This post is actually regarding the London Bombings. It comes down to terrorist tactic versus nation-state strategy. This new, radical Muslim conquest has adopted the methods of the Vandals.
The question is: can the nation-state as the institution of political legitimacy survive under the threat of transnational capitalism from within and endless terror from without?
Anti-capitalist postmodernists don’t think so…and neither do the terrorists.

Posted by: Sloo | Jul 21 2005 18:07 utc | 4

The only thing we should draw from the Robert’s nomination is that Leopold 2 is the driver in the BushCo wagon. The batshit xtian morality is a fine thing to get the sheeple on side but you can’t trust the wingnuts with the really important stuff, like making a dollar. One of those crazy women could do anything, they might get their knickers in a twist about Viagra or Bruckheimer’s democratic right to make a buck by subjecting citizens to violence and porn in prime time. Now is not the time to be rocking the boat. Roberts has shown time and time again that he knows what’s really important in life (heh heh the old man was a real terror at Bethlehem Steel wasn’t he yuk yuk), so not only is his heartlessness in the right place he has the wit to come up with some really off the wall rationalisations (oops sorry ‘precedents’) to justify stomping on the citizenry.
Since the chances of the dem senators attacking Roberts where he should be attacked i.e. on his long history of aligning himself with corporations against individuals, is about nil it would be very smart to get over this one and move back to the issues that have real ‘traction’ and the ability to cause repug discomfort such as karl rove.
I’m sure the flabby windbags would rather fight the repugs on a scotus nomination. They know how to play this one out, they can get money from interest groups (something like $20 mill raised so far to ‘fight’ a scotus nomination), and it doesn’t have that weird, creepy, icy fingers down the spine feeling that taking on Karl Rove gives you. “I mean to say that bloke is capable of anything and who knows what he’s got on us?”
Is it just me or has anyone else noticed that for all of the attention devoted to ‘plamegate’ or whatever this week’s cliche is, very few dem pollies have stuck their head over the parapet? Whereas according to Kurtzie baby in the post senator ted himself was on the blower cranking up the lefty bloggers to stay on message for the roberts thing.
My feeling is that too much time and energy is being wasted on a sideshow where the outcome is almost certain. There is no doubt that there will be more scotus nominations in the bushco term and at least one of them will be a nomination designed to pacify the god botherers. That’s the time to pull out all the stops, but since scotus is already chocka with corporate ass-lickers why even bother with this nomination?

Posted by: Debs is dead | Jul 21 2005 23:00 utc | 6

Well and good D-is-dead, but consider that Roberts, a friend-of-the-family who helped Jeb swing Fla yr00 to brother W, and has that familiar reptilian look about him, may have been recruited to pad the court in the likely coming case of Fitz vs govt. A trojan horse, as was said at kos. This is not something to let pass without a fight.

Posted by: rapt | Jul 22 2005 2:48 utc | 8