guys

we may have a horrible problem ahead.

lack of energy - lack of calories, btus - to fuel our electic needs.

Iran seem to appear to address this problem.

we are trying to get new mexico to address this problem.

http://www.prosefights.org/pnmelectric/pnmelectric.htm

Cheers
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=nojeh+nsa

I read the Guardian May 7, 2007 (still a bit old)  Derakhshan article.  I would not call myself an RSFer for any reason but I am against repression of free speech even if it would be in opposition to my own beliefs so in that sense you could call me a radical cyber-dissident.  It is obvious that Hossein Derakhshan and you are impassioned about the state of Iran.  I am against any aggression against Iran and have stated so in many places on the Truthdig site.  I do not know if RSF censor censorship as I haven’t seen it.  Instead of second hand reports I would believe it if I saw it in their own print.  Do you have that kind of evidence? Would you say that the report dated August 27, 2008, “Journalist from the Arab minority sentenced to five years in prison” is a lie?

Is this “new” enough for you, or are you a “RSF cyber-dissident”, I’m starting to wonder about you.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/may/07/cutthebias

Derakhshan was a poster boy for Reporters Without Borders, until he realized exactly what they were doing with his information - using it to prime the media with anti-Irani information. When he outed them, it was all over and the shutting down of his blog in 2007, DID NOT make their “State of Press Freedom Worldwide in 2007” list.

In checking out Hossein Derakhshan, I can find no reason to believe he provides any truth to his criticisms.  Merely stating someone is not biased does not make it true.  What exactly is the proof of his unbiased opinions?  The article Virginia777 provides of his complaint about Reporters Sans Frontiers which is what Derakhshan calls it (aka Reporters Without Borders) is still a year and three quarters old.  How can campaigns against censorship and human rights violations be counterproductive to Iranis are not explained, just dogmatically insisted?  Please provide real news.  Most of the Truthdiggers I’ve encountered would be glad to hear “real” news and have consistently expressed disbelief in MSM news objectivity.

to: Shenonymous

Hossein Derakhshan is NOT a biased Irani. He is nothing less than Iran’s Online Free-speech Pioneer, also called the Blogfather of Iran and credited with kickstarting Iran’s blogging revolution. He is a brave, essential voice and has faced great hostility for his views.

He has criticized NGOs such as Reporters Without Borders and Human Rights Watch, saying their campaigns against censorship and human rights violations in Iran are often counter-productive and serve American interests more than those of Iranians.

And if important information/News has never been resolved, never been reported on by a MSM (how surprizing) - well, it is still completely valid and relevant.

Thats why this site is called TRUTHdig.

It is always so interesting to read commenters who are somewhat anachronistic using articles years old and if checked out find within those articles commenters who take the writer to rational task.  2006 Reporters without Borders report by Virginia777 is old news written by a biased Irani.

I tend to think that current vitriolic propaganda (my perception) is overstated by those in Washington as an attempt to prepare Americans for a war with Iran not unlike what they did to justify their attacking Iraq.  But that is just an opinion based on no facts!  Just a conclusion come to on hearsay evidence.  How many of you will admit to that?

Virginia777 adamantly insists that to stop an inevitable war with Iran is “via the Media” without any insistence on exactly how to do that.  The media I suppose is MSM and I say they are immovable.  Therefore, one must go outside MSM and go to free presses and other means of communication such as hand bills, posters, email and snail mailings: Direct confrontations, huge demonstrations, marches on Washington.  You know, things that have a rat’s ass chance of being effective.  If you think there are none, then you might as well walk with a paper bag over your head and duck tape on your mouth.

List all verifiable evidence please.

Here’s another media propaganda attack against Iran - from Reporters Without Borders - here they are caught issuing false information on Iran:

http://hoder.com/weblog/archives/015688.shtml
How Reporters Without Borders (RSF) is biased against Iran

The MOTION was mailed Thursday August 28, 2008 about 16:15

http://www.prosefights.org/nmlegal/hearing/hearing.htm#armijovoid2

The Brzezinski criminal complaint affidavit is before a federal court again ... after being struck once before.

The only way to stop this almost inevitable war, is via the Media.

The Media HAVE to function, like they have in the past, as the voice of Reason in this senseless situation.

Media attempts at promoting this war (which there are Plenty of) need to be attacked.

I find one of the biggest dangers in this issue, is coming from once “Liberals”. For instance, I heard a prayer in a “progressive” church, for an “end to nuclear weapon build up”.

(hmmm, where do you think THAT information came from?)

We’re trying to get out of these messes.

http://www.prosefights.org/nmlegal/hearing/hearing.htm#armijovoid2

Sodium – since I always keep a copy of what I post, I checked and all the links I referenced are still appearing at my two-part commentary.  Thank you for asking.  I am familiar with Stiglitz and I will get that book you recommended and I much appreciate your information.  Yes, I directed my final reply to Marshall yesterday.  He and I have had similar interaction before so I am quite familiar with his modus operandi.  I sometimes enjoy seeing his folly.  It is awfully entertaining at times.  And it was good exercise for me to post information and sentiments that otherwise might not have.  Again, I thank you for your assessment of this chronic situation.  The chart I referenced from the House of Representatives that will not link from TD is worthwhile to pursue as far as a quick overview of the Bush administration retrogression.  I am sorry but the site has to be hand accessed because for some odd reason the link changes from what I post to what the internet delivers.

By Marshall, August 11 at 10:27 pm

(the poor in the U.S. pay NO taxes whatsoever, so their share can’t go much lower).
Wrong again Marshall, unless you’d like to give a figure what is ‘the poor’.

Let me tell you a little story to which I can give personal voice. I stopped working in 1997, due to a serious injury on my job. I returned to work in 2000, same company, different position, since I could no longer do the job that I had done for years, due to the permanent disability that resulted from the injury, and a few botched-up surgeries. I might mention that I returned to the new position at 52% less than my former pay. I worked until mid 2001, and was subsequently forced out. 2001 was the last tax return I was required to file. From mid 2001, to Jan 2004, I had ZERO income. In 2004, I was finally awarded Social Security Disability benefits from the hundreds of thousands I’d paid into the system over the 30 plus years of my employment. As far as I’m concerned, the amount that I receive from SSDI puts me in the poverty range. It may not have me in the poverty range if I lived somewhere other than California, but this is where I do live, and so my income makes me a ‘poor person’.

Fast forward to 2006. The IRS (Privatized collection agency that they are) starts tagging my already miserly SSDI for (besides medicare parts A and B) TAXES. Yep…taxes they tell me, (when I checked to find out what the hell was going on) from 1994, when they claim my withholdings were too little. Yeah, allegedly back taxes from 12 years prior, despite the fact that I’d filed 8 tax returns after that, where I got small refunds.

And guess what, they’re STILL taking that money out of my measly benefits, and probably will be for years to come.

Guess what else? I personally know at least 3 dozen other people, to whom this same mysterious phenomena is occurring, and we’re ALL ‘poor’. So, take your little charts, and put them in the same place where all of the rest of your useless statistics belong. They have no resemblance to real life in the Dick Bush Era.

By Paracelsus, August 11 at 8:14 pm #

“There are numerous refutations of the Laffer Hypothesis.”

I wasn’t proposing the Laffer curve - simply trying to parse the meaning of your statement about revenue vs. shortfall.

“Part of formulating a better argument for yourself is actively trying to understand your opponent’s argument. I have a feeling I would spend all of tonight and the next day trying to explain it to you”

No need, as I haven’t established that you’d be a legitimate source for such an explanation.  Your condescension is duly noted though.

“I will give you a hint. In economics there are concept called “elasticity” and “diminishing marginal returns””

I need to disclose that I’m not a professional economist.  Perhaps you are.  What I can say with certainty is that economics is one of the most contentious subjects for debate, especially regarding tax policy.

By Shenonymous, August 11 at 7:32 pm #

“This is an ideal that never materializes.”

And yet it did materialize; for example in the 1980’s when federal revenue increased by $1 trillion in the decade following the 1981-83 tax cuts.

Federal tax revenues also increased every year between 2003 and 2007 (tax cuts were passed in 2001 and 2003).  Here are the CBO figures for federal tax revenue from 2003-2006 as a percentage of GDP (ratio of revenues to GDP rose a total of 1.9% during this period):

http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/CBO_table.jpg

Notice that .3% of the rise in receipts (as a percentage of GDP) was from individual Cap gains.  Also notice that 1% of the total increase was from corporate tax - the result of an improved business climate during lower overall corporate tax rates. And during this period, unemployment fell to an enviable 4.7%.

“It is fetching to think this could work, that the money not paid in taxes by the rich would be invested in business, but facts speak for themselves”

Indeed they do.  First, I didn’t say that taxes saved by the rich go into business; I said that taxes saved overall (yes, everyone received tax rebates) were an economic stimulus that increased federal business tax receipts.  Second, the proportion of federal taxes paid by “the rich” (a moving target demographic) has increased over time, not decreased (the poor in the U.S. pay NO taxes whatsoever, so their share can’t go much lower).

“Jobs and production have not increased.”

Over what period?  Jobs increased every year from 2003-2007 (http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2008/04/us-unemployment-is-short-and-rare.html)
(I post this link for the chart data it contains, which was derived from CBO figures)

Increases in factory production have only recently begun to slow after overall increases during previous years.

“In the last eight years of failed U.S. economy that started with a Clinton treasury surplus, $237 billion which George Bush squandered and has run this country into a debt of 9.2 trillion dollars”

A debt which is, in fact, smaller as a percentage of GDP than at any time during the Clinton administration - despite the then Republican Congress’ trimming of Clinton budgets.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Debt_to_Nominal_GDP_Chart.png

btw - I’ve never argued that we’re not currently in tough economic times.  My point has consistently been that Bush economic policies are not to blame.  You have yet to show how Bush policies led to the sub-prime mess which sparked the latest down turn.

“You bring up taxation of wage labor, but I’m not clear on whether you’re suggesting that personal income tax should be abolished in favor of import duties entirely (and sales tax, I’d assume)?”

I don’t see a Sales(VAT?) tax as something that the federal government should be given- too much potential for abuse. Import duties would strengthen domestic industry. We have too much of an armaments industry as well as a huge standing army. Working people should not have the sweat of their brows taxed. It is a type of slavery. Productive people have eternally been enslaved in one form or another to fuel the dreams of power mad lunatics. A currency that was resistant to expansion would do much to discourage empire building. 

“And I agree with you about socialized medicine (though we already have a partly socialized system).”

Part of the problem is that monopoly medicine derives profit from palliative and ineffective treatments. It is more properly sick care. I think one or two visits to a physician who is motivated to cure rather than to treat a “chronic condition” is the best outcome. Unfortunately our system profits the pharma-petrochemical industry the most. It is as if the FDA is in the business of killing off effective and reasonably priced care, while protecting dangerous products. But I have not a fully structured idea of where to proceed.

  “I believe that such a concept is unworkable in the U.S..  My solution to an extremely complicated issue would be to retain the private part of our system but change the incentives to shift the focus away from denying coverage as the cost cutting measure.  Unfortunately, we’ll certainly see greater wait times as the Canadians, French, and English have all seen.”

Soon we would come up against issues of rationing care with the interventions of bio-ethics boards. It seems to take too much from a “Brave New World”. 

“Addressing our illegal immigration problem would also help significantly, I believe.”

Our illegal immigration problem is no accident or quirk of a badly functioning system. The system functions evilly not from complaisant incompetence, but from malice of forethought. I had mentioned earlier the train of wrecking crew administrations.

“Not clear on what you mean here since, by definition, tax revenue increases reduce revenue shortfall.” 

There are numerous refutations of the Laffer Hypothesis. Some of these are on the internet. Part of formulating a better argument for yourself is actively trying to understand your opponent’s argument. I have a feeling I would spend all of tonight and the next day trying to explain it to you, and I have much more pleasant things to do. I don’t want to run up my blood pressure trying to untangle so much presupposing and impervious sophistry. I do credit that this sophistry is not of your doing, but you have absorbed so much of it.

“The source of the increase derives from greater business activity as the economy is stimulated; more businesses paying tax, more workers paying tax (from higher employment), and more resultant consumer spending completing the circle.”

I will give you a hint. In economics there are concept called “elasticity” and “diminishing marginal returns”.

  “Money Creation happens in numerous ways, like through increased Venture Capital financing for example.”

Money creation happens through fractional reserve banking, and debt backed asset financing. No need for something as primitive as a print shop. Venture capital financing usually involves an equity stake, and the SEC doesn’t allow high base refinancing of stock as is the case with loan assets and the Federal Reserve.

Sorry again, this works on one’s email, but not on this thread.  My apologies again.  If you are interested you will have to go to the site from the provided link then in the search bar type: THE LEGACY OF GEORGE W. BUSH’S PRESIDENCY
The Country He Inherited, The Country He Leaves Behind
It is worthwhile to take a look at as it is very concise and clear.

Correction for the House of Representative Report on the Bush legacy:
http://www.dems.gov/index.asp?Type=B_PR&SEC;={D68CD0B2-1442-4804-9F6B-AF67DE7FF585}&DE;={FDD09C4F-E958-4E13-A92B-179C2FAC6FEA}

My apologies.

You have said this before Marshall, by definition, tax revenue increases reduce revenue shortfall.  The source of the increase derives from greater business activity as the economy is stimulated; more businesses paying tax, more workers paying tax (from higher employment), and more resultant consumer spending completing the circle.   This is an ideal that never materializes.  It is fetching to think this could work, that the money not paid in taxes by the rich would be invested in business, but facts speak for themselves; the fact are that businesses are being forced out of business or forced to drastically cut back all on Bush’s watch,  The prosperity he promised with his proposed economic practices, as seen for the eight years of his schemes, have not materialized because the less taxes the rich pay, the more they sock away in either money market accounts, stocks, or other stagnant money repositories rather than putting their granted gains into the business world.  Jobs and production have not increased. 

You speak in theory but practice speaks for itself.  If you don’t think this country is in a recession then you delude yourself.  It is true you and I do not speak the same language.  You speak in the imaginary, a world that exists only in your mind.  When Bush came into office, important businesses who intuited a non pro high-tech economy, ceased to plan for high-tech transformation of their business and reduced spending on equipment and services involving high technology.  Less Capital Expenditure (CapEx) is what caused the trend downward toward the current economic crisis.  A crisis that exists regardless of how much you wish to deny it.  Every single evening massive layoffs in industry are heard on the business and market reports.  It doesn’t matter what you say, the country is in an economic toilet. 

In 2003, economists declared George W. Bush’s worst economic record of any president since Herbert Hoover.  They have not changed their tune.  I submit that once the GWB’s administration is over, his will be found to have been the worst economic record of any president in US history.

The Internet publication SmartMoney noted in their August 11, 2008 report, Investors expected the economy to prosper under George W. Bush, a self-professed champion of enterprise. But the market and the economy laid an egg.  While he may not be completely at fault, it takes two to tango as the saying goes and what I have been claiming all along in my posts, he is the dancing man in charge.  The housing industry is in the toilet, the government will most likely have to come to the aid of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and even though there is a boom going on in the oil drilling business, every section of the country has seen escalating prices over the edge of sanity if one were to total them up, gasoline for which everybody but the rich are being crushed, and groceries, energy costs to heat or cool houses, these are only the most glaring, the glamor girls of expenditures that Americans are being squeezed to death with. 

You can try to denigrate me and the information I have provided but as I have repeatedly said, facts speak for themselves. 

In the last eight years of failed U.S. economy that started with a Clinton treasury surplus, $237 billion which George Bush squandered and has run this country into a debt of 9.2 trillion dollars that will take generations to discharge. A telling chart published by the Democratic Caucus in the House of Representatives, August 11, 2008 (today) showing the legacy may be found http://www.dems.gov/index.asp?DE={FDD09C4F-E958-4E13-A92B-179C2FAC6FEA}&SEC;={D68CD0B2-1442-4804-9F6B-AF67DE7FF585}&Type=B_PR  It should really be called a disendowment since legacy is too nice a word to use.

Indeed it would be prudent for you to end posting here since you provide no worthwhile information given your propensity for spinning data to portray a completely erroneous picture.

By Shenonymous, August 11 at 2:44 pm #

“under his watch the wealth of the nation has not managed to achieve zero sum but the most incredible negative balance in the history of this country”

Link please?  What do you mean by “wealth zero sum”?  What do you mean by “negative balance”?

“GWB is the source of the diminished wealth of the nation”

Nation’s wealth is measured by GDP, which is higher than at any time in history.  U.S. wealth has increased, not diminished.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gdp

“GWB’s moral and rational decision have led only to this country’s recession”

Actually - technically - we’re not in a recession, as we’ve had no quarters of negative GDP growth.  That aside, what does GWB’s moral decisions have to do with sub-prime loans?

Bottom line, Shenom; I can see that your thinking is driven chiefly by your emotions.  This means it’s unlikely that you and I are actually communicating because you’re ignoring my facts and answering with your personal judgements about ethics, morality and intentions.  You’re also throwing out inaccurate asides like “illegal war”, when we both know that no court has ruled the war illegal.

Your 3rd bullet point is just a wild mess of numbers with absolutely no context.  I assume you just cribbed these from various articles?  I’ll address a couple because the rest have no discernible meaning; they’re just numbers.

The U.S. deficit shrank from 2005-2007, though it is indeed projected to grow in 2008.  But deficit (and the national debt) aren’t measured in raw dollars. They’re measured as a percentage of GDP - which has grown MORE than the debt.  Which means the debt is entirely manageable.

As to Iraq’s surplus - this is a really good thing. You may not be aware that we’re currently negotiating with Iraq to use more of its surplus to replace U.S. reconstruction dollars.  This is the self-sufficiency that has been talked about from the start and that’s finally beginning to come to fruition.

The rest of your post is scatter shot opinion, speculation, etc… so there’s not much for me to address.  I suspect we should end this exchange because I don’t think we’re accomplishing anything given our different approaches to basic discussion.

By Paracelsus, August 11 at 4:57 pm #

Nice to have rational discourse for a change.

“It is general consensus among economists that the tax revenue increases from decreased tax rates can never reach the amount needed to close the government deficits caused by the shortfall in revenue…”

Not clear on what you mean here since, by definition, tax revenue increases reduce revenue shortfall.  The source of the increase derives from greater business activity as the economy is stimulated; more businesses paying tax, more workers paying tax (from higher employment), and more resultant consumer spending completing the circle.  Money Creation happens in numerous ways, like through increased Venture Capital financing for example.

You bring up taxation of wage labor, but I’m not clear on whether you’re suggesting that personal income tax should be abolished in favor of import duties entirely (and sales tax, I’d assume)?

And I agree with you about socialized medicine (though we already have a partly socialized system).  I believe that such a concept is unworkable in the U.S..  My solution to an extremely complicated issue would be to retain the private part of our system but change the incentives to shift the focus away from denying coverage as the cost cutting measure.  Unfortunately, we’ll certainly see greater wait times as the Canadians, French, and English have all seen.  Addressing our illegal immigration problem would also help significantly, I believe.

@Marshall

“As has always been the case historically, the Bush tax cuts *increased* federal tax revenue, so you’re just wrong on this count.”

It is general consensus among economists that the tax revenue increases from decreased tax rates can never reach the amount needed to close the government deficits caused by the shortfall in revenue as opposed to leaving tax rates alone. Look it up in Wikipedia. Money creation is the only option in making up the shortfall.

“First time I’ve heard Bush criticized for spending too much on a social program.  Now THAT’s funny.  Frankly I don’t know how to respond to that.  Do you support universal health care?  Should benefits have been cut?  I’m confused.”

Under our present paradigm, we cannot afford both guns and butter. Yet Bush has decided to increase both. It is just as well as the war budget will encourage money creation which will devalue the money that Medicare recipients receive.

As to whether we should have income taxes on wage labor, I am inclined toward funding government through import duties, and leaving wage labor untaxed. This would mean leaving the current global system. So be it.

As to socialized medicine per the American system, I worry that this would create self interested monopolies who would have no interest in the public health, only monopoly rents. I do not know how we could create a true social medical system without tax revenues being heavily stove-piped into private hands. Any ideas?

Shenonymous and all.

Sometimes, even one small thing, can prove the absolute obvious. Marshall writes this to you:

•  “And I’m dismissing your “truthout” link because, well, I don’t think you’d appreciate it if I posted links from - say - Rushlimbaugh.com.”

If that doesn’t confirm that Marshall is a complete ideologue, with nothing more than bogus straw man rhetoric, then little does. A comparison to truthout, which (while left leaning) incorporates information from multiple sources, to an asshole like Rushlimbaugh, explains exactly where Marshall is. And, that’s what one can gather from just that one statement.

Taken in totality, (as he goes on again to describe someone else (Kurgman) as ‘left-leaning’ we KNOW that Marshall cannot manage or sustain any discourse outside of an ideological lens.

He can define William Greider as a discredited hack writer, and then make the most outrageous nonsensical statement here:

•  “…As has always been the case historically, the Bush tax cuts *increased* federal tax revenue, so you’re just wrong on this count.

How in the hell can anyone claim that tax *cuts* INCREASE federal tax revenue. How insane is that?

That means that a minus equals a plus. Just move those little plus and minus symbols around, and there you have it. The less money you put in your bank account, the more you’ll have. It just won’t be in your bank.

Anyway, that’s the mentality (or lack of one) that you’re dealing with in Marshall.

On a thankfully different note, I’ve gotten about halfway through Shedon Wolsin’s book, “Democracy Incorporated. It’s superb. (but then, for 50 years, he’s been one of the best) I think all sane and rational Americans should read it.

Just a few of the recommendations, since I don’t have the time for any of my own right now,

•  “Wolin’s writing has a resonance that binds the canon of political philosophy to unfolding events and present circumstances. In “Democracy Incorporated, he contends that the institutions and practices that Americans regarded as their defense against totalitarianism—- and other forms of authoritarian domination——have failed them..” ~ Anne Norton, author of Leo Strauss and the Politics of American Empire.

•  “With his fundamental grasp of political theory and restless spirit to get at the essence of what threatens modern democracy, Wolin demonstrates that the threats to our democratic traditions and institutions are not always from the outside, but may come from within…”
~Rakesh Khurana, Harvard Business School, author of From Higher Aims to Hired Hands

•  “..he presents highly original, sober, and persuasive account of a number of tendencies in contemporary American society that constitute a significant danger for the future of constitutional democracy. If totalitarianism establishes itself in the United States, it will be in the ‘inverted’ form Wolin analyzes in this important book.”
~Raymond Geuss, Univ. of Cambridge

•  “As we’ve come to expect from Sheldon Wolin, a tightly argued and deeply revealing book about the dangers of unconstrained capitalism for our democracy.”
~Robert B. Reich, Univ of California, Berkeley

Sheldon S. Wolin is professor emeritus of politics at Princeton University.

Sodium said it succinctly and correctly as far as I am concerned.  As is your usual style Marshall, you ask bogus questions to attempt to deflect answers given.  Your criticism of my post is absurd. 

Responsible and responsibility require defintion:
1.  Liable to be required to give account, as of one’s actions or of the discharge of a duty or trust.  GWB is a servant of the people, not an independent actor.  He is required to give an account of his actions and to discharge his duty to keep the nation’ coffers as healthy as possible.  Instead under his watch the wealth of the nation has not managed to achieve zero sum but the most incredible negative balance in the history of this country.  His policies have diminished the national treasury to a status where it will take new generations of Americans to recover.

2. Being a source or cause.  GWB is the source of the diminished wealth of the nation by declaring war on a country that did not need to have a war declared on, Iraq.  Afghanistan is the country on which war should have been declared if any country deserved it.  GWB’s policies took this nation into a war that has taken it down the economic road to perdition.  Try this site for some insight into GWB’s responsibilty for the current economic state of the country.
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/12/bush200712

3. Able to make moral or rational decisions on one’s own and therefore answerable for one’s behavior.  GWB’s moral and rational decision have led only to this country’s recession and near depression.  Decision going to an illegal the war mainly, and
Between 2005 and 2007, the GAO report says, only ten percent of the Iraqi budget went toward reconstruction of their own country, which means that once again, American taxpayers have been picking up the slack – $48 billion US allocated for reconstruction costs since we rolled into Baghdad more than five years ago.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/blog/2008/08/
The White House projects next year’s federal budget deficit at a record $482 billion, and that’s not counting a possible $25 billion bailout of the mortgage banks Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Or the total costs of fighting in the Middle East, largely kept in the bottom drawer where they’re hard to find. Yet this week, our Government Accountability Office issued a report concluding that by year’s end, the Iraqi government – the regime in power because we put them there – may have a budget surplus as high as $79 billion.
Iraq, as in “war torn” Iraq. A surplus! Seventy-nine billion after we’ve poured $100 billion a year into that country and more than 4100 American lives – so far. Seventy-nine billion based on the record prices we’re paying at the gas pumps, and they’re not spending it on rebuilding, on getting their electrical systems back on the grid, constructing schools and hospitals and housing, making sure everyone has food and clean water.  By the way, that includes $33 million for a new hotel, office complex and shopping mall at the Baghdad airport. Admittedly, a lot of those billions doubtless line the pockets of American contractors who’ve done little if any of what they were hired to do – and endangered Iraqis and our own troops with shoddy, dangerous workmanship.

The fact that more than a million Iraqis have been killed as a result of this illegal war is one of the worst moral disasters in which this country has ever been engaged.

Continued response to Marshall:
4. Able to be trusted or depended upon; reliable. http://www.democracyrising.us/content/view/57/164/
Democracy Rising is a national effort based in Washington, DC. Being inside-the-beltway gives the project a daily focus on the decision makers - in Congress and the Bush Administration - who are waging the illegal war and occupation of Iraq.
The Bush Family’s War Profiteering - The extent of Iraq contracts going to corporations which involve members of President George W. Bush’s family is widespread and extensive involving hundreds of millions of dollars.
5. Having the means to pay debts or fulfill obligations.  It is a well-known fact that GWB and company have driven this country into untold amounts of debt.  It has gotten worse as they realize the Republicans are not going to win the next presidential election and desire to leave the new Democratic president with a debt that is suicidal at best.
6. Required to render account; answerable: The cabinet is responsible to the Congress and the American people.  Perhaps impeachment is on the table after all.  The fact that Democratic opponents of GWB are discussing impeachment is fact enough alone to fulfill the intention of this definition.
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/338631
Admittedly the Nation magazine is a left leaning publication.  But you certainly don’t expect me to cite a right leaning magazine.  The report still makes my point anyway.

By Paracelsus, August 9 at 9:50 am #

“Bush pushed us over the cliff with the tax revenue reductions”

As has always been the case historically, the Bush tax cuts *increased* federal tax revenue, so you’re just wrong on this count.

“and the wartime spending on top of increased Medicare benefits.”

First time I’ve heard Bush criticized for spending too much on a social program.  Now THAT’s funny.  Frankly I don’t know how to respond to that.  Do you support universal health care?  Should benefits have been cut?  I’m confused.

By Shenonymous, August 9 at 3:42 am #

“GWB and company, are completely responsible for the crappy economic state in which America finds itself.”

Yes you’ve still provided no specifics about why this would be the case.

“here are a few reports that provide substance for argument that the condition of the country is in the proverbial toilet.”

I didn’t ask you for proof the country was suffering - I asked for proof that Bush was responsible.  And I’m dismissing your “truthout” link because, well, I don’t think you’d appreciate it if I posted links from - say - Rushlimbaugh.com.

Your economyincrisis.org link: Not sure why you posted it as it has no specifics on Bush policies supposedly at fault.  In fact, it blames the Treasury and Fed - entities over which the President has no control.

William Greider is a discredited hack writer, not an economist.  Even noted left-leaning Princeton economist Paul Krugman dismissed his work as uninformed, misleading, and inaccurate.  Greider’s not a good source to support your arguments.

Florida bank closed by FDIC:
http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/01/news/companies/FDIC_ba nk_closure/

Once again - evidence of economic problems is not evidence that the current administration is responsible.  Bush did not cause banks to collapse; the sub-prime market did.  Do you believe Bush invented the sub-prime loan?

Your presstv.com link: What does Cheney and Iran have to do with the economy?  I’m baffled as to why you posted this link.

On your nytimes “Bush and the planet” link: again, this has nothing to do with the subject of our discussion.  Bush is not a believer in man being the cause of global warming.  That’s a position you may not agree with, but it’s a legitimate one.  But I promise you this: if the global warming crowd gets its way, the U.S. economy will be suffering far more than it is as the result of huge spending increases required to attempt to address this questionable issue.  So prepare yourself for the onslaught of mammoth spending increases that will be needed for this cause, for universal health care, and to rescue the inevitable collapse of Social Security that Dems are loath to even talk about.

I haven’t read your Center for American Progress link yet so I won’t speak to it until I do.

Leefeler, you said it exactly right! The DEMON “people” and Meg-Corps with the big bucks have given the administration their orders, and like the obedient goblins they are (cheNey,buSh) have used our military and our fear and patriotism to SCREW OVER the working class, ROYALLY. They have executed the largest monetary theft in all of human history, combined. Leaving our treasury and our reputation in the sewer. Getting back to your statement, “giving us the finger”.... Some of us tried to stop it right from the beginning but we were called traitors and cowards. So, To all of them, on behalf of all of us,  I say “here is the one finger salute to you”  .!.

To the posters that don’t think invading Iraq is one of the factors in the high oil prices,  you must be living on a different planet then the rest of us. IT IS THE MAJOR factor in the price of oil today. The stock market hates unpredictability and instability such as war and destruction. When Wall Street analysts can’t see some sort of linear production from manufacturers and the like, they head for the hills. Look what the market did after 9/11. Someone posted that oil prices did not rise when we invaded Iraq. This is somewhat true.  The White House and it’s extensive propaganda machine, i.e.  THE MSM had the U.S. brainwashed sheeple-public, so utterly convinced that the the Iraqi people would be licking our asses, as we totally destroyed their 5000 year old buildings and mounuments. They would be “throwing rose at our feet”  as we murdered and tortured and imprisoned thousands and thousands of innocent and adolescent civilians. “Roses at our feet” were Rumsfelds exact words.  Well,  when the roses didn’t drop and the licking of asses didn’t materialize, and American soldiers were dying at 30-40 plus a day, wiser people started to realize this invasion and occupation was not going to be the cake walk so many were duped into believing. That’s when the price of oil started to rise, and rise it did until just about 10 days ago. Also, everytime the Knucklehead buSh alludes to invading Iran, the speculators go to price fixing and salivating.

  I was so surprised to see that the stocks that made money during this occupation were oil, defense, security and military industrial complex companies. I was equally surprised to come to the realization that buSh and cheNey have stock in those very same type of companies. Do you want to hear something even more surprising? Most if not all of their relatives, and closest friends, even acquaintances have ownership or stock in those very same companies. WOW, some people people have all the luck!  Stuff like that never happens to me and all my relatives and close friends and acquaintances. Man what’s the odds, they just happen to own those stocks and companies, just as the people of Iraq were going to invade the United States of America?  They would be so stealth as they traversed MILES and MILES of open desert. Then, sneak their invasion force through several well militarily armed, unfriendly NATO countries going undetected.  Knowing this to be a sure success,  they would then proceed to cross the ENTIRE ATLANTIC OCEAN to surprise attack us, mounted upon their trusty camels. This being that was all all they had, as a result of enduring 12 years of sanctions and the daily bombings that were imposed by the U.N. and carried out by the U.S. and NATO.

Ocjim (and all)

I’m not sure if this link was included in the several that shenonymous posted on this thread, but it’s an excellent piece, (the stuff from TomDispatch always is) So, it might be helpful to send along to your friends. Then again, unless these McCain supporters can come to understand that he is as much a part of this NON-accident as the current thugs are, it may not help.

Follow This Dime: Why Misgovernment Was No Accident in George W. Bush’s Washington

Monday 04 August 2008
by: Thomas Frank, TomDispatch.com

http://www.truthout.org/article/follow-this-dime?print

(I’ve crossposted this on another thread)

By Shenonymous, August 9 at 3:42 am

•  “…Nevertheless for the benefit of others, here are a few reports that provide substance for argument that the condition of the country is in the proverbial toilet.

Dear Professor Shenonymous,

And oh what a BENEFIT IT IS!!!!

This WEALTH of information and resources has just assisted me in clinching two major projects. A reminder that more than just amusement, knowledge is more valuable than gold, (even if one doesn’t have projects that are further benefited by it).

I hadn’t read the piece at truthout yet, even though the site is pretty much my bible. So, for those addicted to brain/mind exercise….INDULGE!!

Thanks Prof.

~~~~~

Lefty, you’re right about Marshall. Odd that he would claim to have started out poor, but has earned everything he has, which is a moderate measure, in terms of LA standards. He says he took advantage of ‘opportunity’. Now, exactly what OPPORTUNITIES were those, and how did he access them?

This is not a rhetorical question at all, because my sister and I were just talking this up not long ago. Her family is probably in about the same ‘classification’ as Marshall here. Moderate income for LA standards, since her husband has a successful medical practice, and she too works hard at making it such.  This came up as a comparison to the complaints that Obama is an ‘elitist’ or somehow ‘privileged’, except of course when we look at his history, we know he didn’t start out at any of that, and basically still isn’t. He didn’t use his hard earned education to work for Wall Street, though he certainly could have. He went into academia instead, and anybody who knows anything, understands that academics don’t get rich. Nobody goes into teaching, expecting to get rich. (or they shouldn’t)

Anyway, HER point was to say that when the system works, (that is people using their birth given talents to work hard, and take advantages of opportunities) we call it one thing if they happen to be black, (affirmative action that then turns them into ‘elitists’) and it’s just “The American Dream” when it happens to anyone else. One that they DESERVE, as a given for having been born white.

I also remember her saying that they didn’t net as much $money$ in the Clinton years, because they did pay more taxes. On the other hand, since the Bush destruction began, they might be ‘personally’ better off, (by a few dollars) but their surrounding community is in economic despair, because all of THOSE boats have gone under. What a paradox for Marshall to claim that he believes a rising tide lifts all boats, and fail to see that a falling tide sinks all of the same. But, the greedy and the selfish never see it that way, until it’s too late. They’re the ones who will be jumping out of buildings and shit when the crash reaches that far up their mountain sides.

“The U.S. economy is already tottering. We recently witnessed the second-largest bank failure in U.S. history, and there are fears that as many as 150 banks could fail over the next 12 to 18 months. “

Worse problems?

“[[t]he $330 billion auction-rate securities market ...]”

http://www.prosefights.org/thecanadian/thecanadian.htm#auctionrate

@Marshall

“Specifically which Bush policies do you think led to the current recession?”

I think it is a matter of contributory negligence. Clinton’s administration greased the skids with the Chinese and Mexican trade “liberalizations”. Bush pushed us over the cliff with the tax revenue reductions and the wartime spending on top of increased Medicare benefits. I think we have had a series of wrecking crew governments ever since the JFK-CIA hit job. Though it could be argued that Truman provided us with our first Patriot Act with his NSA and CIA provisions. Ike pretty much watch over the transformation of our government from a civilian structure with an over funded Pentagon to a military government with a small hearts and minds civilian budget.

re:By Lefty, August 9 at 2:57 am:

Nobody in this world has perfect assurance of not being attacked. Nobody has the right to preventively brutalize another country because of not being absolutely sure that the other country will not someday attack. No one has the right to assert a special privilege of brute domination over others, in the name of “security”. You don’t have the right to kill people for refusing to love and praise your country. You don’t have the right to approach the world in this way - no, not even if you’re Jewish, and not even if Hitler killed half your family back in the 1940s.

And if you DO act in the world in this sway, you deserve whatever other nations may do to prevent, stop, or punish your behavior. And you certainly shouldn’t be getting any support from MY government in your pursuit of these psychotically paranoid endeavors.

Every once in a while I wonder if it really could be the case that President Bush believes himself to be a faithful obedient servant to his God, hastening Armageddon.  On those rare occasions, I am relieved from wondering what he might have to gain:  I know what he thinks he’s doing.

I never have such doubts about Vice President Cheney.  I was so relieved when I learned that he had some heart trouble because it was irrefutable evidence that the man did have a heart.  But I never had any doubt that he has a brain.  So what’s his angle?  Why would he fashion an economic climate in this country as described above?  All the consequences seem to be foregone conclusions.The only one I can think of is that he knows for a fact that he’s not going to live forever, and couldn’t care less what happens to the rest of us when he dies.

The one thing Ii was able to agree with Tolstoy about was his argument in “War and Peace” that one man cannot be solely responsible for any particular political disaster, or success for that matter.  My argument, and I am not alone by any means and if you are a conscious human being who listens to the news reports, reads the reports both printed and online, is that GWB and company, are completely responsible for the crappy economic state in which America finds itself.  Now Marshall, I occasionally sense you are an intelligent man, but you seem to have particular mental blinders on and no portrait of the truth can ever get through.  So be it.  Nevertheless for the benefit of others, here are a few reports that provide substance for argument that the condition of the country is in the proverbial toilet.

For anybody’s amusement, here are just a smattering of articles on the effects of the GWB eight year assault on the United States.  There are tons of these “proofs.”  Rest be assured there are Bush supporter articles as well that are expected from their camp.  However, this is our argument.

http://www.truthout.org/article/the-quagmire
The Quagmire – article August 6, 2008 by Serge Truffaut, Le Devoir
“Apropos of Dick Cheney’s famous comment that budget deficits don’t matter, Serge Truffaut writes: “With the I-don’t-give-a-f—- ... example coming from on high, the universe of finance transformed itself into a pickpockets’ society frequented exclusively by swindlers.””

http://www.economyincrisis.org/?content=eicad1&gclid=CNXYouvJgJUCFQNfFQodAWqhqA
The War And Occupation Of Iraq Costs
$541,986,255,670 as of August 2, 2008

Article by William Greider - Economic Free Fall? at http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20406.htm
“The nation, meanwhile, is flirting with historic catastrophe. Nobody yet knows how bad it is, but the peril is vastly larger than previous episodes, like the savings and loan bailout of the late 1980s. The dangers are compounded by the fact that the United States is now utterly dependent on foreign creditors—Japan and China lead the list—who have been propping us up with their lending.”

Florida bank closed by FDIC:
http://money.cnn.com/2008/08/01/news/companies/FDIC_bank_closure/
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com)—State regulators closed Florida’s First Priority Bank on Friday, marking the eighth bank failure of the year.

http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=65445&sectionid=3510203
How this GWB Administration’s policy operates with an example of the VP’s proposal on Iran.  It is old news that Cheney was part of the architecture firm that forced America to war in Iraq.

As far as GWB policies regarding the dire condition of the planet, July 13, 2009
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/13/opinion/13sun1.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
The Bush administration made clear on Friday that it will do virtually nothing to regulate the greenhouse gases that cause global warming. With no shame and no apology, it stuck a thumb in the eye of the Supreme Court, repudiated its own scientists and exposed the hollowness of Mr. Bush’s claims to have seen the light on climate change.?

A succinct 25-page pdf full report from the Center for American Progress (CAP) that gives a synopsis of the effects of the GWB policies, dated August 4, 2008 may be found at the link provided at the CAP page http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/08/bushonomics.html
Small description of CAP is here provided: The Center for American Progress is a nonpartisan research and educational institute (a think tank) dedicated to promoting a strong, just and free America that ensures opportunity for all.  CAP is also dedicated to improving the lives of Americans through ideas and action and challenge the media to cover the issues that truly matter.

References can infinitely be provided.  I suggest anybody interested to do their own googling.

By Shenonymous, August 8 at 8:05 pm #

I assumed your questions were rhetorical since you seemed more interested in caricaturing me as Daddy Warbucks than in getting useful information.

I have a middle income job (for LA) and have earned everything I have.  I have been “poor” but had enough opportunity in this society to keep from remaining there.  I believe that a rising economic tide lifts all boats, and so I support fiscal policy that promotes that.  I believe that the government is usually the worst tool for fighting poverty and thus entrusting it with vast social spending, subject to its lack of accountability, hurts more than helps.

Your CRR figures are sufficiently vague and without historical context (“live as they would like”?  “moderately comfortable”? “at risk”? ...what do these mean?) as to be rather useless as a benchmark.  But I’ll assume that you brought it up because you support Social Security reform, which the Dems have been deafeningly quiet about; so we’re in agreement there.  What I do know is that our recent economic boom, until it was put on hold by the things you blithely blame on the President but provide not a shred of evidence for, created one of the greatest times of wealth our country has seen.  Virtually every measure of our economy was up - from GDP to home ownership to real wages to productivity to upward mobility.  But economies are cyclical - especially when beset by something like our recent credit squeeze.  And the very last thing we need is a President who decides that this is the perfect opportunity to enact government mandated wealth redistribution - your socialist dream I’m sure.  This would stifle the economy and ironically prolong the pane for the very people we’d all like to help.  Lowering taxes?  That has a measurable and demonstrable effect on the economy.  Increasing govt. spending and taxing business/high incomes to pay for it?  That’s an economic deal breaker.

Now that I’ve answered your questions, perhaps you’ll return the favor and provide some specifics on how the current President is responsible for the price of gas, value of the dollar, the credit squeeze, and the sub-prime mess.

KDelphi,

Just so you know, I definitely was NOT trying to give you a hard time. (and I understand perfectly how people do come across differently on these on line forums than they might in person) It has not only to do with how WE each present ourselves, but how others choose to interpret it. But for sure…I wasn’t disagreeing with you, or pre-assuming anything other than that you were making it clear that what is going on has nothing to do with those few who actually believe in the Christianity they practice. All of that said, I didn’t mean to seem like I was hassling you, because I wasn’t. Just on a roll of sorts, to keep the reality in focus.

As for Jeremy Scahill, I have followed his work, as well as the crimes of Blackwater and so many others.  I’m glad to know you are as well. There are still far too many Americans unaware of what this represents, which has been the near complete take-over of a once open society, that now has us in the same league with other Totalitarian forms of authoritarian states. The militarism, corporatism, fascism, are all forms of authoritarianism, and are displayed in monarchies, theocracies, kleptocracies, or other forms of dictatorships. That’s what we have now, in more than a few of those forms. It’s been the goal of the regime that overthrew our government in 2000, and has continued to wreck the havoc that most of us are experiencing, even if many have yet to connect the cause with the effect. This is unabated fascism, beginning with the Cheney Doctrine of the Unitary Executive, and the Bush Doctrine of Pre-emptive aggression, in pursuit of the goals established by the PNAC. It’s CLASSIC Totalitarianism.

And, so are the results. The total destruction of the economy is NOT part of any ‘cycle’ as we’ve seen over the decades, and this DEPRESSION that we’re in, (I’m sick and tired of people referencing it as a recession, similar to those that have occurred in the past, because it is NOT that) is not like the Depression of 80 or 90 years ago. Nope, this is a very intentionally planned GRAND HEIST!!! And yep, it was very well planned by the thugs who performed the coup that set it off. The Coup of 2000. So it’s not ‘the economy’ in the typical sense of economies, but rather a planned theft, by a relatively small group of criminals. Think back to Enron, and consider the GIGANTIC gap between the few that literally have trillions of the worlds’ wealth, and all the rest of us. GW didn’t plan it because he’s too stupid. But he’s so utterly void of any conscience, (a psychopath) that he made for a good puppet to carry it out.

Here again, this is classic to a totalitarian game plan. There is the shadow government; the one actually controlling the destruction, and then there is the ostensible government, which is the façade for the people, intended to create the illusion that our old form of a constitutional republic is still in place. It isn’t. The standard practice of a totalitarian regime is to break all of that down, generally by creating chaos, which promises instability. Only a sustained instability allows them to continue that totalitarian control. So things like the Constitution are the first to go. It is either ignored, or revised with laws that attempt to make legal, what is clearly and blatantly ILLEGAL. (think torture and the dismissal of something as basic as habeas corpus.)

So, the destruction of our society is intentional and not some matter of a cyclical trajectory in terms of the economy, or anything else. The only hope of changing that, (and the repairs will take decades) will be to first STOP the destruction. That means clearing out the political apparatus that has perpetrated it.

So, we can hope that those who represent the largest of us who need to survive, will in fact prevail. That would mean the 90% of us, as opposed to the 10% of ‘them’ who have pulled off this GRAND HEIST.

btw—this bleeding heart liberal is a democratic socialist, but, if McCain wins, or Obama goes further Centrist—I may be an anarchist. Hey, when you’ve got nothin’ to lose…! Class warfare is NOT a dirty word when it’s this bad—it’s a SMART thing to do! The upper classes have been killing us for long enough. There are thingsworth dying for—Iraqy/Rummy/Dubby et al are not ANY of them@

Shenonymous is absolutely correct, but the fact that you guys don’t see it does not bode well for so-called conservatives for the near (or far) future—-which is a blessing for the US and the planet.

While not quite elderly yet, this bleeding-heart, liberal socialist Democrat, not anarchist, says all of the Bush policies have led to the current recession and for that reason:  yes indeedy he and his toadies are responsible for the condition that sub-prime loans, yes they are responsible for the real estate market deflation, yes, they are responsible for the rise in global gas prices, yes, they are responsible for the devaluation of the dollar, yes, they are responsible for consumers to spend less, but consumers have significantly spent less not as a result of their loss of confidence due to those things, but because they have less cash to spend and will not for many years to come.  Marshall, George claims to be on speaking terms with his god.  Thank you for providing the list.

It is glaringly noticed Marshall that you have once again dodged answering any of my questions.

By Shenonymous, August 7 at 7:46 pm #

I’m trying to figure out which of the economic problems you described are the fault of the President - ANY President .  Was he responsible for those sub-prime loans that caused the credit market squeeze, thus causing the real estate market to deflate?  Did he raise global gas prices?  Did he lower the value of the dollar relative to other global currencies?  Did he cause consumers to then spend less as a result of their loss in confidence due to these things I listed?

If he did then he’s not a President, he’s a God.

Specifically which Bush policies do you think led to the current recession?

Marshall, you and your ilk truly do make me nauseous. GWB and his toadies have done their level best to destroy this country. Of course they have been ably assisted by the lackeys in Congress who always worry about re-election rather than the good of their constituents. But if you truly believe the drivel you have spewed here today, I am sorry for you. This economy is so very weak now that it will be years, if ever,  before there will be any sort of security for the middle and lower class in this “classless society” here in the USofA.

I see—-I meant that if you still think they are about Christianity (or anything but $$), you would have to be insane. Hey, I’m just a carbon based l;ife form…

My friends tell me that I “seem totally different” in the net—I think it is because I am not sure how to do “inflection” with type—and sarcasm doesnt come out well..I also never saw the inside of an Ivy League. But, I was unaware that my ideas were so unclear. cerena—i am in almost total agreement with you. If you read my post0-I did not say W was GOOD at economics—his MBA just makes it all the more pitiful that he screwed everything up! And, maybe shows that even an MBA from Yale can be quite useless. As for him getting $25,000—he is already raising $$ for McCain—was it Barnum that said, “Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the Am people”? Somthing like that. They couldnt PAY ME to listen to him—but he still has fans. I hope he dies brokr in a gutter,personally—alot of people will, thanks to him and his ilk! I have been following Blackwater closely (as closely as I can, since its a secret mafioso!)since New Orleans—-they are disgusting! Have you read Jeremy Scahil’s account? (Pretty sure you have—if you havent, its used on Amazon—it will make y ou more pissed off tho! I have to watch my bp reading it!)YES! Where di I say that the Christian right wasnt about $$?! I read my post, and that was largely what it was about.That is disgusting too. I am an atheist, personaly, but like Hedwig said in the angry Inch—“I love His (jesus’) work.” I have gobs of SPAM too—but its Viagra, etc. I’ve never seen “Christian” stuff like you mention, but I wouldnt put anything that makes money past organized religion.But, I better stop it or Mary is NEVER gonna appear on my grilled cheese! (lol) Shenonymous, good comeback (in a pos. way) and well put! Peace, people

Marshall, we have come to an amiable agreement in the past, but I am breaking the peace pipe here because I cannot let you go on and on about the virtues of George Bush.  First of all, the word brilliant ought not to even be put in the same sentence with his name in it even if it is a negative statement.  I believe this particular President is only a mouthpiece for his corporate comrades,  and not a very good one at that but he has been a poisoned thorn in the American peoples heart.  Do you ever watch David Letterman’s Presidential moments?  Unfortunately for our country Bush has had devastating influence and has driven it into near depression, yes, he and his policies.  The word recession is purposely being withheld out of the new reports and analyses by the MSM because of the effect it would have on their darling candidate McCain.  The claim of lower taxes has not been for anybody but the very rich and big business. 

Yes you are right, the economy will “fix” itself, just like the earth will reclaim itself from the a**holes that has tried to destroy it,,,someday.  The crappy Bush economy, however, has had the current effect of ruining just about everything for everybody who is middle class and under.  Have you really taken stock lately to see what the state of the economy is for the lesser economically situated citizens?  Do we really have to list all the crap, like failing airlines, failing auto manufacturers, price of food going sky high?  And I suppose you are one of the few who can afford the price of gasoline .  And how about the price of medicine and health care?  Bet you can afford that too.  Let’s see, you are probably past needing any post high school education; tuitions are out of this world, mortgage rates are in the toilet, as is the real estate industry, and the housing construction industry is not doing so well, and, and, and, and, ad infinitum ad nauseum.  So I’m sure you are in the upper class and want to hang on to every saved penny you have, right?  Do you know how many Americans do not have enough income to have a savings?  So no social programs for you, right?  Sweet.  Now if you think the billions owed China is not going to affect the American economy, or the cost of the unending Bush war in Iraq, then you might seek a psychiatrist for some help.  Yes, do sit back and have your mint julep while the rest of the country goes to hell, and delusionally think it will vote to keep you there.  The Center for Retirement Research (CRR) estimates 61% of households are “at risk” of being unable to live the way they would like [modestly comfortable] and pay for their health care when they get old.-  February 19, 2008  How about you, Marshall?  Are you part of that 61%?

To bad this President didn’t “stay out of the way” and let the Democratic congress ‘fix” things.  Raising taxes on the rich will end the recession.  So glad that word is back n the current vocabulary again.  Because sweetheart, their money will then go into the general coffers instead of their savings accounts where it just festers more.  The general coffers will then have money towards fixing the economy.

•  “When asked what he would do after the presidency, W said, “Go replenish my coffers! I only have about $25m left.Pres. is not a well paid job.I’m gojnna build a great Freedom Cemter, and make $$ lecturing—I think they get about $25,000 a speech, right? Reagan? Clinton?”

KDelphi, I do remember this, (when the shrub talked about replenishing his coffers and giving lectures) but thanks for the repeat on the lectures part, it’s like comedy central here today. Just thinking about the shub getting paid for people to listen to his bullshit is worth a laugh. Because of course this would only happen in his dreams. He could triple the price and PAY the people to listen to him, and they’d throw it back (or I would) along with anything else they could get their hands on.

As for the money and the Christian thing, they’re both there, because they’re one and the same. Same people stealing it, and the same people using it to enforce their will on the majority. No, it may not be the same ‘Christian thing’ that you’re thinking of, but they’re definitely the same animal. Erik Prince, owner of the private slaughter army, falls all over himself being a so-called Christian, and it’s all about the MONEY and the POWER.

This IS the group that allowed Dick Bush to steal the 2000 election, and they’ve always touted their “Christian” linkage, just as GW has. How many times have you heard/read him say that he talks to God to get directions on how to ‘lead’ the country? That means he’s talking with the fundamentalists on how to get more money from them, and to them.

So, that’s why it’s very much about the Christies, but just not the ones that you’re thinking of. George is supported overwhelmingly by the “Near Enders” who are tired of waiting for the Rapture, so they just wanna ‘bring it on’ themselves. Sound familiar? That costs money, ‘cause they wanna do it in style..before and after the rapture. Too bad for them that the money isn’t worth even half of what it was when they started this Great Heist.

So if you think the Christie fundies aren’t about the money, then you have to start checking things out a little more closely. Think Falwell, and Buchanan, and this latest McCain pimperoo. John Hegee’s got a mega church down in San Antonio, and you best be believing that he’s shoving bucks so fast up McCains hiney that they’re coming up out of the other end. Why do you think McCain has that big bulge on the side of his face? What, you thought it was an extra gigantic chew of tobacco that the shrub ‘broke in, and then willed to him? (I mean since it worked so well for him to steal the last two elections).

And if that doesn’t prove the money connection, you should check out my spam mail, (since we’re totally spied upon, and have been for years now). I must get 30 or 40 pieces of trash a day, JUST from ‘Christian’ enterprises. Christian auto lenders, Christian mortgage lenders, Christian travel agencies, Christian grocers, real estate sales, feed stores, and Christian pet supplies. I get stuff from Christian bookstores, and Christian garden supplies, (their top brand manure sells for $13.00 per cubic foot) and from Christian bakers, (a Christian Baker’s Dozen of donut holes goes for $119.99 and had little prayers baked into them like fortune cookies) and there’s even a Christian pastrami stand in the ‘hood. And of course, all of the gas stations are Christian as well.

So, let there be no mistake about the connection there. Now if you think that’s clinically insane, you might be right. But, it’s not my fault. I’m not even a Christian, because I’m with Gandhi. I like Jesus well enough; at least based on his biography. But, I don’t much like Christians.

By loverofpeace, August 7 at 11:20 am #

No, I don’t believe Bush is a brilliant economist.  I believe that Presidents have limited ability to influence the economy aside from encouraging the right conditions for the economy to grow - which means lower taxes on both individuals and business. 

The economy will basically “fix itself”, as it always has in the past.  Credit conditions will loosen, the housing market will rebound, then consumer confidence will rise again; the #1 key to a good economy.  The President’s job is to stay out of the way and refrain from doing things that will lengthen the recession, like raising taxes.

Bush is an MBA. Neo-cons who voted for him, pointed out that he would be a “good CEO” (ignorign that he had filed bankruptcy in the past—before he helped change the laws). For not being an economic system, neo-cons sure spend alot of money on K St., Am, Enterprise Instio., the Fair Tax,, etc.In short, all they (W is included) care about is MONEY—if you care abput anything else, they think yu are a “moron”.THEY de-regulated everything. THEY decidee that being a “wartime pres.” was the biggest “honor of all”. When asked what he would do after the presidency, W said, “Go replenish my coffers! I only have about $25m left.Pres. is not a well paid job.I’m gojnna build a great Freedom Cemter, and make $$ lecturing—I think they get about $25,000 a speech, right? Reagan? Clinton?” How can it not be economic, when everythimg they do is based on money? If you still think its the “Christian” thing—you must be clinically insane.

Marshall, thanks for your oh-so-enlightening post. Could you be just a little more condescending? What planet are you living on? Do you truly believe that George Bush is some sort of brilliant economist who is doing his best to make our nation better for the real people and not just his extremely wealthy friends? I am sorry but I’m not buying what you’re trying to sell here.

By loverofpeace, August 7 at 9:05 am #

While it may make you feel better to blame economic conditions on “The Neocons”, there are a few things you should know:

1) Neocon’ism is not an economic philosophy, it’s a foreign policy.  And Bush is not a Neocon.

2) Bush did not raise the price of oil, nor did the war in Iraq.  Neither did Bush lower the value of the dollar - he doesn’t control our monetary system or global currency values.  If you believe our government actually has this power, then your blame would be better placed on Congress who actually holds the purse strings of the U.S. government.

3) The shrinking value of the dollar is covered routinely in news media across the country.

4) The value of your retirement is safe.  The average length of post WW-II recessions in the U.S. is 11 months.  Things WILL improve and your savings (and any investments you’ve made) will grow accordingly.  I’d suggest you take advantage of the relative bargains available now to reap the benefits of the coming recovery.

Thanks, Mr. Hedges for writing this essay. Unfortunately few Americans will actually read it or understand it if read.

It angers me that as I approach retirement, for which I have tried to prepare by saving as much as possible, I face an uncertain future due to the machinations of the Neocons and their counterparts the Neolibs who are doing their level best at every turn to make all us regular folks their serfs. I have watched the US dollar drop like a stone against the Euro but very little is ever seen in the daily papers about this.

“Never doubt that a small group of people can change the world—-indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” She also said “If people dont get my quotes exact, if they get the gist of it—thats all that matters”—I thinhk…dont quote me on that..

Shenonymous—I dont disagree that it would be difficult. But, if you want to know the truth, the former middle clas is so pissed off out here that, I would think, the rich SHOULD welcome change…I, for one, and many others I know, would be fully willing to take over the govt and redistribute the wealth. Not a terrorist—just a regular guy with nothin’ to lose! Vive Amerika Libre!! I am NOT going to watch more people die for these aristocrats. If we get attacked for insisting on freedom, basic human rights—OK. There ARE things worth dying for—-rich guys wars are not.

Oh, one more thing:  You are right, Rummy is not a human being.  Sorry, my mistake.  But I remember distinctly his being asked the question repeatedly and his always giving the same nebulous answer.  The assumption that cyrena pointed out is a common oblique mistake and one that politicians make all the time.  Concrete conclusions cannot fruitfully be based on an abstract group (“the Iraqis” are an abstraction just as “the people” are an abstraction and it is fallacious to speak on behalf of whole groups without taking a significant poll of more than 50%).  Not only do imperial mindsets make this mistake, but it is a syndrome of all arguments that appeal to an aggregation then assume facts rather than finding out the reality.

I happen to agree with you KDelphi that a parliamentary system might be a better system.  But just imagine what it would take to change our system of representative democracy which is a constitutional republic.  Even though a parliamentary system is close to our three-way branch of government, there are fifty states that would have to ratify any such change:  Check out Wikipedia “parliamentary system” to see what the structure would be like.  Also just google parliamentary form of government.  The debate would be endless.  Oh, and with the derangement of nationalism that would get whipped up, what politician is going to campaign to change the uniquely original American form of government?  What corporation would not fight the change that already reaps them rewards of the corruption of the system we already have?  It is really a pipedream.

When I say “Who thought we would be in Iraq…blah..” I mean, us fellow humans. Rummy is not included in “humans”. (I raly thought theyd surrender, Saddam would be “scared” and “W” would look like a heroo_ thought that was what was intended—like last itime) Maybe I thought the Am. people would stop W before now.Yes, I meant USSR and China are and were totalitarian dictatorships.Why cant we do a parliamentary system, etc.? When the overly-ahalowed Constitution was written by a bunch of rich land-owning white guys, only rich land-owning white guys could vote. That has changed—-but only a little—lol.

In my own humble opinion, I think MANY people knew that we would still be in Iraq at this point. In fact, the planners were counting on it being FOREVER. The building of the Emerald City; the several billion dollar project for which the US Embassy is the centerpiece, should have settled that question long ago.

The only reason that the ‘planners’ and everybody else expected this to be less bloody, was the assumption that the Iraqis and the rest of the region would be perfectly acceptable to being colonized again. Why anybody assumed that is beyond me. But hey..that’s the imperial mindset.

KDelphi my comment about Chavez was meant in hyperbole and to be sarcastic.  Last I heard he attempted to help the “poor” back in 2006.  I don’t know what he has been doing since then except when the US news media makes brief statements about him and his empire of oil.  The CIA is always involved in deposing competition, aren’t they?  I believe you are correct in saying people outside of the US hate the American government not the American people. 

If you are saying that China and the Soviet Union were fascistic totalitarian governments not communistic, I would have to agree with you.  I also agree that a parliamentary form of government would work better in the US since we have such a problem with government by representation as it is in this country.  The entire Federal Government would have to be changed and that is not going to happen, much as it would be better for this multiethnic and economically stratified population. 

I can think of one who thought we’d still be in Iraq this deep by now, Donald Rumsfeld.  He predicted a very very long involvement.  I guess the saying goes, out of sight, out of mind.

By Duncable, August 6 at 12:44 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

“I don’t know where you’re from, or what you’re smoking buddy, but gas prices are still hovering just below $4/gallon.”

Thank you Duncable for catching my typo.  It is indeed below $4/gal.  My point was to correct the poster’s $4-5/bal. claim.

Gee, Issywise—a little touchy??I just said what my definition was, what I had learned. Futhermore—who gives a rat’s ass? How it was attacking you personally , I have no idea. I have no desire to verbally slam dance with you. And,I didnt say it was “hopeless’, just because we’re already skirmishing there. But, since we are, I dont think Hedges is exagerrating, but nobodfy really knows what these people will do next. Who would have thought we’d still be in Iraq this deep by now? I was completely against it, but, I never imagined ti would be this long or this horrible. Peace.

KDelphi

Gee dude, I was just trying to explain MYSELF. I wasn’t attacking you. I ignored your judgmental and pedantic “sorry” and thought to go on and explain what I MEANT. I MEANT to imply no deficiency in you.

But now that you mention it, I’d hope that graduate school would teach that usages evolve and are applied as TERMS OF ART by different disciplines. For one to assume that he knows all such usages; to declare a final, exclusive and absolute meaning for a usage (and a wrong one at that; and to fault a supposed misuse with a dismissal on form is too contentious for open, good faith exchanges.

I have no idea what point you are asking if I agree with or not.  It’s all apparently so above my oh-so little IQ. I yield to your know-it-all-ness. It couldn’t be that your post is convoluted and weird. It couldn’t be that you only half understood what you were taught in school as well as what is said here.It must be me.

I will accept your coming rejoinder with silent acquiescence. I bow to your manifest superiority oh-so-highly educated one.

Pardon me, mark that nation as Zimbabwe. It’s just my age showing.

@Blackspeare

However, the words of one socialist writer seem to ring true——“Do the most good for the most people.”

Supposing the confiscation of wealth comes from a capable, but “villainous” actor. Would the good coming to these people be smartly used by them? I had read how confiscated farms in Rhodesia had been asset stripped by the new people, thus the farm is no longer productive.

Blackspeare, you ask “Do the most good for the most people.” It seems to me that’s a pretty good philosophy——any arguments?”

It depend on who’s definition of “GOOD” you are talking about

It is obvious that so far all devised social, economic, and political systems can not offer everything to everybody.  However, the words of one socialist writer seem to ring true——“Do the most good for the most people.”  It seems to me that’s a pretty good philosophy——any arguments?

Socialist Democracy works pretty damn well in most of W. Europe—Scandanavia, in particular. They are smaller (pop. and size), but, now that its the EU, it still works well—theyrre alot better off than we are—unless youre one of the to 10% (which all of Congres is) I havent read the Third Way—-I’m on someone else’s pc and wil look at it when I get home in a few days. Chavez “hates all things American”, (even after he gave oil to the poor this winter? More than W did!), because the CIA keeps trying to kill him…tend to leave a bad taste in you rmouth, I guess. But, we do that kind of stuff al the timein South and Central Am.He made the oil industry a public entity—we should have done that a long time ago. To defeat the “Imperial Pres.” crap—have a Parliament and Prime Minister—he/she wouldnt be Head of State.They also would have to answer to someone, regularly. Canada does well with that.From my exp., most people (at least in the Americas and Europe,) do NOT hate the Am. people—they hate our govt. And so do I.I dont advocate “Communism”, but the Peoples Rep. of China was NEVER “communist” n or socialist. USSR, either.

Well with all the millions of words Hedges has printed you’d at least think he would call for specific actions sometimes, how about even once.  A lot of hot air as I’ve already pointed out.  Today the market is up?  Tomorrow it is down, up and down, down and up, blah blah blah.  Go ahead and invest.  I listen to the market reports everyday and the contrivances are amazing.  It is a fake industry based on greed and only greed.  So those hypocrites who dabble in the stock market ought not to be calling the corporate controlled government greedy.  And if you lose your shirt, well Amen.  So be it.  And so it goes.

Capitalism is perhaps not the absolute best economic system, but what is better?  Communism?  Well we have seen how well that works.  Even China is becoming a huge capitalistic economy.  Socialism? what are the arguments for and against?  And I recently saw a kind of hybrid possibility that is being developed called “Just Third Way.”  A quick view comparison chart was presented in August 2005.  I found the following mildly interesting chart at: http://www.cesj.org/thirdway/comparison3rdway.htm
It seems to be an organization that includes religiousity and spiritualism for those non-atheists.  Of course there is the old feudal system which I don’t think anybody but the Middle Easterns with their sheiks and other countries that still have royal leaders, and practice the baronial system of economics, you know pay fealty, will go that.  Well let’s see what economic system is the economic system d’jour.  What do you propose is worthy of reflection?

Excellent input pedro obaachan.  We almost always forget about everything south of the Texas and California borders, except for Hugo Chavez and his petulant hatred for all things American, and of course when the illegals start running across the borderes (which I know is a different problem altogether so I am not inviting comment on that topic, it was just an opportune comparison for the moment). 

Issywise – FYI:  Shenonymous is a ‘her’anonymous.  You make exceptionally good distinctions otherwise.  Thank you.

I didnt have psych 101—it was my graduate major. People seem to use it all kinds of ways—Chris Matthews (such an icon of journalistic subjectivity!!) actually said that “not being black, yet not liking Obama caused cognitive DISTANCE”. If he can use it like THAT (I’m not implying yu were), I guesss we can use it any damn way we want.“Psycho-babble” (what so many conservatives and libertarians take pride in referring to these days) is only BS when you dont need help. Drugs are so much easier and more profitable for Wall St. , right? nrobi, I agree—we need a complete overhaul—not just somebody better than the worst pres. we’ve ever had. Maybe it will take awhile before the upper and middle classes become a little uncomfortable. Whenits the poor—its so easy to dismiss it as :“they’re own fault”—that the easy way out.

Hey , what’s the diff.? It’s not like “emotions” can be quantified , since they are subjective. Lets not argue semantics. Oh, and btw—I never took “marketing” so, I wouldnt use it that way. Do you disagree with my point, or whether cd is the felling of two conflicting (and incompatible) ideas, or the EMOTION of it—again, I dont see the diff. But, if you do, why does it matter. Snooooze argument

“The charge infuriates Dr. Etemad. “With the Shah, we also came to the conclusion that Iran was in great need of nuclear energy because our population was steadily growing and our gas and oil will run out. That’s why even though I was in the old regime, I should be fair to the new regime because they are following the same line. “

http://www.prosefights.org/thecanadian/thecanadian.htm#irannuke

since the original article hasn’t touched upon whatever would happen to Brazil (where i’m from) or latin america, this is how i imagine it would go: (this is just a scenario, i am not at all a veteran at this, so bear with me)

I believe that if we all don’t get frozen by the nuclear winter and the smoke cloud, brazil and most of latin america would become a battle ground in part 2 of the war.  if it remains unattacked (i heard there are missiles pointed everywhere from everywhere) Latin america would become the “farm” for the rest of the world.  If there is enough power left, i imagine everyone trying to call the amazon for themselves, and brazil would have to up itself with its (very small) army.  I believe that two possibilities could also emerge: latin americans unite as a continent, putting away their divergences and becoming centralized in a messianic bolivaran type of congress, and start administrating the food stocks and oil stocks of what’s left….or, Latin america gets invaded, taken and divided sort of africa was (nyah,,,sounds too fantastic even for this scenario.)

anyways, having most of the conflict near or above the equator is likely, but there will be roles for latin america, bits of africa and oceania, once the mess gets lighter.

thanks for the attention
pedro.

wish i knew,

You say: “This article is not fear mongering. Fear mongering tactics function solely to freeze its audience into inaction…Chris Hedges uses extreme scenarios as a specific call to action - quite the opposite of fear mongering.”

Your definition of fear mongering turns on the effect it has on its victims?  Inactivity equals yes; activity equals no?

I wouldn’t define it that way, but OK. Does that mean purposeful falsehoods and unjustified assertions are more acceptable if the purpose is causing action rather than inaction?  Aren’t you equally a victim in both cases—call it what you will?

Isn’t the appeal to passion rather than reason in both cases? Why should you excuse one and not the other?

I may be missing your point, but when you say, “I am afraid that means you are still using common sense, logic and what is good for the American people as the metric…” Why afraid? What else would be a better guide, emotional reaction and submission to purposeful manipulation and agitation?

KDelphi

You say: “congnitive dissonance” (the term)(which I learned in Grad school—it means two competing thoughts at the same time—not what the site blogger describes—sorry”

Interesting point: I was originally taught in psychology classes that “cognitive dissonance” is an emotion: specifically the uncomfortable feeling or stress caused by holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously—not the holding of those ideas itself.  That was interesting, but not such an earth taking thing.

Next I ran into the word while reading marketing science materials.  In marketing science, “cognitive dissonance” is still an emotion, but not one resulting from conflicting ideas, rather it is the feeling a buyer has after a purchase that causes him to seek reassurance that the purchase was wise.  It is why, after one buys as specific model of automobile, one smilingly notices every other vehicle of the same model and make on the road for a while.

The usefulness of this concept in marketing science is that if you can identify a consumer in this phase of emotional reaction to an immediately prior purchase, you can exploit the emotion—hence the huge money retailers spend to identify purchasers of one another’s products.  If they’ve bought a Honda, for a short period thereafter they may be more likely to purchase a….whatever you can associate with a Honda.

The third place I bumped into this phrase was in a discussion with a political professional—an elected official who’d had a career garnering votes to hold office.  In his usage, the phrase “cognitive dissonance” was the tendency of voters to want to have their present attitudes reinforced. He explained for me that much effort is put into “reassuring” voters that they belong to the right team, so that they do not turn on their “headlights of reason” to start looking at each and every issue on its own merits. Shenonymous expresses the same sensibility above when he says, “It just makes one’s views become even more entrenched for we as a species are always looking for things that support our own views.”

Here is my concern, with modern psychological and marketing science accumulating such observations about specie-based propensities, shouldn’t we be more careful to look at every new assertion to be sure it isn’t manipulation and just dismiss the garbage that is thrown at us by the ton?

Also, this stuff of “well, air is worse in Beijing” is no excuse, nor is “he’s better than Bush”. Didnt your mom ever tell you “I dont care what your friends/the crowd is doing…YOU ARE…blah”/ A “volatile stock mkt” (which is just ONE reason capitalism is like las vegas)is “normal” for supply side economics. And, friend, if you can afford to be in the stock mkt (not thru a Pension Fund—remember those??) I’m not really too worried abouot you.

Terrorism is an action—-how do you have a “war on it”?

Overall, people invested in the stock market (and capital gains) are doing VERY well—check the stats. (I’d print them up for you, but I dont feel like it)I believe what hEDGES IS “PROPOSING” (does he HAVE to propose something to have an opinion or write as book? Dont buy it! You like capitalism, right?? Free mkt will take care of it, if he’s “full of hot air”) is that you get angry and do something that doesnt preserve the status quo—because both candidates are largely proposing the status quo.I wasnt attacking anyone in particular—I dont like to “blog slam dance”—we’re hurting bad enough. I have read about everything he ever wrote, before this one, and I value his opinions alot.He has far more experience int he matters he speaks of than most authors. I believe, (not that Hedges does—I didnt hear it in the interview he did on C-SPAN lAst week) that the type of actions taken against eh citizens of the US (and other countries) recently, calls for assertive action. Not just blogging and voting. US needs change that no one person can implement. Peace is not always the absence of aggresion, although that is best.People are so angry that they jump on anything , fior a reason. In your gut, you know youre being screwwed…and, btw—what d you consider to be the diff. between psychopath and sociopath? The PDR doesnt differentiate, nor do most MH professionals. “Psychopath” was just getting a really “bad name”—rightfully so, but, these people, too, are mentally disabled. They dont need to be running a country.

Exactly what action is Hedges proposing?  A lot of hot air far as I’m concerned.  We can’t wage a war with hot air balloons. The volatile stock market is in the insane mode,  And just try to buy some oil stock!  Better to buy airliine stock while they are worhless now.  I think one can be a psychopath and a sociopath at the same time!  I claim to be a liberal DemoCRAT.  You are right about the Death Tax, let’s call it by its rightful name, Inheritance Tax.  Oh, clear skies, take a look at Beijing.  And let’s get rid of No Child Left Behind while we are at it! That one really stinks.  The US is still way behind other countries when it comes to ejumakashun.

Right-o heavyrunner.  And do we think that China and Russia, particularly the latter, wouldn’t go the aid of Iran?  Maybe not China since, ironically, they want paid back the billions of dollars the United States owes them.  Or maybe they think they can just take over America for defaulting on their loans?  Now that is something we ought to worry about more than Iran!

Reference to them in the western media is incredibly spare, but the Iranian military has purchased anti ship cruise missiles from Russian arms manufacturers that can defeat the defenses of U.S. naval ships.  The Iranians have hundreds of these cruise missiles and they are deployed on mobile launchers in hardened shelters in the mountains all along the eastern shore of the Persian Gulf.

This means that the 30,000 or so sailors we have deployed in carrier groups in the Gulf are sitting ducks. 

So in a rather bizarre way, our own military aggression, the stationing of armadas in the Gulf, where they do not belong, has created a deterrent for Iran against us starting a war with them.

I believe this is why the military commanders keep nixing the Cheney/Israeli drive to bomb Iran.  The military guys may be corrupt and confused, but, so far at least, it appears that none of them are ready to issue a command that they know would likely result in a complete Donnybrook in the Gulf with the loss of billions upon billions of dollars worth of ships, including aircraft carriers, and the deaths of 30,000 sailors in a few hours.

The gamble is that Cheney et. al. are probably threatening the Iranians with total nuclear annihilation if they play their cruise missile card.  If they convince a pliably opportunistic military commander that the Iranians are sufficiently terrified with the idea of nuclear retaliation that they will not dare sink the U.S. fleet, we could be in trouble despite the realities of the military situation.

The Union of Atomic scientists commissioned a study a few years ago because of the possibility of nuclear war between Pakistan and India to determine how many nukes it would take to trigger a nuclear winter.  The answer was 50.  50 nukes over areas that would emit a lot of smoke, like cities and oil facilities, would produce enough smoke to make agriculture impossible for an estimated 15 years. 

Let’s hope somebody has told Cheney and the boys that so they realize that their retaliation strategy is suicidal.

Agree, wish i knew. Like I said, “Shock Doctrine”, Naomi Klein. Hedges’ books are good too, and alot are really cheap, when used. The Bush administration’s “legacy” is not incomopetence (well, maybe others are pulling the strings)—its all very intentional. The stiock market is up and down—but doing pretty damn wel. And is youre invested ion oil—youre doing great! Bush is not stupid, he is a psychopath (I refuse to use the pc term “sociopath”) Also lets not let them make “liberal” a dirty word, use the DemoCRAT Party, the DEATH tax, Clear Skies—-it goes on and on. Tax and spend.Entitlement programs.Choice—in health care, union votes.And their idea of FREEDOM (free enterprise, no regulations, unless youre rich adn you screw up)

This article is not fear mongering. Fear mongering tactics function solely to freeze its audience into inaction for the sole purpose of carrying out some sinister plan unfettered.

Chris Hedges uses extreme scenarios as a specific call to action - quite the opposite of fear mongering. His isn’t the end-all be-all for what our future holds. It is a wake up call to Idiot America to stop voting against our own interests, and supporting the very power elite who could not only lead us into such a state, but they would most likely view it as the perfect opportunity to build their own little pure free-market utopia without a silly little thing like democracy standing in their way. Need evidence of my assertion? Read Naomi Klein’s Shock Doctrine. She cites hundreds of sources - most of which happen to be straight from the proverbial horse’s mouth. 
If you are having a hard time entertaining Chris Hedges’ “baseless assertions” I am afraid that means you are still using common sense, logic and what is good for the American people as the metric by which the current neocon power elite gauges their actions in the global arena. Which is exactly what I presume to be Chris’ point.

Yeah! Hedges’ “hyperbole” got you guys talkin’! I think that that is his intent….it works. I have NOT “sat at my pc and typed” and that is all—I only got online about 3 mos ago—a gift . I cant afford it , myself. I was never in a war, but I have protested (and gotten arrested ) at the School of the Americas, the AFSC (Quakers), SP-USA (I left them to vote against Bush—my brother-in law went to school with him, so I knew—well, I didnt know it’d be THIS bad), etc. Before Iraq, when W had a 90% approval, I got spit on and the finger given to me at WPAFB (where the CIA?? took pics of us—Larry Gara—heard of him? Warned me to get out of the pic—not me!)The saddest I saw, was a little boy who gave me the peace sign , i gave it back, and his father smacked him for it!! A future soldier of fortune—what a shame. I have not been in war, but I worked for years with Vietnam vets, with de-institutionalized, etc.I am a very different person than I was growing up middle class in the country—better for it, but sadder. More realistic. I also worked at a prison.I used “congnitive dissonance” (the term)(which I learned in Grad school—it means two competing thoughts at the same time—not what the site blogger describes—sorry, I have RA—cant always look stuf up). You cant “make sense of them together” , as in “free people and blow them up”.The poor wil always be with us, shit is just—shit. The mellenium goals wouldve helped. With all the $$ the rich in this country have—theres no reason fior people who cannot helpe themselves 5to go hungry or without quality med. care. I’m sure Jesus would agree.The “masses of uneducated” are not as “dumb” as you think. I live in an integrated, working-class neighvorhood, and they know when they are being screwed—and , when neither party is addressing their needs—not wants. Survival. That’s their dream. The govt prog. (whew! lol) are poorly done and underfunded.Esp. since Bush.Other civilized countries (are we stil??)would NEVER allow what we do inthe streets—people dying. Children and old people dying for lack of water in N.O. “Poverty” , although it may be wrong in some cases—is easily defined by numbers—try to get on Medicaid—they’ll give you an exact number. And Medicaid covers almost NOTHING.Discreet nos. define poverty, middle class and wealthy and FILTHY rich—it used to be shameful for one person to have so much. I guess we’re going back to “Daisy and Gatsby days”.We CAN stop this. We have too insist that so-called “liberal” leaders include the “least of us” in their reforms, or get out of public service. Other countries see our shame—even in DC, where a guy I used to work with made up a rhuyme (he was my client), called Hurry Tomorrow—“Its the big hypocrisy for all the world to seee—its the nation’s capital, its Washingotn DC”. He’s NOT ignorant. I think he hit the nail right on the head. La-de-frickin’-da, you blue bloods! We’re all brothers under the skin. Sooner or later, our fortunes rise and fall together—as it should be—only faster! Peace.

silly_article,

I think any article proposing a causal link between any policy and “a new depression, economic collapse and political upheaval in the United States..that would make the Depression seem like boom times, industries would fail, banks would collapse, government revenues would dry up, universities would have to close, health care…would virtually cease, “Something like [what] the South suffered at the end of the Civil War would plague the country,” would require some exposition of the reason for believing such a link exists. Bare assertion should not be acceptable.

silly_article,

You say, “I submit that what he says is a little severe; however I wouldn’t be so harsh as to say he is fear mongering or alarmist or manipulating.”

A LITTLE SEVERE? Cause a new depression? Lead to economic collapse and political upheaval in the United States..that would make the Depression seem like boom times, Industries would fail, banks would collapse, government revenues would dry up, universities would have to close, health care…would virtually cease, “Something like [what] the South suffered at the end of the Civil War would plague the country.”

You think it is too harsh to say he is fear mongering or alarmist or manipulating. Nonsense! There are perfectly valid reasons not invade Iran. All of those cited by him are fantasy calculated to emotionally manipulate you and I.

I modestly suggest that it is worthwhile to separate the real reasons for or against a policy from imaginary one invented to cloud our use of reason.

You also say, “During Afghanistan, and when we invaded Iraq, the masses didn’t see that gasoline would be so expensive with prices going even higher…” 

My point is, again, that real facts (ie: reality) should govern discussion of policy. Here are some facts: Iraq’s oil production fell from 3.5 million barrels a day to about 300,000 during the sanctions in the 1990s. It had risen to peaks of 2.6 million barrels a day just before the invasion. In February of this year, production exceeded 2.4 million barrels a day and has likely already exceeded the pre-invasion peak.

Facts would have us understand that—though you and I agree there are hundreds, thousands or perhaps millions of reasons why we shouldn’t have invaded, the current oil price spike has very little to do with the Iraqi invasion. Oil didn’t spike when the sanctions had virtually shut down Iraq’s oil production and it is spiking as Iraq has recovered and is now coming fully back on line.

I respectfully repeat my urging that we base our policies on realities and not on appealing fabrications. To excuse the unsupported alarmist assertions in this article is to defend the indefensible, but more: it is to abandon ones own duty and power to reason based on facts rather than indulging in passionate emoting to guide policy setting. Passionate emoting is what gets us into the many messes we’re in. We ought to be better.

Sorry, I recognize I’m pontificating self-righteously, but I don’t know how else to break through the cognitive dissonance that looks for reinforcement for what we already believe and ignores realities that might challenge those beliefs.

I recognize that I’m being a jerk and apologize, but I think the point I’m making is valid and not overstated in the least.

I think it is quite possible that the U.S. cut a deal with Iran and the Shiites some time ago.  Iran had the U.S. pinned in Iraq: any attack on Iran could be countered not only by Iranian forces but by Iraqi Shiites allied with Iran behind the U.S. front lines.  However, Iran does not have a problem with the U.S. staying in Iraq indefinitely at its own expense to keep the Sunni and Kurds down.  Meanwhile they can sell the U.S. oil at high prices and develop their nuclear potential.  So they called off their Shiite allies and told them to lie low.  As things stand they are in pretty good shape.  Meanwhile the U.S. ruling class wants to continue to pour its declining wealth into its declining empire, shooting themselves in the foot.  Why not give them what they want?