Originally Posted by Seattleblue

... Americans like war

I have found relatively few Americans that say they like war. And of those that say they do, nearly all have never personally experienced it. Those that have the experience and still like war are insane.

Originally Posted by the bouncer

for what it's worth, your criticisms are actually worth listening to, because they're generally snark-free, show some level of intelligence -- and they don't rely on making shit up.

thank god for that.

I would second that and note that I typically do not live up to his standard. In fact, where he has gone a little snarky, it was usually my snark that tirggered it.

I'm not going to change, but it's good to be self-aware.

Originally Posted by JohnMc82

Dude, the invasion of Iraq is the tip of an iceburg of military & executive office reorganization. Obama melts away the rough edges of that tip and most of the rest falls off the radar, back to the icy unseen depths.

But don't dare call it empire, because then we'd have to end the conversation right there. Faith, faith is what we need!

Good to see you're coming around!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Originally Posted by playwrite

Do you really think the people in our intelligence community, the military and the diplomatic corps (you know, the people who do this for a living) know less about this than you do???

If you think OBL gave a rat's ass about Iraqis, children or otherwise, you obviously don't know too much about it.

It comes down to faith in our leadership and those who do know more than we do. You don't have that faith because for you ANY death is unjustifiable. That's different than with Justin, but if that is the case, it still disqualifies you for having at least any lengthy real world discussion on the manner. It’s pretty much limited to “bad, Obama, bad.”

It's about what is withheld from the American people. There was much support for the Vietnam war too. Then came the photos of the carnage and honest investigative reporting that divulged how innocent civilians were being murdered. I'll never forget this:



1972 Kim Phuc in a napalm attack in South Vietnam by Nick Ut
Nick Ut's photograph of five children running in terror from an accidental napalm attack was widely published around the world, and crystallised in people's mind's the grim injustices of the Vietnam war. The war was heavily reported on and historians believe that images, particularly this one, had a huge impact at home, resulting in violent anti-war protests, a world-wide campaign for peace, and even contributing to the end of the war.

Originally Posted by playwrite

There's a lot here and elsewhere that I can sympathize with if not actually agree.

However, here's the key difference - "before the blue team ratchet locks it in place."

The biggest, and most recognized, blunder of the Bush Administration was the invasion of Iraq. Tell me how Obama taking us out of Iraq is a "blue team ratchet" that "locks it in place" as oppose to just mitigating to the greatest extend possible the mistake that was made.

The notion that the Blue Team just rounds out the rough edges of what the Red Team did is no less living in magic pony land than believing there is no discernment between the two teams. At best, it is slightly less intellectually lazy, but it’s as slight as the hair on the flea that's on Justin’s ass.

Snark aside, I see his point, buried in the rubble but there. We have had a seesaw between break-it and fix-it. Fix-it is hard, makes people buy things they don't wan to buy, but has to be done. Since Hoover, that has, primariliy, fallen to the Dems. It sucks, but there it is. Break-it, on the other hand, is responsiblity free, and pretty much a feel good exercise. Since Woodrow Wilson, that's primariliy fallen to the GOP.

Now here's the real kicker: the Fixers have been seen as the lazy types and the Breakers as the doers. This hasn't changed to this day. If anything, that opinion is stronger now than ever.

Originally Posted by Copperfield

Well, that and the hypnotic smile of a 64 toothed used-car salesman delivering the official message. Faith by itself is of little worth without the proper figureheads to seal the deal.

Your daddy was really mean to you, wasn't he?

Originally Posted by Justin '77

WIZARDS!! LASER BEAMS!!! EVIL MOLE PEOPLE!!!

And you still think poison lemon pie is bad for you?? Silly Indy..

I hurt your feelings, didn't I. Bad, PW, bad!

I guess you see Bibi as just another benevolent kind of guy. Even looks a little bit like Putin!

Originally Posted by The Rani

I don't think you understand what we've been saying.
Voting is entirely meaningful, because it gives the victors carte blanche to do whatever the hell they want.
If more people started voting third party, then the PTB might actually work more towards suppression. As it stands now, voting serves them quite well.

Oh, I see, now, voting is cool when its for your guy.

Wow, now there's some new radical thinking! We should call someone!

Originally Posted by Justin '77

Indeed, that's the same line every government, everywhere, uses against its people. No arguments here, it works (or else it wouldn't get used so much).

It does take, however, a special kind of historical blindness not to recognize the argument for what it is, when there have been so many, many, many, many, many examples of its being exposed as a lie.

Hmm... 'historical blindness'... have we stumbled on a linking contributor to your MMT-ism, as well? Ver-r-ry interesting.

"every government"

As I said, that lazy thinking disqualifies you. And calling it "thinking" is really a stretch. More like the Pavlov dog thingee. Now go get a tissue or something and wipe that froth off.

Originally Posted by playwrite

"every government"

Find me three counterexamples.

Originally Posted by JohnMc82

Well, right now, third parties need the most support in between elections. A lot of the guys that run the LP at the state level are pretty much volunteers who have to take a lot of time off when the donations to actually do something come in once every four years.

And while a top-down strategy can actually be rather effective in changing the U.S. political landscape, no third party is going to have half a realistic chance until they are given equal time at the debates and some proportionate amount of funding. Even then, the corporate media will find ways to insert their biases, buzzwords, and talking points in to the discussion and continue to frame third parties as "non-serious" and "unworthy of consideration."

Voting is quick and dirty, it's something you do on a Tuesday afternoon. Getting a third party elected is a life cause that might disappoint in such a short time-frame as one lifespan.

Any system can be corrupted, as long as humans have not evolved sufficiently. That includes spiritually and ethically as well as intellectually.

At least voting means that the people have to be considered by the politicians when they are running for office. This makes for a lot of pandering, but it does allow meaningful change to happen on rare occasions. Some of us Boomers remember these occasions, because we know history, and are not Xers who grew up under Reagan when "government was the problem" and have no other historical knowledge beyond their own childhood experiences. Xers and Millies can blame Boomers for everything, and want us out of the way, but it is Xers who have embraced this cynicism lock, stock and barrel, as is demonstrated on this forum.

Sometimes 3rd parties can make a difference, as when the populists in 1892 had their platform adopted by the Democrats in 1896. That was a major transformation, and such changes only happened when the stars are aligned for them, as they were then. Another such change was in the 1960s, but it was mainly geographical.

Third parties don't have much chance in our elected-king system. More-modern democracies have a parliamentary system with proportional representation, and ranked-choice voting helps eliminate the fear of voting for "spoilers" (like Nader allegedly was in 2000). In these other countries the people are more represented by more parties, and their views have to be considered when forming a governing coalition. Right now people make no connection between the policies they are voting for, and the congressperson they vote for. They vote for "their guy" because (s)he shares their values or brings home the bacon. So we have a legislative branch that has no relationship whatever to the executive branch, and a government designed not to accomplish things for the nation, but to satisfy local special interests. We also have a broken Senate that has become a platform for ideological obstruction. Not to mention money-dominated elections, and districts gerrymandered by the politicians to serve whoever wins, not drawn up by citizens commissions as should be the case.

We get the government we deserve. We can't have one in which voting is worthwhile, unless we the voters insist on these changes, and vote out the politicians who refuse to make them. We have made a good start in California, so don't say it can't be done.

Originally Posted by Deb C

It's about what is withheld from the American people. There was much support for the Vietnam war too. Then came the photos of the carnage and honest investigative reporting that divulged how innocent civilians were being murdered. I'll never forget this:


1972 Kim Phuc in a napalm attack in South Vietnam by Nick Ut
Nick Ut's photograph of five children running in terror from an accidental napalm attack was widely published around the world, and crystallised in people's mind's the grim injustices of the Vietnam war. The war was heavily reported on and historians believe that images, particularly this one, had a huge impact at home, resulting in violent anti-war protests, a world-wide campaign for peace, and even contributing to the end of the war.

Okay, I might say that's hitting below the belt, but it's been 44 years for me so I can take it. And when that pic was taken, I was way way on the other side (you would look like a NeoCon in comparison). I've even manage to attend some Tet events with a heart rate under 100!

Yes, I've been fooled in the past. I was a lot younger, and so was the world. There's no way that level of bullshiting could EVER happen again. Even W was constrained by that history.

The key is watch the needle. Is it pointing up or down. I clearly see it as pointing down with Obama.

Shit, now you got me talking like KIA! Maybe that pic did have an effect. I need a drink. Bye!

Originally Posted by playwrite

I have found relatively few Americans that say they like war. And of those that say they do, nearly all have never personally experienced it. Those that have the experience and still like war are insane.

Amen to that. I would offer a drink, but I got in trouble for that last time.

Oh, what the hell - something out of the ordinary:

Originally Posted by playwrite

You can't have it both ways. Whoops forgot again, you live in magic pony land. Nevermind.

There are so many people living there now. Should they get some electoral votes?

Originally Posted by Deb C

It's about what is withheld from the American people. There was much support for the Vietnam war too. Then came the photos of the carnage and honest investigative reporting that divulged how innocent civilians were being murdered. I'll never forget this:



1972 Kim Phuc in a napalm attack in South Vietnam by Nick Ut
Nick Ut's photograph of five children running in terror from an accidental napalm attack was widely published around the world, and crystallised in people's mind's the grim injustices of the Vietnam war. The war was heavily reported on and historians believe that images, particularly this one, had a huge impact at home, resulting in violent anti-war protests, a world-wide campaign for peace, and even contributing to the end of the war.

Can I assume that you wish to avoid these in the future? Can I also assume that you know that these don't prevent themselves? Journalism is a great tool, but it can't be relied upon to do the job by itself ... especially these days. Right now, the highest loss of life by percentage in all the world's conflicts of the last 30+ years have been journalists ... not soldiers.

There are a lot of adeniline junkies in the profession, but not enough to be our eyes and ears everywhere.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

There are so many people living there now. Should they get some electoral votes?

That's actually very funny!

Eric, just think of what we could do with all of that pony manure. For starters, we could dry it and make pony chips, then use them as fuel and frisbees. It would simply be marvelous fertilizer for our organic gardens. Not to mention that magic pony poop is simply loaded with rainbows and pixie dust. I just love living in such a colorful and resourceful land.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

Can I assume that you wish to avoid these in the future? Can I also assume that you know that these don't prevent themselves? Journalism is a great tool, but it can't be relied upon to do the job by itself ... especially these days. Right now, the highest loss of life by percentage in all the world's conflicts of the last 30+ years have been journalists ... not soldiers.

There are a lot of adeniline junkies in the profession, but not enough to be our eyes and ears everywhere.

Civilian casualties are happening everyday. They are under the radar because it has become the norm not to show what our country does to others. When's the last time you've seen the devastation done to civilians in other countries in our main stream media?

Good work CREDO activists!

(quote from their email to me)

We took down Allen West and some of his best Tea Party friends.


Dear Eric,

Over a year ago, we decided to create CREDO SuperPAC in order to take down some of the most odious and extreme Tea Party Republicans in the House. People like Allen West who were just too crazy to serve in Congress and who set a new low for what is acceptable from Republicans in public life.

On Tuesday we did just that. We took down Allen West. And Joe Walsh. And Chip Cravaack. And Frank Guinta. Dan Lungren is trailing his opponent as final provisional and absentee ballots are being counted. And Michele Bachmann got the biggest scare of her political career — she retained her seat by a shockingly small margin of just over 4,000 votes.

To put in perspective just how difficult it was to pull off this feat, you need to know that 98% of incumbents win re-election. It is against those astonishing odds that we defeated five Tea Party Republicans who not only enjoyed the deep coffers of being a sitting member of Congress but who also were backed by tens of millions of dollars in rightwing super PAC ads which flooded the airwaves with negative television advertising attacking Democratic challengers.

To defend the most extreme band of Republicans in federal office in history, outside groups spent hundreds of millions of dollars, mainly on broadcast television ads. The response of the Democratic establishment and some of the biggest liberal groups in Washington DC was to fight fire with fire, launching big money ad campaigns and millions in direct mail.

We went a different way. We fought fire with water.

Instead of raising and spending millions in anonymous contributions, we built our campaign with the donations of nearly 70,000 CREDO activists and customers, giving one $20 bill at a time.

Instead of spending millions on huge ad buys in the districts, we empowered over 3,000 local volunteers to get involved and hold their extremist representatives accountable, deploying proven voter contact methods in the most cost-effective ways.

Our campaign shaped these races, and put our progressive values squarely in the local and national conversations in this election. We hired progressive organizers and opened local storefront offices that quickly became community gathering places for activists working on our campaign. We held protests in their districts, we packed their town hall meetings, we got local and national journalists to cover the Tea Party Ten's extreme statements and actions.

And then of course we knocked on over 120,000 doors. And made over a million phone calls. And had the volunteer-to-voter conversations which are the single most effective way to move voters. Thanks to this work, and in the wake of the defeat of Allen West and the other Tea Party Ten members, all Republicans are now on notice: If you continue your attacks on women, Medicare, minorities and the middle class there will be a high price to pay.

In the districts of the Tea Party Ten and Michele Bachmann, we were up against nearly $30 million in spending by conservative super PACs. We won five races but we didn't win them all. We fought valiant efforts to defeat Tea Party Republicans Mike Coffman (CO-6), Mike Fitzpatrick (PA-8), Sean Duffy (WI-7), Jim Renacci (OH-16) and Steve King (IA-4) but Republicans prevailed.

We didn't pick any of these races because they were easy; we picked them because they were hard, close, competitive contests. Many of them we chose at the end of last year, knowing a lot would change but wanting to get started building this campaign, because we know that volunteer-driven field campaigns cannot be built overnight.

We're proud of the work we've done, and so thankful to the donors, volunteers and activists who got involved and worked to make it happen. We look forward to continuing the fight together as we move forward.

We learned in 2008 that election night is not the end of our work but the beginning. And now that we've built CREDO SuperPAC we're not about to hang it up on the shelf.

Our work is just beginning. Can you make a $5 recurring contribution to support our continuing work to win progressive victories and hold extremists accountable?

Of course, there were a few other things decided on Tuesday as well.

We're pleased to see our friend Elizabeth Warren will represent Massachusetts in the Senate, and that Tammy Baldwin will become the first openly gay Senator in American history. We also cheered the defeat of some of the most appallingly anti-woman Senate candidates like Todd Akin in Missouri and Richard Mourdock in Indiana.

And of course, it's difficult to see Mitt Romney's defeat as anything other than a resounding referendum on his ideology, and a great disaster averted for our country. We will now continue to push President Obama not to deal away Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security benefits and to show at long last the real leadership we so desperately need to fight the urgent threat of climate change.

There is much to do. But Tuesday's defeat of Allen West and his Tea Party compatriots from the House was a clear victory for grassroots activism and a clear defeat for the Tea Party ideology that has gridlocked Congress and worked to move us backwards.

(unquote)

Now there is an example of making democracy work, instead of just blowing cynical noise. Something for Occupy protesters to aspire to!

Originally Posted by playwrite

Your right, there are different degrees of "out" but there is a huge difference between a full-bore active US combat zone and one with advisors. To suggest otherwise is just lazy dribble, like the rest of your statement.

Of course, which is why I explicitly stated the difference between killing and having no one left to kill. I know those differences are hard to spot when one has to run things through the filter of political dogma. Such is the price you pay for being a believer instead of a thinker.

Originally Posted by playwrite

Again, huge difference between combat and covert operations. And again easy lazy dribble rather than any real attempt at thinking or discourse.

You know, I have a colleague who took part in a few covert operations in Central America during the late 80's. As he is fond of saying about them, "You aren't allowed to talk about it, you don't get a ribbon or a commendation on your record or a reward of any kind. All you have to show for it is the scars from the bullets and burns from the fires."

But I'll be sure to pass on your sentiments to him that covert operations != combat.

Originally Posted by playwrite

And your alternative? You can't on the one hand jump up and down about our involvement and then on the other ridicule because we haven't nuked them. Oh, wait, you can, you live in magic pony land. I forgot.

Leave. It's pretty simple really.

Originally Posted by playwrite

Ah, you're using a 1-year plus old article speculating on whether the withdrawal would actually occur??? Gee, these things kind of move fast. Who knows for sure, but in a year you might not have any combat troops in-country. [IMG]file:///C:/Users/Matthew/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image001.png[/IMG]

You do know the difference between combat troops and advisors, right? I do.

Actually the age of the article was part of the point. You see, Barry followed the "withdrawal" timeline negotiated by the previous administration to the letter (Technically Dubya wanted to be out a bit sooner). Once again, to people paying attention, there is no real difference in Mid East policy between the two teams. There is simply the official imperial policy toward the region.

The squealing comes mostly from the team cheerleaders riling up the crowd and keeping them engaged with the spectacle... Which begs a question. When the coach of your squad wants you in the pyramid does he put all of you fat, old guys on the bottom or does he let you live dangerously and mix it up a bit? From the perspective of the physics involved I can only hope he chooses to go with the former... You know, for the sake of stability and all that.

Realclimate, a web site trying to present the professional perspective on climate science, decided to gloat by proxy over the triumph of Nate Silver's 538 polling methods. For discussion purposes...

Does this sound familiar? A quantitative prediction is inconvenient for some heavily invested folks. Legitimate questions about methodology morph quickly into accusations that the researchers have put their thumb on the scale and that they are simply making their awkward predictions to feather their own nest. Others loudly proclaim that the methodology could never work and imply that anyone who knows anything knows that -it’s simply common sense! Audit sites spring up to re-process the raw data and produce predictions more to the liking of their audience. People who have actually championed the methods being used, and so really should know better, indulge in some obvious wish-casting (i.e. forecasting what you would like to be true, despite the absence of any evidence to support it).

Contrarian attacks on climate science, right?

Actually no. This was assorted conservative punditry attacking Nate Silver (of the 538 blog) because his (Bayesian) projections for Tuesday’s election didn’t accord with what they wanted to hear. The leap from asking questions to cherry-picking, accusations of malfeasance and greed, audits, denial, and wish-casting was quite rapid, but it followed a very familiar pattern. People who value their personal attachments above objective knowledge seem to spend an inordinate amount of time finding reasons to dismiss the messenger when they don’t like the message.

Fortunately for Nate, all it took was one day, and reality came crashing down on his critics entire imaginary world.

For climate science, it will probably take a little longer…

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

If you want unemployment down, just spend about $1T on infrastructure projects every year for the next 4 years. Problem solved. Oh, and the economy will be roaring, with inflation starting to rise ... which it desparately needs to do in any case. By the next election, the economy will be running at $26T a year.

Wow! The economy will be running 6T higher than the 20T national debt with 20 million out there looking for jobs while 7.5% are dealing with the recent loss of their jobs.

Originally Posted by playwrite

Last Tuesday, there were 8.5 million without power. By Saturday, it was under 2 million. In a week, we were under 1 million. Incredible actually.

They're now done to individual blocks and houses. And in some areas, those houses and entire blocks are missing or condemned. Its going to take weeks if not months for some of these areas.

The people who suggest some failing by govt on this tend to be those far away from the situation and completely clueless.

IMO this is a symptom of us becoming an instant gratification society, people expect instant service even if it is not practical, and then blame service providers for not being able to do the impossible.

That is a good thing about me growing up in a rural area, we don't ever expect instant anything.

Originally Posted by '58 Flat

The "problem" with people who reside in states like North Dakota is because they don't see poverty first-hand on any significant scale, it is difficult for them to embrace a full-scale war on poverty; indeed, North Dakota is one of the very few places in the US where the "Community Chest" approach in these matters is actually adequate.

He who is warm thinks all are so.

, Uh, I grew up in a poor rural area in western Minnesota. I have seen poverty first-hand.

Originally Posted by playwrite

There has been extensive job growth in the private sector, rivaling what Bush and Reagan accomplished after their economic contractions.

The problem under Obama has been shrinkage in govt jobs like teachers, police, firemen.

You can't have it both ways. Whoops forgot again, you live in magic pony land. Nevermind.

Hey Manhattan, if you can't get your taxes raised at the federal level, you should vote to have them raised higher at the state level to provide more police, teachers and firemen. New York is a blue state. The time we had cut backs relating to education and teachers, the cutbacks were the result of a big boo-boo in the form of a major shortfall in projected enrollment and a major scandal involving a big fat liberal (my former junior high vice principle) sitting in an important desk who didn't think the $250,000 that he skimmed would be missed.

Originally Posted by Deb C

Civilian casualties are happening everyday. They are under the radar because it has become the norm not to show what our country does to others. When's the last time you've seen the devastation done to civilians in other countries in our main stream media?

Thw world has not had a period without war in several hundred years. Add to that the normal oppression that exists ... more in some places than others. The human condition isn't very good in general, but little of that is due to us, at least right now. Why? Because we are finally untying the noose, and getting ourselves out of the foreign entanglements we've been buried under for the last 10+ years.

That's not the same as saying we're engaged at no level. The hegemon will be engaged, because that is inevitable. Even if we withdrew completely, we would be drawn back in ... and far too often. Then again, we've been engaged for the entire time the Republic has existed, and much of the engagement was commercial. As Smedley Bulter noted, war is a racket. At the very least, we should avoid being the enforcement arm of <Insert the Corproate Interest of Your Choice>. When the Republicans are in, they always go for the money. No one else is in contention.

So, impurity at its essense. If you want it to be different, you'll have to live in a less dominant nation. I recommended Canada to Justin in an earlier post. I've often considered it myself.