I normally leave politics to those better qualified, but I feel compelled to discuss a couple things here.
First, the Bush crew is doing a wonderful job pumping up military spending while slashing taxes, which is in line with the conservative strategy of starving the beast. If they force the government into fiscal crisis, programs will be slashed. In their sights are medicare, social security, arts funding (abysmally funded as is), and public schools. It's an underhanded plan being executed in plain sight, and we are accepting it.
I lately have been satisfied with the fact that GWB is a lame duck with the worst approval ratings in modern times. However, as I watch the illegal immigrant issue get more and more play, I realize how dangerous he and his cronies are. The repubs are set for a big fall in the midterm elections unless they can scare the tar out of the country again. The war in Iraq is no longer doing it for them, but illegal immigrants stealing their jobs sure can. Watch how fast this issue dies after November. They're doing it with Iran, too. The buildup has mirrored the buildup to Iraq with such eerie similarity that I'm afraid it just might work. I wouldn't have thought they'd get away with the same lame PR con job twice in a row while still wallowing in the mess they've made of Iraq. Now, I'm not so sure. How about the US renounces its WMDs and stops supporting brutal and repressive regimes? That would be huge step toward democracy in the middle east and the world over.
Finally, just a quick note on the warmed over subject of Stephen Colbert. The day after the NY Times and other papers justifiably caught flack for not mentioning his performance, while dutifully covering the rest of it. So, the Times followed, two days later with a snarky little puff piece about the effect of Colbert's performance on the blogosphere. The article mentioned that the Times had failed to cover it, but dismissed its omission with the claim that the routine wasn't very funny. Well, I thought it was fairly funny (except for the video segment), but its lack of humor value is not why it didn't get covered. It failed to get press because his harshest and most apt criticisms were aimed at the press corps for being so cowardly and uncurious in its approach to the White House. He called them out and they petulantly and unprofessionally decided that they didn't think it was very funny and refused to cover it. Well, Colbert got the last laugh judging from the unprecedented volume of downloads the clip generated.
4 comments:
Speaking of Iran, I have always believed that we would never resort to hostilities simply because our military is overextended at the moment, but I forgot about the possibility of a bombing campaign with no ground support. I believe that this is a very real, and scary, possibility
And we've got a presidential possie that believes reality is created by them, and who are undaunted by criticism and even failure. In some cases, these traits might be admirable. In this case, not so much.
Bang on, Beckett, re the Stephen Colbert non-response. The way the press takes revenge on anything/one they don't like is to not give them ink.
I notice this over and over with the Times. As pathetically eager as they are to run after meaningless lifestyle trends, they are averse to anything that challenges the powers that be -- like say a peace march numbering in the millions. That, they'll bury in a small article in the back pages.
Liberal media my ass.
See this link for evidence that we will launch an air campaign against Iran, possibly as early as June.
Post a Comment