Bye bye Pensions
US President George Bush’s administration has weathered a pre-election mauling by announcing emergency measures to skirt a $7.38-trillion debt limit.
Treasury Secretary John Snow said he would use pension money to keep the government running.
In a letter to US Senate majority leader Bill Frist on Thursday, Snow said he was immediately suspending payments to a federal employees’ retirement scheme, the Government Securities Investment Fund (G-Fund).
The missing money would be repaid in full later, with no net effect on the fund or retirees, he promised.
The treasury secretary said he was forced to take the emergency accounting step because congress had not acted on his 2 August request for the government’s legal debt limit to be raised.
Any move by congress to raise the debt limit could be politically embarrassing.
Democrats pounced on the news as evidence of fiscal mismanagement by the administration, less than three weeks before Bush faces Democratic challenger Senator John Kerry in the 2 November presidential election.
“George Bush continues to make history for all the wrong reasons: He’s the first president to go without creating a new job since the Great Depression and now he’s run up more debt in [a] shorter period of time than all the presidents combined in the 200 years from Washington through Reagan,” said Kerry campaign spokesman Phil Singer.
“On top of that, this is the third time he’s broken his promise not to raise the debt ceiling. His fiscal mismanagement is taking its toll on America and it’s time for a fresh start,” he said in a statement.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Oct 22 2004 18:10 utc | 3

Has Chris Floyd been reading MOA recently?

Posted by: b real | Oct 22 2004 18:14 utc | 5

b real
“Again, this is no tiny band of cranks meeting in some basement in Alabama…..”
Excellent!

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Oct 22 2004 18:19 utc | 7

@b real
well you know what they say about great minds 😉

Posted by: DeAnander | Oct 22 2004 18:23 utc | 9

@DeAnander
LOL – guess we’re part of the meme generation

Posted by: b real | Oct 22 2004 18:41 utc | 11

[60] The platform of the Republican Party of Texas may be found at: http://
http://www.4religious-right.info/texas_gop.htm. Here are excerpts: “The Republican Party of Texas reaffirms the United States of America is a Christian Nation …
 
“1. GOVERNMENT:  We reclaim freedom of religious expression in public on government property, and freedom from government interference. Support government display of Ten Commandments.
 
Dispel the “myth” of the separation of church and state. A strong and vibrant private sector [should be] unencumbered by excessive government regulation. Oppose Campaign Finance Reform. Oppose any form of gun control. Abolish: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms; Position of Surgeon General; EPA; Department of Energy; Department of Housing and Urban Development; Department of Education; Department of Commerce and Labor; National Endowment for the Arts.
 
“2. ECONOMY:  Abolish the dollar in favor of the gold standard.  Abolish the IRS. Eliminate income tax, inheritance tax, gift tax, capital gains, corporate income tax, payroll tax and property tax. Repeal minimum wage law. … Gradually phase out Social Security tax for a system of private pensions.
 
“3. UNITED NATIONS:   .. We immediately rescind our membership in, as well as all financial and military contributions to the United Nations.” We should ” … evict the United Nations from the United States and eliminate any further participation.
 
“4. FAMILY: We believe that traditional marriage is a legal and moral commitment between a man and a woman. We recognize that the family is the foundational unit of a healthy society and consists of those related by blood, marriage, or adoption. The family is responsible for its own welfare, education, moral training, conduct, and property.
 
     “The practice of sodomy tears at the heart of our society… The party oppose[s] decriminalization of sodomy. Oppose all forms of abortion – even in cases of rape or incest. We unequivocally oppose United States Senate ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
 
“5. EDUCATION: We call for the abolition of the U.S. Department of Education and the prohibition of the transfer of any of its functions to any other federal agency.
 
     “Support official prayer in public schools Oppose Early Childhood Development Programs. We support … a program based upon biblical principles… Terminate bilingual education. Since Secular Humanism is recognized by the United States Supreme Court as a religion … Secular Humanism should be subjected to the same state and federal laws as any other recognized religions.
 
“6. THE ENVIRONMENT:  Oppose the myth of global warming.  Reaffirm the belief in the fundamental right of an individual to use property without governmental interference. Oppose EPA management of Texas air quality.
 
“7. THE MIDDLE EAST:  … Jerusalem is the capital of Israel … therefore, the United States should move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.”
 
To read the complete Texas GOP Platform click here to go to a PDF file: more
 
This ain’t no party, this ain’t no disco, this ain’t no fool’in around……..
So far this notion of dominionism, as a template, fits very well indeed over
the whole of whats been going down, with particular respect to:
the evolution of the Christian right into a political force
the utilization of the Republican party as the instrument of that force
the history of the neo-conservative movement from Leo Strauss to the present
the influence of Machiavelli on the neo-con movement
the functional synthesis of the Christian right and the neo-cons into a de-facto Dominionism
the philosophic suppositions, the methodology, and the record of fact, to all the above.

Posted by: anna missed | Oct 22 2004 19:03 utc | 13

I recall hearing a brief reality blip on NPR before ’00 election – Clinton read then current Texas GOP platform & said “This is fascist.” Perhaps Mexico would like Texas back – we get Molly Ivins, they get the rest.
I think it’s an error that it hasn’t been more widely disseminated that it’s the Theocrats that were prime movers/bankers behind deliberately corrupt computerized voting systems. Then perhaps people would understand that it’s no accident they leave no trace behind & can be rigged by a chimp in a few mins. Did everyone see the video that Bev Harris made & posted on blackboxvoting.org of the Chimp Fixing the Election? (No Joke.)

Posted by: jj | Oct 22 2004 19:31 utc | 15

9/11 Mom: An Open Letter to George W. Bush
    t r u t h o u t | Letter
    By Donna Marsh O’Connor,Liverpool, NY,
    Mother of Vanessa Lang Langer,
    WTC Tower II, 93rd floor
    Friday 22 October 2004
On the Thirty-third Anniversary of My Daughter’s Birth
    cc: Senator John Kerry
    Sometimes, Mr. Bush, it’s the smallest of details that makes everything click. The smallest of details. Right now, Mr. Bush, I am looking at your watch. It’s an item of clothing accessory and, unlike your other costumes, it is one that is particularly revealing.
    On Halloween my daughter would be thirty-three years old. Her child would be almost three. Seven weeks before her twenty-ninth birthday, Vanessa, four months pregnant, ran from the falling towers of the World Trade Center. She did not make it. Her body, and in it the small body of her unborn child, was pulled from the rubble of the fallen towers on September 24th, just ten feet from an alley between towers IV and V. It is important for me to tell you that she was on the phone to her uptown office five minutes after the first plane hit tower I, explaining how she and others in tower II were “safe.”
    Here is what you did regarding specifically the events of that morning: You vacationed before, during and after August 6th, the day you were handed the presidential daily briefing that said very clearly Vanessa Lang Langer and many other Americans were not safe. After the first plane hit tower I, the fact of the PDB did not click in your mind, did not cause you to act, to turn on a television, to contact the Pentagon. You sat so that you did not frighten a group of children. You did not worry about Vanessa’s brothers, or the young children who would certainly be directly affected by that event. You did not, like her fourteen year-old brother, rush from your seat and head for a phone, desperately trying to reach out, to fix, to save. You sat. You said, two weeks to the day before the general election of 2004, that you would protect Americans; that is, according to you, your primary responsibility as Commander-in Chief; no terrorists would get us, no terrorists would attack us (you said this with your arm extended), and I you said and I quote, on your watch. You said this with no sense of irony, no sense, no indication of how that text would sound to those you failed miserably to protect. You never notified officially the airlines, flight schools, persons who lived or worked in our tallest structures. You failed in your watch and on it.
    Help me to understand this, because I was looking so closely at your watch. Five minutes, Mr. Bush. Five minutes. In that five minute space my sons lost a best friend, a future that included a loving sister and her future family. And my daughter lost the only thing in life I ever knew she really wanted. In fact, you stood on September 13th, on the rubble that covered my child’s bones and you began your move to have the war you had been planning since the beginning of your term in office. You, Mr. Bush, used my daughter’s murder to perpetrate the most hideous example of racism with the direst of consequences and you did it standing literally on her bones.
    I am going to be very honest with you, Mr. Bush. I suspect that your culpability does not begin with your failures that day. It may be imprudent to mention this now because evidence is difficult to produce, but I am one of those pragmatists that rely on some basic fundamentals in crime solving. So let me say, when a crime is committed we are to find suspects by exploring motive, by looking at who had most to gain. You did, Mr. Bush, you and your friends at Halliburton and your friends in Saudi Arabia. And you have never answered for this. Don’t you think with all that has happened it would be in order for you to explain all you have come to gain, now and in the future, in terms of both money and power?
    On September 11th, I was in Canada. When I heard the news I was walking in the street, enjoying what was to be the last of the purely beautiful sunny mornings of my life. My cell phone rang. And every second after that call was a mix of panic, dread, calm because this couldn’t be happening, and utter, absolute need to touch my daughter. What would you have done, Mr. Bush? What would your instincts have been? As a parent? I ask this because Senator Kerry during the second debate mentioned you are a “good father.” Are you? Have you made Americans, including your own daughters safer? Let me tell you what I wanted that morning. I wanted to fly to New York, to put my feet on my home soil as fast as humanly possible. I wanted to get to an airport and get home. Not an option for me, Mr. Bush. My husband and I just made it over the border before it closed. And on that morning, when no American citizen was allowed to fly in our airspace, on that morning and the mornings to follow, Americans were grounded. But bin Laden’s family flew. They flew home to Saudi Arabia. Before they were vetted by the F.B.I., by the C.I.A. And worst of all, you never were made to tell the truth about why that was so. I’m sorry, Mr. Bush. I will never understand this. Never. But still: your responsibility was then and is now to explain it. And to explain while that watch of yours leading up to the election is still ticking.
    Right now there is a report from the C.I.A. that names explicitly your administration’s culpability regarding those events. Bipartisan leaders have requested, even demanded that those reports be turned over now to congress. You, according to reports, have refused to allow the C.I.A. to release them, just as you refused to testify under oath before the 9/11 commission. Now, Mr. Bush, release them. Before the election.
    Right now, Mr. Bush, there are wide-spread rumors of vote tampering all over this country. And let me be clear about this: the rumors are that Republicans are benefiting from this tampering. Instead of enumerating our safeties, perhaps you could show some leadership, Mr. Bush, and demand that it stop now. Demand, Mr. Bush, that in this country our right to vote is protected. Because without that, we are not safe. Wouldn’t you agree?
    After the 2000 election, where there were in Florida widespread problems with voting, Mr. Bush, voting in African American communities, you also did nothing. Absolutely nothing. You did nothing to counter the rumors that your brother handed you Florida. Nothing to smooth over what must have felt to African Americans (even if this was just rumor) the painful and the absolute, clear enactment of racial prejudice, not encoded in the ordinary acts of ordinary citizens, but in the very structure of the government that must be protective of all citizens of this country and the world. Why, Mr. Bush, did you fail to go to Florida and demand that these persons’ rights were protected? Or, at the very least, to apologize and guarantee that this would never happen again? What does America mean to you? In August of 2001, the United Nations hosted a conference on racism and Colin Powell, your Secretary of State wanted to attend. You did not allow this because, you said, we don’t have problems with racism in America. Do you see the pattern I am pointing at, here, Mr. Bush? In each case, the problems in this country have been enacted and exacerbated by you and you have attempted to cover them up. How could you do that to Colin Powell? How could you do that to another man?
    When your children are young, Mr. Bush, they are often rebellious. They often admire you, but buck you at the same time. One way a mature parent feels this love is sometimes in the very ways in which your children buck you—by using the very part of your example they most admire. Vanessa confronted me every day of her life, especially on the days when she acted most loving. Parent/child things. The kind of things that all someday are made into family jokes when the child becomes a parent and sees that the very methods of touching and teaching and learning come from actions the parent used without thought. I never had that fully with Vanessa, the day when she consciously, because she was parenting herself, used my methods on another generation. But one day, almost there, Vanessa said to me, “Mom, you always made Christmases at home so beautiful…” and then she said, “And you taught us how not to be racist. You have no idea, Mom, how much racism there is and white people don’t always see it.”
    I cannot tell you in shorthand, Mr. Bush, how important it was that she said those words before I lost her because unless she did, I would always have wondered, was I in any way that mattered a good enough parent to a woman who would die so young. I can tell you some of the methods I used with Vanessa and her brothers, but let me show you what you did that I had to explain and counter with all three of them:
    You refused, when you met face-to-face with James Byrd’s daughter (You remember him, I am sure. He’s the African American man whose head was ripped almost off of his body in Texas by three white men who tied him to their pickup and dragged him along a Texas road.), you refused to sign a hate crimes bill as she begged you, crying. You didn’t even, as Molly Ivins reported, offer her a tissue. In that sense, Mr. Bush, you functioned as a very hostile branch of government, one that we might have predicted would not care if persons of color or persons of the other party were denied the right to vote.
    But then, Mr. Bush, you used this tendency of yours, this refusal to get behind most Americans’ desires to eradicate racism by pretending Osama bin Laden is the embodiment of Saddam Hussein and vice versa. One man equals the other. They are both Arabs. Do you own a globe, Mr. Bush? Do you know where Afghanistan is? Do you know where Iraq is? Have you been there since the war began to examine what you have done to the civilians you were going to protect? Interesting detail (and perhaps a warning from G-d): Vanessa, when she got one of her first jobs, bought me a daily planner with a map on it. The map on this particular piece of canvas has in its center Afghanistan. To the right of this small country is a larger country—Iran and to the right of that—Iraq, also small, even smaller (geographically and metaphorically speaking) of Afghanistan. Just under Iraq, writ very large on my daily planner is Saudi Arabia. You know, Saudi Arabia, Mr. Bush. I know you do because the families of 9/11 who got together to bankrupt terrorism, those people who are bringing suit against the Saudis got no help from your administration. None. Though you should know that a coalition of the willing, including France, Spain, Great Britain and Germany have offered help to the families of 9/11 as they try to connect the events of 9/11 to the real perpetrators. There are connections between the Saudis and the terrorists, the terrorists who, no doubt, now that you have opened up a haven for terrorism in Iraq, are growing in number and resources. How much time do you have left, Mr. Bush? What is on your watch? Am I taking too long?
    What costume will you wear on Vanessa’s birthday this year, Mr. Bush? Will you dress up as the head of the military or a foot soldier of Prince Bandar or Dick Cheney? Will you wear a white sheet with a cone head, Mr. Bush? Will you pretend you’re a plain speaking, Texas cowboy, with your shirt sleeves rolled up, proclaiming happily how safe you’ll keep us as you point to your watch? Will you dress up again as a good Christian? Will you dress up as a Republican? You are, you know, not a Republican. You have shamed Republicans. I know one thing, Mr. Bush: I am going to try very hard not to have you dress up anymore as Commander-in Chief. In more ways than I have articulated here, that costume does not fit you. I am a proud American citizen, Mr. Bush, who is disgusted that you try to portray yourself as patriotic. You have trampled every value of decency America ever held dear.
    Do you believe in G-d, Mr. Bush, really? Really? Because, to me, as a flawed parent, flawed person, flawed citizen, I ask G-d to help me fix my flaws, to forgive me my trespasses. And here’s what I hear Him telling me:
    Don’t let him speak for Me. If you do, it is you who fail to watch over your children. You.

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Oct 22 2004 20:20 utc | 17

Thank you Rgiap, for busting out of the restraints and telling it like it is. Your anger is well-placed and refreshing. Gawd we are prevented here from hearing any of this thru our normal channels. And still it is denied denied denied by so many that anything is out of the ordinary.
Perhaps that is in part because denial has become the norm. Sculpted and basted into the public psyche for many years.
I am sure we are headed for – near the precipice now – for a total meltdown of the faux civilisation that has been built around humanity for the last several hundred years. That is good. It is time. There is no alternative.
But the result of the meltdown can still be shaped by truly great minds and hearts if they are able to see through and resist, overthrow this cabal of reptiles that has us in its grip. It can be done. The ancient knowledge of Native Americans, the Earth People, confirms this.
We are all blessed with the gift that we are here at this time in history to witness and experience this rebirth.

Posted by: rapt | Oct 22 2004 21:20 utc | 19

@GOP church state discussion
Sullivan smells the shit:

THEOCRATS FOR BUSH: Here’s a revealing tale about what’s happening in the Republican party. It’s a story that needs to be followed up. Kudos to Beliefnet for breaking it. The gist:

The Republican National Committee is employing the services of a Texas-based activist who believes the United States is a ‘Christian nation’ and the separation of church and state is ‘a myth.’
David Barton, the founder of an organization called Wallbuilders, was hired by the RNC as a political consultant and has been traveling the country for a year–speaking at about 300 RNC-sponsored lunches for local evangelical pastors. During the lunches, he presents a slide show of American monuments, discusses his view of America’s Christian heritage — and tells pastors that they are allowed to endorse political candidates from the pulpit.

It gets worse. Barton is on the board of advisers for a Christian Reconstructionist group – people who believe that America should scrap its constitution and go back to Biblical law. When I have described the trend within the GOP as theocratic, I am sometimes criticized for hyperbole. But this is the reality. Barton is the vice-chair of the Texas GOP. Figures.

The last time I have been on business negotiations in the states, 2002, I had several business meetings in Denver. The CEO of that company skipt about 2/3rd of the allocated negotiation time during 3 days because of some church duty. The other folks of that company were always kind of depressed when again a meeting was shortened by this and never dared to excuse or explain it even when asked privatly. They always changed themes when I tried to find out about their opinion on the CEOs behaviour. Those folks were fine, mostly tending progressive, open minded and with international experience.
Something had scared them shitless and I didn´t understand what it was. Later one of the guys told me on a private phone call: “He is a believer, he´s dangerous”. I didn´t get it then, but it’s creeping up and I am getting cold showers remembering it.

Posted by: b | Oct 22 2004 21:40 utc | 21

Giap
Truly powerful words………
You’re the steel in the foundation of our community.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Oct 22 2004 21:55 utc | 23

“You preach (or rant) to a choir here at MOA. That’s easy. Presenting an objective, persuasive case to those in disagreement – that’s different.”
It is you who rant Pat……..you lost. Accept it and embrace enlightenment.

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Oct 22 2004 22:54 utc | 25

& any worldview which say that american deaths are loftier than others is an obscenity in my mind because it is not so very different from the murderous madness of king leopold in the congo
your military sd ‘shock & awe’ – what does that mean – it means the death of iraqi civilians for the most part
your military leaders search like carnal wolves through the bible to name their ‘operations’ & thus to sanctify them – they are what the german army used to call ‘police actions’ – einsatzcommando was the name of police/ùilitary units who slaughtered jew & patriots all over eastern europe with the same fervour as your army is doing – it is the same morally because you do not consider arabs – human.
they are so inhuman – that you do not do body counts as gen franks so stupidly sd – he is another westmoreland – a vain & stupid man
let me repeat something again – you are not now today facing – a viet cong or battalions of battle hardened nva – but you are being beaten by a chaotic melange of resistants who come from all over iraq & from every tendency. the puppets in baghdad cannot hide that fact. the work of the extremely courageous robert fisk make that clear in nearly every one of his articles
no death comes to us all but it should not come at the hands of a corrupt clique of gangster who are holding america & the world at ransom
still steel

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Oct 22 2004 23:22 utc | 27

remembereringgiap, you can be very eloquent (if rather predictably eloquent) about the shortcomings of the USA in the scheme of things. And since MoA doesn’t appeal to trolls, I think it might be fair to say that everyone who contributes to MoA pretty much agrees that those shortcomings do indeed exist. It’s also true that you denounce those shortcomngs in a sweeping way. Given the option of analyzing coolly or denouncing hotly, you’ll go for the hot denunciation almost every time. As a result, you misread the contributions of others, and inhibit the process of critique (Marx, it’s true, could deliver the coolest of critiques in the hottest language, but that was a gift that set him apart from the rest of us). I don’t, in any case, think that Marx, in the year 2004, would ever post a diatribe attacking any nation, or even any class within a nation, for being the punctual site or source of our fundamental problems. His take on the topology of violence would be a lot more subtle than that. And I don’t think that he’d misread Pat as you do: her posts are lucid and her parsings are pointed–something we sorely need right now, because the Left is in disarray, and we have to recognize this fact.

Posted by: alabama | Oct 22 2004 23:35 utc | 29

& if i repeat the vietnam, indonesia, chile greece etc it is because as culture we have a very short memory & need to be reminded constantly of the contexts

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Oct 22 2004 23:57 utc | 31

Keep an eye on this
it’d only early voting days yet, and the incident report centre is flooded.

Posted by: DeAnander | Oct 23 2004 0:41 utc | 33

the only apology i will make is that my disease & its recent complication do not make me gentle with time
yes, ‘the prospect of hanging focuses the mind wonderfully’… rgiap imho you are indeed ranting, and somewhat intemperately, but I have sympathy. all our nerves are on edge, even without the anxiety and anger of physical disease, pain, timor mortis etc.
I too am disappointed by pat’s ‘get over it’ dismissiveness, as the evidence for the criminality of the selling of this war, as well as the criminality of its conduct, mounts up. what next? do we “accept” the theft of indigenous people’s land and laugh at those who continue to struggle for restitution/reparation? should the S. Africans have “accepted” apartheid as a fait accompli and ceased to struggle? what is this, the “lie back and like it” school of political philosophy? “facts on the ground,” as the war criminal Sharon is so fond of saying? the “let’s just move on” tactic?
I agree that nothing can now undo the fact that the US, under false pretenses, with a barrage of dishonest propaganda, faked evidence and bully tactics, invaded a crippled country that its own siege warfare had over a 13 year period reduced to Third World status. nothing can undo the deaths of maybe 30,000 Iraqi civilians (and counting). nothing can restore the generation lost to easily-preventable disease during the Siege of Iraq, and nothing can erase from the historical record Allbright’s chilling callousness about their fate. nothing can restore the looted and burned libraries, the smashed antiquities and vandalised historical sites, the stolen museum treasures, even the personal trinkets and jewellery looted from individual homes. nothing can repair the scars left on millions of lives during the period of invasion, mismanagement, looting, chaos. in that sense, yes, we have to “accept” that this has all happened and it was not just a bad dream. nothing can erase this ugly blot from the history of the US or its cowed pup the UK.
that does not mean that we should stop finding out how and why it happened, or fail in the duty of naming and prosecuting those responsible (a) for funding and coddling Hussein from the git-go, (b) for encouraging his war on Iran and selling him WMD, (c) for betraying the Iraqi resistance after Bush War I, (d) for profiteering off the bleeding Iraqi economy during the siege, (e) for constructing an edifice of lies, suborning the media, shamelessly exploiting the WTC dead, and making a mockery of legitimate political process — all in order to justify an invasion and occupation that were a failure only in terms of their overt rationale and agenda. the covert rationale and agenda — hardly covert in its flagrancy — i.e. carpetbagging, war profiteering, commandeering Iraq’s oil reserves, filling the pockets and improving the quarterly reports of AngloAmerican oil, munitions, and services vendors — has been a howling success. the thieves have walked away with the treasure. are we to let them get away with it?
simply to “accept” all this and stop seeking some kind of truth, justice, and reconciliation is beyond me. the odds are against us: as r’giap points out, the majority of war criminals, dictators and gangstas die peacefully in silken beds, with the best of care, while their victims lie in unmarked (sometimes mass) graves. the lousy odds on seeing Messrs Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, et al in the dock at the Hague do not prevent me from wanting to see that day, earnestly hoping for it, doing whatever is within my small power to bring it about. “accept” their malfeasance and give them a free pass? unthinkable. when we “accept” soi-disant leaders of this calibre we render our polity indistinguishable from any tinpot tyranny, save only in the size of our guns.
it is true that the American Left and the world community failed to prevent this crime. we failed, OK? we tried and we failed. we also failed to prevent the installation and maintenance of Hussein in the first place (though I was among those who were outraged by it and protested it 20 years ago when a younger Rummie was shaking hands and slapping backs with a younger Saddam). we failed to prevent the ouster of Mossadegh, which led to the tyranny of the Shah (another of the US’ little pets with charming habits), and thence inexorably to the tyranny of the ayatollahs, whose religious extremism provided the rationale for installing and supporting Saddam. we failed to prevent the gutting of our own movement and subculture by Joe McCarthy, the bizarre Dulles brothers and the seriously strange J Edgar — a putsch from which American political life has never recovered, one of the most successful “social engineering” efforts of all time. but our failure to prevent these things despite resisting them, is hardly to be measured on the guilt-o-meter against the culpability of those who actually did these things — or of those who still refuse to admit that any of it ever happened, or if it did happen, mattered a whit.
and because we have not yet succeeded in stopping these crimes is not, imho, any reason to stop trying. and trying. and trying.
r’giap you are a bad influence 🙂 I was getting better at shorter posts, and now look at all this text…

Posted by: DeAnander | Oct 23 2004 1:29 utc | 35

Here’s an interesting site to keep you occupied for hours.
I’ll also just post the link in case I screwed up again on the html
http://www.rationalrevolution.net/
I’d be interested to hear what people on this site think about the one above. I think it’s fairly level-headed and really asks Americans to try to think about what’s going on instead of falling prey to “bad faith” as Sartre would perhaps call it.

Posted by: fauxreal | Oct 23 2004 2:35 utc | 37

I am not a frequent poster here, but thought I’d take a moment to share a small piece of good news that speaks to the importance and validity of keeping up the fight. The general consensus on the blogosphere tonight is that the lawsuits and boycott, letter writing, phone call, divestment of stock, etc. campaign to stop Sinclair from airing “Stolen Honor” seem to have been effective. I did not see the show on POWs and the media, but the reports by those who did (conservatives and progressives alike) have indicated that it was fair-handed and perhaps even lent additional credibility to Kerry. While charges were leveled at Kerry regarding his anti-war protest, a credible response was included. Portions of “Going Upriver” were shown as well as testimony from Kerry supporters. Posters on the Free Republic blog were more disgruntled after watching the show than those on Kos. So score one for the left, and let’s look at it as a much needed sign that the left can make a difference.

Posted by: conchita | Oct 23 2004 4:11 utc | 39

DeAnander, since when does “accepting” something mean, necessarily, to “get over it”? For me, at least, it means to “get on with it”. If I accept the Holocaust, it’s not that I consent to it, or applaud it, or even agree that it was somehow fated to happen. No, I accept it in order not to be caught in the pathetic whirlpool of the “holocaust deniers,” who cannot be open to the surprising ways in which something unexpected comes to our doorstep from the future.
I expect this to happen: I await a “new international,” an as-yet-unimaginable converging of interests from among the poor, the unschooled, the unexceptional, the ordinary, scattered around the smallest corners of the globe. This thing impends, and nothing in 2004 can possibly stop it.
Pat reminds us of what we must do to entertain such thinking. Bad things happen, certainly, but they are, if I may put it so, not very interesting–not as interesting, anyway, as that unimaginable day, when all the violence of our moment will have dwindled down to the flashings of a glass shard on a lawn of green grass.

Posted by: alabama | Oct 23 2004 4:39 utc | 41

Was it the
Paid for by Cheney-Bush 04 Re-election Committee, Inc.
PO Box 666, Washington, DC 20500
at the bottom of that webpage that gave it away onzaga?

Posted by: Jeorge Bush | Oct 23 2004 4:56 utc | 43

@DeAnander, alabama, rGiap, and Pat
Passions are running high, but I hope we’ll be able to retain that courtesy and decorum, that, yes, seem so rightist and inhibited, but also permit all of us to gradually overcome our vulnerabilities and enter into
a fruitful dialectic (that word “dialectic” was chosen for
rGiap, others, steeped in other rhetorical traditions might prefer the milder term “dialogue”). I think Yeats talked about “custom and ceremony” (in his
“Prayer for my Daughter”) as the only way that “innocence and beauty” can be found, and although I suspect most of us are far from embracing quietism, there is a lot to be said for respecting the “inner light” within each of our dialectical partners.
Although I find myself very much in tune with DeAnander and Alabama’s point of view, I suspect that such lucid rationalism won’t cut much ice outside such ivory tower retreats as MOA. Once again, Yeats already knew that the best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity. That is an oversimplified and overly rhetorical view of where we are, yet
I find it striking (and very dialectical) that the we (and here I include myself) are starting to reflect the very qualities of “passionate intensity” that we find so worrisome in Dominionist circles. It’s difficult to disagree so profoundly with
Bushite policies without becoming a bit fanatical, maybe “a little fanaticism” is even necessary but I suspect that most of us know (permit me a grossly rhetorical “in our hearts”) that none of us and no ideology is the permanent repository of
all truth and wisdom, and that we ourselves can be, and oft are, wrong on points of both fact and substance. I have no doubt that we (the MOA crowd) need companions who
excel at throwing an unforgiving light on dark corners and bringing the jagged edges of political reality into sharp relief, but, in the end, I prefer those posters who make me want to hug them and exchange an ironic smile.

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Oct 23 2004 5:06 utc | 45

“Bad things happen, but they are, if I may put it so, not very interesting”: this is not, DeAnander, the same as saying “bad things happen but they are not so very interesting”. An imperceptible difference? Something in the cadence of the phrasing, perhaps? “Bad things happen” is an unconditional declaration. “But they are not very interesting” is also an unconditional declaration. “Not very interesting” means, that while they may engage our attention, they do not claim it as its all-consuming interest. Not all the libraries, museums, conferences and observances in the world can do justice to the Holocaust, and the Holocaust cannot, if we are honest in our acceptance of it, monopolize our attention. Were it to do so, we’d turn the Holocaust into a fetish and a taboo, something to be worshipped and not understood, and in the process we’d lose sight of the thing that matters most–or matters more: that which lies ahead of us and comes toward us.
A weak messianism, if you will, without a messiah of any kind. Just an impending event–a convergence welling up from within the innumerable issues of the now.

Posted by: alabama | Oct 23 2004 5:43 utc | 47

@ Alabama
Sorry to “but in” to your dialogue with DeAnander, but your
mention of “fetish and taboo” seems to me particularly apt, and not merely for the case at hand. I recently listened to a religious figure
who insisted that the “true” role of religion is precisely to combat fetishism, and that resonated within me. I see American political life as replete with fetishism (U.S. flag lapel buttons being one of the most
banal examples) but with very little “religion” in the authentic sense, whether that be the classical religions or their modern analogues like Marxism, environmentalism, or “what have you”.

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Oct 23 2004 5:57 utc | 49

@ Alabama Right on!! But how to begin repairing things? Do any of us believe that electing Kerry will change American Middle Eastern policy in any fundamental way? This interplay between the moral fonts of a polity and its effective execution must be something that gives political scientists the willies, and not for nothing the coldest Macchiavellian realpolitik has ever been accompanied by a warm cloud of justificatory rhetoric. Mere “management of the existing” is not a glorious slogan, but
it looks like “mismanagement of the existing” will be what brings Bush down, that politically fatal technical incompetence and not a totally justifiable moral revulsion at what he and his criminal crew have perpetrated. Can our realistic ambitions be anything more than to restore a modicum of rationality to the management of the American imperium? Of course, right now, even that looks pretty attractive.

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Oct 23 2004 6:22 utc | 51

RGiap
I must respectfully voice my disagreement with your posts. I’ll do bullet points to keep it short.
– I think you are being unduly harsh with pat. If I understand her correctly (and Pat, please speak up if I misunderstood what you say), she thinks – regretfully – that we should not count on Kerry to do much better strategically than the current crowd (which I interpret as criticism of that crowd…), while noting that people – Americans – active in the field today – are mostly honorable and decent and doing their job well (tactically competent) within the frame they are given. While I am not as close as she is to the battlefield, I see no reason to think this is not overall correct.
– I think you are also misguided to blam all evil in the world on the US or its leaders. I don’t deny all the ugly things that have been part of US policy (although I must confess I am really surprised to see Solidarosc – the Polish one – as part of that ugliness), but I cannot let pass the fact that you seem to say that this is the only source of evil/ugliness in our world, because it is clearly not.
I know we are on opposite sides of the fence on this, but I’d still say that the US (and the West in general) is one of the most benign forms of dominant power, and it was in particular more benign than all forms of communism pushed by Russia and China (now maybe you also count this as part of Western domination…). I agree that we should set our standards higher than Stalin or Mao, but your posts are so heated that this basic fact (Stalin was worse) seems forgotten.
The reason I am optimistic these days, and upbeat about the US/the West is that our system does not eliminate the possibility of evil – it makes it easier to fight it if it appears. The most vociferous critics of all the misguided US policies of the past half-century came from within the US itself and they prevailed (and for instance John Kerry was instrumental in that process re the Vietnam war, which is one of the reasons I have a lot of respect for him). The lessons from that pretty recent part, as well as current trends within the US lead me to my upbeat diagnosis that the current cancer in the White House is going to be voted out and thouroughly discredited. This is the force of our systems – not that our mistakes are somehow smaller, but that we correct these mistakes faster and end up being stronger for it. If this does not come to pass on Nov. 2, then I agree, we’re fucked, and I will let you rant until you run out of breath…
To comment on the extremism vs moderation / passion vs. reason theme, I must say tht I have sadly come to the unpleasant conclusion that it is the extremists that get results when serious change is needed. They bring the issues on the table and force change on the unwilling status quo. Ask kindly and you will be ignored. Of course, at the end of the process, you need credible moderates to actually get to an agreement with the other side…

Posted by: Jérôme | Oct 23 2004 7:35 utc | 53

I was not that guy that caught the ball last in last year’s Cubs game, although it was my post last night that Pat was responding to, so I’ll just say this; Pat I always like what you bring to the moon, most importantly as alabama once said, as an interlocuter. Even if your motives are otherwise, and you are not singing to the choir here, you bring a lucid point that is impossible to neglect in the discourse here. And if something I happen to say here set off such an encyclopedic response I would consider it anything but condemnation, and trust rGiaps prouncement that above all “this is business”.

Posted by: anna missed | Oct 23 2004 9:00 utc | 55

@anna missed
Thanks.

Posted by: Pat | Oct 23 2004 11:02 utc | 57

PASS KAFFIR?

It seems fitting to begin this little notice with the standard insulting question black Africans were subject to for decades in white supremacist South Africa.

In the lead story by James Dao in today’s New York Times, it was revealed that on voting day in Ohio, thousands of paid Republican workers will be swarming around the states many polling places demanding that voters (I imagine particularly minority voters recently registered) produce proof that they are qualified to vote. As far as I know, no one has the legal right to demand that you produce this on the spot. In fact, if I recall correctly, it is the sole job of the state and those running the polls to do so. This appears to be a massive campaign against, most probably, minorities.

In any case, every black man and women will have to run through a gauntlet of angry, white, intimidating thugs to vote. There are only four points that may be challenged in Ohio: challenges could be made: whether the voter is a citizen, is at least 18, is a resident of the county and has lived in Ohio for the previous 30 days. While these are banal questions, they could clog lines and intimidate minority voters.

Paid RNC “volunteers” will stop people who look like they just registered (criteria unknown but easy to guess) or look handicapped in some way (they will have to prove to the RNC troopers that they are intelligent to vote). If the RNC workers feels they are unqualified, they will follow them into the polls and challenge them publically once they try to vote. How these people (1400 in Cuyahoga County alone) are and will be “trained” is not yet known. We also don’t know if members of the press will be allowed to be present during the training process. Oh, for a hidden camera!

Pardon my use of the vocative, but this is a national shame and the RNC has been planning it for months. The article only mentioned Ohio, but I would suspect that other swing states will have similar tactics. I would request that anyone with additional information respond to this post.

Posted by: Diogenes | Oct 23 2004 12:35 utc | 59

i want to be absolutely clear
it is never personal – it is business
the invasion of iraq & the forthcoming invasions are consitent with american foreign policy of the past – even the recent past
u s foreign policy, on the contrary, as is proved by muroch & his affiliates – is forgotten for the most part – except for those with special concerns – policies such as the invasion of iraqu could not have taken place if people did not possess such short memories
i am different from alabama in the sense that i cannot forgive nor forget. it is not for me to do the forgiving. the populations of many many countries must try to do that – latin america especially must have both its heart & body broken by us foreign policy
to blackmail, to corrupt, to suborn, to destabilise & in the final analysis to set up a beauracracy of of evil – death squads, assasinations, etc
jérôme, i do not consider, given the absence of any real norms, in a murdochian world, good & eveil as useful notions. in any way. in any sense. i do not consider ‘america’ the source of all evil. i accuse here this administration of exacerbating, of accumulating all the wrongs of us foreign policy of the last century into a ball of consuming fire which is destroying all in its path. i think the tendency of all elites to financial & moral corruption – an ‘evil’
i consider absolutism of all kinds, repeat of all kinds reprehensible
i want to repeat other points that seem to be glossed over. i do not consider the inhabitants here a choir, in any sense, at all
i argued with the substance & inference of pats post not pat. given that pat has been open about her work in germany – i decided i could afford to be franker still
yes perhaps it is true – i do not have the refinement of which alabama speaks – or the distance necessary – the struggle of different peoples has been an integral part of my life, all my life & i have seen darkness others would not wish top witness
but this moment we are living through seems to me to be one of unrelenting darkness with above all a kind of negligence in our duty to the other whether it is our own citizens or those of another country
when i wrote that post to pat i was speaking to pat but as i do here all the time – i speak to the substance & implications of the post. i know pats reading of kerry, i know the libertarian politics pat articulates. i did not set out to misread, to twist, to turn anything she said. i am not a polemicist – i am like many others here – including pat – a life full of duty with a multiple population. even less in condemantion of a person or even of persons
this is the only space i write in english & i arrive here hoping what i am capable of saying contains some truths – some ability to communicate. sometimes i succeed. sometimes not
above all as jérôme says you live in the belly of the beast – so certain realities you know much better than those of us on this old & beautiful continent
i thank deanander for offering the refinement i seem incapable of offering & for the details – i also thank alabama also – for the critique – it is understood & hopefully interpreted & i thank jérôme – who like i at this moment is going through a physical suffering – & who is still capable of offering optimism
i on the other hand – do not feel optimistic & it is darker thoughts, darker realities which cloud both my heart & mind
in any case, thank you
still steel

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Oct 23 2004 13:12 utc | 61

just a point of memory, here
when pat was attacked intemperately by the ex israeli soldier – i was ther first amongst those who defended her right to speak – though her opinions are diametrically opposed to my own
i attacked that poster because i thought he was personal in his attack & while that might be approropriate elsewhere – it was not here
i attacked him if i remember correctly for an intemperateness that bordered too close to hatred, personal hatred
in my post to pat i was not being intemperate – i was angry at certain deliberate & conscient absences but even then i am thankful that otherwise pat speake honestly of her own position & have sd so even when i’ve been insulted for being gracious
the fact that this is not a choir here i think is outlined by pat & i. i actively through action, military action sought the defeat of your empire in vietnam & i repeat that i am proud of that fact, deeply. pat, on the other hand sought through action the defeat of the soviet union & sattelites through action. that we speak here at all is a celebration of a certain idea of community
still steel

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Oct 23 2004 13:55 utc | 63

rememembereringgiap, there’s something missing from this thread, and I’m a little perplexed as to what it may be. We’ve done a bit of worrying over “acceptance” (Pat’s deliberated word), but it may well be that we haven’t looked hard enough at the words “act” and “action”. “What ‘s to be done?,” as the venerable phrase would have it–and then, upon asking it, lo and behold, we find ourselves wandering around in the labyrinths of “tactics” and “strategy”!…
(more)

Posted by: alabama | Oct 23 2004 14:53 utc | 65

“Action,” in this baffling context, becomes inextricably tied to reflection on what the word “justice” could possibly mean in the midst of such bizarre and sweeping dynamics. And of one other thing I’m absolutely sure: the labor of the negative–Hegel’s definition of reflection generally–entails a movement of forgiveness that is not a forgetting. That’s what I’m groping for in these posts, and that’s what’s so hard to come by.

Posted by: alabama | Oct 23 2004 14:55 utc | 67

I feel the effort people are making here, and value it tremendously. Nowhere else in my daily life (in a very liberal + libertarian neighborhood) do people confront each other so constructively with their views of politics and action. I remain rather afraid to express my thoughts frankly, but you all nourish my courage and remind me of my responsibility not only to think and understand, but also to speak and lead.
I am heartened we each pursue different threads of action yet wish to engage each other’s understanding. Increasingly, I think Pat is right that the U.S. will right its policies and recede from its current Manichaean mania. Yet, increasingly, I understand the U.S. abroad exactly as rememberinggiap describes it – 500 years of genocide which seems to decrease its fury at a pace visible only to deities. I am left confused by this, and so I focus my efforts on developing communities stable enough to support actual and regular befriending in my city, so that despite the insanity, a few of my circles will at least know how much heart can be found in real cameraderie, and seek that cameraderie above all bribes.
There is more for us to do than this, and the Moon here is a place I seek guidance. Thanks to all who recommend new starting points – especially things I have been introduced to by alabama, rgiap, and kate storm. For me Roy Bhaskar and Adorno offer the most encouraging paths forward, but I continue to wander in the desert musically.
Sorry to ramble, but I am trying to balance my internal version of Pat and rgiap’s exchange (not, of course, that I am in a choir for either). Anyone like Chinaco Anejo? I’m buying.

Posted by: Citizen | Oct 23 2004 15:07 utc | 69

I sympathize w/ the view that the good fight must continue against power. I also am concerned w/ the seeming effeteness of opposition. So many problems–the most usual of which is the historic political impassiveness of the middle and lower classes. The factionalization of publics has resulted in the bizarre cathection of these voters upon right-wing imperialism. My hunch is that the appeal of rightist extremism lies in the vestigial American frontier values of domination, of which the narcotic of religion merely serves as a vindication. Elevating general consciousness about the futility of such alliances is crucial, but I have few ideas how this is to be done. On the one hand, the fount of domination–capital–must suffer the insurmountable contradiction (global warming, end of oil, nuclear war). On the other hand, such cataclysm is unlikely to be averted by quasi-democratic processes that ridiculously depend on the vote of the Nietzschean Last Man, the thoroughly administered subject, to be the locus of hope.
Basically, we’re fucked, no?

Posted by: slothrop | Oct 23 2004 16:00 utc | 71

Per alabama’s thoughtful request for clarification of ‘justice.’ What can be done? Perhaps the further fragmentation of discourse via new media will neutralize the cultural hegemony of elites. Utopic new media communications would destroy intellectual property, the status quo of truth, trusted branding and celebrity. This development might assist in the movement towards what Bookshin referred to as “libertarian municipalism.” Forms of interaction would be oriented to local agreement and complementarity rather than domination. It hardly needs to be added that the postcarbon age will require such municipalism. Thus, justice is resolved in the basic sense that the move towards local economic autochthony will require communities to constantly choose a place to go to in their own direction so long as the means of doing so are ‘sustainable.’ Encouragingly, in a small way, new media are the ‘tools of conviviality’ that could aid in this necessary transformation both by obviating the need for elite cultural (re)production and by facilitating communications for this emergent form of life.
Just trying to find a silver lining.

Posted by: slothrop | Oct 23 2004 16:21 utc | 73

Basically, we’re fucked, no?
Might be, but I am going down swinging.
Paying taxes and dying are given as things that are inevitable, My life is just a little bit more complicated than that. I give a shit about the world my children will live in too.

Posted by: Dan of Steele | Oct 23 2004 16:26 utc | 75

alabama, citizen & slothrop
you’re a very prudent thinker alabama & as sam spade says to guttman in the maltese falcon “i love a man who…..” i want to go back & perhaps harp(or rant) but not in nostalgia but in what i believe is active reflection – at the time of the war in vietnam against the american empire – i as many others passed through many stages – all were based on some idea of ‘action’ but finally at a certain point – i decided to aid medically & then militarily the defeat of america in indochina. that ‘action’ was very concrete – it was not ‘clean’ in that it entailed at the other end – concrete facts – which included miltary defeat which included naturally , mutilation, death & nightmares that seem to exist in the american imagination
i have also been involved in ‘action’ in relation to the countries i speak of the greeks, the chileans, the nicaraguans & i must admit here that there were a number of americans also involved in those ‘actions’ – there young americans who died in chile & especially el salvador & nicaragua in the defence, the active defence of a people attacked by the empire
that action was ‘materiel’ in every sense of that word. practically. those ‘actions’ determined the life i lead. i was groomed even by the comrades to live out my years softly propogating at universities or otherwise playing the artist maudite but i have always been propelled to work physically amongst the people – perhaps the maoist fish amongst a sea of people touched me directly. i work to effect changes on a day to day basis. ‘action’ with communities that are in desperate straits. i have as mayakovsky suggested trampled on the throat of my verse for the service of a community & communities where that struggle may appear to be peripheral
what i think is missing here & perhaps why i responded in such anger to pat – was the way americans seem to be silent about the destruction of iraqui culture – it is a cradle of civilisation & it has been irreperably destroyed – it is a matter of grave import. as a writer but also as an internationalist i am still shocked practically by what was done
how could it be done? without second thoughts? it can be done because there exists a theocratic belief that not only do these people do not matter but their culture is not our culture – so it doesn’t matter. the problem is it is our culture in a very practical sense & each book burned, each piece of art, every archive that went up in flames destroys us, practically. then how can people live with that? well that is an old story – they can because they believe & believe in practic&al & military terms like boykin for example that their works are informed & led by their god. it is their only excuse that can respond to the terrible destruction of the cradle of our civilisation. & that excuse is neither comforting for now or for the future
slothrop, when you speak of a redistribution of the means of communicating – well – i just don’t see it – well yes i feel it here & at the speakeasy – but the real & ultimately with laws like the patriot act & the laws to come – will restrict free speech. you are correct – if we could somehow maintain the communities of resistance through these form – it is something – though it may not be the ‘action’ of which alabama speaks – it is something – so that when pat says for example that there was no movement against the war – at least this form of communication exists to say there were ten million people who opposed the war & that in itself is a history exceptional
i hope that we can constitute those networks, those communities of resistance but murdoch & his pals who meet every year in aspen or wherever it is have been totally concerned with the same question – & they are not gentleman opponnents – more than this, they are enemies of democracy & they have proved it beyond reasonable doubt
that an american does not know of the demonstrations all over the world – these actions of many – says to me the control of your media is close to total
but i want to go back to this point of the bibliteques, museums & archives – when i hear read & watched that – & i used the filter of robert fisk & his courageous articles – i was practically shocked & disgusted in the same way that i was when the taliban exploded the budhhas of banyiman because both ‘acts’ were act of barbarians – & in both case fully informed barbarians. there is no other word. barbaric
the people who do this, who allow it & as robert fisk suggests led the sacking of baghdad are a species of man i am very frightened of because their absolutism is not confined to the dinner table but to our reality & they dominate our reality. to say otherwise is wishful thinking
& that act of destruction does not onlyrequire reflection it requires ‘action’ & not just of forgiveness. it demands a reparation but we know what happened is irreperable – in concrete terms. an artifact destroyed is lost to us forever & for that & for future generations we have no right to forgive – that is not a forgiveable crime
look i’m sorry alabama that i cannot be more concentrated because i feel in equal parts shock & a melancholia towards the future that overwhelms me. if only for the daily ‘act’ that my work demands – i would have taken pats advice to dan & finished my existence on this earth that i find more cruder & vulgar by the minute
still(not quite)steel

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Oct 23 2004 18:19 utc | 77

Agree with r’giap about the persistence of a drumbeat (if one may call such a vacuity by so dynamic a name) of complete callousness, a racial/religious posture of Uebermenschkeit that informs US “patriotic” and rightwing discourse on Iraq. Going back to McConnell whom I quote above, among the several scurrilities in his text I would count this — worth examining more closely:

These sentiments mean that as long as Bush is president, we have no real allies in the world, no friends to help us dig out from the Iraq quagmire. More tragically, they mean that if terrorists succeed in striking at the United States in another 9/11-type attack, many in the world will not only think of the American victims but also of the thousands and thousands of Iraqi civilians killed and maimed by American armed forces. The hatred Bush has generated has helped immeasurably those trying to recruit anti-American terrorists…

What I note is the emphasis, the focus, the direction. McConnell does not say that he is personally ashamed of or grieved by the murder of thousands of Iraqi civilians, or that their deaths are a great tragedy — of course not, they can hardly be compared to the deaths of 3,000 or so of the Herrenvolk at the WTC, which were a Tragedy for the Ages, the Worst Thing That Ever Happened, the Day the Earth Stood Still and so on ad nauseam. No, he is distressed by these deaths — he finds them tragic — only because they may draw the sympathy of the world away from the US, or even encourage anger and vengeful feelings towards his country. The only reason he regrets this enormous pile of dead bodies is a strategic one: they died publicly, their deaths are common knowledge, and this reflects poorly on the reputation of the US and may encourage bad attitudes towards it. If it were not for Mr Bush stupidly leaving his victims lying around in plain sight, the world would focus its attention and sympathy properly: exclusively on the American victims of “terrorist” attacks. The world should “only think of the American victims” — anything which distracts it from that duty is bad politics, and Bush should be held culpable for this failure of leadership.
“The hatred Bush has generated” is the issue in this pundit’s mind, not the wickedness of the original crimes that elicit that hatred. This is corporate thinking at its finest: spin control first and foremost, the moral/ethical signature of authoritarian, unaccountable elites the world over. In this gravitational field, the real problem with wrongdoing is getting caught. The real problem with a dead body is that someone might find out about it and that would look bad. It is editorials like this that reinforce the image of Americans as completely, hopelessly, almost psychotically selfish, self-absorbed, self-regarding, autistic, solipsistic, arrogant — in other words, “people who cannot be reasoned with.” McConnell berates Bush for giving America a bad name, but imho it is the impermeable, smug, oblivious disregard for the Other manifested in McConnell’s own prose that elicits the desperate response of violent action, the last resort when trying to get the Uebermensch to admit, finally, that the Other exists as a person, as a free human being.

Posted by: DeAnander | Oct 23 2004 19:01 utc | 79

How is this possible in a so called democracy?
While waiting in line, he noticed a stranger standing alone and invited the person to stand with him. ‘I didn’t think that would be a problem,’ he said. It turned out to be. Individuals from the Bush campaign spotted the individual with the soldier and identified the person as a Democratic supporter.
Amazingly, the unnamed Democrat — who didn’t complain about being searched — had a ticket to the rally but still wasn’t let in. And then it get even creepier.
The Bush people claimed the Democrat wasn’t on a “master list.” The soldier asked to see this list but the organizers said “they didn’t have it.” But, they soon told the solider that he wasn’t it, either — and they turned him away from the event as well.
The story says that the soldier who came to the event undecided walked away vowing to volunteer for the Kerry campaign.
More on the “1984” election
Looks as if it still might be ok for Catholics to vote for Kerry!
Based upon Cardinal Ratzinger’s statement, Catholics might have ”proportionate reasons” to vote for John Kerry. On Nov. 13, 2002, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a statement on Iraq. It ”raised serious questions about the moral legitimacy of any pre-emptive, unilateral use of military force to overthrow the government of Iraq.”
Catholics who intend to vote for George Bush based solely on the issue of abortion should ponder the bishops movingly eloquent message: ”Based on the facts that are known to us, we continue to find it difficult to justify the resort to war against Iraq, lacking clear and adequate evidence of an imminent attack of a grave nature. … We fear that resort to war, under present circumstances and in light of current public information, would not meet the strict conditions in Catholic teaching for overriding the strong presumption against the use of military force.
Bishops’ letter on Iraq gives Catholic voters options

Posted by: Fran | Oct 23 2004 20:42 utc | 81

@Diogenes – I slept on that article. I wonder if voters who are challenged are put in the provisional box to be further checked later. If so, that sets up another Florida scenario – if they can get enough set aside for later inspection & hand count, they could declare themselves the winner in the state & prob. the nation again, while sending in rioters & goons to hamper the hand inspections…..
But I am just as worried that networks are not going to be using exit polling this year. That is accurate. They are only using AP results from the Central Tabulator. That’s the thing that Bev Harris taught a chimp to fix & obliterate any record it had ever been there doing it. (Video of this on her site, blackboxvoting.org.) People all over the country know how to fix the results……This Election is Beyond Nightmare…..The only hope is that the CIA, which wants these guys out, gets in the last fix! INSANE

Posted by: jj | Oct 23 2004 21:29 utc | 83

this just in from AP via truthout.org
 Integrity of Florida Virtual Vote in Doubt
    By Rachel Konrad
    The Associated Press
    Friday 22 October 2004
    Delray Beach, Fla. – Edward Bitet fought in World War II, built affordable housing for veterans and taught sixth grade. When the Long Island native retired to Florida, he fulfilled another civic duty by becoming a poll worker. But Bitet, 77, isn’t volunteering this year — he says he doesn’t trust Palm Beach County’s electronic voting machines. He walked out of a county demonstration of touch-screen terminals convinced that software bugs could wreak havoc on Nov. 2.
    “We lost an election four years ago because they fooled around with the paper ballots and couldn’t recount them,” said Bitet, a Democrat. “Now we’re moving to a system without paper, and they won’t even have the ballots to recount. I can’t be a part of this.”
the article goes on to discuss the fury of the masses when they discover that Repugs plan to steal this one electronically…….I recommend everyone consider this article……I hadn’t realized we could have prolonged chaos…the only institutions that adjudicate this have been stolen or taken over by Repugs. Article finally out about politicization of Supremes & deLay’s gang under indictment for fixing districts in Texas which will prob. guarantee Repugs control House of Rep. So……does the military step in? Just asking. Anyway, consider this may well be a helluva lot uglier than we are thinking about…..

Posted by: Anonymous | Oct 23 2004 21:44 utc | 85

also from truthout:
  Mother of Fallen NYPD Cadet: Does President Bush Know the Anguish of Losing a Child?
    By Talat G. Hamdani
    Yubanet.com
    Saturday 23 October 2004
Mother of Mohammad Salman Hamdani
    My name is Talat Hamdani and I lost my son, Mohammad Salman Hamdani at the WTC terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. Salman was my first-born. I joined my husband, Mohammad Saleem Hamdani, in New York on February 3, 1979. Salman was thirteen months old, learning to walk. We had come in search of the American Dream, which was cruelly shattered that fateful day of September 11, 2001.
    Salman was a paramedic and an NYPD Cadet who voluntarily went there to rescue his fellow Americans and gave the ultimate sacrifice. He had been accepted to Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s MD PhD program in July 2001. A patriotic citizen, he wanted to become a medical doctor on American soil. Ironically, he was suspected and investigated as a terrorist and we were informed on March 20, 2002, that his remains were found, twenty four pieces, outside the North Tower. My life changed forever. I expressed my grief in numerous interviews on the first anniversary of 911.
    There was a void in life, a vacuum, a sense of incompleteness. I stopped cooking and happiness was an alien creature. This loss took its toll on my husband, and he lost his battle with life on July 21, 2004. The loss of my husband, my best friend, my partner of grief, whom I knew for the last 38 years, made me sit back and reflect on my life. Destiny pushed me on a new path of life. I am compelled to speak the truth and participate actively for the security of all human life.
    An educator by profession, I was living in my own world, far away from the world of politics. That’s why, although a registered Democrat, at the advice of my husband, I had crossed party lines and voted for G.W. Bush in 2000, like Salman and my husband. I paid dearly for my mistake and this realization has forced me to get involved with politics. I don’t want to repeat my mistake, nor suffer any more. That is why I am endorsing the Kerry-Edwards team. I feel betrayed by President Bush.
    President Bush led our nation to an immoral war in Iraq where our troops are dying daily and their parents and families are receiving the flag draped coffins to be buried under tons of dirt. Is there any price for life? Can President Bush bring these courageous men back to life? Does President Bush know the anguish of losing a child? Not to be able to see your dear one whom you raised for twenty three years ever again? Each and every moment of my life I miss my son.
    My husband always wondered why were the Bin Ladin’s escorted to safety from our country and not handed over to us? Why did President Bush call this war on terror a crusade? Is this the way you make America safer? Americans are being hunted down and beheaded and we have lost our dignity and credibility in the global community.
    I endorse John Kerry because he has fought for our land and has seen death, and therefore he can empathize with our loss and protect us from any further terrorist attacks. He has put his life in harms way for our nation, and will do again, if necessary. John Kerry supports the 911 Commission’s recommendations without jeopardizing our civil liberties. John Kerry is a man of moral values, who does not lie and I trust him and have full faith in him.
    John Kerry believes in a strong coalition of nations, not of puppets. He knows the importance of alliances which is an important tool to win this war on terror.
    America needs a man of moral values, a man of principles, a man who will not exploit the tragedy and loss of others life for his own selfish ends. America needs a man of integrity and honesty so she may get her dignity and command respect in the world once again.
    John Kerry has all these attributes and I know he will lead our nation to her old glory of liberty and justice for all.

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Oct 23 2004 22:02 utc | 87

@Pat,
This morning 7a.m. NPR announced that Zarqawi had been captured. Surprised not to see other posts about it here. I think that falls within the 48 hr prediction. Kudos!
Re: Pat Buchanan’s question Why reward Kerry for Bush’s mistakes: I would answer because it beats the alternative, which is that rewarding the culprit for his own bad policy removes accountability. Surely we can also throw Kerry out on his can in 4 years if his policies prove to be equally disastrous.
To do otherwise is to put partisanship above principles.

Posted by: gylangirl | Oct 23 2004 23:02 utc | 89

@gylangirl
The coyote again, in a new form?

Posted by: anna missed | Oct 24 2004 0:10 utc | 91

Our Magical President
Believing, it seems, is more important to the President than the substance of his belief. Jesus Christ’s particular teachings — well, those are good, too. But what really matters is that if you believe you can do something, you can.
What Suskind misses, and what Bush’s more orthodox Christian supporters seem to dodge, is that this is not Christian doctrine by any definition. It is, in fact, a key element of the broad, heterodox movement known as New Age religion.
A common aspect of many New Age schools of thought (though not all) is a gentle disdain for perceived reality. That’s different from the fundamentalist aversion to worldliness; rather, this approach views the “real world” as that which is within the mind or heart or spirit of the believer. That idea is often dismissed as a modern bastardization of psychology, but many New Agers argue that their beliefs are actually ancient; and, despite the fact that the superficial characteristics are often of a recent vintage, there’s some truth to that assertion. New Age religions are, literally, reactionary, responses to what’s been called the disenchantment of the world. Another word for that process is the Enlightenment, with its claims of empirical accuracy. New Age movements attempt to revive — or create anew –pre-Enlightenment ideas about magic, alchemy, ghosts, and whatever else practitioners can glean from a record for the most part expunged by institutional Christianity.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Oct 24 2004 5:20 utc | 93

King George the Witless is truly the most venal and corrupt of all American Presidents, a true nadir in U.S. politics. Today the guy saying that he is going to simplify the tax code and make it more fair just signed a pork-laden, $146-billion dollar ‘Corporate Tax Bill’ into law. Here is a list of some of the corporate welfare giveaways:
Ceiling Fans – $44 million – Suspends a $4.7% duty on ceiling fans, which Home Depot is one of the main beneficiaries. This is for any ceiling fans purchased before 12/31/2006: Home Depot is a big supporter of Bush and the Repugs, responsible for more than $500K in direct and indirect campaign contributions. Not a bad investment for them!
Whaling subsidy – Charitable contributions deduction for certain expenses in support of native Alaskan subsistence whaling – $4 million: Isn’t the concept of subsistence whaling to preserve traditional Native American culture? Or have they always hunted whales using power boats and 50-caliber rifles?
etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc…………… I guess you get the message.
More on Needlenose, they also have a direct
Link to the article.
Determined to deal aggressively with the terrorists they expected to capture, the officials bypassed the federal courts and their constitutional guarantees, giving the military the authority to detain foreign suspects indefinitely and prosecute them in tribunals not used since World War II.
The plan was considered so sensitive that senior White House officials kept its final details hidden from the president’s national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, and the secretary of state, Colin L. Powell, officials said. It was so urgent, some of those involved said, that they hardly thought of consulting Congress.
Island of Balta has more and also a direct link to the article.
Now I have to run, as I am working today.

Posted by: Fran | Oct 24 2004 6:34 utc | 95

The plan was considered so sensitive that senior White House officials kept its final details hidden from the president’s national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, and the secretary of state, Colin L. Powell…
and of course it would be just coincidental that these are the only two prominent Black folks in the inner circle, right? the two who don’t need to be consulted, who only find out by water-cooler gossip or (worse) reading the papers, what has gone on behind their backs? what a great feeling it must be for Condi and Colin, to have made it so far and then find out they are just window dressing to paper over the Party’s longstanding racism. or maybe they knew that all along and are only in it for their respective family businesses…

Posted by: DeAnander | Oct 24 2004 13:46 utc | 97

By way of consolation, DeAnander, I offer the following quote from this morning’s WaPo, to be found in an article by Mike Allen and Lois Romano on page AO9, entitled “Candidates Hit Key States”: “One Republican official described the mood at the top of the campaign as apprehensive. ‘”Grim” is too strong,’ the official said. ‘If we feel this way a week from now, that will be grim.'”

Posted by: alabama | Oct 24 2004 15:11 utc | 99