Archive for War

Cheney Despondent

Cheney’s crying his eyes out, not for the 23 people that died in explosion that was meant for him, but because he won’t get that newest, bestest toy that he’s been wanting forever: war with Iran. Turns out those “super IED’s” (or EFP’s, explosively formed penetrators) that could only have been made in Iran, were in fact made in Iraq, from parts bought on the open market in many countries other than Iran.

Comments (2)

No Shit, Joe

Joe Lieberman wants a “war tax.” This is where my high school English teacher would have written “NS.”. Duh! Every war we’ve been in, we’ve raised taxes, and it’s controversial whether we should raise them now? We’re spending billions a day on Iraq, and the debt is up $3 trillion since Bush entered office, and it’s controversial? We have become the ultimate taxophobic society, willing to sell our children into slavery to China rather than pay another 4 or 5 percent in income taxes. The Scandinavian countries have income tax rates approaching 80% and some of the most stable and productive economies, while the U. S. has an obscenely low maximum rate of 35% and an economy that tanks at the slightest ripple.

Okay, got that venom out.

As Alon Levy pointed out, I screwed up a bit. I originally said that Scandinavian countries have income tax rates approaching 50%, rather than 80%.

Comments (2)

Top 5 Reforms Nobody’s Talking About

Well, Nanci Pelosi’s first Hundred Hours were a success, now we wait for the Senate to pass the six reform bills. Of course, the reform bills really just cleaned up some of the mess that Republicans have left in their 12 years in power, and really weren’t that radical. So, Madame Speaker (I love saying those two words together), I have a few suggestions for you. Yes, they’re liberal (in the sense that they don’t benefit big business), but really, they’re the sort of thing that you ought to be able to get all of the country behind. So, without further ado, the Top 5 Reforms Nobody’s Talking About:
Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (4)

Don’t You Want Your Country to Win?

Bill O’Reilly has been asking liberals whether they want the US to win in Iraq recently. Ignoring the question of whether or not it’s possible for us to win, my answer is a definite no. I don’t want to win in Iraq, because winning would be bad for both Iraqis and the United States.

First of all, in order for us to “win,” there has to be a government in place that is friendly to us. In other words, a dictatorship. Think about it. Every one of our Arab allies in the Middle East is a brutal dictatorship: Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, and Uzbekistan, among others. The only three Arab governments that approach democracy are Palestine, currently controlled by Hamas; Lebanon, where Hezbollah has a majority in parliament; and Iran, which Bush apparently wants to nuke.

Winning would be bad for us, as well. The fact is that we are no longer the empire we once were. When the USSR fell, and no one needed us to “protect” them anymore, we lost a lot of international power. Now, we can’t to pump out manufactured goods as quickly as China, and soon we won’t be able to compete with India in technological industries. We are losing what was left of our international power quickly.

This is very similar to what happened to France and Great Britain after the Second World War. Their empires started to crumble. England decided to slowly let go of power, and the Brits essentially resigned themselves to not being a world power anymore. France, on the other hand, clung desperately to their colonies, and got walloped in Vietnam, Algeria, and their other colonies. Yet France still has an attitude that would be more appropriate for Napoleon’s era.

Now that we are losing our empire, we have two choices: accept our fall gracefully, like Britain, or fight it every inch of the way, like France. If we bow out gracefully, we can keep some of our stature and influence. If we don’t, we will be like France—annoying and ignored. If we lose in Iraq, maybe people will wake up to the fact that we’re not an empire anymore and will stop acting like we are.

Comments (1)

Democrats Win!

You all know that Democrats won the House and, now, one of Allen’s aides says that Allen will concede tomorrow afternoon. This means that Bush is now a complete lame duck. He’s already bowed to pressure to fire Rummy.

What does this mean? I would love to say that it’s a clear mandate for the Democrats to rule how they want and that America is finally turning back toward the left, but I don’t think that’s the case. I think that America is just fed up with the war and was willing to take a chance on Democrats to kick the bastards out of office (it doesn’t hurt that the homophobic gay ministers/ephebophile Republicans/general perverts were outed just a few weeks before).

That said, Democrats do have a mandate for certain things:
1) End the war. Most of the democrats (like Tester and Webb) that could never have been elected in their conservative states won because they made the war a big issue.
2) Stop ultra-conservative judges. If, god forbid, one of the liberal Justices should die or resign, or another spot open up in the lower courts, Democrats now have the ability to stop them without an unpopular filibuster. Plus, on the most important issues like presidential power and abortion, Democrats are most definitely in the mainstream.
3) Investigate the Bush Crime Family. Something very serious was going on behind the scenes before we went to war in Iraq, and we can finally get to the bottom of it, as long as Democrats have the cojones to start a real investigation.

Leave a Comment

I Wonder If This Will Be On CNN…

Saddam Hussein was sentenced to death. Is this the October surprise Rove was gloating about? Will it work? Why am I asking you?

Leave a Comment

Killing Civilians Was an "Unfortunate" "Mistake"

Uggh. NATO has bombed civilians again, this time in Afghanistan. Buddhism anyone?

Leave a Comment