January 27, 2008
BILLIONAIRE investor George Soros said the world was facing the worst financial crisis since World War Two and the US was threatened with recession, according to an interview with the Austrian daily Standard.
“The situation is much more serious than any other financial crisis since the end of World War Two,” Mr Soros was quoted as saying.
He said over the past few years politics had been guided by some basic misunderstandings stemming from something which he called “market fundamentalism” – the belief financial markets tended to act as a balance.
“This is the wrong idea,” he said. “We really do have a serious financial crisis now.”
Asked whether he thought the US was headed for a recession, he said: “Yes, this is a threat in the United States”.
He added he was surprised how little understanding there had been on how recession was also a threat to Europe.
European shares fell nearly 6 per cent overnight, their biggest one-day slide since the Septemer 11 attacks of 2001, as fears of a US recession and more debt write downs.
January 23, 2008
He was portrayed as an environmental David who stood up to the corporate Goliath, and became a figurehead of the battle against the introduction of genetically modified crops everywhere. When Canadian farmer Percy Schmeiser was sued by Monsanto for growing the firm’s GM crops, which he claimed blew on to his land, the company’s eventual victory in the Canadian supreme court was overshadowed by accusations of aggressive tactics and corporate bullying.
Now, Schmeiser, of Bruno, Saskatchewan, is back to launch another slingshot at Monsanto, and this time he is suing the billion dollar business for £300 in his local small claims court. At stake, he says, is millions of pounds of compensation for those who have seen their land contaminated with GM material, and the rights of organic farmers and others to produce GM-free crops. Monsanto calls the case “specific and local”.
Schmeiser and his wife, Louise, are suing for the C$600 (£300) it cost to hire contractors to dig up several of Monsanto’s GM oilseed rape plants he found growing in a field he was preparing for a mustard crop in 2005. Schmeiser argues the stray plants are pollution, and the polluter should pay. The company refused unless he agreed not to talk about it.
Schmeiser said: “No corporation should have the right to introduce GM seeds or plants into the environment and not be responsible for it. It doesn’t matter if it was $600, or $600,000. It has now become a very important case, even though it is small, because if we win then it could cost Monsanto millions and millions of dollars across the world.”
He says the rogue GM seeds were probably spilled from a road beside the field. GM crops such as herbicide-resistant oilseed rape are grown in huge quantities across the US and Canada.
“It was almost unbelievable that Monsanto didn’t pay, because it came out and admitted it was their GMO [genetically modified organism] on our property,” he said. “But they said they would refuse to pay unless we signed a non-disclosure statement. No way would we ever give that away to a corporation.”
The case was due to be heard in Saskatchewan tomorrow, but Monsanto said it will be delayed at Schmeiser’s request. Schmeiser said he had not requested a delay.
He said: “If Monsanto had come and removed the plants, it would have been over. We didn’t want another case, but we have to stand up to them again. As long as we have the strength to continue, we will fight for the rights of farmers.”
A spokesperson for Monsanto said: “Mr Schmeiser approached Monsanto about this in 2005. Monsanto has a general policy in Canada to assist in such matters if and when they arise with growers. However, Mr Schmeiser refused our offer to assist and decided to pursue this small claim through the courts.”
January 9, 2008
Pakistani views of the United States are quite negative. About two-thirds (64%) do not trust the United States “to act responsibly in the world.” Very large majorities believe the US military presence in Afghanistan and in Asia is a critical threat to Pakistan’s interests (68 percent and 72 percent respectively). Only 27 percent feel that the cooperation between Pakistan and the United States on security and military matters has benefited Pakistan.
There is a growing Pakistani perception that the United States is hostile to their desire for a more Islamic society. Indeed, 86 percent now say it is definitely (70%) or probably (16%) a US goal to “weaken and divide the Islamic world.” This view also appears to be growing: it is up 13 points from February.
This view is highly correlated with negative views of the United States. Among those who strongly believe the US is seeking to undermine Islam, 57 percent say they do not trust the United States “at all.” Among those who do not think this is a US goal, only 13 percent say they do not trust the United States at all.
January 6, 2008
If Benazir Bhutto was correct then Bin Laden is dead. If Bin Laden is dead, he can’t make tapes. If Bin Laden is dead, everything the US government has said about bin Laden is either wrong, mistaken, or, most probably, a bald-faced lie. If Bin Laden is dead, then everything Bush has been telling you about the war on terrorism over several years is either wrong or a lie or both. In any case, there was never any hard evidence linking Bin Laden to the events of 911! If Binny can’t make tapes, Bush cannot exploit them to wage a “war” about which he has never told the truth.
A few hours after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, the Bush administration concluded without supporting evidence, that “Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda organisation were prime suspects”. CIA Director George Tenet stated that bin Laden has the capacity to plan “multiple attacks with little or no warning.” Secretary of State Colin Powell called the attacks “an act of war” and President Bush confirmed in an evening televised address to the Nation that he would “make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them”. Former CIA Director James Woolsey pointed his finger at “state sponsorship,” implying the complicity of one or more foreign governments. In the words of former National Security Adviser, Lawrence Eagleburger, “I think we will show when we get attacked like this, we are terrible in our strength and in our retribution.”Meanwhile, parroting official statements, the Western media mantra has approved the launching of “punitive actions” directed against civilian targets in the Middle East. In the words of William Saffire writing in the New York Times: “When we reasonably determine our attackers’ bases and camps, we must pulverize them — minimizing but accepting the risk of collateral damage” — and act overtly or covertly to destabilize terror’s national hosts”.– Michel Chossudovsky, Professor of Economics, University of Ottawa, Who Is Osama Bin Laden?
The news that Bin Laden is dead is an inconvenient truth. The Bush administration had much more than money invested in Bin Laden. Bushco had built around Osama an “evil empire” worthy of a James Bond film –The World is Not Enough, the story of oil, intrigue and pipelines.
Sir Robert King, a British oil tycoon and close friend of M, is killed by a bomb attack inside MI6 Headquarters. The assassin was working under orders from Renard, an international terrorist who survived an assassination attempt by 009 and is continually gaining strength as the bullet eliminates his senses of pain and touch before inevitably killing him. James Bond uses an unfinished Q Boat created by his ally Q and chases the killer until she commits suicide.M assigns to protect King’s daughter, Elektra; Renard previously abducted and held Elektra for ransom, and it is believed that he has once again targeted her. Elektra assumes control of her father’s business at a pivotal time, overseeing construction of an oil pipeline that would travel through the Caucasus, from the Caspian Sea to Turkey.–The World Is Not Enough, 1999, Synopsis by Wikipedia
The non-fiction version was already afoot even as the motion picture moguls were writing the script for The World is Not Enough.
Despite complex geopolitics and considerable risks, major oil companies have been acquiring development rights and preparing for production since the early 1990s. Offshore drilling operations are underway in Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, and are set to commence elsewhere.
The majors have also invested significantly in the future construction of oil and gas pipelines to distant ports and refineries. By 2010, they expect to invest at least $50 billion in production and transportation.The first big move was a joint venture between Chevron and Kazakhstan, signed in 1993 to develop the huge Tenzig oil field on the Caspian coast. Three years later, ExxonMobil purchased a 25 percent share. Another consortium focused on Azerbaijan’s offshore fields, with estimated reserves of 32 billion barrels of oil and 35 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, making it the third largest potential regional source.In 1994, BP Amoco, Lukoil, Unocal, Penzoil, Statoil, and others joined with Azerbaijan’s state oil company to form the Azerbaijan International Operating Company. Bush family adviser James A. Baker III, who spearheaded George W. Bush’s victory in the Florida election dispute, headed the law firm representing this consortium and sat on the U.S.-Azerbaijan Chamber of Commerce advisory council, as did Vice Pres. Dick Cheney before him. But before their investments could produce profits, roadblocks would have to be removed. The biggest was how to get the fuel to markets.Prior to 9/11, the U.S. government’s preferred future route, known as the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) project, went from Azerbaijan through Georgia and then south to the Turkish coast. The goal was to reduce reliance on Russia and bring the southern Caucasus into the U.S. fold. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice is a former director of Chevron, a lynchpin of the BTC consortium with extensive operations in Azerbaijan. Until 2000, Cheney was chief executive at Halliburton Co., named a finalist in 2001 to bid on engineering work in the Turkish sector.–Toward Freedom, Oily footprints on the path to 9/11
Early on, it was easy to conclude that the real beneficiaries of a US adventure in Afghanistan would be the big oil consortium that had planned the pipeline across Afghanistan. In 1995, UNOCAL had apparently concluded a deal with Turkmenistan. Members of the Taliban met in the Houston suburb of Sugarland.
A senior delegation from the Taleban movement in Afghanistan is in the United States for talks with an international energy company that wants to construct a gas pipeline from Turkmenistan across Afghanistan to Pakistan.A spokesman for the company, Unocal, said the Taleban were expected to spend several days at the company’s headquarters in Sugarland, Texas.Unocal says it has agreements both with Turkmenistan to sell its gas and with Pakistan to buy it.[ image: The Afghan economy has been devasted by 20 years of civil war] The Afghan economy has been devasted by 20 years of civil warBut, despite the civil war in Afghanistan, Unocal has been in competition with an Argentinian firm, Bridas, to actually construct the pipeline.Last month, the Argentinian firm, Bridas, announced that it was close to signing a two-billion dollar deal to build the pipeline, which would carry gas 1,300 kilometres from Turkmenistan to Pakistan, across Afghanistan.In May, Taleban-controlled radio in Kabul said a visiting delegation from an Argentinian company had announced that pipeline construction would start “soon”.–BBC, Thursday, December 4, 1997 Published at 19:27 GMT
All would not go smoothly; Pakistan and Ahmed Shah Massoud’s government in Afghanistan, meanwhile, had already signed a pipeline deal with an Argentinean company.
BBC – American government told other governments about Afghan invasion IN JULY 2001.The wider objective was to oust the Taleban
By the BBC’s George Arney
A former Pakistani diplomat has told the BBC that the US was planning military action against Osama Bin Laden and the Taleban even before last week’s attacks. Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October.Mr Naik said US officials told him of the plan at a UN-sponsored international contact group on Afghanistan which took place in Berlin. Mr Naik told the BBC that at the meeting the US representatives told him that unless Bin Laden was handed over swiftly America would take military action to kill or capture both Bin Laden and the Taleban leader, Mullah Omar.The wider objective, according to Mr Naik, would be to topple the Taleban regime and install a transitional government of moderate Afghans in its place – possibly under the leadership of the former Afghan King Zahir Shah. Mr Naik was told that Washington would launch its operation from bases in Tajikistan, where American advisers were already in place.He was told that Uzbekistan would also participate in the operation and that 17,000 Russian troops were on standby. Mr Naik was told that if the military action went ahead it would take place before the snows started falling in Afghanistan, by the middle of October at the latest.He said that he was in no doubt that after the World Trade Center bombings this pre-existing US plan had been built upon and would be implemented within two or three weeks. And he said it was doubtful that Washington would drop its plan even if Bin Laden were to be surrendered immediately by the Taleban.–US ‘planned attack on Taleban’, BBC
By July, 2001, the US State Department was reported to have been threatening the Taliban with carpet bombs.
U.S. Policy Towards Taliban Influenced by Oil By Julio Godoy, Inter Press ServicePARIS, Nov 15 (IPS) – Under the influence of U.S. oil companies, the government of George W. Bush initially blocked U.S. secret service investigations on terrorism, while it bargained with the Taliban the delivery of Osama bin Laden in exchange for political recognition and economic aid, two French intelligence analysts claim.In the book ”Bin Laden, la verité interdite” (”Bin Laden, the forbidden truth”), that appeared in Paris on Wednesday, the authors, Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie, reveal that the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s deputy director John O’Neill resigned in July in protest over the obstruction.Brisard claim O’Neill told them that ”the main obstacles to investigate Islamic terrorism were U.S. oil corporate interests and the role played by Saudi Arabia in it”. [emphasis mine, EC] The two claim the U.S. government’s main objective in Afghanistan was to consolidate the position of the Taliban regime to obtain access to the oil and gas reserves in Central Asia.They affirm that until August, the U.S. government saw the Taliban regime ”as a source of stability in Central Asia that would enable the construction of an oil pipeline across Central Asia”, from the rich oilfields in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Kazakhstan, through Afghanistan and Pakistan, to the Indian Ocean.Until now, says the book, ”the oil and gas reserves of Central Asia have been controlled by Russia. The Bush government wanted to change all that”.But, confronted with Taliban’s refusal to accept U.S. conditions, ”this rationale of energy security changed into a military one”, the authors claim.”At one moment during the negotiations, the U.S. representatives told the Taliban, ‘either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs’,” Brisard said in an interview in Paris.According to the book, the government of Bush began to negotiate with the Taliban immediately after coming into power in February. U.S. and Taliban diplomatic representatives met several times in Washington, Berlin and Islamabad.To polish their image in the United States, the Taliban even employed a U.S. expert on public relations, Laila Helms. The authors claim that Helms is also an expert in the works of U.S. secret services, for her uncle, Richard Helms, is a former director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).–US Policy Towards Taliban Influenced by Oil
The negotiations with the Taliban broke down. In that summer of 2001, the American people were distracted by the American media noise machine. See: All Condit All The Time“. The US Government was informing other governments that the US would be at war in Afghanistan no later than October. The US timetable for war was set before 911 would conveniently provide the pretext. Pure luck? I don’t think so.
Thoughtful folk were demonized for daring to raise the issue: how fortuitous, how convenient for Bush that Bin Laden would organize one of the most outrageous, the most unbelievable conspiracies in world history! Bin Laden would recruit and arrange to train a rag tag bunch of “terrorists”. They would all but flunk lessons in how to fly puddle jumpers but would hone their airliner skills in a coin-operated simulator.
Nevermind the question of how they got on board airliners without showing up on flight manifests! Let’s give the liar in the White House the benefit of the doubt. Nevermind that wreckage from four planes completely disappeared –the first and only time in history that such an improbable and incredible thing had ever happened outside David Copperfield’s magic show. Nevermind that the space shuttle, by contrast, entered the stratosphere at speeds up to 10,000 miles per hour yet failed to pop through a wormhole into another dimension. Unlike Flight 77 which left not a trace, the Space Shuttle Columbia left wreckage and identifiable human body parts strewn over three states. The only time in history that four planes completely vanished was on 911. How convenient for Bush! How convenient for Bush that just when he is planning to invade and/or carpet bomb another country, he is given a pretext on a plate! How convenient for Bush that a “terrorist” attack occurs that could be pinned on Bin Laden!
How inconvenient it is for Bush now that Bin Laden has been dead for several years! How inconvenient for Bush that he cannot credibly roll out another fake tape with which to scare the beejeebers out of gullible Americans!
“Gaeity” is a term denoting joyful exuberance or merriment, but in the hands of today’s Republican party, I would not be surprised to find it reinterpreted to a bastion of misleading and negative connotations almost as confusing as the definition and use of the word gay. The “Party of Moral clarity” has demonized the use of any word, term or action that could even hint at homosexuality in order to key into the knee-jerk prejudice of millions of “Christian” voters everywhere. (Note that I put quotes around “Christian” — I can’t duly insult those who actually practice the teachings attributed to Christ, when I’m only targeting those who simply claim to.)
Whenever I hear GOP leaders or pundits screech about a “homosexual agenda” and accuse someone of being gay as though it is a crime against humanity (unlike torture, or melting the flesh off children), I wonder why nobody asks them to clarify.
(Cunningham pic source: madcowprod dot com)
Vitter pic source: wis.dm)
Perhaps it is the overall example of moral clarity and focus — his idea of it, at least — that Tom “The Bug Man” Delay (see also) set for his Republican brethren that first initially got them all confused with the meaning of certain terms. Who knows?
(Hat-tip The Dood Abides)
Republicans are playing the “moral values” card more and more often, desperately attempting to reinforce the misplaced meme that — bolstered by their strong “faith” — they are somehow not only above reproach but also in a position to be forgiven for any minor inequities while denouncing the slightest failing of others. Indeed, the capacity of the Right-Wing Noise Machine1 to gather and swarm like a colony of killer bees attempting to decimate their enemy is almost legendary.
It also appears to be a defense mechanism deeply rooted in fear, self-loathing and some weird form of psychological denial and projection whereby they find the illness within themselves that they most detest and project it upon their enemies, making it — and the enemy — a target of vitriolic hate to be destroyed, a scapegoat2 upon which they heap all their poison and failing and then drive off a cliff in order to feel justified, cleansed and reaffirmed in their self-appointed role of society’s sole benefactors.
It is all a delusion, of course.
The Republican Party of the past two decades has distinguished itself as the Party of Penultimate Corruption, working steadily toward subverting the law and preventing due process as well as oversight in their quest for dominant power. The increased spread of “conservatism” has marked the insidious growth of deceptive practices and manipulation in order to build, reinforce and spread support of their methods, and the sickness that this signifies is spread: the “group mind” that Jung once theorized becomes the “mindless mob” of Republican punditry and zealous disciples, moving en masse in knee-jerk reactionary style to the slightest twitch or tweak of the exposed, raw nerves of once stable moral fibre running the breadth the land.
In short, today’s Conservatives (and hence most of todays Conservative Republicans) are a disease upon the land. It may sound harsh, but even the US Government knows what ill now infests the nation: the government even produced a report3 concluding that “conservatism can be explained psychologically as a set of neuroses rooted in “fear and aggression, dogmatism and the intolerance of ambiguity.”
As if that was not enough to get Republican blood boiling, the report’s four authors linked Hitler, Mussolini, Ronald Reagan and the rightwing talkshow host, Rush Limbaugh, arguing they all suffered from the same affliction.All of them “preached a return to an idealised past and condoned inequality”.
Ouch. Even worse, the authors — realizing the predictable swarm that their report would likely produce — issued a disclaimer that their study
“does not mean that conservatism is pathological or that conservative beliefs are necessarily false”.
Heh. Riiiiiiight… So, that would mean that the poor, mixed-up souls listed above are simply a deviation from the norm of upstanding Republican behavior, right?
Er…no. [Note: Many of the references following come from the same source.]
- Republican Congressman Dan Crane had sex with a female minor working as a congressional page.
- Republican Congressman Donald “Buz” Lukens was found guilty of having sex with a female minor and sentenced to one month in jail.
- Republican Congressman and anti-gay activist Robert Bauman was charged with having sex with a 16-year-old boy he picked up at a gay bar.
- Republican legislator Peter Dibble pleaded no contest to having an inappropriate relationship with a 13-year-old girl.
- Republican legislator Keith Westmoreland was arrested on seven felony counts of lewd and lascivious exhibition to girls under the age of 16 (i.e. exposing himself to children).
Perhaps there’s a reason: could it be the help?
Republicans may be unfairly disadvantaged in the realm of hypocritical sexual misconduct. It could be that they just can’t find folks who actually embrace those idealized Republican Family Values they prize so much.
- Republican politician and former GOP Committeeman Andrew Buhr was charged with two counts of first degree sodomy with a 13-year old boy.
- Republican campaign chairman Randal David Ankeney pleaded guilty to attempted sexual assault on a child and was arrested again five years later on the same charge.
- Republican Committee Chairman Jeffrey Patti was arrested for distributing a video clip of a 5-year-old girl being raped.
- Republican Party Chairman Donald Fleischman was charged with two counts of child enticement, two counts of contributing to the delinquency of a child and a single charge of exposing himself to a child.
- Republican Party leader Paul Ingram pleaded guilty to six counts of raping his daughters and served 14 years in federal prison.
If they can’t depend on reliable help throughout the foundation of their party, what hope have they got of preventing corruption from reaching (or leaking out of) the upper echelons of their party?
Perhaps that explains their party’s obsession with fundamentalism and the reason behind the GOP getting into bed with the radical right. (Oooops…was that a pun, or just the sad truth…?)
What kind of Christians are these guys? The “Party of Christian Values” is, of course, formed from the bedrock of radical fundamental Christianity. What could possibly taint such a solid, upstanding image? Well, perhaps a few bad apples that had rotted through to the core:
- Republican benefactor of conservative Christian groups, Richard A. Dasen Sr., was found guilty of raping a 15-year old girl. Dasen, 62, who is married with grown children and several grandchildren, has allegedly told police that over the past decade he paid more than $1 million to have sex with a large number of young women.
- Republican preacher Stephen White, who demanded a return to traditional values, was sentenced prison after offering $20 to a 14-year-old boy for permission to perform oral sex on him.
- Republican pastor Mike Hintz, whom George W. Bush commended during the 2004 presidential campaign, surrendered to police after admitting to a sexual affair with a female juvenile.
The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose. – William Shakespeare
With such upstanding examples to lead the way, no wonder these fine leaders see no reason to justify things such as denying the mandatory vaccination of young women against a sexually transmitted virus, or pushing to overturn the right for a woman to have an abortion — particularly a young, underage woman? After all, if we would simply adhere to a successful program of teaching abstinence, wouldn’t all our young men and women be safe, and therefore not need any contraceptives, abortions, sex education or fear any sort of STD?
…well…not so much. It appears that Republican hypocrisy sets a somewhat backward example for our younger generations:
Surely, these must be isolated incidents and not a sign of pervasive perversion, right?
Well…again, not so much.
There are some older historical references that allege that senior Republican stateman and former President George H.W. Bush’s Whitehouse had some sordid affairs that ~almost~ came to light:
Republican lobbyist Craig J. Spence organized child sex parties at the White House during the 1980s.
These, of course, are no longer shocking particularly after the Gannon affair(s?).
Much to our collective shame, we also hold the unabashedly disgusting distinction that in recent years our military and defense intelligence networks have allegedly engaged in the most heinous of tortures, human rights abuse and outright crimes against nature and humanity:
Republican Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld authorized the rape of children in Iraqi prisons in order to humiliate their parents into providing information about the anti-American insurgency. See excerpt of one prisoner’s report here and his full report here.
This stain upon the soul of nation emerged during the reign of “Bush the Younger” — George W. Bush, and his cabal of criminal enablers. Could it be that our Republican friends, in their drive to be loyal to God and Country (but Party above all), have overlooked the basic “quirks” that denote such twisted deviants so clearly for the rest of us? Combined with the efforts to flush the faithful to the polls and suppress “the opposition” by hook or by crook, these well-meaning loyal party members may simply require another reminder about the type of people they are actually pushing to the forefront to represent themselves. Candidates for President and Exemplars of Model Conservative Republican Family Values
McCain was still married and living with his wife in 1979 while, according to The New York Times’ Nicholas Kristof, “aggressively courting a 25-year-old woman who was as beautiful as she was rich.”
Giuliani informed his second wife, Donna Hanover, of his intention to seek a separation in a 2000 press conference.[…snip…]
In the acrid divorce proceedings that followed, Hanover accused Giuliani of serial adultery, alleging that Nathan was just the latest in a string of mistresses, following an affair the mayor had had with his former communications director.
And the serial hopeful, serial adulterer, serial hypocrite Newt Gingrich:
But the most notorious of them all is undoubtedly Gingrich, who ran for Congress in 1978 on the slogan, “Let Our Family Represent Your Family.” (He was reportedly cheating on his first wife at the time).
That would be an example of blatant hypocrisy, which has come to symbolize the true nature of today’s conservative Republicans — and Republicans in general, for that matter. To continue from the piece,
In 1995, an alleged mistress from that period, Anne Manning, told Vanity Fair’s Gail Sheehy: “We had oral sex. He prefers that modus operandi because then he can say, ‘I never slept with her.'”
This, too, is an example of Republican strategizing: pre-planning an excuse, a workaround or a loophole in order to ensure a degree of plausible deniability. It’s the Republican way of having to avoid the prevarications required to figure out what the definition of “is” is. A few more facts from the same paragraph:
Gingrich obtained his first divorce in 1981, after forcing his wife, who had helped put him through graduate school, to haggle over the terms while in the hospital, as she recovered from uterine cancer surgery. In 1999, he was disgraced again, having been caught in an affair with a 33-year-old congressional aide while spearheading the impeachment proceedings against President Clinton.
And there we have “family values” and hypocrisy4 all neatly bundled up in one disgusting package — the same package responsible for delivering a Contract on America that resulted in setting the stage of faux credibility and morality while enabling the start of one of the most massive subversions of truth, justice and integrity ever undertaken and premeditated by any political party in American history.
It is, in my estimation, one of the very keystones to the overall foundation of corruption that led to ultimately to the disgraceful sham that is now the George W. Bush and Republican Party legacy: the most inept, criminal and subversive incarnation of the United States government ever to exist, and it is spearheading America’s entry into the twenty-first century. It is a major black mark in the history of our nation, and sure to taint, stain, smudge and smear the efforts of all who strive to overcome it in the next few years.
For you suffer fools gladly, seeing yourself as wise. – II Corinthians 11:19
There is no option, at this point, for any Republican follower to continue to support the words and deeds of the currently entrenched political elite: the ideology of “conservatism” has not only proven to be a dismal failure, it has also negatively impacted the nation and the world for at least the next fifty years. Only through the embrace of a progressive, forward-thinking agenda can we hope to undo the damage of the silver-tongued devils who road the coattails of propriety into power and then swiftboated sanity en masse.
For any true Republican, the only way to undo the legacy of evil that has culminated in the Bush regime is to wholly reject the dangerously subversive and deluding hypocrisy of the far right, and move leftward toward a true center with progressive Democrats and the rest of America. ________________________________________________
1. “Reich”-wing is more like it, if you ask me.
2. The link is to an earlier piece of mine on dKos called “The Pet Goat” that delves into the traditional symbolism of the scapegoat and the GOP’s practice, particularly in George W. Bushworld, of always having one in order to deny accountability. The piece appeared several places, and can also be found on ePluribus Media, Booman Tribune, My Left Wing, ProgressiveHistorians, Political Cortex and Never in Our Names. An important companion piece is Juxtaposition: Edgar Lee Masters and Lessons of Life from Death on the old ePluribus Media scoop site and the short informative blurb on DailyKos called Failure, Scapegoats and the Juxtaposition of Life from Death.
3. Source: The Guardian Unlimited, Study of Bush’s psyche touches a nerve, Julian Borger in Washington, 13 August 2003.
4. More on Gingrich’s hypocrisy during the Clinton affair can be found here: Gingrich Had Affair During Clinton Probe, by Ben Evans, The Associated Press, 8 March 2007 via The Washington Post online.
January 1, 2008
Adam Curtis’ documentary series about junk bonds, gangster capitalism and the wholesale sell-off of British industry in the 1980s.
Episode 1 “Who pays wins”
Episode 2 – Entrepreneur Spelt S.P.I.V.
Episode 3 – Destroy the Technostructure
Episode 4 – The Twilight of the Dogs