AN IDEA WHOSE TIME HAS COME

LZ: Instead, it has allowed itself to become dependent on arms production as a form of economic stimulus, it has allowed the military to become the most respected institution in the country, and it has used the military as a kind of stopgap social safety net for people which the overall economy can’t seem to employ.” 

Who is this “it”?

Who has voted for successive political candidates who never once said, “I am going to reduce the DoD budget!” - they did not dare. Because of the pork-barrel contracts that supply jobs to local constituencies.

The voters have repeatedly voted for those who promised them “jobs, jobs, jobs”. No one ever specified during an election year the kind of jobs, jobs, jobs. Think of what we could have done to create jobs by investing (the $1.3T pissed away in the Middle East sandbox) in America’s Infrastructural Renewal.

The democracy we have is “functional”, that is, it represents the collective will of the people - regardless of how some of us think that will may be tortured and bent. We voted Lead-head not once but twice into office. He was of our making, aided and abetted by BigOil financing, but WE, THE SHEEPLE, VOTED HIM INTO OFFICE!

MY POINT

Changing America starts at the Ballot Box. We are all bitching-in-a-blog here - preaching to the faithful, which is too damn easy.

Our political-party institutions are flexible, but they only bend to the popular will expressed by its members. Regardless of what we think of The Tea-Party, it was a brilliant “third-party” idea that has flummoxed the Republicans. We can do the same with the Dems, who probably need it just as much.

Get off your duffs and militate where it matters - at the grassroots level, somewhere right near you!

Originally, Victor Hugo:

There is no force as great as that of an idea whose time has come.

(Other perspicacious notions from this Great Writer can be found here.)

WORK IN PROGRESS

DofG: However, the consitution’s only has an (impersonal interest) in that “we the people”, maintain our union at all cost despite the human inclinaton toward polarity, until we have evolved enough to realize the utility of collective selflessness by free will.

Quite right.

What brought the colonies together was a communal hatred of the British monarchy. There was agreement on that.

But there was little agreement on what would be the powers of the central government and those of the state ... one which has transcended time to this day.

One can presume that the states were deeply concerned with replacing a European King with a Democratic All-Powerful PotUS. But those times are in the deep past and yet that sentiment remains, though subdued.

(Anecdote: After the skirmishes with the British Army in Massachusetts, the American “farmer-patriots” would heard to yell, “Long live, King George of Washington!” There was no tremendous ground swell of opinion for “democracy”, which, at the time, was unknown in the world - except in the ancient Roman Senate and Plebeians that had long since cease to exist.}

Anyone thinking that our democracy is the “World’s Best” has their head firmly entrenched in a hole. It is still very much “work in progress”.

“What should Obama take from this? He needs to learn the difference between middle-ground policies, which flow from his natural instincts, and soggy, incoherent compromises with opponents who will say he’s wrong no matter what happens.”—E.J. Dionne, Jr.

The aforementioned statement underscores the prevalent misunderstanding, from top to bottom, of Obama, and especially the unfolding goals of our democratic republic. The problem is that since the founding of our system, we have gain much utility from a caricatured perception of the constitution, and especially its basis in Natural Law. Dionne presumes that the president has the authority to do what is “right”. And that’s true within the limits of his authority. However, the consitution’s only has an (impersonal interest) in that “we the people”, maintain our union at all cost despite the human inclinaton toward polarity, until we have evolved enough to realize the utility of collective selflessness by free will.

For Obama, being a disciplned constitutional scholar in this polarized political atmosphere has found himself at odds with detractors from the left and right, simply because, as I believe, he understands that “the center” of political gravity relevant to governance is to be non ideological! And, of course, this doesn’t sit well with a body politic where both sides are thinking two dimensioanlly in a three dimensional political system. This is why in 2004 Obama declared that we are not a collection of red and blue states. And upon entering office, he invoked e pluribus unum (out of many, One!) which substance, of course, is mostly ignored, if even understood, despite being on every coin in America!

The constitution is way ahead of us; and we have a president that understands its function as well as its arcana which allows him to see it for what it really is-rooted in the principles of Cosmic Law.* Unfortunately, like many in history who have vision beyond the outer markers of our own, we repeatedly tend to serve them up at the intersecton of the vertical and the the horizontal, while giving preferential treatment to our own version of “Barabbas”!

*Read “The Curvature of Constitutional Space”: What Lawyers Can Learn From Modern Physics”, a paper written by Larry Tribe and co researched by Barack Obama, Harvard Law Review.

“The resolution called to protect the civilian population in Libya from attempts by forces loyal to Ghadaffi to make them part of the war..”
Which already makes it illegal by design. Refer to charter.

“But I am also honest enough to see past Obama’s flaws”

which include the crime of aggression, as continuing and widening that started by Bush-Cheney in Iraq and Afghanistan; war crimes; accessory after the fact to crimes against humanity and war crimes by refusing the clearly stated obligatory prosecution of confessed criminals… not to mention that the US military code additionally foresees up to maximal penalty separately for the war crimes part of these, up to maximal penalty in US style. Flaws, eh?

“(France and the UK throwing in their support behind the rebels)”
Admirable cluelessness.

“the only president who recently did what you accused Obama..”

Not the only one, and Obama is anyway an accessory to all of that, he is aditionally just as guilty on his own hook, and much worse than Bush in his ending the reign of law to the point of deciding, as a dictator, the murder of US citizens on his personal whim.

And you personally helped continue this “two-party” dictatorship. What do you want, thanks?

Dear Lee Zaslofsky,

Well put. So well put, in fact, I think part of
it should be posted again.

Hey Everyone,

Here’s an excerpt from Lee Zaslofsky’s post. You
should read the whole thing:

“The US, and the world, would be much better off if
there was a massive and permanent reduction in
armaments. As the most fully armed nation, America
should be leading that reduction. Instead, it has
allowed itself to become dependent on arms production
as a form of economic stimulus, it has allowed the
military to become the most respected institution in
the country, and it has used the military as a kind
of stopgap social safety net for people which the
overall economy can’t seem to employ.” 

—Lee Zaslofsky

Inherit the Wind,

Yes. I understand.  It shows a vast misunderstanding
of the scientific method when people say “such and
such” is just a theory.

As a friend of mine once said, it’s a good thing the
fundamentalists don’t understand how microwave ovens
work.  The science involved in microwaving your
popcorn proves everything in The Bible regarding
creation is myth. If they knew that, they’d be banning microwaves.   

But, alas, to the subject at hand, I really do like
all of the discussion about Libya. It seems
like people are doing a good job discussing many
different sides of the issue and it’s really cool
seeing all these thoughts come to light, as it were

Lee Zalofsky:  Bravo!  Adding only one more idea,
why not use moral force instead of military force to exert influence?  Why not work ahead of time, forming coalitions of the willing to study, understand and work to PREVENT wars before they get started?  Why not support democratic movements by not supporting dictators?  Why not stop “using force against civilian populations” ourselves, at home and abroad, and begin to rebuild democratic structures instead of using fear and hysteria to undermine them in order to serve the interest of the military- industrial elites?  Why not?  It’s a moral question fully as worthy of serious consideration as
preventing a dictator from shooting his own people. And if used earlier, might make the second step unnecessary. At least it deserves to be tried.

Gee, Zing—I’ll bet you make tying shoelaces complicated! (J/K)

All those film and television specials are ALL based on the Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee play.  And the play is NOW very current again as numbskulls and fascists play to the mob trying to bring back Genesis as “Science” in the form of “Creationism” or its slicker form “Intelligent Design”.  ITW is a drama about the fight against superstition and ignorance and for clarity and the Scientific method.

So every time I hear someone whine “Evolution is just a theory” it’s like fingernails on a chalkboard.  To them a “theory” is like Columbo or Jessica Fletcher saying “I have a theory about the murder”.  That’s not a “theory”, it’s (hopefully) a testable hypothesis, something very different.

Lawrence and Lee’s play about ignorance and superstition versus science speaks to the issue as does Sagan’s “Demon-Haunted World”.  Today, as Texas is writing Thomas Jefferson out of history and pushing for “Intelligent Design” to be taught, “Inherit The Wind” is more relevant than ever.

“...and the Fool shall be servant to the wise in heart.”

Dear ivan:

Can I please use the following line in the future?

“This is preposterous jingoistic immoral drivel.”

—

Inherit the Wind and NABNYC: 

This is weird, but I read both your posts and agree with both of you.  This is a new experience for me. I have no idea where I stand on this issue. But I respect you both. Good writing. Good thoughts. Good night.

Well, hell, Inherit the Wind, I guess I’m a nitwit,
too. But that’s cool. I get a little brain damage
every time I go to the bathroom.

Thank God for Google by the way.

—

Inherit the Wind may refer to:

Inherit the Wind (play), a 1955 play by Jerome
Lawrence and Robert Edwin Lee.

Inherit the Wind (1960 film), directed by Stanley
Kramer.

Inherit the Wind (1965 film), a television film
starring Melvyn Douglas and Ed Begley.

Inherit The Wind (1969 recording), song by Elvis
Presley.

Inherit the Wind (1988 film), starring Jason Robards, Kirk Douglas, and Darren McGavin.

Inherit the Wind (1999 film), starring Jack Lemmon, George C. Scott, and Beau Bridges.

All these titles refer to Proverbs 11:29, which in
the King James Bible reads:

“He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind.”

—

Where I come from we say it a little differently:  Don’t shit where you sleep.

Damn, NABNYC, that was a kickass post. I was reading it thinking:

Who the hell is this guy and why does he write so well? 

I thought you were Dennis Kucinich. 

I imagine after writing a post like that you blew the
smoke off the barrels of your six shooters, shoved ‘em
back in the holsters and swaggered away, big ass
swaying like John Wayne after opening up a can of
whoop ass. 

Congratulations and a tip of the hat to ya.

A Bird in the Hand, August 27 at 3:14 pm Link to this comment

Inherit The Wind: Your comment reads more like ‘Breaking The Wind’...Just an observation..
And yeah NOBAMA is a liar…
**********

Yet another ignorant nit-wit.  Think you’re original? Not hardly! Do you even know what “Inherit The Wind” is?

“You deliberately leave out (or conveniently ‘forgot’) that the USA did not get involved until =AFTER= the UN resolution…”

It’s left out because totally irrelevant, and could only come from people totally unaware of what’s going on. Among the abuses authorized to the “Security Council” bandits one cannot count that of intervening in a non-aggressive nation. Even if there were such a possibility, which there is not, read the f…. resolution, which is one of flight interdiction.

If you are one of those we have to thank for bringing upon us yet 4 more years of “two”-party dictatorship, your trying to justify that unspeakable act is understandable but not justified. Your Obama is as much Nurenberg material as any Bush or Cheney.

Inherit The Wind: Your comment reads more like ‘Breaking The Wind’...Just an observation..
And yeah NOBAMA is a liar…

Where do all the Obama-haters here get their “information”?

Easy. They pulled it out of their butts.

Not one piece of evidence to show that we’ve been “lied to”, that it’s a phony, that Qaddaffi really is a wonderful human being destined for sainthood and his 72 dark-eyed virgins to fuck into eternity.

They pull it out of their asses because their dogma says: “USA does it? Bad! Enemies/opponents of the USA doe it? Good!”

No judgement, no facts, no analysis, just bullshit, loud, messy and stinking.

This is what happens.

The people get sick of tyrants.
The people revolt against tyrants.
The more powerful tyrants from another part of this
soon to be oil-drained world get wind of this revolt.
They take a wait-and-see attitude
and meanwhile busily add up their assets and their financial sponsors’
assets braided inextricably into the goings-on
in the place where the revolt is taking place.
They take time to decide
if the tyrant who the people are sick of is too important
to the stability of their assets to be replaced, or if the assets are too tangled in
the existing structures of tyranny and whether more loot (chump change really)
must be procured and spent to prop up the tyrant, or if some small cosmetic
changes would do (as long as they are advertised as revolution and a few guns
go off and the people cheer before the military herds them back to their homes
and their tyranny) or if he or she is, in the end, a liability,
and they would be better off buddy-ing up to the rebels
and/or putting their own men or women into key leadership
positions in the rebels’ loosely organized and easily infiltrated structures of leadership.
Then they offer bombs and planes and high tech killing machines to shorten
the ensuing quagmire of death and dismemberment in the most seductive way
possible (because, in the end, they are whores and the political children of
whores)
and help the rebels win… only under certain even unstated conditions
if you can call that winning.
But who wouldn’t hope that a few big planes might keep their sons, daughters,
grandmothers, home towns and own lives vibrant under the gorgeous sky of
this dying planet? Even if it is dying because of the whores and the planes and
the bombs and the tyrants and especially the plundering and hoarding of the
assets?  Which are, after all, the people’s assets
and what the tyrants hoard. It is, after
all, the hoarding that the people revolt against, perhaps not the tyrants
but who could cut that ugly baby in half?
How much does Obama matter in all of this?
I watched a video of a star being sucked up by a black hole. It was pretty for a
short while, but then everything went blank.

Obama broke the law by not getting approval from congress.  And how much did this co$t us? 
Shortly before this Libyan violence, Sec. Clinton was called to meeting by the big oil companies—they complained that Gaddafi was trying to squeeze more money from them.  This administration is totally corrupt (just like the last 4).

“Yet no good Obama deed goes unpunished…”

A good deed that international law, which is also the law of the land for us Americans, defines the most heinous crime against humanity, and punishes with a life sentence (if judged outside the US, that is…)

What is the end goal of all this to have a united Arab front so we can make them the enemy… these secular dictators like Hussein, Mubarek and Gadhafi were put in place by the`West to do their bidding.
Very odd I can’t help thinking how Hamas after they won the Palestinian elections fairly were classed as terrorists

Yes! Right on E.J!

It has “worked” to deliver Libya to the bankers and oil companies!

Well done USA for being on the wrong side again.

Let’s start with the U.S. Constitution.  It authorizes congress to send this country into war.  The framers of the constitution decided not to give that power to the president, because they did not think one person alone could be trusted with such an enormous decision, to commit the public treasury and the life of our people to wars on foreign soil.  So simply to begin, the use of any U.S. weapons or funds in the Libyan war was unconstitutional, ordered by Obama without the involvement of Congress.  As such, since it was not a declared war, not authorized by our government, it is an international war crime.

Second, even if Congress had authorized the war, let’s not forget that Libya never attacked nor threatened to attack the U.S.  That should be the end of the discussion.  We had no legitimate grounds to attack that country.  Again, it is an international war crime.

Third, putting aside all the rest, we have no money left in our public treasury because 70% of the federal government’s gross income is being spend already on wars.  20% of our children are hungry every single day, and the government tells us there is no money.  55,000 Americans die every year from a lack of affordable healthcare, and the government tells us there is no money.  I could go on.  The job of the government, first and above all else, is to devote their energy and all public funds to creating and maintaining a good life for the people of this country.  It is not to overthrow governments in other countries because somebody doesn’t like that government.

Fourth, I could even argue that the constitution does not authorize the government to involve itself in any foreign wars.  All these treaties, nato, pacts, are simply ways to avoid the limits of the constitution as to the power given to the federal government when it comes to war, which is the power to protect and defend this country, the U.S.  It says nothing about wandering the world, establishing bases everywhere, getting involved in every conflict.  As we know, for the most part, the U.S. military is being used as a free goon squad for the WTO corporations to help them go into a country, pummel the people, overthrow and murder the government, take control of and steal the resources. 

And yet we see an article congratulating Obama for wasting a billion dollars of our money, killing unknown numbers of innocent people, attacking a nation that never attacked or threatened us, and doing it all in violation of the constitution? 

It was wrong for bush-cheney to start resource wars of aggression.  It is also wrong for Obama to do so.  Principles before personalities.  These liberals are making fools of themselves in rationalizing every single thing Obama does, refusing to hold him to even the most minimal standards of decency.  Honesty, why is this article posted here?

Thank you Michael Cavlan RN for being on the ball:

‘Of course if Truthdig is now outed as an Obama/Democrat propaganda site, the same way that MSNBC, Air America, The Nation, Mother Jones, Eddie Schultz, Rachel Maddow (man, there are a lot of them, isn’t there?) Amy Goodman etc etc etc, then that makes them much less effective as propaganda outlets. All that grant money going to waste.’

Sure enough it is so…( Bet it’s DOD ‘grant money’..)

““You have to ask: If unemployment were now at 6 percent, would President Obama be getting pummeled for not having us back to full employment already?”“

well, Keith Ellison recently remarked during an interview with Lawrence O’Donnell: “if we had 4% unemployment we wouldn’t be talking about this (raising the debt ceiling)”

No doubt there are Obama-phobes out there who will criticize Obama no matter what.  But, Dionne, come on now—let’s see something in the 7’s and watch his approval ratings soar. 
9%?  No way…

Yes! Mission accomplished and stuff!

Lafayette,

The rebels also estimated that they had captured Gadhafi’s sons. Their estimates
tend to be fictitious or inflated. Nor has any estimate as to how many Libyans the
West’s industrial war machinery has killed been offered so far. And by the way,
was that you in the You-Tube video, aiming a laser target spotter yourself?

There are stories of atrocities the rebels allegedly have committed from the outset of hostilities in Benghazi. The loyalists have committed atrocities too; but stories also persist of ill treatment meted out by the rebels along the way.

And seriously?—the reassuring thing for Dionne is that Obama wasn’t henpecked after all, and could summon up the presidential virility necessary to kill a few thousand foreigners, the way we all expect him to?—with no moral qualms or loss of sleep?

ARMCHAIR OBSERVER

Cope: This Libyan war was nothing but a manipulation of outside power and finance.

And bollocks to this notion as well, from one judging pretentiously. Your ass was not on the line in Benghazi, when Libyan tanks were entering the outskirts.

You did not get killed liberating Brega or Misrata. You are not in Tripoli being shot at by rooftop snipers.

MY POINT

It was a ragtag Army thousands of which died liberating their country from a tyrant. (The rebels estimate total causalities at 20,000.)

Where do you think they got the machine guns on the backs of pick-ups that you saw on the nightly news? They DIYed them all by themselves. Yes, the received some arms and munitions from the West, but most were there in Libya allready.

And now you belittle them by intimating that it was all a Machiavellian Intrigue, the strings pulled from abroad.

You know nothing evidently, preaching from your high perch afar ... an Armchair Observer.

DEMENTED IDEOLOGUES

glider: That is the cover story you were sold, and that you bought hook line and sinker apparently.  Have you ever thought about why we tend to be so much more concerned about the humanitarian issues of oil rich countries?

Take your blinders off. The “Arab Spring” (when it started earlier this year) has been going on all over the North Africa and the Middle-east in general. Where have you been, navel gazing?

For once Uncle Sam does not take the lead and he takes the flack anyway. Some people are such Demented Ideologues they could not see truths that bit them on the nose.

How disappointed you will be when the major oil contracts go to ENI (Italy) and Total (France) and the US gets the crumbs by replacing the Libyan Air Force’s aging jet fighters the Army its now destroyed Russian tanks.

After all, to each according to their specialty.

Obama did right, for once. And that burns you mightily, doesn’t it? Pathetic indignation suits you all soooo well.

Dionne writes:

“Let it be said upfront that the rout of Gadhafi was engineered not by foreign
powers but by a brave rebellion organized inside Libya by its own people.”

It is a shameless sentence.

This Libyan war was nothing but a manipulation of outside power and finance.
And this war is not really over yet. One thing that doesn’t change in all of this is
the hubris of political idealists who leave burnt, limbless corpses, on the Arab
streets of Tripoli and other places. The neo-liberal humanitarian with his success
stories to sell is a rogue as dangerous to this world as his neocon brethren.

The confabulation of lies and intrigue, the movements of ships, drones, laser
target spotters, helicopter gunships, Western Special forces assets,  Saudi
money, weapons smuggled into the country, a smattering of army regulars in civilian clothing sprinkled in from Qatar,  is all a telltale sign of careful planning. The objective was never in doubt, no matter what the daily allotment of propaganda and deception required.

An article like Dionne’s doesn’t merely lie; but thoroughly assassinates the
truth with glib and fatuous language.

Most disconcerting to read such a broad collection of lies and propaganda at TruthDig.

Dims verses Repugs… vote for this corporate candidate or the other corporate candidate… the illusion of choice… of democracy… where there is none.

We are the only nation allowed to act above the law in warring. Britain and France
are shameless in their silence, while waiting for their allotment of the crumbs.
Pathetic.

He did it by starting a war without Congressional
approval, something even Bush wasn’t willing to do, a
war that’s led to an outcome we’ll only know over time.
It’s called unintended consequences and sometimes it’s
best to hold off and see what they are before you
celebrate your successes. Starting a war is a sticky
business and I wouldn’t get too far behind them lest
you yourself become the monster in the room.

Charles and Glider

You were not alone in seeing this. In fact I found out all about the bombing of innocent civilians in Libya, US, Brit and French mercenaries helping the “freedom fighters and help secure Libya’s oil reserves for foreign national domination in extensive coverage from those paragon’s of progressive newstellings EJ Dionne, Robinson, Amy Goodman, Eddie Schultz and all the other progressive media out there.

Oh wait. All of these progressive news tellers were giving the pro-NATO line. While ignoring Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney when she was over there.

Wonder why all of these apologist hacks get coverage on Truthdig anyone? Wonder aloud about invisible donor problems?

No such problem at firedoglake

or

New Progressive Alliance

When a propaganda outlet is outed as a propaganda outlet, it becomes much less useful as a propaganda outlet. That is true for the corporate media just as much as the establishment foundation media.

Gmonst,

“If I recall correctly this all started because Gaddafi decided to send tanks and fighter jets to strike at non-violent protestors”

That is the cover story you were sold, and that you bought hook line and sinker apparently.  Have you ever thought about why we tend to be so much more concerned about the humanitarian issues of oil rich countries?

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/n.php?n=gadhafi8217s-plans-for-nationalizing-oil-could-have-role-in-military-intervention-experts-say-2011-03-30

ok, i must admit that i am clueless about what the libyan rebels stand for!! nevertheless,
offer a guess: to ensure that libya be forever [and not just for a century or millennium]
governed by the ‘elites’ and other personal and cultic supemacists. [amirs,
mullahs/imams/deys/plutos]

i say this, having in view, that we have at our disposal only two structures of
governance/society to develop to their end—and over decades, centuries, millennia, or
even eons: one ideally unequal structure of society-governnace and the other idyllicly
equal-timocratic one.

i hyphenate society and governance because one cannot have one w.o. the other; in short,
the two structures are in reality inseparable and appear as mere aspects of one reality.

[let’s forget ab. govts for now; these come and go, but supremacism {nazism-fascism-
militarism-sybaritism} stays forever; i.e., if we allow it]

we have a choice: go for a timo/pantisocratic structure of governance-society or a cultic
and personal supremacist one.
does anyone question my assertion that the personal, cultural, and cultic supremacists in
u.s [but also in the world] appear going for an ideally unequal structure of
society/governance?

bear i mind that a governance [any whatever] subsumes sly [oops, a typo, spy] agencies,
city police, army echelons, jurisprudence; private control/ownership of money-schooling,
warlords, master of people, arms manufacture, ‘science-technology’, ever ‘better’ killing
machines and each being a part of a whole.

in short what we see in u.s is: Long live serfdom, meat for wars, overuse, warfare, etc.
more cld be said about catastrophy that awaits us, the serfs!
yes, folks it is sick; alas, getting even sicker by day! tnx bozhidar balkas, vancouver

I have to say I agree with Inherit the Wind.  I hate war, I hate violence, I am a peaceful person in my everyday life.  I believe in dialog, compromise, and understanding.  However, in some circumstances in the real world the ideal is not possible.  If I recall correctly this all started because Gaddafi decided to send tanks and fighter jets to strike at non-violent protestors.  That shows his true colors right there as an evil person with no care for his own people.  He is also notoriously stubborn and a bit out of touch with reality.  Not really an ideal candidate for dialogue and compromise.  When Gaddafi says he is going to crush his opponents after he has already send jets to drop bombs on unarmed protestors, I tend to take him seriously.  We had no obligation to help the rebels (who started as protestors but became rebels when Gaddafi sent hired military goons against them.  I think the use of strength in defense of the weak is sometimes the right call.  How would all of you feel if Obama had send fighter jets on protestors here?

Ridiculous.  Since when is “winning” a vindication of the justice of a war unless one is a moral cretin who believes that might makes right.  Another “Mission Accomplished” moment that similarly may not be followed by what the triumphalists expect, including protracted tribal warfare.

This was a war conducted without even the pretense of congressional approval and trumped up over “humanitarian” concerns to participate in a neo-colonial adventure with the old imperial wannabes of Europe like France’s Sarkozy and to cater to militarists in Obama’s administration like Hillary Clinton and Susan Rice.  Spare me the pious BS of liberal interventionism, please, America needs lower gas prices.

I have, in the past considered myself a liberal Democrat, but the hypocrisy of liberal Democrats on this is odious and contemptible.  If Bush was president they would be screaming blood murder if Bush pulled the same stuff Obama did in this war. 

When Obama, in his justification speech for this war in March pontificated the baldface lie, “we are naturally reluctant to use force to solve the world’s many challenges” I felt like throwing something at the television.  Really, what else do you do, Obama, Mr. “Nobel Peace Prize,” to address problems in the world outside of military intervention and giving us sanctimonious lectures dripping with hypocrisy?  BS

It’s likely true that Obama will never get much credit even if he happens to do
the right thing, which fact is largely, though not entirely, of his own making.
Too often we’ve gotten only excuses from Obama, along with claims of
victorious compromises that were in fact merely give-aways, or at best hardly
enough.

I think Dionne forgets all that, even if he’s right that the reactionaries wouldn’t
give Obama credit were he to turn white overnight. Deep down they’d feel
relieved but even they’d know enough—in times of covert racism—not to say
too much. Except for the likes of Rick Perry, now “front-runner.” Maybe he’d
change that to “there’s a white cloud over America,” though I suspect he’d more
likely make no mention of a cloud.

I presume Juan Cole is giving Obama credit, as Cole was for NATO intervention
based on the claim Gadhafi issued that he’d blast Benghazi (I believe it was) to
bits, killing everyone in a massacre. Some recalled Cambodia and Rwanda.

Dionne is just pointing out standard hypocrisy, arguably more acute on the
right than on the liberal left. Obama DID stick to his word of not intervening
further than he said he would.

The deeper question was whether the U.S. had any business intervening at all,
to which I said, no. The U.S. long ago forfeited, I think, any right to intervene
anywhere. Dating back at least to the Spanish-American War, not including
invasion of what later became the U.S.A. by mercantilist Britain, France and
Spain, all three of whom brought disease and murder, ruin in general to what
was a populated part of the world, home to a different (morally superior) point
of view.

Empire is not achievement, let alone progress. Not from any morally rational
standpoint.

I believe that Obama (and Dionne and Cole) believed that intervention in Libya
was on behalf of democracy, freedom, etc., etc., and possibly to ward off
another Rwanda. But it’s just about impossible to know where that belief leaves
off and real politick (America’s and the West’s interest in “stability”) begins.
What we can be certain of is that it is the latter that is the overriding objective,
which in the case of Libya means extraction of oil with fewer impediments,
meaning in the interest of greater profits.

Actually, it could be said of all former (and present) colonial powers that they
have forfeited any right, or even obligation, to intervene—most especially in ex-
colonies. Though the opposite could be argued: Past and present colonialists
have a particular obligation to intervene when they bear so much responsibility
for what happened in ex- or extent colonies. Suppose it had been Cuba that
decided to send military forces to Libya to assist the rebels against Gadhafi?
There would have been cat-calls from all quarters, naturally. But it’s possible
that Cuba has a greater right to intervene, as it did in Mozambique and Angola
among others. Albeit, those occasions consisted of assistance lent natives in
throwing out colonialists more than in toppling indigenous dictators like
Gadhafi. And Cuba could not have brought to bear the air power NATO did
against Gadhafi’s forces. 

And it’s not unreasonable to ask whether or not the toppling of Gadhafi was
desired by a majority of Libyans, though it appears that was the case.
Thousands of Libyans were killed—by bombing and by one another.

Despite my thinking before, NO WAY, and taking into account Chomsky’s
demolishing of so-called “Just War Theory,” I’m forced to think again, though
with the greatest trepidation concerning real motives and while still thinking
NATO ought be disbanded. And despite the ceaseless hypocrisy, whether
Noriega, Hussein, Mubarak and now Gadhafi. And if that crew of thugs, why not
Netanyahu and most of the Israeli government thugs too?

Dionne’s question is a lot narrower while a much wider one also regarding
hypocrisy goes unaddressed.

I guess as long as a Dem is in office, imperial bullying and war crimes are A-OK with Dionne. What a hack!

Philip Giraldi writes:

“...America will someday have to figure what its genuine interests might be and act accordingly after the soldiers and money run out. Then it will be lights out for international regime-change, democracy-promotion, nation-building, and peace-processing.”

http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2011/08/24/whose-congress-and-state-department/

And what’s next? Philip Giraldi writes:

“Hoyer…who is on his 12th trip to Israel, reassured Israelis that Washington’s financial challenges “will not have any adverse effect on America’s determination to meet its promise to Israel.” Hoyer means that it will be okay to cut Medicare and adversely affect the commitment to America’s elderly, but Israel’s $3 billion plus per year, largely used to buy weapons that it does not need, will be untouched.”

Also, did you know this:

“...20 percent of the House of Representatives will be spending its recess holiday on American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) tours of Israel, does not seem to have made the mainstream news, though it has been reported extensively in the alternative media, including this site.”

No wonder 68% of Democratic Reps and 51% of Republican Reps aren’t holding town halls this recess: not only are they too cowardly to face the people they’re supposed to represent, many of them are in Israel, talking to the people they really represent. They, along with the bankers, will decide where the next “kinetic military action” will be.

Sickening.
We stand back and let the people of Libya through out their bat-shit-crazy and evil
dictator, send a few guns, drop a few bombs to bail them out in critical moments and
somehow, to the truly insane fools here this is “evil”.  By that logic the French Navy
stepping in a critical point to protect our Revolution against Great Britain in 1781 was
equally evil and should not have been done.  Instead France should have stood aside,
let Britain crush the revolt, and hang Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison,
Franklin and all the other leaders.  That would have been a “good thing” to all the rabid
critics here, right?

We cannot escape our role in international affairs.  But Iraq was a perfect case of where
“muscular action” was disastrous.  We had no business there, and there was no home-
grown revolt brewing.

But Libya’s revolt wasn’t engineered by NATO (with us pulling the strings).  It was a
reaction to the successful revolts in Egypt and Tunisia, and the growing revolt in Yemen.
Anyone who doesn’t think Qaddaffi wasn’t planning a sickening bloodbath is either a fool
or just so Anti-America that NOTHING is ever justified.

So we mainly stayed the fuck out of Libya.  We let Britain and France (both with an
interventionist tradition far older than ours) organize a far more lucid policy than Bush’s
insane Iraq one.  And what do we see?  Libyans have thrown out Qaddaffi.  Not NATO,
not the USA, nothing like our deposing of Saddam by our 150,000 troops on the ground.

And, yeah, I happen to consider a policy that doesn’t get Americans killed, maimed or
wounded and STILL achieves the goal to be a far smarter one than one that 5,000
killed, and 30,000 wounded.  Silly me.

You think the Libyan people had it bad under Gadhafi? Wait until Western interests begin to dictate and put into force the terms of their loan agreements via the IMF/World Bank. This, to me, appears to be an interesting form of disaster capitalism.

Gadhafi is no saint, but under his “rule”, there was 7.4% of the citizenry under the poverty line, compared with 17% in the U.S. The per-capita GDP was circa $13,000. Unemployment was high at 30%, but the point I’m making is that compared with other nations on the continent, Libya wasn’t doing too badly. Let’s see, however, how things will change going forward.

Sadly, I am not terribly excited.

What “worked”, in Junior’s opinion, was a brutal war
of aggression, and within this reprehensible moral
clothing, the rule of might over right, Junior cloaks
himself and this despicable NATO war for Western
business interests - the people here and there, be
damned.  US casualties, the cost to this “us” Junior
thinks himself a member, has no basis, carries no
weight, and Junior might think a bit differently were
it his family that got killed in one of the thousands
and thousands of cowardly hit-and-run murderous
“sorties” Europe and the US under the guise of the
bullied and the bribed UN and the West enforcer of
choice NATO carried out, were HIS family one of the
countless civilian victims.

This war may have been “legal” but it was
illegitimate on every level, and yet another example
of how accurate the observation is that the West runs
a protection racket, and punishes ANY who chart an
independent (of Western monopoly) course.  This is
the “crime” of independence by the weak that the West
continually punishes, by targeting civilians,
collective punishment, terror and subversion, arming
the most extreme factions, and a host of crimes that
clearly deserve hanging under the Geneva Conventions. 
We are ruled by hoodlums in a mafia neighborhood. 
Neither Obama nor MATO deserve any praise, are not
entitled to be congratulated for such turpitude, for
allowing this to proceed and participating in it. 
Brand Obama is indicative of the emptiness of, the
excuse we have for an executive branch, perfectly
willing to ignore inconvenient law while working
assiduously for and at the behest of the financiers
and Fortune 500. 

If we had a Republican in the White House, at least
we would have the mask removed, know what we were up
against, see the Swastikas.

This is what the Iron Boot of Fascism looks like.

What an Obomination!

“Obama used the greater freedom he has in foreign policy to define the middle ground in the Libyan case on his own terms.”

What Obama did was ignore the Constitution and in more lawful times, he would have been impeached. Instead, he let the oligarchs take over the country, and then he did their bidding: he went to war against a country that had not attacked us, and now the obscenely wealthy are carving up Libya’s resources as we speak. The world hates us, there will be blowback one of these days, and then the leaders will be “outraged” that people want revenge for the murder of their children and the stealing of their resources.
Doesn’t anyone with any power ever think long-term? They’re acting like children who want instant gratification, no matter what the cost. We have to remove Obama. He’s too drunk with power and greed, and it’s not safe to have him as president any longer.

Winning!$$$

http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2011/03/23/profits-and-losses/

Winning!

http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2011/06/21/humanitarian-disaster/

I admit that I’m not a regular reader but I’ve come to Truthdig in the past for a more honest version of the news. I have to say I was surprised to be hit immediately with Obama apologist propaganda. I’m so sick of the excuses, the ‘poor guy can’t win’ nonsense, and the ‘he’s not as bad as…’ rhetoric. I’m also sick of endless, illegal wars while many of our people suffer with no jobs and growing poverty and inequality at home—while all actions taken by the government only make the situation worse. The propaganda seems to be everywhere now. It’s just depressing.

Ok look. EJ Dionne, another Obama/Democrat apologist getting ink at Truthdig. Regular ink.

Why I am shocked, shocked I tell you.

Of course if Truthdig is now outed as an Obama/Democrat propaganda site, the same way that MSNBC, Air America, The Nation, Mother Jones, Eddie Schultz, Rachel Maddow (man, there are a lot of them, isn’t there?) Amy Goodman etc etc etc, then that makes them much less effective as propaganda outlets. All that grant money going to waste.

Oh dear. There goes my chance for Truthdigger Of The Week Award again.

Oh well

New Progressive Alliance

firedoglake

come join us.

Note to the Truthdig editorial team:

Stop running this shit!

Within just a few days, you’ve published two foolish posts by EJ Dionne, and each has diminished the quality of this site.  Does anyone vet this stuff before you run it?

In the latest farce, a nonsensical opening proposition on US unemployment rates somehow equates to yet another illegal intervention in yet another foreign country.

America (and, yes, Canada too) had no business there, but because no American servicemen were on the ground, and America suffered no casualties, Obama gets kudos for valiantly holding to a middle and (surprise, surprise) supposedly winning strategy?  So, finally, something (anything) to cheer for, although Dionne’s seems to be lauding Obama for taking no action where none was warranted.

And, of course, Dionne closes with the obligatory Obamination, that action is justified on “behalf of what’s right”.

It obviously passes at the Washington Post, but I’d hoped for better at Truthdig.

Dionne just can’t help but to jump the gun and heap praise on Obama for having achieved success in his personal illegal war.  Hey, no American lives have been lost so it must be a big success, right?  The implication being that Libyan lives don’t matter in the equation.  Maybe it will “successful outcome”, inspite of the clearly bad precedent, but what the hell does Obamabot Dionne know to make such a premature assessment?

@prisnersdilema, actually Iran hated Gaddafi which is why they cheered the war on and congradulated the rebels. This is like Iraq where Tehran was happy when the US brushed Saddam out of the way. Hezbollah in Lebanon also cheered on the Libya war. And now like in Iraq, they will most likely get more deeply involved.

The purpose of the this War against Libya is only to isolate Iran from potentional allies.

Syria will be next. After months of Revilling Asad, and finding atrocities to blame on him. Ojama will ask him to resign.

Then it will all start again.

Next stop Iran.

Flack