Sunday Open Thread
Chat away...
Comments (153) «
"My maternal grandfather, a violent yellow-dog Democrat who'd been known to wield his cane against outspoken Republicans, called it the "lily-livered cocktail party," and his opinion had long been nearly universal in the South. Democrats were us; Republicans were meddlesome, superior, pro-corporate Ivy Leaguers endlessly devising fresh ways to screw us over.
//www.thenation.com/doc/20070212/moser
jefro,
I like that article already. Be back later after I've had time to read it all and digest.
PS This is a continuing discussion of class warfare and economic populism that started on the the last Saturday open thread.
The same people who called Miss Lucille Ball a communist are now calling minimum wage workers thieves.
DKA,
Very interesting article. Those arrogant SOB's better not attack Iran. I wrote my Senator and Congressperson some time back and told them that an attack would be the end of the fascist bush administration and that I wouldn't stand for it and neither should they.
Those SOB repigs are going to put us in the same position as Hitler was in after his attack on the Soviet Union. bush and cheney and their friends and families will live in their bunkers and we will take the consequences.
Those two assholes must be stopped NOW!!!!!!!
DKA...very good link on the other thread reguarding Bush's intentions to attack Iran...I have been emailing members of Congress on this for quite awhile and have had no response from anyone and see little being done about it. I think Bush intendes to provoke Iran into attacking our ships and will use that as justification to "counter attack" without Congressional approval...
13 Days Countdown To Obama 2008! ( Not your Daddys Black Leader )
Snip:
As we all may may know, Barack Obama is not your average Black American leader. Whether it be his Bi-Racial Heritage or the fact that his father actually did come from Africa making Barack Obama a first generation Black American or whether it's the fact that he's the first serious Black American leader who doesn't act like he was raised by the Black Pather Party, Barack Obama just doesn't seem to fit the average Black Leader Stereotype. This is why I am not surprised when I read the news about Barack Obama and the Black vote. I look at the headlines and see the photos of those who it's been reported , are hesitant to support Barack Obama. Some of it is spin by certain people in the Media who are obviously pushing for their own candidate. Some of it is that Old Fashioned "Planation Mentality" and some of it is based on just not knowing enough about Barack Obama to form an opinion of him and has nothing at all to do with his ethnicity. Quite frankly, that's one of the things I absolutly love about him. He's not your average Black American Leader.
To Read this in it's entirety, please click on the link.
When Bush attaches Iran it is not something that the Russians and the Chinese will be happy about. When they come to the aid and defense of Iran, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfawitz, Rice, et al, can flee to their heavily guarded military bunkers in Paraguay and leave the rest of us to suffer the consequences of their failed "vision"....
Posted by goodfoe on January 28, 2007 at 07:08 PM
Bush is always going after the wrong people. When we were attacked by Afghanistan on 911, he went after Iraq. Now that we know Russia is providing the weapons to the Malitias (sp?) in Iraq , he wants to go after Iran. The man is out of his mind.
Not to mention that attacking Iran will finish pissing off the 1.6 billion Moslems we have not already pissed off and will validate for the Moslem world as factual what bin Ladin has been teling them...
I`m now beginning to read "the Audacity to Hope" by Barack Obama and I must say so far I`m really impressed!He is a person who has a unique perspective that leaves me continually going "Oh my God!This guy really gets it!
Posted by goodfoe on January 28, 2007 at 07:14 PM
Republicans have, for the last five years , managed to cut off opposition debate by accusing our Democratic Leadership of " Encouraging the Enemy ". I appears, that finally our leaders are not allowing themselves to be intimidated by that line of bull. What's really encouraging our enemies is the Bush Administrations policy. They pciked a fight that they believed would intimidate the entire Region and instead, it has backfired on them placing this nations National Security in serious jeapordy. They did quell terrorism, they poured oil on the flame. We the People are now vulnerabe as a result. Is there any place left besides our own country for us to vacation? Seriously.
Posted by virgo on January 28, 2007 at 07:20 PM
I love your username (It's my sign)
Did you read my latest post about him? At the end, there are some links that give more insight to how he really is. I really like this guy. He is so unique and he reaches across all barriers without compromising his true self. He's awesome.
The American People Want Their Country Back
This VIDEO is awesome.
Check it out!
Photo Gallery: Protesters converge on Capitol
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/us/0701/gallery.dc.protest/frameset.exclude.html
They did NOT quell terrorism, they poured oil on the flame.
My mistake. Sorry about that one .
Whew!
;p
Raged in Solidarity with DC Raging Grannies
Members of the protest group, Raging Grannies, held up frying pans and signs during a protest in Mountain View, Calif. against President Bush's plan for sending more troops to Iraq.
sandy- thanks for that- i'm glad you will take the time to read moser's article- i hope that others do as well- i think he has written some great stuff about the south and the opportunity that the dems have there if they choose to reconfigure this party
just fixing dinner here and listening to ol' bobby sing a few songs- that and the band- jen and i enjoyed "the last waltz" last night and i had to put the basement tapes on while cooking- that led to bobby singing "master's of war" downstairs as i write this
Posted by DemocratKickingAss on January 28, 2007 at 07:37 PM
That was pretty awesome wasn't it? I wish I could go to all these things. The best I can do is donate to the different organizations so they have funds to get the buses and the signeage and what have you. That way, I still feel like I'm a part of it. However, there's nothing like actually being there and getting in your own "Bring Em Home". (sign) Also, I still sign every single petition sent to me. I did'nt stop after November.
Thank you for the pictures. I loved them. That crowd was monsterous and EVERYBODY was represented. All demographics showed solidatiry.
here is moser's article after the last election on john edwards- "cornbread and roses"
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20051128/moser
from the article:
Which brings us to Lesson Two: Democrats can't afford to keep ceding the "values vote." Here again, Edwards sees his antipoverty crusade as a step in the right direction. "In a country of our wealth, to have 37 million people living in poverty? It's a huge moral issue," he says. "There's a hunger in this country for a sense of national community, that we're not in this thing by ourselves. There's been a long period of selfish thinking. I think there's a great opportunity for us to be about a big, moral cause that's bigger than people's own self-interest."
yeah, way to go guys! only 20 million more to go!- oh, by the way, buddy, that is now old news- but thanks for sharing
Posted by queencityjefro on January 28, 2007 at 08:35 PM
Great atical,
Thank you for posting.
Rep. Maxine Waters on Ending the Iraqi War
Watch the video, it's worth checking out:
Hi, Goodfoe, DKA, Johnedwrd, and anyone interested on the Iran situation...
The Iran situation greatly concerns me. I have done a lot of research, following up names and front organizations for the MeK, which seems to be where a lot of "evidence" is coming from. Madeline Albright put the MeK on the list of foreign terrorist organizations in the late 1990's and they have a lobbying group in Washington DC today! Their obsession is to overthrow the government of Iran.
I did a humongous post on the Iran topic, on Friday, 1/26, under the "Congress on Iraq" section, listing available research and history. I sincerely apologize for the length, but I was so concerned, and have not heard it discussed much. Personally, I think this topic is of grave importance, and dovetails with the "surge".
Also, on the last open thread, 1/27, I listed articles and authors on the topic. Another good source is "The Next Act. Is a damaged Administration less likely to attack Iran, or more?" by Seymour M. Hersh for THE NEW YORKER. You will also find info in a search through TIME and NEWSWEEK.
I hope some of you are able to take the time to read them and comment. When Bush gets cornered, he acts faster than he planned. I think he will start the confrontation sooner than later. From what I read, he intends to use "Resistance" fighters, with the US providing outside support. You will notice that the Administration says, "We don't intend to INVADE Iran", which may technically be accurate.
The most shocking thing I read is from the Iran Policy Committee, that the way to victory in IRAQ is through dealing with IRAN.
I'm hoping I can hear what you think.
Everthing you wanted to know about Barack Obama in 5 minuets!
The most effective voter is an informed voter.
So, take FIVE!
Posted by DemocratKickingAss on January 28, 2007 at 08:51 PM
"Hell No. We won't Go!"
George Bush better wake up.
Kathleen.....I have not read everything that you have posted but am generaly familiar with the subject. Given that everything you state and have posted is 100% true, what is the solution? What is the course of action? Quite frankly, I feel that most of our Democratic leadership is sidestepping this question. There has been very little reporting on it. If our Democratic leadership won't challenge Bush on this, what are we supposed to do, waite for our electrical grid to be blown up in retaliation?.Our Democratic leadership needs to challenge Bush on this now!!A good question to start with would be, "Just what in the hell do you think you're doing now?"If our leadership waites to react after the fact, the mess that this misadministration will get us into may not be reversible.....
I'm hoping I can hear what you think.
Posted by Kathleen on January 28, 2007 at 08:52 PM
I think your correct on the Chimp's plans for Iran as he needs something to ditract the public from Irag and what may be coming out of the scoot trial.
He only thinks of his legacy and the neocons reputation as world leaders of which we all know there not.
Sniff! Sniff! ( trolls )
Okay. I gotta go start getting ready for work. I'll be back later if it's slow tonight but I doube it seeing that it's the end of the month and that means,
Paperwork,
Spreadsheets,
Inventory,
Oh my !
:O
Later, FRIENDS!
Peace Out!
13 Days Countdown To Obama 2008! ( Not your Daddys Black Leader )
Posted by FreedomOfSpeechForBarackObama2008 on January 28, 2007 at 06:56 PM
awesome read. Straight to the point. Very factual and true. Couldn't have given Obama higher praises on his sincerity and hope for all people.
Dish of reality - unfortunately african-americans are hesitant as to throwing their suppport to Obama because of their unique black experience within this country. Every ethnic heritage has an experience in a countryland and african-americans have one with this country. It's not something that they can take off like a coat or lay aside like a hat.
Obama is speaking a language of unfamiliarity. It contains nothing of their experiences or trials and therein lies the problem. The connection is missing. Not saying that it can't be gained, BUT it is certainly missing. as for black leaders, most sprang to life from the Civil Rights era and therefore again are not hearing any of their rhetoric in Obama's language.
Now by Obama not carrying the baggage of the typical black experiences of life this is why his message is different and carries in a different tone altogether which in turn makes him so appealing to everyone else.
Can this dillema be remedied? I can't say, BUT I will say this one needs to be found because never forget that there are other candidates that will gladly with open arms welcome that black vote. Hillary thinks she has a good lock on it because Bill carries a certain amount in his hip pocket. Other candidates would jump at the chance to snatch a substantial amount of it.
alot of work needs to be done, but anything can be overcome.
By friends, that would be goodfoe, Kathleen and GOTV. DKA and Queen too.
Heck, everyone except Cowpoop and his aliases.
:)
Evening all,
Greetings Freedom, I didn't quite see what a downer I appeared. Thank you for the youthful mirror. I shall try to be more cimcumspect, though my dumbassedness might be incurable. I'm not unfriendly, just not up to all you people's level of knowledge and activity.
Just think the Chimp's fired all the Generals who disagreed with him and now we have the table set for armagedon in the middle east.
No stopping the nukes now without Impeachment and then he still might pull the trigger even while under Impeachment charges.
Now by Obama not carrying the baggage of the typical black experiences of life this is why his message is different and carries in a different tone altogether which in turn makes him so appealing to everyone else.Can this dillema be remedied?
Yes it can. It will be remedied by Baracks fellow Black Americans who also did not come through the sixties and who also do not have that "Baggage" of being Black in America. Those of us in my generation who were born after 1974 don't vote with our skin and our uterous. We don't just like Obama because he's Black. We like Obama because he's real and him being Black is a plus. I don't expect him to really swoop up the "Plantation Vote" because their minds are not free. Hillary can have them. They don't vote anyway. They admited it themselves. look at Obamas staff. They are mostly my age with a few that are his age. What did I say about the Youth when it comes to race? ( We Are Over It ) This is the perfect example of that Generational difference I was talking about. We don't believe that Black Leaders have to be molded and shaped by Sarpton and Jackson in order to be considered real.
;p
Opps,
gregg and J,
Whaussuuuup!
TomN
(huh?)
The 21,000 extra troops are just a smoke screen for us to make hay about and keep us distracted while they plan for Iran. Thats how neocons work.
economic populism that truly speaks for the citizens of this country against those corporate interests that are hardly part of this country anymore (with their overseas tax shelters and their slave labor that they exploit at the expense of the taxpayers here who continue to subsidize their asses)
*****
hello jefro, this is the crux of the problem in government: corporate influence. The question is how to get elected without corporate money. Campaign, media and voting reforms are batted down by special interests.
Lincoln compared with this Idiot, I think not.
Besides he didn't have a nuke and he wasn't an egotistical maniac!!!
J,
Are ya still here?
Why do I keep missing you?
Anyway,
;p
(huh?)
Posted by FreedomOfSpeechForBarackObama2008 on January 28, 2007 at 09:30 PM
I thought you criticised my constantly posting problems and my cynicisms. If the shoe fits, wiggle you toes.
You may have been after another someone, but I am rebuked. Live and learn. :)
You may have been after another someone, but I am rebuked. Live and learn. :)Posted by TomN on January 28, 2007 at 09:45 PM
Jeezuz Croyst, Tom. (shaking my head)
;p
more funny environmental news ( if you are a moron)
Melting ice means global warming report all wet, say some experts
Posted 1/28/2007 9:47 AM ET
GLOBAL WARMING
WASHINGTON (AP) — Later this week in Paris, climate scientists will issue a dire forecast for the planet that warns of slowly rising sea levels and higher temperatures.
But that may be the sugarcoated version.
Early and changeable drafts of their upcoming authoritative report on climate change foresee smaller sea level rises than were projected in 2001 in the last report. Many top U.S. scientists reject these rosier numbers. Those calculations don't include the recent, and dramatic, melt-off of big ice sheets in two crucial locations:
They "don't take into account the gorillas — Greenland and Antarctica," said Ohio State University earth sciences professor Lonnie Thompson, a polar ice specialist. "I think there are unpleasant surprises as we move into the 21st century."
Michael MacCracken, who until 2001 coordinated the official U.S. government reviews of the international climate report on global warming, has fired off a letter of protest over the omission.
The melting ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica are a fairly recent development that has taken scientists by surprise. They don't know how to predict its effects in their computer models. But many fear it will mean the world's coastlines are swamped much earlier than most predict.
Others believe the ice melt is temporary and won't play such a dramatic role.
That debate may be the central one as scientists and bureaucrats from around the world gather in Paris to finish the first of four major global warming reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The panel was created by the United Nations in 1988.
After four days of secret word-by-word editing, the final report will be issued Friday.
The early versions of the report predict that by 2100 the sea level will rise anywhere between 5 and 23 inches . That's far lower than the 20 to 55 inches forecast by 2100 in a study published in the peer-review journal Science this month. Other climate experts, including NASA's James Hansen, predict much bigger sea level rises.
The report is also expected to include some kind of proviso that says things could be much worse if ice sheets continue to melt.
The prediction being considered this week by the IPCC is "obviously not the full story because ice sheet decay is something we cannot model right now, but we know it's happening," said Stefan Rahmstorf, a climate panel lead author from Germany who made the larger prediction of up to 55 inches of sea level rise. "A document like that tends to underestimate the risk," he said.
"This will dominate their discussion because there's so much contentiousness about it," said Bob Corell, chairman of the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, a multinational research effort. "If the IPCC comes out with significantly less than about 39 inches, there will be people in the science community saying we don't think that's a fair reflection of what we know."
In the past, the climate change panel didn't figure there would be large melt of ice in west Antarctica and Greenland this century and didn't factor it into the predictions. Those forecasts were based only on the sea level rise from melting glaciers (which are different from ice sheets) and the physical expansion of water as it warms.
But in 2002, Antarctica's 1,255-square-mile Larsen B ice shelf broke off and disappeared in just 35 days. And recent NASA data shows that Greenland is losing 53 cubic miles of ice each year — twice the rate it was losing in 1996.
Even so, there are questions about how permanent the melting in Greenland and especially Antarctica are, said panel lead author Kevin Trenberth, chief of climate analysis at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado.
While he said the melting ice sheets "raise a warning flag," Trenberth said he wonders if "some of this might just be temporary."
University of Alabama at Huntsville professor John Christy said Greenland didn't melt much within the past thousand years when it was warmer than now. Christy, a reviewer of the panel work, is a prominent so-called skeptic. He acknowledges that global warming is real and man-made, but he believes it is not as worrisome as advertised.
Those scientists who say sea level will rise even more are battling a consensus-building structure that routinely issues scientifically cautious global warming reports, scientists say. The IPCC reports have to be unanimous, approved by 154 governments — including the United States and oil-rich countries such as Saudi Arabia — and already published peer-reviewed research done before mid-2006.
Rahmstorf, a physics and oceanography professor at Potsdam University in Germany, says, "In a way, it is one of the strengths of the IPCC to be very conservative and cautious and not overstate any climate change risk."
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Posted 1/28/2007 9:47 AM ET
I'm not unfriendly, just not up to all you people's level of knowledge and activity.
Posted by TomN on January 28, 2007 at 09:25 PM
i hope that is tongue in cheek...we have our ups and downs...whatcha got?
i look forward to the stuff you bring to the table.
just so long as it's not about the 2008 race...how did you react to the peace actions?
what about Baghdad?
Blackwater?
anything?
I live in Minnesota and a little warming or a lot of warming would be a good thing. Posted by Cow-pie-eater
If you want to be warmer, then move to to ARIZONA, ya self centered little prick! Why should the whole world burn up just for you? BTW, I damn well after just one summer in AZ you'll be crying your eyes out about how hot it is, wimp.
They called Lincoln an idiot too, Nothing has changed with the Democrats in 150 years. Posted by Cow-pie-eater
And nothing has changed with the Republican racists in 150 years.
In the September 18, 1858 debate, Lincoln said:I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And in as much as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.
aren't there any regular Democrat posters for you to piss off tonite? Posted by Cow-pie-eater
I thought that was your job, moron.
aren't there any regular Democrat posters for you to piss off tonite? Posted by Cow-pie-eater
I thought that was your job, moron.
This man has brought about an increased interest in extremism throughout the Middle East. He's done so through his war with Iraq, a war who's purpose has changed to suit the his politcal desires. He's done by refusing to engage the Palestine government, bringing them and Israel to the table for continued peace negotiations, mainly because he was too busy with war in Iraq to bother. (Striking Israeli Airforce Personnel in July of 2003 represented an opportunity to develop peaceful relations if only someone had been interested in persuing that goal.)
The Pentagon and our National Intelligence Agencies acknowledge that the terrorist threat has grown due to our actions in Iraq. Think of it this way. You go to war in Afghanistan to destroy terrorist training camps, but then you got to war in Iraq where a much large population exists. There you provide a training opportunity to extremist elements and individuals who may never have had such an opportunity to train and develop themselves as warriors. Bush gave the terrorists all this and more when he chose to go against international opinion and invade Iraq on what was then and is most certainly now, a false premise.
Sorry, FOS, if there was some misunderstanding. I took you comments of your perspective of the boomer generation's selfishness rather personally. Seems some of those of that generation are behind much of this madness afficting the world.
The 60's generation saw the deception and cupidity behind the war machine/government's "war in Vietnam" and "cold war"and "war". They tried to turn the establishment/military-industrial complex around to serve the health and prosperity of the people. At least some did get it. The money and greed took the others, and the present mess is a continuation of the process of corporate influence in government.
What is it Bush is trying to do in Iraq now? Who is he emancipating as a side? And which parts of the country are trying to disengage from the other?
If you don't think that an Iraqi population who grows familiar with the horrors of war now will not in the future choose violence as a solution over diplomacy, then you've got some surprises coming. This population, that has become accustomed to violence through the years of Saddam's rule and now through the years of American occupation, is likely to become an antagonist of conflict throughout the Middle East. I believe that Iraq will one day again be a unified nation, but that nation is not going to fit Bush's reconstruction image.
Don't tell me that you don't think Bush gives into Israeli interests when he ignores or supports conflict with Palestine and Lebanon. This man also considers what Saudi Arabia has to say quite important. You're a fool if you don't think that international intests drive this man's agenda.
Hi fade,
Good to see you. I went to the march in SF yesterday. It was difficult to tell, but it looked like over 10,000 people. Marched down Market St, but then the march was sort of co-opted by a union demonstration at about pier 23.
I'm a self centered little prick who lives in Minnesota and I don't care who has to die so a little warming or a lot of warming for me would be a good thing. Posted by Cow-pie-eater
The 1995 Chicago heat wave led to approximately 600 heat-related deaths over a period of five days. It is now considered to be one of the worst weather-related disasters in American history.
McClellen wouldn't fight the stupid, meaningless battles that Lincoln, being a heavy handed thug himself, wanted. Lincoln is the guy who hired Shurman to burn the South. That won't be forgotton either.
No stopping the nukes now without Impeachment and then he still might pull the trigger even while under Impeachment charges.
Posted by GOTV on January 28, 2007 at 09:26 PM
Like bush Hitler set the table to attack the Soviet Union. When the war started going badly he fired his generals and ran the war himself since he was the decider. After Stalingrad he seldom left his bunker in East Prussia and moved to his bunker in Berlin as the Soviets approached from the east. He did everything he could to take the German people with him because he considered them treasonous. Then, like a coward, he committed suicide with his buddy Goebbels. Goebbels even killed his children. Hitler killed his wife Eva.
Sound familiar? You could probably substitute bush for Hitler in the above paragraph to get some idea of what will happen when he attacks Iran. We will be the ones that take it in the shorts. He will simply chicken out like he did with the National Guard during the Vietnam War.
TomN,
Good to see you and thank you for your participation! That sounds like a great crowd for January.
Larry: It makes no sense...the reThugs are floating that one around. Rather filthy little troll talking blog tonight, isn't it?
Are you guys enjoying the Libby trial?
It is international trade which interests this man most. Israel is a safety net, something he holds onto for an increased sense of security in the Middle East. You do recall this suggestion being made back in the 1970's and 80's when some were considering our options there?
This man suffers from near-sightedness however. He does not see the big picture and so, as was done in the past, Bush has created greater problems for us in the Middle East and thus decreased our power there. He even through away a renewed relationship with Iran just to invade Iraq and in the process set our current standoff into motion.
Lincoln is no American Hero when you look at some of the things he did. The price he paid for unity was too high.
FOSI'm here. check your messages
Posted by J on January 28, 2007 at 09:50 PM
I just wrote you back. It's rather lengthy so um, bear with me.
LOL
;p
TomN,
Do you live in San Francisco? I was born there so many years ago that I am afraid to count them.
Say, how did that don't negotiate with the enemy strategy work with respect to North Korea? Oh yes, they developed a nuclear weapon thereby increasing their bargaining power.
Hello Marine,
Have you been following the US's arming of Fatah in palestine? Iran then has to eacalate its support of Hamas and the proxy war will accidently hit Israel which may have to launch an attack on Iran. Does this appear to be a plan?
*****
"We are being pressured from the (Israeli) political echelon not to interfere with American plans to provide weapons and equipment to Fatah," said a senior IDF source. "The concerns are that the weapons and equipment will be shared with elements of Fatah that regularly attack Israeli troops and plan attacks against Israeli civilians."
Posted by Domingo on January 28, 2007 at 10:13 PM
Damn you Domingo! You stole my Febuary Black History Month idea. I was gonna call it.
" Abraham Lincoln. Not as "Negro Friendly" as you may have thought "
LOL.
well, that was wierd...i just had to sign in again.
good time to check out.
goodnight everyone
keep it lit~
You think of it as an individual. A society sees things differently. They learn from the past. Those who did not directly experience these battle will see valour and strength in conflict. Also, if you hold those beliefs despite what you see now happening in Iraq, then you are blind. According to your philosophy Iraqis shouldn't now be figthing anyone after having experienced the trauma of Saddam.
Posted by Johnedwrd on January 28, 2007 at 10:36 PM
Hello John, no, I live in NW Sacramento Valley. My parents live in the bay, however, and I took the ferry into the city to avoid the traffic.
keep it lit~Posted by fade2bluz on January 28, 2007 at 10:41 PM
Good Night Fade,
Will do.
:0
Okay, I have to get ready for work. I'm out for reals till later.
Peace Out.
:)
Have you been following the US's arming of Fatah in palestine? Iran then has to eacalate its support of Hamas and the proxy war will accidently hit Israel which may have to launch an attack on Iran. Does this appear to be a plan?
I have and I've seen trouble brewing here from the start. There is no attempt to avoid conflict, in fact it is an obvious attempt to produce conflict. Bush started this by offering support to Palestinians who were willing to remove Hammas from power despite being freely elected into power by the population. This Hammas also backed away from the non-political Hammas' interest in the destruction of Israel and requested negotiations. This was of course before Israel renewed attacks inside Palestine shortly after the Hammas political party came to power.
Organizations that become political like this can change, if allowed to change. The Palestine Liberation Organization is an example, as is the Irish Republican Army. Some members of these organizations once used military tactics to prove a point, that their people should be respected. Never did all members conduct themselves in this manner and as time went on and the political atmosphere changed we began to see more and more turning to diplomacy.
Hammas will follow this path as an organization one day, so long as they are allowed to. It isn't to hard to prevent it from happening with constant military pressure being applied, but it is only inevitable that the atmosphere will one day favor such change.
That's what I was talking about Cowboy, Bush made sure that North Korea had the time and interest in developing a nuclear weapon. They had to prepare to face the threat that Bush publicized and they did by developing that nuclear weapon.
Imagine going back and blaming Jimmy Carter in the 1970's for what Bush is responsible for in the 2000's. God are you ever desperate.
So Bush gave North Korea the time and motivation they needed to finish those nuclear weapons they'd been working on without success since the 1970's? Well, well that is quite an accomplishment. I'm sure his mother would be proud.
Well, that's enough for one night. Have a wonderful night everyone. I'm out of here.
Marine,
Now China is developing satellite killing rockets as a result of raygun and chimp insisting that we must continue the star wars defense system.
I wonder when chimp sold them the technology.
G'night fade,
Just have to add that at the back and side of the Peace march assembly, there were some few people yelling at the crowd anti-peace stuff and nonsense with a megaphone, waving Israel's flags, standing behind the police. Why didn't they just join the crowd and talk, like the rest of the interest groups there? That was the only counter-protest I saw. The police even mainly got back in their cars and waited there when they saw the peaceful and well-behaved nature of the marchers.
Later on
hey fade, i am delighted with the libby trial. i think ari is on tomorrow...should be some real laughs.
now the right wingers are all retreating to the position that bush will be seen as a great president in a decade or two. i can understand the value they place on the future because in the present he sure is winning the sack o shit award.
and yeah carter messed up north korea and the dummie and the tooth have almost but not quite got it all fixed just like they have nicely fixed up the middle east.
here is an interesting fact...71% of the american people wish bush's presidency was over and he would get lost....some real bragging rights in those numbers...
and none of us get any ice cream tonite, we have all been far too indulgent. if you feel this ruling should not apply to you please leave a note on my desk and wash the scoop off before you put it away.
nite. see you in the morning.
didn't herbert hoover goose babs which got her ready to concieve the bush lads? i knew it was all a republicans fault...
i guess the right wants us to believe the buck stops in 1976 or is it 1876???
The geopolitical genius of China's satellite kill
*****
Sure of its ground, the Chinese government - after a test whose only aim was to prove it could obliterate enemy satellites in low earth orbit - even had the gall to declare that "China has never, and will never, participate in any form of space arms race". This was no more truthful than President George W. Bush's insistence that "we do not torture" detainees.
The militarisation of space is only the latest area in which an increasingly assertive China has taken advantage of the typical US approach to critical issues of global importance since the end of the cold war. The US is so protective of its sovereignty and complacent about its power that it often refuses to adhere to accepted international norms or contemplate an international regime that might constrain its room for manoeuvre.
There are at least three areas in which China is happy to ride on America's coat-tails and the first is human rights. Until the US began detaining people without trial at Guantánamo Bay five years ago, it was possible for US politicians, without hypocrisy, to criticise Chinese Communist leaders for jailing their political opponents. The US could exert real influence on Chinese behaviour. Exchanges of presidential visits between the two countries were in those days preceded by the ritual release of Chinese dissidents into US care; today such visits are more likely to be marked by the ritual purchase of Boeing aircraft as part of China's efforts to reduce the US trade deficit.
Chinese officials are not shy to point out Washington's selective approach to human rights. They do not see why resource-hungry China should not support dictatorships in Burma and Zimbabwe if the US does the same in Pakistan, central Asia and west Africa. Nor is there any obvious reason why China should not use its United Nations Security Council veto to protect allies such as Sudan from sanctions when the US does the same for its protégés, including Israel.
Iranian Reveals Plan to Expand Role in Iraq
By JAMES GLANZ
Published: January 29, 2007
BAGHDAD, Jan. 28 — Iran’s ambassador to Baghdad outlined an ambitious plan on Sunday to greatly expand its economic and military ties with Iraq — including an Iranian national bank branch in the heart of the capital — that will almost certainly bring Iran into further conflict with American forces who have detained a number of Iranian operatives here in recent weeks.
The ambassador, Hassan Kazemi Qumi, said Iran was prepared to offer Iraqi forces training, equipment and advisers for what he called “the security fight.” In the economic area, Mr. Qumi said, Iran was ready to assume major responsibility for the reconstruction of Iraq, an area of notable failure on the part of the United States since American-led forces overthrew Saddam Hussein in the invasion nearly four years ago.
Posted by Cowboy on January 28, 2007 at 11:10 PM
cowboy, sally, frosty...
doesn't it make you feel all warm and cozy inside to know that when you're bones are picked clean by all those crabs, and your carbon is sequestered in the bottom of puget sound, nobody will care?
sorry, folks, but it would really be nice if this sack of shit couldn't log onto here...sorry.
Hi, Goodfoe and others, re the Iran situation...
You were wondering what can be done. I'd like to see Congress use whatever authority is available to them to analyze the information that the Bush Administration is using as "evidence" of Iran's aggressive intentions toward the US and Iraq, and also the evidence that is being used to declare that Iran is actually pursuing a nuclear weapons program, one that is not limited to a nuclear program.
So far, the Administration is not forthcoming with the evidence, nor the sources, though they say that they will soon produce something. White House Counsel on a C-SPAN program last night said that they have a right to keep their sources classified, to protect the sources and national security, and that is what makes the President Commander in Chief. However, if among the chief "intel" sources of this Administration is an organization, the MeK, or Mujahedin-e-Khalq,
---whose origin goes back to the early 1960'
in Iran,
---that has assassinated public figures in Iran,
---bombed and engaged in violent acts in Iran,
---murdered US military contractors who were
working in Iran,
---were part of the group that took as a hostage
the US Embassy in Iran,
---participated in the overthrow of the Shah of
Iran,
---and then attempted a violent overthrow of the
next government of Iran,
---and worked with Saddam Hussein in the Iran-
Iraq war against fellow Iranians, and then
joined Hussein in conflicts against the
Kurds and Shia
---and whose reason for living is to reclaim
the government of Iran...
well, I just wonder how reliable or biased their "intel" might be? If using this "resistance" group to destabilize Iran is not bad enough, can you imagine what the new government in Iran would be like, and what THAT VACUUM would look liks should a terrorist organization like the MeK take over?
Congress needs to find out the source of the evidence of the all-encompassing accusations against Iran and verify the accuracy of the information. We just cannot again allow cherry-picked intel or fabrications, and commit troops to a conflict on falsehoods. If the MeK is involved, as the articles suggest, and in some cases confirmed, there is an obvious need to be extremely cautious regarding the source and content. With events moving so quickly on Bush's side, the situation is as volatile as tinder dry wood under a lighted match. There are warships in the waters and troops on the border, and Cheney and Bush making almost daily threats, as they proclaim that they will still pursue diplomacy, but "every options is on the table:. It sounds so familiar.
Almost all of the above details comes from the US State Department's website that lists foreign terrorist organizations. The results of an appeals court case in 2004, still designated the MeK as a terrorist group, along with several other names that represent it. I don't know their status today, as they keep lobbying to have their terrorist designation removed.
Keepin' it lite
Miami bound! Decided to make the family Fort Lauderdale Super Bowl/Soul Bowl Game.
Not really the party type, but hey it's infectious down here. Gonna scream at the game, talk some politics and eat plenty of good food.
Besides we're all Rattler fans and alumni! Gonna support BOTH teams and the featured Marchin' 100.
Kathleen, I agree......
J...did you do any more work on Paraguay?
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS:
SAVE THEM FROM GEORGE W. BUSH
Every time Bush and Cheney are at a lost to justify remaining in their illegal and immoral war in Iraq, they use our troops as human shields to defend their failed policy. Their position is as follows: Taking our troops out of harm’s way is doing the troops a disservice. That’s a non sequitur. If we follow that logic, we must also say that when Bush used every device at his daddy’s command, and Cheney managed to obtain five (5) deferments to avoid going to Vietnam, they were engaged in a selfless and honorable act of self-sacrifice on behalf of the country. But of course, we know that’s a lie.
The fact is, they were involved in a desperate attempt to save their own cowardly necks. Unwittingly however, they did provide a service to the country--based on their current performance, we now know their incompetence as officers in Vietnam would have sent the death toll even higher. Though, the troops in ‘Nam were a different breed. They didn’t suffer prima donnas lightly, so the likes of a Bush or Cheney in 'Nam might very well come up “missing in action"--a summary field maneuver reserved for those who placed their own agenda above the welfare of the troops.
As a Vietnam era Marine, it makes me want to regurgitate every time I hear either Bush or Cheney imply that the people against the war in Iraq are un-American, or “Don’t have the stomach to stay the course.” When they had the opportunity to serve this nation, they didn’t even have the intestinal fortitude to begin the course. History will provide no hypocrite more prolific than these two unrepentant cowards with the audacity to try to reconstitute themselves as latter-day heroes. Yet, as they stand drenched in the blood of others, they have the unmitigated gall to lecture America on the virtues of embracing responsibility. So even as I write, I hear groans reverberating from Arlington Cemetery as proud heroes of the past rollover in their graves.
Their supporters seek to give them a pass by rationalizing that they were simply young, selfish, and foolish like many other young people during the Vietnam era. They say, but in their maturity they’ve seen the light. I have two problems with that rationale. First, other young people of that era aren’t profiting on the blood and guts of young Americans. And secondly, the most cursory reflection on their current commitment also falls short. While these two have lectured the American people long and hard on the importance of this war to our national security, they haven’t encouraged one member of their respective families to step forward to contribute one thing to “this mission that’s so vital to America’s security.” They’ve been content to allow their families to voice their heartbreak and respect for the dying little people while comfortably ensconced in the safe cocoon of exclusive tennis clubs and golf courses.
Where is their dedication? Where is their commitment? One knows it’s time to go to war when one is prepared to see one's own love one become its first casualty. So where is Bush or Cheney's sacrifice to the welfare of this nation? What do they have to loose by "staying the course?"
I have a challenge for America: Tell me one sacrifice that either Bush, Cheney or their respective families--right down to the third cousins--made towards the successful prosecution of this war. Now, and here’s an easy one, list all the ways they’ve benefited, both politically and financially, by sending young Americans to die in Iraq. If the answers you come up with don’t help you to see the truth about these two individuals, you must to be reading this article in Braille.
The gross hypocrisy of this situation also speaks volumes about their supporters. Most supporters of Bush, Cheney, and this war, try to pass themselves off as super patriots. But true patriots don’t vest their loyalty in individuals; true patriots understand that America is not simply a plot of land--America is the moral standard upon which that plot of land stands.
Who were the true patriots in Germany during WWII, the people who supported Hitler, or the German citizens who put their lives at risk to oppose him? Accordingly, anyone who could support sending American troops to a senseless death based on their allegiance to two cowards who were willing to “cut and run” when their country needed them most, aren’t patriots at all--they’re ideologues. They’re motivated by either a hatred for the Iraqi people, or just pure ignorance. So again, because it bears repeating, a true patriot’s loyalty is not to individuals, but to the moral code and foundation upon which a nation stands. Thus, by definition, Bush supporters are patently unpatriotic. In less than six years they’ve done more damage to the image, well being, and the world’s good will towards the United States than any enemy of America in the history of this nation.
Bush is fond of saying that “the Islamic terrorists hate our freedom.” If that is indeed the case, then Bush must be a God send to them. They must love America under Bush a little more each day, because Bush is chipping away at the rights, freedom, and moral code of this country everyday that he’s in office--from illegally invading the right of privacy of American citizens, to rendering and torturing innocent people abroad. If Osama hates American freedom, he must be jubilant at what he sees in America today.
But the fact is, I don’t think our enemies hate America's freedom at all--that’s just Bush’s spin, in an attempt to rally our more gullible citizens. What the enemy, and the world, hates about America are American hypocrites and demagogues like Bush and Cheney, along with America's corporate terrorists.
History will record these demagogues and corporate terrorists as America's true enemies--domestic enemies. Domestic enemies that have used America’s xenophobic, racial, and religious fears to keep us looking abroad, while they rob us blind at home. They're us of both our revenue, and our moral standing as a nation.
In addition, they kill more Americans than any foreign enemy could dream of, by polluting our environment, selling us poisons and defective merchandise, evading safe working conditions, and profiteering on the blood and guts of our youth. They profit by sending our youth to fight and die in wars in distant lands. then they reap further profits by rapping the resources of the countries our young people are forced to invade.
In his final act of office, Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned America of these domestic enemies. In his farewell address to the nation, he referred to them as The Military-Industrial Complex, and he indicated that he knew them well. As Supreme Allied Commander during WWII, it was necessary for General Eisenhower to bring the American military and the nation’s corporate structure together in order to rev the nation up for war. But due to the tremendous amount of profit in war, after WWII, this evil alliance took on a life of it’s own, and now it’s become a revolving door.
High ranking generals and politicians go from their positions in government to lucrative jobs in the defense industry. They then use their influence to lobby their former colleagues and subordinates in the military to buy multi-billion dollar weapons systems from their new companies, while others become politicians and start wars around the world in which to use these weapons. Finally, at the bottom of the chain, our sons or daughters are sent to distant lands to die so they can use the weapons, overcharge the military for goods and services, and start the cycle all over again. Thus, death is big business--the biggest business in the world-- where the blood of our sons and daughters is used to oil this insidious death machine.
Bush and Cheney are directly tied to this machine. The Bush family is knee deep in both oil and the Carlyle Group. The Carlyle Group is an investment group with holdings that make it one of the largest defense contractors in the United States. And prior to becoming vice president, Cheney was the CEO of Halliburton, which was given a no-bid contract in Iraq, and is one of the war’s largest benefactors.
So no wonder Bush and Cheney want us “to stay the course”--they’re, literally, making a killing.
Eric L. Wattree, Sr.
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS:
SAVE THEM FROM GEORGE W. BUSH
Every time Bush and Cheney are at a lost to justify remaining in their illegal and immoral war in Iraq, they use our troops as human shields to defend their failed policy. Their position is as follows: Taking our troops out of harm’s way is doing the troops a disservice. That’s a non sequitur. If we follow that logic, we must also say that when Bush used every device at his daddy’s command, and Cheney managed to obtain five (5) deferments to avoid going to Vietnam, they were engaged in a selfless and honorable act of self-sacrifice on behalf of the country. But of course, we know that’s a lie.
The fact is, they were involved in a desperate attempt to save their own cowardly necks. Unwittingly however, they did provide a service to the country--based on their current performance, we now know their incompetence as officers in Vietnam would have sent the death toll even higher. Though, the troops in ‘Nam were a different breed. They didn’t suffer prima donnas lightly, so the likes of a Bush or Cheney in 'Nam might very well come up “missing in action"--a summary field maneuver reserved for those who placed their own agenda above the welfare of the troops.
As a Vietnam era Marine, it makes me want to regurgitate every time I hear either Bush or Cheney imply that the people against the war in Iraq are un-American, or “Don’t have the stomach to stay the course.” When they had the opportunity to serve this nation, they didn’t even have the intestinal fortitude to begin the course. History will provide no hypocrite more prolific than these two unrepentant cowards with the audacity to try to reconstitute themselves as latter-day heroes. Yet, as they stand drenched in the blood of others, they have the unmitigated gall to lecture America on the virtues of embracing responsibility. So even as I write, I hear groans reverberating from Arlington Cemetery as proud heroes of the past rollover in their graves.
Their supporters seek to give them a pass by rationalizing that they were simply young, selfish, and foolish like many other young people during the Vietnam era. They say, but in their maturity they’ve seen the light. I have two problems with that rationale. First, other young people of that era aren’t profiting on the blood and guts of young Americans. And secondly, the most cursory reflection on their current commitment also falls short. While these two have lectured the American people long and hard on the importance of this war to our national security, they haven’t encouraged one member of their respective families to step forward to contribute one thing to “this mission that’s so vital to America’s security.” They’ve been content to allow their families to voice their heartbreak and respect for the dying little people while comfortably ensconced in the safe cocoon of exclusive tennis clubs and golf courses.
Where is their dedication? Where is their commitment? One knows it’s time to go to war when one is prepared to see one's own love one become its first casualty. So where is Bush or Cheney's sacrifice to the welfare of this nation? What do they have to loose by "staying the course?"
I have a challenge for America: Tell me one sacrifice that either Bush, Cheney or their respective families--right down to the third cousins--made towards the successful prosecution of this war. Now, and here’s an easy one, list all the ways they’ve benefited, both politically and financially, by sending young Americans to die in Iraq. If the answers you come up with don’t help you to see the truth about these two individuals, you must to be reading this article in Braille.
The gross hypocrisy of this situation also speaks volumes about their supporters. Most supporters of Bush, Cheney, and this war, try to pass themselves off as super patriots. But true patriots don’t vest their loyalty in individuals; true patriots understand that America is not simply a plot of land--America is the moral standard upon which that plot of land stands.
Who were the true patriots in Germany during WWII, the people who supported Hitler, or the German citizens who put their lives at risk to oppose him? Accordingly, anyone who could support sending American troops to a senseless death based on their allegiance to two cowards who were willing to “cut and run” when their country needed them most, aren’t patriots at all--they’re ideologues. They’re motivated by either a hatred for the Iraqi people, or just pure ignorance. So again, because it bears repeating, a true patriot’s loyalty is not to individuals, but to the moral code and foundation upon which a nation stands. Thus, by definition, Bush supporters are patently unpatriotic. In less than six years they’ve done more damage to the image, well being, and the world’s good will towards the United States than any enemy of America in the history of this nation.
Bush is fond of saying that “the Islamic terrorists hate our freedom.” If that is indeed the case, then Bush must be a God send to them. They must love America under Bush a little more each day, because Bush is chipping away at the rights, freedom, and moral code of this country everyday that he’s in office--from illegally invading the right of privacy of American citizens, to rendering and torturing innocent people abroad. If Osama hates American freedom, he must be jubilant at what he sees in America today.
But the fact is, I don’t think our enemies hate America's freedom at all--that’s just Bush’s spin, in an attempt to rally our more gullible citizens. What the enemy, and the world, hates about America are American hypocrites and demagogues like Bush and Cheney, along with America's corporate terrorists.
History will record these demagogues and corporate terrorists as America's true enemies--domestic enemies. Domestic enemies that have used America’s xenophobic, racial, and religious fears to keep us looking abroad, while they rob us blind at home. They're us of both our revenue, and our moral standing as a nation.
In addition, they kill more Americans than any foreign enemy could dream of, by polluting our environment, selling us poisons and defective merchandise, evading safe working conditions, and profiteering on the blood and guts of our youth. They profit by sending our youth to fight and die in wars in distant lands. then they reap further profits by rapping the resources of the countries our young people are forced to invade.
In his final act of office, Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned America of these domestic enemies. In his farewell address to the nation, he referred to them as The Military-Industrial Complex, and he indicated that he knew them well. As Supreme Allied Commander during WWII, it was necessary for General Eisenhower to bring the American military and the nation’s corporate structure together in order to rev the nation up for war. But due to the tremendous amount of profit in war, after WWII, this evil alliance took on a life of it’s own, and now it’s become a revolving door.
High ranking generals and politicians go from their positions in government to lucrative jobs in the defense industry. They then use their influence to lobby their former colleagues and subordinates in the military to buy multi-billion dollar weapons systems from their new companies, while others become politicians and start wars around the world in which to use these weapons. Finally, at the bottom of the chain, our sons or daughters are sent to distant lands to die so they can use the weapons, overcharge the military for goods and services, and start the cycle all over again. Thus, death is big business--the biggest business in the world-- where the blood of our sons and daughters is used to oil this insidious death machine.
Bush and Cheney are directly tied to this machine. The Bush family is knee deep in both oil and the Carlyle Group. The Carlyle Group is an investment group with holdings that make it one of the largest defense contractors in the United States. And prior to becoming vice president, Cheney was the CEO of Halliburton, which was given a no-bid contract in Iraq, and is one of the war’s largest benefactors.
So no wonder Bush and Cheney want us “to stay the course”--they’re, literally, making a killing.
Eric L. Wattree, Sr.
Good evening, everyone.
jefro,
Sorry I'm late getting back. I got caught up in family affairs and I was trying to catch up on five episodes of 24. I finally got back to reading that article.
Boy, it hit a lot of sore spots with me.
I remember all too well the Kerry campaign pulling out of Missouri just when we seemed to be making some headway. I was a real disappointment.
I can remember John Edwards stumping out in the rain in U. City late in October. He came into town without any advance notice and folks showed up in droves at the last minute. They had to move the venue outside even with the freezing rain. And Edwards stood on a chair and gave us all we wanted to hear.
We were on a roll and they just packed up the tents and left. It was that way all across the Midwest and Plains states. People were meeting Kerry and Edwards at train stations...the crowds just seemed to be come out of nowhere.
We were building momentum. That last weekend in Ohio and Pennsylvania people were coming out to the rallies in overflow crowds and it was like we almost believed that the Democratic party had found it's soul again.
Why didn't they go to the South, too? The people were waitng for them.
But they gave up on the very people that could have given them the victory. They sold us short.
At least Gov. Dean now understands. John Edwards understands. Maybe Wes Clark understands. Maybe Obama and Webb understand. Maybe even Joe Bidden.
We can't go back to the Clinton centralist formula. It only works with a charismatic candidate like Bill or with Ross Perot to help it work. We need to build our party around our ecomomic populist roots.
There's going to be a showdown over this sooner or later. I'm not sure where Obama stands, but I'm going to find out. When he came out for universal health care last week, it was a good sign.
He's not going to take baby steps. And neither or a lot of our other candidates. We have to start trusting in our insincts and not treat politics like it's some sort of a marketing campaign.
That's the way the Republicans treat the future of this country...as a business plan that will bankrupt our children. We have something better. We have a real agenda that will make America, not the mulitnational interests, strong again.
We need new faces, new dedication to our roots, and new vigor. No more playing the percentages and selling out the people...and entire regions of our country...who need this party more than ever.
I think maybe I've said too much. But somebody has to say it. And it has to be said often.
I noticed several other articles that others have provided links to that interest me. I'm going to sign off and read them now.
Good night.
Ahole bush has surely taken liberties with the title commander in chief.
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS:
SAVE THEM FROM GEORGE W. BUSH
Every time Bush and Cheney are at a lost to justify remaining in their illegal and immoral war in Iraq, they use our troops as human shields to defend their failed policy. Their position is as follows: Taking our troops out of harm’s way is doing the troops a disservice. That’s a non sequitur. If we follow that logic, we must also say that when Bush used every device at his daddy’s command, and Cheney managed to obtain five (5) deferments to avoid going to Vietnam, they were engaged in a selfless and honorable act of self-sacrifice on behalf of the country. But of course, we know that’s a lie.
The fact is, they were involved in a desperate attempt to save their own cowardly necks. Unwittingly however, they did provide a service to the country--based on their current performance, we now know their incompetence as officers in Vietnam would have sent the death toll even higher. Though, the troops in ‘Nam were a different breed. They didn’t suffer prima donnas lightly, so the likes of a Bush or Cheney in 'Nam might very well come up “missing in action"--a summary field maneuver reserved for those who placed their own agenda above the welfare of the troops.
As a Vietnam era Marine, it makes me want to regurgitate every time I hear either Bush or Cheney imply that the people against the war in Iraq are un-American, or “Don’t have the stomach to stay the course.” When they had the opportunity to serve this nation, they didn’t even have the intestinal fortitude to begin the course. History will provide no hypocrite more prolific than these two unrepentant cowards with the audacity to try to reconstitute themselves as latter-day heroes. Yet, as they stand drenched in the blood of others, they have the unmitigated gall to lecture America on the virtues of embracing responsibility. So even as I write, I hear groans reverberating from Arlington Cemetery as proud heroes of the past rollover in their graves.
Their supporters seek to give them a pass by rationalizing that they were simply young, selfish, and foolish like many other young people during the Vietnam era. They say, but in their maturity they’ve seen the light. I have two problems with that rationale. First, other young people of that era aren’t profiting on the blood and guts of young Americans. And secondly, the most cursory reflection on their current commitment also falls short. While these two have lectured the American people long and hard on the importance of this war to our national security, they haven’t encouraged one member of their respective families to step forward to contribute one thing to “this mission that’s so vital to America’s security.” They’ve been content to allow their families to voice their heartbreak and respect for the dying little people while comfortably ensconced in the safe cocoon of exclusive tennis clubs and golf courses.
Where is their dedication? Where is their commitment? One knows it’s time to go to war when one is prepared to see one's own love one become its first casualty. So where is Bush or Cheney's sacrifice to the welfare of this nation? What do they have to loose by "staying the course?"
I have a challenge for America: Tell me one sacrifice that either Bush, Cheney or their respective families--right down to the third cousins--made towards the successful prosecution of this war. Now, and here’s an easy one, list all the ways they’ve benefited, both politically and financially, by sending young Americans to die in Iraq. If the answers you come up with don’t help you to see the truth about these two individuals, you must to be reading this article in Braille.
The gross hypocrisy of this situation also speaks volumes about their supporters. Most supporters of Bush, Cheney, and this war, try to pass themselves off as super patriots. But true patriots don’t vest their loyalty in individuals; true patriots understand that America is not simply a plot of land--America is the moral standard upon which that plot of land stands.
Who were the true patriots in Germany during WWII, the people who supported Hitler, or the German citizens who put their lives at risk to oppose him? Accordingly, anyone who could support sending American troops to a senseless death based on their allegiance to two cowards who were willing to “cut and run” when their country needed them most, aren’t patriots at all--they’re ideologues. They’re motivated by either a hatred for the Iraqi people, or just pure ignorance. So again, because it bears repeating, a true patriot’s loyalty is not to individuals, but to the moral code and foundation upon which a nation stands. Thus, by definition, Bush supporters are patently unpatriotic. In less than six years they’ve done more damage to the image, well being, and the world’s good will towards the United States than any enemy of America in the history of this nation.
Bush is fond of saying that “the Islamic terrorists hate our freedom.” If that is indeed the case, then Bush must be a God send to them. They must love America under Bush a little more each day, because Bush is chipping away at the rights, freedom, and moral code of this country everyday that he’s in office--from illegally invading the right of privacy of American citizens, to rendering and torturing innocent people abroad. If Osama hates American freedom, he must be jubilant at what he sees in America today.
But the fact is, I don’t think our enemies hate America's freedom at all--that’s just Bush’s spin, in an attempt to rally our more gullible citizens. What the enemy, and the world, hates about America are American hypocrites and demagogues like Bush and Cheney, along with America's corporate terrorists.
History will record these demagogues and corporate terrorists as America's true enemies--domestic enemies. Domestic enemies that have used America’s xenophobic, racial, and religious fears to keep us looking abroad, while they rob us blind at home. They're us of both our revenue, and our moral standing as a nation.
In addition, they kill more Americans than any foreign enemy could dream of, by polluting our environment, selling us poisons and defective merchandise, evading safe working conditions, and profiteering on the blood and guts of our youth. They profit by sending our youth to fight and die in wars in distant lands. then they reap further profits by rapping the resources of the countries our young people are forced to invade.
In his final act of office, Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned America of these domestic enemies. In his farewell address to the nation, he referred to them as The Military-Industrial Complex, and he indicated that he knew them well. As Supreme Allied Commander during WWII, it was necessary for General Eisenhower to bring the American military and the nation’s corporate structure together in order to rev the nation up for war. But due to the tremendous amount of profit in war, after WWII, this evil alliance took on a life of it’s own, and now it’s become a revolving door.
High ranking generals and politicians go from their positions in government to lucrative jobs in the defense industry. They then use their influence to lobby their former colleagues and subordinates in the military to buy multi-billion dollar weapons systems from their new companies, while others become politicians and start wars around the world in which to use these weapons. Finally, at the bottom of the chain, our sons or daughters are sent to distant lands to die so they can use the weapons, overcharge the military for goods and services, and start the cycle all over again. Thus, death is big business--the biggest business in the world-- where the blood of our sons and daughters is used to oil this insidious death machine.
Bush and Cheney are directly tied to this machine. The Bush family is knee deep in both oil and the Carlyle Group. The Carlyle Group is an investment group with holdings that make it one of the largest defense contractors in the United States. And prior to becoming vice president, Cheney was the CEO of Halliburton, which was given a no-bid contract in Iraq, and is one of the war’s largest benefactors.
So no wonder Bush and Cheney want us “to stay the course”--they’re, literally, making a killing.
Eric L. Wattree, Sr.
One last thing...
"In most of the South, and most of the country for that matter," Edwards told me ruefully after the election, "you couldn't hardly tell we were running a candidate. It's tough to convince people you're right when you can't be bothered to talk to them."
I think he has the right stuff.
Trying to get as much support as possible for Clinton and Obama here in Texas! Visit http://closetcat.blogmaker.com and http://catigula.journalspace.com
Mortar shells hit a girls’ secondary school in a mostly Sunni area of western Baghdad, killing five students and wounding 20. Meanwhile, Americans from coast-to-coast were protesting the war and protesting Bush’s plan to put 21,500 more Americans in harms way.
It is clear that the citizens of the United States have spoken and the majority agrees that the Bush administration is on the wrong path. Many have said that a vote of “no confidence” will only embolden our enemy. Really? I think that a vote of “no confidence” may, in fact, show our enemy that George W. Bush does not speak for the majority of Americans. A vote of “no confidence” shows that the American people care about not only their soldiers, but the lives of the Iraqi people.
Now, if the enemy continues to attack us after the vote of “no confidence,” then I change my mind and all bets are off.
Adam Woodworth
www.therantings.com/blog
FOS,
I read and watched those links you gave us on Obama. I like the way he writes. Maybe I'm prejudiced because I'm a writer, too; but he does have a way with words and also something important to say. And he seems to have a compulsion to say it.
That is very telling. Whether you are called to be an artist, a scientist or a mechanic. Not to do what you are naturally good at would be a shame. He blushed in that Draft Obama commercial. He had nothing to be ashamed about.
If he seeks out others, who like himself want to make the world a little more decent, then he will go far. If he gives into the urge to go along with others who only want to win, he will betray himself and never reach his full potential.
It should be interesting to see how he allies himself with during the coming election.
that was meant to be "who and how" he allies himself with during the coming election.
If the MeK is involved, as the articles suggest, and in some cases confirmed, there is an obvious need to be extremely cautious regarding the source and content.
Posted by Kathleen on January 28, 2007 at 11:50 PM
Kathleen,
You get the feeling that the information would be just as unreliable as Chalabi's in Iraq and that of the Cuban groups that talked John Kennedy into the Bay of Pigs.
You have to wonder about the credibility of those that exile themselves from their countrymen who stay behind and tough it out. And especially wonder about those that ask foreign powers to invade their own countries.
I don't think I could ever leave the United States no matter how bad things got. I suppose if my children were threatened I'd feel tempted. But to ask China or Russia to come to my assistance against my own countrymen?
There is something wrong in the natures of those world leaders that offer their assistance to these sorts of expatriots. There are no easy answers when it comes to internal struggles among factions within unstable nations.
You can't do the hard part for them. They have to work it out for themselves. It's better to help them by offering a neutral ground for talking through their difference to a settlement of hostilities. To give them guns to keep the conflict going is irresponsible and doesn't solve a thing.
You have to wonder if the neocons really want peace in the Middle East at all. Besides the war profiteering and dominance of oil reserves, what else do they get out of all this turmoil? Is it an ego thing?
We do it because we can?
The world has been turned into a battleground way too many times because of the insuperiority complexes of certain individuals who rose far higher in the food chain than they could handle.
Posted by Cowboy on January 29, 2007 at 12:25 AM
I hope you don't believe half the stuff you post here and are only doing what your boss asks you to do.
Posted by SandyH on January 29, 2007 at 01:25 AM
I think he was blushing because he was just a little shy when it comes down to taking complements. That's how some peole Blush. I do the same ting when I get complements.I get all giddy like a child. He was just blushing is all. He was so baby cute too.
;p
OMG,
This keyboard sucks.
I'm sorry . Let me try that again,
I think he was blushing because he just get's a little shy when it comes down to taking complements. That's how some people blush. I do the same thing when I get complements. I get all giddy like a child. He was just blushing is all. He was so baby cute too.
There we go.
:)
Posted by Wattree on January 29, 2007 at 12:06 AM
Exsellent post....
Should read excellent....not exsellent...Mark Twain once said that any man who could not spell the same word three different ways was not educated....I must be very well educated...I can spell some words 5 different ways....
Good morning Dem's...burrrrr rabit!!!....it's cold down here in s.e. Texas, about 32 degrees, too cold for this old man...just went out and deiced two cars......burrrr rabit!!! I won't be moving to Montana any time soon....John Boy.....
Morning goodfoe,
Yes it's cold here in central New Mexico too. It's 27 degrees.
That post by Wattree was excellent.