There is now no longer any difference between formal democracy and dictatorship

from adbusters...

Capitalism burns all around us, leaving behind the debris of a bankrupt financial and political system. The illusion of limitless economic growth and the endless utopia of consumption have been forever shattered. Now governments have only austerity and hard times to offer us. Yet their assurances are wearing thin. Our political and economic masters know that people no longer believe in them, and behind the calm visage of power there is fear, fear of the specter of insurrection, the old fear that has haunted the imagination of every regime. Doesn’t everything – from the statements of politicians to the market predictions of economic gurus, to celebrity reality shows – now have a slight air of desperation, as if the entire spectacular-capitalist system (a system which in any case no longer even believes in itself and probably never did) is terrified lest it reveal the nihilism behind its facade?

[...]

[T]here is now no longer any difference between formal democracy and dictatorship; it’s simply a matter of degrees of repression.

[...]

And what is democracy in any case but a system that encourages a mass contentment with powerlessness, a collective voluntary servitude legitimated by the purely symbolic ritual of voting? The recent insurrections should be seen as being more than just about democracy, which in any case is now such an ambiguous term. Rather they were a collective form of voluntary inservitude. They were the realization that every system of power is ultimately fragile and dependent on the alienation and relinquishment of our power.

"a mass contentment with powerlessness"... kinda fits, doesn't it...?

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Juan Cole has a run-down on the escalating events in the Middle East

All Hell Breaks Loose in the Middle East

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Chomsky: "democracy is dangerous and intolerable" and stability "means obedience to US domination"

as usual, professor chomsky 'splains it ever so much better than most...

There is a reason why there is so much concern about the democracy uprising in the Arab world than in, say, the sub-Saharan Africa. This is where the major energy resources of the world are. There is quite a good reason why the US and its allies will pull out the stops to prevent any really functioning democracy from developing in the Arab world.

[...]

The leaders of the EU and of the US happen to agree with the ruling clerics in Iran that democracy is dangerous and intolerable.

[...]

You have to remember that stability is a cold code word. Stability doesn't mean stability; it means obedience to US domination.

[...]

Support them as long as possible. When it is no longer feasible, maybe it is the army's turn to turn against them or send them out to pasture, forget about them, issue a ringing declaration about how we are on the side of the people and how we have always loved democracy and then try to restore as much of the traditional regime as possible.

[...]

[E]lite elements are in the West, in Egypt, the old regime, and Iran and elsewhere are not ready for democracy. People are ready for democracy everywhere. That is the problem elite face.

yes, our super-rich elites cannot be happy with current developments...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

The U.S. is trying to maintain the status quo in Egypt

calling for an "orderly transition" led by omar suleiman is hypocrisy of the most disgusting variety...

some background...

A Familiar Story

Resort to the language of order, stability, incrementalism, and moderation is hardly new and existed well before the events of last week. Not only is it consistent with the basic stance that the Obama administration has taken toward the Middle East from the very outset, but it reflects the long trajectory of American practices in the region, which have depended on shoring up Arab authoritarians who are willing to serve in an American "axis of moderation." The members of this axis -- Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Tunisia, Jordan -- have displayed little in common other than a commitment to sustaining current U.S. foreign policy priorities - on Israel/Palestine, the containment of Iran, and access to oil. What they pointedly do not share is any tangible commitment to actual moderation - understood as an internal project of democratization or political openness. This latter fact has been powerfully exposed by the nonviolent demonstrations across the region, and, as in the case of Egypt, the increasingly brutal response such protest has elicited from "moderate" allies.

At the heart of American support for such autocrats is a false opposition between chaos and order, with many in Washington arguing that the only way to avoid pervasive regional violence is to maintain the status quo.

i posted earlier that i think the white house proposed "succession plan" is pure and utter bullshit... the egyptian people are giving us an unprecedented example of solidarity and empowerment that simply must be honored and keeping a foot against their collective throats is NOT the way to do it...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

The White House "succession plan" for Egypt is pure bullshit

a transitional government headed by suleiman is no better and in fact may be even worse than letting mubarak stay on... it's just another way for the u.s. to keep propping up dictators, torturers, and generally bad men while keeping its lips glued to israel's ass...

The Obama administration is discussing with Egyptian officials a proposal for President Hosni Mubarak to resign immediately and turn over power to a transitional government headed by Vice President Omar Suleiman with the support of the Egyptian military, administration officials and Arab diplomats said Thursday.

bullshit, bullshit, bullshit... the anti-government demonstrators in tahrir square ain't gonna buy it and if they do, they're certifiable...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Israel, Palestine and the Middle East - once again Professor Cole 'splains it all for you

insightful, informed, thoughtful and spot on...

a teaser... go read the whole thing...

The US-backed military dictatorship in Egypt has become, amusingly enough, a Bonapartist state. It exercises power on behalf of both a state elite and a new wealthy business class, some members of which gained their wealth from government connections and corruption. The Egypt of the Separate Peace, the Egypt of tourism and joint military exercises with the United States, is also an Egypt ruled by the few for the benefit of the few.

The whole system is rotten, deeply dependent on exploiting the little people, on taking bribes from the sole superpower to pursue self-defeating or greedy policies virtually no one wants or would vote for in the region.

[...]

As long as the president and the Congress are willing to lie down and serve as doormats for America’s supposed allies in the Middle East– out of a conviction of the usefulness of their clients and the inexpensiveness of putting them on retainer– there will be anti-Americanism and security threats that force us to subject ourselves to humiliating patdowns and scans at the airport and an erosion of our civil liberties every day. We are only one step away of being treated, with “protest zones” and “Patriot Acts” just as badly as the peaceful Egyptian protesters have been.

one step away... just one step away...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

20,000 people on the streets in Sanaa, Yemen

i'm getting those chills up and down my back again...

Over 20,000 take to streets in Yemen "Day of Rage"

More than 20,000 Yemenis filled the streets of Sanaa on Thursday for a "Day of Rage" rally, demanding a change in government and saying President Ali Abdullah Saleh's offer to step down in 2013 was not enough.

Further anti-government protests were expected across Yemen, which Saleh has ruled for over three decades, and supporters of the president were driving around the capital urging Yemenis over loudspeakers to join pro-government counterdemonstrations.

But by early morning, anti-government protesters had already gathered the largest crowd since a wave of protests hit the Arabian Peninsula state two weeks ago, inspired by protests that toppled Tunisia's ruler and threaten Egypt's president.

"The people want regime change," protesters shouted as they gathered outside Sanaa University. "No to corruption, no to dictatorship."

this is some truly awesome shit that's going down...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

McClatchy points out what has become disgustingly obvious

at least one major news outlet has decided to shine a spotlight on the vile, barbaric individual who has been the beneficiary of u.s. support for lo these many years...

Wednesday's crackdown was vintage Mubarak

Not long after Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak pledged political reforms and promised not to run for a sixth five-year term, pro-government demonstrators with reported connections to the Egyptian security forces laid siege to a downtown square Wednesday and fought fierce battles with anti-government protesters.

The assault was so well planned that it suggested government orchestration, or at least complicity, according to political observers, who noted that Mubarak backers had been conspicuously silent during a week of massive demonstrations against him.

The strategy of sending in the thugs after making half-hearted promises was vintage Mubarak. The tactic is familiar to political observers, for he's employed the same approach in national elections — assuring Western allies of fair polls and instead rounding up opposition candidates and dispatching foot soldiers to rough up their supporters.

Samer Shehata, an Egypt expert at Georgetown University, said Mubarak has used such tactics for years to break up anti-government demonstrations and to prevent opposition supporters from casting ballots.

right on, mcclatchy...!

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

I was wondering when I'd see a liberal/progressive wake up to a commonality with Tea Partiers

there's a lot that disturbs me about the tea partiers, not the least of which is their homogeneous make-up - white, male, christian, for the most part... i do share, however, their concern for our continuing slide into fascism, highlighted by the erosion of constitutional rights and the complete failure to hold anyone accountable for unconstitutional and illegal actions on the part of our government...

i've recently been wondering why so many in the so-called liberal/progressive ranks, with the exception of glenn greenwald and a few others, have failed to see - or chosen to ignore - that our slide into a fascist dictatorship has continued unabated and, in fact, actually accelerated under obama... these same people, myself included, were screaming bloody murder when bush was in office...

i'd also been wondering why i've heard so little lately about naomi wolf, a very outspoken critic of abuses under the bush administration and a vocal proponent of a return to the principles of our founders and the rule of law... now, i admit, i haven't gone chasing ms. wolf so my lack of current information is purely my own fault... it's interesting, though, that this should now surface in my morning's reading...

naomi wolf talks about how she views the tea party movement...

To be sure, the Tea Party’s brand of aggrieved populism – and its composition of mostly white, angry, middle-class voters – has deep roots in the United States, flaring up during times of change. But observers who have drawn comparisons to the Know-Nothings, the racist, paranoid, anti-Catholic, and anti-immigrant party that surged in the 1850’s, are reading the movement far too superficially.

Indeed, those who deride and dismiss this movement do so at their peril. While some Tea Partiers may be racist or focused on eccentric themes – such as the validity of Barack Obama’s birth certificate – far more of them, those who were part of the original grass-roots effort, are focused on issues that have merit. If you actually listen to them, instead of just reading accounts transmitted through the distorting mirror of the mainstream media, you hear grievances that are profound, as well as some proposals that are actually ahead of their time.

For example, Tea Party activists, using a group called End the Fed, were among the first to focus critical attention on the unelected and unaccountable US Federal Reserve Board. Now legislation is being put forward to establish greater transparency at the Fed – surely a laudable outcome.

While those attracted to the Tea Party movement are a diverse group, some common themes emerge. They see a struggle for the soul of the Tea Party between true libertarians, who are worried about individual liberties, and traditional conservatives.

naomi wolf talks to alternet about how ingrown liberals and progressives have become...

Frankly, liberals are out of the habit of communicating with anyone outside their own ... cohort. We have a cultural problem with self-righteousness and elitism. Liberals roll their eyes about going on "Oprah" to reach a mass audience by using language that anyone can understand even if you majored in semiotics at Yale. We look down on people we don’t agree with. It doesn’t serve us well.

There is also a deliberate building up of two camps that benefits from whipping up home team spirit and demonizing the opposition. With the Internet there is even more fractioning since we are in echo chambers. With so much propaganda it is hard to calm down enough to listen.

[...]

I used to think “End the Fed people” were crackpots. The media paints them as deranged. But it turned out we had good reason to have more oversight. Or take their platform about states’ rights. Demographically, I’m a hippie from San Francisco and I’m not culturally inclined to be sympathetic to states' rights. My cultural heritage is FDR and Medicare and federal government solutions. But if you think through the analysis, strengthening state rights is a good corrective of the aggregation of an over-reaching federal power. Take California’s challenge of the Patriot Act or states like Vermont leading the way with addressing the corruption of the voting system. It’s a good example of the Tea Party thinking out of the box on how to address a problem.

i think anybody who takes the time to step back and see the bigger picture will see that the current state of extreme polarization in the u.s. is a carefully-crafted scheme to keep us focused on each other as "the enemy" rather than seeing our super-rich elite handlers for what they are, greed-besotted, power and control mad monsters who don't give a tiny crap for anybody other than themselves...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 2 comments

What does the 19th century Russian novel "Dead Souls" have in common with Wall Street greed...?

more than i would have thought...

from alternet...

It’s painful to admit this, but the way our 21st century American ruling class treats the rest of us is eerily reminiscent of the great Russian novel Dead Souls, about the 19th century Russian ruling class’s beastly treatment of its serfs (also called “souls”), back when most Russians were essentially slaves, legal property of the ruling class. Dead Souls features one of the most grotesque shysters in any novel: he comes up with a get-rich-quick scheme that’s eerily similar to today’s Wall Street’s latest schemes: the shyster goes from village to village, buying up “dead souls” (or “dead serfs”) who are still on the census rolls of the local landowners. The dead serfs are of no use to their owners anymore, so the landowners are happy to make one last ruble off their dead serfs by selling ownership rights over them to the shyster. The shyster’s plan: to acquire so many “dead souls” that he can package them into valuable collateral, and take out a huge loan against his “dead souls” which will finally make him rich. Wealth spun out of nothing but human misery, so that the shyster can waste huge amounts of money impressing others from the serf-owning class.

In other words: Dead Souls Loans.

Fast-forward to America in 2009, and now we’re the dead souls. Top American corporations are taking out “dead peasant insurance” on their workers without the workers even knowing it—and cashing in hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars on their employees, even though often times they don’t even offer those same employees decent health insurance coverage to allow them to survive illnesses. To top it off, these “dead peasant insurance” payouts are tax-free for the corporation that cashes in. It was a revelation so revolting that even ABC’s News’ mannequins admitted they were “stunned.”

[...]

[T]he state and the people serve the tiny ruling class; and when we’re not serving them, we can fuck off and die. Literally. Because that serves them too.

[...]

[T]oday we have a kind of highly-evolved dictatorship concealing itself as a functioning democracy. But in all the important issues, where billions or trillions are at stake, where their yachts and private jets are pitted against Americans’ lives or the national interest, you can spot the dictatorship’s horrific Predator-beast head rising from the swamp.

more truth-telling about stuff we are already horrifically familiar with...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

We’ll have a military dictatorship fairly soon

gore vidal in the uk times via information clearing house...

Last year he famously switched allegiance from Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama during the Democratic nomination process for president. Now, he reveals, he regrets his change of heart. How’s Obama doing? “Dreadfully. I was hopeful. He was the most intelligent person we’ve had in that position for a long time. But he’s inexperienced. He has a total inability to understand military matters. He’s acting as if Afghanistan is the magic talisman: solve that and you solve terrorism.” America should leave Afghanistan, he says. “We’ve failed in every other aspect of our effort of conquering the Middle East or whatever you want to call it.” The “War on Terror” was “made up”, Vidal says. “The whole thing was PR, just like ‘weapons of mass destruction’. It has wrecked the airline business, which my father founded in the 1930s. He’d be cutting his wrists. Now when you fly you’re both scared to death and bored to death, a most disagreeable combination.”

His voice strengthens. “One thing I have hated all my life are LIARS [he says that with bristling anger] and I live in a nation of them. It was not always the case. I don’t demand honour, that can be lies too. I don’t say there was a golden age, but there was an age of general intelligence. We had a watchdog, the media.” The media is too supine? “Would that it was. They’re busy preparing us for an Iranian war.” He retains some optimism about Obama “because he doesn’t lie. We know the fool from Arizona [as he calls John McCain] is a liar. We never got the real story of how McCain crashed his plane [in 1967 near Hanoi, North Vietnam] and was held captive.”

Vidal originally became pro-Obama because he grew up in “a black city” (meaning Washington), as well as being impressed by Obama’s intelligence. “But he believes the generals. Even Bush knew the way to win a general was to give him another star. Obama believes the Republican Party is a party when in fact it’s a mindset, like Hitler Youth, based on hatred — religious hatred, racial hatred. When you foreigners hear the word ‘conservative’ you think of kindly old men hunting foxes. They’re not, they’re fascists.”

Another notable Obama mis-step has been on healthcare reform. “He f***ed it up. I don’t know how because the country wanted it. We’ll never see it happen.” As for his wider vision: “Maybe he doesn’t have one, not to imply he is a fraud. He loves quoting Lincoln and there’s a great Lincoln quote from a letter he wrote to one of his generals in the South after the Civil War. ‘I am President of the United States. I have full overall power and never forget it, because I will exercise it’. That’s what Obama needs — a bit of Lincoln’s chill.” Has he met Obama? “No,” he says quietly, “I’ve had my time with presidents.” Vidal raises his fingers to signify a gun and mutters: “Bang bang.” He is referring to the possibility of Obama being assassinated. “Just a mysterious lone gunman lurking in the shadows of the capital,” he says in a wry, dreamy way.

Vidal now believes, as he did originally, Clinton would be the better president. “Hillary knows more about the world and what to do with the generals. History has proven when the girls get involved, they’re good at it. Elizabeth I knew Raleigh would be a good man to give a ship to.”The Republicans will win the next election, Vidal believes; though for him there is little difference between the parties. “Remember the coup d’etat of 2000 when the Supreme Court fixed the selection, not election, of the stupidest man in the country, Mr Bush.”

[...]

America has “no intellectual class” and is “rotting away at a funereal pace. We’ll have a military dictatorship fairly soon, on the basis that nobody else can hold everything together. Obama would have been better off focusing on educating the American people. His problem is being over-educated. He doesn’t realise how dim-witted and ignorant his audience is. Benjamin Franklin said that the system would fail because of the corruption of the people and that happened under Bush.”

Vidal adds menacingly: “Don’t ever make the mistake with people like me thinking we are looking for heroes. There aren’t any and if there were, they would be killed immediately. I’m never surprised by bad behaviour. I expect it.”

nothing i can add to this, that's for sure...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Juan Cole on Obama's speech: "Cutting back from three packs a day to only one could still kill you"

as always, professor cole dispenses solid, reasoned wisdom...

I find him making too many concessions to the National Security State that are in my view unconstitutional. He maintains he is cutting back the abuses. But it isn't good enough that one president should identify where he things the US government went too far, and voluntarily cut back. Cutting back from three packs a day to only one could still kill you. And what happens if a different sort of president gets in in 2012 and ramps up the abuses again? By declining to draw a clear and adjudicable line, Obama is unwittingly allowing the Right to lay the groundwork for permanent move to presidential dictatorship. Obama says he doesn't want to re-litigate the last 8 years. That is frankly disingenuous. The last 8 years was never litigated. And crimes were committed. If they are not addressed, they will become norms, not crimes.

thanks, prof... i couldn't have said it better...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

More Glenn, expanding on Charlie Savage

charlie savage's new book, Takeover: The Return of the Imperial Presidency and the Subversion of American Democracy, is given a thorough review by susang at daily kos, but, even more interesting is glenn greenwald's post on mitt romney that builds on savage's boston globe column from yesterday... ol' mitt has certainly been in the cross-hairs the past couple of days (see my earlier post), and, i must admit, is shaping up to be an even more disturbing individual than his empty-suit persona would suggest...

Romney perfectly expresses the driving view of our GOP-dominated political culture over the last seven years, as profoundly un-American as it is Orwellian: You are in grave danger of being slaughtered by Terrorists. The only thing that matters is that your Leader protect you. In order to be safe, you must place your blind faith and trust in the Leader. There can be no limits on the Leader's power -- not even ones you try to place on him through your representatives in Congress -- otherwise you will be in severe danger and might even lose your freedoms.

[...]

Although one would not have thought it possible, a Mitt Romney presidency, by his own description, would remove us still further from those core [Constitutional] principles. Romney isn't running to be President, but to be King. Anyone who wants to dispute that ought to try to distinguish the fantasies of power Romney is envisioning from those the British King possessed in the mid-to-late 18th Century.

i would liken what george bush and his erstwhile successor, mitt romney, espouse as much closer to dictatorship than monarchy... within monarchical systems, there is at least a rudimentary sense of noblesse oblige*... i see nothing in the bush administration or in romney's spoutings that even faintly resembles such a thing...

* "Noblesse oblige" is generally used to imply that with wealth, power and prestige come social responsibilities. The phrase is sometimes used derisively, in the sense of condescending, patronising or hypocritical social responsibility. The term has also been applied more broadly to those who are capable of simple acts to help another, usually one who is less fortunate.

In ethical discussion, it is sometimes used to summarize a moral economy wherein privilege must be balanced by duty towards those who lack such privilege or who cannot perform such duty. Finally, it has been used recently primarily to refer to public responsibilities of the rich, famous and powerful, notably to provide good examples of behaviour or to exceed minimal standards of decency.

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

My country: small-minded, mean-spirited thugs

as elmer fudd would say, "it's twue...!"

It’s said that over time Presidents – especially two-termers – imbue the nation with their personalities and priorities, for good or ill. If that’s true, it could help explain the small-minded mean-spiritedness that seems to be pervading the behavior of the United States these days, both at home and abroad.

On a global level, the world reads about trigger-happy Blackwater “security contractors” mowing down civilians in Baghdad, the U.S. military killing unarmed people under loose “rules of engagement” in both Afghanistan and Iraq, and the CIA “rendering” suspected Islamists to secret prisons or to third-country dungeons where torture is practiced.

Inside the United States, too, a police-state mentality is taking hold. After more than six years of having dissent against President George W. Bush equated with disloyalty, police from Capitol Hill to college campuses are treating vocal disagreement as grounds for violently “taking down” citizens, while bouncers at campaign rallies hustle away prospective hecklers and police preemptively detain protesters or stick them in faraway “free-speech zones.”

[...]

Americans who ask too many annoying questions or don’t demonstrate the right attitude toward government leaders can expect to encounter the hostility of an incipient police state, a thug nation that reflects the pugnacious arrogance and the contempt for dissent that is the stock and trade of the nation’s current two-term President.

there are so many wonderful people in this country - caring, compassionate, thoughtful, concerned - that it's a shame the perception of the u.s. is being framed by george w. bush...

p.s. there are wonderful people all over the world...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Pilger does it again, "The War on Democracy"

[UPDATE and BUMP by profmarcus]

another important video that deserves top billing...



jim's original post from yesterday...

John Pilger has another film that will make you see and feel things that aren't easy for Americans to understand, unless you have been to the favellas, barrios, ghettos or whatever name is given to a slum devoid of hope.
But as Pilger points out, maybe there is hope.
As a regular visitor to Latin America, ProfMarcus may be able to do more justice to this subject than I can, having only made one recent trip to Brazil.
Please watch this film and take note of some familiar players of the world stage.
Once again, courtesy of the Information Clearing House.
I find the CIA guy to be the absolute epitome of NeoCon arrogance. Indeed, the situation in Chile was openly regarded as a victory for the "Chicago Boys". One unmentioned Chicago Boy is Leo Strauss, mentor to Paul Wolfowitz.
These are the people we have entrusted our nation to, and one day the world is going to come knocking on our door asking for answers.
What will we say?

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

"The wisest course would have been for President Bush to use his nuclear weapons to slaughter Iraqis until they complied with his demands"

digby has the entire nine yards on this one... i'm not even going to excerpt... you simply HAVE to read it for yourself... when you have, and have picked your jaw up off the floor, come back here and let me know what you think...

Exclusive: Conquering the Drawbacks of Democracy
Philip Atkinson

Author: Philip Atkinson
Source: The Family Security Foundation, Inc.
Date: August 3, 2007

(thanks to markos...)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

It's time to impeach - OPOL reads my mind

that's the question, all right... do we want to continue to endorse tyranny...?

one pissed off liberal at daily kos lays it on the line in his customary fashion...

It is still possible to live in America while ignoring the reality of it. Sadly, far too many people do.

[...]

With the collusion of the MSM and the Democrats (many of them if not most), the nefarious criminal neocons have seized control of our country in a hostile takeover and have kept it under the radar of average citizens. It has been a brilliant but heartbreaking feat, a stunning coup d’etat, and a devastating loss to us all.

[...]

So between the clueless, the complicit and the corrupt we have all been sold down the river. Normally we would look to the Democrats to help us in such circumstances -normally.

Where are the Democrats?

Wherever they are, they should be feeling the shame of their inaction and their collusion at this point. Even rightwingers are now raising the alarm and calling for corrective action.

[...]

Where is the outrage? Where are the Democrats? And where are all these apologists and enablers coming from?

It is my considered opinion that to argue against impeachment at this point in history, innocently or not, is to argue against freedom and democracy for America and amounts to an implicit endorsement of tyranny.

c'mon, my fellow americans... wake the hell up...!

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

"We are, indeed, a one-party state"

i've been of this opinion for years, but i've tried nonetheless, very diligently, to convince myself that working through our two-party system was the only way to go... i agree with theyrereal at daily kos, the only ones we've been fooling is ourselves...

It's today that I realized that we are, indeed, a one-party state in this country. Oh, we have two official parties, but that's just for show. The reality is that they all work for the same people. Sure, there are different factions and personalities within this all-encompassing group, and granted there might be a few people here and there who doggedly fight the system and actually work for us, but they are VASTLY outnumbered, and more importantly, not taken seriously by the rest of the members of this theatrical group known as the U.S. two-party system.

[...]

I think the happenings of today will result in people finally escaping the fantasy of denial, and see the truth for what it is. That the Dems being an "opposition party" is as fictional as Santa Claus.

Our Democratic Party is a fraud. Our two-party system doesn't exist anymore. Oh, they'll try to tell you it does. Kerry will e-mail you a request to help end the war which links to his "donations" page. So will the others. They still want our money. It's all part of the smoke and mirrors.

[...]

The Democratic Party, by its actions today, has made it abundantly clear who is in charge of the Democratic Party: THE SAME PEOPLE WHO ARE IN CHARGE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

i do happen to believe that there are genuine, honest, authentic, principled people sprinkled in both parties, but that they are the great exception... and, even then, it's really hard to tell when you are seeing someone's true colors... all i know now is this, i don't trust a single goddam one of 'em... that doesn't mean i won't work for someone or something that i THINK may move us out of our morass, but i'm going to do it with my eyes wide open, prepared to bolt at the slightest hint of complicity and collusion... we've simply been burned too often...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

It's official - the far right extremists want a dictatorship

hell, we've been seeing a dictatorship being fashioned right before our eyes for 6+ years, why should it surprise anybody to see it finally admitted in print...? glenn greenwald, one of the more solid voices out there, has some comments (boldface mine...)

The Weekly Standard's Michael Goldfarb participated in a conference call with former Senator George Mitchell yesterday, during which Mitchell advocated a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. This is what Goldfarb wrote about that call:

Pam Hess, the UPI reporter who gave us this extremely moving and persuasive glimpse of the liberal case for the war in Iraq, asked if timetables for withdrawal "somehow infringe on the president's powers as commander in chief?" Mitchell's less than persuasive answer: "Congress is a coequal branch of government...the framers did not want to have one branch in charge of the government."

True enough, but they sought an energetic executive with near dictatorial power in pursuing foreign policy and war. So no, the Constitution does not put Congress on an equal footing with the executive in matters of national security.

needless to say, greenwald comes back forcefully...

The notion that our Constitution vests anything like "near dictatorial power" in the President in any area -- let alone areas as broadly defined as "foreign policy and war" and "national security" -- is so utterly absurd that no response ought to be required.

[...]

One of the principal purposes of the Federalist Papers -- which Goldfarb obscenely cites as though it supports his twisted views of dictatorial omnipotence in America -- was to assuage widespread concerns (or, as Scalia put it, "mistrust") that the President would be, in essence, a new British King. That fear was not eliminated or even diminished, but instead was particularly pronounced, with regard to the President's role as "Commander-in-Chief," which is why there are so many safeguards in the form of Congressional powers designed to limit that role. All of this is excruciatingly basic and obvious, really not much beyond what seventh grade civics students are taught about what distinguishes a Republic from a "dictatorship."

as each day passes, i am less able to distinguish the two...

(thanks to crooks and liars...)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments