one seemed to notice. . . was the ever widening gap. . .between the government and the people. . . And it became always wider. . . the whole process of its coming into being, was above all diverting, it provided an excuse not to think for people who did not want to think anyway . . . (it) gave us some dreadful, fundamental things to think about . . .and kept us so busy with continuous changes and 'crises' and so fascinated . . . by the machinations of the 'national enemies,' without and within, that we had no time to think about these dreadful things that were growing, little by little, all around us. . . Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, 'regretted,' that unless one understood what the whole thing was in principle, what all these 'little measures'. . . must some day lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing. . . .Each act. . . is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for one great shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join you in resisting somehow. You don't want to act, or even talk, alone. . . you don't want to 'go out of your way to make trouble.' . . .But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes. That's the difficulty. The forms are all there, all untouched, all reassuring, the houses, the shops, the jobs, the mealtimes, the visits, the concerts, the cinema, the holidays. But the spirit, which you never noticed because you made the lifelong mistake of identifying it with the forms, is changed. Now you live in a world of hate and fear, and the people who hate and fear do not even know it themselves, when everyone is transformed, no one is transformed. . . .You have accepted things you would not have accepted five years ago, a year ago, things your father. . . could never have imagined."
---From Milton Mayer, They Thought They Were Free, The Germans, 1938-45 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1955)
Monday, May 23, 2005
May 20-22, 2005
More
Is Bush The Worst President
EVER?
Yesterday’s column certainly hit a nerve. (I left it on the bottom of this page if you missed it.)
Is George W. Bush the worst president in the history of the nation? After five years in the White House we now have enough information to begin exploring that question.
So, presidential historians Doris Kearns Goodwin and Michael Beschloss, Haynes Johnson, are you folks up to this challenge?
Of course by the time those guys get around to publishing anything the issue would be moot. So, maybe there is someone(s) out there ready, willing and able to decide this pressing matter before it’s too late.
After reading yesterday’s piece readers added to the list of Bush – shall we call them “shortcomings.” Ruinous tax cuts, millions more American’s without health coverage, a wanton disregard for the environment, facilitating, and even rewarding, corporate corruption on Iraq-rebuilding contracts, stifling life-saving fetal stem cell research to curry favor with the religious right, torture, kidnappings, incarceration without trial and now the new British government memo that proves Bush planned to attack Iraq soon after he was elected, WMD or no WMD.
Asked by reporters if the administration would comply with Democrat’s demand for an explanation of that memo, WH spokesman Scott McClellan, tersely responded, “we see no need to respond.” (Translation: None you their damn business. None of your business either.)
Readers who responded to yesterday’s piece clearly shared my frustrations and fear that we have allowed things to go too far, and now it is too late to stop this rightwing, fundamentalist juggernaut. Some suggested, as I did, large street demonstrations opposing the war and Bush court nominees. Maybe millions of people in the street can convince arrogant Republicans that not everyone out here is a Red voter. And, it might just stiffen the spine of congressional Democrats, assuming they still have one.
Yesterday’s piece appeared today on AlterNet where those readers added their own comments and suggestions. Some suggested circulating an Internet petition demanding a national recall election. While not a constitutional remedy such a petition could be a useful organizing tool.
But I still believe that validation by a creditable source of my premise, that George W. Bush IS the worst president, ever, would be the most useful thing we could do right now.
So, is he? If not then I will shut up about it and just go back to just opposing his policies.
But, if the answer is, as I suspect, yes, yes he is the worst president ever, then wouldn’t that be such an important revelation that we should know it as soon as possible - while it matters and while we might, just might be able to do something about it?
There's no way this Republican-controlled congress will ever impeach Bush -- even if he were caught red-handed personally torturing Saddam in the Oval Office while being serviced by Monica. But, a well-documented study proving that Bush is indeed the worst president in history would certainly clip his wings – and those right-wings that flew him this lofty perch.
So again I ask, beg, plead, implore, grovel…. is there a non-partisan historian or organization out there that can settle this matter while it still matters? Is George W. Bush the worst president ever, or not?
(BTW, Earl Killian has already done a good deal of historical legwork for those interested in taking on this challenge. http://www.killian.com/earl/presidents.html )
Here are some letters from readers on this subject. Below them is the original column.
(And still more letters on this HERE.)
Not only is he the worst president ever but he's the scariest! Damn, I thought I was scared in the 70's always wondering if nuclear bombs were going to be set off. Things are scarier than I ever remember them. Between the debt situation, religion intruding everywhere, global warming/resource depletion, no substantial independent media to speak of, insane people running the world...YIKES!
Nevertheless, I wanted to let you know that I, and some of the people I hang with, DO care and will for some time.
To end on an upbeat note - did you hear what George Galloway had to say to Norm Coleman? Wasn't that great?! More of that, more of that!
Margaret Carbone
Editor,
I think you are on the right track identifying Bush
as the worst US President ever. That actually seems
a bit of a no-brainer, although I realize it takes courage to say it in print.
My concern is that he may actually be one of the worst
figures in all of Western history. Compare your list of
charges against him with Nero, the Pope of the Inquisition, Hitler, ...
In the entire record of Western "civilization" I am hard pressed to think of any regime more frightening than this unholy alliance of greed sucking business dudes -
Cheney, Lay, ... the "Religious" Right types Falwell et al, totally Machevillian political masterminds DeLay, Rove, Frist coupled with the complicity of Corporations who are allowed to do whatever they want without fear of Government sanction, and finally to the American people who are so dumbed down by 50 years of declining public education, and so spoiled by artificially cheap energy that they now believe is their God-given right - Saddam doesn't want to sell us Iraqi oil - well just invade and depose him. That's easy.
Until the American people crawl out of their Hummers,
wake up and demand to see Cheney's energy committee
meeting minutes, and really get their heads around where
these guys have put us, the rest of the world will justifiably despise us.
Bill Fellinger
Williston, Vermont
Mr. Pizzo
The Republicans have been so successful in demanding and getting what they want no matter the cost to the less-than-rich Americans? I cannot for the life of me comprehend how so many can be so ignorant of what is happening or stupid enough to let it happen if they know.
It's as if there is some sort of conservative religious revival taking place in the US that bears no resemblance to truth, fact, or reason.
Scary stuff. But why? I am convinced that it is too late to stop, undo, or reverse the terrible domestic and foreign policies of the Bush administration.
Just who is in power behind this shift to an ultra-conservative government? The famous authors of the 21st Century Plan that was concocted over 12 years ago?
The only way to make sense of what is happening today is to think oil. The US knows that cheap oil is running out and wants to position itself to control the flow of the largest reserves. Why else create permanent military bases in Iraq?
Once you understand that our national security and interests are tied directly to oil, everything else that is happening begins to make sense.
Connecting the dots, it is plausible that the US will engage militarily with any other country in order to protect the supply of oil for American corporations. Oil is the life-blood of capitalism and consumerism in this and every developed country.
And the average American won't speak up against such a policy because we will have lost our rights to do so.
Jeff
Rochester, MN
Steve,
I think that you're absolutely right. But Bush isn't just the worst prez we've ever had. he's also the dumbest! We've hit lows before, but nothing like this clown.
You know, for so many years we've elected Presidents, and whether you thought they were good or bad, whatever, you could always just forget who was in the WH and go about your life.
But with this Bozo, you have to keep up with his shenanigans on a daily basis because you just can't believe it. It's depressing!
Paul B
Steve
Just saw your blog for first time.....We are the underground and we have to be tenacious...Your blog summed up Bush ..I, like you, sometimes get the feeling we can’t do anything about it, but we can.. We are many....We just have to figure it out and don’t stop .The alternative is unthinkable.
I am calling Code Pink’s Grace Kelland today to give her ideas...Such as, a recall petition that states that we want a recall, a vote of no confidence election on paper ballots. An honest election --or are they afraid of an honest election?
Our bill of rights states that congress works for us, and working Americans are not being heard. They cannot destroy our country, they cannot bankrupt our country...They are wasting and stealing our money, and we want a recall!
This petition could be placed on many blogs and I am sure many people would sign it. I bet we could get millions of signatures..
It just might work.....
Peggy
Stephen,
Here in Orange County people are quiet. The flags and W stickers have finally been removed from most people's cars. No one talks readily about junior or Iraq so it is really hard to assess the attitude here.
Orange County is no longer the John Birch Society bastion of my youth due to the other two million people who have moved here in the last several decades, but it ain't no LA or San Francisco either. Clients in my industry are invariably "tax cut" conservatives who, if prodded, will mouth fealty to all the other bilge that issues forth from junior's lying pie hole. I think that privately they are probably horrified at the direction things are going, but would be committing commercial suicide if they shared their concerns with their pals at the yacht/country club. Not being a member, I am only guessing (hoping) of course. The OC (I hate that silly TV name) conservatives are state's rights types who must be nearly frantic at the continuing prospect of junior's DC black hole of political power - but they still love those tax cuts and of course those lucrative government contracts.
The local news is focused on Mr. Villaraigosa and car chases and missing brides and pop pederasts. Workers are loath to expose their true feelings at the water cooler for fear of being labeled a crank or a liberal. Who wants the boss to think you are unpatriotic or worse? My tactic is to talk to people my age raising male teenagers and to bring up the possibility of conscription. Many people seem to think I am crazy, but a few have agreed that they share similar fears. Its hell being a prophet.
The current news seems to indicate that we are at the tipping point, but as you point out it may be for naught. When a puke like Scott McClennan can blame and intimidate Newsweek for printing what should be common knowledge about US military torture and humiliation, its probably too late. Blaming the messenger, indeed.
My wish is for some progressive billionaires to fund a think tank archipelago, one of whose missions would be to research the biographies of any and all GOP leaders (it pains me to write "leaders") present and prospective and out them real good - show no mercy. And publicize their findings using the Heritage, AEI, Hoover Institute models. Ideas matter and the left better get the information/opinion infrastructure in place to compete or its over. We are stuck with junior, the worst president ever, but Jeb is being queued up and I fear that the foundation of destruction laid by his older brother will allow him flush the whole shebang right down the dumper.
From behind the Orange Curtain, I remain,
Kurt
Steve
The Dems need to get angry the way George Galloway did the other day. Why are they so weak-spined and mealy mouthed? I'm nearly 70 years old, but dammit--I'll march!
Sandy
Steve,
I just got back from a month in South Africa. And I tell you what - I felt a lot freer and safer there than I do here. You have no idea what a bad rep this country has over there! What's interesting is that hardly anyone takes any notice of the US any more - they are more interested in what is happening in their own country and in Europe. The majority feels that the US is in deep trouble.
Susan
Steve,
Bush is not just guilty of torture, but murder. Lots of murders. Not as in collateral damage from a bomb killing people. I mean people tortured to death by the U.S. Also, the obscenity of redefining "torture" as anything just short of causing "organ failure" -- with an exception that even causing organ failure and death isn't torture if we were seeking information. (A bit like the Catholic church's old view that a married woman could have sex with her husband without committing a sin as long as it was solely for the purpose of reproduction and she didn't enjoy it!)
Bill
STEPHEN,
YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT ON THE BUSH MACHINE AND THE RADICAL RIGHT WING'S TAKE-AWAY OF OUR DEMOCRACY, TO BE REPLACED BY A THEOCRATIC NEO-NAZI DICTATORSHIP.
YOU ARE ALSO CORRECT IN STATING WE HAVE DONE TOO LITTLE , TOO LATE, TO STOP THIS ABOMINATION. OUR LAST STAND IS MASS DEMONSTRATIONS AND CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE, BUT ALAS, WHO IS THERE TO ORGANIZE THEM? PERHAPS GETTING YOUR STORY OUT, FORCEFULLY AND REPEATEDLY, EVERY WAY YOU CAN, WILL CAUSE A GROUNDSWELL.
TIME IS ON OUR SIDE. IRAQ WILL ONLY GET WORSE, SOCIAL PROTECTIONS WILL ONLY DIMINISH, HEALTH COSTS WILL CONTINUE TO SKYROCKET, ENERGY CRISIS IS HERE, ETC. WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS GET THE COUNTRY PISSED OFF.........GOOD LUCK.
Dr, BOB BROGNA
P.S. AS AN M.D. IT IS QUITE APPARENT TO ME THAT OUR PRES. HAS SERIOUS NEUROLOGICAL PROBLEMS, AND IS SOCIO-PSYCHO-PATHICALLY DYSFUNCTIONAL --SAME AS HITLER
(Yo, Dr. Bob. You need to take your keyboard in for a thorough digital exam. It appears something is stuck in there causing it to produce only CAPS.)
Steve,
I loved your Daily Thinking Points where you build a case, piece-by- piece, why Bush is the worst president ever.
It should be emailed to every conservative in the country. Hell, the GOP should have to address each and every one of the indictments you laid out on primetime nationwide TV.
Keep it up!
Unsigned
Mr. Pizzo
Your comments about the current government and its drive for power and control has a very familiar ring. But, it isn't just this administration or even the last forty years. The thrust for power and control has been a part of the tapestry for a long time.
Perhaps an early example can be found in The Trail of Tears, when President Jackson connived at the theft of Native American lands in the Southeast. Then there was Harry Truman. Aside from the Bomb (while peace talks were in progress), and the arbitrary ceding of half of Korea to the Soviets. he also gave us Executive Order 9835.
That edict resulted in to six million investigations of government employees. There were Star Chamber sessions; no actual witnesses, no real testimony, and above all, no attorneys for the defense. During the same period, the military (the AFOSI especially) followed suit. In addition to other acts, it added illegal searches, theft of private property and mail tampering. Then there were the background interviews, in which the "C" word was always placed front and center. In the Fifties, that was one step short of the firing squad.
When it was all over, there were no actual charges against anyone. The ruined reputations were irrelevant compared to the volumes of lists, especially at promotion time. And most important, the manipulators found that following the examples of HUAC and Joe McCarthy, they could get away with it. The Constitution was shredded. The UCMJ was turned into festive confetti. The victims were left to recover what was left of their lives. It was a first rate rehearsal for those who would give us the (soon to be toughened) Patriot Act.
The most distressing fact is that despite all the commentary, blogs and testimony, the current government just smiles and plows ahead with its multitude of true believers. Eventually, they will have a new armband: A black dollar sign, rampant, over a coiled bullwhip.
The knock on the door still vibrates
George B. Morgan
The Worst President, EVER?
May 19, 2005
For the record, I don’t like George Bush. And I don’t like most of the people who work for George Bush. So diehard Republicans can just brush aside my remarks as so much partisan blather.
But by now I suppose very few diehard Republicans ever read this blog. So do me a favor – email this to the diehards in your family and circle of friends. Ask them to tell me why I am wrong about this:
George Bush is the worst president of the United States of America, ever. Hands down.
And here are just a few reasons why I believe that statement is true.
America the Disgraced
President Bush’s actions and policies have destroyed America’s image as a nation that adheres to a set of core values, such as the rule of law, humane treatment of prisoners, presumed innocence, trial by jury and respect for international laws.
How do I know this? Because, the world is telling us so, whenever we care enough to ask.
“Positive views of the U.S. in Russia have risen 11 points in the past year. But U.S. favorability ratings in France and Germany are somewhat lower than last year and there has been a larger decline in Great Britain (58% now, 70% last year). Young people in Great Britain, France, and Germany have more negative views of America than do people in other age groups. An important factor in world opinion about America is the perception that the U.S. acts internationally without taking account of the interests of other nations. Large majorities in every nation surveyed believe that America pays little or no attention to their country's interests in making its foreign policy decisions. This opinion is most prevalent in France (84%), Turkey (79%) and Jordan (77%), but even in Great Britain 61% say the U.S. pays little or no attention to British interests.” (Full study)
Nice going George. Even Richard Nixon couldn’t tarnish America’s image that much.
George’s Vietnam
Bad Listerner
Then there’s the war that is largely responsible for that drop in our international image. President Bush really screwed this one up. First, everyone not drinking the Neocon Kool-Aid tried to warn George not to pull that trigger. Then Army Chief of Staff, General Shinseki, warned Bush that a war in Iraq would not be the “cake walk” his Neocon Rasputin, Paul Wolfowitz, promised. Instead, he warned, we would need a lot of troops in Iraq for long time. For that piece of advice he was first publicly embarrassed by his boss then shown the door.
“At a Pentagon news conference neither Mr. Rumsfeld nor Mr. Wolfowitz mentioned General Shinseki, the Army chief of staff, by name. But both men were clearly irritated at the general's suggestion that a postwar Iraq might require many more forces than the 100,000 American troops and the tens of thousands of allied forces that are also expected to join a reconstruction effort. "The idea that it would take several hundred thousand U.S. forces I think is far off the mark," Mr. Rumsfeld said. (Full Story)
That was 2003. Here’s a story from today’s paper.
“BAGHDAD, Iraq, May 19 - American military commanders in Baghdad and Washington gave a sobering new assessment on Wednesday of the war in Iraq….. In interviews and briefings this week, some of the generals pulled back from recent suggestions, some by the same officers, that positive trends in Iraq could allow a major draw-down in the 138,000 American troops late this year or early in 2006. One officer suggested Wednesday that American military involvement could last "many years." (Full Story)
Gee. Who saw that coming?
So, thanks to George W. Bush and the handful of Neocon nuts you listen to. Now we are stuck in another Vietnam-type war thousands of miles from home. All the Vietnam trappings are here for anyone who cares to notice – indigenous insurgents, driven by a fanatical ideology, supported and supplied by “spoiler” nation-states with their own anti-US agendas, thousands of dead civilians, American soldiers dying by the gross week in and week out, with no end in sight.
Nice going George. Maybe because you skipped out on the Vietnam War you didn’t know this could happen. Or maybe you really are as dumb as common road gravel.
The Sovietization of America
One of the Republican party’s proudest boasts is that Ronald Reagan defeated the Soviet Evil Empire. The irony is they are now recreating pieces of that police state here at home now.
Hyperbole? You judge – while you still can.
“WASHINGTON, May 18 - The Bush administration and Senate Republican leaders are pushing a plan that would significantly expand the F.B.I.'s power to demand business records in terror investigations without obtaining approval from a judge, officials said on Wednesday. "This is a dramatic expansion of the federal government's power," said Lisa Graves, senior counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union in Washington. "It's really a power grab by the administration for the F.B.I. to secretly demand medical records, tax records, gun purchase records and all sorts of other material if they deem it relevant to an intelligence investigation." (Full Story)
Now, the Patriot Act – you know, the law that among other things allows federal agents to demand your local library tell them what books you are reading – is about to be expanded.
Little by little this administration has chipped away at state powers by transferring them to Washington. And nowhere has this process been more pronounced than in the area of law enforcement and the courts. The FBI, which once had to defer to local and state law enforcers when on their turf, can now barge right in and take charge. All they have to do is an investigation a “national security” or “homeland security” matter.
Federal courts, which have acted as a brake on law enforcement abuses, are being systemically stacked with rightwing judges less likely to side with victims of overzealous cops or invasions of personal privacy.
That’s why this is going on right now:
“WASHINGTON, May 18 - The Senate plunged into an intense partisan struggle on Wednesday over the fate of stalled federal court nominees and the governance of the institution itself as the two parties locked in a debate over the right of the minority to prevent votes on a president's judicial candidates. "If Republicans roll back our rights in this chamber, there will be no check on their power," said Senator Reid. "The radical, right wing will be free to pursue any agenda they want. And not just on judges. Their power will be unchecked on Supreme Court nominees, the president's nominees in general and legislation like Social Security privatization." (Full Story)”
The Bushites are on a Neocon roll and the federal judiciary is their final obstacle. If they can stack the appellate courts and appoint two rightwing Supreme Court justices before the end of Bush’s final term, it will be “game over” for civil libertarians – and America as we knew her.
The Peasantization of Workers
Over the past five years we have seen the biggest transfer of wealth in the history of money. The already wealthy have become mind-numbingly rich under George Bush. Where did the money come from? It came right out of the pockets of working Americans and the poor.
I heard that groan from the right. Same old liberal, bleeding-heart bullshit, right?
So, you judge.
What the right has accomplished in just five years is the creation of a low-wage economy – a management wet dream – a country filled with high-skilled workers so desperate for jobs they will work for peanuts. Once powerful labor unions have been powerless to stop the flow of once high-paying blue and gray-collar jobs to cheap overseas venues. The jobs that replaced those lost to outsourcing pay an average of ten grand a year less. (As I said above, the money came straight out of workers pockets.)
Deflating Inflation
The administration likes to boast that it has kept inflation in check. Yes they have, at least somewhat. But the reasons inflation remains low are all bad reasons that will result in very bad news down the road.
First, consumers have less money to spend, as noted above. Since consumer spending power is a prime driver of price inflation, prices on many core consumer products have remained low. And many of those now low-price products keeping inflation low are no longer made here but in cheap-labor countries like China.
But inflation has many causes, not just consumer spending. Raw materials, shipping costs, currency fluctuations. And deep inside the bowels of the economic gut, rumbling can be heard.
“WASHINGTON -- Consumer prices jumped again last month, primarily reflecting sharp increases in food and energy costs, the government reported today. But prices for items other than food and energy were flat in April, while oil and gas prices have fallen since then, the Labor Department said, boosting hopes in financial markets that the recent inflation flare-up may be fading. Food prices climbed 0.7 percent last month, largely because of the rising costs of fruits and vegetables. But the so-called core-CPI, which excludes food and energy costs, was unchanged in April and is up 2.6 percent from April of last year.” (Full Story)
Inflation is not as benign as the government figures pretend. This is because of how they calculate inflation on individual items in the CPI and can fiddle with the facts. For example, if HP replaces a printer with a new model that might include a few modest enhancements over it’s predecessor which sold for $100, but prices the new model $125, government economists can claim the price really did not go up because the new model is better than the old model.
Trouble is you can’t buy the old model any longer, but never mind that. Even though you have to pay more for basically the same printer, the price did not go up -- because “they” say so.
How much of that is going on in calculating the CPI? Plenty. And if you shop you know it. They keep saying inflation is in check, but the checks I have to write for everything from my utilities to the food keep getting larger.
The point – figures don’t lie but liars can figure – and they are.
Keeping Up Keeping Up
If things are so bad, why hasn’t the economy slipped back into recession? Because it’s been running on credit. During Bush’s first term the economy perked up because Bush pumped $1.6 trillion in tax rebates into it. That was like giving a dying patient an injection of meth and then claiming he was cured because he was up and jerking around in bed.
Once consumers consumed their paltry tax rebates and the wealthy had deposited their hefty rebates into family trust accounts, the economy would have slowed again -- had it not been for low interest rates and easy credit. Consumers turned into home-equity vampires and credit card addicts in order to maintain the middleclass lifestyle their new low-paying jobs could no longer finance.
(See inset chart from yesterday’s Wall Street Journal.)
And, the government as well went on a borrowing binge running up a national credit card debt of just over $7 trillion.
All that damage in just five years! It’s almost unimaginable, but true. And the negative long-term implications stagger those who understand that there really is no such thing as a free lunch, that deficits do matter, be they government deficits or consumer's.
Christian Jihadists
I will not belabor this point, except to say that, at the very time Bush berates religious fundamentalists aborad, he has breached the wall between religion and state here at home. He has jimmied open this Pandora's Box and there will be hell to pay for it eventually -- as there has been everywhere on earth where this was done.
All the above, and more, is why I contend that George W. Bush is the worst president EVER. Hands down, no one else even comes close.
Herbert Hoover may have trigger the Great Depression, but he didn’t invade another nation on false pretenses, or authorize torture of prisoners, or try to stack the courts. Franklin Roosevelt did try to stack the courts but Congress said “no” and he said “okay,” and went on the save the world from fascism and secure the lives of America's elderly by creating Social Security - which Bush now wants to subvert.
Johnson and Nixon did fight an illegal and immoral war but Johnson lifted millions out of poverty and got the Civil Rights Act passed, much to his own party’s determent. Nixon tried to subvert the Constitution but was caught and thrown out of office before he could succeed.
But I fear it’s too late to stop George W. Bush and his band of rightwing revolutionaries. We have let them get to far along now to stop them. We have let them neutralize too many constitutional checks and balances. And, once they deep-six the filibuster it truly will be game over.
Yes, the Democrats have begun to fight, but too little and now too late. The only recourse soon will be public demonstrations of the kind and size not seen here since the 1970s.
The only question is are there still enough of us out here who give damn.
By Stephen Pizzo
<>
Raconteur at Large
http://www.stephen.pizzo.com
Is Bush The Worst President
EVER?
Yesterday’s column certainly hit a nerve. (I left it on the bottom of this page if you missed it.)
Is George W. Bush the worst president in the history of the nation? After five years in the White House we now have enough information to begin exploring that question.
So, presidential historians Doris Kearns Goodwin and Michael Beschloss, Haynes Johnson, are you folks up to this challenge?
Of course by the time those guys get around to publishing anything the issue would be moot. So, maybe there is someone(s) out there ready, willing and able to decide this pressing matter before it’s too late.
After reading yesterday’s piece readers added to the list of Bush – shall we call them “shortcomings.” Ruinous tax cuts, millions more American’s without health coverage, a wanton disregard for the environment, facilitating, and even rewarding, corporate corruption on Iraq-rebuilding contracts, stifling life-saving fetal stem cell research to curry favor with the religious right, torture, kidnappings, incarceration without trial and now the new British government memo that proves Bush planned to attack Iraq soon after he was elected, WMD or no WMD.
Asked by reporters if the administration would comply with Democrat’s demand for an explanation of that memo, WH spokesman Scott McClellan, tersely responded, “we see no need to respond.” (Translation: None you their damn business. None of your business either.)
Readers who responded to yesterday’s piece clearly shared my frustrations and fear that we have allowed things to go too far, and now it is too late to stop this rightwing, fundamentalist juggernaut. Some suggested, as I did, large street demonstrations opposing the war and Bush court nominees. Maybe millions of people in the street can convince arrogant Republicans that not everyone out here is a Red voter. And, it might just stiffen the spine of congressional Democrats, assuming they still have one.
Yesterday’s piece appeared today on AlterNet where those readers added their own comments and suggestions. Some suggested circulating an Internet petition demanding a national recall election. While not a constitutional remedy such a petition could be a useful organizing tool.
But I still believe that validation by a creditable source of my premise, that George W. Bush IS the worst president, ever, would be the most useful thing we could do right now.
So, is he? If not then I will shut up about it and just go back to just opposing his policies.
But, if the answer is, as I suspect, yes, yes he is the worst president ever, then wouldn’t that be such an important revelation that we should know it as soon as possible - while it matters and while we might, just might be able to do something about it?
There's no way this Republican-controlled congress will ever impeach Bush -- even if he were caught red-handed personally torturing Saddam in the Oval Office while being serviced by Monica. But, a well-documented study proving that Bush is indeed the worst president in history would certainly clip his wings – and those right-wings that flew him this lofty perch.
So again I ask, beg, plead, implore, grovel…. is there a non-partisan historian or organization out there that can settle this matter while it still matters? Is George W. Bush the worst president ever, or not?
(BTW, Earl Killian has already done a good deal of historical legwork for those interested in taking on this challenge. http://www.killian.com/earl/presidents.html )
Here are some letters from readers on this subject. Below them is the original column.
(And still more letters on this HERE.)
Not only is he the worst president ever but he's the scariest! Damn, I thought I was scared in the 70's always wondering if nuclear bombs were going to be set off. Things are scarier than I ever remember them. Between the debt situation, religion intruding everywhere, global warming/resource depletion, no substantial independent media to speak of, insane people running the world...YIKES!
Nevertheless, I wanted to let you know that I, and some of the people I hang with, DO care and will for some time.
To end on an upbeat note - did you hear what George Galloway had to say to Norm Coleman? Wasn't that great?! More of that, more of that!
Margaret Carbone
Editor,
I think you are on the right track identifying Bush
as the worst US President ever. That actually seems
a bit of a no-brainer, although I realize it takes courage to say it in print.
My concern is that he may actually be one of the worst
figures in all of Western history. Compare your list of
charges against him with Nero, the Pope of the Inquisition, Hitler, ...
In the entire record of Western "civilization" I am hard pressed to think of any regime more frightening than this unholy alliance of greed sucking business dudes -
Cheney, Lay, ... the "Religious" Right types Falwell et al, totally Machevillian political masterminds DeLay, Rove, Frist coupled with the complicity of Corporations who are allowed to do whatever they want without fear of Government sanction, and finally to the American people who are so dumbed down by 50 years of declining public education, and so spoiled by artificially cheap energy that they now believe is their God-given right - Saddam doesn't want to sell us Iraqi oil - well just invade and depose him. That's easy.
Until the American people crawl out of their Hummers,
wake up and demand to see Cheney's energy committee
meeting minutes, and really get their heads around where
these guys have put us, the rest of the world will justifiably despise us.
Bill Fellinger
Williston, Vermont
Mr. Pizzo
The Republicans have been so successful in demanding and getting what they want no matter the cost to the less-than-rich Americans? I cannot for the life of me comprehend how so many can be so ignorant of what is happening or stupid enough to let it happen if they know.
It's as if there is some sort of conservative religious revival taking place in the US that bears no resemblance to truth, fact, or reason.
Scary stuff. But why? I am convinced that it is too late to stop, undo, or reverse the terrible domestic and foreign policies of the Bush administration.
Just who is in power behind this shift to an ultra-conservative government? The famous authors of the 21st Century Plan that was concocted over 12 years ago?
The only way to make sense of what is happening today is to think oil. The US knows that cheap oil is running out and wants to position itself to control the flow of the largest reserves. Why else create permanent military bases in Iraq?
Once you understand that our national security and interests are tied directly to oil, everything else that is happening begins to make sense.
Connecting the dots, it is plausible that the US will engage militarily with any other country in order to protect the supply of oil for American corporations. Oil is the life-blood of capitalism and consumerism in this and every developed country.
And the average American won't speak up against such a policy because we will have lost our rights to do so.
Jeff
Rochester, MN
Steve,
I think that you're absolutely right. But Bush isn't just the worst prez we've ever had. he's also the dumbest! We've hit lows before, but nothing like this clown.
You know, for so many years we've elected Presidents, and whether you thought they were good or bad, whatever, you could always just forget who was in the WH and go about your life.
But with this Bozo, you have to keep up with his shenanigans on a daily basis because you just can't believe it. It's depressing!
Paul B
Steve
Just saw your blog for first time.....We are the underground and we have to be tenacious...Your blog summed up Bush ..I, like you, sometimes get the feeling we can’t do anything about it, but we can.. We are many....We just have to figure it out and don’t stop .The alternative is unthinkable.
I am calling Code Pink’s Grace Kelland today to give her ideas...Such as, a recall petition that states that we want a recall, a vote of no confidence election on paper ballots. An honest election --or are they afraid of an honest election?
Our bill of rights states that congress works for us, and working Americans are not being heard. They cannot destroy our country, they cannot bankrupt our country...They are wasting and stealing our money, and we want a recall!
This petition could be placed on many blogs and I am sure many people would sign it. I bet we could get millions of signatures..
It just might work.....
Peggy
Stephen,
Here in Orange County people are quiet. The flags and W stickers have finally been removed from most people's cars. No one talks readily about junior or Iraq so it is really hard to assess the attitude here.
Orange County is no longer the John Birch Society bastion of my youth due to the other two million people who have moved here in the last several decades, but it ain't no LA or San Francisco either. Clients in my industry are invariably "tax cut" conservatives who, if prodded, will mouth fealty to all the other bilge that issues forth from junior's lying pie hole. I think that privately they are probably horrified at the direction things are going, but would be committing commercial suicide if they shared their concerns with their pals at the yacht/country club. Not being a member, I am only guessing (hoping) of course. The OC (I hate that silly TV name) conservatives are state's rights types who must be nearly frantic at the continuing prospect of junior's DC black hole of political power - but they still love those tax cuts and of course those lucrative government contracts.
The local news is focused on Mr. Villaraigosa and car chases and missing brides and pop pederasts. Workers are loath to expose their true feelings at the water cooler for fear of being labeled a crank or a liberal. Who wants the boss to think you are unpatriotic or worse? My tactic is to talk to people my age raising male teenagers and to bring up the possibility of conscription. Many people seem to think I am crazy, but a few have agreed that they share similar fears. Its hell being a prophet.
The current news seems to indicate that we are at the tipping point, but as you point out it may be for naught. When a puke like Scott McClennan can blame and intimidate Newsweek for printing what should be common knowledge about US military torture and humiliation, its probably too late. Blaming the messenger, indeed.
My wish is for some progressive billionaires to fund a think tank archipelago, one of whose missions would be to research the biographies of any and all GOP leaders (it pains me to write "leaders") present and prospective and out them real good - show no mercy. And publicize their findings using the Heritage, AEI, Hoover Institute models. Ideas matter and the left better get the information/opinion infrastructure in place to compete or its over. We are stuck with junior, the worst president ever, but Jeb is being queued up and I fear that the foundation of destruction laid by his older brother will allow him flush the whole shebang right down the dumper.
From behind the Orange Curtain, I remain,
Kurt
Steve
The Dems need to get angry the way George Galloway did the other day. Why are they so weak-spined and mealy mouthed? I'm nearly 70 years old, but dammit--I'll march!
Sandy
Steve,
I just got back from a month in South Africa. And I tell you what - I felt a lot freer and safer there than I do here. You have no idea what a bad rep this country has over there! What's interesting is that hardly anyone takes any notice of the US any more - they are more interested in what is happening in their own country and in Europe. The majority feels that the US is in deep trouble.
Susan
Steve,
Bush is not just guilty of torture, but murder. Lots of murders. Not as in collateral damage from a bomb killing people. I mean people tortured to death by the U.S. Also, the obscenity of redefining "torture" as anything just short of causing "organ failure" -- with an exception that even causing organ failure and death isn't torture if we were seeking information. (A bit like the Catholic church's old view that a married woman could have sex with her husband without committing a sin as long as it was solely for the purpose of reproduction and she didn't enjoy it!)
Bill
STEPHEN,
YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT ON THE BUSH MACHINE AND THE RADICAL RIGHT WING'S TAKE-AWAY OF OUR DEMOCRACY, TO BE REPLACED BY A THEOCRATIC NEO-NAZI DICTATORSHIP.
YOU ARE ALSO CORRECT IN STATING WE HAVE DONE TOO LITTLE , TOO LATE, TO STOP THIS ABOMINATION. OUR LAST STAND IS MASS DEMONSTRATIONS AND CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE, BUT ALAS, WHO IS THERE TO ORGANIZE THEM? PERHAPS GETTING YOUR STORY OUT, FORCEFULLY AND REPEATEDLY, EVERY WAY YOU CAN, WILL CAUSE A GROUNDSWELL.
TIME IS ON OUR SIDE. IRAQ WILL ONLY GET WORSE, SOCIAL PROTECTIONS WILL ONLY DIMINISH, HEALTH COSTS WILL CONTINUE TO SKYROCKET, ENERGY CRISIS IS HERE, ETC. WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS GET THE COUNTRY PISSED OFF.........GOOD LUCK.
Dr, BOB BROGNA
P.S. AS AN M.D. IT IS QUITE APPARENT TO ME THAT OUR PRES. HAS SERIOUS NEUROLOGICAL PROBLEMS, AND IS SOCIO-PSYCHO-PATHICALLY DYSFUNCTIONAL --SAME AS HITLER
(Yo, Dr. Bob. You need to take your keyboard in for a thorough digital exam. It appears something is stuck in there causing it to produce only CAPS.)
Steve,
I loved your Daily Thinking Points where you build a case, piece-by- piece, why Bush is the worst president ever.
It should be emailed to every conservative in the country. Hell, the GOP should have to address each and every one of the indictments you laid out on primetime nationwide TV.
Keep it up!
Unsigned
Mr. Pizzo
Your comments about the current government and its drive for power and control has a very familiar ring. But, it isn't just this administration or even the last forty years. The thrust for power and control has been a part of the tapestry for a long time.
Perhaps an early example can be found in The Trail of Tears, when President Jackson connived at the theft of Native American lands in the Southeast. Then there was Harry Truman. Aside from the Bomb (while peace talks were in progress), and the arbitrary ceding of half of Korea to the Soviets. he also gave us Executive Order 9835.
That edict resulted in to six million investigations of government employees. There were Star Chamber sessions; no actual witnesses, no real testimony, and above all, no attorneys for the defense. During the same period, the military (the AFOSI especially) followed suit. In addition to other acts, it added illegal searches, theft of private property and mail tampering. Then there were the background interviews, in which the "C" word was always placed front and center. In the Fifties, that was one step short of the firing squad.
When it was all over, there were no actual charges against anyone. The ruined reputations were irrelevant compared to the volumes of lists, especially at promotion time. And most important, the manipulators found that following the examples of HUAC and Joe McCarthy, they could get away with it. The Constitution was shredded. The UCMJ was turned into festive confetti. The victims were left to recover what was left of their lives. It was a first rate rehearsal for those who would give us the (soon to be toughened) Patriot Act.
The most distressing fact is that despite all the commentary, blogs and testimony, the current government just smiles and plows ahead with its multitude of true believers. Eventually, they will have a new armband: A black dollar sign, rampant, over a coiled bullwhip.
The knock on the door still vibrates
George B. Morgan
The Worst President, EVER?
May 19, 2005
For the record, I don’t like George Bush. And I don’t like most of the people who work for George Bush. So diehard Republicans can just brush aside my remarks as so much partisan blather.
But by now I suppose very few diehard Republicans ever read this blog. So do me a favor – email this to the diehards in your family and circle of friends. Ask them to tell me why I am wrong about this:
George Bush is the worst president of the United States of America, ever. Hands down.
And here are just a few reasons why I believe that statement is true.
America the Disgraced
President Bush’s actions and policies have destroyed America’s image as a nation that adheres to a set of core values, such as the rule of law, humane treatment of prisoners, presumed innocence, trial by jury and respect for international laws.
How do I know this? Because, the world is telling us so, whenever we care enough to ask.
“Positive views of the U.S. in Russia have risen 11 points in the past year. But U.S. favorability ratings in France and Germany are somewhat lower than last year and there has been a larger decline in Great Britain (58% now, 70% last year). Young people in Great Britain, France, and Germany have more negative views of America than do people in other age groups. An important factor in world opinion about America is the perception that the U.S. acts internationally without taking account of the interests of other nations. Large majorities in every nation surveyed believe that America pays little or no attention to their country's interests in making its foreign policy decisions. This opinion is most prevalent in France (84%), Turkey (79%) and Jordan (77%), but even in Great Britain 61% say the U.S. pays little or no attention to British interests.” (Full study)
Nice going George. Even Richard Nixon couldn’t tarnish America’s image that much.
George’s Vietnam
Bad Listerner
Then there’s the war that is largely responsible for that drop in our international image. President Bush really screwed this one up. First, everyone not drinking the Neocon Kool-Aid tried to warn George not to pull that trigger. Then Army Chief of Staff, General Shinseki, warned Bush that a war in Iraq would not be the “cake walk” his Neocon Rasputin, Paul Wolfowitz, promised. Instead, he warned, we would need a lot of troops in Iraq for long time. For that piece of advice he was first publicly embarrassed by his boss then shown the door.
“At a Pentagon news conference neither Mr. Rumsfeld nor Mr. Wolfowitz mentioned General Shinseki, the Army chief of staff, by name. But both men were clearly irritated at the general's suggestion that a postwar Iraq might require many more forces than the 100,000 American troops and the tens of thousands of allied forces that are also expected to join a reconstruction effort. "The idea that it would take several hundred thousand U.S. forces I think is far off the mark," Mr. Rumsfeld said. (Full Story)
That was 2003. Here’s a story from today’s paper.
“BAGHDAD, Iraq, May 19 - American military commanders in Baghdad and Washington gave a sobering new assessment on Wednesday of the war in Iraq….. In interviews and briefings this week, some of the generals pulled back from recent suggestions, some by the same officers, that positive trends in Iraq could allow a major draw-down in the 138,000 American troops late this year or early in 2006. One officer suggested Wednesday that American military involvement could last "many years." (Full Story)
Gee. Who saw that coming?
So, thanks to George W. Bush and the handful of Neocon nuts you listen to. Now we are stuck in another Vietnam-type war thousands of miles from home. All the Vietnam trappings are here for anyone who cares to notice – indigenous insurgents, driven by a fanatical ideology, supported and supplied by “spoiler” nation-states with their own anti-US agendas, thousands of dead civilians, American soldiers dying by the gross week in and week out, with no end in sight.
Nice going George. Maybe because you skipped out on the Vietnam War you didn’t know this could happen. Or maybe you really are as dumb as common road gravel.
The Sovietization of America
One of the Republican party’s proudest boasts is that Ronald Reagan defeated the Soviet Evil Empire. The irony is they are now recreating pieces of that police state here at home now.
Hyperbole? You judge – while you still can.
“WASHINGTON, May 18 - The Bush administration and Senate Republican leaders are pushing a plan that would significantly expand the F.B.I.'s power to demand business records in terror investigations without obtaining approval from a judge, officials said on Wednesday. "This is a dramatic expansion of the federal government's power," said Lisa Graves, senior counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union in Washington. "It's really a power grab by the administration for the F.B.I. to secretly demand medical records, tax records, gun purchase records and all sorts of other material if they deem it relevant to an intelligence investigation." (Full Story)
Now, the Patriot Act – you know, the law that among other things allows federal agents to demand your local library tell them what books you are reading – is about to be expanded.
Little by little this administration has chipped away at state powers by transferring them to Washington. And nowhere has this process been more pronounced than in the area of law enforcement and the courts. The FBI, which once had to defer to local and state law enforcers when on their turf, can now barge right in and take charge. All they have to do is an investigation a “national security” or “homeland security” matter.
Federal courts, which have acted as a brake on law enforcement abuses, are being systemically stacked with rightwing judges less likely to side with victims of overzealous cops or invasions of personal privacy.
That’s why this is going on right now:
“WASHINGTON, May 18 - The Senate plunged into an intense partisan struggle on Wednesday over the fate of stalled federal court nominees and the governance of the institution itself as the two parties locked in a debate over the right of the minority to prevent votes on a president's judicial candidates. "If Republicans roll back our rights in this chamber, there will be no check on their power," said Senator Reid. "The radical, right wing will be free to pursue any agenda they want. And not just on judges. Their power will be unchecked on Supreme Court nominees, the president's nominees in general and legislation like Social Security privatization." (Full Story)”
The Bushites are on a Neocon roll and the federal judiciary is their final obstacle. If they can stack the appellate courts and appoint two rightwing Supreme Court justices before the end of Bush’s final term, it will be “game over” for civil libertarians – and America as we knew her.
The Peasantization of Workers
Over the past five years we have seen the biggest transfer of wealth in the history of money. The already wealthy have become mind-numbingly rich under George Bush. Where did the money come from? It came right out of the pockets of working Americans and the poor.
I heard that groan from the right. Same old liberal, bleeding-heart bullshit, right?
So, you judge.
What the right has accomplished in just five years is the creation of a low-wage economy – a management wet dream – a country filled with high-skilled workers so desperate for jobs they will work for peanuts. Once powerful labor unions have been powerless to stop the flow of once high-paying blue and gray-collar jobs to cheap overseas venues. The jobs that replaced those lost to outsourcing pay an average of ten grand a year less. (As I said above, the money came straight out of workers pockets.)
Deflating Inflation
The administration likes to boast that it has kept inflation in check. Yes they have, at least somewhat. But the reasons inflation remains low are all bad reasons that will result in very bad news down the road.
First, consumers have less money to spend, as noted above. Since consumer spending power is a prime driver of price inflation, prices on many core consumer products have remained low. And many of those now low-price products keeping inflation low are no longer made here but in cheap-labor countries like China.
But inflation has many causes, not just consumer spending. Raw materials, shipping costs, currency fluctuations. And deep inside the bowels of the economic gut, rumbling can be heard.
“WASHINGTON -- Consumer prices jumped again last month, primarily reflecting sharp increases in food and energy costs, the government reported today. But prices for items other than food and energy were flat in April, while oil and gas prices have fallen since then, the Labor Department said, boosting hopes in financial markets that the recent inflation flare-up may be fading. Food prices climbed 0.7 percent last month, largely because of the rising costs of fruits and vegetables. But the so-called core-CPI, which excludes food and energy costs, was unchanged in April and is up 2.6 percent from April of last year.” (Full Story)
Inflation is not as benign as the government figures pretend. This is because of how they calculate inflation on individual items in the CPI and can fiddle with the facts. For example, if HP replaces a printer with a new model that might include a few modest enhancements over it’s predecessor which sold for $100, but prices the new model $125, government economists can claim the price really did not go up because the new model is better than the old model.
Trouble is you can’t buy the old model any longer, but never mind that. Even though you have to pay more for basically the same printer, the price did not go up -- because “they” say so.
How much of that is going on in calculating the CPI? Plenty. And if you shop you know it. They keep saying inflation is in check, but the checks I have to write for everything from my utilities to the food keep getting larger.
The point – figures don’t lie but liars can figure – and they are.
Keeping Up Keeping Up
If things are so bad, why hasn’t the economy slipped back into recession? Because it’s been running on credit. During Bush’s first term the economy perked up because Bush pumped $1.6 trillion in tax rebates into it. That was like giving a dying patient an injection of meth and then claiming he was cured because he was up and jerking around in bed.
Once consumers consumed their paltry tax rebates and the wealthy had deposited their hefty rebates into family trust accounts, the economy would have slowed again -- had it not been for low interest rates and easy credit. Consumers turned into home-equity vampires and credit card addicts in order to maintain the middleclass lifestyle their new low-paying jobs could no longer finance.
(See inset chart from yesterday’s Wall Street Journal.)
And, the government as well went on a borrowing binge running up a national credit card debt of just over $7 trillion.
All that damage in just five years! It’s almost unimaginable, but true. And the negative long-term implications stagger those who understand that there really is no such thing as a free lunch, that deficits do matter, be they government deficits or consumer's.
Christian Jihadists
I will not belabor this point, except to say that, at the very time Bush berates religious fundamentalists aborad, he has breached the wall between religion and state here at home. He has jimmied open this Pandora's Box and there will be hell to pay for it eventually -- as there has been everywhere on earth where this was done.
All the above, and more, is why I contend that George W. Bush is the worst president EVER. Hands down, no one else even comes close.
Herbert Hoover may have trigger the Great Depression, but he didn’t invade another nation on false pretenses, or authorize torture of prisoners, or try to stack the courts. Franklin Roosevelt did try to stack the courts but Congress said “no” and he said “okay,” and went on the save the world from fascism and secure the lives of America's elderly by creating Social Security - which Bush now wants to subvert.
Johnson and Nixon did fight an illegal and immoral war but Johnson lifted millions out of poverty and got the Civil Rights Act passed, much to his own party’s determent. Nixon tried to subvert the Constitution but was caught and thrown out of office before he could succeed.
But I fear it’s too late to stop George W. Bush and his band of rightwing revolutionaries. We have let them get to far along now to stop them. We have let them neutralize too many constitutional checks and balances. And, once they deep-six the filibuster it truly will be game over.
Yes, the Democrats have begun to fight, but too little and now too late. The only recourse soon will be public demonstrations of the kind and size not seen here since the 1970s.
The only question is are there still enough of us out here who give damn.
By Stephen Pizzo
<>
Raconteur at Large
http://www.stephen.pizzo.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
