Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- A Culture That Condones The Killing Of Children And Teaches Children To Kill
- Slaughter in Connecticut: 20 Children, 6 Adults Dead in Kindergarten Massacre
- How the Mighty (Mississippi) Has Fallen: Historic Drought Plagues US
- Robots and Robber Barons
- The PSY Scandal: Singing about Killing People v. Constantly Doing It
- A Culture That Condones The Killing Of Children And Teaches Children To Kill
- 'I'd Rather Fight Like Hell': Naomi Klein's Fierce New Resolve to Fight for Climate Justice
- Save the Children: Tears and Tragedy in Connecticut
- Study: World's Mighty Giants Dying off at Alarming Rate
- Thinking the Unthinkable: On Mental Health, My Son, and Gun Violence
Popular content
Today's Top News
I Accuse You, Mr. Bush...
"I didn't vote for him," an American once said, "But he's my president, and I hope he does a good job."That-on this eve of the 4th of July-is the essence of this democracy, in 17 words. And that is what President Bush threw away yesterday in commuting the sentence of Lewis "Scooter" Libby.
The man who said those 17 words-improbably enough-was the actor John Wayne. And Wayne, an ultra-conservative, said them, when he learned of the hair's-breadth election of John F. Kennedy instead of his personal favorite, Richard Nixon in 1960.
"I didn't vote for him but he's my president, and I hope he does a good job."
The sentiment was doubtlessly expressed earlier, but there is something especially appropriate about hearing it, now, in Wayne's voice: The crisp matter-of-fact acknowledgement that we have survived, even though for nearly two centuries now, our Commander-in-Chief has also served, simultaneously, as the head of one political party and often the scourge of all others.
We as citizens must, at some point, ignore a president's partisanship. Not that we may prosper as a nation, not that we may achieve, not that we may lead the world-but merely that we may function.
But just as essential to the seventeen words of John Wayne, is an implicit trust-a sacred trust: That the president for whom so many did not vote, can in turn suspend his political self long enough, and for matters imperative enough, to conduct himself solely for the benefit of the entire Republic.
Our generation's willingness to state "we didn't vote for him, but he's our president, and we hope he does a good job," was tested in the crucible of history, and earlier than most.
And in circumstances more tragic and threatening. And we did that with which history tasked us.
We enveloped our President in 2001.And those who did not believe he should have been elected-indeed those who did not believe he had been elected-willingly lowered their voices and assented to the sacred oath of non-partisanship.
And George W. Bush took our assent, and re-configured it, and honed it, and shaped it to a razor-sharp point and stabbed this nation in the back with it.
Were there any remaining lingering doubt otherwise, or any remaining lingering hope, it ended yesterday when Mr. Bush commuted the prison sentence of one of his own staffers.
Did so even before the appeals process was complete; did so without as much as a courtesy consultation with the Department of Justice; did so despite what James Madison-at the Constitutional Convention-said about impeaching any president who pardoned or sheltered those who had committed crimes "advised by" that president; did so without the slightest concern that even the most detached of citizens must look at the chain of events and wonder: To what degree was Mr. Libby told: break the law however you wish-the President will keep you out of prison?
In that moment, Mr. Bush, you broke that fundamental com-pact between yourself and the majority of this nation's citizens-the ones who did not cast votes for you. In that moment, Mr. Bush, you ceased to be the President of the United States. In that moment, Mr. Bush, you became merely the President of a rabid and irresponsible corner of the Republican Party. And this is too important a time, Sir, to have a commander-in-chief who puts party over nation.
This has been, of course, the gathering legacy of this Administration. Few of its decisions have escaped the stain of politics. The extraordinary Karl Rove has spoken of "a permanent Republican majority," as if such a thing-or a permanent Democratic majority-is not antithetical to that upon which rests: our country, our history, our revolution, our freedoms.
Yet our Democracy has survived shrewder men than Karl Rove. And it has survived the frequent stain of politics upon the fabric of government. But this administration, with ever-increasing insistence and almost theocratic zealotry, has turned that stain into a massive oil spill.
The protection of the environment is turned over to those of one political party, who will financially benefit from the rape of the environment. The protections of the Constitution are turned over to those of one political party, who believe those protections unnecessary and extravagant and quaint.
The enforcement of the laws is turned over to those of one political party, who will swear beforehand that they will not enforce those laws. The choice between war and peace is turned over to those of one political party, who stand to gain vast wealth by ensuring that there is never peace, but only war.
And now, when just one cooked book gets corrected by an honest auditor, when just one trampling of the inherent and inviolable fairness of government is rejected by an impartial judge, when just one wild-eyed partisan is stopped by the figure of blind justice, this President decides that he, and not the law, must prevail.
I accuse you, Mr. Bush, of lying this country into war.
I accuse you of fabricating in the minds of your own people, a false implied link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11.
I accuse you of firing the generals who told you that the plans for Iraq were disastrously insufficient.
I accuse you of causing in Iraq the needless deaths of 3,586 of our brothers and sons, and sisters and daughters, and friends and neighbors.
I accuse you of subverting the Constitution, not in some misguided but sincerely-motivated struggle to combat terrorists, but to stifle dissent.
I accuse you of fomenting fear among your own people, of creating the very terror you claim to have fought.
I accuse you of exploiting that unreasoning fear, the natural fear of your own people who just want to live their lives in peace, as a political tool to slander your critics and libel your opponents.
I accuse you of handing part of this Republic over to a Vice President who is without conscience, and letting him run roughshod over it.
And I accuse you now, Mr. Bush, of giving, through that Vice President, carte blanche to Mr. Libby, to help defame Ambassador Joseph Wilson by any means necessary, to lie to Grand Juries and Special Counsel and before a court, in order to protect the mechanisms and particulars of that defamation, with your guarantee that Libby would never see prison, and, in so doing, as Ambassador Wilson himself phrased it here last night, of becoming an accessory to the obstruction of justice.
When President Nixon ordered the firing of the Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox during the infamous "Saturday Night Massacre" on October 20th, 1973, Cox initially responded tersely, and ominously.
"Whether ours shall be a government of laws and not of men, is now for Congress, and ultimately, the American people."
President Nixon did not understand how he had crystallized the issue of Watergate for the American people.
It had been about the obscure meaning behind an attempt to break in to a rival party's headquarters; and the labyrinthine effort to cover-up that break-in and the related crimes.
And in one night, Nixon transformed it.
Watergate-instantaneously-became a simpler issue: a President overruling the inexorable march of the law of insisting-in a way that resonated viscerally with millions who had not previously understood - that he was the law.
Not the Constitution. Not the Congress. Not the Courts. Just him.
Just - Mr. Bush - as you did, yesterday.
The twists and turns of Plame-Gate, of your precise and intricate lies that sent us into this bottomless pit of Iraq; your lies upon the lies to discredit Joe Wilson; your lies upon the lies upon the lies to throw the sand at the "referee" of Prosecutor Fitzgerald's analogy. These are complex and often painful to follow, and too much, perhaps, for the average citizen.
But when other citizens render a verdict against your man, Mr. Bush-and then you spit in the faces of those jurors and that judge and the judges who were yet to hear the appeal-the average citizen understands that, Sir.
It's the fixed ballgame and the rigged casino and the pre-arranged lottery all rolled into one-and it stinks. And they know it.
Nixon's mistake, the last and most fatal of them, the firing of Archibald Cox, was enough to cost him the presidency. And in the end, even Richard Nixon could say he could not put this nation through an impeachment.
It was far too late for it to matter then, but as the decades unfold, that single final gesture of non-partisanship, of acknowledged responsibility not to self, not to party, not to "base," but to country, echoes loudly into history. Even Richard Nixon knew it was time to resign
Would that you could say that, Mr. Bush. And that you could say it for Mr. Cheney. You both crossed the Rubicon yesterday. Which one of you chose the route, no longer matters. Which is the ventriloquist, and which the dummy, is irrelevant.
But that you have twisted the machinery of government into nothing more than a tawdry machine of politics, is the only fact that remains relevant.
It is nearly July 4th, Mr. Bush, the commemoration of the moment we Americans decided that rather than live under a King who made up the laws, or erased them, or ignored them-or commuted the sentences of those rightly convicted under them-we would force our independence, and regain our sacred freedoms.
We of this time-and our leaders in Congress, of both parties-must now live up to those standards which echo through our history: Pressure, negotiate, impeach-get you, Mr. Bush, and Mr. Cheney, two men who are now perilous to our Democracy, away from its helm.
For you, Mr. Bush, and for Mr. Cheney, there is a lesser task. You need merely achieve a very low threshold indeed. Display just that iota of patriotism which Richard Nixon showed, on August 9th, 1974.
Resign.
And give us someone-anyone-about whom all of us might yet be able to quote John Wayne, and say, "I didn't vote for him, but he's my president, and I hope he does a good job."
© 2007 MSNBC Interactive
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

140 Comments so far
Show AllTruthteller speaks the truth. In reality, however, the women and children must be spared.
The circle of hatred continues unless we react...
...
wow! i am impressed.
keith you are the man!
my personal solution, and it could work on the larger picture, is to stop shopping for things. food and very personal stuff excluded.(medication)
why are you making such a fuss about it.
these nuts are addicted to the money and the power this enables them.
so take away the money WE put in their pockets and lets wait a week maybe not even to see how they react to this punishment.
we the people have the power but we are so blinded by our own greedy minds that we can not see the power behind our hard earned money and the choices we make every single day a few times a day when we use it. we support their criminal acts by bying their poisons.
i ask you the commonwealth of this country, are you ready to change your choices right now so that change can take place? this is big commitment people. BIG!!!!!!!!
i say to you let's BOYCUTT!
BOYCUTT: TO ABSTAIN FROM USING, BUYING, OR DEALING WITH TO EXPRESS PROTEST OR TO COERCE.
THE MOST BENEVOLENT WAY TO SAY NO! I WILL NOT SUPPORT YOUR TACTICS.
I read all your comments and am humbled by all your good efforts.
here is one way to remain human and still stick it to them.
in the name of peace for all beings, let us begin the work. NOW or it will be too late for a lot of good innocent beings.
namaste' November 3, 2005
Israel and the Neocons
The Libby Affair and the Internal War
By JAMES PETRAS
The national debate, which the indictment of Irving Lewis Libby for perjury and obstruction of justice has aroused in the mass media, has failed to address the most basic questions concerning the deep structural context, which influenced his felonious behavior. The most superficial explanation was that Libby, by exposing Valerie Plame (a CIA employee), acted out of revenge to punish her husband Wilson for exposing the lies put forth by Bush about Iraq's "importation" of uranium from Niger. Other journalists claim that Libby acted to cover up the fabrications to go to war. The assertion however raises a deeper question -- who were the fabricators of war propaganda, who was Libby protecting? And not only the "fabricators of war", but the strategic planners, speech-makers and architects of war who acted hand in hand with the propagandists and the journalists who disseminated the propaganda? What is the link between all these high- level functionaries, propagandists and journalists?
Equally important given the positions of power which this cabal occupied, and the influence they exercised in the mass media as well as in designing strategic policy, what forces were engaged in bringing criminal charges against a key operative of the cabal?
Libby's rise to power was part and parcel of the ascendancy of the neo-conservatives to the summits of US policymaking. Libby was a student, protégé, and collaborator with Paul Wolfowitz for over 25 years. Libby along with Wolfowitz, Elliot Abrams, Douglas Feith, Kagan, Cohen, Rubin, Pollack, Chertoff, Fleisher, Kristol, Marc Grossman, Shumsky and a host of other political operators were long term believers and aggressive proponents of a virulently militaristic tendency of Zionism linked with the rightwing Likud Party of Israel. Early in the 1980's, Wolfowitz and Feith were charged with passing confidential documents to Israel, the latter temporarily losing his security clearance.
The ideologues begin their "Long March" through the institutions of the state. In some cases, advisers to rightwing pro-Israel congressmen, others in the lower levels of the Pentagon and State Department, in other cases as academics or leaders of conservative think tanks in Washington during the Reagan and Bush senior regimes. With the election of Bush in 2001, they moved into major strategic positions in the government, and as the principal ideologues and propagandists for a sequence of wars against Arab adversaries of the Israeli State. Leading neocons, like Libby, drew up a war strategy for the Likud government in 1996, and then recycled the document for the US war against Iraq before and immediately after 9/11/01. Along with their rise to the most influential positions of power in the Bush administration, the neocons attracted new recruits, like New York Times reporter Judith Miller.
What is striking about the operations of the 'cabal' is the very open and direct way in which they operated: former Director of the National Security Agency (under Reagan) Lt. General William Odom, retired Marine General Anthony Zinni, Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson (former chief of staff of Powell), retired Air Force Lt. Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski, National Security Adviser to President George Bush (the First) Brent Scowcroft, and numerous disenchanted officials, including veterans of the intelligence agencies, high level observers, and former diplomats openly criticized the neocon takeover of US policy and the close relationship between them and Israeli officals.
In the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, Wolfowitz and Libby were the architects of the military strategy for Rumsfeld and Cheney, their bosses. Douglas Feith established the "Office of Special Planning" to fabricate the lies to justify the war. Judith Miller, David Frum and Ari Fleisher served to disseminate the lies and war propaganda through articles, interviews, press conferences, and speechwriting for President Bush.
The neocons pushed to manipulate and marginalize many of the key institutions in the US imperial state. To circumvent intelligence from the CIA that didn't promote the Israeli agenda of war with Iraq, neocon Douglas Feith (number 3 in the Pentagon) established the Office of Special Planning, which fabricated propaganda and channeled it directly to the President's Office bypassing and marginalizing any critical review from the CIA. Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld marginalized the leading generals, promoting nondescript "loyalists" and outsiders to the top positions, and discarding any advice which opposed or conflicted with their plans for war with Iraq. The Secretary of State referred to a speech prepared for him by Libby as "bullshit" because of its falsehoods. His chief aide, Colonel Wilkerson has written disparagingly of the cabal, which marginalized the State Department including his boss Powell.
The prosecution of Libby however reveals the intense internal struggle over the control of the US imperial state between the neocons and the traditional leaders of its major institutions. Along with the indictment of Libby by a grand jury at the request of the special prosecutor, the FBI has arrested the two leading policy makers of the most influential pro-Israeli lobby (AIPAC) for spying for the State of Israel. These are not simply isolated actions by individual officials or investigators. To have proceeded against Libby and AIPAC leaders , they had to have powerful institutional backing; otherwise the investigations would have been terminated even before they began.
The CIA is deeply offended by the neocon usurpation of their intelligence role, their direct channels to the President, their loyalty to Israel. The military is extremely angry at their exclusion from the councils of government over questions of war, the disastrous war policy which have depleted the armed forces of recruits, devastated troop morale, and the neocons' grotesque ignorance of the costs of a colonial occupation. It is no wonder that General Tommy Frank referred to Douglas Feith as "the stupidest bastard I have ever met."
The current institutional war recalls an earlier conflict between the rightwing Senator Joseph McCarthy and the Defense Department. At the time during the mid 1950's, Senator McCarty was accumulating power first by purging trade unions, Hollywood, the universities, and promoting likeminded conservative officials. He successfully extended his investigations and purges to the State Department and finally tried to do the same to the military. It was here that Senator McCarthy met his Waterloo, his attack backfired, the Army stood its ground, refuted his accusations and discredited his fabrications and grab for power.
In the meantime, the neocons are not at all daunted by the trials of their colleagues in AIPAC and the Vice President's office: they are pressing straight ahead for the US to attack Syria and Iran, via economic sanctions and military bombing. On October 30, 2005 the former head of the Israel Secret Police (Shin Bet) told AIPAC to escalate their campaign to pressure in the US to attack Iran (Israel National News.com). There was a near unanimous vote in the US Congress in favor of economic sanctions against Syria. Despite mass demonstrations, and because of a 'captured' congress, it appears paradoxically that the only force capable of defeating the neocon juggernaut, like the earlier Joe McCarthy, are powerful voices in the state threatened by new disastrous wars not of their making.
James Petras, a former Professor of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York, owns a 50 year membership in the class struggle, is an adviser to the landless and jobless in brazil and argentina and is co-author of Globalization Unmasked (Zed). His new book with Henry Veltmeyer, Social Movements and the State: Brazil, Ecuador, Bolivia and Argentina, will be published in October 2005. He can be reached at: jpetras@binghamton.edu
November 3, 2005
Israel and the Neocons
The Libby Affair and the Internal War
By JAMES PETRAS
The national debate, which the indictment of Irving Lewis Libby for perjury and obstruction of justice has aroused in the mass media, has failed to address the most basic questions concerning the deep structural context, which influenced his felonious behavior. The most superficial explanation was that Libby, by exposing Valerie Plame (a CIA employee), acted out of revenge to punish her husband Wilson for exposing the lies put forth by Bush about Iraq's "importation" of uranium from Niger. Other journalists claim that Libby acted to cover up the fabrications to go to war. The assertion however raises a deeper question -- who were the fabricators of war propaganda, who was Libby protecting? And not only the "fabricators of war", but the strategic planners, speech-makers and architects of war who acted hand in hand with the propagandists and the journalists who disseminated the propaganda? What is the link between all these high- level functionaries, propagandists and journalists?
Equally important given the positions of power which this cabal occupied, and the influence they exercised in the mass media as well as in designing strategic policy, what forces were engaged in bringing criminal charges against a key operative of the cabal?
Libby's rise to power was part and parcel of the ascendancy of the neo-conservatives to the summits of US policymaking. Libby was a student, protégé, and collaborator with Paul Wolfowitz for over 25 years. Libby along with Wolfowitz, Elliot Abrams, Douglas Feith, Kagan, Cohen, Rubin, Pollack, Chertoff, Fleisher, Kristol, Marc Grossman, Shumsky and a host of other political operators were long term believers and aggressive proponents of a virulently militaristic tendency of Zionism linked with the rightwing Likud Party of Israel. Early in the 1980's, Wolfowitz and Feith were charged with passing confidential documents to Israel, the latter temporarily losing his security clearance.
The ideologues begin their "Long March" through the institutions of the state. In some cases, advisers to rightwing pro-Israel congressmen, others in the lower levels of the Pentagon and State Department, in other cases as academics or leaders of conservative think tanks in Washington during the Reagan and Bush senior regimes. With the election of Bush in 2001, they moved into major strategic positions in the government, and as the principal ideologues and propagandists for a sequence of wars against Arab adversaries of the Israeli State. Leading neocons, like Libby, drew up a war strategy for the Likud government in 1996, and then recycled the document for the US war against Iraq before and immediately after 9/11/01. Along with their rise to the most influential positions of power in the Bush administration, the neocons attracted new recruits, like New York Times reporter Judith Miller.
What is striking about the operations of the 'cabal' is the very open and direct way in which they operated: former Director of the National Security Agency (under Reagan) Lt. General William Odom, retired Marine General Anthony Zinni, Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson (former chief of staff of Powell), retired Air Force Lt. Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski, National Security Adviser to President George Bush (the First) Brent Scowcroft, and numerous disenchanted officials, including veterans of the intelligence agencies, high level observers, and former diplomats openly criticized the neocon takeover of US policy and the close relationship between them and Israeli officals.
In the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, Wolfowitz and Libby were the architects of the military strategy for Rumsfeld and Cheney, their bosses. Douglas Feith established the "Office of Special Planning" to fabricate the lies to justify the war. Judith Miller, David Frum and Ari Fleisher served to disseminate the lies and war propaganda through articles, interviews, press conferences, and speechwriting for President Bush.
The neocons pushed to manipulate and marginalize many of the key institutions in the US imperial state. To circumvent intelligence from the CIA that didn't promote the Israeli agenda of war with Iraq, neocon Douglas Feith (number 3 in the Pentagon) established the Office of Special Planning, which fabricated propaganda and channeled it directly to the President's Office bypassing and marginalizing any critical review from the CIA. Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld marginalized the leading generals, promoting nondescript "loyalists" and outsiders to the top positions, and discarding any advice which opposed or conflicted with their plans for war with Iraq. The Secretary of State referred to a speech prepared for him by Libby as "bullshit" because of its falsehoods. His chief aide, Colonel Wilkerson has written disparagingly of the cabal, which marginalized the State Department including his boss Powell.
The prosecution of Libby however reveals the intense internal struggle over the control of the US imperial state between the neocons and the traditional leaders of its major institutions. Along with the indictment of Libby by a grand jury at the request of the special prosecutor, the FBI has arrested the two leading policy makers of the most influential pro-Israeli lobby (AIPAC) for spying for the State of Israel. These are not simply isolated actions by individual officials or investigators. To have proceeded against Libby and AIPAC leaders , they had to have powerful institutional backing; otherwise the investigations would have been terminated even before they began.
The CIA is deeply offended by the neocon usurpation of their intelligence role, their direct channels to the President, their loyalty to Israel. The military is extremely angry at their exclusion from the councils of government over questions of war, the disastrous war policy which have depleted the armed forces of recruits, devastated troop morale, and the neocons' grotesque ignorance of the costs of a colonial occupation. It is no wonder that General Tommy Frank referred to Douglas Feith as "the stupidest bastard I have ever met."
The current institutional war recalls an earlier conflict between the rightwing Senator Joseph McCarthy and the Defense Department. At the time during the mid 1950's, Senator McCarty was accumulating power first by purging trade unions, Hollywood, the universities, and promoting likeminded conservative officials. He successfully extended his investigations and purges to the State Department and finally tried to do the same to the military. It was here that Senator McCarthy met his Waterloo, his attack backfired, the Army stood its ground, refuted his accusations and discredited his fabrications and grab for power.
In the meantime, the neocons are not at all daunted by the trials of their colleagues in AIPAC and the Vice President's office: they are pressing straight ahead for the US to attack Syria and Iran, via economic sanctions and military bombing. On October 30, 2005 the former head of the Israel Secret Police (Shin Bet) told AIPAC to escalate their campaign to pressure in the US to attack Iran (Israel National News.com). There was a near unanimous vote in the US Congress in favor of economic sanctions against Syria. Despite mass demonstrations, and because of a 'captured' congress, it appears paradoxically that the only force capable of defeating the neocon juggernaut, like the earlier Joe McCarthy, are powerful voices in the state threatened by new disastrous wars not of their making.
James Petras, a former Professor of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York, owns a 50 year membership in the class struggle, is an adviser to the landless and jobless in brazil and argentina and is co-author of Globalization Unmasked (Zed). His new book with Henry Veltmeyer, Social Movements and the State: Brazil, Ecuador, Bolivia and Argentina, will be published in October 2005. He can be reached at: jpetras@binghamton.edu
The consequences of George W. Bush's choices, as President of the United Stats of America, both domestic and abroad, have not even come full circle yet. He does SO much damamge to the world, including his own country. Yet, there are STILL fans of George W. Bush in the USA. I just...can't believe it. EVERY American should show an extreme dislike of their President. Every single one. I mean...I just don't understand. Perhaps the slim minority of George W. Bush fans simply do not care of the negative choices he has made I guess. This will bite American society in the butt within the decade I predict.
George W. Bush...whew! How you sleep at night? Honestly, Americans should have cut their losses after September 11th, 2001. You, George, should have admitted something like, "Ok we admit that we are not friendly to some nations in the world. Consequently, the civilians of these respective nations are mad at us and did the most messed up action imaginable on September 11th, 2001 to give the USA a taste of what they were experiencing every day for decades by Americans and the British." Well George, if you would have said somethign along these lines, that would have been a start. Plus, this admittance would have saved lives and money for the USA, an uncountable amount of money. After all, admitting there is a problem of extreme arrogance among the general populace of the USA is only half the battle of eradicating this determental superior face Americans show to the world.
One tragedy, in addition to all the Iraqi lives lost, is that the USA played right in to bin Laden's hands. Almost as if the USA is daring bin Laden and al-Qaeda to strike the USA again. They are already punishing the UK for helping the USA invade Iraq.
Saila, please read his blog once more. He says he dreams of not only murdering every one in the Bush Adminitration, but also their wives and children. If he wants to have dreams of that type, he shold keep them to his self! Noone should post such disguting inhumane thoughts on this forum. Are we to be as evil as the Bush administratin? Those are dreams of a deranged madman and if you or any support that type of insanity,___ peace be with you.
I have always admired your writings and you always seemed to me, to be the type of person one would like to know as a friend. I am aware of what Bush and Cheney have done. I am aware of what they may attempt to do and I hate their actions and deeds. I will help in any way I can, to legally fight to have them removed from office. But killing innocent children? I've buried two sons and it has been more than forty years and it still hurts. The wound never heals. Yeah, speak up for that sicko and feel proud that you have.
It is little wonder to me, that some worry about being abducted by the Bush goons. With comments like that being published here, is is little wonder some worry. If I were subjected to it, I would be inclined to look the person up and determine just how dangerous they may be. Peace to you also,___ Kem Patrick
weepingbuffalo
You are the one who asked for justification for guns and you got mine. Now, you quibble about whether the 2nd amendment is reasonable at this time, thinking it's purpose was to be a deterrent against Britain.
Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
There you have it. Seems to me lately, that when our own government doesn't respect the rule of law, and in so many areas, a armed people have a better chance of securing a free State for themselves, against their own government if so needed.
Sorry to hear about your sons, and to see that my words have apparently upset you. Rest assured that was not the intent. I don't see how you got the impression that I was speaking up for him. I was merely trying to draw your attention to the fact that he was merely talking as compared to what is actually happening on the ground in Iraq, and to provide perhaps a means of comparison aimed at relieving your anger at his words. My description of what was actually happening in Iraq was meant as an illustration to dramatize that point.
It is always a pleasure to see and read your blog.
Saila, I just went to the archives and read a large number of my comments and there are well over a hundred where I have spoken out against this administraton. I am totally aginst Bush and was before he was elected the first time. I believe he is attmpting to take us down the Primrose Lane and if he has his way, he will ruin this nation. Bush has killed everyone in Iraq and ruined thei land for centuries to come__ by approving the insane use of DU in weaponry. He and Cheney are worse than Saddam.
I have also written numerous blogs, over twenty, stating I believe Pelosi should put impeachment on the table and to do it yesterday.
Please don't state I fear bloodshed, I'm a disabled vet who seved in the military for 23 years and had my face shot to pieces when flying on a mission in Vietnam. I eventually lost one eye and am now legally blind. It shows in my spelling. I shed blood and a lot of it and I didn't panic. And if the time should ever come when our government is dissolved for certain, (and presently that is not so.) I will be prepared to fight any who decare they are our dictatorial ruler.
I also love my country, our flag and love ths forum, I've learned a lot here. I do not love comments where any would write the type of deplorable comments written here by a person who has written similar things in the very few blogs he has posted. Thank you, Kem Patrick
Evelyn/Kem said about me, "...the very few blogs he has posted."
Many of us work a lot of hours and can't spend all of our time commenting on sites like this. We also spend a considerable amount of time composing and editing our posts so we come across as intelligent and knowledgable. I know I go days and sometimes weeks without posting, but when I do, I hope that it is something meaningful and thought-provoking.
Evelyn/Kem, or whoever you are, if what you say about yourself is true, I say nothing to diminish your service, and understand your aversion to violence. However, know that the times we live in are not ammenable to tactics that have worked in the past to gain change. For peaceful change to work, those in power have to have some sense of acting for the good of the vast majority, something this cabal doesn't care about.
If your sensibilities are easily offended, then you probably wouldn't want to participate at Alternet.com, which I find even more free-wheeling than here.
Truthteller: When I called a contributor to these posts an idiot and a moron for analyzing politics using astrology as a tool, Evelyn pulled the same stunt on me. He told me I was insane and needed to seek help NOW. For some reason, he goes a little berserk when someone crosses a line of decorum that he has set up for these posts. Funny that dreams of murdering children draws the same rebuke as harsh words denouncing astrology! But Evelyn has a big heart and is always quick to apologize when wrong. He spreads more good cheer than ill will so he's a good guy, even if he does lose it every now and then.
Evelyn: Despite your occasional over-the-top outbursts, you are a great contributor to these posts and I look forward to hearing what you have to say on many topics. You've paid your dues, and I will always pay attention to your comments.
To make it plain and simple; don't throw rocks in glass houses! I agree his actions with Libby were wrong! I agree that the Gulf War was probably a personal issue! He is the President of the USA, final! Last time I looked he looke like me a human being and I make many mistakes and admit them! Do you all? Stop being Democrat/Republican and start bein an American, who supports the troops! If you haven't been in a fire-fight visit Iraq and experience it! It by no means is fun or excitinig when you hold your brethern, crying for a med-vac chopper to fly faster then is feasibly possible. Support the troops if you do not want to support your President! It's your right, that is why most join the military to give you all the right to sit at home typing away bad mouthing the President and the government! At the beginning of WWI, many COngressional persons did the same thing as now, withdrew their support, when they left that day they all received a present a little piece of black rope in the design of a hangman's noose! I believe war is wring on any scale, because I have been there, seen it first hand, felt the blood of my Marines, wrote the letters home, and bleed myself for my country..9 times personally. Now, you want to complain counter that...the President is a person, you want to impeach him, they did Clinton to no avail! Human beings make misrtakes, Bush has, you do, I do , I will , you will and Bush will as well. The next big-wig will make similar mistakes. Clinton put me on the beach of Somolia, I saw a lady get killed by a man and could do nothing about it because of rules of engagement, government playing war! Want the problkem fixed let warriors be warriors, the job will get done if the people support the troops! For thise out there that might read this that are former Marines, this is the Ghost! Semper Fi!
That means, "Always Faithful" Ken
Join Cindy's walk on Washington and arrest the S.O.B.'s
baa, baa, impotent baaing
all the day long.
Stop censoring my posts;
and you have the nerve to
criticize the merciless
censorship practiced by
others.
Dwayne Chandler, US army.
baa, baa, yawn......
Sheepdog for President 2008
and beyond.
Hillary, Obama, Edwards and
maybe Gore.
Any sheepdog to guard the
hypnotized sheep mass
will do; even a ham sandwhich.
Dwayne Chandler, US army.
Stop censoring my posts.
It seems to me that resident Bush no longer has a need for the carefully cultivated air of authenticity that saw him through his past electoral contests as he has so clearly traded it in for Esprit de Corpse(sic) within his administration.
Imagine all the foul scents that would eminate from the executive body were Libby allowed to fester despite his loyalty?
For if loyalty goes unrewarded, why shouldn't the maggots migrate away and pupate in moister more welcoming environs?
This quid pro quo smells like embalming fluid :-/
Evelyn Smith,
Just want you to know that I was first attracted to CommonDreams by the fine quality contributions of people like yourself. Although I disagree with your stance vis à vis truthteller (and your definition of "insanity"), I deeply respect your right to expression and appreciate your blogs...as my French friends say, "Courage...and Audacity, always!!" Forward, our destiny continues.
Okay, Pardon me. I,m crazy too.
Startin to like you Ron.
Also
the amount of US Bonds held by the PRC is a very small fraction of the total outstanding US Bonds. The vast majority is held by US Corporate pension funds. If anything, the war is being financed by the pension funds of millions of american workers.
To PeaceMaker
you asked: So why did American's vote him back into office?????
You obviously don't understand the way the American republic works. Let me try and help you. The American people vote for whoever is in the race. In 2004, it was a choice between John Kerry, and George Bush. The American people selected the lesser of two evils. That's the way it has always been, that's the way it will always be!. It can't be any other way! The only person that agrees with 100% of your views is YOU. We weigh and measure the candidates in totality and select the lesser of two evils. Sometimes we get it right sometimes we don't. We can't even know when we get it wrong. We would have to examine the exact same circumstances in some parallel universe, perhaps the other guy would have been even worse!
You said: We have an out of control administration who has thumbed it's nose at the laws, the Constitution, at Democracy and all this country stands for from day one! Tried to dismantle the entire country, bankrupt it and insulted it with a orgy of corruption.
Sounds nice, but you have to be more specific. Which laws did the administration thumb it's nose at? What part of the country is being dismantled? It was bankrupt before GWB took office, the "orgy" of corruption is just a continuation from many previous administrations.
The beat goes on.
Speedster, you make some excellent points. I wonder about your comment, that the United States was bankrupt before GWB took office?
I read that when Clinton left office, our national debt was a multi-billion surplus. Presently, after six years of GWB, we owe China alone over eight and a half "trillion" dollars. If that was a problem surfacing when GWB took command, he sure hasn't done anything to correct or reverse it. Nope, he borrowed the money from China to fight "his" war with Iraq, depose Saddam and take out the guy responsible for 9-11. I also thought Kerry did win___ but then didn't when millions of votes were "not" counted. Your other points are well taken by me and indeed, the beat goes on.
Evelyn
The yearly budget (amount needed vs the amount collected on a year to year basis) was in surplus ie. the US was collecting more than it was spending on a year to year basis, when GWB took office. The National debt (money owed by federal government, municipal government or local government) was in the trillions when GWB took office.
Also
As far as the US borrowing money from china goes. The US doesn't borrow money from China. The US sells government bonds in an open market. You could buy some if you want to. It is an arms length transaction, nobody is forced to to anything, the US gives them a piece of paper, (a promise to give them dollars in the future), and they give us United States Dollars now. They traded DVD players and iPods and poison dogfood and toothpaste etc. for US Dollars, now they need a place to spend all those dollars. If they could get a better deal from someone somewhere, else they would. The process binds their success to the US. If the US fails, they loose money. That is one benefit of global exchange.
You are correct speedster. I like that code name BTW, I once owned a 55 Studebaker Speedster, the first of the mucscle cars and gasoline was $0.28 a gallon for premium. She'd do 168 in ninth gear, it had three speeds in each gear. I never did it, chickened out at 140.
Anyway, in 1989 our national debt was considered to be a crisis at almost three tillion and it shocked the nation. That was during the Bush Sr. admin. My point was, Bush Jr. has not done anything to correct a bad dream he inherited and the national debt is now approaching nine trillion almost double that which he inherited. Wonder what would happen if China turned in their bonds Monday and demanded payment? When that happened with France and Mexico, it evolved into a war, another war France lost.
If we all recieved an annual statement from our government, it could read. "Dear Sir, your share of the national debt is now $120,000. Would you like to send in that ammount now, or defer it to your great grandchildren?
Thomas Jefferson once said, "To preserve our independence, we must not allow our leaders, to load us with perpetial debt".
What happened to the surplus in our annual budget since GWB took office? What is the current deficit?
I personally believe you're more qualified than I to discuss our national financial situation. I do have a lot of questions however, as it sure don't look good to me.
The only logical way to measure these things is as a % of GDP because the actual numbers always get bigger. 2004 is the only year where the numbers are in. 2004 = 3.6%, projections by the OMB are 2005 = 3.5%, 2007 = 2.3%, 2008 = 1.7%, 2009 = 1.5%
Government accounting is a bit of a smoke and mirrors, they don't follow the rules they force on everybody else. So basically no one knows(i'm not sure we really want to know!)
If you think Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid are killing us now, wait another 20 years!
Most of the surplus was spent on homeland security and defense spending.
By the way, all the numbers are available on the web at;
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006
The good news is that the Government owns most of the land west of the mississippi, so they could eliminate a big portion of the National debt by selling camp pendelton in california. It's prime beachfront property!
anyway, gotta go buy some groceries.
Hi speedster. I appreciate your lessons on economics, but I failed it in college because it was such mixed up bull, got all A's in the rest though. Well a D in spelling.
You mentioned the land west of Ol Man River; unfortunently, over half of it is land we swiped from the Mexicans. They want it back and if we ever have a depression, there will be multi-millions of illegals coming across our southern border, only they'll be armed with guns, RPGs and grenades. It will be hell on Earth and it could end up with the Mexicans being the legals and us the illegals. (What comes around goes around.) That's Karmoo, learned about it here from other spritual bloggers.
Imagine a depression in this day and age, where the millions of small farmers aren't here anymore. It won't be like the depression of 1929, hungry people will kill for food. There will be rioting everyplace, anarchy, with blood flowing in the streets and rivers. We will be invaded by Mexicans___ and we did literally take the land from them. It was Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada and California adnmaybe utah, not sure of Utah.
Hate to think it, but if Bush attacks Iran, it will come soon after. Of course we have the big problem of global warming and Depleted Uranium filling the atmosphere and maybe a king taking over. Damn, I'm gonna go to bed.
Nanoo
Oh yeah! Well I'll be blowed.
You just stick to shooting out tires and don't be getting any ideas now!
Damn Evelyn!
You must have flunked History too! Ever hear of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo?
We didn't "SWIPE" the land from mexico, The United States bought it!
The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo is the peace treaty, between the United States an the interim government of a militarily occupied Mexico, that ended the Mexican-American War (1846–1848). The treaty provided for the Mexican Cession, in which Mexico ceded 525,000 square miles of its pre-war territory to the United States in exchange for US$15 million (equivalent to $313 million in 2006 dollars) The United States also agreed to take over $3.25 million ($68 million in 2006 dollars) in debts Mexico owed to American citizens.
The land mass that we PURCHASED from Mexico is now California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, part of Wyoming and part of Colorado and part of New Mexico.
The treaty was signed in a suburb of Mexico City on 2 February 1848.
Speedster, I'm fully aware of the treaty Mexico signed at "gunpoint". Ever hear of the Halls of Montesuma? The Marine theme song. We invaded Mexico with reasons as bad as the ones used to invade Iraq. Mexico surrended in Mexico city. The Mexican people are fully aware of the treaty and they all believe it was a raw deal and the ammount of money they recieved was pennies per acre if that much.
My point was not what I feel on that score, my point was and is, if we have a depression and many smart people believe we will if we start a war with Iran. If that should occur, Mexicans will be pouring across the border to take the land THEY feel was stolen fom them. They don't give a rat's ass about the treaty.
Where we live, over half of the population is Mexicans and it is often spoken of by Mexican Americans and visitors from Mexico.
BTW Speedy, what exaactly have I flunked besides history in your humble opinion? I know___ spelling and economics. Did good in history, all As.
But back to the main theme. If the Mexicans don't ever try invading us, selling military bases in Calif might be a your best idea.
Hey Speedy,___ you still alive? Did you check to see if any of the groceries you bought last night were from China? Those guys are trying to posion us you know. Nobody likes us anymore. We went to a Chinese reataurant today, it's right next to a Wal-Mart. Imagine that. They had fried fish too.___ "Cat" fish.
Have we somehow drifted off the subject here?
Speedster,
While you may be correct about China and bonds, the consequences remain threatening.
I continually hear the same propagandistic talking point slam by Republicans about, "Tax and spend Democrats", but how is this an inferior fiscal policy when compared to, "Borrow and spend Republicans"? Republicans have support of, and give it to, bankers who rake in boatloads of interest payments, while the taxpayer gets stuck for the bill. People need to realize there is 'no free lunch' in this deal.
Since the Bush administration has been in office they squandered a $3.1 trillion surplus, and changed it into a $5 trillion deficit. Where did that money go? It sure wasn't consumed ,but partially, by the half trillion we've currently squandered in Iraq, or the small bit begrudgingly doled out to rebuild after Katrina. A larger share than both those combined has gone for tax cuts to the wealthiest 1% of Americans at the expense of the middle class and viable social safety nets for all Americans. Warped & devastating priorities for sure, but that's the right wing ideology in action.
Remember the consequences I mentioned? Aside from the damage the Republican fiscal policy does to us internally, as a people, here's what Hedges relates we face as a nation:
"The weakening of the United States, economically and militarily, is giving rise to new centers of power. The U.S. economy, mismanaged and drained by the Iraq war, is increasingly dependent on Chinese trade imports and on Chinese holdings of U.S. Treasury securities. China holds dollar reserves worth $825 billion. If Beijing decides to abandon the U.S. bond market, even in part, it would cause a free fall by the dollar. It would lead to the collapse of the $7-trillion U.S. real estate market. There would be a wave of U.S. bank failures and huge unemployment. The growing dependence on China has been accompanied by aggressive work by the Chinese to build alliances with many of the world's major exporters of oil, such as Iran, Nigeria, Sudan and Venezuela. The Chinese are preparing for the looming worldwide clash over dwindling resources."
Last year Americans borrowed more money than they made. If we expect to have any kind of decent quality of life in the future we need to curtail the borrowing, and make more of an effort to pay our own way. Several government agencies have declared there is $65 billion in wasteful spending in the military budget, that if eliminated would not effect our military capabilities whatsoever. Instead of eliminating this waste, which could fund programs that positively affect literally tens of millions of our citizens, we roll over and INCREASE the funds demanded by the Pentagon. Is something radically & ethically wrong with this picture? You bet!
I,too, accuse you, Mr Bush, of lining the pockets of the least needy, at the expense of the neediest. Shame on you and your cohorts!
I'm not an economist, but the ones I listen to, advise me that the US debt is NOT out of control.
You and I measure our wealth by comparing our assets against our liabilities. If that is the measure of a countries wealth, (it's not BTW) the US has far, far, far more assets than liabilities just based on the governments real estate holdings.
But, like I stated earlier, I'm not an economist, just a reader and someone that tries to look past outlandish demagoguery and apply logic and common sense to problems and possible solutions.
Exactly how would these mexican invaders take back the land? Would they murder the current owners, would they burn the current deeds, would they drive the current owners away or just sqat on the land.
And which of the invaders is going to get the good land, will they be killing each other to get Disneyland or Pebble Beach country club?
And how would the US authorities react to these takings? The US authorities would'nt give a rats ass about the invaders FEELINGS on whether a 150 yr old treaty was valid or not.
also, I don't understand how a downturn in the US economy would trigger a massive invasion from mexico? Please explain.
To PaulMagillSmith
You said: "Since the Bush administration has been in office they squandered a $3.1 trillion surplus, and changed it into a $5 trillion deficit. Where did that money go?"
Get your facts straight man! The surplus was about $300 Billion when GWB took office. We do not have nor have we ever had a $5 Trillion deficit!
The $300 billion went to Homeland security and defense spending.
Defense spending (as a percentage of GDP) is still far below recent historical levels.
You said: "Last year Americans borrowed more money than they made. If we expect to have any kind of decent quality of life in the future we need to curtail the borrowing, and make more of an effort to pay our own way. Several government agencies have declared there is $65 billion in wasteful spending in the military budget,"
And how would you propose to we get americans to stop borrowing more money than they make?
There is outrageous waste in all areas of government spending, look at the FEMA spending on Katrina relief. The government has no incentive to avoid waste. It's not their money. If they flush it down a rat hole, they'll just come and confiscate more of mine and yours! So what the hell, a $600 hammer, or $1200 toilet seat? big deal. Thousands of mobile homes sitting in a field unused, who cares? Let's hand out prepaid charge cards to anyone who show up at the astrodome. Some of it will be used correctly, some of it will be used incorrectly (Buying hookers and porn) But hey, what the hell.
The beat goes on.
Paul
What would you propose we do to get americans to stop borrowing more than they make?
There is HUGE waste in all areas of government spending. The government has no incentive to reduce waste. It's not their money, if they need more they will just confiscate more of it from me and you.
If the DOD pays $600 for a hammer, who cares? $1200 for a toilet seat, big deal. 1000's of mobile homes for Katrina survivors rotting away, unused in a louisiana pasture. Hey, we'll buy more! Let's give prepaid mastercharge cards to anyone who show's up at the Astrodome. If they use it for hookers or online porn. What the hell?
At least, if we pay $600 for a hammer, At the end of the day, we have a hammer.
If we give someone a $2500 Mastercharge, what do we have?
The government should get out of the charity business IMHO.
Hey Speedy are you getting uptight about this debate? Hope not. Okay, how would it occur. I wrote, it will happen IF we suffer another depression, and if we invade Iran that is a very likely prospect. If we have a depression there will be an almost total lack of food supplies, everyplace. The millions of truck farmers are gone, Society is no longer like the crash of 29 in Amaerica. We also now import much of our food from other countries. Mexico, South America, China, etc. Those imports will cease during a depression, for it will be a world wide depression just as it was in 1929.
With an almost total lack of food, here comes rioting and anarchy all across the land. It would be Katrina magnified a thousnd times. That is reality. The Mormons for example are prepared for such an eventuality and are prepared to fight off any invaders. They do have farms and their families have each stocked a years supply of food___ and guns. They aren't stupid.
The United States government would fail within days, our militry is already broken and they have to eat too. There would be no military to fight anyone except us. Our borders are open now, we cannot even stop millions of illegals from crossing. If we have a depression and once the rioting begins in every single large and small metro area, they will come, armed and ready to fight and kill. Would they win? I don't know, but they will attempt to. That Speedy is a sure bet and it is reality.
Picture how it will be when people are hungry, with empty stores, rioting, fires, no money, our credit cards worthless. There will be anarchy and there will be kiling that will make Baghdad seem like a resort town. Oh no, we have Fema, the Red cross, Federal assistance, Homeland Security. Really? Remember Katrina? Our government is a mess now and it will be every man for himself.
Naw, head for the hills, maybe deep in the Apalachians, bring a gal too, need someone to clean the fish and skin the deer.
Hey Speedo,
Deficits, when figured by the CPA's are calculated on a ten year cycle, hence the $3.1 & $5 trillion numbers I cited. So what that DHS & Katrina was $300 billion; that only represents one tenth of the projected Clinton surplus.
As for how Americans can make more than they borrow that is elementary...RAISE THE MINIMUM WAGE! That also has the added benefit of increased tax revenues WITHOUT RAISING TAXES, causing the deficit to shrink. While at it rescind the tax cuts for the wealthiest 1%, re-institute the inheritance tax on large estates, raise the income 'cap' on Social Security to $150,000, make off-shore tax shelters for US corporations illegal, and stifle the hordes of illegal immigrants forcing Americans' wages down from invading our country by penalizing and/or jailing employers breaking the laws alreasdy on the books.
The primary way we can make moves toward being solvent as a country again is to rein in military spending. Did you know that on 9/10/2007, that's right the day before 9/11, an article came out stating the Pentagon couldn't account for $2.7 TRILLION in materials. How convenient it was for 9/11 to happen the very next day, and push that news item to a small notation on a back page, coincidence? Hell, the books are in such disarray at the Pentagon, there hasn't been an approved audit in a number of years. Some claim an accounting isn't possible, but that doesn't fly. If the military demands money for a program don't you think it should be fiscally responsible enough to show how the funds designated were spent? It's a basic business and accounting problem, not rocket science.
A way we can definitely reduce our defence/offense spending is stop funding for 'contract' support troops (read mercenaries). They make $100,000 to $300,000 doing what our soldiers do for around $25,000, but we are picking up the tab. If we are so undermanned we have to resort to outrageous payments like this, and this war is really all that vital to our nation's security, why not re-institute the draft? With American's realizing a justified war entails making real & shared sacrifices, this war will end pronto. (more later)
That's a pretty sexist thing to say Evelyn.
I wasn't meaning to be sexist Kathy, gals are better at cleanng fish and besides, there are other things they could help with. Then too, it appears Speedy isn't all that bright, he'd need sameone with some brains there in that hideaway, like most country boys would. He could bring along a piano.
Hey Evelyn, nice to know gals are better at cleaning fish and that we can be helpful, but I consider that sexist.
Why should we be stuck with being helpful? That's like guys being helpful with housework instead of being equally responsible for the messes they help to create.
Anyway, it's not hoards, it's hordes. Hoarding is something we do, not are.