OpEdNews » From Stupid to Moronic to Evil

Refresh Tag(s): Afghanistan; Disinformation; Energy; Georgia Russia Conflict; Iran; Iraq; Israel; Kosovo; Media Use In Asymmetric War; NATO; (more...) Neocon Military Aggression; Propaganda; Republican; Russia (less...)
Add to My Group

August 10, 2008 at 14:21:53

View Ratings | Rate It

Promoted to Headline (H3) on 8/10/08:
From Stupid to Moronic to Evil

by Paul Craig Roberts Page 1 of 1 page(s)

www.opednews.com

SAVE FAVORITES

VIEW FAVORITES

"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative." John Stuart Mill

Many years ago, during the 1970s if memory serves, neoconservative Irving Kristol, echoing John Stuart Mill, called his conservative party, the Republican Party, "the stupid party."

Kristol was referring to the Republicans' inability to compete on the policy front. Jack Kemp and Ronald Reagan led the Republicans out of the wilderness, but now Republicans have reverted to the stupid party, or more precisely the moronic party.

Take a minute to examine the presidential campaign propaganda that Republicans send around the Internet, and you will see what I mean. For example, recently while Obama was traveling abroad, showing himself to the remnant of our allies, Republican political operatives blitzed the Internet with the suggestion that Obama might not be an American citizen. Doubt was cast on either of his parents being American citizens. The message went on to suggest that Obama refused to produce his birth certificate. All the while, Obama was traveling abroad on a US passport, a document that cannot be obtained without a US birth certificate.

Considering that the Republican candidate, John McCain, was born in the Panama Canal Zone, only the GOP would be dumb enough to make an issue over whether the Democrats' candidate was born in one of the 50 states.

The innuendo and negativism with which the Republicans are conducting their presidential campaign are unprecedented. There is no sign of issues in McCain's Karl Rovian campaign. Issues have been superseded by hate, lies, and war.

Republicans stand for war without end, a police state to make us "safe," and "energy independence," which means drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Preserve and offshore of Florida's Gulf Coast beaches.

What Republicans really mean by "energy independence" is prevailing over environmentalists. Republicans lump environmentalists in the same category with abortionists, gays, feminists, food stamp recipients, trade unionists and terrorists. To a Republican, saving America means prevailing over these people.

The notion that Americans can achieve energy independence by drilling offshore wells and in the arctic is absurd. A number of experts have pointed out that the best data do not support any such possibility.

For example, Robert Kaufman at Boston University, citing US government data, reports that the US might have 40 billion barrels of oil in undeveloped reserves which are not off limits. Another 19 billion might be in off-limits offshore sites and in the Arctic National Wildlife preserve.

All of this oil cannot be brought up at once, and apparently none before 2017. Bringing it all into production would, experts think, increase US oil production by 1-4 percent. In other words, nothing. Currently the US uses 21 million barrels a day, and the entire world uses 86 million barrels a day. At best, the Arctic Wildlife Refuge could by 2017 produce 1 million barrels a day, about one-twentieth of current US use and one-eighty-sixth of current world use.

This is not energy independence, and it would have no material effect on price. Indeed, the offshoring by US corporations of US jobs has a much greater effect on the dollar price of oil by inflating the US trade deficit and driving down the exchange value of the US dollar. But, of course, here we are talking about facts, and facts are of no interest to Republicans.

Republicans are interested in prevailing over the "bad guys." The fact that the bad guys are Bush, Cheney, Rice, Wolfowitz, Perle, Bill Kristol, and other such is beyond the Republicans' imagination. Bad guys are "towel heads" with beards and robes and are "over there" where they must be killed before they come "over here." The extent of the Republican intellect boils down to "over here" vs. "over there."

The other great bugaboo of Republicans is "the liberal media." Fox "News" has Republicans convinced that "the liberal media" is endangering America by siding with terrorists.

Clearly, Republicans never look at "the liberal media." It was Judith Miller at the "liberal" New York Times who served up as fact all the neocon disinformation about Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction and al Qaeda connections. Without the New York Times leading the way, the neocons could never have pulled off their illegal invasions.

On July 18, 2008, the New York Times allowed the Israeli Benny Morris to spew lies about Iran that he used to justify an attack on that country, possibly even involving nuclear weapons. This is the same New York Times that the idiot conservatives believe is part of "the liberal media."

It was ABC News that served up the neocon disinformation that the anthrax had been traced to Saddam Hussein.

And, today, August 9, 2008, as I write, it is the "liberal" Washington Post that has written an editorial urging the US to go to war with Russia.

With its editorial, "Stopping Russia: the US and its allies must unite against Moscow's war on Georgia," the Washington Post has established a world record for the maximum number of lies in the minimum number of words.

Except for the Washington Post, the entire world knows that Georgia (the birthplace of Joseph Stalin, not Georgia USA) initiated the aggression that killed Russian peacekeepers and hundreds of civilians in South Ossetia, peacekeepers who were there with the blessing of Georgia and international agreements.

The true facts are available all over the world press. But the "liberal" Washington Post serves up the lie that Russia has attacked Georgia and conceivably plans to conquer all of Georgia. "This is a grave challenge to the United States and Europe," thunders the Bush Regime's mouthpiece, aka, "the liberal media."

Thirsting for blood, the "liberal media" declares: "The United States and its NATO allies must together impose a price on Russia."

Here we see the combination of idiocy and delusion in one sentence. The United States has proved that it is incapable of occupying Iraq, much less Afghanistan. Russia has a large trade surplus. America's NATO allies are dependent on Russian natural gas. Yet the "liberal" Washington Post wants a bankrupt US and "its NATO allies" who are dependent on Russian energy "to impose a price on Russia" for defending its peacekeepers!

Seldom has the world seen such total insanity as the neoconservative Washington Post, a propaganda sheet as far from "liberal media" as it is possible to be.

Georgia was part of Old Russia and the Soviet Union for two centuries. After Soviet communism collapsed, the US taxpayer-funded neoconservative National Endowment for Democracy broke every agreement President Reagan had made with Gorbachev and began using US taxpayers' money to rig and purchase elections in former constituent parts of the Russian/Soviet empire.

The Endowment for Democracy purchased Georgia as a US colony. The affront to Russia was extreme, but at the time Russia was weak. Oligarchs with outside money had grabbed control over Russian resources, and Russia was in dire straits and could not resist American imperialism.

Putin corrected the situation for Russia.

Now using American weapons, Georgia, for reasons yet to be revealed has violated its own agreement with Russia and attacked South Ossetia, killing in the process Russian peacekeepers. Vladimir Vasilyev, chairman of the Russian State Duma Committee for Security told the press:

"The things that were happening in Kosovo, the things that were happening in Iraq – we are now following the same path. The further the situation unfolds, the more the world will understand that Georgia would never be able to do all this without America."

Yes, without America there would be no war in Ossetia and no war between Russia and its former constituent part.

Without America there would be no war in Afghanistan. No war in Iraq.

Without America there would not be 1.2 million dead Iraqis and 4 million displaced Iraqis. We have no idea of the toll on Afghan civilians, although women and children appear to be the prime targets of the US/NATO forces that are "bringing peace and freedom to Afghanistan."

Recently, US Secretary of State Condi Rice said that the US government could not prevent an Israeli attack on Iran. Israel is an independent country, said the American Secretary of State. What an extraordinary lie.

Israel cannot exist without American weapons and money. Israel cannot attack Iran without overflying Iraq, which the US air force can easily prevent. It is clear as day that the Bush Regime has given the green light to Israel to attack Iran so the Bush Regime can rush to "Israel's defense."

Meanwhile the "liberal" media is urging the US to get involved in a war between Russia and Georgia. The insanity will lead to the unloosening of nuclear weapons.

Paul Craig Roberts, a former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury and former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, has held numerous academic appointments. He has been reporting shocking cases of prosecutorial abuse for two decades. A new (more...)

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author

Contact Editor

View Authors' Articles

Book Recommendations for "Afghanistan"

Afghanistan: A Military History from Alexander the Great to the War against the Taliban
by Stephen Tanner

$17.95
Lowest New Price $9.99
Number of pages: 392
Publisher: Da Capo Press

Horse Soldiers: The Extraordinary Story of a Band of US Soldiers Who Rode to Victory in Afghanistan
by Doug Stanton

$28.00
Lowest New Price $13.25
Number of pages: 416
Publisher: Scribner

Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and bin Laden, from the Soviet Invasion to September 10, 2001
by Steve Coll

$29.95
Lowest New Price $9.20
Number of pages: 720
Publisher: Penguin Press HC, The

The Photographer: Into War-torn Afghanistan with Doctors Without Borders
by Emmanuel Guibert

$29.95
Lowest New Price $16.33
Number of pages: 288
Publisher: First Second

View All Book Recommendations

Share this page: (what's this?) Tell a Friend:

(More...)

12 comments

Kevin Gosztola

And while all of this madness is happening

The Democrats are looking out for the poor and working classes of America and preparing plans to repudiate the Bush Regime on Day One after getting Obama elected in November???

Seems like somewhere in this dismal picture of Republicans who believe in a "liberal" media, us vs. them, and that we can drill our way to energy independence by drilling for oil in America and off of our shores you are leaving out the Democrats.

Conveniently.

by Kevin Gosztola (302 articles, 146 quicklinks, 81 diaries, 1082 comments [77 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Aug 10, 2008 at 4:49:03 PM

(0+)

richard

If you listen to PCR's

participation on internet/broadcast radio interviews you will know he does not regard democrats blameless. But he is a Republican (perhaps was, now) and is clearly disgusted with what his party has become.

I only fault him in that he has not typically addressed the issue that both parties are complicit with the NWO/industrial fascism. Both parties are puppets. The great hoax of 'choice'.

by richard (0 articles, 5 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 1359 comments [400 recommended, 8 rejected]) on Sunday, Aug 10, 2008 at 5:12:20 PM

(0+)

Richard Mynick

PCR often sounds almost like a leftist. In this piece, there

is only one passage that wouldn't easily fit into a high-quality leftwing journal. That's where he tosses a quick approving nod in Reagan's direction, writing, "After Soviet communism collapsed, the US taxpayer-funded neoconservative National Endowment for Democracy broke every agreement President Reagan had made with Gorbachev and began using US taxpayers' money to rig and purchase elections in former constituent parts of the Russian/Soviet empire."

Apart from that, the rest of the article wouldn't be out of place in a serious leftwing critique. In fact, it would have a sharper edge than many supposedly "leftwing critiques." It's more succinct & accurate than any of the drivel that comes out of the mouths of Democratic politicos or pundits, & is much better than the stuff written by over-the-hill former leftists like Tom Hayden or Todd Gitlin. It's remarkable, & really very admirable, considering where PCR has been.

by Richard Mynick (2 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1552 comments [255 recommended, 5 rejected]) on Sunday, Aug 10, 2008 at 6:37:03 PM

(0+)

waldopaper

The Great Hoax of Choice...

...exactly. There is only ONE "party:" the Money Party... and they don't give a crap whether you "vote" for McPantsload or Bama-lamma. They disconnected the levers 8 years ago. Anybody who has evidence to reveal this will wake up one morning with a horse's head. They have all but dropped the pretext.

All they need is the 37% terminally-stupid part of the US population who will get all lumpy over flags and eagles and buddy-Christ and "precious moments" figurines to operate the death camps and populate the "Police Departments." "Idealism" or "philosophy" has nothing to do with any of this. "Conservative?" "Liberal?" What a load of crap.

The REAL "political" spectrum no longer goes left-to-right... it goes top-to-bottom. We keep the hoax going by nattering about "elections" and celebrity-cult "politics."

But, hey-- it's good for clicks and eyeballs.

by waldopaper (15 articles, 3 quicklinks, 34 diaries, 609 comments [84 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Aug 10, 2008 at 6:41:40 PM

(0+)

Joel S. Hirschhorn

Reply: On this correct hoax of choice

Please check out my new article published only on Swans:

Misplaced Blame Undermines Democracy

http://www.swans.com/library/art14/joelh05.html

If you appreciate this article, please pass the link around.....thanks

by Joel S. Hirschhorn (141 articles, 50 quicklinks, 65 diaries, 546 comments [2 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Aug 11, 2008 at 10:13:23 AM

(0+)

Mac McKinney

Pravda better than the Post

If I want to read about foreign affairs, I will read Pravda before the Washington Post. The Post sucks and it's editors are pathetic propagandists.

by Mac McKinney (53 articles, 114 quicklinks, 241 diaries, 1414 comments [31 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Aug 10, 2008 at 9:44:59 PM

(0+)

Keystone

Total control? NOT

This goes out to all the spooks working for the NWO; Try and control this: http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2004/07/a/format/zoom/

by Keystone (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 301 comments [79 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Aug 10, 2008 at 10:34:44 PM

(0+)

Mike Folkerth

At some point

in the not so distant future, China, Russia, Korea and India will both require and take by force if necessary, the entire resources on this planet.

If China alone consumed on a per-capita ratio that which the U.S. consumes, they would require greater than 100% of all global resources.

The U.S. has planned poorly for decades, that poor planning is becoming more evident every day. Note that in this conflict in Russia, it is over resources and industrial might.

by Mike Folkerth (120 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 566 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Aug 11, 2008 at 10:56:54 AM

(0+)

Richard Mynick

Reply: Why don't you include "The US" in your list of nations that

will "require and take by force if necessary, the entire resources on this planet"? I hope you're not assuming that the US claim to those resources is naturally justified, while those others are mere usurpers.

You say that "The U.S. has planned poorly for decades." I agree -- if you mean that the mistake was in failing to reduce consumption, & to become more resource-efficient. // But the US always tried as hard as it possibly could to control the maximum amount of global resources -- & is still trying to do exactly that. In that sense, US leadership was always aware of the potential difficulty, & tried to plan for leaner times. The mistake was not one of ignoring the potential trouble; it was that the only solution US leaders could envision, was via the path of control & domination.

by Richard Mynick (2 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1552 comments [255 recommended, 5 rejected]) on Monday, Aug 11, 2008 at 11:21:33 AM

(0+)

waldopaper

Speculation...

...that the ruling elite in China, Russia, India, etc. are more than aware that they cannot seize the natural resources of the entire world by force.

Only the US elite... with its megabuck wartoys are under the illusion that it is possible for THEM to do so... and have been attempting to do that very thing for a loonnng time.

by waldopaper (15 articles, 3 quicklinks, 34 diaries, 609 comments [84 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Aug 11, 2008 at 12:38:05 PM

(0+)

John Sanchez Jr.

Reply: Never, ever,...

underestimate the capacity for delusion in any ruling elite. It is why history books are divided into eras of conflict.

by John Sanchez Jr. (9 articles, 0 quicklinks, 25 diaries, 1793 comments [148 recommended, 3 rejected]) on Monday, Aug 11, 2008 at 1:01:56 PM

(0+)

pft

Evil is right

http://www.debka.com/index1.php

DEBKAfile’s military sources note that the arrival of the three new American flotillas will raise to five the number of US strike forces in Middle East waters – an unprecedented build-up since the crisis erupted over Iran’s nuclear program.

This vast naval and air strength consists of more than 40 carriers, warships and submarines, some of the last nuclear-armed, opposite the Islamic Republic, a concentration last seen just before the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Our military sources postulate five objects of this show of American muscle:

1. The US, aided also by France, Britain and Canada, is finalizing preparations for a partial naval blockade to deny Iran imports of benzene and other refined oil products. This action would indicate that the Bush administration had thrown in the towel on stiff United Nations sanctions and decided to take matters in its own hands.

2. Iran, which imports 40 percent of its refined fuel products from Gulf neighbors, will retaliate for the embargo by shutting the Strait of Hormuz oil route chokepoint, in which case the US naval and air force stand ready to reopen the Strait and fight back any Iranian attempt to break through the blockade.

3. Washington is deploying forces as back-up for a possible Israeli military attack on Iran’s nuclear installations.

4. A potential rush of events in which a US-led blockade, Israeli attack and Iranian reprisals pile up in a very short time and precipitate a major military crisis.

5. While a massive deployment of this nature calls for long planning, its occurrence at this time cannot be divorced from the flare-up of the Caucasian war between Russia and Georgia. While Russia has strengthened its stake in Caspian oil resources by its overwhelming military intervention against Georgia, the Americans are investing might in defending the primary Persian Gulf oil sources of the West and the Far East.

DEBKAfile’s military sources name the three US strike forces en route to the Gulf as the USS Theodore Roosevelt , the USS Ronald Reagan and the USS Iwo Jima . Already in place are the USS Abraham Lincoln in the Arabian Sea opposite Iranian shores and the USS Peleliu which is cruising in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden."

by pft (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 601 comments [7 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Aug 12, 2008 at 6:29:49 PM

(0+)