Saturday, April 19, 2014

Republican Godfather Viguerie Joins anti-Libertarian Crusade


You have to give one thing to Richard Viguerie, besides being really old in that he represents the fossilized relic of an idealized and selectively recalled bygone past era that will never again mesh with  the modern world. He also just like the rotten, neocon saturated Republican establishment that he represents does not ever quit. Viguerie joined the neocon war on libertarians with potential 2016 presidential candidate Rand Paul in their cross-hairs with one hell of a manifesto that was published at the chronicle of the inside the beltway circle jerk that is Politico Magazine. It is a doozy too. The epic screed, entitled “We’re Coming for You Boehner”  Viguerie issues the war whoop to oust the Speaker of the House who is probably one of the most dishonest servants of entrenched interests in Congress which says a lot. Boehner however doesn’t represent the “right” interests, those would be better served by the ascension of the serpentine House Majority Leader and Bibi Netanyahu lickspittle Eric Cantor.
While Viguerie’s manifesto is disguised as a shot at Boehner it is truly another salvo in the desperate struggle of warmongering entrenched power in Washington to preempt any discussion of the right and proper role of America in the coming elections. Americans are by all indications growing tired of the eternal wars of Oceania versus Eastasia that have gutted the Constitution and put the nation on a course of financial collapse and the current relentless attempt to instigate hostilities with Russia would likely be met with rejection were the state-corporate media not so relentless in their control of the information. The best way to not have to have a real debate and to return to a non-interventionist role which unlike the post WW II era of CIA/NGO regime changes is more suited for the increasingly modern globalized world. The neocons and their cultural populist army of bootblacks are hellbent at preventing a long needed reigning in of the war machine, the surveillance state and corrupt looter capitalism in favor of minding our own business, dealing fairly with other countries, restoring the Constitution and engaging in honest free trade.
They are cornered animals on the losing end of history and they know it so they are not going to go down without a fight and a dirty one at that. The Viguerie piece is excruciatingly long so I am going to excerpt some of the pieces that are best deserving of rebuttals – which will be in brackets:
The GOP has been hijacked. That’s right, hijacked. Over the past 100 years, an elite progressive minority has taken the Republican Party far afield from its conservative platform and the interests and values of its grassroots conservative base.
[It is astonishing that the word “progressive” can in any way describe the Republican party which is decidedly NOT conservative in as much that it is a corrupt fascist machine that mirrors the competing criminal gang that is the Democrats. “Grass roots” conservatives is a bumper sticker term that in no way accurately describes what the Republican party has become and is more indicative of easily hoodwinked rubes or as the great H.L. Mencken would refer to them “Boobus Americanus”. It is an angry army but guys like Viguerie are the root of the problem, pied pipers who would lead them over the edge of a cliff for a song]
For those born in the Internet age or after the advent of cable TV, it may be hard to imagine how difficult the job of marketing conservatism and conservative ideas was in 1961. To this day, the New York Times carries on its front page the motto “All the news that’s fit to print,” and in 1961, as it is today, liberals were largely in charge of deciding what was fit to print in the establishment press and what wasn’t.
 The conservative print media was small; Human Events was an eight- to 12-page newsletter, the National Review was just getting started, and YAF’s publication, the New Guard, first edited by Lee Edwards, now a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, had just a few thousand subscribers.
It was hard, if not impossible, to find the conservative point of view on television. Walter Cronkite of CBS and his establishment media colleagues at ABC and NBC would go on air at 6:30 p.m., and by 7:00 p.m. America would have been told what to think— and it wouldn’t be that communism was evil and dangerous and that lower taxes, less government and more freedom were good ideas.
[Invoking the bead and butter liberal media bogeyman and the rebooting of the anti-Communist crusade will bring about a New Cold War will ensure that trillions of dollars will continue to be looted from the American taxpayer by the war machine and if given to them by Republicans the money will roll in. Note that the Democrats, particularly Secretary of State John Kerry, Samantha Power, Susan Rice and their ilk also are jostling to paint the bad old Russian bear up like a fake devil so that they will be the ones reaping the spoils.]
Goldwater—the candidate of the New West and conservatives— had won the Republican nomination over the strong objections of the Eastern establishment Republican leaders. Once he had the nomination in hand, they did little to help him and much to hurt him, and when he went down in flames, they were quick to blame conservatives for the party’s defeat and do their best to purge Goldwater supporters from the GOP.
If things look bleak for conservatives today, trust me: Conservatives were in a darkness of biblical proportions after Goldwater’s defeat.
The long knives of the Republican establishment were out for anyone who had supported Goldwater or who questioned the “go-along, get-along” attitude of the party’s congressional leaders whose failure to stand for conservative principles had assigned Republicans to what appeared to be the status of a permanent minority on Capitol Hill.
[Actually Barry Goldwater came to loathe swine and religious fanatics like Viguerie and the others and lambasted them accordingly while warning of the danger of such lunatics ever gaining power]
Plenty of conservatives then, and throughout the early years of the rise of the modern conservative movement, thought that the only way to advance the cause of conservative governance was to form a third party.
William F. Buckley, Jr. disagreed. Buckley argued that conservatives should take over the Republican Party, while others, such as the author Ayn Rand, argued for a separate movement and a third party.
Angry as we were about the criticism verging on sabotage Senator Goldwater received from the Republican establishment, and as insulted as some conservatives were over the personal attacks they received at the hands of establishment Republicans, we had a sense that even though Goldwater had lost the election, his grassroots support demonstrated that millions of Americans thought he was right on many issues.
[Buckley is an arch-neocon and like John Kerry and the Bushes a member of the elitist Yale secret Society Skull and Bones. You just can't sell the snake oil of being an outsider when invoking Buckley as a role model - good thing that most of the GOP base doesn't bother doing their own reading and research or Viguerie would never have gotten away with his bullshit for so long]
We saw the establishment leadership of the Republican Party as intellectually bankrupt, and we believed that if we could just get the message out, we could, as the late Margaret Thatcher allegedly said, “First win the argument and then win the vote.”
[This is offensive on more than one level but particularly in the worship of a foreigner – Margaret Thatcher – the reigning queen of enforced austerity of the type that is setting off geopolitical disasters across the planet. I guess that sniffing Maggie’s knickers can be expected when dealing with the neocons whose reverence for Sir Winston transcends their worship of God himself]
I formed the Richard A. Viguerie Company, Inc. and began the journey of pioneering ideological/political direct mail on behalf of the conservative movement.My first client was Young Americans for Freedom; however, in one of the frequent upheavals typical of an organization run by a bunch of college kids, I lost the account within six weeks. But other business soon came along.  From the start, the company grew quickly, and I came to work with many of the key organizations and candidates of the New Right and the modern conservative movement, including the Conservative Caucus, the Committee for the Survival of a Free Congress, the National Conservative Political Action Committee, the National Right to Work Committee, the American Conservative Union, Sen. Jesse Helms’s National Congressional Club and Gun Owners of America. We also helped market many of the early stars of the conservative movement who sought elective office, such as congressmen Phil Crane and Bob Dornan, Ron Paul, John Ashbrook, Sens. Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond, California state senator H. L. “Bill” Richardson, and candidates Max Rafferty, Howard Phillips, Jeff Bell and G. Gordon Liddy.
[Nice slate of references including those like Gun Owners of America who whore themselves out to as lobbyists for the firearms and ammunition industry and care more about profits than the Second Amendment,  Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond (why not David Duke?) who are two of the most disgusting racists in the modern era of American politics and G. Gordon Liddy a felon and admitted admirer of Adolf Hitler]
The coalition of national defense conservatives and economic conservatives appealed to millions of voters whom the Viguerie Company reached and energized through direct mail to create what you might call a “two-legged stool.” It could, and did, win some elections, but with only two legs it wasn’t yet a stable, winning national coalition.
It was Reagan who had the insight—perhaps genius is a better term—to create his winning political movement by adding a third leg: social conservatives.Reagan didn’t originate the idea. Astute observers of national politics, such as Tom Ellis of North Carolina, had already seen the unharnessed political potential of Evangelical Christians, but the idea of organizing the Religious Right into a political committee perhaps formed first in the minds of Paul Weyrich and Rev. Jerry Falwell.
Their vision came to fruition at a meeting between Bob Billings, Ed McAteer, Howard Phillips, Weyrich and Falwell, who came together at Falwell’s office in Lynchburg, Virginia, to brainstorm what eventually became the “Moral Majority.”Led by Reverend Falwell and run by his executive assistant Ron Godwin, the Moral Majority quickly became the largest and most effective conservative organization in the country.
[Libertarians should never tolerate such intolerance as scum like Falwell and the rest of the so-called “Moral Majority”, a collection of hateful, delusional superstitious swine who worship the state as long as it can be weaponized and turned against their enemies – take a number because the line is extremely long. These are the type who want the government to dictate what Americans do in the privacy of their own bedrooms and to force their own bastardized version of Christianity down the throats of others with the backing of the full power of the state. The tyranny that would occur were this element to ever gain control of the entire government would make The Inquisition look like child’s play.
Also -
[The so-called social conservatives (translation: ignorant bigots) that Viguerie appeals to are a deranged pack of Christian Zionist religious fanatics whose idea of a good time is whiling away their time until the Middle East erupts in a nuclear conflagration so that Jesus can come back. They also more often than not put the state of Israel in front of America when it comes to loyalty because, well that is the way that God wants it to be. Religion is the ultimate enslavement of the human mind and none can be truly free until the shackles of that most primitive form of oppression can be broken free from. Not that anyone can blame the morally bereft movement conservatives from using it is a unifying force, that is after all what kings and popes, tyrants and despots, Fuhrers and presidents rely on to legitimize their power over others. It is really no different today than when the pharaoh was having thousands of poor bastards enslaved to haul rocks to build idols of his likeness. ]
In 2009 a fourth leg was added to the Reagan coalition—the limited-government constitutional conservatives of the Tea Party movement, who were unfettered by ties to the old Republican establishment and represented the forgotten men and women of America whom Angelo Codevilla identified as “the Country Class” in his essay “America’s Ruling Class—and the Perils of Revolution” in the July-August 2010 issue of the American Spectator.
[The so-called Tea Party movement is the greatest fraud since the man of hope and change and was solely a re-branding of the dregs of society that comprised the Republican base. There was a Tea Party and it existed before Obama, primarily libertarians and Ron Paul supporters but it was hijacked by the Republican party who purged it of anyone with either principles or smart enough not to be duped by the siren song of neo-confederate bigotry directed at the BLACK man in the WHITE House. Like libertarians serious and intellectual conservatives were rapidly exiled from the ranks from what became nothing more than an exoskeleton for the same corrupt GOP charlatans – including guys like Mr. Richard Viguerie]
For many on the right, these frustrations have boiled over into new calls for the formation of a third party, especially from some Tea Party movement supporters and libertarian-minded conservatives who were attracted to the presidential candidacy of Texas Rep. Ron Paul.
However, the arguments against a third party are the same now as they were when Bill Buckley and Ayn Rand first jousted over where conservatives should find their political home a half a century ago. The bottom line is that although third-party movements, such as Libertarians, have gained some recognition and added to their numbers, they haven’t actually been electing candidates to office. Limited-government constitutional conservatives running as Republicans win, but the same candidates, with the same ideas, running as Libertarians, lose.
Ron Paul admitted as much when he said no one would have paid any attention to him or his ideas if he had run as a Libertarian, and there is no doubt that his son Rand would not be a U.S. senator if he had run as a Libertarian instead of as a Republican.
But there is good news and bad news in Libertarian ideas. The good news is that, while as yet imperfectly realized, Libertarian ideas have had a powerful influence on the 21st-century conservative movement, and due in part to Libertarian influence, the Republican Party may truly become the party of less regulation, lower taxes and more personal freedom. This certainly hasn’t always been the case; consider that fewer than 40 years ago the EPA was established and wage and price controls were instituted under Republican President Richard Nixon.
[There it is - buried well into the thing is the intention, the appeals to libertarians to chuck their principles in the crapper and line up to salute the Republican brand - my God, isn't it evident by now that supporting either of these two dueling criminal syndicates that run America is the real problem?] 
The bad news is that many in the national and state Libertarian parties actually pride themselves on being destroyers, and when they lose a primary or otherwise don’t get their way, rather than selling themselves and their ideas harder, they try to “teach Republicans a lesson” by running a third-party candidate and thereby causing the Republican candidate to lose, as happened in the November 2013 Virginia governor’s race, when Ken Cuccinelli, one of the most principled limited-government constitutional conservatives ever to seek statewide office in America, was defeated because a Libertarian candidate siphoned off enough conservative votes to elect Terry McAuliffe, a radical liberal Democrat.
[Granted that McAuliffe is a scumbag but hardly a radical liberal Democrat, he is a connected con artist of the worst type and it speaks volumes losing to him. But the whining is misplaced in blaming it on the libertarians – kind of like the Democrats kicked around Ralph Nader after the 2000 Florida debacle – when their “most principled limited-government constitutional conservatives ever to seek statewide office in America” was a champion of subjecting women to the state-mandated rape of transvaginal ultrasound probes – what horseshit that one was]
This is a bad way to sell your ideas in the best of times; it is dangerous to the future of the country if a splintering of the conservative coalition returns conservatives to permanent minority status in America.Yes, Ron Paul and his delegates to the 2012 Republican Convention were treated in a ham-handed way by Reince Priebus and other establishment Republicans.Yes, it makes all of us angry when John Boehner, who was made speaker of the House through the efforts of millions of Tea Party movement voters and volunteers, refers to limited-government constitutional conservatives as “knuckle-draggers.”
[The truth sucks but it is absolute. When you troll for the low-hanging fruit don’t be surprised when it is gobbled up by “knuckle-draggers” and the inclusion of the Ron Paul delegates lumps those who actually stand for something in with the moronic shocktroops who are as unquestionably and blindly obedient as their historical counterparts in Nazi Germany]
The entire thing is a sordid magnum opus of horseshit, whining and bargaining  and revisionist history as well as an insult to libertarians who need to just go and tell lifelong establish Republicans like Richard Viguerie to go and fuck himself. Movement conservatism, like the constantly exhumed Ronald Reagan is a rotting corpse and the sooner that it is put out of its misery the better that all who value the concept of liberty will be.
Read the whole thing at Politico Magazine - that is if you can stomach it.

Friday, April 18, 2014

Democrat-Republican Warmongers Unite to Crush Antiwar Rand Paul

Perhaps the greatest hoax in the toxic sewage lagoon that is the political system of The Homeland circa 2014 is that there is no such thing as bipartisanship. Bullshit! While the ongoing con job that is staged for public consumption of the irreconcilable differences between Team Red Elephant and Team Blue Jackass is what passes for conventional wisdom in the state-corporate media and as such is eaten up by the rubes and low-information types that comprise the vast majority of the American electorate the truth is pretty clear to any who want to see. Both American political parties (any others are completely shut out of the phony democratic process) are nothing more than dueling factions of a criminal syndicate and there is ALWAYS agreement on certain issues. For example, the mass warrantless surveillance of millions of law abiding Americans, the ongoing redistribution of wealth to the top fractional one percent, the ongoing fleecing of the American taxpayer to continue to underwrite the criminal scams of the untouchable gamblers on Wall Street and the support of all wars both foreign and domestic. Oh, and there is the bipartisan effort to destroy prospective Republican presidential candidate Rand Paul that is now as the economic propaganda slogan goes "picking up steam".
With the neoconservative warmongers again ascendant, the incompetent Obama on his way out and either Hillary Rodham-Clinton or some Sheldon Adelson funded Nazi ready to take over the keys to the war machine Senator Paul's anti-interventionist stance, criticism of the NSA Stasi and other the post September 11, 2001 Constitutional wrecking machine and message which is resonating must be stopped at all costs. The neocons are the ultimate parasites and their origins as ideological worshippers of Leon Trotsky were at one time allied with the Democrats until the antiwar movement during the Vietnam era. They jumped to a new host on the rising Ronald Reagan-Bush dynasty GOP and are very close to making the round trip if the warmongering Mrs. Clinton wins the presidency in 2016. The Pauls being Rand and his father Ron - whose courageous stance against the neocons when any opposition to the Bushreich's wars of aggression was shouted down as treason made him a modern American hero - have become public enemy number one for the entrenched two-party gangsters that have seized control of both foreign and domestic policy.
Rand Paul represents exactly what the existing occupiers of the American political system fear the most which is a deviation from their ongoing game of 3 card Monte continually staged on Main Street of a star-spangled Potemkin Village and sold to the suckers as "democracy". God forbid that anyone ever emerge to create a debate on the "New Normal" of the wars and looting of those both foreign and domestic to enrich plutocrats, energy cartels, the global finance mafia and the whores who serve them.
The great libertarian writer Justin Raimondo of Antiwar.com who never hesitates to call out bullshit in high places, hypocrisy and the scoundrels who are passed off as respectable by the corrupt media in their methodical polish a turd with a red, white and blue cheesecloth calls it like it is in his latest piece entitled "The Establishment's War on Rand Paul" from which I excerpt:
The war is on – no, not that war, this war: I’m talking about the GOP establishment’s war on Kentucky Senator Rand Paul, whose presidential campaign has taken wing and soared. And it isn’t just the Karl Roves and Peter Kings of this world who are up in arms over the prospect of an anti-interventionist libertarian in the White House: they’re getting plenty of tactical support from "liberals" like David Corn.
Why do they hate him?
The Rovians hate him because he challenges the whole Fox News-neocon right-wing paradigm that has kept the GOP a dwindling minority party ever since the Bush era ended with a whimper. The progressives hate him because he is the most likely candidate – at the moment – to be facing Hillary Clinton in 2016, and they know they’ll have a hard time selling a candidate who still refuses to second guess her 2003 vote for the Iraq war. So the two groups have a common enemy – which, in politics, is enough to cement a working alliance between two supposedly antithetical forces.
Of course they aren’t really antithetical: while Establishment Republicans and Establishment Democrats duke it out every election, it’s not an ideological fight so much as a battle for the spoils. And when it comes to foreign policy, "politics stops at the water’s edge," as that old reprobate Arthur Vandenberg used to say: left and right are united for the Empire.
AND
In the context of today’s politics, the demographics are different but the principle of "divide and rule" is the same. The "Paul Democrats" and "Paul Independents" are precisely the kind of younger urban voters both Rand and his father have done such a phenomenal job attracting. These are people Democrats have tended to take for granted – and Rand is the first Republican politician since Reagan to challenge them on this terrain. Which is why Democrats like Corn, and the other partisan hacks masquerading as "journalists" – Rachel Maddow comes to mind – have it in for Sen. Paul.
As for the Rovians and their neocon Deep Thinkers, their unappeasable hate for the Senator is due to his last name – and the knowledge that this isn’t really about Rand Paul or any particular person, it’s about a movement that threatens to overtake them. Once John McCain and Peter King stop being the face of the GOP, the Establishment that manipulates the leadership of both parties is in big trouble.
The last thing the Establishment of both parties wants is a 2016 presidential race pitting an anti-interventionist anti-surveillance Republican against the stridently interventionist Hillary, who long ago declared that the Internet needs "gatekeepers." I would argue that of all the potential candidates, it’s Rand Paul who has the best chance of stopping the Clinton Restoration. Jeb Bush as the candidate would make it a clash of dynasties, with the Clintons an easy winner in that kind of contest. Marco Rubio has limited appeal, and by the time the primaries get going will be polling in the vicinity of John Bolton. Chris Christie is over. David Petraeus, once a neocon favorite, is in disgrace: you only get to have that kind of fun after you’re safely elected. So who’s left?
Yes, the increasingly odious Ms. Maddow over at MSNBC the Obama apologist network. While I always have viewed Rachel Maddow with a somewhat jaundiced eye, particularly since she like Minnesota Senator Al Franken emerged not only unscathed from the wreckage of liberal radio network Air America. While serious critics of US policy and the entire corrupt system like Mike Malloy and Randi Rhodes were exiled Maddow and Franken saw their fortunes improve dramatically when the network collapsed. Their prominent positions today would seem to indicate at best a tendency to sell out a cause, go establishment or cash in or in layman's term become RATS.
I have followed the work of Maddow for a good while now and while talented, the pride of MSNBC is nothing more than a shill for the corrupt ruling political class. Her show is regularly devoted to nothing more than the promulgating of DNC talking points, playing the identity politics card (she is openly gay) to demonize the Republican party - largely through her cherry picking of the most racist, white-supremacist, ignorant religiously obsessed morons - to shill for corporate sellout Democrats. What a sad demise for a woman who actually has talent but now as is apparent zero principles beyond whoring herself out for her defense contractor employer and the Democratic party. Hell, she actually makes Roger Ailes look honorable in a perverse sort of way, after reading what has been pretty much called a hit-piece "The Loudest Voice in the Room" I can say that the man at least has some sort of values system - as largely repugnant as it often is which is something that Ms. Maddow and the rest of the war party winged monkeys that are now being scrambled for an attack on Rand Paul are lacking.

Thursday, April 17, 2014

East Ukraine Jew Registration Tale Reeks of CIA Psyop


In a rapidly spreading sensationalist story about the evils of the pro-Russian (translation: anti-austerity) opposition in East Ukraine a particularly lurid piece of vile propaganda has been launched into the US state-corporate media echo chamber. There has been an amazing discovery of leaflets distributed in Donetsk requiring all Jews over the age of 16 to register with the authorities, the culprit behind this obvious false flag operation is the vaunted bastion of dumbed down American journalism USA Today - which is written at about a seventh grade reading level.  For those who have a functional memory this is an exact duplicate of that 2006 hoax that there was a new law in Iran requiring Jews to wear a yellow badge in Iran, a massive neocon promulgated lie that was nearly immediately retracted. As propaganda both rank right up there with the infamous fairy tale of Saddam Hussein's soldiers yanking babies out of Kuwaiti incubators as agitprop to induce a war frenzy in the US where nothing much changes except the designated devil, then it was Ahmadinejad and now it's Putin. While the media pounced on this like a pack of starved dogs thrown a chunk of maggoty rotting meat the tale was immediately met with skepticism within the alternative media which unlike the bought and paid for Washington presstitutes have a sense of duty as well as functional bullshit detectors.
Unfortunately the bullshit detector of one Secretary of State John Forbes Kerry, Skull and Bones alumni and constant source of American foreign policy embarrassment either doesn't work or he is in on the con, my guess is the latter. In another of his pathological rushes to judgement Kerry condemned the leaflets demanding the bogus Jew registration program as "not just intolerable, it's grotesque, is beyond acceptable" which is a statement that perfectly nails Kerry's job performance as the most abysmal excuse for a Secretary of State in US history. The tale is so ludicrous and conveniently timed that even the neocon central transmission center at The Washington Post put up a story that is chock full of caveats and qualifiers including that the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) is "skeptical about the flyer's authenticity" although it wasn't questionable enough to prevent Kerry's latest outbreak of chronic diarrhea of the mouth. Kerry like the on staff WaPo neocons continue to push their lies, like that mysterious sarin gas attack in a Damascus suburb that nearly started another war last summer.
Interesting in that CIA Director John Brennan paid a visit to Kiev over the weekend and "The Agency" is no stranger to planting false stories and disseminating propaganda but it is going to take one hell of a lot more than some phony anti-Semitic leaflets a few days before Passover to sell the illicit US installed regime in Ukraine. It's a damned good thing for the Obama regime and his neocon infested foreign policy team that Americans have been fed such a constant diet of lies about Ukraine that they have zero idea that their tax dollars are funding REAL anti-Semites and neo-Nazis or this latest "ham-handed" attempt to generate outrage could put a ding in the ongoing war effort. Obama is once again getting his face rubbed into a pile of shit thanks to his own ineptitude and his choice of people to run his loathsome administration, a failure of historic proportions that will doom this country in the long run far worse than anything that Bush and Cheney did. 
The malodorous lineup of hacks, political cronies, incompetents and recycled and retained Bush-Cheney neocons that Barry has fielded over the last five plus years has been dismal beyond comprehension but Kerry has to be the cherry on top of the entire shit cake. He is the proverbial gift that keeps on giving and nobody short of the insane warmonger John Bolton (and maybe Donald Trump) would have been a worst choice as the nation's top diplomat. In great story written by Robert Parry over at Consortium News entitled "What's the Matter With John Kerry?" he knocks it out of the park. I excerpt the following:
So, when John Kerry replaced Hillary Clinton on Feb. 1, 2013, the State Department was in need of a responsible adult who would rein in the department’s penchant for stirring up trouble and then looking on helplessly as the chaos spun out of control.
But which Kerry would show up? The young Kerry who recognized how belligerent talk and playing with facts could end up getting lots of innocent people killed or the older Kerry who had trimmed his sails and learned to go with the prevailing winds, regardless of the dangers to the world?
There are times at the end of a politician’s career when the person reverts back to an earlier, more idealistic self, though more often a deeply compromised politician just continues doing what’s been learned over the decades of political survival.
It’s now clear that John Kerry fell into the latter approach. He did undertake a quixotic pursuit of an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal, perhaps hoping that success in such an impossible undertaking would be the “crown jewel” of his career, compensating for his 2004 defeat.
But Kerry also let himself be turned into a hand puppet for the neocons and R2Pers who had gained bureaucratic control of State and were set on escalating confrontations with Syria and Iran by essentially following the “regime change” blueprint designed by Vice President Dick Cheney and the neocons in the Bush-43 administration.
Influential neocons and R2Pers took command of key positions in 2013, as Kerry moved from Capitol Hill to Foggy Bottom and Obama entered his second term. Neocon Victoria Nuland was promoted from State Department spokesperson to Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs. Susan Rice became National Security Adviser, and Samantha Power took over as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations.
AND
Again, someone like the young Kerry might have spoken up about the danger from unintended consequences when arrogant U.S. officials interfere in the internal affairs of another country. The young Kerry might have pondered how the Nuland-Gershman strategy of destabilizing Ukraine actually helps either the Ukrainians or the American people.
So far, the scheme holds the possibility of civil war in Ukraine, disastrous economic trouble for Europe (with fallout for the U.S. economy, too) and another splurge of U.S. military spending as bellicose politicians cut back even more on domestic priorities.
The younger Kerry might have been wise enough to cool the rhetoric and redirect the narrative into a realistic discussion that could resolve the crisis. For instance, it wouldn’t have been very hard to insist that the Feb. 21 agreement be enforced – with Yanukovych possibly serving in a ceremonial capacity until new elections could select a new president, rather than the U.S. and the EU immediately embracing a neo-Nazi-led coup.
But the older Kerry is behaving much like the older generation of Cold Warriors did in the 1960s when they insisted that there was no choice other than a U.S. military intervention in Vietnam, that the lives of tens of thousands of young American men and millions of Vietnamese was a small price to pay to stop some imaginary dominoes from toppling. South Vietnam had to be kept in the “free world.”
Yet, rather than the dovish warrior of his youth, Kerry has become a hawkish diplomat in his old age, refusing to see the other side’s case and eager to take extreme positions that are sure to get more young people killed. John Kerry in his 20s was a much wiser man than John Kerry at age 70.
Note that the author’s reference to R2P is described as  “responsibility to protect” or “R2P” – the entire story along with all of Parry’s great work – he is a dedicated investigative journalist of the type that was run out of the establishment in droves and the voluminous archives at Consortium News are an invaluable resource for those seeking to understand what has gone rotten in this country as written by a consummate professional who takes his First Amendment duty to call out corrupt and entrenched power seriously.
The Jew-baiting pamphlet hoax litmus test will be what appears in Friday’s papers, will the neocons as they usually do in their intellectual and moral corruption and insane dogma of world domination, Muslim and Russia hating and warmongering double down? Every day that the Washington Post and to a larger degree the entire US media continues to hammer this horseshit is another day of a very slow leak of those who believe it and one day the tipping point will arrive when it will all collapse under the accumulated weight of its own bullshit. 

Neocon Washington Post Gives Rand Paul a Forum


Outside of Fox News there has been no bigger cheerleader for the ongoing series of American wars of aggression that only serve to alienate, bankrupt and poison the national soul than at The Washington Post. Do not be fooled by the Pulitzer Prize for journalist Barton Gellman's reporting on the documents procured by former government contractor turned NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, the WaPo is a teeming snakepit of neoconservative propaganda. Which is why it was a bit surprising to see an editorial written by Kentucky Senator Rand Paul shoehorned in between the rants, screeds, polemics and jeremiads by the likes of war wench Jennifer Rubin, Charles "Dr.Strangelove" KraĆ¼thammer, Republican party hacks George Will and Marc Thiessen and an all star lineup of guests brought in to make the case for the latest war, this one a confrontation in Ukraine that is a thinly veiled proxy war with the Russian bear.
Given the trashing that Senator Paul has taken, particularly by Ms. Rubin whose prolific churning out of nasty hit pieces about the son of Ron's stance towards a less domineering foreign policy that is in direct opposition to the neocon doctrine as put forth by the Project For the New American Century has been as vicious as it is dishonest. So the Post has now given Paul an opportunity to defend himself which he did although in a more wishy-washy way that would be needed to rebut the resurgent cancer of neoconservative ideology that now rages through the government and the political class like a cancer. In the piece originally published Wednesday with the title "Foreign policy is no place for 'red lines" but on Thursday changed to "Where I Stand on Containing Iran" Paul writes:
I am not for containment in Iran. Let me repeat that, since no one seems to be listening closely: I am unequivocally not for containing Iran.
I am also not for announcing that the United States should never contain Iran. That was the choice I was given a few months ago and is the scenario being misunderstood by some in the news.
To be against a “we will never contain Iran” resolution is not the same as being for containment of a nuclear Iran. Rather, it means that foreign policy is complicated and doesn’t fit neatly within a bumper sticker, headline or tweet.
Those who reduce it to such do a disservice to their reporting and, potentially, to the security of our nation.
To some people this may seem to be a nuance, but it is, in fact, an incredibly important detail in the consideration of war.
Nuance has been a bit lacking in our foreign policy of late. Whether through preemptive war or “red lines” that were crossed without consequence, the extremes of foreign policy have had their way, and it has not worked.
Ronald Reagan was once criticized for not announcing in advance his policy toward particular situations. He was accused of not having a concrete foreign policy. His response was that he simply chose not to announce his policies in advance.
If he had been bluffing the Soviets with his Strategic Defense Initiative, or using it as leverage in negotiations, it would have been counterproductive to announce that in advance.
In fact, Reagan often practiced strategic ambiguity. He thought, as many other presidents have, that we should not announce to our enemies what we might do in every conceivable hypothetical situation.
It is a dumb idea to announce to Iran that you would accept and contain that country if it were to become a nuclear power. But it is equally dumb, dangerous and foolhardy to announce in advance how we would react to any nation that obtains nuclear weapons.
If, after World War II, we had preemptively announced that containment of nuclear powers would never be considered, the United States would have trapped itself into nuclear confrontations with Russia, China, Pakistan, India and North Korea.
I believe all options should be on the table to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons, including the military option. I have voted repeatedly for sanctions against Iran and will continue to do so. But I will also continue to argue that war is a last resort and that, as Reagan wrote, we should be reluctant to go to war but resolved to do so if necessary.
Should war become necessary, the American people through their representatives must debate and deliberate the pros and cons of action and not be trapped into a predetermined response based on a resolution passed without debate or discussion.
The Constitution reserved the power to declare war to Congress, and when contemplating war, words are critical.
Containment of Iran is a bad idea, but our leaders need to think before they speak and consider that preemptively announcing responses to every hypothetical situation may well damage our ability to keep the United States safe and strong.
I have often said that we have, for too long, had a debate between the extremes of foreign policy — and that to be on either end of the extremes can have life-or-death consequences.
False choices between being everywhere all of the time and nowhere any of the time are fodder for debate on Sunday morning shows or newspaper columns. Real foreign policy is made in the middle; with nuance; in the gray area of diplomacy, engagement and reluctantly, if necessary, military action.
National defense is the No. 1 job of our government, and I believe in a strong nation, at peace with the world.
I believe peace through strength should be our goal at all times.
Hardly the full-throated rebuttal of the warfare state that is needed and on Iran - a war that the neocons and the right wing government of Israeli leader Bibi Netanyahu have been trying to suck America into for well over a decade - it is brings to mind an overcooked piece of linguine but at least it is something and you don't get placement at WaPo for such things as calling out war criminal Dick Cheney for war profiteering as Paul did his reference to the former VP's obvious conflict of interest in working for Haliburton and then dialing up the Iraq war on false pretenses once in office. The only way that you deal with bullies, liars and chickenhawks like the neocons is to stop mincing words and dancing around and to for their jugular. Their weakness is the ideology and it needs to be boiled down into one or two of those bite sized bumper sticker slogans that Americans best understand.
The piece wasn't without very strong points, particularly this:
To be against a “we will never contain Iran” resolution is not the same as being for containment of a nuclear Iran. Rather, it means that foreign policy is complicated and doesn’t fit neatly within a bumper sticker, headline or tweet.
Those who reduce it to such do a disservice to their reporting and, potentially, to the security of our nation.
To some people this may seem to be a nuance, but it is, in fact, an incredibly important detail in the consideration of war.
Nuance has been a bit lacking in our foreign policy of late. Whether through preemptive war or “red lines” that were crossed without consequence, the extremes of foreign policy have had their way, and it has not worked.
Hey Jennifer - zing, bang, pow... to the moon bitch.
The column will likely only further inflame the usual suspects and the Washington Post will erupt with anti-Paul smears anew in the coming days, led of course by the dog-faced Rubin. The William Kristol (the Joseph Goebbels of our time) propaganda machine will go into overdrive and casino mega-billionaire Sheldon Adelson will open the floodgates of his dirty money to defeat - if not destroy Senator Paul as well as any other impediments to the nuking of Iran along with the global conquest that is the wet dream of every neocon.
But at least they published it.

Wednesday, April 16, 2014

Biden Shamelessly Exploits Boston Marathon Bombing Tribute


Tuesday, on the one year anniversary of the Boston Marathon bombing allegedly to be the work of two lone wolf Muslim “terrorists”, both of whom managed to slip through the NSA’s “collect it all” net of total national surveillance was either commemorated or celebrated, probably a combination of both across the fruited plain of The Homeland. The incident, a heinous criminal act consisting of the planting of two shrapnel filled pressure cooker bombs at the finish line permanently altered forever the livesof hundreds of innocent people, a good number of who lost limbs was allegedly perpetrated by two young Muslim men the Tsarnaev brothers, Dzhokhar and Tamerlan. The older brother,Tamerlan who had a mysterious background that seems to have included trips abroad and possible involvement in acts of violence domestically was killed in a shootout. The younger Dzokhar was the target of what was the rollout of a state of martial law and went on to gain national infamy when a flattering picture of him adorned the cover of Rolling Stone magazine – not to bother with the hypocrisy that a similar picture was published in the establishment New York Times and other papers without similar ginned up outrage.
Vice President Joe Biden, still a potential 2016 Democratic party presidential contender until the unstoppable juggernaut that is Hillary Clinton formally announces that she is running (if she is) showed up in Beantown on Tuesday to like the state-corporate media milk the anniversary of the tragedy for all that it was worth. In a soaring and often inspirational speech at the tribute Biden mixed platitudes and Tony Robbins style motivational with the standard demagoguery of the post September 11, 2001 permanent warfare state. The media prepped the masses with the constant reminder that the 3 actual deaths and 264 injured was the WORST TERRORIST ATTACK ON AMERICAN SOIL SINCE 9/11 and the Vice President seized upon that to hammer home his message of hope and American exceptionalism all nice and tightly bound up and then dipped in a coating of pure bullshit to keep it together.
The city of Boston, unified in grief, outrage and I would imagine a good deal of shame after their neighborhoods were swarmed by legions of black clad paramilitary police forces conducting house to house searches at gun point in what for all intents and purposes looked like martial law. The nifty bumper sticker slogan “Boston Strong” was rolled out in the aftermath of the bombing and it was seized upon by locals, the national baseball league Red Sox who used it as a motivator for their World Series run and most of ally by self-serving authoritarian types to push for their police state as well as to use for cheap politics.
Vice President Joseph Biden was one of them. According to a Reuters story Biden thundered:
"We refuse to bend, refuse to change, refuse to yield to fear"... "that is what makes us so proud of this city and this state, what makes me be so proud to be an American. It's that we have never, ever yielded to fear. Never"
While it wasn't exactly George W. Bush standing on the smoldering debris of the World Trade Center the point was made that under the existing poisoned and compromised political class that The Homeland that was birthed on 'the day that everything changed' is here to stay. Biden though is full of crap because FEAR is exactly what Americans yielded to after that pristine Tuesday morning back in 2001  turned into a horror show.  Biden is a liar though because yielding to fear is exactly what Americans did after that day. 
FEAR allowed for the rollback of civil liberties
FEAR provided the basis for an illegal invasion of Iraq, a country that did not threaten America
FEAR unleashed the fully militarized police state on America, as seen in action in Beantown last year two days after the bombing as thousands of black clad paramilitary types ransacked neighborhoods to hunt down one punk. 
FEAR provided the excuse for the NSA and it's private and foreign collaborators to usurp the Constitution and to conduct massive data-mining and warrantless surveillance on millions of law abiding citizens.
FEAR allowed for the redirection of trillions of taxpayer dollars into a monstrous surveillance machine, a Top Secret America that became a Surveillance State Gomorrah and continues to grow daily. 
FEAR allowed the Bush administration to turn the USA into a torture state and Obama is still covering up conduct that was so over the line that it rivaled that of Nazi war criminals hanged at Nuremberg. 
I could continue but I don't have the time...
 Biden also paid tribute to the arrogant form of American imperialism that currently has the world on the brink of a war to end all wars thanks to the hubris, moral rot and bloodlust that permeates from the administration which he is a member of.  The applause line that "We are America, we own the finish line" is ironically appropriate in more ways than one, the real finish line is coming as the Empire is on a collision course with nuclear power Russia as well as economic power that is China, both of whom our neocon infested policy establishment is hellbent at confronting.
The reference to the "finish line" is also fitting for Boston in that after the triumphant World Series win of the Red Sox who rode "Boston Strong" like a gravy train there was a pilgrimage of revelers who actually showed up at that exact same finish line to kiss the street - they had better get used to doing exactly that if and when the martial law drill conducted last year goes live.
FEAR has a twin brother named SHAME and Americans should be ashamed of ourselves for allowing charlatans the likes of Biden and his ilk to have exploited the former without any semblance of the latter.