LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman. Winner 2013 Webby Awards for Best Political Website
May 18, 2013

 Choose a size
Text Size

Trending:     chris hedges     economy     elizabeth warren     politics     robert scheer
Most Read

The History That Birthed the Tsarnaev Boys

Jerry Brown: California's Mystery Man

Chris Hedges: The 'Terrifying' State Assault on Press Freedom

'The Daily Show': Stewart Slams Hypocrites Cheney and Rumsfeld

This Is Water: Fishy Advice From David Foster Wallace

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports
 * NEW! * How the IRS’ Nonprofit Division Got So Dysfunctional
Recurring Nightmares? Wake Up and Take Action

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture
Act of Congress
Daily Rituals
The Girls of Atomic City

Digs

Truthdig Bazaar
Lords of the Land

Lords of the Land

By Idith Zertal and Akiva Eldar
$ 19.77

more items

 
Reports

Bush’s Baffling Optimism Defies Harsh Reality in Iraq

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Jul 13, 2007
bush cheney rice
AP Photo / Pablo Martinez Monsivais

President Bush, Vice President Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice powwow with various groups working on making progress in Iraq, such as the Iraq Provincial Reconstruction Team Leaders, via video on Friday.

Patrick Cockburn

     

     

Scrambling to shore up crumbling support for the war in Iraq, President George Bush released a report yesterday [Thursday, July 12] claiming sufficient political and military progress to justify the presence of 170,000 US troops in the country.

       

President Bush said he still believed victory in Iraq was possible.

Advertisement

“Those who believe that the battle in Iraq is lost will likely point to the unsatisfactory performance on some of the political benchmarks,” he said.

“Those who believe the battle in Iraq can and must be won see the satisfactory performance on several of the security benchmarks as a cause of optimism.” He added it was too early to say if his new strategy in Iraq was working.

But in Iraq as in the US there is a sense that Washington is playing its last cards. “I assume the US is going to start pulling out because 70 per cent of Americans and Congress want the troops to come home,” Mahmoud Othman, a veteran Iraqi politician, said. “The Americans are defeated. They haven’t achieved any of their aims.”

The report itself admits to a sense in Iraq that the US, one way or another, is on the way out more than four years after its invasion in 2003.

It says that political reconciliation in Iraq is being hampered by “increasing concern among Iraqi political leaders that the United States may not have a long-term commitment to Iraq”.

The White House yesterday sought to suggest possible change for the better in Iraq by saying that there had been satisfactory progress on eight of the 18 goals set by Congress. Unsatisfactory progress is reported on six, unsatisfactory but with some progress on two and “too early to assess” on a further two.

The picture it hopes to give—and this has been uncritically reported by the US media—is of a mixture of progress and frustration in Iraq.

The wholly misleading suggestion is that the war could go either way. In reality the six failures are on issues critical to the survival of Iraq while the eight successes are on largely trivial matters.

Thus unsatisfactory progress is reported on “the Iraqi security forces even handedly enforcing the law” and on the number of Iraqi units willing to fight independently of the Americans. This means that there is no Iraqi national army but one consisting of Kurds, Shia and Sunni who will never act against their own communities. Despite three years of training, the Iraqi security forces cannot defend the government.

Set against these vitally important failures are almost ludicrously trivial or meaningless successes. For instance, “the rights of minority political parties are being defended” but these groups have no political influence. The alliance of Shia religious and Kurdish nationalist parties that make up the government is not keen to share power with anybody. This is scarcely surprising since they triumphantly won the election in 2005.

There have been some real improvements over the past six months. Sectarian killings in Iraq have declined to 650 in June compared with 2,100 in January. So-called “high-profile” bombings, including suicide bomb attacks on Shia markets, fell to 90 in June compared with 180 in March. But it is doubtful if these are entirely or even mainly due to the US surge.

The fall in sectarian killings, mostly of Sunni by Shia, may be largely the result of the Mehdi Army militia of Muqtada al-Sadr being told by their leader to curb their murder campaign. It is also true that last year, after the attack on the Shia shrine in Samarra on 22 February 2006, there was a battle for Baghdad which the Shia won and the Sunni lost.

Baghdad is more and more Shia-dominated and the Sunni are pinned into the south-west of the city and a few other enclaves. As Sunni and Shia are killed or driven out of mixed areas, there are less of them to kill. Some 4.2 million people in Iraq are now refugees, of whom about half have fled the country.

The real and appalling situation on the ground in Iraq has been all too evident this week. Thirty bodies, the harvest of the death squads, were found in the streets of Baghdad on Wednesday. The figure for Tuesday was 26 and, in addition, 20 rockets and mortar bombs were fired into the Green Zone killing three people. This was significant because they were fired by the Mehdi Army, who had been upset by criticism made on them by the Iraqi Prime Minister, Nuri al-Maliki. By way of gentle reproof they shelled his offices in the Green Zone.

US and British claims of success in Iraq over the past four years have a grim record of being entirely sculpted to political needs at home. British ministers trumpeted the success of Operation Sinbad in Basra last year and early this one saying it would put the worst of the militia out of business. This year Basra is wholly ruled by these very same militias.

Overall the “surge” has already failed. It was never necessary to wait for yesterday’s report or a further assessment in September. The reason for the failure is the same as that for American failures since 2003. They have very few allies in Iraq outside Kurdistan. The occupation is unpopular and always has been.

Economic and social conditions are becoming more and more desperate. There is in theory 5.6 hours of electricity in Baghdad every 24 hours but many districts get none at all. It is baking hot in the Mesopotamian plain, where temperatures even at night are above 40C. People used to sleep on the roof but this has become dangerous because of mortar bombardments.

Oil pipelines are sabotaged by insurgents and punctured by thieves. “In just one stretch of pipeline between Baghdad and Baiji, we found 1,488 holes,” the Oil Minister, Hussein Shahristani, told the Iraqi parliament, speaking of a important pipe that brings oil product to the capital from Baiji refinery. He added: “It doesn’t function as a pipeline… it’s more like a sieve.”

Gasoline is brought to Baghdad by truck but these are not allowed on bridges because they might be packed with explosives. In a further sign of how life is lived in Baghdad, clerics have issued a fatwa against eating river fish - previously a favourite food - because the fish gorge on dead bodies floating in the Tigris river.

Astonishingly, the report suggests that one of the successes in Iraq has been the spending of $10bn “for reconstruction projects, including delivery of essential services, on an equitable basis”.

The danger of the false optimism in the report is that it prevents other policies being devised. In January, President Bush decided to in effect ignore the most important recommendations of the Baker-Hamilton report, which were to talk to Iran and Syria and to disengage US troops. Instead Mr Bush sent reinforcements to Iraq, denounced Iran and Syria and added to the number of his enemies by threatening to clamp down on the Shia militias.

But talking to Iran has always been essential to any solution in Iraq.

“The Iranians can afford to compromise in Iraq but they cannot afford to lose,” said one Iraqi observer. The more threatened they feel by the US over nuclear power or the possibility of air attack, the greater incentive they have to ensure that the US does not succeed in gaining control of Iraq. For most of the past four years they have not had to do much because the US has helpfully ensured its own failure by pursuing disastrous policies.

Paradoxically, Iran, unlike Saudi Arabia and the Sunni Arab states, actually supports the Iraqi government in Baghdad. It is run largely by their Shia co-religionists and political leaders, who were supported by Iran for years against Saddam Hussein. The problem here is that Washington has never been willing to accept that the great campaign it launched to overthrow Saddam Hussein has increased Iranian influence and put Shia clergy in black turbans in power in Baghdad as they have long held power in Tehran.

The “benchmarks” in President Bush’s report are trivial and prove nothing. They appear to be an attempt to pretend that the war is still winnable in Iraq up to the Presidential election in the US next year.

These vain hopes of victory rule out compromises that the US still might make and are a pretence which many Americans and Iraqis will die unnecessarily trying to sustain.

Benchmarks for progress

Unsatisfactory

* De-Baathification

* Equitable distribution of oil among Sunnis, Shias, Kurds and other Iraqis

* Providing Iraqi commanders with full authority

* Even-handed law enforcement

* Number of Iraqi units capable of operating independently

* Ensuring that political authorities do not make false accusations against the Security Forces

Unsatisfactory, but some progress

* Reducing sectarian violence and eliminating militia control of local security

* Independent High Electoral Commission, provincial councils, and a date for provincial elections

Satisfactory

* Constitutional Review

* Legislation on semi-autonomous regions

* Political, media and economic committees to support Baghdad Security Plan

* Three Iraqi brigades to support Baghdad plan

* Ensuring the security plan will not provide a haven for outlaws

* Joint security stations across Baghdad

* Minority parties’ rights in the legislature

* Allocating and spending $10bn for reconstruction

Too early to assess

* Enacting and implementing amnesty

* Militia disarmament

Originally published in The Independent.
     


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By clifylq, October 28, 2007 at 10:43 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

REGARDING:
Patrick Cockburn

Scrambling to shore up crumbling support for the war in Iraq, President George Bush released a report yesterday [Thursday, July 12] claiming sufficient political and military progress to justify the presence of 170,000 US troops in the country.

President Bush said he still believed victory in Iraq was possible.

MY RESPONSE:
AMERICA THE FOLLOWING IS WHAT THE COMMUNIST MAIN STREAM MEDIA IN AMERICA WON’T TELL YOU THAT REALLY HAPPENED IN NEW ORLEANS AND TO COMPARE IT WITH THE RECENT FIRES IN CALIFORNIA IS TOTALLY ASS NINE. THE PEOPLE IN THE KATRINA ASSASINATION BY OUR GOVERNMENT; ISRAEL, ENTAILED POOR BLACKS AND WHITES WITH NO MONEY OR CLOUT WITH THE INTENTION OF STEALING THEIR PROPERTY ULTIMATELY TO BUILD HUGE LUXURY HOTELS TO MAKE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS FOR THEMSELVES. TO COMPARE THAT TO THE VICTIMS IN CA’S FIRES LIKE THE BLUE BLOODED PEOPLE IN RANCHO BERNARDO, RANCHO SANTA FE, POWAY, ETC., WHO FOR THE MOST PART LIVE IN MILLION DOLLAR HOMES MAKES ME WANT TO PUKE. THESE FIRES WERE PURPOSELY SET BY THE SAME GOVERNMENT (OURS) THAT DESTROYED THE TWIN TOWERS, OK BUILDING ETC. IT WAS DONE MERELY TO BE ABLE TO IMPROVE BUSH’S IMAGE WITH THE PUBLIC FROM HIS INEPT & PURPOSEFUL MIS HANDLING OF THE KATRINA VICTIMS. IT ALSO GAVE HIM THE CHANCE TO BLAME HIS EVIL ON THE AL QUEDA (ISRAEL’S MOSSAD). HIS HANDLING OF THE CA FIRES VICTIMS WOULD IMPROVE HIS IMAGE WITH KATRINA AND LOOK LIKE HE WAS AFTER THE TERRORIST THAT CAUSED IT ALL ULTIMATELY TO GET AWAY WITH GOING TO WAR WITH IRAN FOR ISRAEL TO START WW3. HE CAN’T DO SO WITH SUCH A LOW IMAGE HE HAD PRIOR. HOW SICK IS THAT? WHY CAN’T YOU SEE THIS AMERICA?? BUSH/ISRAEL HAS ABSOLUTELY NO GOOD FEELINGS FOR ANYONE IN AMERICA JUST THEIR EVIL AGENDA OF NWO/JWO FOR ISRAEL’S NEW WORLD ORDER AND THE ENSLAVEMENT OF AMERICA/WORLD. http://clifylq.livejournal.com/62723.html

clifylq
http://clifylq.livejournal.com/

Report this

By ardee, July 22, 2007 at 8:05 am Link to this comment

#88586 by Expat on 7/21 at 8:24 pm
(59 comments total)

#88386 by ardee on 7/20 at 6:26 pm
(311 comments total)

Yes, like you, I’m at a loss to understand these vicious attacks on Nader.  I have followed him from the 60’s when he trashed the Chevy Corvair as “Unsafe at Any Speed”.

The policy of personal destruction as used by Rove to such effect has spread to all corners of political debate. When one is faced with a message impossible or at least difficult to refute one simply smears the messenger…..

This is not at all limited to the neocons, and I admit readily to having used such against certain incorrigible posters even here, racists and such. Perhaps it is our deteriorated educational system that doesnt allow folks to learn how to fact find, use a search engine ( first you must understand how to phrase the parameters)or give them the patience to see it through and make intelligent deduction based on input.

” Those who are too intelligent to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are not.”...attributed to Plato

“If a man begins in certainty he will end in doubt.” Francis Bacon

one more only, I promise;

“When great changes occur in history, when great principles are involved, as a rule the majority is wrong.”  Eugene v. Debs

Report this

By cyrena, July 21, 2007 at 11:01 pm Link to this comment

#88340 by ardee on 7/20 at 3:04 pm


Ardee: Thanks for this.
Cyrena
Hate to overload, but a fascinating subject…heres some background:

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Democracy_America/Be stElections_Money_TDF.html

No overload. I have time for now, so I was able to read this, and appreciate the information. There’s never been any doubt in my mind, that our political system, (and particularly campaign practices) have become totally corrupted by -MONEY-. And, it’s worse now than it was in the past, because of all the brainwashing required via advertising. My own former corporation has ALWAYS contributed to BOTH parties, (though I’ve discovered that they’ve been far more generous to the Repubs when they’ve been in office)
Now, I find that cynically hypocritical, but they just consider it “business as usual”.

So yeah, it’s ugly, but I haven’t figured out a fix.

Report this

By Expat, July 21, 2007 at 9:24 pm Link to this comment

#88386 by ardee on 7/20 at 6:26 pm
(311 comments total)

Yes, like you, I’m at a loss to understand these vicious attacks on Nader.  I have followed him from the 60’s when he trashed the Chevy Corvair as “Unsafe at Any Speed”.

Meglomaniac?  Egotist? Huh? 

But then I am also at a loss for what we allow today in “our” government

Report this

By cyrena, July 20, 2007 at 8:06 pm Link to this comment

#88364 by Ernest Canning on 7/20 at 4:56 pm

Ernest, much thanks for Amy’s interview. I don’t usually miss her, but I did that day. So, I’ve printed it for my files. I’m pretty much in agreement with Nadar, and I had an “opportunity” to evaluate the campaign finance reform bill a few years ago. (Only because it was a required assignment….what a mess).

So yeah, it’s bad, which is why one needs to be wealthy to declare a candidacy… which is why the best of our leaders are probably never known to us. They remain anonymous.

Still, Nadar didn’t present an entirely true picture of Obama’s campaigning funds, because while I know that he has received backing from the corps, (via individuals-Oprah?), I also know for a fact, that most of his funding IS on the grass roots level, and in small donations. And, while Barack must certainly have made a large portion of his cash from his book(s) sales, he didn’t start out wealthy, or “corporately connected”. (It helps to have Harvard Law money, but one need not be a millionaire to attend.)

Also, at the time that Obama entered politics, he already had a day job teaching Law at De Paul University. (I doubt they pay them as much as they pay politicians) So, he’s simply never had the kind of corporate contacts that come anywhere near the others. He just hasn’t been around long enough. He’s not OLD enough. And THAT had been, at least initially, his main attraction for me. (besides the fact that he was articulate, and very obviously an excellent thinker, but more importantly, an independent thinker, and one capable of utilizing the resources of experts, for the stuff that he needs. (like the team he put together to come up with a universal health care plan).

More than anything, he hasn’t the baggage. Now, I should mention that I read somewhere in a post, that Barack’s wife, Michelle, is or was on the Board for Wal-Mart. If that is true, then I’ll have to swallow my words about corporate connections being slim. 

And, I DID hear him make the same comment that Ralph Nadar was complaining about in the interview. He did want to beef up the military, but I interpreted it differently. I interpreted it as intent to simply try to put it back together again, so that we wouldn’t have our National Guard, and our Reserves, and all of the rest of them, so completely wiped-out. So that we wouldn’t have to continue hiring felons, and high school drop-outs, and have to rely on a private shadow army of contractors that number right now, the same as our troops. At least that was MY interpretation, but that doesn’t mean that I wasn’t somehow reading more intent than was there.

What I know about Kucinich is originally from nearly 4 years ago, when he was considering a run for the White House back then. We didn’t hear much more from him until about a year ago, and so I’ve picked up his thread again. I’m not as impressed as I was then.

Anyway, based on the fact that Obama has in fact done some serious “mobilizing” and because he’s a straight shooter, and not likely to let “fame” go to his head, that’s pretty much who I’m looking at right now. I’m definitely a sucker for his willingness to recognize the rule of law, both domestically and internationally, and his commitment to using that to resolve the disaster that is Iraq. We need to let that system work as it’s been designed, and make sure that ALL of the Middle Eastern states take a part in restoring Iraq, under the guidance of the UN. The neo-cons have so seriously de-legitimized the UN, that they’ve been basically cut-off at the knees for the past several years. Still, I’m sure they can do their jobs, if we allow it.

More than anything, Obama is fully aware that the disaster that is Iraq, wouldn’t be the disaster that it is, if we weren’t there. And, needless to say, if our loved ones weren’t there, (kid, spouse, parent, sibling) they wouldn’t be dying.

But…I like Mike Gravel too!!

Report this

By ardee, July 20, 2007 at 7:26 pm Link to this comment

I have been reading the utterances of Ralph Nader for years now, many in fact, and I simply fail to understand the knee jerk reactions to him from intelligent folks such as Frank Cajon. If Nader’s speeches were reprinted sans attribution every moderate and leftist would applaud them with unanimity. He speaks the way I remember real democrats speaking in my youth, before the DLC ruined that party ( or maybe they were ruined even earlier by their obsessive need for more and more money, not their fault but they could work to change the damn system).

But Nader remains, to these folks as an egotist, a spoiler, a man who puts his own ahead of the nations…..This guy comes from a solid small town background. His father’s store was the gathering place for liberal thought and Ralph could have joined a major law firm out of school and made megabucks, instead he spearheads consumer protection legislation, and for far, far less dough…but he is perceived so poorly by those who refuse to self examine.

I cannot help but wonder why these folks dont seem to grasp the fact that Nader spoiled nothing, that Democrats would have been a bit less blatant than the GOP but no less damaging in the long run.

Report this

By cann4ing, July 20, 2007 at 6:57 pm Link to this comment

ITW, I will accept your post #87929 as a dispassionate and reasoned response to mine.  I also agree that all nations should be judged by the same international standards.  My problem is that I see most of what we see, hear & read within the U.S. corporate media as subjecting a favored status upon Israel and a disfavored status on all things Arab, Palestinian or Persian.  As I noted, the scope of acceptable discourse is far narrower for Americans than it is for Israelis.  Here is an example, excerpts from a 10/17/04 Ha’aretz article, “Killing Children is No Longer a Big Deal” by Gideon Levy.

“More than 30 Palestinian children were killed in the first two weeks of Operation Days of Penitence….It’s no wonder that many people term such wholesale killing of children ‘terror.’  Whereas in the overall count of all victims of the intifada the ratio is three Palestinians killed for every Israeli killed, when it comes to children the ratio is 5:1….According to B’Tselem…even before the current operation in Gaza, 557 Palestinian minors…were killed, compared to 110 Israeli minors.

“...According to B’Tselem…42 of the children who have been killed were 10; 20 were seven; and eight were two years old….The youngest victims are 13 newborn infants who died at checkpoints during births.

“With horrific statistics like this, the question of who is a terrorist should have long since become very burdensome for every Israeli.  Yet it is not on the public agenda.  Child killers are always Palestinians, the soldiers always only defend us and themselves, and the hell with the statistics.

“The plain fact…is that the blood of hundreds of Palestinian children is on our hands.  No tortuous explanations by the IDF…about the dangers posed to soldiers by the children, and no dubious excuse by the public relations people in the Foreign Ministry…will change that fact.  An army that kills so many children is an army with no restraints, an army that has lost its moral code.

“. . . .

“Palestinian children have no refuge: mortal danger lurks for them in their homes, in their schools and on their streets.  Not one of the hundreds of children who have been killed deserved to die, and the responsibility for their killing cannot remain anonymous….

“. . . .

“The public indifference that accompanies this pageant of unrelieved suffering makes all Israelis accomplices to a crime.”

Since Mr. Levy is an Israeli, I suspect it would be a bit difficult for even the most die-hard Zionist to accuse him of anti-Semitism.  But it is equally clear that an article like this would never appear in either the Washington Post or the New York Times.

Report this

By cann4ing, July 20, 2007 at 5:56 pm Link to this comment

Ardee & Cyrena, as a follow-up to your excellent posts, consider Amy Goodman’s recent interview of Ralph Nader:

Amy Goodman:  I wanted to ask you about these secret trade deals that are being made behind closed doores between the Democrats and the White House…Rick MacArthur, publisher of Harper’s, said that “Rangel, Pelosi are saying ‘...we’re gearing up for the 2008 election.  We’ve got to raise a lot of money.’  They’re closer to the Clinton wing of the party, which is the pro-so-called-free-trade wing of the party…And this is a way of saying to the corporate community…—Wall Street, Wall Mart—...we’re open for business…”

Ralph Nader:  The corporate Democrats in action again.  Why should we all be surprised?  When you ask Democrats in Congress, “How are you doing against the Republicans in the coming election?”  The first answer is about money.  It’s not about justice.  It’s not about the agenda.  It’s not about mobilizing people.  It’s about dialing for corporate dollars.  These two parties have sold the US government and the American people to the highest bidders.  And that’s why we have a corporate sovereign political economy, and that’s why workers are daily in peril of losing their economic security and their pensions and retirement or their jobs or their health and safety in the workplace.”

During the interview, Nader referred to the “WTO and NAFTA” as “an albatross around the neck of workers, of consumers and of clean environments.”  He noted that they pull “down our standards so our workers have to compete with brutalized child labor in third world countries.”  Nader singled out Dennis Kucinich as a notable exception to this sorry state of affairs.

http://www.democracynow.org/print.pl?sid=07/07/09/131226

Report this

By ardee, July 20, 2007 at 4:06 pm Link to this comment

A bit more…I actually found a TON of data on DLC dragging the party rightward to pander for the money there…

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20020805/borosage20020726

http://www.alternet.org/election04/20774/

D.L.C.: Democrats Love Corporations?

By David Sirota, The Nation. Posted December 17, 2004.

The Democratic Leadership Council’s addiction to contributions from Philip Morris, Texaco, and Merck is proof enough that its “centrism” is really a naked corporate agenda.

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles7/Nader_DLC.htm
Looking out over Washington, DC, from his plush office, Al From is once again foaming at the mouth. The CEO of the corporate-sponsored Democratic Leadership Council and his wealthy cronies are in their regular postelection attack mode. Despite wins by economic populists in red states like Colorado and Montana this year, the DLC is claiming like a broken record that progressive policies are hurting the Democratic Party.

From’s group is funded by huge contributions from multinationals like Philip Morris, Texaco, Enron and Merck, which have all, at one point or another, slathered the DLC with cash. Those resources have been used to push a nakedly corporate agenda under the guise of “centrism” while allowing the DLC to parrot GOP criticism of populist Democrats as far-left extremists. Worse, the mainstream media follow suit, characterizing progressive positions on everything from trade to healthcare to taxes as ultra-liberal. As the AP recently claimed, “party liberals argue that the party must energize its base by moving to the left” while “the DLC and other centrist groups argue that the party must court moderates and find a way to compete in the Midwest and South.”

Report this

By ardee, July 20, 2007 at 4:04 pm Link to this comment

Cyrena
Hate to overload, but a fascinating subject…heres some background:

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Democracy_America/BestElections_Money_TDF.html

The Tilt to the Right

Impressive signs of Democratic gains in fundraising lie in the comparisons of contributions to the congressional elections in 1984 and the off-year elections in 1986. In this two-year period, Democratic challengers and candidates for open seat races greatly increased their share of contributions from corporate, trade, and “nonconnected” PACs, while maintaining their near monopoly on labor PACs. Democratic candidates’ share of corporate contributions rose from only 8 percent in 1984 to 28 percent in the 1986 off-year elections. In 1988, their share compared to contributions to Republicans rose to 27 percent.
Despite (or because of) the Democratic gains in fundraising, it is clear that the ideological pendulum did not swing back toward liberalism. The Democrats’ courting of corporate and trade PACs reflected a swing to the right in the congressional wing of the party. As the National Journal pointed out after the 1984 elections, business gave more to the Democrats because “there was a dearth of vulnerable Democratic incumbents with voting records that the business community opposed.” The American Enterprise Institute’s Michael Malbin attributed shifting corporate funding to “congressional Democrats…speaking more about capital formation and other business issues.” Representative Coelho’s attempts to attract corporate money prompted the chair of the PAC funded by Tenneco Inc., the third largest corporate PAC giver in 1984 and fourth largest in 1986, to comment that “the political climate has changed somewhat and is more [supportive of] the private sector.”
Corporate PAC money also helps keep the Democrats listing to the right because it helps more conservative candidates defeat liberals in Democratic primaries. Where liberal Democratic incumbents are relatively secure, corporations use PAC contributions to preserve access to them, as in the case of possible presidential contenders like Senators Ted Kennedy and Joseph Biden. But when liberals are confronted with a viable conservative challenger, they are likely to get short shrift from wealthy individuals and business interests. Liberal Bruce Morrison of Connecticut, for example, was touted by Representative Coelho as worthy of business support, but in the last few weeks of his close but successful 1984 race to retain his seat, he attracted only $7,000 from corporate PACs while his more conservative opponent received $37,000.

Report this

By cyrena, July 20, 2007 at 1:40 pm Link to this comment

Comment#88203 by ardee on 7/20 at 4:56 am

...“Think about the numbers for a moment. Senatorial races cost about ten million dollars minimum. In the last Presidential race both candidates spent in excess of one hundred million each. Do you really believe the bulk of this money comes from anywhere else but special interests?”...

Well Ardee, I didn’t get to check the site yet, (though I will) but this pretty much answers my question. When you said the dems were raking in more money than the repubs, I was thinking in terms of the upcoming elections, and I admit I hadn’t even considered Senatorial candidates. So sure, we can figure that the bulk of the money come from special interest, which is generally corporate in nature. I don’t even have to look at prior elections to know that.

And, even if we WERE only talking about the current presidential candidates, there’s no doubt that some of them are primarily special interest sponsored as well. I think I wanted to just highlight that this was not the case with ALL of them. And, while “special interest” isn’t ALWAYS “corporate”, I certainly accept the reality that it generally does make up the bulk of campaign funding.

Still, I’m seeing some refreshing moves away from that, for the first time in decades. Just hanging on to a little hope I guess.

Report this

By ardee, July 20, 2007 at 5:56 am Link to this comment

#88147 by cyrena on 7/19 at 8:37 pm
(419 comments total)

#88009 by ardee on 7/19 at 10:43 am
Ardee, I have just a couple of questions on this:
• By the by, numbers are showing that Democrats are receiving more money than their Republican counterparts, and much of this is corporate in nature. Handwriting on the wall I guess, positioning to be owed favors by the winners…...
I guess I have seen a few of these “numbers” on the campaign monies, but nothing (yet) that provides any clear evidence or connection to “corporate” sources, though I would pretty much expect that from ALL of the republicans, and some of the Democrats. Still, this is sort of “vague” to just put “out there”, as some sort of handwriting on the wall.
..................
Cyrena,
I am posting at work (430 AM, prior to shift start at five) so excuse me for not doing the leg work. If you go to the AAR wbsite, click on the Thom Hartmann page you will find the numbers you seek. I would imagine, and will check after work today, that there are other sources as well.

Think about the numbers for a moment. Senatorial races cost about ten million dollars minimum. In the last Presidential race both candidates spent in excess of one hundred million each. Do you really believe the bulk of this money comes from anywhere else but special interests?

Report this

By cyrena, July 19, 2007 at 9:37 pm Link to this comment

#88009 by ardee on 7/19 at 10:43 am
Ardee, I have just a couple of questions on this:
•  By the by, numbers are showing that Democrats are receiving more money than their Republican counterparts, and much of this is corporate in nature. Handwriting on the wall I guess, positioning to be owed favors by the winners…...
I guess I have seen a few of these “numbers” on the campaign monies, but nothing (yet) that provides any clear evidence or connection to “corporate” sources, though I would pretty much expect that from ALL of the republicans, and some of the Democrats. Still, this is sort of “vague” to just put “out there”, as some sort of handwriting on the wall.

Not everyone of the Democrats is “corporately” supported. A few have gone out of their way to AVOID such tainted money, which is…in part, why some have been able to collect larger than normal sums. They’ve hit up a much larger “audience”, for far more modest contributions. The numbers seem to work in their favor with that sort of “populist” formula.

Meantime, the Republicans have already told all poor Americans, that they DON’T WANT THEM TO VOTE, so if they wanna be a part of the process here, they’re gonna throw their few dollars at the Democrats.

No “corporate nature” there. Just plain old common sense. Maybe it’s finally coming back. That would be good.

Report this

By Frank Cajon, July 19, 2007 at 9:23 pm Link to this comment

Mudwollow: First, I am not saying you should have voted for Gore instead of Nader. You could have voted for George Bush, who may indeed have ‘earned’ your vote, my statement was that many of my political acquaintances share a belief that Nader clearly handed the close 2000 election to Bush. Two days ago, I had another blogger come on here and make the case that Nader’s candidacy in a splinter party didn’t cost the Democrats the 2000 election. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and woulda, shoulda, coulda, but do the math: Nader pulled over 120,000 votes in New Hampshire and Florida alone and Bush won both states by a total of 13,000 votes; sure, make the argument that way more Green party members come from the GOP than the Democrats. Sure.

BTW, I agree with you that with only a couple of noted exceptions there isn’t a ‘dime’s worth of difference’ between the two major parties. I think the Green movement is idealistically admirable. pretend that Ralph Nader ever is going to build a splinter party capable of doing anything beyong creating interesting math, it will be by rewriting the Constitution to permit instant runoff voting, which is similar to what made Aaron Burr kill Hamilton and John Quincy Adams president while polling less than 40% of the popular vote and less than 50% of the electoral college. I have a better, just as likely idea for scrapping the constitution: get rid of the executive branch.
We are staring in the face the very real possibility that Bush/Cheney may decide they like it on top and suspend the 2008 elections on the basis of national security, especially if there is any terrorist activity next year. Sound paranoid? This is reality, and I work with patients with real paranoia and know the difference. There are plans in place to put FEMA and Blackwater in charge of large US cities on executive order, anyone can be arrested without charges or arraignment if declared an enemy combatant, and Bush/Cheney have weeded out any high military officers who aren’t with their program. There is a new layer of Homeland Security secret police intended to prevent terrorists from attacking us, who Bush/Cheny have coopted to eavesdrop and wiretap on nearly anyone they feel the inclination to without warrants. I am not convinced that Bush is mentally stable enough to realize that he will have to step down from office. If he actually does, my hope is that this near miss with dictatorship will startle Americans into realizing they have two options: a new, different political representation by a completely rebuilt party in Washington-one that can draw enough votes to defeat the GOP status quo-or a much less likely, but hopefully eventual movement to reduce the powers of the president and executive branch, with an ultimate goal of a legislative democracy, with a prime minister, multi-party system, only Congress having the power to declare war or hostile actions, and the Supreme Court elected by the people and representing their interests and views.

Report this

By cann4ing, July 19, 2007 at 7:29 pm Link to this comment

mudwollow, so long as the Dems & Repugs are in control, instant run off voting is a pipe dream.  Nader would have been far more effective if he had chosen to help recapture the people’s party, the Democratic Party, from the corporatist charletons of the DLC who have coopted it.  The fact is that there is someone running right now within the Democratic Party who is as attuned to the needs of the vast majority of Americans, the middle and working classes.  Go to   http://www.kucinich.us  and see for yourself.

Report this

By ardee, July 19, 2007 at 11:43 am Link to this comment

Kudos Mudwollow for noting IRV as a change we do need. That still doesnt help us correct the “dimes worth of difference” problem however.

#87871 by Frank Cajon on 7/18 at 7:23 pm
(19 comments total)

The points being made by readers all have some merit. Some feel like I that it is blood for oil, a money scheme, others that it’s a Zionist proxy fight.
To Ga and Ardee Ralph Nader, if you can do math that puts Bush in the White House if Nader threw his support to GOre in 2000, you won’t get a rational argument from me to the contrary. BTW, I spent over 20 years in third and fourth parties. In the US, the Peace and Freedom Party and Socialist Workers Party are completely marginalized. I was constantly hit up for money by the SWP, and often had no say in the selection of candidates for their state and national offices of either party, since their conventions weren’t always publicized and their mailing lists updated. It was like being in a PTA at a poorly run school. P&F ran Angela Davis for an office in California, and as far to the left as I was, she was at the time a riot-inciting radical (this may not be the case now).

Frank, It matters not whether Nader voters added up to a winning margin for Gore because , were Nader not in the race I wouldnt have VOTED FOR GORE anyway!. I imagine that would be true of any number of Nader voters. Not trying for redundancy here but MY vote is earned not owed!

As to splinter parties and organisation, I too am very familiar with the problem. We must endeavor to persevere.


I think we need to reorganize the Democratic Party and integrate the Green Party and some of the ideals of the P&F party into it; while losing the ‘Republocats’ that constitute about 3/4 of the current Democratic encumbents. Dianne Feinstein is a big time Senator from my home state, who I vote against because she voted for Iraq funding, and who now is the poster girl for every conservative website and newspaper because she has been funneling $ to her hubby’s no-bid companies who are doing the same shit in Iraq that Cheney’s old pals are. We need to get new blood, young left-wing anti-war Congressmen and Senators elected and a grass-roots effort is the only way it will happen since the big biz $ is going to the Republocats, who represent all of the current crop of Democratic presidential hopefuls except for Kucinich, and MAYBE Obama if he votes against future war funding. Out with the old, in with the new. Trust me, the splinter party guys don’t stand a chance. Been there, done that.

Your comments re: integration saddens me, frankly, Frank. It shows that you fail to grasp the message of Ralph Nader or the events of the last six years plus; there isnt a dimes worth of difference between the two parties.

Merging the Greens with the Dems would be the death knell for the Green Party, and in two ways. Firstly the cornerstone of the Green Party is the refusal to take corporate monies and secondly I and many like me I imagine, would simply leave the Green Party, or rather it would have left us.

I recall that Dianne’s hubby was extremely wealthy when she was mayor of SF and do not know what she throws his way, do you? If true then see the “dimes worth of difference” comment….

By the by, numbers are showing that Democrats are receiving more money than their Republican counterparts, and much of this is corporate in nature. Handwriting on the wall I guess, positioning to be owed favors by the winners…...

Report this

By Mudwollow, July 19, 2007 at 10:31 am Link to this comment

Getting off the subject but bringing up Ralph Nader and blaming him for spoiling the election means it’s time to bring up INSTANT RUNOFF VOTING. Instant runoff voting is easy to understand, simple to implement and eliminates this type of blame and finger-pointing.

Instead of constantly being forced to vote for the lesser of two evils, IRV allows American voters to rank their votes. Instant runoff voting allows voters to vote for who they really want without feeling that they’re throwing their votes away. In the Nader/Gore example, a voter would vote for Ralph Nader first and for Al Gore second. Your vote for Ralph Nader would be tallied so everyone would know how well Ralph did, but because Ralph didn’t receive a majority of votes your vote would go to Al Gore. It’s automatic and simple. Your vote for Ralph Nader is tallied but not lost because it then goes to Al Gore.

Instant runoff voting, gives American voters the feeling that their votes are worth something. Voters never have to feel that they are throwing their votes away by voting for the lesser of two evils. Instant runoff voting is the only method by which third party candidates stand a chance of winning major elections. If we do not implement instant runoff voting nationally, it’s guaranteed that we will have a two party system nearly indistinguishable from a single party system for the foreseeable future.

Rolf Nader said of the Democrats and Republicans “there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between the two” and it’s hard to argue with that assessment. So if you’re sick of voting for Demopublicans or Republocrats you should check out instant runoff voting and start by getting it implemented on the local level.

http://www.instantrunoff.com/

Report this

By cann4ing, July 19, 2007 at 8:31 am Link to this comment

Cyrena, it isn’t often that you and I disagree, but the fact is that Obama, since entering the Senate, voted to fund this war on every occasion but the very last time.  Obama said they simply did not have the votes to block funding.  That was a lie.  Then and now it only takes 41 votes in the Senate to fillibuster any bill containing funding.

This latest charade was over an effort to attack an amendment to the latest defense authorization bill that would have required a withdrawal commencing next April.  They made a good show of it, staying up over night, before caving in.  If they had any courage, they would refuse to permit an up or down vote on the defense authorization bill until the amendment was included.

Report this

By Expat, July 19, 2007 at 6:13 am Link to this comment

#87521 by johnofportland on 7/17 at 2:36 pm
(14 comments total)

Yeah, as an old fart from the 60’s (Nam era) I have the same question.  Everbody is complaining but I don’t see anybody on the streets…I remember…it really got everyones attention and even when I was called a “commie faggot” it felt good because I knew it was having an effect.

Happy Trails

Report this

By Expat, July 19, 2007 at 6:02 am Link to this comment

#87876 by cyrena on 7/18 at 7:54 pm

#87871 by Frank Cajon on 7/18 at 7:23 pm

Frank, thanks for the post. On this, I wanted to add a note…

“We need to get new blood, young left-wing anti-war Congressmen and Senators elected and a grass-roots effort is the only way it will happen since the big biz $ is going to the Republocats, who represent all of the current crop of Democratic presidential hopefuls except for Kucinich, and MAYBE Obama if he votes against future war funding. Out with the old, in with the new. Trust me, the splinter party guys don’t stand a chance.

Okay guys…can we dispense with the left wing/right wing crap…we need intelligent compassionate people and I know they exist on both sides of the spectrum.  Tom McCall, the past governor of Oregon was an example of a truly progressive person and he was a Republican.  True, the present herd of Republicans are, are, shit, but I know this R/L stuff is dividing and we need a unified front against this fascist grab of our country.  So let’s welcome anybody from any belief to join against this very real, very dangerous enemy inside of our gate.  The real problem is, most of us just don’t see or realize this very real threat and it’s very real and it’s here now.  Unify and conquer the bastards.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, July 19, 2007 at 4:54 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Ernest,
I have to admit you have me baffled:

ITW, this is one occasion in which you and I agree, somewhat.  Posters who seek to reduce everything the U.S. does to some unseen, behind-the-scenes Zionist conspiracy border upon paranoid anti-Semites.  That said, I am also convinced that those posters who seek to conflate every criticism of Zionism or Israel’s illegal, brutal occupation into some rabid anti-Semitism are likewise disengenous.

Here we DO somewhat agree—I’ve NEVER said Israel doesn’t merit criticism, and hasn’t screwed up royally in the last few years. Were he not in a coma I would advocate hauling Sharon before the ICJ.  But I object to the description of all of Israel and the Jewish State as this vast evil when it exists surrounded by far less free Moslem states who repress their ethnic and religious minorities far worse than Israel.  Fair’s fair.  But when a different standard is applied to Israel and posters blindly pretend that the Arab states don’t do the same and worse, what am I to think but that the REAL difference is one state is Jewish and the others are Moslem?

I would agree with you that the effort to explain Iraq by way of Zionism alone is like having a tail wag the dog.  But I also know that Israel and AIPAC are not innocent bystanders and that they exercise a degree of influence over U.S. politicians and the American media that is vastly greater than one would expect from a nation of that size, in part because many Jewish Americans are more rabid Zionists than many ordinary Israeli citizens who experience a greater range of dialogue, critical of the occupation, in the Israeli press than we do here.

I agree on wagging the dog.  And I do NOT agree with AIPAC on many issues.  But here’s where we differ. WHAT Israeli press? Fox Noise? Murdoch’s not Jewish and his empire is to news what a Big Mac is to nutritional eating.  Undue influence? Is it any more than Cuban-Americans in Florida keeping us from having an intelligent relationship with Cuba for 45 years? Or Irish-Americans who prolonged the Ulster conflict for DECADES with their support to the IRA?  Or Chinese-Americans acting as a conduit to China that is now SO out of control that we don’t DARE impose deserved sanctions on the Middle Kingdom for fear their floating the Yuan will destroy our economy?  Meanwhile they are selling us poisoned dog food and poisoned toothpaste, “Thomas The Tank Engine” toys where the red paint is full of lead (luckily my 2 year old doesn’t put them in his mouth and we got rid of all the tainted ones).  And we do NOTHING!

When it comes to Iraq, one cannot overlook “U.S.” policy as spelled out by the PNAC as early as 1991.  The goal was always regime change for the purpose of acquiring a permanent base of operations for the U.S. military in the oil rich middle east.  There is, indeed, a “U.S.” imperialism and U.S. military-industrial complex that is broader in scope and purpose than Israel, a U.S. client-state.

Agreed. 100%

This does not mean that the goals of both U.S. imperialism and Israeli Zionists are not aligned, but it does mean that the issues and relationships are far more complex than simplistic Zionist conspiracy theories can explain.

Agreed again. It also does not mean they ARE aligned either.  As you said, simplistic explanations don’t cut it.

So I am baffled by this versus your other posts.  What I advocate is a two-state solution. I want both parties to be only partly satisfied and to KNOW that the other side is only partly satisfied.  This will allow the Israelis and Palestinians to FINALLY stop killing each other and begin to live in peace.

I expect there will be lots of conflicts, and lots more to be worked out.

BOTH sides will need to rein in their radical minorities.

In time, it will allow them to forge the strong economic bonds like the EU that ensure there will not be a European conflict for generations into the future.

Report this

By cyrena, July 18, 2007 at 8:54 pm Link to this comment

#87871 by Frank Cajon on 7/18 at 7:23 pm

Frank, thanks for the post. On this, I wanted to add a note…

“We need to get new blood, young left-wing anti-war Congressmen and Senators elected and a grass-roots effort is the only way it will happen since the big biz $ is going to the Republocats, who represent all of the current crop of Democratic presidential hopefuls except for Kucinich, and MAYBE Obama if he votes against future war funding. Out with the old, in with the new. Trust me, the splinter party guys don’t stand a chance. Been there, done that.”...

I agree with all of the above, (having been there and done it myself.. and we have the same State senator.)

But, just a note on Obama…he has NEVER voted in favor of funding this war…EVER. He didn’t vote to use force to begin with, (as did nearly all of the others from both parties that were in the Senate at the time…except for Kucinich). So, that shouldn’t be lost. He’s also managed to gather his funding through grassroots organizations, rather than the usual corporate and other “sponsors.” He’s done it primarily by soliciting small donations that the much less fortunate can come up with, and that includes most of us. I even gave him $10.00.

I’ve also been able to take only a brief glimpse of a health plan that he’s proposed, (having assembled a team of experts that actually know how this stuff could actually WORK) and it looks pretty good. I’ve also had an opportunity to read a lot of Obama’s own work, (and his books) and I think that he deserves serious consideration. I’m doing that more and more, as others simply disqualify themselves. I think he should hook up with Mike Gravel, since it would be good to have a backup with some experience that Barack hasn’t lived long enough to get yet.

For an old dude, Mike Gravel is pretty cool. He’s got good “history”.

Meantime, Angela Davis has long ago given up inciting rebellion. She’s teaching at UCSC now, and was here in our own area a couple of years ago. She’s definitely mellowed out, and it was a good talk.

Report this

By Frank Cajon, July 18, 2007 at 8:23 pm Link to this comment

The points being made by readers all have some merit. Some feel like I that it is blood for oil, a money scheme, others that it’s a Zionist proxy fight.
To Ga and Ardee Ralph Nader, if you can do math that puts Bush in the White House if Nader threw his support to GOre in 2000, you won’t get a rational argument from me to the contrary. BTW, I spent over 20 years in third and fourth parties. In the US, the Peace and Freedom Party and Socialist Workers Party are completely marginalized. I was constantly hit up for money by the SWP, and often had no say in the selection of candidates for their state and national offices of either party, since their conventions weren’t always publicized and their mailing lists updated. It was like being in a PTA at a poorly run school. P&F ran Angela Davis for an office in California, and as far to the left as I was, she was at the time a riot-inciting radical (this may not be the case now). I think we need to reorganize the Democratic Party and integrate the Green Party and some of the ideals of the P&F party into it; while losing the ‘Republocats’ that constitute about 3/4 of the current Democratic encumbents. Dianne Feinstein is a big time Senator from my home state, who I vote against because she voted for Iraq funding, and who now is the poster girl for every conservative website and newspaper because she has been funneling $ to her hubby’s no-bid companies who are doing the same shit in Iraq that Cheney’s old pals are. We need to get new blood, young left-wing anti-war Congressmen and Senators elected and a grass-roots effort is the only way it will happen since the big biz $ is going to the Republocats, who represent all of the current crop of Democratic presidential hopefuls except for Kucinich, and MAYBE Obama if he votes against future war funding. Out with the old, in with the new. Trust me, the splinter party guys don’t stand a chance. Been there, done that.

Report this

By cann4ing, July 18, 2007 at 6:14 pm Link to this comment

ITW, this is one occasion in which you and I agree, somewhat.  Posters who seek to reduce everything the U.S. does to some unseen, behind-the-scenes Zionist conspiracy border upon paranoid anti-Semites.  That said, I am also convinced that those posters who seek to conflate every criticism of Zionism or Israel’s illegal, brutal occupation into some rabid anti-Semitism are likewise disengenous.

I would agree with you that the effort to explain Iraq by way of Zionism alone is like having a tail wag the dog.  But I also know that Israel and AIPAC are not innocent bystanders and that they exercise a degree of influence over U.S. politicians and the American media that is vastly greater than one would expect from a nation of that size, in part because many Jewish Americans are more rabid Zionists than many ordinary Israeli citizens who experience a greater range of dialogue, critical of the occupation, in the Israeli press than we do here.

When it comes to Iraq, one cannot overlook “U.S.” policy as spelled out by the PNAC as early as 1991.  The goal was always regime change for the purpose of acquiring a permanent base of operations for the U.S. military in the oil rich middle east.  There is, indeed, a “U.S.” imperialism and U.S. military-industrial complex that is broader in scope and purpose than Israel, a U.S. client-state.

This does not mean that the goals of both U.S. imperialism and Israeli Zionists are not aligned, but it does mean that the issues and relationships are far more complex than simplistic Zionist conspiracy theories can explain.

Report this

By NYT9237723, July 18, 2007 at 5:10 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Thanks, Mudwollow (#87744).

It’s truly amazing that people believe that Bush doesn’t know what has been happening to the poor and the middle class, to civil rights, to the military and National Guard, to the distribution of wealth, to NOLA, etc.

One government official after another resigns and tells the same story: s/he was ordered not to discuss subjects or alternatives not approved by this administration. GWB, Cheney and their advisors are well aware of the state of the Union. Their agenda is one transferring wealth to the neo-con wealthy, discrediting significant opponents by any means, and ensuring that the law prevents any redress for the poor and middle class.

GWB has consistently pulled out political sock puppets and distracted the American people, the Democrats, and few remaining media voices from the neo-con agenda with a wide variety of “issues” from “supporting the troops” if one is a real Murkan to gay marriage to immigration. It’s been quite easy for them.

Meanwhile, all the money has been spent. There is no cash for social programs, and our grandchildren will be toiling under the national debt, unless the US defaults. Who knew the fall of the middle class would be so quick and accomplished with so little opposition?

Report this

By Ga, July 18, 2007 at 3:36 pm Link to this comment

I meant, ‘DemocratIC party’ of course.

Report this

By Ga, July 18, 2007 at 3:33 pm Link to this comment

One thing about Nader “taking votes away” from Gore: Pure speculation.

Perhaps in Florida the amount of votes for Nader that would have been for Gore or Bush would have resulted in more for Gore. One may say even, probably. But overall, one can not say for certain what would have happened. Nader made a good case that he had recieved many Republican votes.

This “Nader took away” concept is just not an absolute and no reasonable person should adere to it.  people just love simple answers to much.

Also, and perhaps more important, is that we want, need, more than just two of the same choices every damn time!

When are people really going to wake up? Many people here are Dems/Libs/Progs/Mods, and many of those also complain about the Democrat party. Then we need a THIRD or even a FOURTH or FIFTH PARTY!!!!!!!!!!!!

Report this

By ardee, July 18, 2007 at 3:05 pm Link to this comment

Frank Cajon,

We seem in agreement on Israel and thats nice. We remain in disagreement on Nader’s right to run and his involement in Gore’s loss, and thats OK. It would be weird and boring to be in agreement about everything.

For me, Ralph Nader stood for far more than did Al Gore, spoke to issues and policies that I endorsed and I voted for him precisely because he best represented me. I believe that one is modest about ones successes and stands up for ones own failures, and Gore, to his credit , has never once blamed Nader. You are, of course, free to do so. I am free to vote for him again should he run and should he again represent my views.

Inherit The Wind,

Thank you for the kind words and it is good to see that at least one other shares my view of the absurdity of a mythic and powerful Zionism that rules the world. I,too, see such as nothing less than a new form of anti semitism.

When one reads GodSpeak one shudders for his religious zealotry, the kind that burned witches.Most here debate sans personal attack, some do not. I can give as good as I get and dont worry much about personal insult, its the politics I speak to and the hopes and dreams for the future.

Report this

By Otto, July 18, 2007 at 2:34 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

When there is that much of a disconnect between those in power and the reality of the world, our democracy is in extreme danger.  We are fortunate enough to have a legal and political way of dealing with this.  It is called impeachment.  However, those with the power to impeach and convict must have the wisdom and courage to do so.

Report this

By Mudwollow, July 18, 2007 at 1:09 pm Link to this comment

#87686 by NYT9237723 on 7/18 at 8:14 am
(Unregistered commenter)

Again: bright people miss the point of GWB. Insulting him by calling him “idiot” or some variation denigrating his intelligence blinds people to his strengths and his agenda.

Thanks for reiterating this. It is amazing how few are willing or able to see the true sinister nature of Dick Cheney, George Bush and their brownshirt brethren.

The Bush Cheney game employs a new twist on good cop bad cop. It’s kind of a combination of good cop bad cop and perpetual bait and switch. Continue the charade that Dick Cheney is the bad cop and that George Bush is the good buddy doofus as long as you possibly can. Then when no one gives a crap anymore, switch the good buddy doofus into a demented nutcase. Now you’re left with no one to blame and no one to be angry with. Bad cop-crazy cop, what a choice. But it’s just a game. A game that’s successfully looted trillions of dollars and killed hundreds of thousands of people, but just a game.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, July 18, 2007 at 11:24 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

ardee on 7/14 at 6:24 am
(292 comments total)

Israel, tool or toolmaker?

So many cite Israel as the reasons for our involvement in Iraq and the impetus for remaining there long after the truth of our failures emerges.

While the government of Israel is as guilty in its actions towards the Palestinians as our own government is in our treatment of the Iraqis I cannot support the view of Israel as motivator of American foreign policies.

This tiny little nation is seen by some as running the policies of a nation of 300 million. I would remind everyone that the stated ambitions of the Vulcan Group, two decades ago, was to see a large and permanent military force in the Middle East, in order to gain control over the shrinking oil reserves in that region. Not to bring security to Israel but for reasons of national security vis a vis OIL.

I would suggest that Israel, far from being so in control of our government, is simply another in a long list of tools of USA interests. I have never understand the arch enemy mentality, one that makes all politics cartoonish in nature, opposing a villain writ large and looking for a hero to save the day.

Life and reality is more mundane than all of that, there is no arch villain though there are villainous folks enough, and the hero that will fly in and save us all wears no cape or costume, but is found in our own mirror.

**************************

Ardee:
The anti-semites here have already discounted your cogent, perceptive post.  That’s because you are pointing out the fatal flaw in their conspiracy theory: There’s NO WAY Israel can control the US, despite Sharon’s stupid boasts.

Israel is a tool of American policy, not the maker of it.

But they have already heaped abuse on you because it’s their pet dogma that Israel is evil-incarnate, has demonic powers to exact control, and is out to HARM America (Many of them believe Israel was behind 9/11—despite the fact that it makes no sense—she would have MUCH to lose and little to gain).

They are as non-reality based as the right-wingnuts who still believe Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and was the principle force supporting Al Qaeda. The “Zionist Conspiracy” crowd are no more reality-based than Saddam/WMD/AQ connection crowd.

They also yank EVERY thread over to that—it’s all the fault of the Jews, whoops! Zionists (chortle)

Report this

By NYT9237723, July 18, 2007 at 9:14 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Again: bright people miss the point of GWB. Insulting him by calling him “idiot” or some variation denigrating his intelligence blinds people to his strengths and his agenda.

The neo-cons’ agenda is to un-do the Great Society and New Deal and to return the US to the unfettered capitalism of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. This means virtually no government regulation of business, no protections for the average citizen and the use of the US military to further US business interests abroad.

Since the defeat of Barry Goldwater in 1964, neo-cons have bought newspapers, radio and television stations, and now essentially control most of the media. They control all three branches of the US government, and have dismantled the guarantees of civil liberties in this country. Opposition takes the form of a few comedians like Bill Maher—people who have a following but no real power.

GWB has stayed on message. He has been willing to stand up and utter incorrect statements and downright lies, and to refuse to compromise. He is by no means an idiot. He has delivered the US to his base—the “haves and have-mores”—without hesitation. His base is not the middle class and it’s certainly not the poor.

A couple of more points: GWB’s base is not the religious right. Demographically fundamentalists are not usually among the “have mores,” but they are useful to the neo-cons for votes. Equally, Jews aren’t usually among GWB’s base, but Israel is a handy US surrogate in the Middle East. If (or when) the neo-cons don’t need these groups, they will drop Evangelicals and Jews like a bad habit.

The post by Ender 87267 suggests that all that remains for the neo-cons to do is this: respond to a staged terrorist incident (preferably in a blue state) in which the Moslem perps are identified but not caught and use it as an excuse to suspend elections. Most of the US armed forces and the National Guard are pinned down in an unwinnable war in Iraq. Who is left to resist in such a case?

On the other hand, the Democrats are probably going to run Hilary, who simply cannot win. Even life-long liberal Democrats can’t support her without reservations. In that case, all the neo-cons have to do is to run a reasonably personable candidate (someone with whom guys would want to have a beer, as was said about GWB in 2000), rig a few Diebold machines, and celebrate 8 more years.

Report this

By Frank Cajon, July 17, 2007 at 10:14 pm Link to this comment

To Non Credo and Ardee, and others that have problems with my blog, I reiterate that I don’t use this as a chat room, those are just my reads. Yeah, I think Nader has an ego the size of the world, because of it took votes away from Gore in 2000 when he could have done more good for his own cause by not enabling Dubya to take the environment and consumers down along with the rest of America for what has become an eight year decline.
Like a lot of other people who want change I have never been pleased with the militaristic government in Israel and the way that the US has sold that government weapons of mass destruction since the late 1940’s. I am nervous as hell that Israel has nuclear weapons, but not as much as I would be if North Korea had them, or Iran. But I don’t favor war with either of those countries, either.
I have lurked this site for months and only been blogging, (mainly about Bush’s paranoid schizophrenia due to my work in the mental health field, but also about the Libby farce, etc) for only a couple of weeks. I personally think that the blogs that claim Zionist or Israeli operatives blew up the buildings on 9/11 or that they secretly fund Cheney and Bush and are behind the Iraq invasion are almost ridiculously wrong. I think that simple greed, that the Saudi connection, the money laundering of our half-trillion into the pockets of arms dealers, no-bid contractors, and equally corrupt lobbyists and politicians like Duke Cunningham, Tom Delay, and countless others is a much more obvious answer to this mess than a pro-Zionist conspiracy, but that’s just my read, take it or leave it. What I am most serious about is the fact that the US Congress has been castrated and will not stand up to the fact that Bush has declared himself, Cheney, and Rove some Triumvirate for the 21st Century. They control all three branches of government with complete impunity, ignoring all legal precedents. When Nixon tried this shit, articles of impeachment were on the printers and he was told they were, so got the fuck out of dodge. Now, not only do we see none of the top rank of Democratic opposition willing to deny him a cent to fight this atrocity war, we see very little in the way of demonstrations against the war and no discussion of impeachment against him or Cheney when both clearly have been guilty of obstruction of justice, contempt of Congress, and conspiracy to commit both of those crimes.
A non-violent day of civil disobedience, with organized assemblies demanding an end to the bloodshed, nationwide, has not been tried on a large scale. On a small scale, it gets the old ‘not supporting our troops’ shit, when it is the ultimate act of support for them, to go to the streets making yourself heard to bring them home alive. None of the Demo candidates has the courage to call for this, but it is the only way to get the new ‘silent majority’ heard. If only they cared enough to get out from in front of their TVs and out of their SUVs and off their cells and get out and do it.

Report this

By vet240, July 17, 2007 at 9:39 pm Link to this comment

On a humorous side, bu$h reminds me of those old time snake oil salesman.

On a more ominous side he reminds me of that religeous nut Jim Jones who convinced 900 of his folowers to follow him to hana then convinced them to follow him into heaven by drinking the Cherry Cool-aid laced with arsenic.

This guy is a nutso job!

Report this

By Hammo, July 17, 2007 at 5:07 pm Link to this comment

Using psychology and the mass media to achieve their goals has long been methods of the Bush-Cheney administration.

Though many Americans have gotten wise to this, it seems like we still need to stay one step ahead of the Bush-Cheney bunch.

Any insight we can gain about human psychology, intelligence, the mass media and other aspects of our society in these times could be very helpful.

A few elements might be worth checking out in the article ...

“Being open to perception can be troubling, enlightening”

American Chronicle
July 16, 2007

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=32379

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, July 17, 2007 at 4:48 pm Link to this comment

We the people need to set some Benchmarks on our elected representatives.

Report this

By ardee, July 17, 2007 at 4:33 pm Link to this comment

#87370 by Frank Cajon on 7/16 at 8:52 pm
(17 comments total)

For those who feel that laying some of the blame for the BushReich on the American public is off the mark, hey, I don’t chat room or argue. I do feel that Americans put this fucker in office, at least once (2004, and likely did in 2000 with the assistance of Ralph Nader-another megalomaniac) and have a responsibility to deal with the fact that this was a grave mistake and take steps to correct it.

We all have opinions…Mine is that , in the two thousand election, Jeb installed his brother in the WH, with a little help from Al Gore running an abysmal campaign and losing his own damn state!

In 2004 Bush was again propelled into another four years by the Ohio Blackwood thievery. When one has the head of the Re-elect Bush campaign in Ohio running the election one might expect the machinations that followed.

Your opinion of Nader personally is not my problem, neither of us knows him well enough to judge him as you do. Megalomania is a harsh judgement for a man whose campaign was the only one worth listening to and he had every right to run for that office.

Report this

By johnofportland, July 17, 2007 at 3:36 pm Link to this comment

#87398 by Expat on 7/17 at 4:31 am
(48 comments total) on #87298 by johnofportland:
“Maine or Oregon…I’m Oregon.”

Oregon.

“just look at the apathy that is so rampant now. Can you even believe your eyes?”

I spent twenty-two years in citizen involvement at local, state and federal levels.  Yes, I believe it - there has been a consistent effort to kill public education, capture the free press, eliminate public spaces (vee call zem MALLS, but zpell zem MAULS), break the unions, advance religion as a civil panacea, and suppress, oppress, or destroy opposition via any means fair or foul on the CIA-insitutionalized philosophical premise that the “end justifies the means.”  “We can do a really foul awful deed, if it’s in the best interests of the country.” This has been a premeditated and carefully orchestrated strike on the New Deal, democracy, and the American constitution by the ultra rich, and their willing, and largely selfish and ignorant republican and religious fundamentalist allies - the same sort of coalition that supported the growth of national socialism in Germany (and we all know that grandpa Prescott Bush helped finance the Nazis, don’t we?). 

I spent most of my career trying to wake people up, speaking out all over the country, but my words were lost in the sea of loud ignorant biased nonsense bought and paid for by the power elite to submerge legitimate debate and to defeat communally based decisions of benefit to the greatest number.  As animals, we don’t tend to move off our feed unless the predator is right on top of us.  Well, whichever correspondent below mentioned the new slave-owning class, be advised that vasoline and a kerchief can help to ease chafing from metal leg, wrist, and neck shackles. 

We’ve got road agents and stage robbers holed up in the Whitehouse. This is serious, and one wonders why, if the congress can’t or won’t act, the vigilantes aren’t staging. 

Paul Revere, are you watching?

Report this

By Scott, July 17, 2007 at 12:29 pm Link to this comment

What we need is a state of enforced transparency, and enforce it with extreme prejudice.

Otherwise, the toxicity of the crap and corruption trickling down through society from the top will poison it to death.

To save it, you may have to destroy your government as you know it. It seems the other side (secrecy-mongers) already knows this.

Report this

By Scott, July 17, 2007 at 12:14 pm Link to this comment

“I long for the day when congressional people become concerned about their positions of responsibility”

That will only happen when people have the means to monitor the government to the extent that Orwell’s Big Brother monitored people.

Official secrecy is democracy’s Achille’s heel. Outlaw it and everything should change. Surveillance of the powerful and wealthy clearly works, look at Conrad Black for example.

Report this

By Mudwollow, July 17, 2007 at 12:05 pm Link to this comment

What does “victory” mean?...OIL

Report this

By Emily Anne, July 17, 2007 at 11:48 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Today the government announced that al Qaeda is now a larger, more dangerous and threatening group than it was four years ago. In other words, the policies of Bush have not made us safer. On the contrary, they have created a worse situation than we were in before. Such sheer incompetence is grounds for removal from office in most organizations of which I am aware.

Report this

By pacrat, July 17, 2007 at 11:40 am Link to this comment

Bush is still optimistic about victory in Iraq?

What does “victory” mean? The death of all the Sunnis - or the death of all the Shiites? Or does it mean when 5,000 of our troops have been killed and at least 150 thousand Itaqis are dead? Or will “victory” be declared the last night of the Bush royal rule?

Let’s define “victory” and set up realistic deadlines and deliverables - after all, as a government contractor that was expected of me.

Yes, I have become bitter and cynical. I resent the irresponsibiliy of the republican acquiescence to the Bush/Cheney “takeover” of our government - and the fact that the democrats seem unable to bring the congress under their control.

I long for the day when congressional people become concerned about their positions of responsibility and not about their next donation or their “public” appearance. Please wake up before it’s too late to turn this mess around!

Report this

By 911truthdotorg, July 17, 2007 at 10:58 am Link to this comment

I urge you all to read Paul Craig Roberts’ article:

He was Asst Sec of the Treasury under Reagan

http://theprogressivemind.info/2007/07/paul-craig-roberts-impeach-now-or-face.html

Google videos: 9/11 Press for Truth, Loose Change 2nd Edition, America: Freedom to Fascism

Report this

By Mudwollow, July 17, 2007 at 10:19 am Link to this comment

Read my lips. No permanent bases in Iraq. Hundreds of billions of dollars worth of concrete “enduring military bases”, but no permanent military bases. I guess George Bush and Dick Cheney are using that new “improved” dissolving concrete.

For those who like maps.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/iraq-maps.htm

A picture is better than a thousand words. Not hard to do when those words are among the most flagrantly obnoxious lies of the 21st century.

Report this

By ender, July 17, 2007 at 9:02 am Link to this comment

Jeff Rense and Rense.com talk a lot of conspircy wingnut sounding ‘stuff’, but the idea that this administration has created well thoughtout plans to declare a national emergency, and use that to side step posse comitatus and indefinately delay elections is something I can imagine them doing.  They have exhibited a disdain for the American Citizenry and class arogance that can only be compared to aristocracies or totalitarian dictatorships ie third reich or USSR.  Eight states already have laws, florida among them(thank go jebs out) that can delay elections in the event of a national emergency.  Our Constitution does no spell out what a standing President cannot do in such an event.  If the Joint Chiefs see fit to ignore comitatus and follow the orders of the CINC, we are a clock tick from a dictatorship.

It sounds insane, but so does unauthorized wiretaps, suspension of habeas corpus and the right to trial, all of which have been accomplished.

This administration just may be laughing their arses off when some compare them to Hitler.  They are better prepared than the Third Reich.

Report this

By Expat, July 17, 2007 at 8:39 am Link to this comment

Ah, now we know why the moron in chief is so optimistic…there is to be a second surge.  More troops from an already broken army for an already lost cause.

Boy, I can’t wait to hear this explaination…I’ll bet it’s a doozy.

If anybody thinks this nightmare is ending, you had better wake up…this is going beyond the pale.

I would suggest that anybody who can pack their bags and leave should catch the first plane out of here, to anywhere far away from here…there is nothing left to fight for…the people just don’t get it…it’s now or never time…your leaders are failing…no…they have failed you…time to get out.  This is just like the Nazis taking over Germany pre-WWII.  Mostly, they didn’t believe it either.  Look at the price they paid.

Report this

By Scott, July 17, 2007 at 8:17 am Link to this comment

I guess its probably safe to assume that America will soon have WMD’s based in Iraq too.

You got your rogues and then you got your super-rogues.

Report this

By Expat, July 17, 2007 at 5:31 am Link to this comment

#87298 by johnofportland on 7/16 at 4:29 pm

“A neocon G. W. Bush Senior Whitehouse aide confided that destroying the American military would be necessary if one wanted to take over the country, and that could be accomplished with a debilitating foreign war, which could be “trumped up at need,” and using a “domestic private security force trained in urban policing.” This was in mid-1991, during a conversation describing “medieval England as the best form of government ever.” Pre Magna Carta, of course. He was serious, not joking.”

Maine or Oregon…I’m Oregon.

Well, I’m not surprised but…I think we will just roll over and let it happen…it won’t even be dramatic, not a whimper…just look at the apathy that is so rampant now. Can you even believe your eyes?

Report this

By Expat, July 17, 2007 at 5:21 am Link to this comment

#87377 by 911truthdotorg on 7/16 at 9:49 pm

“We’re not going anywhere, folks.”

Oh, yes we are.  The new surge is on the way…how ‘bout them apples?

#87370 by Frank Cajon on 7/16 at 8:52 pm
(17 comments total)

“For those who feel that laying some of the blame for the BushReich on the American public is off the mark, hey, I don’t chat room or argue. I do feel that Americans put this fucker in office, at least once (2004, and likely did in 2000 with the assistance of Ralph Nader-another megalomaniac) and have a responsibility to deal with the fact that this was a grave mistake and take steps to correct it.”

Well, I’ve been ranting also about the “R” word (responsibility)but maybe you’ll have more luck than I.  I’ve tried playing nice, so I don’t offend anybody and then I blast for all the obvious reasons and plead and talk about going to the streets, blah, blah, blah, blah.  I’m not one who is easily discouraged but I’m very close now.  I think the concept that we could actually become a fascist country has escaped the general population because it can look so democratic…until it doesn’t.

I really appreciate your and all others input in this direction…I’m from the Nam era where direct action ruled…this I-net stuff has limited value and then only if it’s used effectively.

Happy Trails

Report this

By bob, July 17, 2007 at 4:10 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

This outpouring of cyber sentiment as refreshing as it is, minus the rhetorical rants serves only one purpose sadly it must be stated; it allows us a means to vent our collective frustration via, the quiet safety of our homes. I must admit myself, I am just as guilty, yet with out this type of form we all would be stuck having to quell these internal stressful feelings in other unhealthy ways. So thus again I find myself up late trying to express thoughts that seem to falling on deaf ears. To the point, I have found the comments of Expat, 87058, posted 7-15 to be as motivating as those of Mr. Cajon, F. Yet Mr. Cajon’s tone though as sincere I suspect, is tinged a bit with very understandable anger, and as much as I find his insights, insightful; I must say as well that the anger used as a vehicle of expression; although an understandable way to express indignation, serves little purpose but allow those allied against him the ammunition they can use in-order to discredit his positions.. Mr. Expat on the other hand, was just as telling and even more to the point. The Internet has become the ‘new streets’, sadly enough to say; yet even though we all know the house is on fire, no one has yet to come forward with a sensible plan in-order of finding the exit. Are we just preaching to the choir? Yes we are, now the next challenge as Expat has so aptly put forward with that insight is for us to learn new and inventive ways to reach beyond this venue, and motivate those who may not understand things the way we do. We must all try and find one, just one to reach, so they can reach out and teach another. I found as well the post by Non Credo, 86951, 7-14, just as enlightening. It was large majorities of a homogenized if you will mostly white native ethnic German population, which enabled a Hitler type to come to power. I will add to that that the absence of that in our present situation is the only redeeming aspect if it can be said that about it that sets America in 2007 apart from 1936 Germany. We are a nation of many diverse ethnic and racial types. That along with that understanding has just as many diverse viewpoints. Yet even though as self serving and, saving a grace as it may appear, we cannot allow ourselves to underestimate the power of the media, and its even more sinister ability to misinform with disinformation. Least we forget the teaching of Herr Goebbels, when he said if you tell a lie long and loud enough, they would come to accept it as the truth. For the only thing that makes ours the greatest Nation on the planet, is not the size of our military, yet the size of libraries. What I mean by that is this, it is because we can still in spite of all the B.S rhetoric pumped in our faces and ears on a daily bases, by the so-called liberal free press; any American can go to any paper stand or public library, if they are so inclined to do so or, the Internet too, and enjoy the real power that makes this country great; That being the freedom of thought, expression and, the expansion of understanding. And that my cyber friend’s is the only true freedom worth dying for as Americans in-order to maintain, here or abroad. Yes it is true the numbers of those supporting this grand misadventure are falling like crap through a greased tube. And then it is possible that there is possibly a minority of those not only in Israel and the America as well who wish a wider conflict; but they must first convince the rest of to go along with it. Yes there are those among you who may say, they will by any means necessary, but I say only if we are asleep as a Nation.

Report this

By 911truthdotorg, July 16, 2007 at 10:49 pm Link to this comment

We’re not going anywhere, folks.

Read it and weep:
http://www.inteldaily.com/?c=166&a=2776

Google videos: 9/11 Press for Truth, Loose Change 2nd Edition, America: Freedom to Fascism

Report this

By cann4ing, July 16, 2007 at 9:54 pm Link to this comment

Cindy Sheehan is leading a march from Crawford Texas that began July 13 and will arrive in Washington DC on July 23.  For details, go to

http://www.thecampcaseypeaceinstitute.org/

Report this

By Frank Cajon, July 16, 2007 at 9:52 pm Link to this comment

For those who feel that laying some of the blame for the BushReich on the American public is off the mark, hey, I don’t chat room or argue. I do feel that Americans put this fucker in office, at least once (2004, and likely did in 2000 with the assistance of Ralph Nader-another megalomaniac) and have a responsibility to deal with the fact that this was a grave mistake and take steps to correct it. I don’t think saying you disagree with Bush in a poll is the kind of activism that will cause change-it was common knowledge in Nazi Germany that there were death camps full of Jews, Gypsies, and POWs and nobody did anything about it. The fact that both major parties are putting candidates that either supported the Iraq fiasco from the start or are still throwing money at it disgusts me. Yeah, the Supreme Commander’s poll numbers are down, do you think that gives him or his henchman Cheney pause as they drain the lifeblood of the country for even a second? Get real, people. And this crap that it’s all a Zionist plot gets old. If anything, Herr Bush is the poster boy for the Christian Coalition, who figured in 2000 they had finally erased that problematic little section of the Constitution that separates Church and State. This Iraq war is many respects like the first Gulf War, an oil monopoly fought by the US for the Saudis to insure a regional oil monopoly for them. Again, the American people sit on there asses, watch dumbed-down TV and let Herr Bush vicariously play his worldleaderpretend game with our sons and daughters lives in the balance. Ask a liberal about it, you get anything from Israelis crashing the 9/11 jets to Hillary Clinton being electable. Both equally ridiculous.
Wake up. We need a national strike day as a demonstration against Herr Bush and his war, and his spying, and his lies, and his cronies, and his court, and his corruption. And if that doesn’t work, we need another one to show that we are mad as hell, and we aren’t going to take it any more.

Report this

By Mstessyrue, July 16, 2007 at 8:28 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

American people are fed up with lies and arrogance from the Bush administration.  Not only does this war and the defense policies in this country has very little to prove to its people, also it is causing great violence, terror and poverty around the world and in this nation.  There are more critical issues that affecting the lives of millions of americans and people world wide that our president is not taking actions against. Now the war has proven to be a failure and is causing more violence, terror and poverty in this world.  According to the Borgen Project, it only takes $19 billion dollars annually to eradicate world hunger and poverty.  However, our government has already spent more than $450 billion dollars over this fruitless war in Iraq.  It is time for the Bush Administration to take a real interest in the lives of the American people as well as people who are in desperate needs around the world.  Stop the lies and stop poverty now.  Put away the arrogance and put the needs of the people before political gains.

Report this

By rage, July 16, 2007 at 7:44 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

We need to stop this nut from doing all these dangerous drugs and booze combinations. It’s apparent that this rascal has gone from being stoned out of his tiny brain to being downright delusional in a very bipolar way that is a real threat to national security. He’s beyond just saying no. And, we can no longer afford to have him in public saying anything else retarded that further embarrasses America or causes the planet Earth any more harm. The Nation is demanding that someone call Poppy41 to escort Junior43’s straightjacket-crazy rump back to Crawford, where he can talk to Jesus, Who stopped acknowledging him in the ‘70s when he went AWOL. Non Compis chimpus needs some extended mental health leave that lasts until the 20th January 2009, when he’s committed to an asylum for the criminally insane for the rest of his life. Tell him he’s at the Magic Kingdom with Jebby. He’ll be al’ight.

Report this

By deang, July 16, 2007 at 6:46 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Bush’s optimism is not that baffling, really. Because the US can’t slaughter without resistance in Iraq, many Americans feel the US is “losing” in their attack on the country. However, much as in Vietnam, the US is obliterating vast numbers of Iraqis and destroying much of the country, primarily via its air force, while the US military has lost a minute number of lives compared both to the number of Iraqis murdered by the US and to the number of US soldiers killed in Vietnam. In addition, the US has succeeded in setting up more of their infamous military bases in the country, and they’ll be there for a long time to ensure that the US can wield even more power in the region. Meanwhile, the US public either doesn’t know or doesn’t care about what’s really going on in Iraq. And when you consider that the second most right-wing president in US history, Ronald Reagan, is now considered saintly despite his horrendous record, there is a possibility that the Bush II regime will be considered great in the US in years to come.

Report this

By johnofportland, July 16, 2007 at 5:29 pm Link to this comment

Mudwollow on 7/16 at 11:41 am paraphrase:

“This article misses the mark.  The Bush/Cheney cabal, Halliburton and Blackwater are doing just fine.” 

A neocon G. W. Bush Senior Whitehouse aide confided that destroying the American military would be necessary if one wanted to take over the country, and that could be accomplished with a debilitating foreign war, which could be “trumped up at need,” and using a “domestic private security force trained in urban policing.”  This was in mid-1991, during a conversation describing “medieval England as the best form of government ever.” Pre Magna Carta, of course. He was serious, not joking.

Report this

By Louise, July 16, 2007 at 4:30 pm Link to this comment

#87270 by Scott

“It could be like some sort of national Big Brother reality show, society could log on, partake in polls and be their own watchdogs.”

What a great idea! We can have weekly “throw the bum out” call-in votes every Friday!

Once the White House is cleaned out, we can start scrubbing the floors of Congress. Then, we can start with a new cast of characters for the next show!

Only problem, it wont take many shows before we run out of politicians altogether!

I guess then we can start putting Administration Department Directors on. And when we run out of them start on the ABC bureaus.

Eventually we’ll get around to the Think Tanks.
I look forward to that one!

Probably won’t improve government much, but at least it will get the people involved in the process!

Report this

By Scott, July 16, 2007 at 1:39 pm Link to this comment

I take it that wiring our leaders to the Internet is not an option then?

Think of it this way then, society used to rely on the omniscient presence of God’s judgemental watchfullness to check the abuse of power. Is what I’m proposing really that strange a concept?

It could be like some sort of national Big Brother reality show, society could log on, partake in polls and be their own watchdogs.

Why just wish to be a fly on the wall in some smoke-filled backroom when its entirely possible to do even better?

Report this

By ender, July 16, 2007 at 1:26 pm Link to this comment

This war isn’t nearly over.  As the previous poster states, there are still $Billions$ to be made by Bush and Cheneys family cabal of crooks and thieves.  This talk of withdrawal dates is just silly.  Right now, the Air Force is funding (not building, just fundint) the largest air facility in Iraq to house and maintain the new REAPER drone aircraft.  We are right in the middle of acceptance testing for a new and very expensive weapons system, the real business of war.  This is time to ramp up, not be talking about withdrawal.

Report this

By Mudwollow, July 16, 2007 at 12:41 pm Link to this comment

Bush not baffling Ernest….not one bit.

#87156 by Ernest Canning on 7/15 at 8:50 pm
(629 comments total)

The problem with this article is that it misses the real benchmarks of the Bush/Cheney cabal.  Halliburton and Blackwater are doing just fine.  With the conflict preventing the flow of oil, prices are sky high and billions are flowing to the coffers of the military-industrial complex.  Yeah, 70% of the American people want us out, but these people do not make up what Bush proclaimed was his base—the haves and the have mores who make up the richest 1%, or as Noam Chomsky puts it, “the substantial people.”

Report this

By THOMAS BILLIS, July 16, 2007 at 11:20 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Somebody much smarter than I said"you can not convince a man of something that his paycheck{legacy} depends on him not believing”.Bush wants to run out his term continuing in Iraq and dump it on the next President.Any type of withdrawal will mean no bullshit it really it is a disaster.If the next person withdraws he can say I would have stayed and the outcome would have been better.Do not laugh there are people who use that arguement in relation to Viet Nam today.They were all in the National Guard during Viet Nam but they say it nontheless.George Bush thinks he is going to be vindicated by history.The best history is going to do for George is vote him the next to last worst President.Dick Cheney will be voted the worst.

Report this

By ardee, July 16, 2007 at 11:13 am Link to this comment

Expat

My question to you would be this:  What is the reason Israel can continue to break so many international laws with our blessing?  To wit; we supply them military hardware…the agreement (treaty) is they can not use this equipment against civilians. They Cluster bombed Lebanese civilians, Palestinians etc.…these crimes against humanity go on and on…so…what is the reason we support them to our detriment?  We consistently veto anything from the UN that will actually affect them.  Israel has spies in our country…some have been convicted…please tell me why they spy on us, their good buddies.  Does the tail wag the dog?  I think it does…but, I don’t have the answer as to why.  It really doesn’t seem logical, but then my mind is limited in it ability to understand these Machiavellian realities.

Why should we expect more from Israel than we do from ourselves? We violate as many or more such international laws than most any other nation on earth. I believe that we use each other and quite candidly.There used be the feeling that Israel was our buffer in that region, thus we armed them well. Now we have our own troops in the region, apparently with no intention to withdraw them ever.

I would add one more thing…we are dealing with an evil from within we’ve never seen before.  We will need new ways of seeing and understanding, for the realities now are convoluted beyond our idealistic past: Orwell and Aldous Huxley have told us of future potentials as did Dwight Eisenhower.  These potentials are here now.  We are challenged as never before and it is important beyond our wildest expectations that we understand and see the present for what it really is.  Beware of the “Kansas City Shuffle”, it always means dead bodies.  Our worst nightmare is here…truly.

I quite agree with your perceptive analysis as it pertains to our internal problems and the external realities it causes. We have an electorate bloated on cheap toys, mostly from China, for which they (we) indebt themselves for life to credit card companies. We have lost the ability to look inward and cast about for someone, anyone else to blame for that we created ourselves.

It is the electorate of any democratic nation that is in control, it is thus the responsibility of each and every one of us to accept the blame for losing our own government to the wealthiest one percent who finance our bought and paid for government. Have we become so afraid of losing a plastic reality for which we pay usurous interest rates that we will not “throw the bums out?”.

Report this

By Goffredo, July 16, 2007 at 10:53 am Link to this comment

Louise,

Great post!  Throw that pompous ass Sean Hannity in there as well.  Despite getting his lunch handed to him by the mayor of Salt Lake City in a debate about Iraq, he continues to honor himself among the right-wing lemming population.  What will these synthetic intellectuals do when the right loses both congress and the white house?

Report this

By Louise, July 16, 2007 at 10:40 am Link to this comment

Schizophrenic Mental Illness:

A mental illness in which the person suffers from distorted thinking, hallucinations, and a reduced ability to feel normal emotions.

Sociopath Personality Disorder:

One who is affected with a personality disorder characterized by chronic antisocial behavior and violation of the law and the rights of others. They appear to have no feelings. They demonstrate no care for others’ feelings or remorse for hurting others, and tend not to show their own feelings except for anger and hostility

Narcissist Personality Disorder:

Characteristics:
Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)

Preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love

Believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)

Requires excessive admiration

Has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations

Is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends

Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others

Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her

Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes

[Ann Coulter? Bill O’Reilly? Rush Limbaugh?
Occurs to me these characteristics could describe a wide swath of leading pundits and politicos, Christian, Repub and otherwise]

Narcissists never outgrow their demands for dedicated attention to their infantile needs 168 hours a week. Narcissists are like vampires: they will take all you can give while giving nothing back, then curse you for running dry and discard you as a waste of their precious time.

And, any one of these behaviors, Schizoid, Sociopath, or Narcissist frequently have one other characteristic in common. Self pity. When the tears flow, it is because of internal focus on the self and should never be confused with compassion or empathy.

So, perhaps we have a Schizophrenic, Sociopath Narcissist running the “free” world.

Irregardless, we have a NOT VERY NICE person here. Perhaps the question we should all ask:

How is it that our government is so heavily populated with these type personalities? After all, the president ... any president ... has to have an administration. And each department in that administration has to be directed and staffed. And we see as complete a collection of fruitcakes as has ever been brought together under one blanket.

And then we have to ask, what’s wrong with a society that puts fruitcakes in charge?
That may very well be the only reason the majority in Congress refuse to consider IMPEACHMENT.
Maybe they’re all fruitcakes too!

Or maybe they are just governed by conceit, and greed, corruption and stupidity!

Or maybe, just maybe a person has to be a Schizophrenic, Sociopath Narcissist to even want to be in charge!!

[Exceptions noted, and we all know who they are ... well all except main stream media that is]

“Once you climb in bed with the devil, it’s awfully hard to climb out.”

“I don’t think the devil looks ugly and frightening. If he did, people wouldn’t find him so attractive. The devil must be a handsome man.”

Report this

By Goffredo, July 16, 2007 at 9:25 am Link to this comment

If you can stand the electronic reading voice, this clip is interesting (more the historical background of the second half, as the first half is theorizing that Israeli terrorists were responsible for 9/11…I’m not ready to go there…yet):

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1585562142333161866&q=people+jumping+from+world+trade+center

Report this

By Scott, July 16, 2007 at 8:01 am Link to this comment

Ardee wrote [B]“Our government rules, not for the smallish state of Israel, but for the even smaller constituency of the extremely wealthy. Only when we restore the power of the people to the governing process will we be able to restore sanity to our decision making.[/B]

Power and wealth the usual suspects do to people what salt and oxygen do to iron. They corrode and corrupt human beings.

I don’t think its as much a case of restoring sanity as the public actually gaining control of its own domain. I see no option other than outlawing official secrecy and physically monitoring the actions of our civil and corporate leaders - the politicians, lobbyists, CEO’s and senior bureacrats. All should be wired 24/7 to the Internet to facilitate their surveillance.

I subscribe to the notion that the root causes of most insecurity in the world stem from the secret back-room machianations of power and wealth. I think a trickle down effect of their corruption is destroying the fabric of our society and I think the only way to correct the situation is to take away their ability to operate in secret.

Perhaps if the public domain’s security were actually rooted in the public’s hands decency and honesty would rise to the top.

Report this

By Dr. Nonothingatall, Phud., July 16, 2007 at 7:02 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The Emperor has no clothes!

So many variations, so many stories, so many diversions.

We are so easily distracted.  If we get too close to the facts, create a diversion.  We have the attention span of a gnat.

Focus, focus, focus!  We are the frog in the pot of cold water being slowly heated to boiling.  Before we know what’s happened…we’re cooked!

Ethnocentrism is a bitch!  Get over it or…

Report this

By disgusted, July 16, 2007 at 6:04 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Yup the inane and innept being guided by the insane. Realizeing that the Dems’ have no intention of doing anything as far as accountabiliuty for this admistration goes (unless another non binding agreement), their FAILURE to reinstate the HABEUS CORPUS is further proof that hey are takeing direction from the right and the lack of intestinal fortitude on seeking IMPEACHMENT against the VPs’ office is criminal.

Can the CITIZENS of this coutry bring the administration up on charges of DIRELECTION of DUTY and CRIMINAL OBSTRUCTION (lack knowledge of legal terms) and TREASON as well as VIOLATION of the oath of the Presidency and VP oath.

Even out of office these CRIMINALS should be held accountable since the CONGRESS REFUSES to do so. Somebody please answer me .

Report this

By Expat, July 16, 2007 at 5:56 am Link to this comment

#87135 by ardee on 7/15 at 6:02 pm
(285 comments total)

Israel again:

“But to extrapolate that a small and imperilled Middle Eastern nation is responsible for all the ills of our foreign policies in that area simply is a way to shuffle the ultimate responsibility from us to them. Many call it a sophisticated form of antisemitism, I just say it is a way to excuse oneself from guilt.”

I would agree we are not taking responsibility and I understand your point.  I don’t quite understand the whole thing either.  We are using Israel as our proxy in the Middle East and they are using us for weapons and cash.  We will use them to attack Iran and I believe this will happen.  When Iran retaliates we will then step in to defend Israel.  We will finish what Israel starts.  We used to be considered “an honest broker” there, but since last year’s war against Lebanon we showed our true colors (Rice) and lost that questionable status (I don’t think we’ve ever been an honest broker).  As an aside it’s interesting to note that France doesn’t classify Hezbollah as a terrorist organization, but we do.

My question to you would be this:  What is the reason Israel can continue to break so many international laws with our blessing?  To wit; we supply them military hardware…the agreement (treaty) is they can not use this equipment against civilians. They Cluster bombed Lebanese civilians, Palestinians etc.…these crimes against humanity go on and on…so…what is the reason we support them to our detriment?  We consistently veto anything from the UN that will actually affect them.  Israel has spies in our country…some have been convicted…please tell me why they spy on us, their good buddies.  Does the tail wag the dog?  I think it does…but, I don’t have the answer as to why.  It really doesn’t seem logical, but then my mind is limited in it ability to understand these Machiavellian realities. 

I would add one more thing…we are dealing with an evil from within we’ve never seen before.  We will need new ways of seeing and understanding, for the realities now are convoluted beyond our idealistic past: Orwell and Aldous Huxley have told us of future potentials as did Dwight Eisenhower.  These potentials are here now.  We are challenged as never before and it is important beyond our wildest expectations that we understand and see the present for what it really is.  Beware of the “Kansas City Shuffle”, it always means dead bodies.  Our worst nightmare is here…truly.

Report this

By ardee, July 16, 2007 at 5:47 am Link to this comment

Addendum

I would urge all to read and think on the words of Mr. Canning,#87156, as the real crux of the problem.

I wish I could muster the intellect of that fine addition to this forum…I just muddle along.

Report this

By ardee, July 16, 2007 at 5:44 am Link to this comment

NonCredo
The Israel lobby is the political factor that tips the balance. The other factors bringing us to war are there, yes. But the Israel lobby, because its propaganda tugs at the heartstrings of so many voters who consider themselves “liberal”, is what makes the war machine unstoppable.

One might conjecture that more “liberals” support the rights of the Palestinian people than the expansionist brutality of the government of Israel.

I would repeat that the Vulcan Group, when planning a permanent military presence in the Middle East in the eighties never mentioned Israel but constantly referred to oil. Also, as stated earlier, in reply to your dismissing Pelosi’s kowtowing to big oil,
” If Pelosi is so brave in the face of big oil why then did she waffle on one of her major campaign promises, cutting the huge oil subsidies in the face of record oil company profits? “

Non Credo notes that :

Look, Ardee, I really don’t know quite HOW it works. But the fact is that it DOES work. Most US members of Congress are terrified of doing anything to displease the Israel lobby, and it’s not just a few legislators from heavily Jewish districts.

It is good to admit that some things are beyond our understanding, though we must continue to strive to gain that understanding. I readily admit that I know little, echoing Santayana,” Our knowledge is but a torch of smoky pine, illuminating a bit of the darkness”. That is why I object to such firm conviction that it is Israel that must be blamed for all that ails the USA. This notion is not only blatantly incorrect, in my own opinion, it actually hinders arriving at a solution to that which ails this nation.

We must never look without but always within to fix what is wrong with this democracy. Our government rules, not for the smallish state of Israel, but for the even smaller constituency of the extremely wealthy. Only when we restore the power of the people to the governing process will we be able to restore sanity to our decision making.

All this talk of an evil Israel is nothing less than a distraction and a roadblock to progress.

Report this

By mark, July 16, 2007 at 3:43 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Nine billion a quarter is not baffling.

Report this

By Sandy, July 15, 2007 at 11:53 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Bush is a madman….listening to Cheney, the Insane:

http://tinyurl.com/24opw3

Cheney pushes Bush to act on Iran

Ewen MacAskill in Washington and Julian Borger
Monday July 16, 2007
The Guardian

The balance in the internal White House debate over Iran has shifted back in favour of military action before President George Bush leaves office in 18 months, the Guardian has learned.

The shift follows an internal review involving the White House, the Pentagon and the state department over the last month. Although the Bush administration is in deep trouble over Iraq, it remains focused on Iran. A well-placed source in Washington said: “Bush is not going to leave office with Iran still in limbo.”

The White House claims that Iran, whose influence in the Middle East has increased significantly over the last six years, is intent on building a nuclear weapon and is arming insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The vice-president, Dick Cheney, has long favoured upping the threat of military action against Iran. He is being resisted by the secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, and the defence secretary, Robert Gates.

Last year Mr Bush came down in favour of Ms Rice, who along with Britain, France and Germany has been putting a diplomatic squeeze on Iran. But at a meeting of the White House, Pentagon and state department last month, Mr Cheney expressed frustration at the lack of progress and Mr Bush sided with him. “The balance has tilted. There is cause for concern,” the source said this week.

Nick Burns, the undersecretary of state responsible for Iran and a career diplomat who is one of the main advocates of negotiation, told the meeting it was likely that diplomatic manoeuvring would still be continuing in January 2009. That assessment went down badly with Mr Cheney and Mr Bush.

“Cheney has limited capital left, but if he wanted to use all his capital on this one issue, he could still have an impact,” said Patrick Cronin, the director of studies at the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

The Washington source said Mr Bush and Mr Cheney did not trust any potential successors in the White House, Republican or Democratic, to deal with Iran decisively. They are also reluctant for Israel to carry out any strikes because the US would get the blame in the region anyway.

“The red line is not in Iran. The red line is in Israel. If Israel is adamant it will attack, the US will have to take decisive action,” Mr Cronin said. “The choices are: tell Israel no, let Israel do the job, or do the job yourself.”

Almost half of the US’s 277 warships are stationed close to Iran, including two aircraft carrier groups. The aircraft carrier USS Enterprise left Virginia last week for the Gulf. A Pentagon spokesman said it was to replace the USS Nimitz and there would be no overlap that would mean three carriers in Gulf at the same time.

No decision on military action is expected until next year. In the meantime, the state department will continue to pursue the diplomatic route.

Sporadic talks are under way between the EU foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, and Iran’s top nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, on the possibility of a freeze in Iran’s uranium enrichment programme. Tehran has so far refused to contemplate a freeze, but has provisionally agreed to another round of talks at the end of the month….”  excerpt

Report this

By madeline boyle, July 15, 2007 at 10:49 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Bush and Cheney and all connected to them are sociopaths. They have no empathy or sympathy for mankind’s ills nor for the Iraqi people whom they have murdered, tortured, treated as collateral damage as so much unnecessary trash. We Americans must march on Washington and demand justice for our fellow human beings and an immediate end to this demonic war else we are complicit in it. I am 75 and have never seen my country and our Constitution in such desperate state. If we do not save our blessed democracy, no one else will. It is up to us.

Report this

By PBMUS, July 15, 2007 at 10:16 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Has anyone ever heard of zanax…...bushie is hooked

Report this

By Goffredo, July 15, 2007 at 9:57 pm Link to this comment

On a side note, with all of this “we must win” talk…

What exactly does “win” look like?  Is that when we see Bin Laden lead a group of 10,000 down the side of a mountain in Pakistan, waving a white flag and declaring that this “jihad” business “wasn’t gonna last forever” and “okay, okay, we give up…the fatalities on our side are overwhelming”?  Probably won’t play out that way.  Just an educated guess.

Is it remotely possible that those who subscribe to a radical Islamic group actually have an agenda that stretches much further than what the Bush administration claims to be so simplistic and elementary (that all they do is hate our freedom and want to prevent it from flourishing)?  Something tells me that these fellas (sorry for the Bushism) are fairly clever.  If that is the case, and I firmly believe that it is, then what would appear logical would be more of a cerebral, psychological approach to this dilemma.  But, as the Decider has made very clear, “the United States of America will not talk to terrorists.” (instead, we’ll broaden the conflict and continue to put our citizens at risk…that’ll show ‘em!)

Is it possible that this modern day hatred for the west reaches far back in history, and is tied to placing an unfortunately displaced people on top of already existing people who have had that land since the beginning of the human race?

Here’s my plan for the “surge”:  how about we cut OFF the SURGE of support for Israel?

Report this

By cann4ing, July 15, 2007 at 9:50 pm Link to this comment

The problem with this article is that it misses the real benchmarks of the Bush/Cheney cabal.  Halliburton and Blackwater are doing just fine.  With the conflict preventing the flow of oil, prices are sky high and billions are flowing to the coffers of the military-industrial complex.  Yeah, 70% of the American people want us out, but these people do not make up what Bush proclaimed was his base—the haves and the have mores who make up the richest 1%, or as Noam Chomsky puts it, “the substantial people.”

This bit about Bush being out of touch with reality covers up the true extent of the danger.  Dick Cheney, the true mover in the lawless “Unitary Executive” (and Bush himself) know that they are lying about “progress” now, just as they knew they were lying about WMD and links to 9/11 & al Qaeda back in 2002/03.  We deal with an executive that not only asserts it is beyond the reach of the law, but which asserts it can declare a national emergency in the event of another terrorist attack on U.S. soil.

We deal with a cabal that, once it left office, could potentially face future prosecutions for war crimes (assuming the Military Commissions Act were repealed).  The question one has to ask is not only whether they ever intend to leave Iraq but whether they intend to ever leave office—and it is this threat, above all else, that demonstrates why Congress must proceed with impeachment, and right soon!

As to the so-called Democratic “leadership” in Congress, they are more concerned with garnering corporate dollars for the next campaign.  They evade alienating either the oil industry or the military-industrial complex.  Where European nations conduct elections in a matter of weeks, the U.S. is now in a permanent electoral cycle as our “representatives” spend more time seeking out the corporate dollars needed to feed the deceptive 30 second sound bite ads, which is usually their only opportunity to reach out to the American people, since the corporate media has a vested interest in evading meaningful coverage of where candidates stand on issues that truly matter.

With so much time spent on fundraising, and so little on governing, is it any wonder that people like Nancy Pelosi are not attuned to the gravity and immediacy of the danger? 

There is a means by which we can change the momentum.  We have to negate the value of money as a political weapon.  People need to flock to the Kucinich campaign in such massive numbers that the corporatist charletons who masquerade as Democrats, so that they see their very political survival as linked to impeachment.

Report this

By Kwagmyre, July 15, 2007 at 8:10 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

From Cyrena #87055:

• “I hate to say it but it looks like the majority in America might have to take their country back by force. Its a harsh realization.”

I’ve often told others that a coup d’etat here launched by enough of the disaffected military brass(perhaps including even Colin Powell)would be such a great way to pull this off because that would demonstrate vividly as just about nothing else can just how much they’ve become so resentful of the “Commander in Thief” for the strategic and tactical blunders committed in Iraq.  But of course this will only happen when “Hell freezes over.”

Report this

By ardee, July 15, 2007 at 7:02 pm Link to this comment

Israel again:

We give that nation billions in aid each and every years. Thus, it would seem that they are beholden to us and not vice versa. The wishes of the Israeli government may influence, through the lobby AIPAC, the decisions of a few key legislators, epsecially those from districts with large Jewish populations.

But to extrapolate that a small and imperilled Middle Eastern nation is responsible for all the ills of our foreign policies in that area simply is a way to shuffle the ultimate responsibility from us to them. Many call it a sophisticated form of antisemitism, I just say it is a way to excuse oneself from guilt.

Report this

By ardee, July 15, 2007 at 6:52 pm Link to this comment

#86845 by Non Credo on 7/14 at 6:51 am
(96 comments total)

#86841 by ardee on 7/14 at 6:24 am:

“Not to bring security to Israel but for reasons of national security vis a vis OIL.”
—————-
No, ardee. This does not explain the bipartisan nature of the paralysis.


There is no evidence that Nancy Pelosi is afraid of displeasing Big Oil or Haliburton. If it were only these Republican-aligned interests pushing us to war against Iran, Pelosi would come out squarely against it.

Err Non, If Pelosi is so brave in the face of big oil why then did she waffle on one of her major campaign promises, cutting the huge oil subsidies in the face of record oil company profits?

If you mean by bipartisan that we as a antion use other nations at will and to our own purpose then I agree wholeheartedly. If you attempt to use the term to prove Israel wagging the dog I fail tomake any such connection.

This image of Israel as omnipotent manipulator of a nation of 300 million flies in the face of the historical fact that it is the USA that has always been the user. The very best way to ensure freedom from excessive control by interests both selfish and against our best interests is to end the power of the lobbyists…...

Report this

By Goffredo, July 15, 2007 at 6:04 pm Link to this comment

Thanks BigJimbo…

Anyone on here live in the Phoenix area, or in Arizona?

Report this

By bigjimbo, July 15, 2007 at 5:51 pm Link to this comment

Friends, and from reading the comments, you are my friends and I want you to consider a thought.  I am not a pacifist; I am a vietnam vet with a son who is beginning his second army tour in Iraq.  Like you, I consider Iraq a war we were lied into and then conducted with criminal negligence.  What kind of a war plan would rely on, “and then we will be greeted by flower girls because chalabi and cheney told us so.”  What kind of insane administration would staff its civilian work force in iraq based on the question, “where do you stand on roe v. wade”?  But that is in the past.

When I attended the air war college in 1973-74, a guest speaker told us that all governments govern with the consent of the governed.  The student body of about 300 lt col’s and col’s, 10 percent of whom had been recent pow’s in vietnam, of course scoffed, with visions of the ussr and red china in our minds. Yeah, right!  But he persisted and events proved him right when the peoples of eastern europe collectively said, “we have had enough”, and the totalitarian governments fell like a house of cards.  Here in the US, when the people have had enough, all it would take is for a critical mass to take to the streets in non-violent civil disobedience to bring this fiasco to an end.  Many of us have taken a solemn vow to protect and uphold the Constitution from all enemies. Has our precious and sacred Constitution, created by the genius of a brilliant, remarkable group of patriots ever been under a more lethal and insidious attack than by this administration?  I am not asking or imploring you to do anything, except to take a minute and think about it.  I don’t want it to come to this.  Instead, call your representatives.

Report this

By cyrena, July 15, 2007 at 12:29 pm Link to this comment

Comment#87078 by ChicagoGuy on 7/15 at 11:09 am

On the draft….

Conyers and I believe Levin, (though I could be wrong about him) did in fact sponsor a bill to reinstate the draft, back at the beginning of the “war on terror” because of exactly this reason. It was in part, due to what initially occured, and that was that we were winding up with what would become a mostly black/brown army. And, people of color do indeed serve disproportionately to their numbers within the greater population.

But, it was also for this very reason…when folks have to consider sending their own into the fray, they become less blood/oil thristy.

Of course that bill never went anywhere.

Report this

By ChicagoGuy, July 15, 2007 at 12:09 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Big difference between Vietnam war demonstrations and lack of Iraq war demonstrations. Many of the Vietnam era demonstrators were protesting AGAINST THE DRAFT! Haven’t you noticed that not once has either the repubs nor dems mentioned having a DRAFT? You want to end this war fast? Just call for a DRAFT and you will see how many people will come out and protest.

Report this

By Expat, July 15, 2007 at 10:29 am Link to this comment

#87048 by Scott on 7/15 at 8:34 am

I realize some are but I haven’t seen anything like the Vietnam era demonstrations in the streets of America’s cities that would lead me to think a vast majority are rising up against Bush. I have little doubt Pelosi would have voted for Hitler.

#87047 by Goffredo on 7/15 at 8:33 am

Here’s what’s baffling: the lack of resistance by Democrats and the lack of intelligence by the U.S. Citizens who still believe the ridiculous, adolescent lies of this administration.

Yes!  So, you and I and many posters here are in agreement.  Why are “we” not effective?  Because we are lazy and afraid!  We are not hitting the streets because this site and the Internet are supposedly “the street”.  This absorbs the energy of dissent and there is no net effect.  I call bullshit on the net as the “new” street!  If we think for one moment we are making a difference by posting here we are gravely mistaken!  We are preaching to the choir and we will not be heard by the government; aka “Bush”.  Given the effectiveness of the opposition (LOL) if I were Bush I would do the same…as in; ignore the people who don’t agree with his “plan”.  The worst of it is…”IT’S WORKING!”  This man is not stupid…but maybe we are.  Or worse, apathetic, or worse yet, lazy.  The value of this site would be it’s ability to rally the people into a popular opposition.  But alas, this isn’t happening.  I have railed and railed as have many others and we still don’t get it.  Tell me…what’s it going to take?  When will we finally go to the streets and put our butts on the line?  We don’t have much time left.  God…we whimper and die…what a sad ending.  If this is the best we can do then maybe it is time to roll over and say goodbye.  For myself…never!

Report this

By cyrena, July 15, 2007 at 10:04 am Link to this comment

#87048 by Scott on 7/15 at 8:34 am

•  “...The American people are tearing their hair out, saying, “We don’t like Bush and we don’t trust Bush, and we don’t want these wars! Stop!”
•  I realize some are but I haven’t seen anything like the Vietnam era demonstrations in the streets of America’s cities that would lead me to think a vast majority are rising up against Bush. I have little doubt Pelosi would have voted for Hitler.

Well Scott, I don’t know if Pelosi would have voted for Hitler or not. Maybe…but it’s not entirely true that there have not been demonstrations in the streets, or that folks have not openly shared their disgust with the puppet pres. So, if you haven’t seen us demonstrating, it’s only because we do not have the media coverage that we had back in the Vietnam era, and of course we don’t have the draft as we did back then, which made all of the difference in the world. Back then, the killing and the dying were equal opportunity events for a much larger percentage of the population. There can be no doubt that if we had this draft now, we would not have a war, or two or three, because the majority of the people who do not like dick bush, (and a 26% approval rating confirms that) would do MORE to make sure that they got rid of them, and they would never have authorized the war to begin with. (because of the chance that their own loved ones might be required to serve). As long as it stays “voluntary” and it’s somebody else’s blood, and we can keep sending the SAME selected few “volunteers” for tour after tour, with no risk to the “others” than maybe that’s why there isn’t more of a visible backlash. But, it’s definitely there, and the politicians would do well to recognize that.

•  I hate to say it but it looks like the majority in America might have to take their country back by force. Its a harsh realization.

This too may be true, but it doesn’t have to be a destructive or violent “force”. Some of those old “non-violence theory” techniques could still work.

Report this

By Scott, July 15, 2007 at 9:34 am Link to this comment

“In Nazi Germany, large majorities supported Hitler and swooned in feverish adoration at his huge rallies.”

Hitler apparently never captured more than 37% of the vote in any election. He rose to power on the backs of corporations, industrialists, the army, other nationalists and a mix of conservative parties who conspired behind closed doors to ensure liberal parties didn’t come to dominate the German political landscape. Democracy in Germany was basically rigged against the majority, and a media dominated by partisan interests portrayed the opposite of what was really the case. Sounds familiar doesn’t it?

I see little reason to disbelieve that Isreal has an interest in seeing the US militarily involved in the region but I think Israel is simply one more actor in the cast of a Republican putsch.

“...The American people are tearing their hair out, saying, “We don’t like Bush and we don’t trust Bush, and we don’t want these wars! Stop!”

I realize some are but I haven’t seen anything like the Vietnam era demonstrations in the streets of America’s cities that would lead me to think a vast majority are rising up against Bush. I have little doubt Pelosi would have voted for Hitler.

I hate to say it but it looks like the majority in America might have to take their country back by force. Its a harsh realization.

Report this

By Goffredo, July 15, 2007 at 9:33 am Link to this comment

Here’s what’s baffling: the lack of resistance by Democrats and the lack of intelligence by the U.S. Citizens who still believe the ridiculous, adolescent lies of this administration.

Report this

By ChicagoGuy, July 15, 2007 at 8:41 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I think Pelosi has to step up or resign and let someone who is willing to do the right thing (impeach bush and cheney) take over as speaker. Last election the general public spoke loud and clear. We want change and for this reason the dems were put into a position to make those changes. When will our politicians listen to their constituents? bush has failed over and over again and yet, we sit here and do nothing and watch our legal system get destroyed and our constitutional rights erode. Writeyour policitians and let them know you will not tolerate their empty meaningless rhetoric and demand ACTION! NOW!

Report this

By Expat, July 15, 2007 at 8:04 am Link to this comment

ADDENDUM:

It appears there are two elements at work here; oil and Israel.

If Israel has to negotiate with the Palestinians or anybody else for that matter, they will have to compromise.  Compromise will rob them of their ability to go unfettered, continuing their extra-judicial killings of those they don’t like.  Israel is guilty of so many violations of human rights as well as untold violations of UN resolutions that it’s pointless to even consider them as a law abiding member of the world.  We have learned well from them and we emulate them at every turn.  Together Israel and America treat the world with utter contempt.  Look at it, please.

Oil; on this we will not be denied.  This has been openly stated many times by many past American presidents.  The oil in the Middle East will not be denied to us…at the peril to those who would deny us.  Middle Eastern oil is our right to have and we will by god have it.

The obvious arrogance and racist undertones of our policies are to be noted and this administration is in many ways more honest than most because they just flat out say it.  For my part, I think we must face the present reality and look long and hard at just who we really are or have become; is this…what we really want?  If it is, please state it openly so I can pack my bags and get the hell out of here.  If it isn’t, then get leaders who can and will do something.  Recall Pelosi for gross negligence and all of the other impotent “elected” senators and congressman.  Show these people who is really the boss.  If it ain’t us, then we’re screwed.

Report this

By Charlie, July 15, 2007 at 7:56 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Baffling optimism? What so baffling about a liar putting on a public face to hide his lies?

Bush knows that he still retains control of 30% of the people who still think there are WMDs in Iraq yet to be found and that global warming is really not a problem since any additional water from melting glaciers will simply roll of the edges of the earth!

If he doesn’t put on his smiling face they might wake up from their slumber and realize what a true disaster this administration has been. That’s why their is nothing baffling about his optimism. The only thing baffling is why anyone in his right mind would follow him. ( Hey, maybe I just answered my own question!!)

Report this

By GW=MCHammered, July 15, 2007 at 7:49 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

It’s clear that the Dems and Gops share the same K-$treet pocket. It’s K-street giving us the war via cheerleader BushCo; it’s K-street promoting politicians to celebrity status via ever-earlier hype(r)-media coverage; it’s K-street that must be made to stay 500-miles from The People’s government at all times.

But that won’t happen via the siamese twin-parties. The People must resoundingly disjoin this ill union. The People must expel one or both dysfunctional political parties, as each enable K-street. And if the twins even appear to steal the vote, The People must storm the Hill to save it.

That is the America our great grandkids must learn about in school.

Report this

By Expat, July 15, 2007 at 5:57 am Link to this comment

#86951 by Non Credo on 7/14 at 6:39 pm

“If Pelosi’s failure to stand up to Bush on Iraq and Iran were a function of the American people’s complicity, you would be right. If Bush’s poll numbers were sky-high, intimidating Pelosi and making her afraid to challenge Bush, you’d be right.”

“But that is not the case. The American people are tearing their hair out, saying, “We don’t like Bush and we don’t trust Bush, and we don’t want these wars! Stop!” But Pelosi, who supposedly leads the ‘opposition’, won’t do all she really could to stop this madness.”

The logic and facts here are beyond doubt.  “Non-Credo” is correct.  This monster in charge is defying everything and everybody.  Hell, he finally got Russia to withdraw from a critical arms treaty.  Why?  So he can take the advantage as well.  All part of the plan.  This guy, unfortunately, is not stupid (as I’ve recently realized).  We would be better served to understand this and coldly question and look at everything he does.  You must know your enemy if you are to defeat him.  Stop the name calling and look at the reality.  Don’t be blinded by old ideas…these guys are forging a brave new world…and we will pay dearly if we don’t understand just what these fascists (not name calling, this is a fact) are doing to us.

Wake up, this isn’t a bad dream….it might be time to…

Report this

By republicansscareme, July 15, 2007 at 1:38 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The American public will no longer follow a pack of liars and thugs, no matter what they say about the consequences of leaving Iraq.

If George Bush and Richard Cheney had any honor, they would resign their offices.  In fact, so would his whole disgusting crew.

Report this

By Kwagmyre, July 14, 2007 at 7:44 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Louise #86398:

“Mr. Bush must stay the course, because Mr. Bush IS schizophrenic.”

Actually the term I would apply here is “schizopathic” meaning a combo of the schizoid and sociopathic.  I’ve done so because of the highly manipulative, devoid of conscience, feelingless character in Bush’s actions(and which characterize the typical sociopath). Moreover, the substance addiction he once had is now replaced by an addiction to amoral self-delusion with its seemingly schizophrenic sense of acting from “divine inspiration”. Doesn’t matter that on a few occasions he’s feigned regret for the loss of “American”(and VERY seldom if ever, Iraqi)lives.  It’s all a contrived act wherein he has continued with this self deception so much himself into thinking that he “knows” what’s best for America’s security as he shamelessly goes on with empty posturing about threats from “Al Queda in Iraq being the same element that attacked us on 9/11.”

Report this

By Scott, July 14, 2007 at 6:57 pm Link to this comment

Credo’s question… “Why are not just the Republicans but also the Democrats unable to stand up effectively against him?”

...was answered by Frank Cajone’s comment…

“Hitler would never have been able to fight WWII without the silent approval of the German people and their politically elected representatives, and Bush is our generation’s equivalent of that paranoid madman,”

It’s not the Israelies, its the American people and their representatives - our generations equivalent of the German people - that are stopping anything from being done.

Now I know how Hitler rose to power.

Report this

By cyrena, July 14, 2007 at 6:22 pm Link to this comment

Comment#86873 by KYJurisDoctor on 7/14 at 9:11 am

KYJD: I understand the frustration in your posting…


.....“IRAQ PM says his country can do without the U. S. Well, they better. Come September 15th, after the “surge” report comes out and tells us the Iraqis have been on “August recess” while we fought for them, we start drawing down our troops!”....

I read this myself, although I’ve certainly read all of the leadups to it, when gates/rice/cheney/the ambassador/etc made the rounds during the past 6 months, threatening the Iraqi parliament that they damn sure better NOT go on any routine summer break, until they got that OIL LAW signed and implemented. (that’s really always been the number one “benchmark”...sign over the oil).

So, naturally, the Cabal is thoroughly pissed, (along with others like yourself)that while they were able to prevent the Parliament from taking a full 6 or 8 weeks off, (this actually IS routine for the area, because it gets to be 130 degrees in the shade there)they are still taking these 4.

Like I said, I understand the anger and the frustration. Thing is, we can’t just continue to maintain the assumption, that the Iraqis are somehow “indebted” to us. Or…even that OUR troops, are fighting FOR the benefit of the Iraqis. They are NOT fighting for the benefit of the Iraqis, but rather our uninvited and unpopular presence there, has only CREATED the horror that the average Iraqi lives with. We actually DO have to remember, that we were never invited, and that from the position of the majority of the Iraqi population, we are in fact responsible for all of the misery that has overwhelmed them.

So, while I can certainly understand how WE feel, I think it would benefit us to also recognize the reality of what the presence of US troops in Iraq, means to the people of Iraq. It can’t or shouldn’t be ignored, just because our own MSM doesn’t give us that view, and just because the Cabal that perpetrated the aggression, and the occupation, has yet to care or ask exactly what the majority of the people want for their nation.

Most of them have wanted US out for a very long time, (since the beginning) and so this is not a surprise to FINALLY hear from Maliki. He’s failed to represent the population, and has allowed the Cabal to dictate everything that goes on in Iraq. And, he’s been a weakling, that has allowed it to happen.

The people know that of course, and are now actively boycotting his government. So, it’s falling apart. The people know he’s a puppet. So, he’s trying to save himself, (ergo, the announcement about not needing our help) but I think it’s too late.

These people are not going to sign over all of their oil, unless or until the Cabal can wipe ALL of them out, so them taking a vacation in the deadliest of the heat, will not make a difference on that, one way or the other. Just more people will die. But, maybe they can do some internal “politicking” while their off, so that when they return, they’ll have their own plan to give to the U.S.

(I’m being mildly facetious with that last part, because of course that’s what the Iraqis should have done a long time ago.)

Report this

By Louise, July 14, 2007 at 5:49 pm Link to this comment

Mr. Bush must stay the course, because Mr. Bush IS schizophrenic.

Mr. Bush smiles because Mr. Bush’s reality is the reality the world is turning in. He is happy.

Mr. Bush knows the difference between right and wrong. Right is the way his father and other “bosses” want it. Wrong is the way reality seems to indicate it should be.

Mr. Bush doesn’t have to concern himself with what reality seems to indicate the way it should be, because his reality is daily fortified by those around him. Those who are trapped in HIS reality and see no other way. They are unhappy. They are miserable. Or they are blind stupid. And a few of them know perfectly well their leader is schizoid, but are happy to use that fact to increase their own wealth and power.

The one thing you do not find in this equation is personal conscience, or a high moral standard. Certainly no integrity.

Granted, every once in a while someone who manages to escape from within the circle of the schizoid’s reality feels a need to un-burden. To confess the schizoids influence on THEIR bad choices. But always ... too little, too late. And never with an apology for whatever they may have done.

Another essential to the schizophrenic. He must surround himself with weak people. People who are easily influenced. People who are easily corrupted. Or people who are already corrupted.

Schizophrenia has many forms. The form characterized by compulsive lying and the need to control reality and those around them, is one of the most common mental illnesses in society. And goes largely un-recognized and untreated. Written off instead to a bad temper, or eccentricity, or a drug or drinking problem. People who live with it think there is something wrong with them, because they have trouble understanding the schizoid.

You find them in every walk of life. At the pulpit and at the corner bar. you find them looking always for someone who will agree with them, and give them control. They can not stand to be alone, but very carefully seek at the right kind of associates.

They seem to always be seeking approval and advise, but any seeming agreement to any advice is only to the degree that person will be deceived, and caught off guard. You will never find the schizoid honestly seeking and listening to advice and council from a truly honest man. The schizoid can not risk having his reality challenged. That could be very, very dangerous.

Yes, Mr. Bush does know exactly what he’s doing. Schizophrenia is not stupidity, or a lack of awareness, or knowledge. It just makes it easier to do amoral things. After all ... there is no danger of reality kicking in remorse, or change, or self examination. Because the schizoid is after all, the creator of his reality.

At least, that’s the way it looks to me.

Report this

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 >

Newsletter

sign up to get updates


 
 
 
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
© 2013 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.