Pundit Pap
for Sunday, June 30
Dump Yassir! Stop the corporate evildoers! God told me to!
by The Pundit Pap Team
June 30, 2002 -- New York/Washington (APJP, updated July 1, 12 PM) -- The pundit shows followed Bunnypants Bush's lead this week on four fronts.
Top issue: the appointed, unelected Doofus-in-Chief attempting to pressure Palestinians into dumping Yassir Arafat. The guy they elected by a huge landslide. Okay, Arafat is admittedly a sleazebag and terror maven, but the fact that a guy who couldn't even get a majority of the popular vote and had to get daddy's pals on the Supine Court to make him "president' isn't going unnoticed. We have to agree with the pundits and comedians who think Arafat should agree -- once there's a complete recount of the Florida presidential ballots from 2000.
Second issue: Kenny-Boy's buddy at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue calling on corporate America to clean up their act -- this from a guy who tanked at least three companies himself!
Third issue: the former Texas governor promoting the erosion of the exclusion clause after a Nixon-appointed judge on the Ninth Circuit wrote a majority ruling finding the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional because of the words "under God". Guess the Shrub has a bone to pick with the Founding Fathers, who knew how insane the overly religious can be.
There was also some discussion of this week's Supremos ruling clearing the way for your tax dollars to subsidize extremist religious schools -- at the expense of our public schools. Can you say "American madrassas"?
Here's what we caught:
ABC This Weak
Once again, we were "treated" to a preview of what This Weak is going to be like with George Stephanopoulos as host. You guessed it -- the same weak, wishy-washy, conservative-slanted show that Sam "The Hairpiece" Donaldson and Cokie "Schoolmarm" Roberts (who was thankfully away this weekend) drove into the ground. It only makes us miss Howard K. Smith and the journalists ABC used to have back in the days when the program was called Issues and Answers all the more.
Guest one: SEC chairman Harvey Pitt. Sam played some choice footage of Al Gore slamming Pitt for trying to open accounting loopholes. Like a typical politician, Pitt LIED, calling himself a loophole "closer" (we can only guess he was thinking about a different set of loopholes -- say, padding his SEC expense account). Pitt acted as if he were God's gift to enforcement for "his" SEC having gone into action hours after WorldCom admitted they were cooking the books (well, gosh, given what happened with the SEC's mishandling of Enron, Arthur Andersen, Global Crossing and a pile of other fishy corporate failures, it's about time they learned to lift a finger). There was plenty of tough talk from Pitt on those evil insider traders and actual indictments for criminal fraud (which have yet to materialize in anything approaching substantial form). Pitt said he'd have the courts see to it the fraud-meisters are stripped of money, assets, everything (again, why wasn't this the case before, Pitt?).
Sam turned the tables on Pitt, citing another SEC official saying that there was no surprise that WorldCom was issuing bogus earnings statements. Pitt just blurted out more tough blather.
Sam then did the unthinkable -- asking Pitt about Halliburton and whether or not Cheney would be indicted if he is shown to have engaged in wrongdoing. Pitt said nobody is immune (sorry, Harv, we don't buy it and we doubt you will move against W's boss -- this one calls for a special prosecutor).
Sam confronted Pitt about the composition of investigative boards and Sen. Paul Sarbanes' call for auditors to be investigators instead of corporate toadies. Pitt sounded as if he is resisting the good advice and sensible calls for reform of the SEC -- and then tried to write off criticism as politically motivated, saying he's not elected but appointed and would get to the bottom of the problem.
We don't trust Harvey Pitt as far as we can throw him. He sounded phonier than Smirk trying to pass himself off as a serious student of history.
Sam then turned to Dick Grasso at the New York Stock Exchange, who deflected Sam's questions about a "crisis of confidence" in securities markets and lauded Pitt's tough talk (you guessed it -- these two are peas in a pod). Sam asked if capitalism is on trial (that ought to have riled wingnut viewers), but that was merely Grasso's cue to praise the capitalist system while denouncing "just one WorldCom or one Enron [as] too many" (too late to put the genie back in the bottle, Grasso) Sam asked about crooked analysts, and Grasso said he wants them to be honest (but offered no solution to the problem). What happens when execs and analysts start taking the fifth? Grasso again gave an obvious, get-tough answer: they should tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Sam asked Grasso about Martha Stewart's travails -- and Grasso said she is innocent until proven guilty.
A shame that they did not talk a little more about Ms. Stewart and the amazingly nasty press she's gotten this week -- one reason being a surprising number of enemies Ms. Stewart, notorious in some circles for her nasty personality, has managed to cultivate in the media and business world. For many of these people, this is personal and a chance for public comeuppance -- and, we would add, unfair to Stewart, who may well have been duped by her circle of "friends".
After a break, George Stephanopoulos interviewed Colin Powell -- who made it clear that there'd be no settlement of the Mideast mess as long as Arafat is in power.
Translation: the number one message of the Smirk Junta is that Arafat is now an un-person. The rest of the interview followed the lead of that massage which George had rather clearly cued Powell to give right off the bat.
Powell said that he personally had been patient with Arafat, and Bush had even used the term "Palestine" (well, whoop-dee-doo, Colin, it doesn't impress Palestinians all that much, especially given that most of them feel that the Appointed Smirk is trying to depose a freely elected leader, even if said man has been a terror-mongering pus-bucket).
Powell blasted the encouragement of terror within the Palestinian community, in essence laying the full blame on Arafat (this despite evidence that some of the terror organizations are loose cannons out of Arafat's control). Powell said Arafat has not used his moral authority to call for an end to terrorism (which is not completely true in that Arafat has denounced many terror attacks -- and given the cultural issues Arafat confronts it would be tough for him to call for an end to terrorism without ceding more of his waning power). Powell did a little weasel wording, claiming that the G8 leaders "understand" our position on Arafat -- and George pointed out that Egyptian President Mubarak opposes Bush's push to dump Arafat.
George asked Powell to name one Palestinian leader who is NOT tainted by terror (as if you can't say the same about the present leadership of Israel) -- and Powell tried to sidestep the question, instead blasting Palestinians for not backing pro-peace leaders (and ignoring the desperate poverty that has driven Palestinian extremists to violence). Powell also said that he does not see an immediate chance of meeting with Arafat (a possible concession?) -- and is seeking leaders who back a peaceful solution to the problem. Powell denied that he has talked to Sharon about expelling Arafat, but did admit that he backs a pledge not to harm Arafat (can you say exile?). Powell then slammed Palestinian bombers, but did have to admit that Israel is being unrealistic if they expect Palestinians to live in their present situation, under de facto house arrest with Israeli tanks in their streets.
There was a little talk about the "war on terror", and Powell said he does not discount reports of an alliance between Hezbollah and Al Qaeda.
Following the break -- oh, joy -- it was round table time. Should Arafat go? ABC correspondent Michelle Martin said it's Smirk's right to ignore Arafat -- but it invited defiance by the Palestinians. Jacob Weisberg, editor of Slate, said that calls to oust an elected leader may be counterproductive -- but Arafat is about as likely to give up terrorism as Tiger Woods is to give up golf (our pick for pundit line of the week)! We ignored George Will's rant (hint: it was knee-jerk and pro-Smirk). Sam said that the new anti-Arafat stance by Smirk shows that pro-diplomacy Powell has lost out; Michelle said that there are real questions about whether this will work, and there is a need for more than just "democracies-in-name" in the region. There was more blather from Will. Sam asked Weisberg whether America should push its weight around and force democracy on Palestine; Weisberg does not think it would necessarily end trouble in the region.
Talk turned to corporate corruption. Will sounded absurd as he claimed that "irrational exuberance" was to blame and tried to "defuse" the issue of obscenely high salaries (okay -- to his credit, he didn't blame Clinton as some idiots did this week). Sam brought up the real issue: outright fraud. Weisberg said that the greed took flight and generated crooked moves at the end of the recent boom; business leaders must restore confidence in the market. Sam brought up the idea of having CEOs swear to the accuracy of their statements under penalty of prosecution; Michelle said there are real opportunities for moderate Republicans in Congress, including one former CEO: Amo Houghton.
Talk turned to the split decision by the Supreme Court to finance American madrassas -- er, excuse us, private schools -- with your taxpayer money. Will, naturally, lauded the decision; Weisberg said that vouchers are worth experimenting with, but they do not create real choice; Martin said that there must be other options including magnet schools, and over a million children are home-schooled. Will insisted -- wrongly -- that the middle class already has school choice; Weisberg said most middle-class families can't afford private schools, vouchers are unproved, and perhaps New York Mayor Bloomberg has the right idea: system-wide reform with accountability. Martin also blasted Will's statement that middle-class families have real school choice. Weisberg said that real choice in the 'burbs would entail bussing -- and that would inflame Republicans.
And, of course, we ignored Will's anti-Ninth-Circuit rant at the end of the show.
-- JJ Balzer
McLaugh-In
America's favorite political group therapy session was a bit more sedate than usual this week, and once again our favorite rantin', ravin' pundit John "McLaugh-In" McLaughlin dithered between sounding sensibly lucid and thunderously insane. Nevertheless, it was eminently watchable and even shocking as arch-reactionary Pat "Puke Cannon" Buchanan sounded refreshingly sane -- even close to moderate at some points!
Issue one: carnage on Wall Street! John gave an ominous assessment of the stock market, citing the movement of investor funds into money market accounts, savings bond purchases, "investors...in a panic!", tax-cheat CEOs and CFOs, and a litany of corporate wrongdoers ending with WorldCom. John characterized Shrubbie's new attitude on corporate fraud as tough (snicker).
John dared ask why W. was not outraged about Enron. Pat got it right about Smirk's hand-wringing over WorldCom: "Because 'Kenny-Boy [Lay] wasn't involved!" (Go, Pat!) He predicted Smirky's words would have no effect. Eleanor Clift responded to John's mention that a smirk relative lost money in Enron by saying that Smirk is not doing enough to boost the economy -- and even all of his "experienced" people are no help. Are the scandals currently racking the country hitting Tony's portfolio? Tony said he's concerned about insanely high price-to-earnings ratios; Larry O'Donnell said that the Doofus-in-Chief still gets good approval ratings -- but the big problem is the potential collapse of pension funds. Pat said that NASDAQ is down about 70% from his peak. John said that GDP is up 6.1% in the first quarter of 2002. Eleanor said that the Democrats are salivating about tying the corporate scandals to the GOP. John asked which will work: reform or jail time? Larry said both -- send the crooks to jail.
Will the Dow go below 8000?
Pat: If so, the GOP is in trouble.
Eleanor: It will probably fall short.
Tony: Probably not.
Larry: If there's a collapse of, say, Xerox or another big company, yes -- but probably not.
John: Yes, a meager and short-lived dip.
Issue two: Smirko's Mideast gamble! John pointed out that the G8 stopped short of endorsing the ouster of Arafat -- especially Jacques Chirac, who sounds uncomfortable with the idea (to say the least). John reirterated the announcement of Palestinian elections -- and the likelihood that Arafat will run.
Grade the boldness of the initiative!
Pat: F -- Yassir could've been a Sadat or Rabin, and it was foolish to call for Arafat's ouster; Palestinians OUGHT to defy Smirk ordering them what to do.
(Whoa! "Foolish"! Pat really DOES think the Texas Dauphin is an idiot! We bet Karl Rove and Ari Fleischer will be burning Pat in effigy today!)
Eleanor: F -- you can't be for both democracy and a predetermined outcome. (Got that, Scalia?)
Tony: A- for boldness, but let's see whether anyone listens to him.
Larry: A for boldness, Smirk has joined the Likud, but an F for effectiveness.
John: Smirk has pushed Sharon into support for a Palestinian state! A if not A+!
Issue three: the Pledge of Allegiance! John recounted the Ninth Circuit's decision declaring the Pledge unconstitutional for the inclusion of the words "under God". John played video clips of Senators from both parties and the Chimp-in-Charge commenting negatively and often angrily on the ruling (most notably ex-Klansman Robert Byrd). Larry had the best comment -- the nation is getting all hopped up about a poem written a hundred years ago by a socialist -- and called it a loyalty oath! Even Pat Buchanan had to admit that reciting the Pledge is voluntary. There was a characteristic moment as the group talked over each other followed by shouting, at which point Tony claimed that the words "under God" are a unifying element in a "time of war". John sounded as if he were in favor of the Ninth Circuit ruling!
Will the ruling be overturned?
Pat: the Ninth Circuit will overturn it themselves.
Eleanor: Ditto.
Tony: The Ninth Circuit will overturn it en banc. He called the circuit "left-leaning".
Larry: The dissenting commentary said the wording was harmless.
John: Too close to call!
Final prediction: will Congress pass pharmaceutical aid for the elderly?
Pat: No.
Eleanor: No -- the House bill was a subsidy for the insurance industry!
Tony: No.
Larry: No.
John: YES!!!!
-- Dave "Doctor" Gonzo
Eat the Press
How to soak up air time and say absolutely nothing!
Dr. Condi Rice from the planet Blah-Blah never ceases to amaze me. She skillfully soaks up air time without enlightening anyone. Atta girl, Condi!
And as if that weren't enough, Tim Russert was going to chat with a real live possibly non-Christian, non-Catholic Palestinian -- and didn't even make him recite the pledge!
Hey now! It's Dr. Condi Rice. And she says she's glad to be here with Tim.
I bet she is. Tim would rather French kiss Alan Dershowitz than embarrass Condi on the air.
First of course, we must reassure an anxious nation that Smirk is OK after having a largish tube snaked up his lower intestine. Everyone knows that this was due to his brain trust figuring this must be where Osama bin Laden was hiding. It makes as much sense and was as successful as their other efforts to find him.
Or maybe they were looking for the Chimp-in-Charge's real head, since it's plain it's been lodged there for much of his life.
Dr. Condi reassured us all that Little Prince George was just fine, and the nation heaved a collective sigh of relief.
Thank God we're SAFE!
She said that Smirk "felt great" after undergoing the rectal probe.
Hmmmm...perhaps this was just a cynical political ploy to curry favor with the Log Cabin Republicans?
Why did his handlers tell the Dip Wad to speechify that Arafat has to go?
Well, says the good Doctor, Smirk just wants to do what's best for "peace" and improving "the lives of Palestinians and Israelis alike."
Hey, sounds good to me. Too bad it's a crock.
She went on to say that they'd like to deal with Arafat, but he hasn't reined in and controlled terrorism. The Palestinian people, she says, need leadership that can improve their situation and stop terrorism and provide safety for the Israeli population as well as the Palestinians.
That sounds perfectly reasonable. But it ignores the details, which assume that the Israelis have total control and that puts the entire burden of peace on the Palestinians, and also ensures that the Israelis will always have the upper hand.
Rice blathered about setting up Palestinian institutions which will check the power of a single leader. Basically, what they want is a docile and compliant Palestinian government that will dance to the US/Israeli tune.
Well, wouldn't that be CONVENIENT, to borrow a phrase from the Church Lady.
Condi continued her nervous defense of a very shaky policy. Timbo played a few clips of Ari "Pud" Fleischer saying over and over again that the "president" doesn't think it's the duty of the US to pick the leader of the Palestinians, and that Arafat is their leader.
What about that, Dr. Condi? The clip was a direct contradiction to Frat Brat's recent pronouncement. Well, the "president" was looking forward there, she said. Rice went on with the foolish and rather bizarre argument that Arafat has supposedly refused to rein in, control, and completely stop all terrorist activities.
This exhibits a willful ignorance of the fact that the Israelis have totally destroyed what little authority Arafat had.
And this begs the question, which Tim wouldn't DARE ask: just how in the hell do they expect Arafat to rule these groups with an iron fist in the midst of a relentless and extensive effort to wipe out his "government", blast his resources to dust, and reduce him to irrelevance?
It's more glaring hypocrisy and "through the looking glass" manipulation of the truth that this administration absolutely thrives on. Up is down, down is up, good is bad, bad is good. Reality and the truth are completely abstract concepts -- unless, that is, they can be bent into "moral clarity".
But you try defending the indefensible. You'd sound just as ridiculous I'd imagine. It's like a guy coming home with his pants on backwards and three different shades of lipstick on his shirt, and saying with a straight face that he was mugged by a gang of Mary Kay cosmetic saleswomen at 3 a.m.
These are the "grown ups" we were promised during the campaign. And not only do they expect us to believe them, but most people do!!! Ay carumba!
After extensive efforts by Russert to cut through the B.S. blizzard put up by Rice and get a straight answer as to whether Powell or our representatives will continue to meet with Arafat, she finally said that they probably won't.
This should be interesting, to say the least. I shudder to think what a disaster this first lurch into an actual Israeli-Palestinian policy will turn out to be. I think that maybe the Dim Son's "do nothing" approach towards the situation wasn't so much an actual policy, but simply the result of the fact that they had no clue how to proceed. As usual, their interests conflict directly with the ideals that the dunce constantly says he holds dear, like freedom, democracy, and other stuff he couldn't care less about.
Some sort of action by the US is certainly long overdue. The consequences of doing nothing are painfully apparent. But we all may live to see the day when we long for the days before the un-elected dunce and his crew started meddling in the area.
The warmongers among the Punk Prince's retinue have apparently carried the day, and we'll all find out how this brilliant strategy works. Hey, anyone knows that the best way to create a long-lasting peace and convince the Palestinian suicide bombers that they should relax and live in peace is to surround them with tanks and armed soldiers and control their every move and keep that body count moving steadily upward. The "lay down your arms or we'll slaughter you, destroy your homes, and take over your land. (Only this time we won't even pretend to show restraint)" strategy has always been the best course for long-lasting peace. I think we can all agree it's the best way to deal with zealots willing to sacrifice their lives for their cause.
But one can't be faulted for wishing this group of stuck in the past cold warriors at El Dunce's side would consider thinking "outside the box" and try something new. I mean, expending billions on military actions and blithely sending young men and women into harm's way in order to slaughter, terrorize, and flatten a country into shock and economic ruin is soooooo 50's. God, how I'd wish they'd come up with a Plan B. But the old plan makes for a lot of very rich people, and expands their economic stranglehold to the few parts of the globe that they don't already have wrapped up.
I mean, that's always been a good way to get rich: using other people's money. They take billions of our tax dollars, and the end result is that while a relative few of us benefit from jobs in the defense industry, a handful get to reap obscene profits, and the blood of our youth is spent in securing new markets and fat contracts to rebuild the countries we've just paid dearly to destroy.
Their "vision" for the Mideast is so easy to understand. All we have to do is wait until we install our puppet Palestinian leaders and the radical Arab groups decide that they like it that way. Voila, all is well. Brilliant, no?
A stupider plan of action is hard to conceive. It's the 50's CIA follies all over again, but with Smirk's aged cold warrior crew, what did you expect? They're a band that only knows how to play one tune.
Then Timmy showed Arafat's response to Dr. Condi saying that he "cavorts with terror." Arafat said that Condi should mind her own business, and that he is going to do what is best for his people, and not take orders from her or anyone else.
Condi's response to this was to reiterate her attack on Arafat and say that he'd rejected some great deals in the past, and that Arafat's "reliance" on terrorists is not what is best for the Palestinian people, and therefore, he needs to be 86ed.
The thought occurred to me that, without the terrorists, the Palestinians would have ZERO leverage, would be getting ZERO attention from the U.S. or anyone else, and would be bullied and oppressed just as much if not more by the Israelis. Now, no rational person can suggest that terrorist attacks on innocent civilians is a desired action, but at the same time, what else would you have them do? Simply capitulate to everything demanded and imposed on them?
Should they build a standing armed forces? Would that somehow be more acceptable to us? If they had billions in tanks, armor, and air power, would they still be "terrorists"? I've heard plenty of condemnation of Palestinian terror, but not a word of what alternative means of protest and resistance they should utilize when their citizens are being killed on a 10 to 1 ratio to Israelis.
Political negotiations is obviously the preferred way to go. Why these have failed is largely due to groups on both sides that oppose and sabotage any peace agreement, no matter what. Any progress must address these groups on both sides. Unfortunately, one of the groups that opposes peace is the current government of Israel.
Then the "run to the toilet and hurl" line of the day. I caution anyone against reading it if you've recently eaten.
Fat Tim asked Condi if the Chimp's total dissing of Arafat might only serve to have the effect of guaranteeing his election in any upcoming elections. In effect, the "Anyone that the US and Israel hate can't be all bad." theory.
The good doctor then said, "Sometimes, Tim, you just have to tell the truth, and this president is a firm believer in telling the truth..."
Yes. She actually said that.
Condi continued, "...and laying out the facts as he sees them."
Well, hell! There ya go. At first I thought she was saying he told the truth! Whew, that was close! Ha, ha. Now I see that you're saying he tells the truth "as he sees it". Well, that's something completely different.
"Truth" as Dumbya sees it is nothing remotely like the truth you and I know.
Truth as he sees it is like a fire hydrant as a dog sees it. We all recognize that by now. You scared us there for a second, Condi.
Tim then read quotes from noted and smarter authorities on His Dimness' garbled pronouncement of his Mideast "policy." George Mitchell had said that if Arafat is removed, he may be replaced by even more radical elements. Vladimir Putin said it would be "dangerous and a mistake" to remove Arafat, and would radicalize the Palestinians. and Kofi Annan noted the same, that if the US removes Arafat, it would open it up to even more radical elements being elected, and that we would then have to respect that.
Will the U.S. recognize whomever ends up being democratically elected?
By the length of Condi Rice's answer and the slew of weasel words that passed her lips, I'd say the answer is no. She seemed to suggest that there was nothing to worry about -- which must mean that we are very confident we can rig the election. She then threw in that El Busto believes that the Palestinians will make the right choices. (Yeah, with his goons and spooks pulling the strings and enough gun barrels pointed at their heads, maybe.)
You either vote for our guy, or we'll let Israel go medieval on your ass. Spoken like a true "man of peace."
The Chimp line seems to be that he won't (can't) deal with things as the stand. This seems about par for the course. The sitchyation has too much dang complexiveness fer him. But with Israel on one side, and a hand picked puppet on the other, maybe he can wrap his miniscule intellect around it. As with the rest of his life up until now, he needs to have other people rig the game so he can fail upward. If the games not rigged, then Georgie Boy doesn't want to play.
Never mind that any success with this plan will certainly be short-lived and likely to erupt in even more horrific ways somewhere down the line. It's like putting a big cork in a bottle where the pressure is ever increasing. Nothing will happen for a while, but the pressure will continue to build until there's a big, messy, explosion.
Tim AGAIN asked Dr. Rice if the government will deal with whoever is legally elected. She slithered and slid and weaseled her way around this direct question once more by reverting to her previously stated spiel about the need for democratic institutions and how this is all really great for the Palestinians. She basically refused to answer.
Tim realized he was being hosed and asked her for the THIRD time: will we recognize the person that wins an election? She AGAIN started in on the BS, and the closest she ever came to an answer was saying that we'd "respect the democratic process", which is not saying that they'd recognize whoever is elected, just the "process."
That this gang of usurpers should have little regard for democratically elected leaders is only fitting. Since they got away with installing themselves against the clear will of the people, they figure that they can arrange it for other's as well. Give them an inch and they'll take a mile.
What wonderful principled people we are. We have a dunce who is not even rightfully elected to his position telling other nations that they have to change their leadership, but you better pick the person we want you to, or we won't recognize them. We'll make you keep doing it over until you get it right.
Such pure crap. It's just stunning how this un-elected fraud is almost single-handedly destroying all respect our country has around the world. He's making us hated almost universally and recognized as a country with absolutely ZERO principles. In other words, the image projected to the world is that personified by the Republican right. And it's tarring us all as liars, hypocrites, and bigoted, intolerant, arrogant bullies. I for one, am not happy about that.
Then Tim just had to show that stupid, overhyped picture of a baby (looks more like a doll) dressed up as a terrorist. This is so idiotic. It was someone's idea of a sick joke, and now Tim is solemnly asking Dr. Rice what she thought of it, as if he almost hates to show it -- as if it was a picture of the Pope dressed in full bondage gear.
I, for one, am so sick of these cheap-ass attempts to further vilify whatever it is they're trying to vilify that I could scream, "We get it!!!" 9 out of 10 times, it's something unverified, silly, and peripheral at best, and just plain loony at worst. (Such as Osama's "coded messages" in his tapes, or the "Smirk ran because Air Force One was a target.")
Someone, PLEASE tell me: where ARE these "adults" we were promised? All I see are a bunch of frightened and easily panicked dopes flailing around and grasping at straws. If they believe even half the lies they constantly speak, then we're all in worse danger than we imagined. I only give myself the cold comfort that they can't possibly believe the crap they spew. This makes them immoral and corrupt liars of course, but it's slightly better than thinking we have people stupid enough to actually believe the incredible defenses and phony justifications for their greedy and violent actions.
Tim wanted to know if there's a "breakdown" in bipartisan support for this phony "war." Rice of course says she doesn't think so, and keeps repeating the lie that everyone understands that this war will last forever and everyone's fine with that, and right on board with the Chimp.
Count Timula tries once more to scare all us kids by asking if we should be scared -- REALLY scared, on July 4th. (Hey, never pass a chance to scare the crap out of gullible people, right?) Condi just said that they were going to try to keep things safe. (Duh!)
Why does the press and government even bother with all this crap? Why all the warnings? Why all the speculation about attacks? Why not just DROP it???!! I mean, what does this accomplish? That's right, nothing.
The government is supposedly doing things to deal with this threat. Though what they're doing besides legislating the spending of hundreds of billions of tax dollars is a complete mystery.
The plain fact is, the threat of terrorism is the same every day, every week, every year. There is absolutely NOTHING that any of us could do even if we knew there was a specific threat, and frankly, not a whole lot the government could do to protect us.
So I suggest that they just drop the entire fake drama entirely. Just leave us alone and let the chips fall where they may.
I predicted shortly after September 11th that there would be no more attacks, much less any approaching the September attack. I feel September 11th was a fluke, a one-of-a-kind, unrepeatable "lucky" strike.
Of course, President Moron has done everything he possibly can to provoke another attack, but I don't see it happening. (Unless the Menace from Texas gets jittery towards election time and decides to arrange an attack himself.)
The threat of terrorist attacks are just a fact of life now, just as they are in many parts of the world. And frankly, unless you live in a large city, you're at almost zero risk. This is no comfort to the millions living near potential targets in large cities, but the fact is, the vast majority of people in this country are at little or no risk.
I find all this paranoia and gnashing of teeth accomplishes nothing other than scaring a great many gullible people into neurosis and creating a lot of needless anxiety. If we're attacked, we'll know it. And can you imagine if they actually tried to warn us of an actual attack? What a joke! And what a disaster! There'd be more harm done by panicked people than the terrorists themselves!
The Bushies are happily trying to scare the wits out of people in an attempt to accomplish two things. First, create such fear of an unknown and unseen menace that the public will develop a feeling of dependence on the great Dim Son in Washington to keep us all safe, and therefore sweep him back into office in '04. A stupid immature brat as father figure. Go figure.
Secondly, it's to keep us off balance and hide their incompetence and blatant corruption. They know that if you're scared for your families and your own safety, you're not going to worry too much about who's stealing a few billion dollars or how you're being lied to repeatedly. It's the old pickpocket trick of misdirection. "Hey! Look over there! Yoink!"
It's reprehensible and sickening. I wish they'd knock off this stupid and needless fear campaign and leave us alone. If I want to be scared, I think of what life will be like if Bush and his thugs are actually elected for the first time in 2004, or the long lasting damage he's causing that we and our children and grandchildren will be left to deal with. (Shudder.)
So thanks anyway, but don't bother me with your stupid attempts to keep us scared and paranoid and unaware of your corruption and incompetence.
Next Timbo had on Nasser Al-Kidwa, Palestinian representative to the UN.
Russert asked him if he thinks old Yassir should get the boot. Obviously, Al-Kidwa said that the Palestinians should be the ones to choose their leader. Guess he hasn't heard 'bout the new style of governin' since January. Democracy isn't hip anymore. Get with it Nasser.
When asked if Arafat would run for election, Al-Kidwa had an interesting response. He said that for Palestinians, Arafat is head of a mission, rather than occupying a post. They want him to be in charge of the mission of fighting for the establishment of a Palestinian state. After that, however, Al-Kidwa says, they may want different leadership, as Arafat isn't seen as the person who could build the Palestinian state after it has been established.
But as long as they are in the stage of national liberation, Al-Kidwa says, Arafat will remain the representative of the Palestinian people's struggle.
Timmy, always out for a good conflict, asked if What-Me-Worry's speech denouncing Arafat would actually help Arafat's chances of getting elected. (This is the second time he's trotted this out. It's so simple-minded that it must appeal to him.)
Al-Kidwa said that the Palestinians had a WHOLE lot more problems with Smirk's speech other than the call for Arafat's ouster. He said that the monkey in a man suit's plan put enormous burdens on the Palestinians and demanded that they accomplish near impossible feats, all while under Israeli occupation and their continuing military campaign against them.
But he said he agreed with Chimp's "vision thing", saying that at least he seemed to recognize that Israel must immediately cease their building of settlements and withdraw from Palestinian territory. Al-Kidwa says that they'd love to work with our Moron-in-Chief on these goals, but, (predictably), Smirk's plan includes absolutely NO framework, plan, outline, or even a hint as to a process to achieve those goals. (In other words, it's all hot air. All hat, no cattle.)
That, of course, comes as no surprise to those who have paid attention to this administration, but Al-Kidwa is still finds that mouthing a bunch of platitudes and proposing a bunch of feel good measures without any serious plan to accomplish it to be a bit remarkable.
Then Tim had to AGAIN show the stupid baby terrorist picture, complete with extreme close-up that inched up the picture. "What's that ABOUT?", whined Tim in incredulous tones.
Al-Kidwa hipped Tim to a litany of oppression and death that has created this spirit of rebellion. Tim of course, turned a blind eye to these facts, and asked if that excused suicide bombings. "Of course not!" said Al-Kidwa, and again said that they'd like nothing more than to work with the US for establishment of a Palestinian state, but unfortunately, Smirk offered not a shred of an idea as to how to realistically work towards that goal. (Note to Nasser: He doesn't have one.)
Then Tim slid into the gutter by actually quoting the absolutely loathsome Bill "Chickenhawk" Bennett from his phony-ass book, "Why We Fight." Incidentally, Bennett doesn't explain why HE HIMSELF didn't fight and slithered his way out of duty when he was eligible to go to Vietnam. Of course, this book is a detestable load of half-baked lies and BS. Timmy tries to use a quote from this load of rubbish to suggest that the PLO's only true aim is the complete elimination of Israel. (Any Arab or Israeli [or anyone else] that believes that Israel could ever be wiped out is a fool. Period.)
The rock solid evidence Bennett's book provides for this? Why, he says, just look at the shoulder patches of some of the PLO members. They show the map of Israel with crossed rifles and a hand grenade. Well there you go! Who needs more proof of the true philosophy and aims of an entire people? This is so damn stupid as to be laughable! I mean, I doubt it would be very hard to come up with a patch from some division of the US armed forces that shows an eagle killing something or other, or a skull and crossbones or something similar. I guess that would be proof positive that the US only wants to kill, kill, kill, kill, kill. (I don't think someone would have to resort to patch analysis to advance that theory.)
Bennett also puts words and thoughts into the PLO's, and thus the entire Palestinian people's, mouths. He makes the leap that because the patch shows the entire state of Israel, rather than just the bits that the Palestinians want returned, that therefore, it represents the territory that the PLO wants to liberate. (follow along now). This, Bennett surmises, is proof that the PLO wants to eliminate the state of Israel entirely. Bill must have had to down a LOT of scotch to come up with that swill. This absurd logic is why he makes tens of millions a year. Right wing troglodytes like it so much, the pay for it.
Then there was another hilarious piece of "proof" from Timmy that the PLO thinks it can wipe out the 3rd most heavily armed country on the planet. He quotes a US News and World Report article that (pay attention now) supposedly quotes Arafat, not directly, but second hand. In response to being asked why he didn't accept the peace terms offered by Clinton, Arafat supposedly said to the former president of Indonesia a few years ago "Look, we've got 150 years and we'll throw them into the sea." Ha!
And these clowns like Timmy and Bennett eat it up! Why 150 years? Have the Palestinians got an appointment they have to go to then? Is a craft going to come take them to planet Hale Bopp? Did they commission a scientific analysis of how long it would take to completely eliminate Israel and figure they should be able to get it done in 150 years, give or take a decade? (Fat chance.) Or did they all get together and say, "Hey, listen, if we can't get this done in 150 years, let's just call it quits?" Is this just a tentative schedule? Or is there a provision to extend it another century or so if things aren't on track in the year 2150?
Al-Kidwa looked at Tim with a look that said, "You've GOT to be 'Al-Kidding' me, you misguided fool", and said, "Mr. Bennett neglected to show us the Israeli patch. It too does not show borders."
Well, so much for the slug Bennett's bellicose, silly, and typically simplistic effort to vilify people the right wants to go to war with.
Timmy then asked Al-Kidwa if Arafat had said what he was quoted as saying. "Absolutely not", said Al-Kidwa in a manner that showed that he really didn't think it was necessary to explain that the quote was preposterous.
To end the segment, Russert asked Al-Kidwa if he thought he will ever see a Palestinian state. Al-Kidwa's optimistic reply was that he absolutely believed he would. For all our sakes, let's hope he's right. If the situation can survive the horrid policies of this gang, perhaps after 2004 when they are thrown out on their asses, there will be a chance for peace for all the good people in that region.
Does the name Winton M. Blount ring a bell? Didn't think so. He was Postmaster General in the 60's and the guest in the "Meet the Press" moment. Evidently, the Postal Service were in a financial crisis even way back then.
We're nuts in this country. The loony right has got most people convinced that government is bad, bad, bad, and that we should bitterly begrudge giving them so much as a dime of our "hard-earned money." And coupled to this is the goofy expectation that we should be indignant about having to pay for the many services government provides, and provides consistently well, such as the postal system.
The Republicans labor long and hard to kill government by starving it of funds, and then howl the loudest when an agency says it can't survive on the pittance it's getting. The right screams about how inefficient government bureaucracy is, then cuts their funding so severely that it guarantees that they become inefficient due to radical staffing cuts and other corner cutting. Then predictably, they'll howl when the cost of a stamp goes up or they ask for more funding. Jerks.
Of course, this also completely ignores the fact that this rate increase is also due to the rights religious zeal for privatization. When the postal service was the only game in town, everything was cool. But now they have to change rapidly and compete in a very crowded field. Nothing inherently wrong with that, but the more people use UPS and FedEx, the more it's going to hurt the post office and drive up the cost of mail. And if the right can continue cutting funds, it will bankrupt the Postal Service, or reduce their service to the point where other businesses can take over. Then we can all get our mail from non-union workers, pay the same or higher rates for worse and worse service, and the billionaires get more billions. This, the right would have you believe, is far better than having to pay a few extra cents for a stamp.
For decades, the postal service has given the families of millions of employees a decent wage and benefits, and provided mostly excellent service in performing an unimaginably difficult job. Not any more. Now they're forced to operate in the same cut-throat environment that ensures that employees and their families are the first to suffer through lay-offs and increased work load for less pay.
I may be a minority, but postal rate hikes don't bother me at all. I still think it's darn cheap for the service they provide. (Plus, if it puts the hurt on the people that send reams of junk mail, all the better.)
Well, that's the end of this week's review, with rants thrown in at no additional cost to you, the reader.
If you actually read the entire piece this far, you are automatically a member of my "Legion of Honor." This is a great addition to a resume and really impresses women.
-- Dash Riprock
JJ Balzer is a former television news producer. He lives in New York City.
Dave "Doctor" Gonzo is a media producer and guru<. He lives in fortified, high-rise compound in New York City.
Dash Riprock is a free-lance smart aleck based in Moline, IL. Despite appearances, he does not get paid by the word. He realizes he is prone to being long-winded and giving you a lot to read, so balance it out by giving him some of your own words at dashriprockapj@hotmail.com
Copyright © 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1998, 1997, 1996, American Politics Journal Publications, Inc. All rights reserved. Read our privacy policy. Contact us.
ISSN No. 1523-1690