Where do I begin? How do you tell a mentally ill person or an alcoholic that they have a problem? I suppose it's equally impossible; but I feel the need to vent and have the right; so here goes.
I think I'll have to start with the present situation America is in, so I'll start with now and work my way back in ensuing installments.
Eight years ago you elected a Republican oilman President. I could see you were clueless how it might work out, but I knew and I tried to tell you. So did a lot of other people. To your credit, Bush got 500,000+ fewer votes than Al Gore, but you let him be President anyway, without so much as a whimper. So did Gore and the Democratic Party.
(I except the Black Congressional caucus who, to their everlasting credit, protested vehemently Bush's illegal appointment to the throne. But not one US Senator, including Gore himself, whom I therefore count amongst your cretinous number, would sign onto their protest, and it died a silent death.)
And hardly a further word was ever said to this day about election 2001, what should have been the greatest criminal/political scandal election fraud, conflict-of-interest and subversion of democracy in USA history.
Bush actually won the presidency in a lawsuit, in the US Supreme Court. A lawsuit to prohibit the counting of democratically cast votes. No greater crime against the American people or democracy has ever been committed by a candidate for President.
The first thing Bush did was steal your trillion dollar tax surplus right out of the United States Treasury and give it to the wealthiest multinational corporations and families in America. Everybody knew (it was right in the newspaper) that the "have-mores" GOP base, as Bush came to call them, took all your money along with massive tax cuts over the next eight years. And you wimps got nothing! No tax-cut. Nothing but a $300 tax rebate (more on that later).
Of course, when you elected all those Republicans across the country on the "no-tax pledge" your property, state, local taxes and other federal taxes (gasoline tobacco), and any other revenue source, went continually up and up to finance the shortfall coming from the US Treasury. And you dimwitted Americans cheered the whole time. I simply couldn't believe it. That was your money!
That was only the beginning of eight years of utter disaster, which you supported and applauded.
The next significant thing that happened is Bush ignored all the warnings of a terrorist attack and even cut spending to the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration), allowing the airlines to "privatized" security at airports etc. Of course profit came before security, as profit always comes first, and security went right to the top of the cost-cutting list and a bunch of minimum-wage legal immigrants were manning the security posts at the airports on 9/11. We all know what happened next. Nineteen suicidal lunatics with five bucks worth of razorblades did an end-around Commander-in-Chief Bush and your $500,000,000 (ahhhh.....that's 500 billion dollars) a year National Defense and crashed into the World Trade Center. Any other President would have resigned.
But were the American people angry at the lax security? Did Americans blame Bush/GOP who were in power? Were they angry at law enforcement? The airlines? The FBI? None of the above!! You blamed a country full of stone-age Afghani people most of whom never heard of New York City much less the WTC. And evidently, if Guantanamo Bay is any indication, few of them ever heard of Bin laden either (torture was instituted first at Guantanamo Bay when Rumsfeld became frustrated that no useful information was coming from the POWs. (Evidently none ever did torture included.)
Instead of resigning in disgrace for his unprecedented negligence resulting in 3,000 deaths, on September 12th, 2001 Bush, who ran and hid on 9/11, became the most popular President ever..... in the history of America. Incredible! How you Americans got talked into "Bush: the security President" is really beyond the pale...him of all people!, the guy who let 3,000 people get killed for lax security. Jeeez how dumb is that?!
And on that same day, Sept 12th, unbeknownst to practically everybody, Bush shuttled dozens of Saudi Arabians including the Bin laden family, (18 of the 19 of the 9/11 high-jackers were, Saudi Arabian dissidents as is Osama), out of America while no American was even allowed to fly on an airplane. And you were told all about this long before election 2004. Bush enjoyed an 80+% approval from "the people" for 2002 and beyond. Just incredible! Utter stupidity beyond all rational reckoning! I still can't believe it. I thought he should have been impeached on the spot! And later, but before the election 2004, was it revealed that a few days before 9/11 Bush received a memo specifically warning that Al qaeda sought the hijacking of commercial airliners to use as missiles; a memo which he ignored out of hand.
The corporate GOP media in particular was remiss and negligent, in investigating and reporting the truth about these and many other misdeeds, illegal, Unconstitutional, criminal and dishonest adventures engaged in by Bush/GOP/Cheney/Rice/ Rove/Delay......etc...
So the next thing Bush does is invade Afghanistan supposedly to "get Osama Bin-laden dead or alive". And he,to this day! runs free. The Afghanistan War was lost because Bush never achieved his stated war objective.
When you fail to achieve your war objective you've lost. Never mind that the Taliban offered to turn Osama over to the USA if Bush simply delivered evidence of his complicity in 9/11; which would seem available enough if Bush had enough evidence to invade another country. Don't ya think America?! Bush ignored their offer and opted for a 100s billion-dollar murderous war of invasion that is by no means over yet.
Like the author of this great article, I have wondered endlessly about America's love story with stupidity. Really, it boggles the mind.
The US has to be the only place in the world where the word elitist is an insult--everywhere else, it's a compliment, or at least there is an admission that power in the hands of morons is lethal and that only the best and the brighest should be in charge of the affairs of the State.
Why do we have this fatal attraction for stupid leaders? Bush was accepted at Yale on the coattails of his grand father, and he was known as a mediocre and incurious student. The senile senator was 5th from bottom at the Naval Academy; can't average voters see the difference between American peace and prosperity during the 2 terms of a brilliant, if sexually unstable, Rhode scholar President, and the string of disasters brought about by the reign of King George the Moron?
The rest of the world cannot comprehend what happened to the most powerful, educated country in the world, and how it could roll over, forget its most fundamental democratic principles and be led over the cliff by such a dim bulb.
Maybe it's because this dim bulb is also an arrogant macho sociopath with a streak of sadism, and we are attracted to arrogant macho sociopaths even more than to plain idiots?
by
francine (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 332 comments)
on Sunday, June 15, 2008 at 1:06:25 PM
Believing your own propaganda. During the cold war the US projected a 'air brushed' image of itself at home and abroad as part of the 'image' war between Capitalism and Communism. When the war ended the US forgot to take off the wartime rose coloured glasses as fantasy on TV was preferable to re-engaging with reality.
by
kwalsh (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 206 comments)
on Sunday, June 15, 2008 at 10:00:30 PM
In fact Part II of this series will concern the origins of the Cold War, post-WWII 1950s and the dumbing down of America (that started in the schools) and the "purchase" of the federal government by the corporate/military complex, as a meer corporate subsidary. Compared to the prices of corporate buyouts these days, the Bush/GOP federal government was a bargain-basement steal at a few hundred million bucks.
by
Kevin Sysyn (12 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 16 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 12:31:10 AM
Perhaps the reason we have such crummy leaders is we pay them so poorly that they are forced to steal themselfs into richness. What say we PAY the dirty buggers so much money (like our sports personalities) that stealing from us would be a waste of their time. As a side effect, perhaps then we would have actual qualification tests (like the lowest Civil Servant takes to qualify for their jobs) and have some expectations of fullfilling the job description with actual performance. It's no damn wonder we have a bunch of knotheads running us into the ground
Veteran '66-68
by
Roger (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 359 comments)
on Sunday, June 15, 2008 at 10:20:51 PM
I think its because truly well-meaning compassionate smart and good people don't want to be destroyed by the witchhunting hysterical petty media, GOP their bosses and minions, who's design it is to distract America from the real issues of importance to them, their happiness and future.
I mean can you imagine!? The price of a frikking haircut became a huge campaign issue for at least two candidates. These people are running for President for chrissake! What somebody's pastor said years ago...jeeezuz!
What smart person would want to be part of that?
Speaking of which, if you look at Bush's 8 years in office there was not one...not one... STATESMAN in the whole gang. Not a single intelligent charming understanding human being amongst them! Rice is the worst since Dulles who chased bogeymen of his own.
by
Kevin Sysyn (12 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 16 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 12:46:06 AM
Here the thing; as pissed off as I am at the "progressives" as well as the 27%ers alike, you foget one thing. It ain't their fault.
And it's not like we are the only ones; how's that Tony Blair thing working out? How about Brown? He any better? Got enough comeras watching you day in and day out over there? How about that EU Lisbon Treaty? You all behind that, or do you even get to vote.
And if you are questioning the "official story" of 9/11 (as I do) what about 07/07? What are the odds of them running drills in the very locations on the very day at the very time of 3 of the 4 bombings?
But I digress; it ain't their fault.
What they do is they devalue the currency and inflate prices. Food, gas, insurance, morgages... everything up up and up. while the pay rates and benifits go down down and down.
People are so wrapped up in work, they haven't got the time to analyse the news sources. They just turn on the tube while fixing dinner or helping the kids with homework, and they listen to some talking head (specificly choosen for believability factors) in the background.
And that guy lies to them. Not only does he lie to them, but, as is evident in the Tim Russert death, he becomes an almost parental figure of trust.
It's like a father teaching racism to a kid. Why would the child question the father? What other perspective does he have to draw from?
So, if you get multible news sourses repeating the same lies, or ridiculing the same truths, then you have complete control over the majority. Now there will always be those that this doesn't work on, but they will be in the minority.
And when they act up and protest, the media simply doesn't show it to the rest, and it slips quietly by, like it never happened.
The media is more responcible for what has happened over the last 8 years than anything else. And it sickens me to see people weeping for a sellout like Russert.
At least the UK still has a somewhat free press. the Guardian is still free, for now, i think.
by
scott creighton (24 articles, 10 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 203 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 12:32:29 AM
If the idiot Americans would just simply vote their own personal interests the GOP would get about 10% of the vote. Every time, every election everywhere.
Forget comparisons with European countries. their average working folk are waaaaaaaay better off than Americans in good times and in bad. And they tend to correct their mistakes, or try hard to anyway. They learned a lot from centuries of mutual destruction.
They are much more evolved politically than America.
Most of their problems lay with providing and maintaining tremendous government benifit to all of their people. In terms of political philosophy Sarkozy the "conservative" Pres of France is way left of Obama.
Britain is about to leave Iraq.
by
Kevin Sysyn (12 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 16 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 1:13:06 AM
and the Lisbon Accord? It failed a few years ago in the referendum vote in France and (Germany?) so what do they do? They don't let them vote this time around. And they put up with it. They had a vote in Ireland, and thank goodness for the Europeans, it got creamed. So guess what they are going to do: change the rules so they don't have to have it approved by all of the participating governments.
You know what is funny? Many people living outside the US can easily see the problems and the cracks in our democratic facade, yet, you don't see them in your own.
You know why? Because your media doesn't talk about yours; just like ours doesn't talk about ours. See how that works?
You say the Brits WILL be leaving Iraq? Really? Who told you that? Our government tells us we WILL be leaving too. But we know better than to believe the lyings shits. I mean, didn't Tony Blair have to resign over the Iraq lies in Brittan? And you are still in Iraq aren't you? What does that tell you.
Once the Lisbon Accord is forced on the people over there and your national sovegnty is gone, you keep arguing about how stupid WE are, please.
Hows that Euro working out?
by
scott creighton (24 articles, 10 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 203 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 7:00:12 AM
"It was asking for trouble to seek a vote on a 280-page technical text with no clear line but plenty of pickings for opponents to fan fantasies about the Union..." Charles Bremmer, Times Online.
That's right, the people of Ireland are too stupid to understand how wonderful the EU really is. He explains the good things the dumb Irish peasants don't understand...
"As for what works, here's a short list: The single market in goods that is slowly expanding into services and which is policed by the unpopular Commission; the euro (single currency), which has defied its detractors and succeeded beyond expectation; the removal of frontiers in most of the bloc; bringing prosperity to poor members (yes, including Ireland);" Charles Bremmer
Ah yes. Why can't we simple folk just understand that the unrestricted free market will save us all? It's not about making huge profits for the CEO and investor class... NO... it's about helping raise the standard of living for everyone and sharing the wealth of nations in a more equal manner.
Bullshit. I know it, and you probably know it. The idea behind it is simple; pit the working peoples of a 1st world country against those of a third world country then devalue their pay rate to "compete on the global market". All the while, raising the prices for the goods so that even more profit is attainable.
You see where he says it's slowly expanding into "services"? Do you know what that means? Desperate immegrants migrating to fill jobs at cut rates all across Europe. Argue that isn't happening.
More people competing for fewer jobs; what happens to the pay rates?
The French and the Dutch blew this thing out of the water 2 years ago, and this time around they weren't even allowed to vote. Yeah, much more "advanced" government there, huh?
Did you know that Great Britan has more survaillance cameras focused on them than the people of China? Did the Brits vote for that one?Or was it stuffed down their throats.
It's starting to sound to me like someone doesn't recognize the fascist state developing over in the UK just like it is here. The only thing is, that SONEONE is writing about how stupid we are for not seeing it.
Pot... meet Kettle. Kettle... meet Pot. (Pol Pot that is)
by
scott creighton (24 articles, 10 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 203 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 7:29:49 AM
before you start raving about all the "democracy" in Europe these days, check out this demonstration last night where the goon-squad riot police broke some heads and went into the crowd to get certain agitator leaders from the protest group.
It was a Bush protest, but it was outside Parliment, in GB.
to mr Creighton: true, there is no overabundance of great leaders in Europe either, but there is a big difference between ordinary or mediocre leaders--like Blair--who actuall y did not do too bad for a while--and catastrophic ones like Bush. And Angela Merkel seems pretty good so far.
You say it's not the American people's fault if they have been deceived and lied to and that they have no responsability in the present situation.
I beg to differ, if only because democracy is built on the notion that voters are adults able to make informed decisions regarding public affairs, and not kids who need a Big Brother to make these decisions for them. it's either or: You cannot demand the right to vote and refuse to take responsability for the consequences of your vote. If people are as gullible and easily led on as you say--then it would be best to do away with the fiction of democracy altogether and accept that the power to make major decisions concerning the country and our lives should be taken away from us and left to self appointed elites.
So, yes, people who supported the war and voted for Bush twice bear a responsability in the present situation--tyrants don't exist in a void, they cannot exist without enablers. It was not that difficult to find out that the rationales for this war were bogus, it is not that difficult to reach the conclusion that torture is bad, violating the constitution is bad, detaining prisoners without trial is against the law, etc. These debates were all over the media and from day one, there was a minority of respected political figures, both conservative and liberal, who took a stand against against the war-my Senator Jim Webb is one of them.
Fess up guys: people who turned a blind eye to the Republican elephant in the room and let it go on a rampage are Bush's partners in crime, period.
by
francine (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 332 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 6:23:35 AM
... but I have to point out, that if they had continued to count the votes in 2000, Bush Lost. It was his cronies in the Supreme Court that were put there by his father that made him president.
Not the will of the people of America.
Same thing is true of Ohio in 2004. So in fact, we didn't elect him either time.
He was defeated twice. And as long as those parental figure talking heads on tv keep saying the election fraud never happened, how many working fathers have time to go investigate it themselves?
Here's an example: how come YOU didn't know about Florida 2000 and Ohio 2004? You said we the asshole, when we clearly didn't. Don't you have time to investigate?
by
scott creighton (24 articles, 10 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 203 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 7:37:02 AM
This mystifies me: where did you get that I was not aware of Florida/2000 and Ohio/2004? These accusations of fraud were so all over the internet, and to a lesser extent the media, that I would think that anybody in the US who is not aware of them has lived in a cave for the last 10 years.
If only because I post on OEN News regularly, how could I NOT know that elections were rigged in 2000 AND 2004? And in more places than jUst FL. and OH. I am so aware of the risks of electronic voting that I have been campaigning for a return to paper ballots and signed various petitions to that effect on the net.
What I was saying is--check my post--: ONLY those voters who supported the war in Iraq and voted for Bush, not once but twice, are co-conspirators and enablers of the neocons' war against democracy and should face their responsabilities. While it's clear that fraud accounted for a small percentage of Bush's votes, a very high percentage of voters voted for him--and there are still nearly 30% of them who stubbornly back a failed president who has opened the gates of hell on our country.
People who were against the war from day one and did not vote for Bush did the right thing and are certainly not responsible for the present mess; that leaves us with nearly 50% who did--and those definitely bear some form of responsability for our present problems. At least for being gullible, herdlike, uncurious and siding blindly with authority.
Unless you are very poor and downtrodden, there is no excuse for being an inept, lazy, incompetent citizen and not getting the minimal information you need to exercise your right to vote properly ; it doesn't require a superhuman strength to watch the news, surf the net daily or listen to the radio on your way to work. I understand your point of view, but I think that by making excuses for these lazy, incompetent voters , you encourage the very shortcomings that made them susceptible to be misled.
When I was a teenager in the 70s, Americans were possibly better informed, at least more into individual thinking and leary of authorities than today. It's because these healthy attitudes have receded that Americans drank the kool aid and have been under the moron's spell for 8 long years.
by
francine (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 332 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 11:15:06 AM
The problem here is the author thinks we still have a Democracy, and that anything would be different if a Democrat was in office.
GWB was elected by an elite that is able to rig elections via election fraud and media manipulation of news. For example, Bush could have been defeated in 2000 or 2004 if he was given the Swift Boat treatment over his National Guard service. Instead, a 2000 article in the Boston Globe exposing this was essentially ignored by the MSM. Dan Rather was allowed to do the same, but was set up, so the messenger became the story and not Bushs National Guard service, or lack thereof.
Much of Americas support for Bush policies were a result MSM propaganda. Most have no time to figure things out for themselves, even if they could think.
Now the ruling elite, know that 60% of the population are unable to figure things out given all the propaganda. Thirty percent will vote Republican, 30% will vote Democrat, no matter what. And 30% of the other 40% will vote for who is most popular. They vote for the winner, elections are like the World Cup or Super Bowl to them. The other 28% might try and figure things out, but the propaganda is way to much for most of them.
Now MSM is being given permission to expose some of what GWB has done, at least the softer stuff, in order to transition to the next stage in the ruling elites plan, which requires a Democrat Global Warming Bunny Puppet. Thats Obama (although McCain is being painted green too, so perhaps not). Good cop, bad cop. When people realize good is bad, then it's time for change, and the next good cop from the opposition party gets voted in. Same old, same old. They been doing it for almost 100 years now.
The fact that more Americans have not figured it out proves the author is right, in a limited way. America has been dumbed down. Pretty much everything they believe is a myth. Their detachment from reality is so great, knowing the truth might be too much for them to take. Lying at this point is an act of kindness.
So where are we now?
In Platos "Republic" he outlined the basis of the future totalitarian state, ruled by the elite he called "philosopher kings", or "guardians". The Republic provided the basis for all future Illuminati projects, including communism, the elimination of marriage and the family, compulsory education, the use of eugenics by the state, and the employment of deceptive propaganda methods.
Leo Strauss, much like Plato, taught that within societies, some are fit to lead, while others are fit only to be led. For Strauss, a NWO would accept, understand, and harness man’s tendency for "self-interest", or "human nature". Those who are fit to rule are those who realize there is no morality. He believed the world to be a place where policy advisers may have to deceive their own public leaders. If exposed to the absence of absolute truth, the masses would quickly succumb to nihilism or anarchy. They "can’t handle the truth". Thus, according to Strauss, it is necessary to maintain "the Noble Lie".
Strauss believed that the aggressive nature of human beings could only be restrained by a powerful state. In other words, Fascism. "Because mankind is intrinsically wicked, he has to be governed," he once wrote. "Such governance can only be established, however, when men are united – and they can only be united against other people."
Our leaders worship at the alter of Strauss and Plato. This is their secret religion, and we live under their rules, as they see themselves as Gods. They dictate, we obey. Tommorow we may worship the king of the elite, once he is announced, perhaps as the Messiah the religous masses are waiting for.
by
pft (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 466 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 1:01:47 AM
On the contrary, I believe and have written many times that if America had a real democracy the GOP would have gotten 10% of the vote every election since Roosevelt...and in the next one too.
More on that in Part II.
by
Kevin Sysyn (12 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 16 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 1:21:32 AM
So spot on as an article I hardly care to mention it, but you show five hundred million in figures and write five hundred billion in words. Was that an intended amendment?
by
amazin (34 articles, 0 quicklinks, 11 diaries, 400 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 2:17:26 AM
It was a joke. I meant it to appear I started writing $500,000,000,000 and decided that the avergae American couldn't cipher all those zeros so I....ahhhh.... changed to the written word. I feared the joke would be missed once I read it on the site. Sorry!
by
Kevin Sysyn (12 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 16 comments)
on Monday, June 16, 2008 at 9:41:20 AM
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
