Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiDubya's Dallas: Into the Belly of the Beast
The hellish-hot weather persuaded me that I was wise to ignore the caution expressed by a close friend who grew up in Dallas, as I set off to give talks there. Better wear a bulletproof vest, he told me.
I was, nonetheless, feeling a bit anxious, given what had happened during my last major speech there, when I addressed the World Affairs Council of Greater Dallas on Jan. 20, 2004. Then my topic was "Intelligence and War: Lessons From the Recent Past," and I was very intentional about being, well, fair and balanced in devoting equal time to listing the baleful lies of two Texans - Lyndon Baines Johnson and George W. Bush - both of whom got a lot of people killed in unnecessary war.
I even reached back into history to enlist help from a former president whom Bush had called his favorite - Teddy Roosevelt, who said:
"To announce that there is to be no criticism of the president or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but morally treasonable to the American people."
Suffice it to say that my attempt at evenhandedness failed miserably, even though I used up a lot of precious time rehearsing LBJ's perfidy on Vietnam - dissecting, in particular, his exploitation of dubious intelligence regarding the Gulf of Tonkin non-incident of Aug. 4, 1964. I gave pride of place to that well deserved castigation before I delved into a reconstruction of what was already discernible as of January 2004 with respect to the lies told by George W. Bush to "justify" attacking Iraq exactly 10 months before.
Okay, so maybe I laid it on a little thick in citing what Nazi war criminal Hermann Goering told his American interrogator in Nuremberg:
"Naturally, the common people do not want war. That is understood. But after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a communist dictatorship....
"The people can always be brought to do the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
Oil executives and other Dallas insiders in the audience took that as a signal to bolt - and did. One of the early departed, Herbert Hunt of the Hunt Oil family expressed chagrin at having been tricked into attending on false pretenses. He told an associate that, hearing of my continuing friendship with George Herbert Walker Bush, he was deceived into thinking I was "one of us."
Following the Q & A session after my presentation, the World Affairs Council president at the time, Jim Falk, was icily proper. It was not until much later that I learned that he labeled my speech "awful," and that the WAC Executive Committee member who had invited me became the target of a whispering campaign for not really being "one of us." My inviter was declared persona non grata and removed from the Executive Committee.
I
had made what I thought was an honest effort to be fair and balanced but,
clearly, my attempt had fallen far short in Dallas.
This Time It Would be Different
Now, five and a half years later, the task of exposing lies and spreading some truth around had become much less daunting, given the abundant material that had become available in the interim. And Dallas seemed the ideal place to do so, since George W. Bush had just moved in, causing not a ripple of concern - much less disapproval - among the indigenous, so to speak.
Indeed, far from the embarrassment I thought I would encounter among Dallasites over having a suspect war criminal as neighbor, the vast majority seemed utterly pleased - with one notable exception. There were recurrent complaints over inconvenient delays on the golf course, when the former president and his friends insisted on playing through.
Neither George nor Laura Bush came to the Dallas Peace Center dinner at which I spoke on July 9 (although I extended them a cordial invitation). And the nouveau riche were conspicuously absent. Fine by me. Except for a few predictable grimaces when I mentioned the dangerous Israel-centric policy pursued by Bush-43 in the Middle East, I enjoyed an audience that was, in Ciceronian terms, "benign [and] attentive." No one stormed out this time.
The week before my talk, I had offered an op-ed draft, "Is Texas Harboring Torture Decider," to the Dallas Morning News and the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, both of which rejected it (surprise, surprise).
That homework having been done, I rang some changes on the theme of the op-ed - namely, that a "smoking-gun" executive memorandum of Feb. 7, 2002, signed by George W. Bush, is confirmation that the responsibility for torture is correctly attributed to rotten apples, but that they fouled the barrel from the top, not the bottom.
The four nauseating "torture memos" under Department of Justice letterhead show (1) that the "banality of evil" did not stop with Adolf Eichmann and other functionaries of the Third Reich; and (2) that top CIA officials displayed fawning obeisance in their eagerness to go over to "the dark side." But the sum total of ALL the memos and investigations now at hand shows with embarrassing clarity that there was only one "decider" - the one now playing 18 holes in a fancy Dallas neighborhood.
And if further proof were needed, we now have the full text of the Senate Armed Services Committee report, approved by the full Committee without dissent, the executive summary of which was released by Carl Levin and John McCain on Dec. 11, 2008.
Its conclusions are equally nauseating, showing - among other things - that not one of the eight addressees of Bush's Feb. 7, 2002, directive demurred about his decision to exempt al Qaeda and Taliban detainees from Geneva protections - a violation of the War Crimes Act of 1996, as well as the Geneva agreements.
The Senate report asserts that the president's memorandum "opened the door to considering aggressive techniques."
Conclusion Number One states:
"Following the President's determination, techniques such as waterboarding, nudity, and stress positions ... were authorized for use in interrogations of detainees in U.S. custody."
None of the guests at the Dallas Peace Center dinner did a Cheneyesque shrug, as if to say, "So...?" That was encouraging, and an easy segue into What Do We Do Now?
Accountability Are Us
Dallas progressives were receptive to the notion that, by happenstance, they may bear a special responsibility to face into the reality that one of their new neighbors is, arguably, a war criminal. How does one actually deal with that? It seems a matter of conscience; ignoring the situation does not seem quite right. And yet, an American is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
A dilemma. Because, those who are not captives of the Fawning Corporate Media (FCM) are aware of so much incriminating evidence of such heinous crimes, that the prospect of walking down the street with a, "Hi, George; how's Laura?" really jars.
A consensus seems to be building that perhaps Dallasites are uniquely situated to bring their dilemma to the attention of the country as a whole. How do we Americans handle this unprecedented set of circumstances?
By investigating what happened and, if warranted, initiating a judicial process.
As one Dallas Peace Center activist put it, "We are here in Dallas, with George W. Bush playing golf and living a life of ease, while a library and institute are built to enshrine his version of history. Our struggle for clarity and accountability must intensify, not out of vindictiveness but because there will be dire consequences in the future, if no one is held accountable for the suffering and devastation of torture."
Even Dick Cheney now says that the former president knew everything Cheney knew about "enhanced interrogation techniques." On May 10 the former vice president told Face the Nation's Bob Schieffer that Bush "knew a great deal about the program. He basically authorized it. I mean, this was a presidential-level decision. And the decision went to the president. He signed off on it."
This is not to suggest we have to take Cheney at his word, but is there not a compelling need to get to the bottom of this? The question answers itself. No One Is Above the Law cannot become an empty slogan.
And so, it was very encouraging to have a good turnout on Saturday morning, July 11, at the Dallas city branch library nearest the new Bush residence. We took some time to think these things through, and ponder Cesar Chavez' dictum: Without action, nothing good is going to happen.
A dozen of us decided to exercise our First Amendment rights and go see if George and Laura were home. [Click here for images and here for story.]
And you know the best news? As one hardened activist put it:
"For some of those joining us this was their first such march. There was the distinct possibility we might end up in the pokey, but they did not blink an eye. It was a small group, but the point was, we took it right to the belly of the beast. I think we all knew that we were doing what has to be done. We were jacked!"
No pious platitudes for peace. Rather, placards for justice and accountability. And BLOCK LETTER reminders that no one, no one is above the law.
It is, no doubt, too early to know for sure. But it does seem as though a sturdy group of George W. Bush's neighbors are determined to hold their new neighbor accountable, and may become an example - a catalyst - for the whole country.
27 Comments so far
Show AllMr. McGovern's fantasy -- that anyone in the Bush Clique will ever be held accountable for their crimes (whether against the Geneva Conventions or the U.S. Constitution) -- is exactly that: a fantasy, the dismaying adult equivalent of belief in Santa Claus.
As the Obama Administration continues to demonstrate on a daily basis, no matter who is in Congress or the White House, the United States remains relentless in its devotion to what has become its one and only purpose.
That sole purpose is the perpetuation of capitalism -- the absolute protection of the ruling class, the total subjugation of all the rest of us -- the purpose that explains why the Obama Clique employs so many of the same looters and liars who were central to the Bush Clique.
Cliques? Absolutely: not parties, not administrations, merely cliques within the ruling class.
Ultimately the only "change we can believe in" -- the one change which (if we are very fortunate) might come out of all this ferment -- is expanded recognition that the U.S. is a one-party nation: that behind its smokescreen of rhetoric, the two-party system has become the biggest Big Lie ever peddled to the U.S. electorate.
But since we have already been methodically reduced to Moron Nation, such recognition will make no difference at all.
Emergence of a genuine working-class party -- the one alternative that might yet save us (that is, before the already covertly nullified Constitution is overtly discarded) -- will never be allowed. We the people have lost the ability to overcome.
Thus the U.S. will continue its march toward theofascism at home and Nazi-type imperialism abroad -- its capitalist-driven (and therefore inevitable) transformation into a genuine Fourth Reich -- while we ourselves do naught but gibber like cage-trapped primates, helpless in our fear and confusion.
Those with wealth want torture -- Rest of us hate it
Survey middleclass neighborhoods and most approve of torture, survey slums and to a laboring man it is detestable. For most of those who get tortured are laboring men, all torture goons are of the intelligent middleclass and the issue is really about income and job security.
RAY ARE YOU SAYING THAT DALLAS IS A TROGLODYTE ENCLAVE?
NO ? REALLY?ACTUALLY THAT'S A INSULT TO TROGLODYTES! I
TRAVELED ALOT ON BUSINESS AND CAN AND WILL CERTIFY DALLAS
AS CAVEMAN CENTRAL IN THE US OF A.RUDE BIGOTED AND RACIST
COMMENTS?ITS DALLAS. AND ITS A CALCULATOR SOCIETY
WHERE THEY WANT TO KNOW THE COST OF SOMETHING NOT THE VALUE.
AND EVERYTHING'S JUST LIKE NEW YORK. LISTEN UP JETHRO
BILLY BOB RAY AND GOOBER IT WILL never be NY!WHEN THESE
CLOWNS STARTED WITH KKK STUFF I STARTED CHARGING THEM AN ASSHOLE
TAX.TOO FUNNY AND NEVER AGAIN.
Torture was a smoke screen. The real program was to cover the tracks of the perps of nineleven.
When someone says, "For the slow-witted out there such as Mr. Ekzile", I take that as an insult, but no matter. Forget American War in Vietnam, forget Barbara Tuchman and her daughter, forget Ellsberg - - the time is now - - there are no lessons to be learned from the past unless one is talking strategy which I fear Erroll is doing - - how to win or lose which I am not referring to. Erroll and McGovern do make a good point some 4 months ago about Obama advisers. Does Obama listen to these advisers (he has certainly appointed them and one must supposes respects them) and then makes a reasoned, reasonable decision or is Obama merely a puppet who is controlled by these advisers? Can we blame the situation on these advisers whoever they may be - - I am sure Obama will take full responsibility for his decisions (assuming they are his to make). Anyway, Erroll's and McGovern's history lesson does not interest me. Perhaps McGovern was opposed to Afghanistan/Pakistan war some 4 months ago so perhaps Erroll can show us some other of his comments since that time that shows he is still interested in the subject rather than beating a dead horse of Bush/Cheney. We all know what Bush/Cheney did - - lock'em up and throw away the key - - I am more interested in what Obama is doing right now and will continue into the future at an excellerated escalation.
Edzile
I will attempt this one more time. The point that I and Ray McGovern were, as you were say, attempting to get across is that Obama has decided to ignore the lesson of what happened in Vietnam by instead sending troops once again into a third world country needlessly and unjustifiably. I am unable to comprehend what decision I need to make, as you say, since I am not, unlike Obama, president of this country.
As for not allegedly "know[ing] the history of American War in Vietnam" I submit that the veracity of that statement is hardly accurate as I and hundreds of thousands of other military personnel saw up close the stupidity of that war and the horrors that it had wrought upon the Vietnamese people.
You seem to bizarrely imply that Obama does not need to know and understand the lessons of Vietnam as if what happened in that conflict was entirely inconsequential. You also absurdly claim that McGovern is trying to somehow "excuse Obama for what he is doing" which is totally distorting what McGovern had said. McGovern noted that Obama was being wooded-headed for continuing policies which originated from "preconceived fixed notions." And because of those notions McGovern certainly recognizes that many innocent civilians will again needlessly die at the hands of another American president just as innocent Vietnamese civilians died from American bombs, rockets and bullets under another Democratic president named Lyndon Johnson. Yes, you are right, Obama should not have needed to know about Vietnam in order to realize that occupying Afghanistan and sending drone missiles into Pakistan is the wrong thing to do. But the point, of course, is that Vietnam did indeed happen so Obama has no excuse to claim, like Bush did in Iraq, that the insurgents [i.e. the freedom fighters] and the Taliban would not rise up and continue to fight the Americans until, as in Vietnam, they are finally driven from their country.
If possible, attempt to argue from an intellectual position instead of claiming, as you did in your comment, that I supposedly insulted you. And by the way, the name is Erroll, which is spelled with two ls instead of one.
Well, Errol has thrown down the gauntlet with insults. This is the point that I do not seem to be getting across: Obama doesn't need advisers to tell him what to do - - who are these advisers? doesn't he have eyes and ears and a heart and soul. I don't believe quoting history by McGovern is convincing - - does Obama and Errol need to know the history of American War in Vietnam to make a decision. This piece that Errol uses as a justification for the lame work of McGovern, delivered in March, is weak in the extreme. Can not McGovern state the obvious fact that Obama is a monster, a liar, a cheat, a murderer - - the facts are there. McGovern prefers to rail against Bush/Cheney of the past while omitting criticism of Obama .... except that he has bad advisers. This is serious stuff for some of us and to excuse Obama for what he is doing because he has bad, inexperienced adviser is inexcusable and then go on about Bush administration while the slaughter goes on is somthing else.
Perhaps I am being too hard on McGovern. I took a look at the article Errol said showed that McGovern was critical of Obama; however if one looks a little closely what McGovern said in that piece, one can see that McGovern excuses Obama and his criticism is of the most tepid kind. At the conclusion of that piece McGovern states "Mr. Obama, you need to find some advisers who are not still wet behind the ears and who are not brown noses – ....." In other words back in March the problem with Obama is that he does not have good advisers. Draw your own conclusions.
Ekzile
You should take your own advice and reread your first sentence. You claim that "McGovern excuses Obama and his criticism is of the most tepid kind" such as not having the right kind of advisers. If you had read further on in that sentence you would have found McGovern stating that advisers are needed "who have lived Vietnam and Iraq and have an established record of responsible, fact-based analysis." The point of that sentence, which one would have assumed is rather obvious, is that those who had experienced the utter idiocies of Vietnam and Iraq could have then told the militant Obama that his plan to carry out imperialism in Afghanistan, which then translates into the killing of innocent civilians, is doomed to fail.You seem to have missed the part in the article where McGovern states that "Kennedy RESISTED the kind of pressures to which President Obama has now succumbed."
Or perhaps you skipped over where McGovern mentioned where Obama would be wise to read about Daniel Ellsberg and how he blew the whistle on on those who were quick to call for more war in a place called Vietnam [see The Pentagon Papers for proof of this assertion]. Maybe if you were not so quick to condemn McGovern you would have read where he noted that "There is still time to put the brakes on this disastrous policy". This is because "One key lesson of Vietnam is that an army trained and supplied by foreign occupiers can almost be readily outmatched and out-waited in a guerilla war, no matter how many billions of dollars are pumped in."
For the slow-witted out there such as Mr. Ekzile, what Ray McGovern is saying is that Obama does not appear to have learned the lessons of Vietnam, which is that the United States has no right to invade and occupy third world countries for the most specious of reasons and to do so will almost always invite disaster for the invading nation.
Tepid criticism? I suggest that we need more fools like Ray McGovern who are willing to point out that Obama would be most stupid and most wrong to continue, as Barbara Tuchman has said, his wrong-headedness by emulating people like Lyndon Johnson and George W. Bush.
Some fellow attacked my criticism of McGovern (see below) and I responded about 20 minutes ago but it didn't appear. Let's see what happens here. Erroll says that I did not read a McGovern piece from March and this is true; however I pointed out to him that this current piece has no mention whatsoever of Obama and looking at CounterPunch.org for McGovern, I have found that articles on July 8 and July 15 do not mention Obama at all. But on June 24 McGovern does mention Obama as "who is trying to put a definitive end to the torture approved by the Bush/Cheney administration" which is obviously false as we now see - - there is no end to torture or closing prisons and preventative detention has been further established and expanded under Obama - - he could end it with a stroke of a pen. The point is that McGovern is a military type as well as a CIA agent who is also a Democratic Party operative. Beware of ex-CIA agents who go Left/Progressive/Democratic. My understanding is that one never leaves "The Company" except people like Philip Agee who had to leave for Cuba. McGovern seems to be doing just fine, in fact getting some good coverage in the Lefty media and probably making a few bucks at it as well.
McGovern certainly could have done a lot worse. He could have made a swing to the neon-nazi Bush/Cheney regime. Where there is no truth abount anything. Just think he could have been a draft dodger like Cheney or a deserter like Georgieboy. Or he could have been another corrupt republican politican.
"[Obama] could end it with the stroke of a pen."
Actually, no he can't. Clandestine groups in the shadow government (CIA, Pentagon, and Blackwater to name a few) would assassinate him. That is the illusion in this country. Obama can end everything on his own. He can't. But that does not mean he is not part of it. As much evidence exists that proves he is complicit in commiting war crimes, he also faces the pressure of the a shadow government and shadow banks, and they are the ones who really call the shots.
I once again reccomend Russ Baker's Family of Secrets.
We should consider ourselves fortunate to be getting a little beyond the horror of 2000, Which I believe was the peak of the "Great Repression" - that is still powerfully squeezing the life out of this planet. Baker's work enables us to understand the Dallas Cabal and how it originated, and perhaps provides the best reasons for to keeping it at bay.
Informative and inspiring as always from Ray McGovern. Torture justifyer Judge Jay Bybee has protesters outside his courtroom of injustice in San Francisco periodically, Donald Rumsfeld has an acreage near Taos, NM; John Yoo is teaching law (NO, that must be a vile rumor, certainly no reputable univerity would have someone teach a subject for which they have obvious contempt) at UC, Berkeley; and Condolessa Rice is at Stanford; Dick Cheney is in a bunker somewhere unknown. Could a movement be sparked into ever wider action by local groups focusing on these criminals? Certainly Cindy Sheehan's vigil outside the Bush ranch acted as a spark of energy activism. And Ray McGovern was one of the participants. What do others think?
McGovern does this all the time: he focuses on Bush/Cheney when the current, actual, present monster is Obama and his gang (and Congress as well). He is obviously another Democratic Party supporter. We're movin' on into the present and future - - which brings me to moveon.org, The Nation mag and many Liberal/Progressive/Democratic Party sympathizers and operatives - - they're giving Obama more time to straighten things out ("hold his feet to the fire") - - when are they going to face the facts, reality that is staring, screaming in their face. Obama said before being elected that Afghanistan War was the good war that had to be won and that he would attack Pakistan and that is exactly what he has done. If one thinks that is a good, righteous plan then Obama is their boy. Let's throw Stewart/Colbert in with those monstrous, vicious supporters of Obama. I must admit that Obama throwing trillions of dollars to rich people and bankers and letting the citizens lose their jobs and homes and retirement was a little surprising but one does learn.
Ekzile
You would be most wise to check what you write before making accusations which prove to be blatant untrue. If you had read an article Ray McGovern had written on March 29 of this year for Antiwar.com you would have realized that Mr. McGovern is anything but a supporter of Barack Obama. The article, titled Welcome to Vietnam, Mr. President, cites the historian BArbara Tuchman and her use, from her well known work The March of Folly, of the word wooden-headedness which Mr. McGovern justifiably believes can be applied to Obama as well as the term cognitive dissonance in regard to Obama's foolish desire to ramp up the military escalation in Afghanistan. As Mr. McGovern points out in the article, Obama would do well to listen to former military personnel who realize that maintaining a war in Afghanistan is as foolish as when LBJ sent hundreds of thousands of US forces into Vietnam in a futile attempt to force democracy upon the Vietnamese people. Ray McGovern also quotes Barbara Tuchman's daughter Jessica Tuchman Matthews and who is the president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, who observed that:
"The only way to halt the insurgency's momentum is to start withdrawing troops. The presence of foreign troops is the most important element driving the resurgence of the Taliban."
In short, Ray McGovern recognizes that Barack Obama is just as much of a warmonger as was LBJ and George W. Bush.
I think at this point, our only remote hope of justice is Judge Garzon in Spain. Even then, if they convict Bush, he simply has to avoid traveling to Spain where he will be arrested. AG Holder is such a spineless coward that we basically can expect nothing to come from the DOJ. Much of the evidence to prove criminal conduct to lock up Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and other members of the Bush cabal for years exists, yet no one in the Obama Administration has the stones to prosecute because they all are buddies with these war criminals. In our history and political science texts, when we get to the section about the DOJ, let's remove most of it, leaving one page with "corrupt and dysfunctional" typed on it? For that matter, how about the entire political system. Maybe that will reduce the price of textbooks for students.
If Garzon has an arrest warrant out for him, it must be enforced in any other EU country. Remember Pinochet was held under house arrest in London to answer to Garzon's warrant.
However, as Bush has never been interested in foreign travel the chance of him being picked up on such a warrant is, in effect, remote.
Rainborowe
Yes, you are right about Pinochet. My oversight. But your second comment is my real point - there is little to no chance of Bush ever setting foot in EU countries.
There were recurrent complaints over inconvenient delays on the golf course, when the former president and his friends insisted on playing through.
The Texas Reichstag recently promulgated a law making it a capital offense not to let George Wanker Bush play through on any golf course in Texas, public or private. The Wanker can murder you on the golf course if you do not comply and the rest of your foursome will have to bury you at their expense. Or he can murder the entire offending foursome if he so chooses. You have probably not heard or read about this in the MSM.
Dallas: The city of hate
Dallas: The city that roughed up Adlai Stevenson
Dallas: The city that called JFK a traitor & killed him
Dallas: The city that harbors a war criminal named Bush
Dallas: Just north of Waco Texas
And just north of Mt Carmel where 11 FBI and ATF officers lied to the world, pretending that an empty building actually contained 97 men, women and children - when they burnt it to the ground.
For as I published in the Dallas Morning News just after the shootout,
"One small tank slowly and carefully poking holes in Mt Carmel and all could go home in peace."
And so, be it make believe cremation east of Waco, or real torture east of Miami, what a deceitful government won't do to terrorize its people into submission.
When I looked at the election results (www.uselectionatlas.org), Dallas turned out to be strongly for Obama while the surrounding suburbs were flaming red. I don't see Dallas, TX remaining Dubya's Dallas although the Republicans could win it back in the next presidential election should Obama lose very badly in 2012. Anyone from Dallas or anywhere in TX know what's going on there?
Dallas won't be turning back, though Obama is going to lose in 2012 unless he changes course drastically, and soon, but you can count on the Suburbs staying bright red. They are bastions of Conservative thought and money.
Think of the area where the shrub lives in Dallas as a suburb. Though its in Dallas, its a pocket of privilage.
Many other parts of Texas went for Obama, but its hard for the folks that prefer stereotypes to see truth. Impressive that you actually looked to see what was going on.
Henry8, I come from a state that hasn't voted Democrat since 1964 up until last year. TX on the other hand simply hasn't gone D since 1976.
"Dallas won't be turning back, though Obama is going to lose in 2012 unless he changes course drastically, and soon, but you can count on the Suburbs staying bright red. They are bastions of Conservative thought and money.
Think of the area where the shrub lives in Dallas as a suburb. Though its in Dallas, its a pocket of privilage."
What you say about Dallas sounds very similar to Fairfax County, VA and you've probably heard all about that county every time Virginia politics gets discussed these days. That county has joined Arlington County, VA in being the pockets of the privileged although the suburban sprawl is getting worse in Fairfax County that there are now serious considerations to rename it Fairfax City and the inside Fairfax City something else. The other suburbs in Northern Virginia (Loudoun, Prince William, and Manassas) went from 55-45 red in 2004 to 53-46 blue in 2008. I saw more results of TX in 2004 and 2008 and compared those flaming red suburbs. I must say that amazingly Obama, despite never campaigning in the state, has somewhat tempered the flames from 70-30 to 60-40 and in the case of Tarrant County 62-37 to 55-43. Technically, Obama has 3 years to turn things around but yeah, it has to be dramatic, something I seriously doubt will happen. The normally reliable Republican suburbs in Hampton Roads turned out to be swing last year and all except for VA Beach went for Obama and that too was very close. If Obama keeps getting worse, the Democrats will be unable to secure let alone build their victory in Hampton Roads and the exurbs in Northern Virginia (Prince William, Loudoun, and Manassas) could return to red even if Fairfax County stays blue similar to Dallas.
Right now, Obama's slipping popularity is starting to pour in to the current gubernatorial race. Right now, Deeds seems to be in good shape to win but two things could result in VA going GOP this year. In addition to Obama's slipping popularity, the party that occupies the White House almost always loses the gubernatorial race in that year.
"Many other parts of Texas went for Obama, but its hard for the folks that prefer stereotypes to see truth. Impressive that you actually looked to see what was going on."
I always thought Texas and Florida were very similar to Virginia in terms of conservatism. I'm just amazed that Obama was able to turn born-again Republican states like Indiana and Virginia that haven't voted Democrat since 1964 blue and yet Texas his team left out just because of some stupid polls showing that he can't win there. You should check that site out. David Liep gets his results up to date pretty good.
I don't know whether there will ever be an accounting for W's crimes but I am pretty sure that, if there is, it won't be in Texas.
q
Your examples of this?