In this time of Palin diaries and convention rhetoric, I have been holding back writing this diary for the right moment. Everyone seems to be so concerned about what Sarah Palin has done in the past that they fail to realize that she really has no effect unless she gets elected. The people who got our country into the position that it is in are still at work, part of them trying to get McCain elected, and part of them still fleecing our society for every penny they can. I decided to write a diary to refocus on those people and give a little perspective on what is really going on right now besides the election.
In every endeavor, in every organization, there are “planning” people and “action” people. In my business, the Engineering people are the planners, and the Operations people are the action people. The normal dynamic is that engineers are horrible operators, and vice-versa. Upon looking at the Bush Administration, I noticed a similar dynamic and I found that most people have missed the clear definition of who the engineers are and who the operators are.
The” engineers” in the Bush Administration are very visible and very obvious. Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, and Alberto Gonzales are easily named examples of people who are actually creating plans for the things that the government is doing. They are outspoken, brute-force people who can lie to you without blinking an eye or giving a tell. It is a common misconception that Karl Rove is the master operative, in addition to being a planner. I have a different idea about who the “Operations Manager” is in the current administration actually is.
The people who have been put into action to further the goals of the Bush Administration are lawyers working in the Justice Department and in the Department of Homeland Security. These people have been hand-picked and groomed for their task by DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff. They have been protégés of Chertoff when he was the U.S. Attorney in New Jersey, a partner at Latham & Watkins, counsel to the Senate committee investigating the Clintons, or in charge of the DOJ’s Criminal Division. I believe you have probably heard of the four that I will highlight below.
In 2004, a company called CCA, Corrections Corporation of America, had a lobbyist on staff who lobbied the DHS for the ability to house illegal immigrants after they were apprehended by ICE activities. This would allow private companies to build detention facilities and lease prison space to the government. This change in policy would facilitate the prisoners from the new DHS plan ENDGAME, which was very similar to Oliver North’s controversial Rex-84 “readiness exercise” for COG in 1984. This called for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to round up and detain 400,000 imaginary “refugees,” in the context of “uncontrolled population movements” over the Mexican border into the United States. This lobbying succeeded and privately owned prisons became the detention centers of choice for ICE. In 1996, CCA’s revenue from holding immigrants jumped 21 percent, to $95 million from $70 million in 2004.
This lobbyist’s name was Philip Perry, a partner with Chertoff at Lanham and Watkins, and works with him on the Whitewater investigation. He also happens to be Dick Cheney’s son-in-law, married to Dick’s daughter Elizabeth. Perry was later named the general counsel of DHS in 2005. Once he came to DHS, he continued his path for making money at the expense of illegal immigrants and their families by bringing in another Chertoff disciple and fellow Cornell grad Julie Myers.
Ms. Myers was recess appointed by President Bush to the post of assistant secretary for Immigration Customs and Enforcement, part of the Department of Homeland Security on January 9th, 2006, despite the fact that Ms. Myers was only 36 at the time and had never managed a large department or dealt extensively with immigration issues. Ms. Myers is also married to John Wood, Chief of Staff to Mr. Chertoff, and is the niece of the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Richard Myers. In 2006, ICE ramped up the detention of immigrants. There were about 500 ICE workplace raids in 2002, and 3,600 in 2006. On average, ICE pays $95 a day per immigrant that it detains, yet research indicates that other, far cheaper, methods can work almost as well in making sure immigrants show up in court. These alternative methods are called intensive supervision. Using this method, almost 90% of immigrants showed up for their court hearings. This intensive supervision costs an average of $14 per detainee per day, according to congressional testimony by Julie Myers. But in fiscal year 2007, ICE spent only $44 million on intensive supervision methods and $1.2 billion on detention. Legislation sponsored in 2006 by representatives Heath Shuler (D-N.C.) and Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) in the House would authorize the agency to develop another 8,000 detention beds, which must be provided by private contractors such as CCA "whenever possible."
In January of 2006, The Army Corps of Engineers gave a contract to KBR (yes, that KBR) for $385 million to build “emergency detention centers”. From the Halliburton website, “the contract, which is effective immediately, provides for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities to augment existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations Program facilities in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs." The number of immigrant raids and the profits of these private prison corporations have skyrocketed since. I guess we know the real reason behind "immigration reform" now.
Another Chertoff protégé, Alice Fisher, was nominated and recess appointed by President Bush to be Assistant Attorney General (Criminal Division) at the Department of Justice. Ms. Fisher was a Partner with Latham & Watkins, LLP. She previously served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice. Earlier in her career, Ms. Fisher served as Deputy Special Counsel to the U.S. Senate Special Committee to Investigate Whitewater Development and Related Matters. One of the reasons Ms. Walker was not approved by the Senate due to questions about her involvement in the policy making concerning prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. She apparently had a role in overseeing the methods of prisoner treatment during intelligence extraction. Vermont Senator Patrick J. Leahy said in his May 12, 2005, statement. "I am somewhat concerned, however, that Ms. Fisher is nominated for one of the most visible prosecutorial positions in the country without ever having prosecuted a case, and she brings to the position minimal trial experience in any context," he said. Another reason for her unpopularity was her conflict of interest due to her involvement with the Tom Delay legal defense team.
One of her subordinates, Noel Hillman, was the lead investigator for the DeLay and the Abramoff cases. From Newsweek magazine, “The probe is being overseen by Noel Hillman, a hard-charging career prosecutor who heads the Public Integrity Section and who has a long track record of nailing politicians of all stripes. But politics almost certainly will creep into the equation. Hillman's new boss will soon be Alice Fisher, who is widely respected but also a loyal Republican socially close to DeLay's defense team. The larger question is whether Justice -- run by Bush's buddy Alberto Gonzales -- will aggressively seek evidence that could lead to DeLay or to other Republicans in Congress. "I just don't know that they have the stomach for it," said a lawyer close to the probe.” Hillman is also a Chertoff protégé, hired as a federal prosecutor by Chertoff when Chertoff was New Jersey’s U.S. attorney. He became the lead Justice Department prosecutor in the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal. His political ambitions had been thwarted when he had approached Bush about a federal judgeship and been turned down. However, the investigation into Jack Abramoff, the disgraced Republican lobbyist, took a surprising turn when the Justice Department said the chief prosecutor in the inquiry would step down because he had suddenly been nominated to a federal judgeship by President Bush. Some claimed that Bush essentially "bribed" Hillman to look the other way concerning the Abramoff investigation and the White House, and that negotiations had been underway for this move for over a year, while Hillman was prosecuting the case. Hillman is currently a federal judge in New Jersey, and has been involved recently with the Don Siegelman case. He apparently was the hatchet man at Justice concerning Gov. Siegelman when he was the head of the Public Integrity Section, a position he was appointed to by Chertoff.
One more Chertoff protégé is Tim Griffin who was a special assistant to Chertoff, when Chertoff was the assistant attorney general at the Justice Department's criminal division. During five months on that job, Griffin "tracked" issues for Chertoff, such as extradition and provisional arrest, according to Griffin's résumé. There is so much I could write about Griffin, I won’t even start.
I guess the entire point of this long and tedious diary (hey, it is not a short one, so I guess I won’t be asked to please delete ) is that the wolves are still in charge of the hen house. The introduction of Sarah Palin and even the candidacy of John McCain have served as great distractions for the stuff that is still going on. Michael Chertoff has succeeded in poisoning our legal system for the benefit of “loyal Bushies”. He is definitely the sharp end of the stick in implementing the criminal policies and ideas of our current administration. We must remain vigilant, even with all the hoopla about teen pregnancy and mooseburgers.
I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; not enlightened enough to exercise their control with wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion. Enlighten the people generally and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day. -- Thomas Jefferson
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
The Legend of John McCain
The political career of John McCain has been made possible by a series of political maneuvers and a skillful public relations campaign, creating the juggernaut that I like to call The Legend of John McCainTM. There are many facets of The LegendTM, but the base of the entire concept lies in John McCain’s military service. The deification of his service and of his time in Vietnam as a prisoner of war has been constructed into a nearly impenetrable firewall against scrutiny, and have also served, along with media complicity, as rose colored glasses to the public throughout his political career. Up until recently, no one could ever think of questioning any part of The LegendTM without facing serious public backlash. Fortunately, his candidacy for President has allowed and demanded closer scrutiny of his history, and of the phenomenon that is The Legend of John McCainTM.
The Legend of John McCainTMstates that: John McCain is an honored Veteran, is always on the side of Veterans, and all Veterans admire him and will vote for him in the upcoming election.
Point 1: The LegendTM states that John McCain is always on the side of veterans.
Paul Lindsay, an Ohio-based McCain spokesman, said: "Veterans and our military men and women have always supported John McCain because he has always, and will always, support them." The fact of the matter is that John McCain has consistently voted against veterans while in the Senate. Nothing could be further from the truth.
McCain opposed the 21st century GI bill because said it was too generous. McCain did not actually vote on the new GI Bill that provides better educational opportunities to veterans of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, paying full tuition at in-state schools and living expenses for those who have served at least three years since the 9/11 attacks. McCain opposed the bill because he thinks the generous benefits would “encourage more people to leave the military.” (S.Amdt. 4803 to H.R. 2642, Vote 137, 5/22/08)
McCain Voted Against Increased Funding for Veterans’ Health Care. Although McCain told voters at a campaign rally that improving veterans’ health care was his top domestic priority, he voted against increasing funding for veterans’ health care in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007. (Greenville News, 12/12/2007; S.Amdt. 2745 to S.C.R. 95, Vote 40, 3/10/04; Senate S.C.R. 18, Vote 55, 3/16/05; S.Amdt. 3007 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 41, 3/14/06; H.R. 1591, Vote 126, 3/29/07)
Opposed an Assured Funding Stream for Veterans’ Health Care. McCain opposed providing an assured funding stream for veterans’ health care, taking into account annual changes in veterans’ population and inflation. (S.Amdt. 3141 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 63, 3/16/06)
McCain Voted Against Adding More Than $400 Million for Veterans’ Care. McCain was one of 13 Republicans to vote against providing an additional $430 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs for outpatient care and treatment for veterans. (S.Amdt. 3642 to H.R. 4939, Vote 98, 4/26/06)
Voted Against Establishing a $1 Billion Trust Fund for Military Health Facilities. McCain voted against establishing a $1 billion trust fund to improve military health facilities by refusing to repeal tax cuts for those making more than $1 million a year. (S.Amdt. 2735 to S.Amdt. 2707 to H.R. 4297, Vote 7, 2/2/06)
McCain Opposed $500 Million for Counseling Services for Veterans with Mental Disorders. McCain voted against an amendment to appropriate $500 million annually from 2006-2010 for counseling, mental health and rehabilitation services for veterans diagnosed with mental illness, posttraumatic stress disorder or substance abuse. (S. 2020, S.Amdt. 2634, Vote 343, 11/17/05)
McCain Voted in Support of Disabled Veterans Only 25 Percent of the Time from 2004-2005. While McCain claims he “has been a leading advocate” for veterans with disabilities, statistics show he supported the Disabled American Veterans’ interests only 25 percent of the time in 2004-2005. In 2006, that figure slipped to 20 percent of the time. (Project Vote Smart)
McCain Voted Against Providing Automatic Cost-of-Living Adjustments to Veterans. McCain voted against providing automatic annual cost-ofliving adjustments for certain veterans’ benefits. (S. 869, Vote 259, 11/20/91)
Source: AFL/CIO
Point 2: The LegendTM states that John McCain is admired by all Veterans and all Veterans support his candidacy.
John McCain’s presidential aspirations have shined a light on how Veterans really feel about him. Veterans of two generations, emboldened by the window of opportunity to challenge The LegendTM afforded to them by his candidacy, are organizing and are vocalizing their disdain for John McCain.
Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain is a group formed by Vietnam Veterans and POW/MIA activists Jerry Kiley and Ted Sampley. From their website, their mission statement is :
“Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain was formed to dispel the myth of "Straight talkin’, principled, maverick war hero" John McCain. Through more than two decades of investigation of his behavior, through open-source documents, public statements of his colleagues, and personal conversations with other Vietnam POWs, we have come to the unavoidable conclusion that he is unfit by virtue of his temperament, character, dishonesty, and emotional instability to serve as President of the United States or in any other position of public trust.”
Their website includes a challenge to John McCain that if he can prove their statements about him to be incorrect, they will stand down. They even include their phone number on the website so he can call them. Contributors to the website include the late Col. David Hackworth, a Vietnam combat legend.
The warriors of this generation feel equally slighted and have similar oppositions to the thought of John McCain becoming the President of the United States and the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces.
VoteVets.org, a group founded by Iraq War Veterans Jon Stolz and Brandon Friedman, campaigns actively against John McCain. It’s tagline is “The Voice of America’s 21st Century Patriots.” Their website includes video ads supporting Veteran candidates for public office, as well as support links for all veterans. Their organization is building grassroots support for Veterans' issues by helping returning Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans get elected to local and state offices. VoteVets has funded national ads opposing the policies of George Bush and of John McCain. Those videos are available for view at their website.
This week, a study by the Center for Responsive Politics reported that members of the military are giving more donations to Senator Obama than Senator McCain. The troops in the field are seeing first hand what the policies of the current Administration are doing to the readiness and morale of the military, and are contributing to the candidate who they believe will remedy the situation. Their support is absolutely contrary to The LegendTM, and was not a variable that was planned for by the McCain organization. When the donations of troops that are actually deployed are isolated for examination, Barack Obama attracts more donations by a 6 to 1 factor. The troops are looking out for themselves and for the future of our military, in direct contradiction to The LegendTM.
John McCain’s military service and his POW history have served him for decades as a shield against criticism and scrutiny. Until now, even taking a closer look at his Senate business and financial dealings have been considered a nearly traitorous act. Any question of his integrity or his intentions have been perceived as a direct attack against all Veterans due to the creation of The Legend of John McCainTM. We must shine the light on this false media creation that threatens the future of our American way of life.
“The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is.” – Winston Churchill
“Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.” – Albert Einstein
Cross-posted at VetVoice
The Legend of John McCainTMstates that: John McCain is an honored Veteran, is always on the side of Veterans, and all Veterans admire him and will vote for him in the upcoming election.
Point 1: The LegendTM states that John McCain is always on the side of veterans.
Paul Lindsay, an Ohio-based McCain spokesman, said: "Veterans and our military men and women have always supported John McCain because he has always, and will always, support them." The fact of the matter is that John McCain has consistently voted against veterans while in the Senate. Nothing could be further from the truth.
McCain opposed the 21st century GI bill because said it was too generous. McCain did not actually vote on the new GI Bill that provides better educational opportunities to veterans of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, paying full tuition at in-state schools and living expenses for those who have served at least three years since the 9/11 attacks. McCain opposed the bill because he thinks the generous benefits would “encourage more people to leave the military.” (S.Amdt. 4803 to H.R. 2642, Vote 137, 5/22/08)
McCain Voted Against Increased Funding for Veterans’ Health Care. Although McCain told voters at a campaign rally that improving veterans’ health care was his top domestic priority, he voted against increasing funding for veterans’ health care in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007. (Greenville News, 12/12/2007; S.Amdt. 2745 to S.C.R. 95, Vote 40, 3/10/04; Senate S.C.R. 18, Vote 55, 3/16/05; S.Amdt. 3007 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 41, 3/14/06; H.R. 1591, Vote 126, 3/29/07)
Opposed an Assured Funding Stream for Veterans’ Health Care. McCain opposed providing an assured funding stream for veterans’ health care, taking into account annual changes in veterans’ population and inflation. (S.Amdt. 3141 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 63, 3/16/06)
McCain Voted Against Adding More Than $400 Million for Veterans’ Care. McCain was one of 13 Republicans to vote against providing an additional $430 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs for outpatient care and treatment for veterans. (S.Amdt. 3642 to H.R. 4939, Vote 98, 4/26/06)
Voted Against Establishing a $1 Billion Trust Fund for Military Health Facilities. McCain voted against establishing a $1 billion trust fund to improve military health facilities by refusing to repeal tax cuts for those making more than $1 million a year. (S.Amdt. 2735 to S.Amdt. 2707 to H.R. 4297, Vote 7, 2/2/06)
McCain Opposed $500 Million for Counseling Services for Veterans with Mental Disorders. McCain voted against an amendment to appropriate $500 million annually from 2006-2010 for counseling, mental health and rehabilitation services for veterans diagnosed with mental illness, posttraumatic stress disorder or substance abuse. (S. 2020, S.Amdt. 2634, Vote 343, 11/17/05)
McCain Voted in Support of Disabled Veterans Only 25 Percent of the Time from 2004-2005. While McCain claims he “has been a leading advocate” for veterans with disabilities, statistics show he supported the Disabled American Veterans’ interests only 25 percent of the time in 2004-2005. In 2006, that figure slipped to 20 percent of the time. (Project Vote Smart)
McCain Voted Against Providing Automatic Cost-of-Living Adjustments to Veterans. McCain voted against providing automatic annual cost-ofliving adjustments for certain veterans’ benefits. (S. 869, Vote 259, 11/20/91)
Source: AFL/CIO
Point 2: The LegendTM states that John McCain is admired by all Veterans and all Veterans support his candidacy.
John McCain’s presidential aspirations have shined a light on how Veterans really feel about him. Veterans of two generations, emboldened by the window of opportunity to challenge The LegendTM afforded to them by his candidacy, are organizing and are vocalizing their disdain for John McCain.
Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain is a group formed by Vietnam Veterans and POW/MIA activists Jerry Kiley and Ted Sampley. From their website, their mission statement is :
“Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain was formed to dispel the myth of "Straight talkin’, principled, maverick war hero" John McCain. Through more than two decades of investigation of his behavior, through open-source documents, public statements of his colleagues, and personal conversations with other Vietnam POWs, we have come to the unavoidable conclusion that he is unfit by virtue of his temperament, character, dishonesty, and emotional instability to serve as President of the United States or in any other position of public trust.”
Their website includes a challenge to John McCain that if he can prove their statements about him to be incorrect, they will stand down. They even include their phone number on the website so he can call them. Contributors to the website include the late Col. David Hackworth, a Vietnam combat legend.
The warriors of this generation feel equally slighted and have similar oppositions to the thought of John McCain becoming the President of the United States and the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces.
VoteVets.org, a group founded by Iraq War Veterans Jon Stolz and Brandon Friedman, campaigns actively against John McCain. It’s tagline is “The Voice of America’s 21st Century Patriots.” Their website includes video ads supporting Veteran candidates for public office, as well as support links for all veterans. Their organization is building grassroots support for Veterans' issues by helping returning Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans get elected to local and state offices. VoteVets has funded national ads opposing the policies of George Bush and of John McCain. Those videos are available for view at their website.
This week, a study by the Center for Responsive Politics reported that members of the military are giving more donations to Senator Obama than Senator McCain. The troops in the field are seeing first hand what the policies of the current Administration are doing to the readiness and morale of the military, and are contributing to the candidate who they believe will remedy the situation. Their support is absolutely contrary to The LegendTM, and was not a variable that was planned for by the McCain organization. When the donations of troops that are actually deployed are isolated for examination, Barack Obama attracts more donations by a 6 to 1 factor. The troops are looking out for themselves and for the future of our military, in direct contradiction to The LegendTM.
John McCain’s military service and his POW history have served him for decades as a shield against criticism and scrutiny. Until now, even taking a closer look at his Senate business and financial dealings have been considered a nearly traitorous act. Any question of his integrity or his intentions have been perceived as a direct attack against all Veterans due to the creation of The Legend of John McCainTM. We must shine the light on this false media creation that threatens the future of our American way of life.
“The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is.” – Winston Churchill
“Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters.” – Albert Einstein
Cross-posted at VetVoice
Monday, August 13, 2007
Common Sense = Crazy
There has been an attack on Senator Barack Obama based on his comments about going into Pakistan to get Osama Bin Laden if the Pakistanis would not or could not do it. What the spinmeisters have turned this into is Obama wants to invade our “ally”, Pakistan. This has caused such an uproar that President Musharraf has contemplated declaring a state of emergency in Pakistan. The Republicans and Mr. Obama’s opponents on the Democratic side have denounced his comments as “irresponsible” and “dangerous”. I have a few questions.
1. Since when is it a bad idea to go after Osama Bin Laden? Don’t we want him “Dead or Alive”?
2. Since when does invading a sovereign nation not cause instability in the region, but a few common sense comments does?
3. How is it OK to invade Iraq with false intelligence, to get Saddam who had no WMD and was no threat to us, but it is not OK to go into Pakistan to get OBL who attacked the US, and is being harbored by the Pakistani government who has nuclear weapons?
4. Why haven’t we invaded Pakistan? They are a radical Muslim country headed by a brutal, military dictator, that has nuclear weapons, and is the home country of A.G. Khan, a nuclear scientist that has sold nuclear technology to “terrorists”. They are also harboring Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Waziristan. They are mortal enemies in constant warfare with India, who is definitely our ally militarily and economically.
5. How can anyone who has screwed up foreign policy so horribly, criticize anyone who makes a statement about a possible policy? These are the people who brought you the Iraq War and the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act. How is their opinion credible in the least?
6. Why do you think Iran wants nuclear weapons? So we will not attack them. The US has never attacked a country that has nuclear weapons. North Korea, Pakistan, The Soviet Union (Russia), all safe.
I guess I am just a crazy, left wing whacko who is irresponsible and dangerous. :) Obama/Richardson 2008
1. Since when is it a bad idea to go after Osama Bin Laden? Don’t we want him “Dead or Alive”?
2. Since when does invading a sovereign nation not cause instability in the region, but a few common sense comments does?
3. How is it OK to invade Iraq with false intelligence, to get Saddam who had no WMD and was no threat to us, but it is not OK to go into Pakistan to get OBL who attacked the US, and is being harbored by the Pakistani government who has nuclear weapons?
4. Why haven’t we invaded Pakistan? They are a radical Muslim country headed by a brutal, military dictator, that has nuclear weapons, and is the home country of A.G. Khan, a nuclear scientist that has sold nuclear technology to “terrorists”. They are also harboring Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Waziristan. They are mortal enemies in constant warfare with India, who is definitely our ally militarily and economically.
5. How can anyone who has screwed up foreign policy so horribly, criticize anyone who makes a statement about a possible policy? These are the people who brought you the Iraq War and the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act. How is their opinion credible in the least?
6. Why do you think Iran wants nuclear weapons? So we will not attack them. The US has never attacked a country that has nuclear weapons. North Korea, Pakistan, The Soviet Union (Russia), all safe.
I guess I am just a crazy, left wing whacko who is irresponsible and dangerous. :) Obama/Richardson 2008
Wednesday, August 8, 2007
Fascism in 2007
For the purpose of this perspective, consider the following regimes: Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, Franco’s Spain, Salazar’s Portugal, Papadopoulos’s Greece, Pinochet’s Chile, and Suharto’s Indonesia. To be sure, they constitute a mixed bag of national identities, cultures, developmental levels, and history. But they all followed the fascist or protofascist model in obtaining, expanding, and maintaining power. Further, all these regimes have been overthrown, so a more or less complete picture of their basic characteristics and abuses is possible.
Analysis of these seven regimes reveals fourteen common threads that link them in recognizable patterns of national behavior and abuse of power. These basic characteristics are more prevalent and intense in some regimes than in others, but they all share at least some level of similarity.
1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism. From the prominent displays of flags and bunting to the ubiquitous lapel pins, the fervor to show patriotic nationalism, both on the part of the regime itself and of citizens caught up in its frenzy, was always obvious. Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia.
2. Disdain for the importance of human rights. The regimes themselves viewed human rights as of little value and a hindrance to realizing the objectives of the ruling elite. Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.
3. Identification of enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause. The most significant common thread among these regimes was the use of scapegoating as a means to divert the people’s attention from other problems, to shift blame for failures, and to channel frustration in controlled directions. The methods of choice—relentless propaganda and disinformation—were usually effective. Often the regimes would incite “spontaneous” acts against the target scapegoats, usually communists, socialists, liberals, Jews, ethnic and racial minorities, traditional national enemies, members of other religions, secularists, homosexuals, and “terrorists.” Active opponents of these regimes were inevitably labeled as terrorists and dealt with accordingly.
4. The supremacy of the military/avid militarism. Ruling elites always identified closely with the military and the industrial infrastructure that supported it. A disproportionate share of national resources was allocated to the military, even when domestic needs were acute. The military was seen as an expression of nationalism, and was used whenever possible to assert national goals, intimidate other nations, and increase the power and prestige of the ruling elite.
5. Rampant sexism. Beyond the simple fact that the political elite and the national culture were male-dominated, these regimes inevitably viewed women as second-class citizens. They were adamantly anti-abortion and also homophobic. These attitudes were usually codified in Draconian laws that enjoyed strong support by the orthodox religion of the country, thus lending the regime cover for its abuses.
6. A controlled mass media. Under some of the regimes, the mass media were under strict direct control and could be relied upon never to stray from the party line. Other regimes exercised more subtle power to ensure media orthodoxy. Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite. The result was usually success in keeping the general public unaware of the regimes’ excesses.
7. Obsession with national security. Inevitably, a national security apparatus was under direct control of the ruling elite. It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting “national security,” and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.
8. Religion and ruling elite tied together. Unlike communist regimes, the fascist and protofascist regimes were never proclaimed as godless by their opponents. In fact, most of the regimes attached themselves to the predominant religion of the country and chose to portray themselves as militant defenders of that religion. The fact that the ruling elite’s behavior was incompatible with the precepts of the religion was generally swept under the rug. Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the “godless.” A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.
9. Power of corporations protected. Although the personal life of ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure military production (in developed states), but also as an additional means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of “have-not” citizens.
10. Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Since organized labor was seen as the one power center that could challenge the political hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass, viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being poor was considered akin to a vice.
11. Disdain and suppression of intellectuals and the arts. Intellectuals and the inherent freedom of ideas and expression associated with them were anathema to these regimes. Intellectual and academic freedom were considered subversive to national security and the patriotic ideal. Universities were tightly controlled; politically unreliable faculty harassed or eliminated. Unorthodox ideas or expressions of dissent were strongly attacked, silenced, or crushed. To these regimes, art and literature should serve the national interest or they had no right to exist.
12. Obsession with crime and punishment. Most of these regimes maintained Draconian systems of criminal justice with huge prison populations. The police were often glorified and had almost unchecked power, leading to rampant abuse. “Normal” and political crime were often merged into trumped-up criminal charges and sometimes used against political opponents of the regime. Fear, and hatred, of criminals or “traitors” was often promoted among the population as an excuse for more police power.
13. Rampant cronyism and corruption. Those in business circles and close to the power elite often used their position to enrich themselves. This corruption worked both ways; the power elite would receive financial gifts and property from the economic elite, who in turn would gain the benefit of government favoritism. Members of the power elite were in a position to obtain vast wealth from other sources as well: for example, by stealing national resources. With the national security apparatus under control and the media muzzled, this corruption was largely unconstrained and not well understood by the general population.
14. Fraudulent elections. Elections in the form of plebiscites or public opinion polls were usually bogus. When actual elections with candidates were held, they would usually be perverted by the power elite to get the desired result. Common methods included maintaining control of the election machinery, intimidating and disenfranchising opposition voters, destroying or disallowing legal votes, and, as a last resort, turning to a judiciary beholden to the power elite.
Does any of this ring alarm bells? Of course not. After all, this is America, officially a democracy with the rule of law, a constitution, a free press, honest elections, and a well-informed public constantly being put on guard against evils. Historical comparisons like these are just exercises in verbal gymnastics. Maybe, maybe not.
i am back...
Well, I seem to have some time on my hands, and I am adequately annoyed so I updated the look of my blogsite and decided to post something.
My renters haven't sent the rent check yet. It was due on the 5th. If I call him, he will lie and say he sent it on the 1st. Does he think I am stupid? Here's another thing...he told my old neighbors that they would not be renewing the lease at it's expiration. All I know is that he is not getting one cent of his deposit back.
Not supposed to smoke in the house....smoked.
Not supposed to have pets...2 dogs.
Supposed to give 30 days notice prior to vacating...probably won't.
I have been nothing but nice to him and his fat ass wife (and when I say fat ass, I mean 50 lbs. from having to get a forklift to remove her from the house), and this is how I am repaid.
It is a lesson learned for me. The next tenant will be under the full-on ironclad contract that will allow me to penalize them like Lindsay Lohan in a driving contest at 3am.
On a lighter note. I recently bought a Harley. A custom V-Rod. Very fast and very fun. Too bad it has been raining everyday this summer.
Also, I have a new band. I know, I always have a new band. This one definitely has promise. More later on the band and schedule.
My renters haven't sent the rent check yet. It was due on the 5th. If I call him, he will lie and say he sent it on the 1st. Does he think I am stupid? Here's another thing...he told my old neighbors that they would not be renewing the lease at it's expiration. All I know is that he is not getting one cent of his deposit back.
Not supposed to smoke in the house....smoked.
Not supposed to have pets...2 dogs.
Supposed to give 30 days notice prior to vacating...probably won't.
I have been nothing but nice to him and his fat ass wife (and when I say fat ass, I mean 50 lbs. from having to get a forklift to remove her from the house), and this is how I am repaid.
It is a lesson learned for me. The next tenant will be under the full-on ironclad contract that will allow me to penalize them like Lindsay Lohan in a driving contest at 3am.
On a lighter note. I recently bought a Harley. A custom V-Rod. Very fast and very fun. Too bad it has been raining everyday this summer.
Also, I have a new band. I know, I always have a new band. This one definitely has promise. More later on the band and schedule.
Saturday, March 24, 2007
the end of music....apparently
Lately I have had the distinct displeasure of being exposed to noise. Noise is a nice word, meaning music that is crap. I hesitate to use the phrase "crappy music" because that would imply that what I have been listening to has resemblance to music, which it doesn't.
First and foremost, the addictive abomination that is American Idol, comes into my home twice a week and pollutes the air with sweet pop stink that eminates from my TV set. I know I don't have to watch it, but you don't have to watch a spectacular car crash either. American Idol is wrong in so many ways, I don't know where to begin. I'll start with the first that I can think of. It normalizes horrid music and makes people think that the "music" on American Idol is the standard, and that the singers are doing it well. Wrong on all accounts. Do you know how bad I would love to see Vinnie Paul Abbott from Pantera beat Sanjaya to death on live TV? American Idol also gives hope to horrible musicians that they can make music and sell it. The horrific plague of rap music has proven that anything can sell, but you definitely don't want to promote it. The last thing about American Idol that I will list is that it identifies Paula Abdul as a musician. Paula, smoking a record producers pole until he screams high C is not making music. And cut back on the Xanax bars and whisky prior to the show. Your dumbass is showing.
The other abomination that has stricken my life recently is a Disney/Billy Ray Cyrus created monstrosity called Hannah Montana. Apparently, BRC is smoking some pole and landed his daughter in a Disney TV show that features her as a singer. Well, the apple didn't fall too far from the tree in this case, because like her father before her, Hannah (Miley Cyrus is her real name) couldn't carry a tune in a bucket. Apparently, she does have a skill of planting subliminal messages in her "music" that is only noticed by 9-11 year old girls (the rocket offspring) and makes them crave all Disney products.
The last and definitely the dirtiest is Gwen Stefani. The reason I loathe her the most is because she actually used to make great music. No Doubt was a killer ska band and definitely one of my favorites. She turned to the dark side, or should I say the crap side, as soon as she married no talent, flash in the pan, Gavin Rossdale. Yeah, Bush had some decent music despite him, but I think his overall suckiness bled over to her through the womb when they conceived their children. Now, Gwen, who once kicked ass, is a horrible corporate shill squeeling out drivel for the masses.
Overall, I think the problem with music today is a lack of heroin. No one does it anymore, and no good music is being made. Layne Staley and Kurt Cobain, send your heroin addled ghosts back to earth and show Sanjaya and Hannah how to make some music that is actually listenable. Dimebag, come back from the dead and shoot Sanjaya up with a big dose of smack, and make him see Shiva and write a grunge album so filled with pain and passion that it oozes like hot blood from my radio and changes my life.
Or, just shoot him up with a hot dose and kill him. Either one will do.
First and foremost, the addictive abomination that is American Idol, comes into my home twice a week and pollutes the air with sweet pop stink that eminates from my TV set. I know I don't have to watch it, but you don't have to watch a spectacular car crash either. American Idol is wrong in so many ways, I don't know where to begin. I'll start with the first that I can think of. It normalizes horrid music and makes people think that the "music" on American Idol is the standard, and that the singers are doing it well. Wrong on all accounts. Do you know how bad I would love to see Vinnie Paul Abbott from Pantera beat Sanjaya to death on live TV? American Idol also gives hope to horrible musicians that they can make music and sell it. The horrific plague of rap music has proven that anything can sell, but you definitely don't want to promote it. The last thing about American Idol that I will list is that it identifies Paula Abdul as a musician. Paula, smoking a record producers pole until he screams high C is not making music. And cut back on the Xanax bars and whisky prior to the show. Your dumbass is showing.
The other abomination that has stricken my life recently is a Disney/Billy Ray Cyrus created monstrosity called Hannah Montana. Apparently, BRC is smoking some pole and landed his daughter in a Disney TV show that features her as a singer. Well, the apple didn't fall too far from the tree in this case, because like her father before her, Hannah (Miley Cyrus is her real name) couldn't carry a tune in a bucket. Apparently, she does have a skill of planting subliminal messages in her "music" that is only noticed by 9-11 year old girls (the rocket offspring) and makes them crave all Disney products.
The last and definitely the dirtiest is Gwen Stefani. The reason I loathe her the most is because she actually used to make great music. No Doubt was a killer ska band and definitely one of my favorites. She turned to the dark side, or should I say the crap side, as soon as she married no talent, flash in the pan, Gavin Rossdale. Yeah, Bush had some decent music despite him, but I think his overall suckiness bled over to her through the womb when they conceived their children. Now, Gwen, who once kicked ass, is a horrible corporate shill squeeling out drivel for the masses.
Overall, I think the problem with music today is a lack of heroin. No one does it anymore, and no good music is being made. Layne Staley and Kurt Cobain, send your heroin addled ghosts back to earth and show Sanjaya and Hannah how to make some music that is actually listenable. Dimebag, come back from the dead and shoot Sanjaya up with a big dose of smack, and make him see Shiva and write a grunge album so filled with pain and passion that it oozes like hot blood from my radio and changes my life.
Or, just shoot him up with a hot dose and kill him. Either one will do.
as the tangled web unravels...
As we are watching the Bush dynasty crumble piece by piece, I thought it would be nice to rub some salt in the wound. Although I am not foolish enough to think any of the big players will go to prison, at least they won't be resurrected in another 15-20 years (see Nixon Administration). Here are some fun quotes for you...
The National Government will regard it as its first and foremost duty to revive in the nation the spirit of unity and cooperation. It will preserve and defend those basic principles on which our nation has been built. It regards Christianity as the foundation of our national morality, and the family as the basis of national life.
George Bush? Jerry Falwell? Sam Brownback? nope....Adolf Hitler.
See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda.
Hitler? Goebbels? Mussolini? nope....George W. Bush
HERE ARE THREE WHOPPERS FROM THEODORE ROOSEVELT THAT THE 30% OF AMERICA THAT STILL SUPPORT PRESIDENT BUSH SHOULD READ!!!
That we are to stand by the president, right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.
It is unpatriotic not to tell the truth, whether about the president or anyone else.
Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official...
Can you tell I am fired up today? Anyway, I am going to be working 6 days a week, 12 hours a day, nights only, for the next 5 weeks. As I enter my nocturnal existence, please enjoy the sunlight for me and give me some comments for future posts.
thanks...rickrocket
The National Government will regard it as its first and foremost duty to revive in the nation the spirit of unity and cooperation. It will preserve and defend those basic principles on which our nation has been built. It regards Christianity as the foundation of our national morality, and the family as the basis of national life.
George Bush? Jerry Falwell? Sam Brownback? nope....Adolf Hitler.
See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda.
Hitler? Goebbels? Mussolini? nope....George W. Bush
HERE ARE THREE WHOPPERS FROM THEODORE ROOSEVELT THAT THE 30% OF AMERICA THAT STILL SUPPORT PRESIDENT BUSH SHOULD READ!!!
That we are to stand by the president, right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.
It is unpatriotic not to tell the truth, whether about the president or anyone else.
Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official...
Can you tell I am fired up today? Anyway, I am going to be working 6 days a week, 12 hours a day, nights only, for the next 5 weeks. As I enter my nocturnal existence, please enjoy the sunlight for me and give me some comments for future posts.
thanks...rickrocket
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
