Four years ago??!! How about eight years ago? One of the great (and highly accurate) gripes about the way the Republicans run things is that since the days of Ronald Reagan their economic policies have consistently enriched the top 1% of earners while reducing the well-being of the rest of us. It isn’t a questionable assertion, but one that is easily supported with U.S. government data.
This morning’s paper carried a little AP article that went a long way, in my mind, toward pinpointing the economic woes we currently face thanks to trickle-down economics.
The Christian question to ask about the effect of economic policy is, “What does it do for the least of us?” The answer is it slaps them upside the head with an inability to meet necessary expenses. Oh well, the poor will always be with us, so that excuses it – right?!
> There has been no change in the overall poverty rate of 12.5% of the population, but more Latinos, children and foreign born Americans have joined that level.
> While the article contends that middle class incomes have “edged up” to $50,233, that rise of $665 was only from 2006 to 2007. In 2000, the median household income was $50,557. A rise in the past year to a level below that of 10 years ago doesn’t look to me like a rise at all.
> The first line of the article says that the number of people without health insurance fell by 1 million in 2007 and represents a gain in the number of insured people under G.W. Bush. It doesn’t say how many of that 1 million were insured through government programs.
I’m one of that million, but it sure wasn’t because my income increased. I just became Medicare eligible, or I still wouldn’t have any insurance. The article doesn’t say how many of the million got Medicare or Medicaid, but it does say that the increase was “largely because more people were covered through government programs”.
And now for the Whitehouse spin. These numbers, says Tony Fratto, are “definitely good news”. Sure they are. They’re good news if you want to ignore what they mean.
Yes, I’m happy to have Medicare, but I would have been happier to have been capable at some point in my life to have been able to afford health care coverage that paid for anything other than a catastrophe. It doesn’t help much to see your income rise by $665 a year if it costs you $2,500 more to live during that year. It particularly doesn’t help if that increase only brings you up to a level below where you were ten years ago. Claim all you want to that more people are insured today than last year, but the fact is that private coverage paid for by employers and individuals continues to decline while enrollment in Medicaid grows like Topsy.
You can pin all the roses you want to on that pig, but it still stinks.
“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” – Patrick Henry
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Monday, August 25, 2008
CONDASLEEZA VEEP
Here’s an interesting little news burp from CLG News:
Did McCain Help Bait Russia into Georgia? By Joe Lauria 17 Aug 2008 Who benefits most from painting this a revival of Soviet-era aggression? John McCain. The Georgian crisis has created a campaign issue McCain can run on. McCain's best chance to win, unless Obama self-destructs, is to portray himself as the Cold War-era war hero ready to do battle again against our old Cold War adversary. McCain is yesterday's man, so revive yesterday's "threat..." A compliant media will keep the phony Russian threat an issue throughout the campaign. It could even raise Condi Rice's vice presidential fortunes, as her only expertise was the former Soviet Union. The original Cold War was based on manufactured threats. The new trumped up threats about Russia will make Condi's experience "relevant" again. They can both run on Russia.
I don’t know that you can lay the Georgian conflict at the feet of John McLame, but there is no doubt in my mind that it much more the brainchild of his and W’s neocon backers than it is evidence of Russian aggression.
What the article hit on that amused me, though, was the reference to the possibility of Condasleeza Rice being McLame’s running mate. What a quandary that would create for the nation's subliminal bigotry.
As it stands the polls show McLame gaining substantial ground on Obama, which is no real surprise when you take into account the fact of this country’s racially biased history. Voters all over the spectrum are voicing euphemisms for their objection to his skin color. Donald Kaul pointed it out beautifully in a recent column revealing the real motivation in parenthesis behind the excuses; ala he’s too risky (he’s black), he doesn’t have enough experience (he’s black), he’s a Muslim (he’s black), etc., etc.
So what if McLame named Sleeza as his running mate? What would the poor voters do then? She doesn’t have any experience (she’s black, but is he blacker?). She has the heart of vulture (she’s black, but is he blacker?). The last time she laughed was when her mother fell down the stairs (she’s black, but is he blacker?). She’s a Republican (well then, he’s blacker).
The closer we get to this election the more pessimistic I become. A few months ago I did a blog about the right wingnut who called me at home to tell me that this country isn’t ready for a black, Muslim president. I told him first, of course, that he's not a Muslim and then that it had better get ready because the time has come, but as the campaign process moves along and I hear more and more euphemisms from potential Obama voters, the more likely it seems to me that the subliminal racism of this nation combined with its fear of anyone who doubts the value of war spell sure defeat for anyone who thinks as well as he does and talks about what he thinks.
By the way, just as one final effort to convince any right leaners who might happen to read this diatribe – Obama ISN”T black. He is of mixed race – just like you and me. You may not believe in evolution, but you can’t deny that the first people to appear on this planet were NOT WASPS.
“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” – Patrick Henry
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
Did McCain Help Bait Russia into Georgia? By Joe Lauria 17 Aug 2008 Who benefits most from painting this a revival of Soviet-era aggression? John McCain. The Georgian crisis has created a campaign issue McCain can run on. McCain's best chance to win, unless Obama self-destructs, is to portray himself as the Cold War-era war hero ready to do battle again against our old Cold War adversary. McCain is yesterday's man, so revive yesterday's "threat..." A compliant media will keep the phony Russian threat an issue throughout the campaign. It could even raise Condi Rice's vice presidential fortunes, as her only expertise was the former Soviet Union. The original Cold War was based on manufactured threats. The new trumped up threats about Russia will make Condi's experience "relevant" again. They can both run on Russia.
I don’t know that you can lay the Georgian conflict at the feet of John McLame, but there is no doubt in my mind that it much more the brainchild of his and W’s neocon backers than it is evidence of Russian aggression.
What the article hit on that amused me, though, was the reference to the possibility of Condasleeza Rice being McLame’s running mate. What a quandary that would create for the nation's subliminal bigotry.
As it stands the polls show McLame gaining substantial ground on Obama, which is no real surprise when you take into account the fact of this country’s racially biased history. Voters all over the spectrum are voicing euphemisms for their objection to his skin color. Donald Kaul pointed it out beautifully in a recent column revealing the real motivation in parenthesis behind the excuses; ala he’s too risky (he’s black), he doesn’t have enough experience (he’s black), he’s a Muslim (he’s black), etc., etc.
So what if McLame named Sleeza as his running mate? What would the poor voters do then? She doesn’t have any experience (she’s black, but is he blacker?). She has the heart of vulture (she’s black, but is he blacker?). The last time she laughed was when her mother fell down the stairs (she’s black, but is he blacker?). She’s a Republican (well then, he’s blacker).
The closer we get to this election the more pessimistic I become. A few months ago I did a blog about the right wingnut who called me at home to tell me that this country isn’t ready for a black, Muslim president. I told him first, of course, that he's not a Muslim and then that it had better get ready because the time has come, but as the campaign process moves along and I hear more and more euphemisms from potential Obama voters, the more likely it seems to me that the subliminal racism of this nation combined with its fear of anyone who doubts the value of war spell sure defeat for anyone who thinks as well as he does and talks about what he thinks.
By the way, just as one final effort to convince any right leaners who might happen to read this diatribe – Obama ISN”T black. He is of mixed race – just like you and me. You may not believe in evolution, but you can’t deny that the first people to appear on this planet were NOT WASPS.
“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” – Patrick Henry
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
Friday, August 22, 2008
REPTILIAN SYNDROME
The discussion at our breakfast table this morning seemed unrelated to the newspapers spread out between us, but only on the surface. We weren’t talking about why we continue to be embroiled in a foreign war that never had any relevance to our national security. We weren’t talking about why our government’s system of checks and balances seems not to work any more. We weren’t going on about statistics like the top one percent of earners in our society increasing their wealth by 140% between 1979 and 1997 while the earnings of the middle class rose 9%. We weren’t even talking about how quickly Obama turned McCain’s unforgivable faux pas in not knowing how many houses he owns into an attack ad, or how quickly McCain’s people turned out a counter-attack ad.
We were talking about reptilian brains. We have both recently read a novel by James Lee Burke who is one of our favorite authors because he is able to paint the psyche of his characters so deftly. In this latest book, “Swan Peak”, he explored the psyche of the American male, particularly the southern-born American male, at some length and his explorations gave rise at our table to a discussion of the fear/anger circuit that currently drives the American psyche?
Throughout history political parties of all stripes have inflamed people to patriotic fervor in order to achieve their nationalistic goals. Over the past fifty years, the Republican Party has taken the process to its highest levels and reached a pinnacle few parties have ever even striven for, let alone achieved. That is the complete alienation of their followers to the messages of their political opponents – the vilification of all things leftward leaning. The phrase “bleeding heart liberal”, for instance, has no counterpart in the liberal lexicon. No one has been able to instill a phrase like “hard hearted neocon” into the language. “Gluttonous elite” just doesn’t carry the panache of “Welfare Mom”
The left has generally striven to open society to broader perspectives while the right draws its power by restricting openness. Why, we were asking, do people on Main Street accede to the demands of people on Wall Street instead of standing up for their own best interests? Why does our society so willingly spend so much on arms and warfare and so little on taking care of its own people? The answer, we concluded, lies in the fact that the majority of people do not feel a strong enough sense of personal empowerment to demand that their needs be met first.
At the very core of most Americans lies a somewhat scared, somewhat angry, privately insecure person who bluffs his or her way through life behind a wall of fear and anger that makes them susceptible to manipulation by those who understand how to turn personal fear and anger into societal action. It lies within that reptilian brain in our brainstems and reacts to sensed danger by attacking.
Today’s far right, better than any other force in American history, has learned to channel all that individual fear and anger into a refusal to consider other points of view and to support any action proposed in the name of national security. Rather than assuming that they can maintain their position in the world through the strength of their integrity and true belief in a god that teaches peace above all, our reptilian brain takes over and we succumb to the fear that someone wants what we have and that the only way to keep it to ourselves is through wars created by the same leaders who are spending so much time tweaking our insecurities.
We’ve all had experiences in life that make us feel insufficient, insecure, not as good as the next guy; learning that we didn’t make the team, being rejected by the high school ‘in group’, failing to get a date for the prom, being passed over for promotion, etc. We bury these deep inside those little turtle brains and hide our fears of inadequacy behind fierce masks designed to keep our neighbors at arms length while we wonder what they think of us. If we have faith in ourselves and get lucky, we get over it. If not, the insecurity festers unknown to us and those around us, but it makes us manipulable.
We all have had experiences in life that led us to create a bit of a chip on our shoulders. Those experiences tend to find a place somewhere deep in that reptilian cortex to lie in wait for opportunities to show themselves and scare off our “enemies”. Having difficulty loosening a nut on the lawnmower, we fling the wrench across the garage in anger for its failure to resolve our frustrations. Worn out from a rotten day at work, we stomp through the front door and kick the dog or terrorize our own children. Frazzled from the trauma of a terrorist attack, we sign up for the war our leaders create even though the target of that war had nothing to do with the attack.
It’s that chip on our shoulder that generates all that. It’s that anger and insecurity buried deep inside of us – if we have been unable to get beyond it – that allows us to accept an irrational argument for irrational action and then back it even if a half hour’s thought is all it would take to work through the insanity of it all.
Called by our political parties to vote for them, we do so in response to their negative ads because it’s a lot like kicking the dog. Answering “our country’s” call to serve in the name of freedom in a war that yields only death, destruction and restrictions of freedom is justifiable only if we can’t take an honest look at it for fear that our neighbors might disagree with us or that we might be thought unpatriotic. Our personal insecurities and buried anger make us vulnerable to the easy fix of feeding our feeling of empowerment through angry group action.
And all that’s needed to trigger it is a little flag waving and finger pointing. And that really works for any politician who wants to use it. And all that comes of it is more pain, more anger, and more insecurity that can be used against us again in the future.
It’s a cycle that needs to be broken. Got any ideas on how to do it? Put ‘em in the suggestion box. Maybe someone will act on it.
Or maybe . . . just maybe, we could take Gandhi’s advice, and BE the change we want to see in the world.
“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” – Patrick Henry
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
We were talking about reptilian brains. We have both recently read a novel by James Lee Burke who is one of our favorite authors because he is able to paint the psyche of his characters so deftly. In this latest book, “Swan Peak”, he explored the psyche of the American male, particularly the southern-born American male, at some length and his explorations gave rise at our table to a discussion of the fear/anger circuit that currently drives the American psyche?
Throughout history political parties of all stripes have inflamed people to patriotic fervor in order to achieve their nationalistic goals. Over the past fifty years, the Republican Party has taken the process to its highest levels and reached a pinnacle few parties have ever even striven for, let alone achieved. That is the complete alienation of their followers to the messages of their political opponents – the vilification of all things leftward leaning. The phrase “bleeding heart liberal”, for instance, has no counterpart in the liberal lexicon. No one has been able to instill a phrase like “hard hearted neocon” into the language. “Gluttonous elite” just doesn’t carry the panache of “Welfare Mom”
The left has generally striven to open society to broader perspectives while the right draws its power by restricting openness. Why, we were asking, do people on Main Street accede to the demands of people on Wall Street instead of standing up for their own best interests? Why does our society so willingly spend so much on arms and warfare and so little on taking care of its own people? The answer, we concluded, lies in the fact that the majority of people do not feel a strong enough sense of personal empowerment to demand that their needs be met first.
At the very core of most Americans lies a somewhat scared, somewhat angry, privately insecure person who bluffs his or her way through life behind a wall of fear and anger that makes them susceptible to manipulation by those who understand how to turn personal fear and anger into societal action. It lies within that reptilian brain in our brainstems and reacts to sensed danger by attacking.
Today’s far right, better than any other force in American history, has learned to channel all that individual fear and anger into a refusal to consider other points of view and to support any action proposed in the name of national security. Rather than assuming that they can maintain their position in the world through the strength of their integrity and true belief in a god that teaches peace above all, our reptilian brain takes over and we succumb to the fear that someone wants what we have and that the only way to keep it to ourselves is through wars created by the same leaders who are spending so much time tweaking our insecurities.
We’ve all had experiences in life that make us feel insufficient, insecure, not as good as the next guy; learning that we didn’t make the team, being rejected by the high school ‘in group’, failing to get a date for the prom, being passed over for promotion, etc. We bury these deep inside those little turtle brains and hide our fears of inadequacy behind fierce masks designed to keep our neighbors at arms length while we wonder what they think of us. If we have faith in ourselves and get lucky, we get over it. If not, the insecurity festers unknown to us and those around us, but it makes us manipulable.
We all have had experiences in life that led us to create a bit of a chip on our shoulders. Those experiences tend to find a place somewhere deep in that reptilian cortex to lie in wait for opportunities to show themselves and scare off our “enemies”. Having difficulty loosening a nut on the lawnmower, we fling the wrench across the garage in anger for its failure to resolve our frustrations. Worn out from a rotten day at work, we stomp through the front door and kick the dog or terrorize our own children. Frazzled from the trauma of a terrorist attack, we sign up for the war our leaders create even though the target of that war had nothing to do with the attack.
It’s that chip on our shoulder that generates all that. It’s that anger and insecurity buried deep inside of us – if we have been unable to get beyond it – that allows us to accept an irrational argument for irrational action and then back it even if a half hour’s thought is all it would take to work through the insanity of it all.
Called by our political parties to vote for them, we do so in response to their negative ads because it’s a lot like kicking the dog. Answering “our country’s” call to serve in the name of freedom in a war that yields only death, destruction and restrictions of freedom is justifiable only if we can’t take an honest look at it for fear that our neighbors might disagree with us or that we might be thought unpatriotic. Our personal insecurities and buried anger make us vulnerable to the easy fix of feeding our feeling of empowerment through angry group action.
And all that’s needed to trigger it is a little flag waving and finger pointing. And that really works for any politician who wants to use it. And all that comes of it is more pain, more anger, and more insecurity that can be used against us again in the future.
It’s a cycle that needs to be broken. Got any ideas on how to do it? Put ‘em in the suggestion box. Maybe someone will act on it.
Or maybe . . . just maybe, we could take Gandhi’s advice, and BE the change we want to see in the world.
“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” – Patrick Henry
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Obama Backs Bush
Watching a presidential race is often a frustrating exercise, and more than usually so when a candidate leaves his principles behind in order to avoid losing support. That’s what I see in Barack Obama’s response to the situation in Georgia.
What is happening here is that two historically opposed nations that have had the opportunity to bury the hatchet over the past decade now find themselves in reversed positions from the face-off they had over Cuba in 1962. At that time, the US called the hand of the USSR, both leaders backed down and the situation was defused. Today, neither leader shows a sign of backing down, and the world is watching while the two cowboys approach each other ala High Noon.
The really disappointing thing to me is that most of the world recognizes the risk that the Bush response poses, but Obama doesn’t seem to, and if he does, it’s worse because he then appears willing to sell out his own principles and risk inflaming an already dangerous situation in order to hang onto his chance of winning the election.
This is also disappointing for his lack of faith in the American voter. Right now, most Americans seem to be supporting Bush’s position that this is a case of unwarranted Russian aggression, but if Obama and the Democratic Party had the guts to do it, they could weather the initial storm of catcalls by repeatedly publicizing the reality of the situation. At the very least, they could demonstrate that the situation is not so simple.
The American people should be given enough information to understand the absurdity of the claim that Russia has attacked a sovereign nation without provocation. (South Ossetia broke away from Georgia in the early 1990s and exists as an independent state with full Russian support. Georgian troops attacked separatists there and Russia sent troops to stop them. If you don’t believe it, Google “Who governs South Ossetia?”) They should be given enough information to understand the military relationship between America, Israel and Georgia, and they should be given enough information to understand the nature and result of Georgian president Saakashvili’s attack on South Ossetia – not to mention the motivation for that attack and US role in urging the action. They should also be given enough information to understand not only that America has (just today) signed an agreement with Poland to place defensive missiles on their soil, but also before today negotiated a deal to provide ten offensive missiles to the Polish military.
From the Russian perspective, the US has done exactly what the USSR did in placing missiles in Cuba in 1962. Instead of backing down, however, both leaders are clinging to their assertions that the other is out of bounds. The only development that has helped my knees to still their knocking is that Russia has filed a case with the world court charging Saakashvili with war crimes. If they are willing to listen to a third party regardless of the outcome, there may be hope.
Hopefully the worst thing that could come of all this is the re-opening of the Cold War. The dark side is the potential for WWIII.
Sadly, because of America’s and Obama’s reluctance to take a hard look at the situation, the most hopeful case is probably the end result that BushCo wants. America always needs an identified enemy to keep the paranoia level high, and nothing strikes fear in the American heart like the specter of domination by the godless communists, so starting the Cold War again fills the bill.
Even more sadly, Obama seems to be playing into the whole situation by backing the Bush play instead of showing the depth of his leadership and the courage of his convictions by being the one who finally points out that the emperor has no clothes. And saddest of all, the world is left, once again, under the horrible shadow of BushCo’s militarism and the threat of a face-off of gargantuan proportions between two powers that should, by all rights, be cooperating in the effort to contain the spread of nuclear materials but instead may well be seeking to add to the stockpiles of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction.
The end result is not likely to be positive for anybody but the arms manufacturers, and the voters will be left once again with two unsavory choices for the presidency.
So what’s new?
“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” – Patrick Henry
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
What is happening here is that two historically opposed nations that have had the opportunity to bury the hatchet over the past decade now find themselves in reversed positions from the face-off they had over Cuba in 1962. At that time, the US called the hand of the USSR, both leaders backed down and the situation was defused. Today, neither leader shows a sign of backing down, and the world is watching while the two cowboys approach each other ala High Noon.
The really disappointing thing to me is that most of the world recognizes the risk that the Bush response poses, but Obama doesn’t seem to, and if he does, it’s worse because he then appears willing to sell out his own principles and risk inflaming an already dangerous situation in order to hang onto his chance of winning the election.
This is also disappointing for his lack of faith in the American voter. Right now, most Americans seem to be supporting Bush’s position that this is a case of unwarranted Russian aggression, but if Obama and the Democratic Party had the guts to do it, they could weather the initial storm of catcalls by repeatedly publicizing the reality of the situation. At the very least, they could demonstrate that the situation is not so simple.
The American people should be given enough information to understand the absurdity of the claim that Russia has attacked a sovereign nation without provocation. (South Ossetia broke away from Georgia in the early 1990s and exists as an independent state with full Russian support. Georgian troops attacked separatists there and Russia sent troops to stop them. If you don’t believe it, Google “Who governs South Ossetia?”) They should be given enough information to understand the military relationship between America, Israel and Georgia, and they should be given enough information to understand the nature and result of Georgian president Saakashvili’s attack on South Ossetia – not to mention the motivation for that attack and US role in urging the action. They should also be given enough information to understand not only that America has (just today) signed an agreement with Poland to place defensive missiles on their soil, but also before today negotiated a deal to provide ten offensive missiles to the Polish military.
From the Russian perspective, the US has done exactly what the USSR did in placing missiles in Cuba in 1962. Instead of backing down, however, both leaders are clinging to their assertions that the other is out of bounds. The only development that has helped my knees to still their knocking is that Russia has filed a case with the world court charging Saakashvili with war crimes. If they are willing to listen to a third party regardless of the outcome, there may be hope.
Hopefully the worst thing that could come of all this is the re-opening of the Cold War. The dark side is the potential for WWIII.
Sadly, because of America’s and Obama’s reluctance to take a hard look at the situation, the most hopeful case is probably the end result that BushCo wants. America always needs an identified enemy to keep the paranoia level high, and nothing strikes fear in the American heart like the specter of domination by the godless communists, so starting the Cold War again fills the bill.
Even more sadly, Obama seems to be playing into the whole situation by backing the Bush play instead of showing the depth of his leadership and the courage of his convictions by being the one who finally points out that the emperor has no clothes. And saddest of all, the world is left, once again, under the horrible shadow of BushCo’s militarism and the threat of a face-off of gargantuan proportions between two powers that should, by all rights, be cooperating in the effort to contain the spread of nuclear materials but instead may well be seeking to add to the stockpiles of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction.
The end result is not likely to be positive for anybody but the arms manufacturers, and the voters will be left once again with two unsavory choices for the presidency.
So what’s new?
“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” – Patrick Henry
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Pearl Harbor or Iraq?
I recently got together with an old friend whom I love and respect, but whose political views are diametrically opposed to mine. It was a great pleasure to see him, but it was also deeply disturbing because, although he occasionally follows my blog, he could not seem to see it as anything but “Bush bashing”.
The disturbing thing for me is that the exploration of facts seems not to compute for those whose political loyalties lie on the right. I cannot seem to convince people – even old and dear friends - that I would be screaming just as loudly if the things to which I object were being perpetrated by Bill Clinton or John Kennedy instead of George Bush.
When you get right down to it, I don’t even think W is the problem. He’s just a dumb bunny with a lot of money whom the real powers see as an easily manipulated front man.
The problem is that my country has been taken down a very dangerous and downright evil path by a bunch of crazies whose goal is world domination.
At this point, my right wing friends will point at me and shout “Hypocrite” because they see that line as pure hyperbole in the middle of an essay that will discuss the need to avoid hyperbole. But the bottom line fact for me is that the line is not hyperbole at all, but a pure and clear statement about the direction my country is going.
For me, the clearest example of this is that Congress has accepted BushCo’s doctrine of pre-emptive war. This is at the top of the heap of accepted policies that I think contradict long-standing American values. In my mind, there is nothing more anathematic to the American way than pre-emptive war.
Just for clarity, consider the World Book Dictionary definition of pre-empt: “1. To secure before someone else can; acquire or take possession of beforehand. 2. To take over; displace.
Step back for a minute and examine the nature of the events we, as Americans, have always held up as examples of the greatest wrongs committed in modern times – Hitler’s invasion of Poland to begin WWII, and Japan’s invasion of Pearl Harbor that drew America into that war.
Consider both of those events from the perspective of Germany and Japan. From that view, both of those events were nothing more than pre-emptive war. Germany attacked Poland from the air without warning with the purpose of destroying the Polish air defenses to avoid the possibility of a tough initial fight in their attempt to take over the world. Japan attacked America from the air with the purpose of destroying the American naval defenses to avoid the possibility of America’s entry into the war with an effective fighting force. In other words, they were pre-emptive strikes to secure dominance.
America was rightly repulsed by the aggressive nature of those strikes and struck back in anger at the affront of the invasion of territory and power under our control. Why does any American now think that we should have the right to strike other countries before they strike us? Does this not sink us to the level of Germany and Japan in the thirties and forties? Is our interest in controlling the world economy OK while theirs was evil?
Another friend, who leans a bit more to the left than the dear friend who inspired this essay, recently sent an article by Paul Craig Roberts called, There May Be Many Mushroom Clouds In Our Future. She asked if I thought it was more politically correct than an early article she had sent and to which I had objected. This article was a bit over the top in my view, too, employing some exaggerations that took it a little too far beyond factual representation for me, but it did contain a great many truths and culminated in one that I believe to the core of my being. Its last line was, “The neoconservatives represent the greatest danger ever faced by the United States and the world. Humanity has no greater enemy.”
I know that to my conservative friend that, too, will sound like hyperbole, but it is certainly not.
Paul Roberts, BTW, was an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under Ronald Reagan and is known as the father of Reaganomics – not exactly known as a hot blooded left winger, but definitely aware of the risks the neocons pose to the world.
Pre-emptive warfare is just the tip the iceberg of the necons’ damage to America and the world. Their approach to surveillance of the American people, torture and abuse of prisoners, and disregard for the rule of law are more symptoms of their similarity to Fascists. No American, whether Republican or Democrat, can afford to ignore the dangers these people pose to the Republic. The stakes are far too high.
Another point Roberts made in his article was that the American public has been brainwashed to the point that they can't seem to understand how dangerous our present course is. I'm afraid that's true, too. Otherwise, how could thoughtful, intelligent and caring people like my Republican friend so glibly support our nation's decline?
“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” – Patrick Henry
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
The disturbing thing for me is that the exploration of facts seems not to compute for those whose political loyalties lie on the right. I cannot seem to convince people – even old and dear friends - that I would be screaming just as loudly if the things to which I object were being perpetrated by Bill Clinton or John Kennedy instead of George Bush.
When you get right down to it, I don’t even think W is the problem. He’s just a dumb bunny with a lot of money whom the real powers see as an easily manipulated front man.
The problem is that my country has been taken down a very dangerous and downright evil path by a bunch of crazies whose goal is world domination.
At this point, my right wing friends will point at me and shout “Hypocrite” because they see that line as pure hyperbole in the middle of an essay that will discuss the need to avoid hyperbole. But the bottom line fact for me is that the line is not hyperbole at all, but a pure and clear statement about the direction my country is going.
For me, the clearest example of this is that Congress has accepted BushCo’s doctrine of pre-emptive war. This is at the top of the heap of accepted policies that I think contradict long-standing American values. In my mind, there is nothing more anathematic to the American way than pre-emptive war.
Just for clarity, consider the World Book Dictionary definition of pre-empt: “1. To secure before someone else can; acquire or take possession of beforehand. 2. To take over; displace.
Step back for a minute and examine the nature of the events we, as Americans, have always held up as examples of the greatest wrongs committed in modern times – Hitler’s invasion of Poland to begin WWII, and Japan’s invasion of Pearl Harbor that drew America into that war.
Consider both of those events from the perspective of Germany and Japan. From that view, both of those events were nothing more than pre-emptive war. Germany attacked Poland from the air without warning with the purpose of destroying the Polish air defenses to avoid the possibility of a tough initial fight in their attempt to take over the world. Japan attacked America from the air with the purpose of destroying the American naval defenses to avoid the possibility of America’s entry into the war with an effective fighting force. In other words, they were pre-emptive strikes to secure dominance.
America was rightly repulsed by the aggressive nature of those strikes and struck back in anger at the affront of the invasion of territory and power under our control. Why does any American now think that we should have the right to strike other countries before they strike us? Does this not sink us to the level of Germany and Japan in the thirties and forties? Is our interest in controlling the world economy OK while theirs was evil?
Another friend, who leans a bit more to the left than the dear friend who inspired this essay, recently sent an article by Paul Craig Roberts called, There May Be Many Mushroom Clouds In Our Future. She asked if I thought it was more politically correct than an early article she had sent and to which I had objected. This article was a bit over the top in my view, too, employing some exaggerations that took it a little too far beyond factual representation for me, but it did contain a great many truths and culminated in one that I believe to the core of my being. Its last line was, “The neoconservatives represent the greatest danger ever faced by the United States and the world. Humanity has no greater enemy.”
I know that to my conservative friend that, too, will sound like hyperbole, but it is certainly not.
Paul Roberts, BTW, was an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under Ronald Reagan and is known as the father of Reaganomics – not exactly known as a hot blooded left winger, but definitely aware of the risks the neocons pose to the world.
Pre-emptive warfare is just the tip the iceberg of the necons’ damage to America and the world. Their approach to surveillance of the American people, torture and abuse of prisoners, and disregard for the rule of law are more symptoms of their similarity to Fascists. No American, whether Republican or Democrat, can afford to ignore the dangers these people pose to the Republic. The stakes are far too high.
Another point Roberts made in his article was that the American public has been brainwashed to the point that they can't seem to understand how dangerous our present course is. I'm afraid that's true, too. Otherwise, how could thoughtful, intelligent and caring people like my Republican friend so glibly support our nation's decline?
“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” – Patrick Henry
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
Friday, August 15, 2008
CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK
One of the things I have noticed about political interaction is that if you want to disarm your opponent’s ability to attack you for what you do or are about to do, you first accuse him of doing it. It’s the pot calling the kettle black as an offensive tactic.
Want to start a potentially unpopular war? Start by labeling those who might oppose you as unpatriotic. Want to establish control over a foreign country? Start by calling them unacceptably aggressive. That may be what is going on in Georgia today.
The United States celebrated the fall of the USSR and the end of the cold war, but did not stop acting as though the cold war was still in effect. Right now, the Bush administration is pointing at Russian aggression in Georgia and saying that the Russians are acting as if the cold war had never ended, but we are the country that has never stopped creating nuclear weapons. We are the nation that has sought, though NATO treaties, to arm countries near the Russian borders. Georgia is just one of those countries, but it is so close that Russia sees our arming that nation the same way we saw the USSR’s arming of Cuba in the 1960s. The dangerous difference is that this time we have leaders in both countries who are much more willing to pull the trigger than were Kennedy and Kruschev.
BushCo’s desire to establish a defensive missile system in the region feeds this fire. In fact, the BBC reported this morning on the US request to put missiles in Poland. Czechoslovakia is another chosen location, but from Russia’s perspective that system could as easily be offensive, and Georgia is far too close for their comfort. If the cold war is over, they reasonably ask, what is the need for any missile defense system in the region?
The Russian bear is also awakened by the thought that the US is trying to cut off their access to Georgia as an alternative shipping site for their oil exports. There can be no doubt that we are at least trying to protect our own access to the non-Russian pipelines of Georgia.
The third thorn in the Russian bear’s paw is Georgia’s resistance to the Russian backed revolt against the government of Georgia, which is the impetus for the Georgian president’s punitive actions. From the Russian perspective, he is holding two provinces hostage so they are acting to free them. (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/46812.html) They don’t see any difference between what they are doing in South Ossetia and what we did in Kosovo.
Given the low esteem in which the Bush administration is currently held, it would be hard pressed to drum up support at home or in Europe for any kind of military expenditures in the Central Asian region (i.e. move against Russia) and it would be a stupid thing to do anyway, but if Russia could be goaded into acting first perhaps that sentiment would change. Saakashvili knew his troops would stir the Russians to respond militarily. Could it be, then, that the whole idea is to bait Russia aggression so that BushCo could legitimize its desire to protect its Georgian oil pipelines through combined action with its NATO allies while at the same time developing a NATO ‘defensive’ missile system with the smiling approval of the American people?
Thanks to vigilant Springfieldian who keeps on top of such things and freely distributes web-based information about them, we can also check these video references and explore the question:
Nuclear war by miscalculation
F William Engdahl: The geopolitics of Georgia pt2 August 14, 2008
The geopolitics of Georgia
F William Engdahl: There are far bigger stakes being played out in Georgia than a territorial dispute August 13, 2008
Who's to blame for the Russian Georgian conflict?
Pepe Escobar: Georgia is a strategic client state of the US with close ties to the Bush administration August 12, 2008
President Saakashvili definitely overshot his bounds and overestimated the willingness of the US to confront the Russians gun for gun, but the upshot of this episode is likely to be further degradation of the American image in the eyes of its allies. From the perspective of newly acquired allies like Georgia, the US has been unable to deliver on its promise of support in the face of external aggression. All the posturing and pointing in the world will not ease their feeling that an alliance with the US is an empty gesture.
Russia is not going to gain from this either. They are coming off as viciously militaristic hardliners willing to overthrow their neighbors and risk large-scale warfare to protect their own economic interests. Unless these nations’ true motivations emerge in negotiations, this messy wound is likely to fester and might ultimately have very serious consequences.
The bottom line in politics is always that nothing is what it seems to be. Exactly what this situation really is remains to be seen, but one key to understanding political action definitely is to look first at the pot that’s doing the pointing.
“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” – Patrick Henry
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
Want to start a potentially unpopular war? Start by labeling those who might oppose you as unpatriotic. Want to establish control over a foreign country? Start by calling them unacceptably aggressive. That may be what is going on in Georgia today.
The United States celebrated the fall of the USSR and the end of the cold war, but did not stop acting as though the cold war was still in effect. Right now, the Bush administration is pointing at Russian aggression in Georgia and saying that the Russians are acting as if the cold war had never ended, but we are the country that has never stopped creating nuclear weapons. We are the nation that has sought, though NATO treaties, to arm countries near the Russian borders. Georgia is just one of those countries, but it is so close that Russia sees our arming that nation the same way we saw the USSR’s arming of Cuba in the 1960s. The dangerous difference is that this time we have leaders in both countries who are much more willing to pull the trigger than were Kennedy and Kruschev.
BushCo’s desire to establish a defensive missile system in the region feeds this fire. In fact, the BBC reported this morning on the US request to put missiles in Poland. Czechoslovakia is another chosen location, but from Russia’s perspective that system could as easily be offensive, and Georgia is far too close for their comfort. If the cold war is over, they reasonably ask, what is the need for any missile defense system in the region?
The Russian bear is also awakened by the thought that the US is trying to cut off their access to Georgia as an alternative shipping site for their oil exports. There can be no doubt that we are at least trying to protect our own access to the non-Russian pipelines of Georgia.
The third thorn in the Russian bear’s paw is Georgia’s resistance to the Russian backed revolt against the government of Georgia, which is the impetus for the Georgian president’s punitive actions. From the Russian perspective, he is holding two provinces hostage so they are acting to free them. (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/46812.html) They don’t see any difference between what they are doing in South Ossetia and what we did in Kosovo.
Given the low esteem in which the Bush administration is currently held, it would be hard pressed to drum up support at home or in Europe for any kind of military expenditures in the Central Asian region (i.e. move against Russia) and it would be a stupid thing to do anyway, but if Russia could be goaded into acting first perhaps that sentiment would change. Saakashvili knew his troops would stir the Russians to respond militarily. Could it be, then, that the whole idea is to bait Russia aggression so that BushCo could legitimize its desire to protect its Georgian oil pipelines through combined action with its NATO allies while at the same time developing a NATO ‘defensive’ missile system with the smiling approval of the American people?
Thanks to vigilant Springfieldian who keeps on top of such things and freely distributes web-based information about them, we can also check these video references and explore the question:
Nuclear war by miscalculation
F William Engdahl: The geopolitics of Georgia pt2 August 14, 2008
The geopolitics of Georgia
F William Engdahl: There are far bigger stakes being played out in Georgia than a territorial dispute August 13, 2008
Who's to blame for the Russian Georgian conflict?
Pepe Escobar: Georgia is a strategic client state of the US with close ties to the Bush administration August 12, 2008
President Saakashvili definitely overshot his bounds and overestimated the willingness of the US to confront the Russians gun for gun, but the upshot of this episode is likely to be further degradation of the American image in the eyes of its allies. From the perspective of newly acquired allies like Georgia, the US has been unable to deliver on its promise of support in the face of external aggression. All the posturing and pointing in the world will not ease their feeling that an alliance with the US is an empty gesture.
Russia is not going to gain from this either. They are coming off as viciously militaristic hardliners willing to overthrow their neighbors and risk large-scale warfare to protect their own economic interests. Unless these nations’ true motivations emerge in negotiations, this messy wound is likely to fester and might ultimately have very serious consequences.
The bottom line in politics is always that nothing is what it seems to be. Exactly what this situation really is remains to be seen, but one key to understanding political action definitely is to look first at the pot that’s doing the pointing.
“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” – Patrick Henry
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Lighten Up
I don’t usually pass along the jokes, etc. that I receive as email, but this item (thanks, Karolyn) was so good I decided to include it in my blog archives. If this doesn’t make you chuckle you are far too deeply involved with the Republican Party. Today, let’s just lighten up:
George W. Bush Presidential Library to Open in 2009
The George W. Bush Presidential Library is now in the final planning stages.
The Library will include:
The Hurricane Katrina Room, which is still under construction.
The Alberto Gonzales Room, where you won't be able to remember anything.
The Texas Air National Guard Room, where you don't even have to show up.
The Walter Reed Hospital Room, where they don't let you in.
The Guantanamo Bay Room, where they don't let you out.
The Weapons of Mass Destruction Room, which no one has been able to find.
The National Debt room which is huge and has no ceiling.
The 'Tax Cut' Room with entry only to the wealthy.
The 'Economy Room' which is in the toilet.
The Iraq War Room. After you complete your first tour, they make you to go back for a second, third, fourth, and sometimes fifth tour.
The Dick Cheney Room, in the famous undisclosed location,complete with shotgun gallery.
The Strategic National Energy Policy Room currently under construction by OPEC/Carlyle Group.
The Supreme Court's Gift Shop, where you can buy an election.
The US Constitution Room is also under construction by the new and improved American Fascism Group aka American Enterprise Institute.
The Airport Men's Room, where you can meet some of your favorite Republican Senators.
The 'Decider Room' complete with dart board, magic 8-ball, Ouija board, dice, coins, and straws.
The museum will also have an electron microscope to help you locate the President's accomplishments.
I might add here: The Hall Of Shame ..... Lined with photos of all those who became wealthy during the granting of governmental contracts.
And one more: The Oil Slick Balcony: Dedicated to those who were slick nuff to dodge prosecution for their illegal actions.
“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” – Patrick Henry
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
George W. Bush Presidential Library to Open in 2009
The George W. Bush Presidential Library is now in the final planning stages.
The Library will include:
The Hurricane Katrina Room, which is still under construction.
The Alberto Gonzales Room, where you won't be able to remember anything.
The Texas Air National Guard Room, where you don't even have to show up.
The Walter Reed Hospital Room, where they don't let you in.
The Guantanamo Bay Room, where they don't let you out.
The Weapons of Mass Destruction Room, which no one has been able to find.
The National Debt room which is huge and has no ceiling.
The 'Tax Cut' Room with entry only to the wealthy.
The 'Economy Room' which is in the toilet.
The Iraq War Room. After you complete your first tour, they make you to go back for a second, third, fourth, and sometimes fifth tour.
The Dick Cheney Room, in the famous undisclosed location,complete with shotgun gallery.
The Strategic National Energy Policy Room currently under construction by OPEC/Carlyle Group.
The Supreme Court's Gift Shop, where you can buy an election.
The US Constitution Room is also under construction by the new and improved American Fascism Group aka American Enterprise Institute.
The Airport Men's Room, where you can meet some of your favorite Republican Senators.
The 'Decider Room' complete with dart board, magic 8-ball, Ouija board, dice, coins, and straws.
The museum will also have an electron microscope to help you locate the President's accomplishments.
I might add here: The Hall Of Shame ..... Lined with photos of all those who became wealthy during the granting of governmental contracts.
And one more: The Oil Slick Balcony: Dedicated to those who were slick nuff to dodge prosecution for their illegal actions.
“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” – Patrick Henry
Be the change you wish to see in the world. -- M. K. Gandhi
The reason for going was to keep the crude flowing and raise a false flag abroad. – from a poem by Jack Evans titled 3500 Souls - http://www.myspace.com/paralegal_eagle
Individually we have little voice. Collectively we cannot be ignored.
But in silence we surrender our power. Yours in Peace -- BR
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
