China has launched at satellite killing satellite. While the Bush Administration was starting futile conventional wars that are contrary to U.S. national interests and private bureaucracies known as corporations were outsourcing vital aspects of our economy, the Chinese stole a march on us: A Long March.
This will have the utmost significance in the mid and long term future. This is a critical national security issue, and we as a nation are unprepared. Terrorists and dictators and other bogeyman were never the threat. We have ceded space without a shot being fired.
America is being run in an entirely irrational fashion, by soft handed double dealers and cheats. The public has been fooled, because they act the fool.
We need a new government. We need informed people. Soon.
We like to think we have a two party system. In fact we have a one party state, with factions. If the Democrats were fundamentally different from the Republicans they would propose and enact fundamentally different policies: but they just fuss around the margins of policy. If the Democrats were not part of the same party system they would impeach George W. Bush (Worst President Ever) for high crimes and misdemeanors. But that isn’t even on the table. It would deligitimize the phony and corrupt “Two-Party” system to have impeachment related to official capacity, instead of personal foibles.
Again that is because they are part of the same party system. There may be “Two Party’s” as a brand idea, but they are one party in fact and practice. The system is not self reforming and the people are mysteriously satisfied with a change in the window dressing of government. People are so busy working and entertaining themselves that they have forgotten to engage themselves in politics. The minimal peripheral attention they give politics is well suited to the propaganda of fear.
We need a new government. We need real news, and independent media. We need a citizenry politically engaged. We need to run the fools and fear-mongers, thieves and cowards, sanctimonious bigots and irrational sociopaths out of our government. We need a government in which the informed consent of we the people matters, and the consent of foreign and domestic vested interests, have no place.
Wake up America!
I have had a most enlightening exchange. It has been suggested to me by someone whose opinion I value, that I tend toward rhetorical overreach, and am use language inexactly. I thought about it for several days, and tend to find merit in that notion. Though I think some of that comes from the assumptions we all make about what is generally known or accepted by others.
In any case I think we would all benefit by common usage of words and terms. Politicians have become past masters at manipulating language, and as Orwell suggested we cannot let them have control over the language, because with that, thought follows.
If we could agree on terms, words, and meanings then we could all spend more time discussing an idea, less time arguing past each other.
I am not sure how we could do this. Are there any suggestions?
When is enough? I try to distinguish between people of faith and spirituality from those who are political sectarians, but it is getting harder.
There is a big difference between having faith oneself, and forcing that faith on others through the political process. Where is the internal restraint from the religious side? The compromise of religion with political power and material wealth always corrupts the church. It is an absolute; an article of faith. The message of faith is always lost in the halls of power.
There seems to be a desire among the faithful to have people with similar beliefs in office. That in itself is reasonable. The method used in our country fails. You religious folk are judging whether someone has your values by party labels and campaign rhetoric. Those are always lies.
If the faithful of this country want simple people of faith in office, they must look to the lives that these candidates lead, not ever, what they say. You have chosen Karl Rove over John Danforth. A fine speech of family values by a candidate who lives a life of debauchery, dishonesty and sin, shouldn’t sway the faithful, but it does.
I accuse the faithful of laziness and sloth, and suggest that their litmus test require a life lived according to their teachings, not sanctimonious speeches. Then they can regain their self respect, and remove the suspicion of other believers and non believers.
The “surge” will apparently take place; I’d like to go on record as saying that: not only will this fail too; it will give the impression of being our maximum effort, which till the surge would have been a question mark for many. This further failure will embolden the Iraqi partisans/guerrillas. But will it topple a criminally incompetent,
America betraying, chief executive?
The military have a “can do” attitude; it colors their judgment. They will try their utmost, though they cannot succeed. The military has been betrayed by the President and his regime.
The U.S. went into
Iraq with no plan, just hopes and dreams. It would have taken about 60,000 troops, Armor, Mech., and Air Cavalry to overthrow Saddam. It would have taken about 400,000 troops of all kinds to overthrow Saddam, secure the country, and create a provisional government: if the Iraqi’s supported us and
Kurdistan was allowed to break away. It will take 2.5 million troops of all kinds, plus civilian/paramilitary officials to secure
Iraq now against the will of the Iraqi’s. And then
Iraq will only be secure while we have 2.5 million troops there. It will revert to type, as soon as we leave. There is no true model of permanent success: some ideas are just plain bad.
We need a new government.
I have seen the footage of Saddam’s execution; I can only shake my head in disbelief. The guards were not uniformed, and showed no gravitas or military bearing. They seemed like sectarian thugs for one of
Iraq’s political factions, undisciplined and unqualified for the task.
Saddam went to his death with dignity and courage, and presence: dressing down his executioners for the shambolic train wreck they made of an historic event. In his last moments, Saddam’s impeccable behavior made him finally human and sympathetic, simply a man facing death with grace; not the tyrant and mass murderer we know him to have been. Of all the scenarios of Saddam’s demise that have been bandied about for lo these 14 years, none of them included Saddam as a sympathetic figure.
How could they screw this up? How in fact is it possible for the Bush Administrations to always be wrong, and fuck up all and sundry? Statistical probability should allow them some successes: it is really quite extraordinary.
We need a new government.