World Politics

[Alpe d'Huez]

Ryan won't seek the Presidency. But I can easily see him as the VP candidate under Rick Perry on the GOP side.

That Bill King article says similar to what Bruce Bartlett now says. Back when we had 70% taxes at the upper tier, 48% tax on capital gains, high interest rates and stagflation, supply-side economics is what was needed to drive the economy. Bartlett now supports a mix of demand-side economics as the times are different.

 

[rhubroma]

That guy from Texas, Rick Perry, is down right scary creepy. What a crackpot he is. I mean participating in a mass evangelical Christian prayer session to pray for the US economy and all. Now I just got back from Tanzania, in other words the Third World, and if the Almighty were to be so concerned about the economic woes of the richest nation on the planet so as to see fit to send the prayed for fiscal stimuli, while billions regularly live below the poverty line, then I'd say he's a pretty cynical god. Or a downright sinister one.

Unfortunately all the crazies get the most media coverage. I don't know, it all seems broken.

 

[rhubroma]

Satan Announces Run for Republican Presidential Nomination

This puts a satirical and ironic spin on the so called "war on terror" which the necons contrived under Bush. While it made me reflect upon the tendency in conservative Americana (which this piece makes a farce of in the comedic sense) to view both internal affairs and the world as an eternal conflict between "the good" and "the evil"; and how, in this sense, US domestic and foreign policy has been shaped under them by millenarian beliefs which aren't the product of a rational engagement with American society or the world, but rather a faith-based mission.

If we take the case of the “war on terror,” for example, it is not just a mistaken metaphor. It embodies a tendency to think of international conflict in theological terms that has long been present in the American right, which the increased power of evangelical Christianity has reinforced.

A Homeland Security Planning document published in July 2004 described the terrorist threat facing the US as being perpetrated by the Universal Adversary - a description that was echoed in Bush's many references to a "war against evil" and in the apocalyptic rhetoric founded upon millennialist beliefs. Such beliefs are of the kind found among the Christian right, a worldview that embodies a view of history that is framed in eschatological concepts, according to which American power can be used to rid the world of evil. During the Bush years his faith-based mission was fused to the social-science theories of neo-conservatives, which says humankind is on the brink of an American-led "global democratic revolution," that tyranny will be overthrown in a planet that is destined to adopt an American version of democracy.

 

[ChrisE]

That guy from Texas, Rick Perry, is down right scary creepy. What a crackpot he is. I mean participating in a mass evangelical Christian prayer session to pray for the US economy and all. Now I just got back from Tanzania, in other words the Third World, and if the Almighty were to be so concerned about the economic woes of the richest nation on the planet so as to see fit to send the prayed for fiscal stimuli, while billions regularly live below the poverty line, then I'd say he's a pretty cynical god. Or a downright sinister one.

Unfortunately all the crazies get the most media coverage. I don't know, it all seems broken.

Don't worry. I'm not sure he is very tight with god. He asked us to pray for rain a couple of months ago, and that hasn't worked out very well.

 

[titan_90]

That guy from Texas, Rick Perry, is down right scary creepy. What a crackpot he is. I mean participating in a mass evangelical Christian prayer session to pray for the US economy and all. Now I just got back from Tanzania, in other words the Third World, and if the Almighty were to be so concerned about the economic woes of the richest nation on the planet so as to see fit to send the prayed for fiscal stimuli, while billions regularly live below the poverty line, then I'd say he's a pretty cynical god. Or a downright sinister one.

Unfortunately all the crazies get the most media coverage. I don't know, it all seems broken.

His friends are even more scary and creepy.

Here are two videos talking about the particular "Christians" he hangs out with.
Part 1
Part 2

 

[Anonymous]

Perry = Scary, Creepy
Palin = Scary, Creepy, Stupid (all repub women are stupid by definition)
Bachmann = Scary, Creepy, Stupid
Romney = Weird, Scary, Creepy
Santorum = Scary, Creepy
Paul = Scary, Creepy, Out There
Tea Party = Scary, Creepy, Inflexible, Stupid, Racist
Conservatives (limited govt types) = Scary, Uninformed, Stupid, Creepy and of course Racist Bigoted Sexist Homophobes.
Anyone not a big government liberal = Scary, Creepy and probably Stupid.


Is that about right? Who did I miss that is Scary and Creepy? Oh, Cain... he's really Scary and Creepy. An African-American Conservative. Gulp. What next, some hispanic limited government type? Oh wait, what about that Scary and Creepy Rubio dude from Florida...

Wow, what about a Rubio-Cain ticket? The world would spin backwards. The only thing worse would be Palin-Bachmann. I can't even imagine....


Before some are tempted to go ballistic, the above was in good fun and meant to be 70% humorous and 30% serious. Maybe 60-40

 

[rhubroma]

Perry = Scary, Creepy
Palin = Scary, Creepy, Stupid (all repub women are stupid by definition)
Bachmann = Scary, Creepy, Stupid
Romney = Weird, Scary, Creepy
Santorum = Scary, Creepy
Paul = Scary, Creepy, Out There
Tea Party = Scary, Creepy, Inflexible, Stupid, Racist
Conservatives (limited govt types) = Scary, Uninformed, Stupid, Creepy and of course Racist Bigoted Sexist Homophobes.
Anyone not a big government liberal = Scary, Creepy and probably Stupid.


Is that about right? Who did I miss that is Scary and Creepy? Oh, Cain... he's really Scary and Creepy. An African-American Conservative. Gulp. What next, some hispanic limited government type? Oh wait, what about that Scary and Creepy Rubio dude from Florida...

Wow, what about a Rubio-Cain ticket? The world would spin backwards. The only thing worse would be Palin-Bachmann. I can't even imagine....


Before some are tempted to go ballistic, the above was in good fun and meant to be 70% humorous and 30% serious. Maybe 60-40

Invigorating...elegant, witty, incisive...your assault on Enlightenment ideas of progress is timelier than ever.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Obama = Timid, spineless, compromising, bland. Yep, pretty much the opposite of the other side.

Actually, I don't find the "conservatives" to be very limited government in their thinking. At least not the current Republican crop in control in Washington, including many Tea Party members. They tend to be pro-war, pro-interventionist nation building (at great cost), anti-abortion, anti-gay rights, and have no interest in changing campaign finance or lobbying rules or laws, or stressing a more fair tax code. Many are just as interested in pork money as the "liberals" at nearly every step as well.

Where the cons seem to be limited government to me are where it's often damaging. Such as the Ryan plan, pollution restrictions, science research, alternative transportation (including bike lanes), National Parks, OSHA, etc.

Of course neither party seems interested in what I have posted several times on the SBA, and the Democratic party is just as guilty on campaign financing, lobbying, pork, and when it comes to putting their foot down, war and nation building. Both parties are in many ways very similar, they just report to their owners who fund them, just as George Carlin said.

 

[usedtobefast]

the whole T-vangelical thing is pretty reactionary. some of us commie liberals are pretty spiritual people. we just figure it is a personal choice.
"creepy,scary" is the new normal. Obama is way to bland and sensible, like uber bland. remember his "mom" jeans?

 

[Anonymous]

Obama = Timid, spineless, compromising, bland. Yep, pretty much the opposite of the other side.

Actually, I don't find the "conservatives" to be very limited government in their thinking. At least not the current Republican crop in control in Washington, including many Tea Party members. They tend to be pro-war, pro-interventionist nation building (at great cost), anti-abortion, anti-gay rights, and have no interest in changing campaign finance or lobbying rules or laws, or stressing a more fair tax code. Many are just as interested in pork money as the "liberals" at nearly every step as well.

Where the cons seem to be limited government to me are where it's often damaging. Such as the Ryan plan, pollution restrictions, science research, alternative transportation (including bike lanes), National Parks, OSHA, etc.

Of course neither party seems interested in what I have posted several times on the SBA, and the Democratic party is just as guilty on campaign financing, lobbying, pork, and when it comes to putting their foot down, war and nation building. Both parties are in many ways very similar, they just report to their owners who fund them, just as George Carlin said.

Oh no, no no. Only the right is Scary, Creepy, Racist, Sexist, Bigot, Homophobe and Stupid. That is ours and we are not sharing. Go find your own labels.

 

[Anonymous]

Obama = Timid, spineless, compromising, bland. Yep, pretty much the opposite of the other side.

Actually, I don't find the "conservatives" to be very limited government in their thinking. At least not the current Republican crop in control in Washington, including many Tea Party members. They tend to be pro-war, pro-interventionist nation building (at great cost), anti-abortion, anti-gay rights, and have no interest in changing campaign finance or lobbying rules or laws, or stressing a more fair tax code. Many are just as interested in pork money as the "liberals" at nearly every step as well.

Where the cons seem to be limited government to me are where it's often damaging. Such as the Ryan plan, pollution restrictions, science research, alternative transportation (including bike lanes), National Parks, OSHA, etc.

Of course neither party seems interested in what I have posted several times on the SBA, and the Democratic party is just as guilty on campaign financing, lobbying, pork, and when it comes to putting their foot down, war and nation building. Both parties are in many ways very similar, they just report to their owners who fund them, just as George Carlin said.

WHAT??? I thought that was what was wrong with the other side. I am now very confused. You guys freak out on the repubs that will not compromise but the bash your own for compromise.

So, if I'm correct here, compromise only exists when repubs agree to dems demands. Did I get that right??

 

[rhubroma]

Obama = Timid, spineless, compromising, bland. Yep, pretty much the opposite of the other side.

Actually, I don't find the "conservatives" to be very limited government in their thinking. At least not the current Republican crop in control in Washington, including many Tea Party members. They tend to be pro-war, pro-interventionist nation building (at great cost), anti-abortion, anti-gay rights, and have no interest in changing campaign finance or lobbying rules or laws, or stressing a more fair tax code. Many are just as interested in pork money as the "liberals" at nearly every step as well.

Where the cons seem to be limited government to me are where it's often damaging. Such as the Ryan plan, pollution restrictions, science research, alternative transportation (including bike lanes), National Parks, OSHA, etc.

Of course neither party seems interested in what I have posted several times on the SBA, and the Democratic party is just as guilty on campaign financing, lobbying, pork, and when it comes to putting their foot down, war and nation building. Both parties are in many ways very similar, they just report to their owners who fund them, just as George Carlin said.

That's because both parties are on the right.

 

[gregod]

...
Paul = Scary, Creepy, Out There
...

you forgot one thing about ron paul: ignored. not only by the left, but most of the mainstream republicans do their best to treat him as a nonentity.

Oh no, no no. Only the right is Scary, Creepy, Racist, Sexist, Bigot, Homophobe and Stupid. That is ours and we are not sharing. Go find your own labels.

i would like to address each one of those.

scary: of the lot this is the most unfair. the left cravenly acquiesces to any and all war-making and civil liberty restraining in order to appear strong (which only justifies their perceived weakness). where this does hold up is the right seems to have a lot more "true believers" (probably because they are more vocal) and they tend to think the ends justify the means.

creepy: the right's obsession with people's sex lives is pretty creepy. 'nuff said.

racist/bigot: the right has been consistently behind the curve on civil rights. plus the fact that they don't realize how racist it looks to drag out every black and hispanic in their party shouting "hey look we're not racist. we have a negro and a mexican in our party." (one more thing: it was amusing how the right asserted that america wasn't a racist country any longer because a half black guy that they didn't vote for was now president.)

homophobe: does this one need to be explained?

stupid: john stuart mill (a conservative) once said, "the conservative party is the stupid party. it is not that conservatives are stupid, it is that stupid people tend to be conservative." this is the second most unfair of the lot. true believers of any stripe who try to conform reality to their beliefs tend to look pretty stupid doing it. (look at all of the lefties who say they hate all of obama's policies, but they just know, KNOW he will change and they will vote for him anyway.)

there are conservatives who are not any of the above, but their voices are drowned out by the ones who conform to some or all of the stereotypes above and the media are complicit because reasonable people do not make interesting TV/copy.

 

[rhubroma]

the whole T-vangelical thing is pretty reactionary. some of us commie liberals are pretty spiritual people. we just figure it is a personal choice.
"creepy,scary" is the new normal. Obama is way to bland and sensible, like uber bland. remember his "mom" jeans?

One interpretation of Marxism is a Christian-historicist gloss on a Greek-rationalist doctrine of salvation. In this view, Marxism, and its embodiment in Soviet Communism, has origins in a secular faith of the Enlightenment. It's ideas about a self consciously planned society and of a universal civilization grounded in scientific knowledge are central elements of a religion of humanity that is expressed in Marxism (and, ironically, economic liberalism for that matter). However the "commie liberal" world view (which is what you sarcastically meant by a leftist position) need not necessarily take on any spiritual overtones, in the religious sense, because there is a secular reasoning which imbibes the same humanitarian and ethical philosophies without religion. In a distinctly modernist fashion, then, leftist values and beliefs have been derived from the secularizing forces of Renaissance humanism and the Enlightenment that, in the wake of the decadence of Western Christianity in mid-late XIX and XX centuries Europe and given the capitalist tyranny of the Industrial Revolution, consciously sought to provide a moral alternative.

In fact what went horribly wrong with the application of Marxism within the Soviet regime, and what proved it to be as destructive as religion at its worst there, was that Communism became a political religion orchestrated around the sanctification of power as Lenin's embalmment attests.

That in America many "liberal commies," however, are also devoutly religious only demonstrates a general mania for faith and religion within US society at large and not something intrinsically leftist, as for example with the growing fashion for secularism among Europe's gauche. Whereas the most impassioned, mobilized and proactive (and hence virulent) form of religiosity within US politics and the state, has long been found within America's Christian right as is commonly known.

My viewpoint, consequently, wasn't reactionary in the slightest, but was actually grounded in an undeniable reality. Market fundamentalism, religious fundamentalism and the neo-conservative doctrine came together to adhere to a far-reaching ideology during the Bush administration and supported a foreign policy that emphasized rivalry between states rather than the possibilities of international cooperation. The rise of religious fundamentalism which until recently stayed relatively on the fringes of US conservative politics, with Bush took on a much greater presence than ever before. Although it must be admitted, as your comment suggests, the tendency to be 'pretty spiritual' or to impregnate political rhetoric with religious sentiments is not unique to the republican party - or even to the most rigidly bigoted Christian right within it – however the central role of religion in the Bush administration is where it departed from its predecessors. And this has become the most glaring aspect of the new republican party: namely, its ferverent religiousity. While some of its, the Bush administration's, most dangerous features of its approach to foreign policy betrayed the influence of beliefs deriving from Christian fundamentalism. Consider the strategies for dealing with terrorism I mentioned before. Catch phrases referring to 'the war on terror' and 'war against evil' used repeatedly by Bush embody a tendency to think of international conflict in theological terms that has long been present on the American right, which the increased power of evangelical Christianity has reinforced (and will continue to do so in the foreseeable future). Conservative evangelics, and their secular counterpart now among the Tea-party movement, count heavily both in funding the Republican party and as voters. This too will remain a fixed feature of conservative Americana for some time to come and, as such, represents a political ally that must be courted and appeased. But the Christian right's role in US politics and the state is not simply that of an ally, because as the Bush administration had demonstrated, as well as with several current likely republican presidential candidates, there is a clear affinity in worldview. Millenialist beliefs shaped and will continue to shape republican administrations' thinking, in secular as well as overtly religious forms.

In conclusion, while it's true that such overtly religious forms in American political thinking are not an exclusively conservative monopoly, but are at times expressed and shared among the 'liberal commies' too in what might be called a typically American cultural conflation; there can be no doubt that the principle intended audience of say the faith-based foreign policy of the Bush administration - its central folly - was the conservative Christian right.

 

[Rouetheday]

One interpretation of Marxism is a Christian-historicist gloss on a Greek-rationalist doctrine of salvation. In this view, Marxism, and its embodiment in Soviet Communism, has origins in a secular faith of the Enlightenment. It's ideas about a self consciously planned society and of a universal civilization grounded in scientific knowledge are central elements of a religion of humanity that is expressed in Marxism (and, ironically, economic liberalism for that matter). However the "commie liberal" world view (which is what you sarcastically meant by a leftist position) need not necessarily take on any spiritual overtones, in the religious sense, because there is a secular reasoning which imbibes the same humanitarian and ethical philosophies without religion. In a distinctly modernist fashion, then, leftist values and beliefs have been derived from the secularizing forces of Renaissance humanism and the Enlightenment that, in the wake of the decadence of Western Christianity in mid-late XIX and XX centuries Europe and given the capitalist tyranny of the Industrial Revolution, consciously sought to provide a moral alternative.

In fact what went horribly wrong with the application of Marxism within the Soviet regime, and what proved it to be as destructive as religion at its worst there, was that Communism became a political religion orchestrated around the sanctification of power as Lenin's embalmment attests.

That in America many "liberal commies," however, are also devoutly religious only demonstrates a general mania for faith and religion within US society at large and not something intrinsically leftist, as for example with the growing fashion for secularism among Europe's gauche. Whereas the most impassioned, mobilized and proactive (and hence virulent) form of religiosity within US politics and the state, has long been found within America's Christian right as is commonly known.

My viewpoint, consequently, wasn't reactionary in the slightest, but was actually grounded in an undeniable reality. Market fundamentalism, religious fundamentalism and the neo-conservative doctrine came together to adhere to a far-reaching ideology during the Bush administration and supported a foreign policy that emphasized rivalry between states rather than the possibilities of international cooperation. The rise of religious fundamentalism which until recently stayed relatively on the fringes of US conservative politics, with Bush took on a much greater presence than ever before. Although it must be admitted, as your comment suggests, the tendency to be 'pretty spiritual' or to impregnate political rhetoric with religious sentiments is not unique to the republican party - or even to the most rigidly bigoted Christian right within it – however the central role of religion in the Bush administration is where it departed from its predecessors. And this has become the most glaring aspect of the new republican party: namely, its ferverent religiousity. While some of its, the Bush administration's, most dangerous features of its approach to foreign policy betrayed the influence of beliefs deriving from Christian fundamentalism. Consider the strategies for dealing with terrorism I mentioned before. Catch phrases referring to 'the war on terror' and 'war against evil' used repeatedly by Bush embody a tendency to think of international conflict in theological terms that has long been present on the American right, which the increased power of evangelical Christianity has reinforced (and will continue to do so in the foreseeable future). Conservative evangelics, and their secular counterpart now among the Tea-party movement, count heavily both in funding the Republican party and as voters. This too will remain a fixed feature of conservative Americana for some time to come and, as such, represents a political ally that must be courted and appeased. But the Christian right's role in US politics and the state is not simply that of an ally, because as the Bush administration had demonstrated, as well as with several current likely republican presidential candidates, there is a clear affinity in worldview. Millenialist beliefs shaped and will continue to shape republican administrations' thinking, in secular as well as overtly religious forms.

In conclusion, while it's true that such overtly religious forms in American political thinking are not an exclusively conservative monopoly, but are at times expressed and shared among the 'liberal commies' too in what might be called a typically American cultural conflation; there can be no doubt that the principle intended audience of say the faith-based foreign policy of the Bush administration - its central folly - was the conservative Christian right.

.... what he said.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

If you look back at history Marx and Engels were actually aiming toward England with their communism. But it didn't take hold. There really was only one country where it could, Russia, and that's where it did. But whatever dream they, or people like Reed or Lenin had was quickly squashed by Soviet statism. Proving that while it did take hold, full communism wouldn't work, ever. It never will.

Interesting post Gregod, but as one who flips through talk radio when driving I can assure you there are stupid lunatics on both sides. You should listen to the crazy people that call Michael Savage, and Alan Colmes. It's scary.

 

[Amsterhammer]

You people appear to be blissfully unaware of the fact (or choose to ignore it) that there is another great, historical event taking place right now, today. The revolution in Libya is finally reaching a climax, the rebels are approaching Tripoli from all sides, and I have just watched the official Libyan spokesman give what sounded very much like his final statement, complete with warnings about the extent of killings to come, and complete blame for all that is to come being laid at NATO's door.

CNN is covering what could be the 'final day', but if any of you in the US have access to satellite tv, I would recommend either Sky or Al-Jazeera for the best coverage.

I've seen an awful lot of big words bandied about here with regard to the political/economic/social condition of the US. My bottom line is - the US will continue to stay as appallingly right-wing and f***ed up as it is today until either a fundamental massive change of the collective consciousness allows a thorough revision of the Constitution and the entire electoral system to take place, thereby introducing multi-party democracy for the first time, OR - we enable all the most extreme lunatics to realize their ambition for something like an independent republic of South Texas (or similar) and let these loonies secede. This process would cleanse the remaining united states of the dregs of society - all the totally loony extreme right wingers like the Tea baggers and their fellow travelers, racists, Nazis, the Klan, radical fundamental Christians and their ilk, as well as all other assorted loonies who see 'Washington' as their worst enemy. Go, in God's name, get the f*** out of the country and go isolate yourselves in your own pariahland so that the rest can try and drag the US into the 21st century.

The trouble is that even a great number of those whom the loony right labels as 'liberals' in the US, are right wingers by comparison with the rest of the world. I often think that those of you living in the US, even those of you whose hearts are in the right place, really have no idea just how extremely, and dangerously right-wing US politics are. The most 'right-wing' mainstream party here in Holland, for example, is far to the left of mainstream US 'Democrats'. I really do despair.

 

[gregod]

...

Interesting post Gregod, but as one who flips through talk radio when driving I can assure you there are stupid lunatics on both sides. You should listen to the crazy people that call Michael Savage, and Alan Colmes. It's scary.

thanks. i hope it didn't come across as a one-sided attack. i tried to include one of many examples of stupidity on the left. what i was trying to get across was that noted conservative intellectuals (yes, they do, or at least did, exist!) have long known that their party attracts the more of the uneducated and uneducatable.

 

[gregod]

...
The trouble is that even a great number of those whom the loony right labels as 'liberals' in the US, are right wingers by comparison with the rest of the world. I often think that those of you living in the US, even those of you whose hearts are in the right place, really have no idea just how extremely, and dangerously right-wing US politics are. The most 'right-wing' mainstream party here in Holland, for example, is far to the left of mainstream US 'Democrats'. I really do despair.

well said. that is my perception also as someone who hasn't lived in the US in almost twenty years.

on a side note; i always that it was funny that european and south american commentators used to call the policies of the bush administration, "neo liberal". their politics had moved so far to the right that it circled around to the left. the irony being that "liberal" is anathema in US politics.

 

[ChrisE]

http://www.businessinsider.com/moodys-analyst-conflicts-corruption-and-greed-2011-8#ixzz1VZr2osVE

Hopefully the government won't step in and hold anybody accountable. That would be bad for business, and socialist on top of that.

 

[rhubroma]

If you look back at history Marx and Engels were actually aiming toward England with their communism. But it didn't take hold. There really was only one country where it could, Russia, and that's where it did. But whatever dream they, or people like Reed or Lenin had was quickly squashed by Soviet statism. Proving that while it did take hold, full communism wouldn't work, ever. It never will.

Interesting post Gregod, but as one who flips through talk radio when driving I can assure you there are stupid lunatics on both sides. You should listen to the crazy people that call Michael Savage, and Alan Colmes. It's scary.

One school of thought has been that Marxism in Russia was ruined because of the imprint of orthodox Christianity upon its state application. Or rather the fusion there of a preexisting orthodox religious ethos into an essentially secular political ideology, which transformed communism into a political faith or a religion of the state. In this sense the type of Soviet statism that ruined Marxism essentially resulted from the projection of an Russian orthodox worldview upon the secular regime.

I mention this not as a dig on anyone's religious inclination, whatever that may be, but simply in response to what you correctly mentioned about Marxism being "designed" for England and how under a majority protestant culture, though, its realization would have either been impossible or would have taken on a completely different form as that which had resulted in the Soviet Union.

I'm not sure I fully agree with this line of thought, however, there seems to be a certain degree of plausibility behind it.

In regards to Marxism not being able to ever be fully realized, I think it's fair to ask though which kind? Because I don't think the type Marx himself would have envisioned or fancied was ever recognizable in any of the forms of communism that have actually been produced.

 

[rhubroma]

You people appear to be blissfully unaware of the fact (or choose to ignore it) that there is another great, historical event taking place right now, today. The revolution in Libya is finally reaching a climax, the rebels are approaching Tripoli from all sides, and I have just watched the official Libyan spokesman give what sounded very much like his final statement, complete with warnings about the extent of killings to come, and complete blame for all that is to come being laid at NATO's door.

CNN is covering what could be the 'final day', but if any of you in the US have access to satellite tv, I would recommend either Sky or Al-Jazeera for the best coverage.

I've seen an awful lot of big words bandied about here with regard to the political/economic/social condition of the US. My bottom line is - the US will continue to stay as appallingly right-wing and f***ed up as it is today until either a fundamental massive change of the collective consciousness allows a thorough revision of the Constitution and the entire electoral system to take place, thereby introducing multi-party democracy for the first time, OR - we enable all the most extreme lunatics to realize their ambition for something like an independent republic of South Texas (or similar) and let these loonies secede. This process would cleanse the remaining united states of the dregs of society - all the totally loony extreme right wingers like the Tea baggers and their fellow travelers, racists, Nazis, the Klan, radical fundamental Christians and their ilk, as well as all other assorted loonies who see 'Washington' as their worst enemy. Go, in God's name, get the f*** out of the country and go isolate yourselves in your own pariahland so that the rest can try and drag the US into the 21st century.

The trouble is that even a great number of those whom the loony right labels as 'liberals' in the US, are right wingers by comparison with the rest of the world. I often think that those of you living in the US, even those of you whose hearts are in the right place, really have no idea just how extremely, and dangerously right-wing US politics are. The most 'right-wing' mainstream party here in Holland, for example, is far to the left of mainstream US 'Democrats'. I really do despair.

No the Libyan conflict is quite problematical. The dilemma with removing a repressive dictator you have either ignored, tolerated or courted for decades, is that he doesn't go down without a fight and the remaining supporters make any peaceful political transition totally impossible.

By all indications it's going to get very, very bloody and with Egypt also going through a period of instability and transition, the most delicate balance of power that had existed for years in the Maghreb has now irrevocably deteriorated, and will surly give way to great instability and factious warfare in the region for years to come. This does not bode well for the West, whose Nato forces will likely become as you suggest another scapegoat for unleashing Arab discontent and rage, nor especially for Israel, which is terrified of the prospect of fundamentalist Islamic revolutionary movements of the Khomeinist type gaining stronger positions of power locally.

The trouble with the US as I see it is that unfortunately it is too insular and auto-referential for most of the population to come to terms with, let alone realize, the dreadful political state in which it exists because it doesn't know other situations and realities. And frankly doesn't give a damn. Plus it's all just about the economy, were it not for it the bulk of American society would care absolutely nothing for the state of the world beyond its expansive borders.


If this is at times bad for the world, it is worse for the Americans themselves, who are largely unaware in the critical sense that the empire won't last eternally. Even in this moment of precipitous decline of US power globally and the shifting orientation of political and economic gravity from West to East.

 

[fatandfast]

You people appear to be blissfully unaware of the fact (or choose to ignore it) that there is another great, historical event taking place right now, today. The revolution in Libya is finally reaching a climax, the rebels are approaching Tripoli from all sides, and I have just watched the official Libyan spokesman give what sounded very much like his final statement, complete with warnings about the extent of killings to come, and complete blame for all that is to come being laid at NATO's door.

CNN is covering what could be the 'final day', but if any of you in the US have access to satellite tv, I would recommend either Sky or Al-Jazeera for the best coverage.

I've seen an awful lot of big words bandied about here with regard to the political/economic/social condition of the US. My bottom line is - the US will continue to stay as appallingly right-wing and f***ed up as it is today until either a fundamental massive change of the collective consciousness allows a thorough revision of the Constitution and the entire electoral system to take place, thereby introducing multi-party democracy for the first time, OR - we enable all the most extreme lunatics to realize their ambition for something like an independent republic of South Texas (or similar) and let these loonies secede. This process would cleanse the remaining united states of the dregs of society - all the totally loony extreme right wingers like the Tea baggers and their fellow travelers, racists, Nazis, the Klan, radical fundamental Christians and their ilk, as well as all other assorted loonies who see 'Washington' as their worst enemy. Go, in God's name, get the f*** out of the country and go isolate yourselves in your own pariahland so that the rest can try and drag the US into the 21st century.

The trouble is that even a great number of those whom the loony right labels as 'liberals' in the US, are right wingers by comparison with the rest of the world. I often think that those of you living in the US, even those of you whose hearts are in the right place, really have no idea just how extremely, and dangerously right-wing US politics are. The most 'right-wing' mainstream party here in Holland, for example, is far to the left of mainstream US 'Democrats'. I really do despair.

The revolution you appear to missing is the one in which violent street protests yield great results. Once the US tries this on for size the story will be very different. As China kills people to keep the peace the US may tweet, that 's bad stop it, or when Turkey bombs the holy bejesus out of anybody that gets in the way. Again the US and it's other euroweenies will send strong emails or send Hillary or her equiv over there and suggest stopping.

The US will forever regret allowing states like Israel, Turkey, China to kill in the name of safety and tell Syria and Libya that they should step down. If you wanna be the world's policeman then you have to enforce the law evenly not just to the easily cited offenders.

If every protest can overthrow any government as the US is using as it's new model it's only a matter of time before there will be a burning car or 2 in front of the white house..can't wait for the Olympics.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

You people appear to be blissfully unaware of the fact (or choose to ignore it) that there is another great, historical event taking place right now, today. The revolution in Libya is finally reaching a climax, the rebels are approaching Tripoli from all sides, and I have just watched the official Libyan spokesman give what sounded very much like his final statement, complete with warnings about the extent of killings to come, and complete blame for all that is to come being laid at NATO's door.

CNN is covering what could be the 'final day', but if any of you in the US have access to satellite tv, I would recommend either Sky or Al-Jazeera for the best coverage.

I've seen an awful lot of big words bandied about here with regard to the political/economic/social condition of the US. My bottom line is - the US will continue to stay as appallingly right-wing and f***ed up as it is today until either a fundamental massive change of the collective consciousness allows a thorough revision of the Constitution and the entire electoral system to take place, thereby introducing multi-party democracy for the first time, OR - we enable all the most extreme lunatics to realize their ambition for something like an independent republic of South Texas (or similar) and let these loonies secede. This process would cleanse the remaining united states of the dregs of society - all the totally loony extreme right wingers like the Tea baggers and their fellow travelers, racists, Nazis, the Klan, radical fundamental Christians and their ilk, as well as all other assorted loonies who see 'Washington' as their worst enemy. Go, in God's name, get the f*** out of the country and go isolate yourselves in your own pariahland so that the rest can try and drag the US into the 21st century.

The trouble is that even a great number of those whom the loony right labels as 'liberals' in the US, are right wingers by comparison with the rest of the world. I often think that those of you living in the US, even those of you whose hearts are in the right place, really have no idea just how extremely, and dangerously right-wing US politics are. The most 'right-wing' mainstream party here in Holland, for example, is far to the left of mainstream US 'Democrats'. I really do despair.

WoW...thats like more than once you have made some disparaging xenophobic remark about people you do not even know. Are all people living in South Texas holding the views which you have or are suggesting to force on them?

The trouble is that there are a great number of "loony" left wing nut jobs that make any "conservatives" in the US look like ??????

 

[ChrisE]

It's pretty funny that some of you think any nation based upon religion will respect the basic tenets of democracy.