Posts Tagged ‘TWITTER’
ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, ALTERNET, AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BASHIR AL-ASSAD, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHILE, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, FACEBOOK, HOUSE UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES COMMITTEE, HUMAN RIGHTS, IRAN, JOHN BOEHNER, JOHN MCCAIN, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NICARAGUA, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REUTERS, RUSSIA, S.I. HAYAKAWA, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SYRIA, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, VLADIMIR PUTIN
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on October 17, 2018 at 12:21 am
On September 11, 2013, the New York Times published an Op-Ed (guest editorial) from Russian President Vladimir Putin, entitled: “A Plea for Caution from Russia: What Putin Has to Say to Americans About Syria.”
No one should be surprised that Putin came out strongly against an American air strike on Syria.
Its “President” (i.e., dictator) Bashir al-Assad, is, after all, a close ally of Russia. Just as his late father and dictator, Hafez al-Assad, was a close ally of the Soviet Union until its collapse in 1991.

Putin, of course, is a former member of the KGB, the infamous secret police which ruled the Soviet Union from its birth in 1917 to its collapse in 1991.
He grew up under a Communist dictatorship and clearly wishes to return to that era, saying publicly: “First and foremost it is worth acknowledging that the demise of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century.”
So it would be unrealistic to expect him to view the current “Syria crisis” the same way that President Barack Obama did.
(A “crisis” for politicians is any event that can be exploited to increase their own status—and thus power. Few politicians really care about the “human rights” of other nations—unless promoting this issue can empower themselves and/or their own nation.
(President Ronald Reagan, for example, often wailed about the Soviets’ oppression of the Polish union, Solidarity—while firing hundreds of unionized air traffic controllers who went on strike.)
(A “crisis” for the media is any event that can be exploited for higher ratings.)
In his September 11, 2013 guest editorial in the New York Times, Putin offered the expected Russian take on Syria:
- Poison gas was used in Syria.
- It wasn’t used by the Syrian Army.
- It was used by “opposition forces, to provoke intervention by their powerful foreign patrons.”
But it was the concluding paragraph that enraged American politicians the most—especially Right-wing ones. In it, Putin took exception with American “exceptionalism.”

Vladimir Putin
This is the belief that the United States is unlike other nations. That it is unlike other nations in its innocence and steadfast dedication to human rights above all else.
Citizens of nations whose governments have been overthrown by the United States—such as Chile, Iran and Nicaragua—and replaced with brutal dictatorships would strongly disagree.
Referring to then-President Obama, Putin wrote:
“And I would rather disagree with a case he made on American exceptionalism, stating that the United States’ policy is ‘what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.’
“It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation.
“There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their policies differ, too.
“We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord’s blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.”
Putin has never publicly shown any interest in religion. But by invoking “the Lord,” he was able to turn the Christian beliefs of his Western audience into a useful weapon.
“I was insulted,” then-House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) told reporters when asked for his blunt reaction to the editorial.
“I have to be honest with you, I was at dinner, and I almost wanted to vomit,” said U.S. Senator Bob Menendez (D-New Jersey).
Putin had dared to question the self-righteousness of American foreign policy—and those who make it.
Making his case for war with Syria, Obama had said: “America is not the world’s policeman….
“But when, with modest effort and risk, we can stop children from being gassed to death, and thereby make our own children safer over the long run, I believe we should act.
“That’s what makes America different. That’s what makes us exceptional. With humility, but with resolve, let us never lose sight of that essential truth.”

President Barack Obama
In short: Because we consider ourselves “exceptional,” we have the divine right to do whatever we want.
It’s not necessary to see Putin as a champion of democracy (he isn’t) to see the truth in this part of his editorial: “It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation.”
From 1938 to 1969, the House Un-American Activities Committee sought to define what was “American” and what was “Un-American.” As if “American” stood for all things virtuous.
Whoever heard of an “Un-French Activities Committee”? Or an “Un-German” or “Un-British” one?
The late S.I. Hayakawa once made an observation that clearly applies to this situation.
Hayakawa was a professor of semantics (the study of meaning, focusing on the relation between words and what they stand for).
In his bestselling book, Language in Thought and Action, he observed that when a person hears a message, he has four ways of responding to it:
- Accept the speaker and his message.
- Accept the speaker but reject the message.
- Accept the message but reject the speaker.
- Reject the message and the speaker.
Americans might want to consider #3 in the recent case of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AMERICAN EMPIRE, AP, BILL CLINTON, BUREAUCRACY, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHRIS MATHEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, DWIGHT EISENHOWER, FACEBOOK, FBI, FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, GEORGE H.W. BUSH, GEORGE W. BUSH, GERALD R. FORD, HARRY S. TRUMAN, JEB BUSH, JIMMY CARTER, JOHN F. KENNEDY, LYNDON B. JOHNSON, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NIGEL HAMILTON, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SUETONIUS, SYRIAN CIVIL WAR, SYRIAN REFUGEES, TERRORISM, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE TWELVE CAESARS, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on October 16, 2018 at 12:45 am
September 11, 2018, marked the 17th anniversary of the worst terrorist attack on United States soil.
Inevitably, this was a time to remember the 3,000 Americans whose lives were so cruelly snuffed out.
But it also should have marked a time to remember those who made this atrocity inevitable—by refusing to acknowledge and address the impending threat from Al-Qaeda.
For Republicans, it’s taboo to hold President George W. Bush accountable for this atrocity. That’s why Donald Trump’s daring to note that it happened on Bush’s watch was greeted with a Right-wing outcry.
And Democrats have been too cowardly to state this truth—a major reason for their losing the 2004 Presidential election.
But British historian Nigel Hamilton has chronicled the arrogance and indifference of those officials in his 2010 biography: American Caesars: Lives of the Presidents from Franklin D. Roosevelt to George W. Bush.
Hamilton noted that during the first eight months of the Bush Presidency, Richard Clarke, the national security adviser on terrorism, was forbidden to brief President Bush, despite the mounting evidence that al-Qaeda was planning to strike.

Richard Clarke
Even more vexing for Clarke: During his first eight months as President before September 11, Bush was on vacation 42% of the time, according to the Washington Post.
Clarke was certain that Osama bin Laden had arranged the USS Cole bombing in Aden on October 12, 2000.
For months, Clarke tried to convince others in the Bush Administration that Bin Laden was plotting another attack against the United States—either abroad or at home.
But Clarke could not prevail against the know-it-all arrogance of such higher-ranking Bush officials as Vice President Dick Cheney; Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld; Rumsfeld’s deputy, Paul Wolfowitz; and National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice.
Rice initially refused to hold a cabinet-level meeting on the subject. Then she insisted the matter be handled only by a more junior Deputy Principals meeting in April, 2001, writes Hamilton.
Wolfowitz, the number-two man at the Department of Defense, said: “I don’t understand why we are beginning by talking about this one man, bin Laden.”
Even after Clarke outlined the threat posed by Al-Qaeda, Wolfowitz—whose real target was Saddam Hussein—said: “You give bin Laden too much credit.”
Wolfowitz insisted that bin Laden couldn’t carry out his terrorist acts without the aid of a state sponsor—namely, Iraq. Wolfowitz, in fact, blamed Iraq for the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.
Clarke was stunned, since there was absolutely no evidence of Iraqi involvement in this.“Al-Qaeda plans major acts of terrorism against the United States,” Clarke warned his colleagues.
He pointed out that, like Adolf Hitler, bin Laden had actually published his plans for future destruction.

Osama bin Laden
And Clarke added: “Sometimes, as with Hitler in Mein Kampf, you have to believe that these people will actually do what they say they will do.”
Wolfowitz heatedly traded on his Jewish heritage to bring Clarke’s unwelcome arguments to a halt: “I resent any comparison between the Holocaust and this little terrorist in Afghanistan.”
Writing in outraged fury, Hamilton sums up Clarke’s agonizing frustrations:
- Bush’s senior advisers treated their colleagues who had served in the Clinton administration with contempt.
- President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz seemed content to ignore the danger signals of an impending Al-Qaeda attack.
- This left only Secretary of State Colin Powell, his deputy Richard Armitage, Richard Clarke and a skeptical Treasury Secretary, Paul O’Neill, to wage “a lonely battle to waken a seemingly deranged new administration.”
Clarke alerted Federal Intelligence agencies that “Al-Qaeda is planning a major attack on us.” He asked the FBI and CIA to report to his office all they could learn about suspicious persons or activities at home and abroad.
Finally, at a meeting with Condoleeza Rice on September 4, 2001, Clarke challenged her to “picture yourself at a moment when in the very near future Al-Qaeda has killed hundreds of Americans, and imagine asking yourself what you wish then that you had already done.”
Apparently Rice couldn’t imagine such a scenario, because she took no action to prevent it. Nor did she urge anyone else to do so.
Seven days later, Al-Qaeda struck, and 3,000 Americans died horrifically—and needlessly.
Neither Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld nor Wolowitz ever admitted their negligence. Nor would any of them be brought to account.
Disgustingly, these were the same officials who, afterward, posed as the Nation’s saviors—and branded anyone who disagreed with them as a traitor.
These are practices the Republican Right continues to exploit to this day.
Only Richard Clarke—who had vainly argued for stepped-up security precautions and taking the fight to Al-Qaeda—gave that apology.
On March 24, 2004, Clarke testified at the public 9/11 Commission hearings. Addressing relatives of victims in the audience, he said: “Your government failed you, those entrusted with protecting you failed you, and I failed you.”
It’s an admission that no other Republican has been willing to make. And it remains an indictment that no Democrat has had the courage to assert.
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AMERICAN EMPIRE, AP, BILL CLINTON, BUREAUCRACY, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHRIS MATHEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, DWIGHT EISENHOWER, FACEBOOK, FBI, FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, GEORGE H.W. BUSH, GEORGE W. BUSH, GERALD R. FORD, HARRY S. TRUMAN, JEB BUSH, JIMMY CARTER, JOHN F. KENNEDY, LYNDON B. JOHNSON, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NIGEL HAMILTON, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SUETONIUS, SYRIAN CIVIL WAR, SYRIAN REFUGEES, TERRORISM, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE TWELVE CAESARS, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on October 15, 2018 at 12:12 am
You don’t ever have to frame anybody, because the truth is always sufficient.
–Willie Stark, in All the King’s Men, by Robert Penn Warren
When one politician wants to truly hurt another, the weapon of choice is not lies. It’s the truth.
And on October 16, 2015, then-Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump used that weapon to take down his opponent, Jeb Bush, former governor of Florida.
Trump was being interviewed by Bloomberg TV’s Stephanie Ruhle when she asked: Would you be able to comfort the nation in the event of a mass tragedy like 9/11 or the 2012 elementary school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut?
And Trump, who always claims to be smarter, tougher and richer than anyone else, had a ready response: “I think I have a bigger heart than all of them. I think I’m much more competent then all of them.”

Donald Trump
So far, just what you would expect from Trump. Then:
“I mean, say what you want, the World Trade Center came down during his time.”
“Hold on,” said Ruhle, “you can’t blame George Bush for that.”
“He was President, okay? Blame him or don’t blame him, but he was President,” Trump said. “The World Trade Center came down during his reign.”
Three thousand Americans died during the September 11, 2001 terror attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center.
But holding Bush accountable for 9/11 is taboo for Republicans—and avoided by cowardly Democrats.
Whereas Republicans spent four years blaming President Barack Obama for the deaths of four Americans killed in an American consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
Immediately after Trump’s remarks, the Right exploded.
Representative Peter King, Republican of New York, said that no one saw the 9/11 attacks coming and that blaming the former president was a cheap shot.
Speaking on Right-wing Fox Radio, King added: “I think Donald Trump is totally wrong there. That sounds like a Michael Moore talking point.”
And Jeb Bush rushed to his brother’s defense on Twitter: “How pathetic for @realdonaldtrump to criticize the president for 9/11. We were attacked & my brother kept us safe.”
Of course, “my brother” didn’t keep safe those 3,000 Americans who died on 9/11.

The World Trade Center on September 11, 2001
Nor did Jeb mention that, during his first eight months in office before September 11, George W. Bush was on vacation 42% of the time.
Fortunately, British historian Nigel Hamilton has brutally laid bare the facts of this needless tragedy.
Hamilton is the author of several acclaimed political biographies, including JFK: Reckless Youth and Bill Clinton: Mastering the Presidency.
In 2007, he began research on his 2010 book: American Caesars: The Lives of the Presidents from Franklin D. Roosevelt to George W. Bush.
The inspiration for this came from a classic work of ancient biography: The Twelve Caesars, by Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus—known as Suetonius.
Suetonius, a Roman citizen and historian, had chronicled the lives of the first 12 Caesars of Imperial Rome: Julius Caesar, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero, Galba, Otho, Vitellius, Vespasian, Titus and Domitian.
Hamilton wanted to examine post-World War II United States history as Suetonius had examined that of ancient Rome: Through the lives of the 12 “emperors” who had held the power of life and death over their fellow citizens—and those of other nations.

For Hamilton, the “greatest of American emperors, the Caesar Augustus of his time,” was Franklin D. Roosevelt, who led his country through the Great Depression and World War II.
His “”great successors” were Harry S. Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy—who, in turn, contained the Soviet Union abroad and presided over sustained economic prosperity at home.
By contrast, “arguably the worst of all the American Caesars” was “George W. Bush, and his deputy, Dick Cheney, who willfully and recklessly destroyed so much of the moral basis of American leadership in the modern world.”
(Hamilton’s book appeared before Donald Trump reached the Oval Office—and made George W. Bush look like a statesman.)
Among the most lethal of Bush’s offenses: The appointing of officials who refused to take seriously the threat posed by Al-Qaeda.And this arrogance and indifference continued—right up to September 11, 2001, when the World Trade Center and Pentagon became targets for destruction.
The only major administration official who did take Al-Qaeda seriously was Richard Clarke, the chief counter-terrorism adviser on the National Security Council.
Clarke had been thus appointed in 1998 by President Bill Clinton. He continued in the same role under President Bush—but the position was no longer given cabinet-level access.
This put him at a severe disadvantage when dealing with other, higher-ranking Bush officials—such as Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Rumsfeld’s deputy, Paul Wolfowitz and National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice.
These proved to be the officials who refused to believe that Al-Qaeda posed a lethal threat to the United States.
After 9/11, they wrapped themselves in the flag and posed as America’s saviors.
“Indeed,” writes Hamilton, “in the entire first eight months of the Bush Presidency, Clarke was not permitted to brief President Bush a single time, despite mounting evidence of plans for a new al-Qaeda outrage.” [Italics added]
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AP, AR-15, ATOMIC BOMB, BENEATH THE PLANET OF THE APES, BUZZFEED, C-PAC, CBS NEWS, CIA, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DEMOCRATIC PARTY, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, FBI, GUNS, MARJORY STONEMAN DOUGLAS HIGH SCHOOL, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, NSA, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REUTERS, RUSSIA, SALON, SANDY HOOK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, SEATTLE TIMES, SECOND AMENDMENT, SECURITY GUARDS, SLATE, SOCIALISM, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, USA TODAY NIKOLAS CRUZ, VLADIMIR PUTIN, WAYNE LAPIERRE
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on October 9, 2018 at 2:07 pm
On February 14, 2018, 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz slaughtered two faculty members and 15 students at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.
His weapon of choice: An AR-15 assault rifle, often favored by gun massacre killers.
Eight days later, on February 22, Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association, attacked those he held responsible for the series of massacres plaguing American schools.

Wayne LaPierre
And it wasn’t crazed gunmen armed with automatic weapons designed for military use.
With funerals still being planned for some of the victims, LaPierre blamed “the elites,” “saboteurs” and “new European-style socialists” for this and other gun massacres.
He did so at the Conservative Political Action Conference (C-PAC) in National Harbor, Maryland.
“They hate the NRA, they hate the Second Amendment,” said LaPierre, like an Old Testament prophet addressing his fanatical congregation.
“They hate individual freedom. In the rush of calls for more government, they have also revealed…their true selves.
“The elites do not care about America’s schoolchildren. If they truly cared, they would protect them. For them, it is not a safety issue. It is a political issue.
“Their goal is to eliminate the Second Amendment and our firearms freedoms, so they can eradicate all individual freedoms.”
His C-PAC congregation gave him a wild ovation.
He then outlined his solution for protecting America’s schoolchildren: Turning schools into virtual concentration camps patrolled by heavily-armed security guards.
And he accused the Democratic party of being “infested with saboteurs who do not believe in capitalism, do not believe in the Constitution, do not believe in our freedom, and do not believe in America as we know it.”
These “saboteurs” were “new European-style socialists.”
Which was ironic: In 2016, the NRA spent $30 million to elect Donald Trump—who fiercely defends Russian Communist dictator Vladimir Putin against the FBI, NSA and CIA.
But perhaps the highlight of LaPierre’s speech came at its close: “And there is no greater personal, individual freedom than the right to keep and bear arms, the right to protect yourself, and the right to survive.
“It is not bestowed by man, but granted by God to all Americans as our American birthright.”
Anyone who’s seen the 1970 sci-fi movie, Beneath the Planet of the Apes, remembers the final scene: Where seemingly normal underground dwellers strip off their human face masks and reveal themselves to be radiation-scarred mutants.
They wear white robes, and stand silently during a sermon or shout “Amen!” in what is clearly a dark parody of a religious service. It’s immediately clear what they are worshiping: An atomic bomb standing upright.

And they pay tribute to the engine of obliteration that has destroyed human civilization and brought about a world ruled by apes.
Their leader, Mendez, chants:
“Glory be to the Bomb, and to the Holy Fallout. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be. World without end. Amen.
“His sound has gone out to all lands, and his light unto the end of the world.
“Almighty and everlasting Bomb, who came down among us to make Heaven under Earth. Lighten our darkness. O instrument of God—grant us thy peace!”
Reading Wayne LaPierre’s eulogy to the Gun and his passionate invoking of God, it’s easy to re-imagine his giving a slightly altered version of the sermon offered in Beneath the Planet of the Apes. It’s also easy to imagine this taking place during an NRA convention.
WAYNE LAPIERRE: The heavens declare the glory of the Gun. And the body-count showeth His handiwork.
NRA CONGREGATION: His sound is gone out to all lands; and his Light unto the end of the world.
WAYNE LAPIEREE: He descendeth from the outermost part of Heaven; and there is nothing hid from the lead thereof. There is neither speech nor language after His voice is heard among them.
NRA CONGREGATION: Praise Him! Praise Him! My Strength and my Redeemer!
WAYNE LAPIERRE: Glory be to the Gun, and to the Holy Bodycount! As it was in the Beginning, is now and ever shall be, massacres without end. Amen!
NRA CHORUS: Amen! Amen! Amen! Amen!
WAYNE LAPIERRE: Almighty and everlasting Gun, who came down among us to make Heaven unto Earth. Lighten our darkness with your muzzle flashes. O instrument of God, grant us They peace.
NRA CHOIR: Almighty Gun, who destroyed all men—to create corpses! Behold His glory!
WAYNE LAPIERRE: Behold that Truth that abides in us. To reveal that Truth unto that Maker.
WAYNE LAPIERRE AND NRA CONGREGATION: I reveal my inmost self unto my God.
NRA CHORUS (singing): Unto my God!
NRA CONGREGATION (singing):
All guns bright and beautiful. All creatures dead with lead.
The good Gun makes us what we are!
He takes out eyes to see with, and lips that might yet speak. How great the Gun Almighty, who has made all things dead. Amen!
WAYNE LAPIERRE: May the Blessing of the Gun Almighty and the fellowship of the Holy Bodycount descend on us all, this night and forevermore!
* * * * * *
In 2012, a psychotic gunman slaughtered 20 first-graders and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Since then, at least 1,862 mass shootings have erupted nationwide,with at least 2,071 killed and 7,852 wounded.
ABC NEWS, ABORTION, ADOLF HITLER, ALTERNET, ANTI-FEMINISM, ANTI-SEMITISM, AP, BIRTH CONTROL, BURQAS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHADORS, CNN, CONTRACEPTION, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, FACEBOOK, INTERNATIONAL WOMEN'S DAY, ISLAM, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, Ronald Reagan, RUSH LIMBAUGH, SALON, SANDRA FLUKE, SAUDI ARABIA, SCOTT DESJARLAIS, SEAN HANNITY, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TALIBAN, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WOMEN
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on October 8, 2018 at 8:43 am
Republicans—at state and Federal levels—hate welfare for mothers too poor to support their families. But they love fetuses.
And to make sure there are plenty of them available, Republicans have launched an all-out war against a woman’s right to abortion—and even birth control.
So what’s responsible for all this fetus fanaticism? Several factors.
First, there is an energized constituency for politicians willing to wave this red flag.
Every major Republican Presidential candidate since Ronald Reagan has tapped into this voting bloc. And each has found plenty of votes to be gotten from it.
Second, many fetus fanatics simply dislike women.
They fear and resent the women’s movement, which has given women the right to enter the workforce and compete directly with men.
And what they hate most is the legal right of a woman to avoid becoming pregnant via birth control—or to abort the result of a male’s sperm if they do. They see this as a personal rejection. Perhaps it reminds many of them of their own failures in romance/marriage.

The Right is made up overwhelmingly of white males. And many of these men would feel entirely at home with a Christianized version of the Taliban.
They long for a world where women meekly cater to their every demand and believe only what their male masters approve for them to believe.
Third, many “pro-life” fetus fanatics hypocritically refuse to support the needs of children from low-income families.
Their attitude is: “She shouldn’t have had a child if she couldn’t support it.”

Fourth, many fetus fanatics are “family values” hypocrites.
For example: Representative Scott DesJarlais (R-TN), an anti-abortion, “family values” doctor, had an affair with a patient and later pressured her to get an abortion. He also agreed that his wife should have two abortions.
People like this subscribe to a philosophy of: “Do as I say, not as I do. And if I do it, it’s in the service of a Higher Cause and therefore entirely justified.”
Fifth, many fetus fanatics feel guilty about their own past sexual transgressions—especially if these resulted in pregnancy.
And they want to prevent others from living the same life they did. Some of these people are well-intentioned.
Even so, they usurp unto themselves a God-like right to intrude on the most intimate decisions for others—regardless of what those people may need or want.
Sixth, many fetus fanatics embrace contradictory goals.
On one hand, most of them claim they want to “get government off the backs of the people.” That usually means allowing corporations to pollute, sell dangerous products and treat their employees as slaves.
On the other hand, they want to insert the government into the vagina of every woman. That means empowering State and Federal authorities to prevent women from getting an abortion—even in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother.
Seventh, many leaders of the fetus-fanatics movement are independently wealthy.
This means that even if abortion could be outlawed for the vast majority, they could always bribe a willing doctor—here or abroad—to perform such an operation on their wife, daughter and/or mistress. For them, there is always an escape clause.
Eighth, many fetus fanatics are not truly “pro-life.”
They totally oppose abortion under most—if not all—circumstances. But they also fully support:
- Making military-style assault weapons available to the mentally ill.
- Capital punishment.
- Going to war for almost any reason.
- Wholesale massacres of wildlife.
- Despoiling of the environment; and
- Even nuclear war.
Lucy, the famous cartoon character in Charles Schultz’ “Peanuts” series, once said: “I love humanity. It’s people I can’t stand.” For fetus fanatics, the line runs: “I love fetuses. Everything else is expendable.”
Ninth, many fetus fanatics believe that since their religion teaches that abortion is wrong, they have the right to enforce that belief on others.
This is especially true for evangelical Christians. They condemn Muslims—such as those in Saudi Arabia—for segregating women, forbidding them to drive and forcing them to wear head scarfs or chadors (black veils) or burqas (garments which cover a woman’s body from head to foot).

Taliban: Islam’s version of the “Right-to-Life” movement
But while evangelical Christians condemn Islamics for their fanatical intolerance of others’ religious beliefs, they lust to impose their own upon those who belong to other churches. Or who belong to no church at all.
Tenth, many fetus fanatics are just as opposed to birth control as they are to abortion.
Thus, when Georgia University law student Sandra Fluke asked Congress to require insurance companies to cover birth control, Rush Limbaugh branded her a “slut” and a “prostitute.” A man should have the right to make a woman pregnant, but she should be powerless to prevent it.
* * * * *
It’s time to face the blunt truth: A “Conservative Victory,” as Sean Hannity put it, would impose an anti-women Taliban on America.
Thus, a woman who seeks to control her own destiny would be insane to vote for a Right-wing candidate. Just as it would have been insane for a Jewish citizen to give his vote—and his life—to Adolf Hitler.
2001 TERROR ATTACKS, 9/11 ATTACKS, 9/11 TERRORIST ATTACKS, ABC NEWS, AIRPORT SECURITY, ALTERNET, AP, BIRTH CERTIFICATES, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, DRIVER'S LICENSES, FACEBOOK, FBI, IDENTIFICATION, JOHN DILLINGER, MOHAMMED ATTA, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NATIONAL GUARD, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, PASSPORTS, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REAL ID ACT, REUTERS, SALON, SAN FRANCISCO FEDERAL BUILDING, SEATTLE TIMES, SECURITY THEATER, SLATE, SOCIAL SECURITY CARD, TERRORISM, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, THEODORE BUNDY, TIME, TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WORLD TRADE CENTER
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary on October 5, 2018 at 12:11 am
Starting in 2016, traveling by air in the United States got more complicated. But not necessarily safer.
In 2005, Congress passed the Real ID Act as a counter-terrorism measure. Its goal was to set security standards for government-issued IDs.
The Act started to be introduced in late 2013. Now in the last phase of its implementation, its enforcers have decided that some states haven’t complied with its requirements.
As a result, driver’s licenses from those states will no longer suffice to pass through airport security. And that includes domestic flights as well as international ones.
Those states: New York, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Louisiana and American Samoa.
The reason: Licenses issued by those states don’t contain enough identifying information to pass muster with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).

So how are residents of these states supposed to cope? The Federal Government is advising them to get a passport.
But, as one New York traveler outlined:
“To get a passport I’ll first need to get a certified copy of my birth certificate.
“And to get a copy of my birth certificate I need only to submit a copy of my driver’s license. A copy, no face-to-face, is-that-really you?
“So a New York driver’s license isn’t good enough for flying but it is good enough to get a birth certificate, which gets me a passport, which allows me to fly.”

Sample state ID card that’s acceptable under the Real ID Act
So much of what passes for security is actually security theater. It doesn’t actually make us safer, but it makes us feel safer.
And it makes us feel the government is keeping us safe, even when it isn’t.
For example: In the months after 9/11, National Guard troops were stationed in American airports. They certainly looked impressive.
What passengers didn’t know was that the Guardsmen carried unloaded assault rifles.
Consider this advice posted on the State of California Department of Motor Vehicles website:
“A valid California driver license or ID card can be used for federal purposes, including boarding a domestic flight and entering military bases or secure federal facilities, until October 1, 2020. After that date, only a REAL ID card or other federally approved documents will be accepted, such as a valid U.S. passport, passport card or military ID.”
To apply for a REAL ID card:
- Make an appointment (recommended) to visit a DMV field office.
- Provide proof of identity, such as a certified copy of a U.S. birth certificate, U.S. passport, employment authorization document, permanent resident card or foreign passport with an approved form I-94.
- Present proof of your Social Security number, such as an SSN card, W-2 or paystub with full SSN.
- Show a California residency document, such as a rental or lease agreement, mortgage bill, utility bill or employment, medical or school document.
- An original or certified copy of a name change document, such as a marriage certificate or divorce decree, may be required.
How does showing a “utility bill” document prove your integrity?
No doubt Mohammed Atta—the ringleader of the September 11, 2001 attacks—faithfully paid his utility bills—right up to the day when he highjacked American Airlines Flight 11 and crashed the plane into the North Tower of the World Trade Center.
And what does a “school document” reveal about the character of the person?
That s/he attended school? So what?
Theodore Bundy attended the University of Puget Sound and the University of Washington—before embarking on his career as a burglar, kidnapper, rapist and serial killer.
Or take the checking of photo IDs that has become routine to enter State and Federal office buildings.
What exactly does this tell the security guard?
If you’re John Dillinger or Osama bin Laden, it tells him: “This is a very wanted man.”
But if you’re John Q. Public, who’s not notorious as a bank robber or terrorist, showing him your ID tells him nothing.
But people watching the guard performing this security theater ritual assume: “The guard must know what he’s looking for. So we have to be safer for his checking those IDs.”
In fact, most security guards have little training and even less experience. Many of them don’t carry firearms and lack self-defense skills.
According to Salary.com: The median annual Security Guard salary is $29,204, as of July 29, 2016, with a range usually between $25,857 and $33,522.
Not exactly a salary geared to attract “the best and the brightest,” is it?
Or suppose you want to report a crime to a field office of the FBI.

A secretary asks why you’ve come.
If she considers your reason legitimate, she requires you to show your driver’s license or State ID card. Then she makes a xerox of this and hands the card back.
Then you must fill out a single-page form, which requires you to provide your:
- Name
- Address
- Phone number
- Social Security Number
- Reason to speak with an FBI agent
The FBI has always encouraged Americans to report anything they consider a threat to national security or a violation of Federal law.
But demanding so much private information just to report a crime will almost certainly decrease the number of people willing to do so.
ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, ALBERT SPEER, ALTERNET, AP, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, COREY LEWANDOWSKI, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DAVID IRVING, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, FAITH & FREEDOM COALITION, FRANK BRANDENBURG, HANS BAUR, HEINRICH HIMMLER, HITLER’S WAR (BOOK), HOLOCAUST (TV SERIES), INSIDE THE THIRD REICH (BOOK), JERRY FALWELL JR., KARL WOLFF, KAY IVEY, LIBERTY UNIVERSITY, LINA HEYDRICH, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OTTO REMER, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, QUEST: SEARCHING FOR GERMANY'S NAZI PAST, RALPH REED, RAW STORY, REINHARD HEYDRICH, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, ROY MOORE, RUDOLF HESS, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SOVIET UNION, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WEST GERMANY
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on October 4, 2018 at 12:05 am
Frank Brandenburg had just turned 16 in 1979 when he saw the NBC mini-series Holocaust, depicting the Third Reich’s extermination of six million Jewish men, women and children.
He was stunned. Had such atrocities really taken place?
His parents, friends and teachers refused to talk about Adolf Hitler and his Nazi party that had tyrannically ruled Germany for 12 years.
“No one wants to talk today about that! Let the past sleep,” he was repeatedly told.
Frank Brandenburg had a deeply personal reason for pursuing the truth. He was a citizen of West Germany, growing up in a country that was still divided in two for having lost World War II—a war Hitler had started.
He started reading such books about the Holocaust as:
- Inside the Third Reich, by former Reichminister for Armaments Albert Speer, stated that it had happened.
- David Irving’s Hitler’s War, on the other hand, seemed inconclusive on the subject.
- The Auschwitz Lie, by Thies Chrostophersen, flatly asserted that the victorious Allies had concocted this slander to blacken the good name of Germany.
So Brandenburg did something no other teenager had dared attempt: He set out to meet and interview as many former members of the Third Reich as possible.
Among those he interviewed:
- Lina Heydrich, the widow of Reinhard Heydrich, the #2 man in the Schutzstaffel, or SS.
- Otto Remer, who put down the July 20, 1944 generals’ plot against Hitler.
- SS General Karl Wolff, a close confidant of SS Reichsfuhrer Heinrich Himmler.
- The widow and sons of Deputy Fuhrer Rudolf Hess.
- Hans Baur, Hitler’s personal pilot.
These interviews ultimately became a 1990 book: Quest: Searching for Nazi Germany’s Past, co-authored by Brandenburg and Ib Melchior. It is a book that can never be duplicated, because those interviewed by Brandenburg are now dead.

Of his encounters with so many former Nazis, Brandenburg reflected:
“Today I know that in some cases…I was confronted with defensive statements, evasion, self-exoneration and prejudiced portrayals of the facts.
“But when I began my project, at the age of 16, I—naively—had no conception that this might be the case. Not one of the people I talked to expressed any kind of guilt or remorse. Not one of them had regrets or concern for their victims.
“Yet, it is easier for me to understand that. Who, in his old age, wants to admit having committed such misdeeds? To admit that everything one had believed in, worked for and lived for, had been corrupt?”

Nazi SS soldiers marching
Which helps explain the reaction historians will receive when, in the future, they interview supporters of Donald Trump.
The Original Nazis were guided by Hitler’s belief that the world was polluted by corruption and ugliness—and their mission was to remove that ugliness and corruption.
This meant removing those peoples they deemed inferior—Jews, Slavs (Poles, Serbs, Russians), Communists, liberals, gypsies, the physically and mentally handicapped.
Today’s Republicans believe themselves to be the only legitimate political party. And so do their supporters.
No sin—or even crime—is intolerable if it’s committed by a Republican.
On October 7, 2916, The Washington Post leaked a video of Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump making sexually predatory comments about women:
You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful—I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star they let you do it. You can do anything.

Donald Trump
Right-wingers rushed to excuse Trump’s misogynist comments as mere “frat boy” talk.
- Corey Lewandowski, a former Trump campaign manager and now CNN commentator: “We are electing a leader to the free world. We’re not electing a Sunday school teacher.”
- Jerry Falwell, Jr., president of Liberty University: “When they ask [if Trump’s personal life is relevant] I always talk about the story of the woman at the well who had had five husbands and she was living with somebody she wasn’t married to, and they wanted to stone her. And Jesus said he’s–he who is without sin cast the first stone. I just see how Donald Trump treats other people, and I’m impressed by that.”
- Ralph Reed, founder and chairman of the Faith & Freedom Coalition: “People of faith are voting on issues like who will protect unborn life, defend religious freedom, grow the economy, appoint conservative judges and oppose the Iran nuclear deal.”
In 2017, Roy Moore, the twice-ousted former chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, ran for the state’s U.S. Senator.
Four women, in a Washington Post story, accused Moore of seeking romantic relationships with teenage girls while he was in his 30s, and even trolling malls for such dates.
Kay Ivey, the state’s Governor, offered the real reason why Republicans supported Moore:
“I believe in the Republican party, what we stand for, and, most important, we need to have a Republican in the United States Senate to vote on things like the Supreme Court justices, other appointments the Senate has to confirm and make major decisions. So that’s what I plan to do, vote for Republican nominee Roy Moore.”
In short: The mission of the Republican party is to attain absolute power over the lives of American citizens. Compared to that, electing even accused sexual predators shrinks to insignificance.
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ALEXANDER SHUSTOROVICH, ALTERNET, ANDREW INTRATER, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, BLACKS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHUCK GRASSLEY, CIA, CITIZENS UNITED, CNN, COMMUNISM, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DEMOCRATIC PARTY, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DONALD TRUMP, DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER, EDWARD R. MURROW, FACEBOOK, FBI, FEDERAL ELECTIONS COMMISSION, FOX NEWS, FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, GEORGE C. MARSHALL, GEORGE H.W. BUSH, GOP, GREAT SOCIETY, H.L. HUNT, HARRY S. TRUMAN, HILLARY CLINTON, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HOWARD HUGHES, JAMES COMEY, JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY, JOHN F. KENNEDY, JOHN KASICH, JOHN STEINBECK, JOSEPH R. MCCARTHY, JOSEPH STALIN, KGB, LEN BLAVATNIK, LIBERALS, LINDSEY GRAHAM, LUCILLE BALL, LYNDON B. JOHNSON, MARCO RUBIO, MEDICAL CARE, MITCH MCCONNELL, MITT ROMNEY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION (NATO), NPR, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, OLIGARCHS, ORRIN HATCH, PAUL RYAN, PETE SEEGER, POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEES (PACS), POLITICO, PROPAGANDA, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, RICHARD NIXON, ROBERT MUELLER, ROBERT WELCH, ROD ROSENSTEIN, RODNEY KING RIOTS, RUSSIA, SALON, SCAPEGOATING, SCOTT WALKER, SEATTLE TIMES, SENATE LEADERSHIP FUND, SIMON KUKES, SLATE, SOCIALISTS, SOVIET UNION, SUPREME COURT, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TRUMP INAUGURAL COMMITTEE, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, UPI, USA TODAY, VLADIMIR PUTIN, WIKILEAKS, WORLD WAR 11
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on October 3, 2018 at 4:00 pm
During the 1970s and 1980s, Republicans continue to accuse Democrats of being devious agents—or at least unwitting pawns—of “the Communist conspiracy.”
As late as 1992, President George H.W. Bush and the Republican establishment charge that Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton might be a KGB plant.

George H.W. Bush
Their “evidence”: During his tenure at Oxford University in 1969-70, Clinton had briefly visited Moscow.
In short: Clinton might have been “programmed” as a real-life “Manchurian candidate” to become, first, Governor of Arkansas—one of America’s poorest states—and then President.
Making this charge even more absurd: The Soviet Union had officially dissolved in December, 1991.
After the Soviet Union’s collapse, Republicans find that accusing Democrats of being “Commies” doesn’t carry the same weight.
So they turn to “domestic enemies” to rail—and run—against: Liberals, blacks, Hispanics, “uppity” women, war protesters, lesbians, gays, and—after 9/11—Muslims.
From 1945 to 1991, it is unthinkable for a Republican Presidential candidate to pay tribute to a Soviet dictator.
But that utterly changes when Donald J. Trump, a “reality TV” host with longstanding financial ties to Russian oligarchs, runs for President of the United States.

Donald Trump
Trump lavishly praises Russian President Vladimir Putin—and even invites him to directly interfere in the 2016 Presidential race.
The reason for the Trump-Putin bromance is simple: Each has something to offer the other.
Putin wants the United States to ditch the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) alliance, which has preserved Western Europe from Russian aggression since World War II. And Trump has often attacked America’s funding of NATO as a drain on the American economy.
And Trump wants to be President. For this, Putin can supply monies, Internet trolls to confuse voters with falsified news, and even the hacking of key voting centers.
These Russian monies are officially classified as “campaign contributions,” not bribes.
On July 22, 2016, Wikileaks releases 19,252 emails and 8,034 attachments hacked from computers of the highest-ranking officials of the Democratic National Committee (DNC). Early reports trace the leak to Russian hackers.
“Russia, if you are listening,” Trump says at a press conference in Doral, Florida, “I hope you are able to find the 33,000 emails that are missing [from Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s computer]. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
This is treason—calling upon a foreign power, hostile to the United States, to interfere in its Presidential election.
Hours later, the Main Intelligence Directorate in Moscow targets Clinton’s personal office and hits more than 70 other Clinton campaign accounts.
Nor is Trump the only Republican receiving “help” from Putin. A network of Russian oligarchs—all of them answerable to Putin—has been increasingly contributing to top Republicans.
According to the Federal Election Commission:
One such major contributor is Len Blavatnik, who holds citizenship in both the United States and the United Kingdom. During the 2015-16 election cycle, he proves one of the largest donors to GOP Political Action Committees (PACs).
Blavatnik’s net worth is estimated at $20 billion. Before 2016, he donates to both Democrats and Republicans in meager amounts. But in 2016, he gives $6.35 million to GOP PACs.
Millions of dollars go to top Republican leaders—such as Senators Mitch McConnell, Marco Rubio (Florida) and Lindsey Graham (South Carolina). Specifically, he contributes:
- A total of $1.5 million to PACs associated with Rubio.
- $1 million to Trump’s Inaugural Committee.
- $41,000 to both Republicans and Democrats in 2017.
- $1 million to McConnell’s Senate Leadership Fund.
- $3.5 million to a PAC associated with McConnell.
- $1.1 million to Unintimidated PAC, associated with Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker.
- $200,000 to the Arizona Grassroots Action PAC, associated with Arizona Senator John McCain.
- $250,000 to New Day for America PAC, associated with Ohio Governor John Kasich.
- $800,000 went to the Security is Strength PAC, associated with Senator Lindsey Graham.
Another Russian oligarch, Alexander Shustorovich, contributes $1 million to Trump’s Inaugural Committee.
Altogether, four Russian oligarchs—Blavatnik, Shustorovich, Andrew Intrater and Simon Kukes—–contribute $10.4 million from the start of the 2015-16 election cycle through September 2017. Of this, 99% went to Republicans.
As Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell participated in high-level intelligence briefings in 2016. From agencies such as the FBI, CIA and the code-cracking National Security Agency, he learned that the Russians were trying to subvert the electoral process.

In October, 2016, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) issue a joint statement: The Russian government had directed the effort to subvert the 2016 Presidential election.
Two weeks later, McConnell’s PAC accepted a $1 million donation from Blavatnik.
On March 30, 2017, McConnell’s PAC accepted another $1 million from Blavatnik. This is just 10 days after former FBI Director James Comey testifies before the House Intelligence Committee about Russia’s efforts to subvert the 2016 election.
So, what has changed in the Republican Party? Essentially nothing.
Its enemies changed—from Russian Communists to American liberals—but its goal remains the same: The quest for absolute power.
When Americans feared Communism, Republicans depicted themselves as the only ones who could be trusted to protect the United States. Big contributions poured in from Right-wing billionaires like H.L. Hunt and Howard Hughes.
But when Republicans found they could enrich themselves and stay in power via Russian “campaign contributions,” they decided: Better Red than un-elected.
2016 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN, ABC NEWS, ALEXANDER SHUSTOROVICH, ALTERNET, ANDREW INTRATER, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, BLACKS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHUCK GRASSLEY, CIA, CITIZENS UNITED, CNN, COMMUNISM, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DEMOCRATIC PARTY, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, DONALD TRUMP, DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER, EDWARD R. MURROW, FACEBOOK, FBI, FEDERAL ELECTIONS COMMISSION, FOX NEWS, FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, GEORGE C. MARSHALL, GEORGE H.W. BUSH, GOP, GREAT SOCIETY, H.L. HUNT, HARRY S. TRUMAN, HILLARY CLINTON, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HOWARD HUGHES, JAMES COMEY, JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY, JOHN F. KENNEDY, JOHN KASICH, JOHN STEINBECK, JOSEPH R. MCCARTHY, JOSEPH STALIN, KGB, LEN BLAVATNIK, LIBERALS, LINDSEY GRAHAM, LUCILLE BALL, LYNDON B. JOHNSON, MARCO RUBIO, MEDICAL CARE, MITCH MCCONNELL, MITT ROMNEY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION (NATO), NPR, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, OLIGARCHS, ORRIN HATCH, PAUL RYAN, PETE SEEGER, POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEES (PACS), POLITICO, PROPAGANDA, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, RICHARD NIXON, ROBERT MUELLER, ROBERT WELCH, ROD ROSENSTEIN, RODNEY KING RIOTS, RUSSIA, SALON, SCAPEGOATING, SCOTT WALKER, SEATTLE TIMES, SENATE LEADERSHIP FUND, SIMON KUKES, SLATE, SOCIALISTS, SOVIET UNION, SUPREME COURT, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TRUMP INAUGURAL COMMITTEE, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, UPI, USA TODAY, VLADIMIR PUTIN, WIKILEAKS, WORLD WAR 11
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on October 2, 2018 at 12:27 am
A CNN headline says it all: “Obama asked question everyone’s been wondering about GOP”
“What happened to the Republican Party?”
That’s the question former President Barack Obama asked at the University of Illinois on September 7. And he quickly answered it:
“Its central organizing principle in foreign policy was the fight against communism, and now they’re cozying up to the former head of the KGB. Actively blocking legislation that would defend our elections from Russian attack. What happened?”

Barack Obama as President
On the surface, it seems the Republican Party has drastically changed. But, in reality, there has been no substantial change at all.
Let’s start at the beginning—in this case, 1932.
Democratic nominee Franklin D. Roosevelt wins election against Republican President Herbert Hoover. So popular is he that he wins an unprecedented four terms—12 years!—in the White House, seeing America through the Great Depression and World War II,
In 1945, Roosevelt suddenly dies in office, leaving Vice President Harry S. Truman in command. He lacks the imperial magnetism and eloquence of FDR, so Republicans assume that 1948 will be a cakewalk for them.
But it isn’t. Instead, Truman wins a second term—and rubs it in by holding up the now-defunct headline, “DEWEY DEFEATS TRUMAN” for reporters to photograph.
By 1952, Republicans have been locked out of the White House for 20 years. They’re desperate to return—and angry enough to do anything to win.
They find attacking the integrity of their fellow Americans a highly effective tactic.
During the 1950s, Wisconsin United States Senator Joseph R. McCarthy rides a wave of paranoia to national prominence—by attacking the patriotism of anyone who disagrees with him.
Elected to the Senate in 1946, he rises to national prominence on February 9, 1950, after giving a fiery speech in Wheeling, West Virginia:
“The State Department is infested with communists. I have here in my hand a list of 205—a list of names that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping policy in the State Department.”

Senator Joseph R. McCarthy
Americans are already growing increasingly fearful of Communism:
- Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin has not withdrawn the Red Army from the countries it has occupied in Eastern Europe during World War II.
- In 1948, the Soviet Union develops—and demonstrates—its own atomic bomb, an achievement U.S. scientists had claimed would not happen for at least a decade.
- In 1949, China falls to the triumphant armies of Mao Tse Tung. Generalissimo Chaing Kai Shek is driven from mainland China to the tiny island of Taiwan.
Anti-communism as a lever to political advancement sharply accelerates following McCarthy’s speech.
Any American can be accused of being a Communist or a Communist sympathizer—”a Comsymp” or “fellow traveler” in the style of the era.
Among those accused:
- Secretary of State George C. Marshall, who had overseen America’s strategy for defeating Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan
- President Harry S. Truman
- Playwrights Lillian Hellman and Arthur Miller
- Actors Charlie Chaplin, Zero Mostel, Lloyd Bridges, Howard Da Silva, Edward G. Robinson and John Garfield
- Composers Arron Copland and Elmer Bernstein
- Physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer, who presided over the creation of America’s atomic bomb
- Actresses Lee Grant, Delores del Rio, Ruth Gordon and Lucille Ball
- Journalists Edward R. Murrow and William L. Shirer, who had chronicled the rise of Nazi Germany
- Folksinger Pete Seeger
- Writers Irwin Shaw, Howard Fast, John Steinbeck and Dashiell Hammett
Even “untouchable” Republicans become targets for such slander.
The most prominent of these is President Dwight D. Eisenhower—labeled ”a conscious, dedicated agent of the Communist Conspiracy” by Robert Welch, founder of the John Birch Society in 1958.
In 1953, McCarthy attacks the leadership of the United States Army as “a hotbed of traitors” and convenes an inquiry through the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.
But the hearings backfire, exposing McCarthy as a bullying demagogue. A Senate committee condemns his behavior as acting “contrary to senatorial ethics and tended to bring the Senate into dishonor and disrepute.”
Yet even without McCarthy, Republicans ride the issue of anti-Communism to victory from 1948 to 1992. “Respectable” anti-Communists—like Richard M. Nixon—depict themselves as the only ones who can be trusted to safeguard America.
Republicans hold the White House for eight years under Dwight D. Eisenhower, then lose it in 1960 to John F. Kennedy and again in 1964 to Lyndon B. Johnson.
By 1968, with the nation mired in Vietnam and convulsed by antiwar demonstrations and race riots, Americans turn once more to those who prey upon their fears and hates.
They elect Richard Nixon, who promises to end the Vietnam war and attack “uppity” blacks and antiwar demonstrators—and, above all, “the Communist menace.”
The same strategy re-elects him in 1972.
Jimmy Carter wins the Presidency in 1976 and loses it in 1980 to Ronald Reagan. Republicans hold the White House until 1992.
Reagan doesn’t want to continue the “stalemate” of “containing” Communism. He intends to roll it back. Tensions rise between the United States and the Soviet Union—the highest since the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962.
American proxies fight Soviet proxies in Afghanistan and Central America, but the world escapes nuclear holocaust.
ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, AP, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, COLIN KAEPERNICK, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, FOOTBALL, MARSHAWN LYNCH, MICHAEL BENNETT, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OAKLAND RAIDERS, POLICE BRUTALITY, POLITICO, RACISM, RAW STORY, REUTERS, SALON, SAN FRANCISCO FORTY-NINERS, SEATTLE SEAHAWKS, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SYMBOLISM, TAKING A KNEE, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE PRINCE, THE STAR SPANGLED BANNER, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, Entertainment, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on October 1, 2018 at 12:35 am
A war is flaring in football stadiums across the country.
It’s a symbolic war—with football players literally “taking a knee” on one side and with President Donald Trump and his Right-wing minions symbolically waving the Stars and Stripes on the other.
And it’s fueled, on both sides, by a stadium-sized dose of hypocrisy.
For players, “taking a knee” during the playing of the National Anthem before the start of a football game means protesting against racial injustice and police brutality aimed at blacks.
For the Right, refusing to stand for “The Star Spangled Banner” is unpatriotic, perhaps treasonous. They claim it’s insulting to the military—and especially those soldiers who have died in America’s wars.
San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick first took a knee on August 14, 2016.

Colin Kaepernick
During the 49ers’ first game of the pre-season, Kaepernick sat on the bench during the National Anthem both then and in their next game.
On August 26, he did so again. The next day, he explained his reason for ,it: “I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color. To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.”
On August 29, Trump—still a Presidential candidate—thrust himself into the budding controversy: “I think it’s personally not a good thing. I think it’s a terrible thing. And, you know, maybe he should find a country that works better for him. Let him try. It won’t happen.”

Donald Trump
One year later, on August 12, 2017, Oakland Raiders running back Marshawn Lynch sat for the anthem during preseason, on his first game back post-retirement.
The next day, Seattle Seahawks defensive lineman Michael Bennett sat for the anthem. He gave as his reason the “Unite the Right” rally of white racists in Charlottesville, Virginia.
On September 17, Trump—now President—told a rally in Alabama that refusing to sing the National Anthem showed “disrespect of our heritage. Wouldn’t you love to see one of these NFL owners, when somebody disrespects our flag, to say, ‘Get that son of a bitch off the field right now, out, he’s fired.'”
On September 23, Trump, on Twitter, called for NFL players who “disrespect our great American flag” to be fired. Later on in the day, he called for a boycott of the NFL.
On September 24, infuriated by Trump’s insults, NFL players across the country linked arms, took a knee, or stayed in the changing room during the National Anthem. Every game featured some form of demonstration.
Since then, the confrontation between players “taking a knee” and Trump and his Right-wing shills has mushroomed.

Oakland Raiders Kneeling
By Keith Allison from Hanover, MD, USA [CC BY-SA 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)%5D, via Wikimedia Commons
During 2017, there were 987 fatal police shootings; 223 blacks were shot and killed by police (23% of all fatal shootings), and 68 of the victims were unarmed.
Yet these protests have not led one police department to change its “use-of-deadly-force” policies. No State legislature has offered reform legislation. Nor has Congress.
Blacks are still getting shot by trigger-happy police—often while they’re unarmed and unresisting
So where does the hypocrisy come in?
On the part of the players:
- These protests have caused police shootings to be largely forgotten—while the kneeling players are claiming the media’s attention.
- The kneeling players consider themselves heroes—and are considered heroes by many within the black and white communities.
- Yet there is nothing remotely heroic about kneeling for about a minute before you’re about to earn tens of thousands of dollars just for knocking a ball around a stadium. It’s a cheap and easy way to win applause while risking nothing.
- These players’ celebrity could be put to far better use by appearing before legislative committees urging reforms in police “use-of-deadly-force” policies.
On the part of the Right:
- Donald Trump, for all his boasts of patriotism, was a five-deferment draft dodger during the Vietnam war. Four deferments cited academic reasons and the fifth cited bone spurs—which usually result in small pointed outgrowths of bone—in his heels.
- Many of those attacking the patriotism of the kneeling players have similarly refused to enter military service.
- Standing for the National Anthem is likewise a cheap and easy way to declare yourself a patriot.
- It’s akin to taking forced loyalty oaths: You take the oath, “prove” your integrity—and can then betray national security secrets almost with impunity.
Finally, there is one truth takes precedence over all others: There is no reason to play “The Star Spangled Banner” at football games—or any other sports event.
The reasons:
- There is nothing inherently patriotic about attending any sports game:
- The country isn’t being threatened.
- No one is risking anything in its defense.
- There are no casualties (save those suffered by athletes earning kingly salaries).
- No one’s life is made any better by watching the game—or the protests.
Police brutality remains a serious matter. But “taking a knee” and its opponents most definitely isn’t.
ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, ALTERNET, AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BASHIR AL-ASSAD, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHILE, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, FACEBOOK, HOUSE UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES COMMITTEE, HUMAN RIGHTS, IRAN, JOHN BOEHNER, JOHN MCCAIN, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NICARAGUA, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REUTERS, RUSSIA, S.I. HAYAKAWA, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SYRIA, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, VLADIMIR PUTIN
THE MYTH OF AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on October 17, 2018 at 12:21 amOn September 11, 2013, the New York Times published an Op-Ed (guest editorial) from Russian President Vladimir Putin, entitled: “A Plea for Caution from Russia: What Putin Has to Say to Americans About Syria.”
No one should be surprised that Putin came out strongly against an American air strike on Syria.
Its “President” (i.e., dictator) Bashir al-Assad, is, after all, a close ally of Russia. Just as his late father and dictator, Hafez al-Assad, was a close ally of the Soviet Union until its collapse in 1991.
Putin, of course, is a former member of the KGB, the infamous secret police which ruled the Soviet Union from its birth in 1917 to its collapse in 1991.
He grew up under a Communist dictatorship and clearly wishes to return to that era, saying publicly: “First and foremost it is worth acknowledging that the demise of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century.”
So it would be unrealistic to expect him to view the current “Syria crisis” the same way that President Barack Obama did.
(A “crisis” for politicians is any event that can be exploited to increase their own status—and thus power. Few politicians really care about the “human rights” of other nations—unless promoting this issue can empower themselves and/or their own nation.
(President Ronald Reagan, for example, often wailed about the Soviets’ oppression of the Polish union, Solidarity—while firing hundreds of unionized air traffic controllers who went on strike.)
(A “crisis” for the media is any event that can be exploited for higher ratings.)
In his September 11, 2013 guest editorial in the New York Times, Putin offered the expected Russian take on Syria:
But it was the concluding paragraph that enraged American politicians the most—especially Right-wing ones. In it, Putin took exception with American “exceptionalism.”
Vladimir Putin
This is the belief that the United States is unlike other nations. That it is unlike other nations in its innocence and steadfast dedication to human rights above all else.
Citizens of nations whose governments have been overthrown by the United States—such as Chile, Iran and Nicaragua—and replaced with brutal dictatorships would strongly disagree.
Referring to then-President Obama, Putin wrote:
“And I would rather disagree with a case he made on American exceptionalism, stating that the United States’ policy is ‘what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.’
“It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation.
“There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their policies differ, too.
“We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord’s blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.”
Putin has never publicly shown any interest in religion. But by invoking “the Lord,” he was able to turn the Christian beliefs of his Western audience into a useful weapon.
“I was insulted,” then-House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) told reporters when asked for his blunt reaction to the editorial.
“I have to be honest with you, I was at dinner, and I almost wanted to vomit,” said U.S. Senator Bob Menendez (D-New Jersey).
Putin had dared to question the self-righteousness of American foreign policy—and those who make it.
Making his case for war with Syria, Obama had said: “America is not the world’s policeman….
“But when, with modest effort and risk, we can stop children from being gassed to death, and thereby make our own children safer over the long run, I believe we should act.
“That’s what makes America different. That’s what makes us exceptional. With humility, but with resolve, let us never lose sight of that essential truth.”
President Barack Obama
In short: Because we consider ourselves “exceptional,” we have the divine right to do whatever we want.
It’s not necessary to see Putin as a champion of democracy (he isn’t) to see the truth in this part of his editorial: “It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation.”
From 1938 to 1969, the House Un-American Activities Committee sought to define what was “American” and what was “Un-American.” As if “American” stood for all things virtuous.
Whoever heard of an “Un-French Activities Committee”? Or an “Un-German” or “Un-British” one?
The late S.I. Hayakawa once made an observation that clearly applies to this situation.
Hayakawa was a professor of semantics (the study of meaning, focusing on the relation between words and what they stand for).
In his bestselling book, Language in Thought and Action, he observed that when a person hears a message, he has four ways of responding to it:
Americans might want to consider #3 in the recent case of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Share this: