Burn baby burn

Teddy Roosevelt was a Socialist; so was Adam Smith, Adolph Hitler and FDR. Anyone in fact who thinks there ought to be a government is a Socialist unless there's " a war on." At that point everything changes and anyone who thinks there's too much government, too intrusive and abusive in it's powers becomes the Socialist villain. That's the simple version. Of course people who wonder why, when half the e-mail screeds one gets from Republican sources begin with a picture of the World Trade Center in flames and exhortations never to forget, we can also call an official day of Remembrance and Service "Socialist." Is it the service that sours the remembrance? Perhaps a national day of insulting France would have been less Socialist. Perhaps burning the UN would have been more "conservative."

“The plan is to turn a ‘day of fear’ that helps Republicans into a day of activism called the National Day of Service that helps the left,”

writes Matthew Vadum in The Spectator. What could be more Socialist that interfering with the fear level Republicans promote in concert with international terrorists to keep authoritarianism alive in America.

"Nihilistic liberals are planning to drain 9/11 of all meaning.”

Or at least the meaning that can be interpreted to demand bigger, more militaristic government and an attack on Constitutional Government. That's "desecration" howls Vadum. I'm sure that all the police, fire, public safety, paramedics and others who died on that day were Socialists as well - and desecrators as well. And what about all the Socialists who volunteered afterwards? You can see the danger!

So when you see the inevitable burning towers picture, remember to preserve the fear, promote the panic and for heaven's sake don't do anything to get in the way of ever increasing government power and defense contractor profit. That would be nothing but Nihilism and Socialism (if your doublethink capacity is great enough to tie those two together.)

While your doublethink module is engaged, please remember that it wasn't Socialism to support a national day of service when George Bush promoted the idea or when it got Bipartisan support this Spring. It's Socialism because Barack Obama is President.

Damn, these socialist/nihilist Liberals are insidious! Promoting positive outcomes and reducing fear is the first step down the slippery slope toward Socialism and if that is difficult for you to understand, Raw Story has all the reasons all the Republican opinion shouters give us to support "conservative" fear mongering, xenophobia, divisiveness, totalitarianism, Chauvinism and military aggression instead of that goddamn e pluribus unum constructivism those nihilist homosexual, far-left Socialists, want to sell us.

Threat level orange

Well it certainly won't be a surprise to anyone who thought the Bush administration was using Tom Ridge's color coded threat levels to keep his poll ratings up every time they needed a boost - like right before an election. even though he was quoted in 2004 as saying

"We don’t do politics in the Department of Homeland Security."

Ridge's new book contains at least one bombshell of a revelation according to MSNBC's Chris Matthews - yes indeed Ridge was pressured to raise the level days before the 2004 election even though there was no threat. He refused.

In rather dry and understated language he explains that he now had proof that the main concern of the administration was politics and not national security and this was the moment he decided he had to get out.

The Test of Our Times: America Under Siege...and How We Can Be Safe Again is due to be released September first. That should give the Republicans enough time to launch a smear campaign.

Rationing, Death Panels and Takeovers, Oh my!

Is it a lack of determination that keeps me at this? There are times I just want to sail away into the sunset and forget about our idiot's Republic that seems hell bent to destroy itself in an orgy of irrational anger -- but I don't. Sometimes it takes only a word to start me off again and this time the word was "rationing."

On thing that's consistent about American politics is the practice of hiding your worst vices by preemptively accusing your opposition of it. If your practice of rationing health care to maximize profits hangs around your neck like a decomposing albatross, if you let people die because your top executives need their 20 million dollar salaries and the lobbyists and Congressmen need to be kept rich and happy, you make up a story about Obama and rationing and you stage public events where people pretend to be furious at it until eventually people do become furious enough that they stop thinking and start screaming.

Ask Wendell Potter, former vice president of CIGNA quit his job at Corporate Communications because of the company's decision that the life of 17 year old Nataline Sarkisyan was not worth saving: the liver transplant cost too much so the CIGNA Death Panel refused, calling it "experimental." Although outcry from the public and organizations such as the California Nurses Association caused CIGNA to re-focus on how much the bad publicity was costing them and relented, it was too late and the girl died.

Now rationing is the thing with transplants. The supply is severely limited and systems are in place that attempt to make distribution equitable, but it's not based on the cost. That's not the case at CIGNA nor is it indeed in American health care. Our "system" if you can call it that, will decide how much your life is worth to them and whether or not you've paid your premiums, they will refuse treatment if it will eat into profitability. They will do so even though profitability is growing rapidly. Rationing of health care: it's nothing personal, it's just business and it's just about profits.

"I know from personal experience that members of Congress and the public have good reason to question the honesty and trustworthiness of the insurance industry."

testified Potter to the Senate Commerce Committee last month. He related how unprofitable companies were purged, to maximize profits and he's now telling CNN that the buzz words and hackneyed phrases being shouted at Town Hall meetings come straight from the wordsmiths of the Insurers.

"People talk about the government takeover of the system ... that's a buzz term that comes straight out of the insurance industry," says Potter.

Rationing of treatment is not new, nor has it anything to do with who's providing it. When resources are limited, it has to occur, whether it's because there aren't enough organs or operating rooms or surgeons or equipment. Indeed when kidney dialysis was developed in the early 1960's, a committee was set up in Seattle's Artificial Kidney Center for instance, to ration the use of their machinery. I hesitate to call it a death panel, but if you needed time on the machines, a group consisting of a minister, a banker, a labor leader and a housewife picked by the Center would ration it based on such criteria as your record of Church attendance, net worth and marital status. In other words private parties could decide what your life was worth and factor their profit into the equation. It wasn't until the "government takeover" which was Medicare that opened up access to almost everyone in need and perhaps lessened the ability of insurers to indulge in profit based rationing. They sure as hell don't want much more of that at CIGNA.

A great deal of thought goes into choosing words like "death panel" and "rationing" and "takeover." They are chosen with surgical precision so that using by them as accusations, the corporate death panels, the corporate rationing of health care and the monopolistic trusts that indulge in them are protected from the truth.

Now contemplating just how dumb are the people plugged into the corporate matrix, I'm back to wanting to give it all up and let the country sell itself deeper into slavery and dependency on those who see the American People as sheep to be fleeced.

Rounding up the righteous.

Glenn Beck, that bottomless sack of snake shit, is trying to make you forget that the last administration set new highs in illegal surveillance of private citizens by referencing a small item at the Whitehouse.gov web page which asks that the endless stream of e-mail lies be forwarded. The site, if you care to look, has information and videos that attempt to disprove the mostly baseless claims. The professional liars are alarmed and so they want you to be alarmed -- and so they break out the swastikas again and try to pin them on the Democrats. "They're rounding up the conservatives, they cry, while trying not to snicker. "they've created a new 'Information Czar'" says the bullshit Czar, Glenn Beck.

People who invent psychotic scenarios and dress them up as dire warnings are "conservatives" you see and only trying to help you see that Obama is a fascistcomministmuslim and illegal alien -- conservatively speaking.

If you're like me, you've had enough of the Palin "death panel" fraud and a great many others and forwarding them to Snopes or Factcheck simply doesn't help much. Returning them with comment to the people who sent them to you doesn't help either. Depending on the Media to refute the obvious and childish fabrications is a lost hope, but it seems that Mr. Beck and Senator Cornyn and the other professional traitors and haters of honesty are afraid someone will get to the bottom of it all and trace the sabotage, the lies and the psychotic ravings back to the RNC and into their own hard drives from whence it originates.

Behold, we're now all being asked to "squeal on our neighbors" say the folks who wanted to have postal letter carriers peek in our basement windows a few years ago and encouraged librarians to spy on those of us who read. Obama is making up a list, just like Santa and he's going to put all those people who tried to warn you that Obama is Hitler into camps.

Did I mention that Poland invaded Germany? The Liberals don't want you to know.

Poor little Palin, part II

"I continue to be surprised at the vicious attacks on her. I've never seen anything like it"

says John McCain on CNN.com. Of course that's not nearly true or credible and of course "viciousness" is not what distinguishes the many criticisms of Palin from the criticism McCain himself endured; criticism that he handed out and that he observed being handed out to people like John Kerry while standing by saying little or nothing. Indeed the hypocrisy of anyone in any way part of the Republican establishment of the last decade who is still crying about how poor Sarah has been treated is something the like of which I've never seen. What distinguishes complaints about her ethics with accusations that McCain sired an illegitimate, black daughter or that Barak Obama was born in Kenya and is a Marxist who wants to destroy the country, are the facts behind them -- or not behind them.

McCain and his party would very much like you to think that what really sours people like me on candidates like Palin are her daughter's pregnancy or some details of her private life that should be beyond public scrutiny. Indeed the campaign was complaining about such things far in advance of public awareness, making it apparent that they intended to make her an antihero and to run on sympathy rather than on any strong capabilities she might have. Of course any suggestion that anything in a candidate's life should be beyond scrutiny when made by a Republican is so hilarious as to be horrifying while there is ongoing hysteria about things that are not part of Obama's life being treated as controversial by people who know better.

That Palin lied about refusing earmarks, about being opposed to running up debt, is a small matter compared to the accusations of treason she smilingly made againstBarak Obama in her pedantic sing-song tones and nothing said against her suitability compares with Republican accusations against McCain made by the Bush camp. Of course complaining about criticism alone and without reference to the content and the facts of the matter constitutes deliberate misrepresentation. Is it vicious to accusePalin of ethical violations when there are legal proceedings based on formal accusations? Is it vicious to mention misstatements, to mention lifelong dedication to witch hunters and heretic persecutors or other things which are incontestably true?

If so, what then are accusations based on lies and distortions? If so what do we do with a candidate whose entire campaign was run upon such things while she whined about how unfair it was to criticize her at all?

It's rare enough for a governor, even a governor under indictment, to simply walk away from the job without explanation, yet Mr. McCain would like us all to believe that she was forced out by the nefarious and vicious Liberals who just can't stop asking why she did it. It's an insult to the electorate, of course, but no more of an insult than the McCain/Palin campaign was. They've been getting away with insulting and assaulting us for a long time -- because we're stupid, because we're emotionally and tribally driven and too often only informed by those who insult us.

That McCain is still playing the victim game; the poor, suffering and forgotten hero game, doesn't speak well for him. That he's still viciously attacking efforts to fix the problems his party created while offering no other suggestions than the same policies that caused them and the same policies that turned the crash of '29 into the Great Depression, doesn't recommend him either, but his misplaced loyalty that drives him to cover up for the VP candidate who may have cost him the election all by herself certainly suggests self-delusion, a total lack of independence and the kind of situational honesty that makes me so very glad he lost.

SOP

It would be hard to substantiate a claim that the United States of America hasn't been a country safe from foreign invasion, at least since the war of 1812 ended, although politicians have been shouting "danger" and starting profitable wars to ward it off for a long time. Even during the infamous first year of this new millennium, more people died of influenza in the US than in the World Trade Center; more than ten times as many on the highway. There's no money in perspective however and there's no safety for the Republican party in it either and so we still have dishonest intellectual lightweights like Liz Cheney claiming that "We" have kept the country safe since September 11, 2001 by launching the second most expensive war in US history and torturing prisoners while essentially refusing to do a damned thing about the surviving perpetrators.

Her crime boss father may or may not be able to keep a straight grimace telling us tall ones like that, but she is and although she has no way of knowing much of anything (unless the old man has been giving away State secrets,) she claims that getting close to Cheney's crimes is demoralizing the CIA which is putting us all in further danger, danger, danger. Yes, the bogeyman will crash more planes into New York if we try to prove that her father broke the law by authorizing torture, lying to Congress and a host of other unprecedented crimes.

The evidence however is that the CIA isn't demoralized at all, but of course we have Fox and Friends to further the fallacy as they always do. It's their own private sector version of Screwing America for Profit, or from the viewpoint of the GOP, it's SOP.

Kiss our American asses, world!

I haven't posted in a while, having been preparing for and then recovering from a rather ill-conceived and harrowing nautical excursion over the weekend. I was hoping to be far away and in another country and thus to avoid what has become, like the War on Christmas, another contrived anti-American battle. But the sea pays no attention to our ambitions and acts of arrogance and there was no escape for the old captain this time.

The war on Memorial Day is a bit different, but no less insidious than our religious wars. We're long since used to being chastised for our lack of piety in not spending the event in self flagellation and the worship of the American messianic mission that some would pass off as appreciation for those who have died in Military service. We've never been asked however, at least not to my knowledge, to express our ritualized regret for the premature deaths of the 60 to 70 million who died in WW II alone, but only for the US soldiers who won it without assistance from the unappreciative world -- and I've long suspected that the War on Memorial Day has become the sole reason for the holiday itself.

If it were an expression of the wish that no more people would die in wars, it would be more likely to please the dead, could they be aware of it, but what it is supposed to be about has been, at least to those who write viral e-mails, a celebration of soldiering; the glory, the rituals and all the self worship and vainglorious bluster America can muster. It's the day of unmitigated, unalloyed arrogance, unrestrained by fact or reason and often not even by sanity or decency.

Of course in these latter days, when we have a President whose rationality and lack of shamanistic display require that we simply make shit up in order to preserve our military/religious complex, the War on Memorial Day is become the war that is Memorial day. It's now a war against Obama and Obama's honest assessment of what we have done, what we are doing and what we should do beyond waving flags, setting ourselves up as the world's sole and only begotten savior, puking up beer and burgers and getting discounts on foreign made goods at the big box stores.

Apologize for what? asks the e-mail. What follows is a sequence of pictures of US military cemeteries in Europe all entitled "We apologize." It ends with

"Apologize to no one. Remind those of our sacrifice and don't confuse arrogance with leadership. And we have to watch an American elected leader who apologizes to Europe and the Middle East that our country is "arrogant"! HOW MANY FRENCH, DUTCH, ITALIANS, BELGIANS AND BRITS ARE BURIED ON OUR SOIL, DEFENDING US AGAINST OUR ENEMIES?? WE DON'T ASK FOR PRAISE ... BUT WE HAVE ABSOULUTELY [sic] NO NEED TO APOLOGIZE!!"

No, it's not just the typical American arrogance about the world needing to kiss our feet every day. It's not just an illustration of our stunning ignorance of history, it's just another rabble rousing attack on a president who had the honesty to say that we have often of late been perceived as arrogant and we've often been unfair to those who disagree and that others have likewise been unfair to us. It's actually one of the best things Obama has said, in my opinion, and they're not going to let him get way with such heresy; not while there remains one pitchfork wielding and furiously ignorant psycho-patriot to arouse.

American Patriotism is a large and dense forest in which more scoundrels than we can count have taken refuge. I'm afraid there isn't enough Agent Orange and enough napalm to force them out or do away with them. I'm afraid that soon enough, Memorial Day will be the day some of use remember that there used to be an America that stood for something; something that contained a lot of good before the bastards flushed it down the toilet.

Happy Deepavali!

by expatbrian (cross posted from World Gone Mad)

I've never been so remiss before about posting to this blog. But alas, my excuse is a good one as I have been blogging elsewhere. That link will take you to the blog I set up at the school for foreign students where I teach.

Anyway, since I already heard the fat lady singing, there hasn't been that much to talk about. Sure, the campaigns have continued. McBush is down double digits and like the ignoramous he is, he says he's happy with that. Palin has "gone rogue" in the words of some inside staffers. In other words, as could have been easily predicted, the dingbat is out of control, gone completely batshit with the media frenzy that surrounds her, and will certainly do something so incredibly stupid that her political career will implode if it hasn't already.

I've been especially amused by the various opinions expoused lately on what a "real American" is. It seems to be anyone who falls between Walter Brennen's "Old Rivers" and Andy of Maybury. Somehow, those of us who are educated, professional, thinking adults have been excluded from the definition. I mean, is anyone else as utterly offended as I am at the idea that, in order to be viewed as a "real American" we have to be the sort that drinks a six-pack at night after showing our butt crack all day?

Bloggingdino was right in his (her?) critique of one of my earlier comments over at The Swash Zone. The American voter is not mind numbingly stupid as I overgeneralized. It is only approximately half of them that are. Well, in the case of this election, less than half and that number is deteriorating rapidly. In any case, the moronic ones are quite simply the Republicans, who, with all of their failures so blatantly exposed, continue to support not only their ridiculous "team" of McCain/Palin, but continue to preach - to an emptying room - that their way works the best! They are apparently absolutely blind to their own recent history!

Like so many others, I feel like I have been politically brutalized by the Republicans for so long that I find it nearly, if not completely impossible to be in any way optomistic of the future. Yet, with Obama in charge and a 60+% in congress, who knows. Maybe, like Michelle, I'll get a renewed sense of pride and hope.

Six degrees of suppuration

No, that's not a typo. Although it's fascinating to see how easy it is arbitrarily to relate one person to another and one person's principles to another person's totally unrelated opinions, it's disgusting to witness the misuse of that effect to slime, smear, slander and misrepresent without scruple.

The Gateway Pundit, for instance: a website that still as of this morning still blares the lurid, inflammatory but absolutely fake story about an Obama supporter beating and robbing a McCain supporter, is insisting on a very important "link" between Barak Obama, "Jew-hater" Rashid Khalidi, and "terrorist" Bill Ayers. A film clip exists, they say. The existence of a film clip is "confirmed" says the Blog; a clip that shows Obama engaged in Jew-bashing at a dinner in Khalidi's honor in 2003.

It must be true, right? Obama must hate Jews if someone at that dinner read a poem criticizing Israel. Indeed all the Israeli Jews must hate themselves if they oppose their government's policies - and of course all Jews are Israelis, right?

Well forgive me if I automatically discount the kind of article that is designed to be bantered back and forth between people trying hard to maintain a belief; the kind of article that insists a major newspaper is sitting on a scoop of monstrous proportions because they're "Liberal."

"Khalidi and the Obamas were great friends in Chicago and often shared meals together." The quote oozes like pus from a chancre. "By the way, Khalidi was also best friends with Bill Ayers."

continues the writer, suppurating like a bedsore.

It's tempting to correct the flawed grammar and very tempting to note that the entire diatribe hinges upon the crapulous credibility of the writer, but I really don't care about who Obama knows, about who may have said what at some dinner he attended, and I'm certainly not going to inflate this pastiche of fragments to the level of "confirmation" of anything but the desperate need to demonize the Democrat in order to disguise the failure of the Republican. It's the kind of need that prompts a writer to make a jewelled elephant out of a fake police report made by a mentally deranged young woman, painting it up like a cheap whore, decked out with gems of outrage, smug condemnations of the perfidy of Democrats in general and stepping in its own excrement.

That the people who write for this blog really care about whether someone hates Jews is remarkable, but then of course, Obama, by associating with Jew haters, partying with Jew haters, eating dinner with Jew haters, is also part of a great conspiracy against the US and everything this country holds dear - why should I disbelieve? It's all "confirmed!"

Insane McCain

If you've ever been to a turkey farm, you will have seen how one lone animal will begin gobbling and the rest will follow suit until the whole flock begins to sound like the American news media commenting on an election.

"Spread the wealth" seems to be the latest gobble ever since John Mc Cain, in his desperation, attempted to conflate the Obama tax policy, which hardly differs from what we've had since the beginning of income taxes in America, with socialism. It's not much more of an idiotic redefinition than is typical of the 2008 campaign rhetoric which has it that a hundred year occupation of a foreign country is a "victory" and accomplishing the goal of regime change and democracy is "surrender." Indeed the trickle down theory is little more than a scenario in which people the government helps to get rich then redistribute a small part of it by spending.

In St. Charles Missouri this weekend, John McCain attempted to show the show me state that lifting some of the burden from the struggling classes is Socialism. Senator Martinez from Florida compared Obama's tax plan to that of Fidel Castro and the chorus of boos from their gobbling audiences is not directed at the dishonest and sometimes demented charges or the turkeys who make them, but at anyone outside the circle of the tribe by virtue of sanity, education, honesty or intelligence: particularly intelligence. There is no idea too stupid, too false, to demented that the tribe will not dance around the fire and scream "kill him!"

It there any charge quite as incredible as insisting that presidents like Dwight Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan must have been socialists who wanted to redistribute the wealth by not giving the kind of tax breaks to the top 5% that George Bush did and that John McCain wants to continue and extend? We have never had a bigger and bigger spending government than we have now and McCain has no plan to change that that could pass a second grade arithmetic teacher's scrutiny. He has hot button topics like earmarks, and socialism and spreading the wealth, but the rest is only "trust me my friends."

"Our opponent's plan is just more big government, and John and I think that that is the problem, not the solution," said the gobbler in the glasses "Instead of taking your hard-earned money and spreading your wealth, we want to spread opportunity so people like you and Joe the plumber can create new wealth."

Of course it's not more big government by any measure. It's a return to the time before George Bush's borrow, bloat and spend policies.

What's the Palin plan? Give it to the rich and let it trickle down. Gobble, gobble, gobble. What's the plan? borrow and spend and put the burden of all that debt on people like you and me and Joe the plumber and our children and grandchildren, and how do we sell it? We lie about palling around with terrorists, we call Obama an elitist Arab Muslim Terrorist, who conspires with Vietnam War protesters, who is a Chicago Machine politician with no experience, whose house was paid for by gangsters, who reads books by terrorists and whose education was paid for by Pakistani Fundamentalists and who isn't even an American. Did I mention that he's black?

At this point and regardless of who wins, I'm ashamed to be part of this. If Obama wins, the country has been so damaged already and will be filled with a large minority who think he's the devil, the future is so dim my old eyes can't see anything but gloom.

Terrible Sarah the terrorist

Most people who only know me casually are surprised that I'm interested in politics. I rarely talk about it in this coven of Republicans. That's changed recently. I've begun to tell off the people who forward me these e-mails claiming Obama was put through school by Muslim extremists from Malaysia, that Obama is "palling around with people who attacked America" and horror of horrors, was seen wearing a USMC T-shirt when he hadn't "earned" it.

It's hard to tell which GOP cesspool some of these things come from, but the business about Obama being best buddies with Bernardine Dohrn and Bill Ayers comes from Sarah Palin - you know, the same Sarah who believes in witches and knows all about Russia because someone told her you could see an uninhabited rock from a tiny Alaskan island she's never been to.

She's been making the Slime Circuit, or cruising the Bullshit Belt if you prefer, telling the folks that Obama is a terrorist and a friend of terrorists. She cites a New York Times article as a source although, true to the Palin Practice, the article does not say anything of the sort and that's been affirmed by most of the mainstream media. Of course back when Ayers was raising hell trying to stop the Vietnam war by blowing things up, Obama was thousands of miles away and eight years old. They do, now that Ayers is a 63 year old professor at the University of Chicago, live in the same neighborhood and both once did sit on the board of the Annenberg Foundation, but that's as far as it goes. Close enough though for someone devoid of conscience, uncaring enough for responsibility and in utter contempt of truth like Sarah Palin.

Of course if having once said hello to a former radical makes one a terrorist, then the U of C, who employs Ayers as a professor must be an al Qaeda stronghold, but I'm rapidly running out of cynicism here. I'm just too damned angry.

Actually, if anyone is effectively participating in terrorizing Americans and interfering with the democratic process, it's Slimy Sarah and now we know why she was selected. It would have been damned hard to find anyone else low enough, un-American enough, deranged enough to believe her own lies. She allows McCain to wash his hands and pretend to be unsullied. She allows bigots and racists to pretend they have legitimate reasons for hating Obama.

The McCain Bailout: Privatizing success, socializing failure.

When it looked like the bailout bill was going to get the votes, who was all too happy to claim the credit?

John McCain.

When the bill didn't get the votes, who deserves the blame?

Practically everyone except that wacky Maverick.

Democrats failed.
Pelosi failed.
Obama failed.

John? Not his fault. He didn't phone it in. (Except that reports say that's exactly what he did, preferring telephone calls to face-to-face meetings during his little jaunt back to Washington last week.)

For the McCain campaign, the buck stops... ...anywhere but with them. Like the failed Wall Street firms, they're only accepting credit for good news. Blame for bad news belongs to someone (anyone, & if possible, everyone) else. Profits to me, loss to everyone else.

And after it failed, who looked more presidential?
Obama spoke to the American people and appealed for calm, assuring them that there will be a solution.
McCain boarded a plane without speaking to reporters or issuing any statement.

That's some kinda leadership there, Johnny... Heck of a job...

X-post @ Wingnuts & Moonbats

Similar:
Think Progress: After Taking Credit For Bailout Bill, Is McCain Campaign Willing To Share Responsibility For Its Failure?

Marc Ambinder (September 29, 2008) - McCain's Share of The Blame?

Bail Out Fails,McCain Owns It

I don't know anything

Nobody knows anything. I've heard the quote attributed to Samuel Goldwyn, but I don't know. I don't know anything.

I don't know how the economy can go straight to hell in a supersonic hand basket and yet the dollar can gain strength against stronger currencies.

I don't know how John McCain can bellow about Obama's lack of leadership when he can't rally his own party to fix his own party's disaster and I don't know how he can mock Obama for being aloof regarding the deliberations when McCain continued his campaign after his "putting it on hold" play to the grandstand, and he and Lieberman went out to dinner at an expensive restaurant while it was going on.

I don't know why it's a good thing to be a maverick who can't get along with his party or the other one when leadership is required and I don't know why it isn't a bad thing when a senator or congressman votes against the wishes of over 80% of his constituents.

I don't even know why McCain, who despite his hyperbloviations has reversed 26 years of experience in backing this bailout, can blame Obama for being more fiscally conservative and a big spender at the same time. I don't know why McCain bellows about lowering taxes when the Democrats' tax plan lowers them for more people and I don't know why his party doesn't simply fall down and die of shame after telling us we need an immediate, no questions asked bailout only days after insisting that the economy was sound and debt didn't matter and in fact we needed more of it. I don't know how leadership consists only of blaming others while weaseling out of responsibility for having been part of the collapse that I and many others predicted would come of borrow and spend economics. I don't know how leadership involves lying repeatedly, consistently and thoroughly and I don't know how one gets points for snickering and grimacing in a debate.

I don't know why this flyblown, disease ridden, dishonest old crank has more than a dozen supporters, but he does. I don't know anything and that's an understatement.

Cross posted from Human Voices

From lie to shining lie

Many of us saw the photos of the anti-Palin rally in Alaska recently, and patriots took heart at the negative reception. The Palin Rally in The Villages, a planned community near Orlando, Florida yesterday was a different scene entirely. Estimates of the size of the turnout ran from 30,000 to 50,000.

The South is Palin Country read the banner, although the area is home mainly to retired people from the North. Just as her performance with Sean Hannity suggested, she spent 23 minutes slinging wild and wicked lies about Barak Obama because, like her enthusiastically stupid supporters, she has very little to brag about in terms of knowledge, experience, education or intelligence.

The Tax and Spend straw man, which should have been relegated by current events to some bonfire of the vanities, was aired along with the promise that more regulation is what the Republican ticket is all about. No word yet from the Reagan grave site as to subterranean rumblings.

McCain "fought for the surge" lied Palin, as if that surge and not the ethnic cleansing, slaughter and forced exile had caused the death rate to descend from cataclysmic to simply horrible. Of course although she claims to have been on the battlefield, she's never been to Iraq. She briefly visited Kuwait and lies about it. Perhaps we should forgive the gross ignorance because you can't see either country from Alaska. '

'At a decisive moment in the course of the war in Iraq, John McCain fought for the strategy, the surge, that has brought victory within sight,''

said Palin, neglecting to note that it's been in sight and around the corner since 2003 and failing to explain what the hell victory might mean in terms of long term occupation of a devastated, depopulated country that insists we leave now.

Although Obama does openly favor responsible offshore drilling, along with investment in alternative energy, Palin continued her bleat with:

''Maybe if he'd been the governor of an energy-rich state, he'd get it. Maybe if he'd been on the front lines of securing our nation's energy independence, he'd understand.''

Of course she's never been on the front lines of anything. Although she lies by insisting that Alaska, with 3.5% of domestic production provides 20%, in truth it doesn't have enough oil to make a dent in energy independence and Texas provides more oil. Canada provides the lion's share of imports. George Bush, whose qualifications regarding oil greatly exceed hers, hasn't proved to be much of a help in the energy independence department and both Palin and McCain are staunch and relentless foes of energy conservation and alternative energy.

Her reception confirms several things, among which are that there is no lie so transparent or so gross that the party faithful will not believe it with enthusiasm, nor is there a candidate so obviously unqualified by intelligence, knowledge or character that she will not be supported. A new Miami Herald/St. Petersburg Times/Bay News 9 poll showed that 40 percent of voters who back McCain said Palin made them feel stronger about their choice. Meet it is, I set it down -- a woman can lie, and lie and lie and be Vice President.

''She's the sunrise, not the sunset,''

said Linda Cusumano, 57, of Orlando, quoted in today's Miami Herald.

"She makes me feel there's nothing we can't do.''

Indeed she's right. Linda and the other Visigoths can destroy the United States of America far better than any invading army ever could, much less a ragtag bunch of amateur suicide pilots. Linda and her ilk have, in fact, made it not worth saving. Perhaps future historians will try to fix the exact point at which the collapse became irreversible. Perhaps that moment will be this one.

Cross posted from Human Voices