We are being manipulated.

[mattclearing]

I'm convinced that a combination of the media and election tampering has already taken our democracy from us.

Al Gore was completely destroyed by the media in 2000, and yet still won the popular vote by a convincing half-million votes. He should have won Florida, if not for a well-planned and executed "felon" purge that removed thousands of likely Democratic votes from Florida.

Gore won the 2000 election, but was not allowed to ascend to the Presidency, thanks to a well-planned and managed attack on Florida's voting machinery.

Bush predicted victory even when networks announced grim electoral results early on Election Night. The totals eventually backed him up, and the media perpetuated the Sore-Loserman idea.

Bush, in his post 9/11 address, inexplicably warned against conspiracy theorists, when seemingly the entire world was enrapt in a "Let's Roll" storyline.

We were told that Bush was a two-term president long before November 2, 2004, and it was merely a set-up, a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Kerry, despite winning all three debates, was totally ignored by the media, and bizarre voting phenomena helped to lose him the Presidency. Anyone who questioned it was labeled a conspiracy theorist.

Now we are told, even by Bush himself ("Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton"), that Hillary is our next president.

Watch over the next year as coverage of Democrats and Republicans shifts dramatically.

Indeed, it began with Katrina, and continues today with the LA terror lies.

The media will start to question Republicans more, and Democrats less.

Democrats will get equal airtime again, and will be allowed to make Republicans look silly on national television, as Bill Clinton did regularly.

We will even get help in doing so from many of the same sources that have hurt us in the past few years, like Chris Matthews and Tim Russert.

Will we pat ourselves on the back when Hillary is President?

If the outcome is pre-ordained, this isn't democracy.

But the exchange of power between sides is meant to silence criticism and eliminate suspicion.

So when the storyline that is already being peddled comes to be, will we be so happy to be rid of Bush that we will accept Clinton?

Do we prefer the illusion of democracy so long as our side appears to be in control?

Or do we want real democracy, and a return to a government of, by, and for the people?

Y'all might think I'm crazy now, but when Hillary wins in '08, just like everyone on television predicted she would, even President Bush, I hope you will wonder if this is all just an elaborate ruse to reassure us that we are in control, when the reality is that we are being manipulated.

[Vincardog]

1. Bingo

[NightOwwl]

18. self-delete

[formercia]

2. Hillary was once a Goldwater Republican

now, there was a conservative.

[mattclearing]

5. Hillary isn't the worst thing in the world.

But it sure would make a lot of sense that our Senators always keep the gloves on against these guys.

After all, if the outcome is pre-determined, then there is always the need to pull punches.

[GreenPartyVoter]

32. So was my dad. He's a Green now.

[mattclearing]

128. People change.

Hillary isn't talking about health care reform much these days either.

[GreenPartyVoter]

142. Yes, they certainly do. My grandfather got weird as he got older. We think

it was a series of mini-strokes and Alzheimer's (which is known to change personalities to the extent that even people's religious views can be seriously skewed from what they previously believed. Makes me wonder about Dobson and Graham, because they used to be more moderate in their views.)

[KitchenWitch]

184. But conservative in the true sense of the word

Not in the neocon sense.

[leeroysphitz]

188. Goldwater was "out there" but one thing he was NOT

was a corporate shill like the repukes we have today. The things he said were often downright loony but you knew he actually BELIEVED them. It would almost be a treat to be dealing with his brand of conservative as opposed to what we are contending with today.

[hwmnbn]

3. You are not crazy......

The effect the media has on our consciousness cannot be minimized. They can make the majority of americans believe anything if it's packaged nicely.

Our only chance for escaping this matrix is for REALITY to step in. The economy, will make people stand up and notice everything isn't as it is being depicted. I only hope that dose of reality comes soon.

[FrenchieCat]

4. You mean.....

We're not really a democracy? :shrug:

[mattclearing]

6. You saw them turn General Clark into "an amateur politician."

You tell me.

[FrenchieCat]

41. Yes...there is no Democracy left in America......

[FreedomAngel82]

70. And what else has he done now?

What's something he's done now that is political?

[Talismom]

55. Ahhhh! ROFLMAO! n/t

[helderheid]

7. Sounds right. Sounds 100% right.

[The Backlash Cometh]

8. We would first have to take over the executive branch in the next

presidential election...then we would sue the shit out of every media outlet that participated in the lockdowns after the elections, and who hired the pundits to use their positions to control public opinion.

ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, FOXNEWS, just to name a few of the usual suspects, would be turned over to the public because they wouldn't have the money to pay the damages to 60,000.000 aggrieved individuals.

[mattclearing]

10. Only one person who could credibly do that and change my mind.

It'll be interesting to see how Hillary beats him.

You know who I'm talking about. He voted against the Patriot Act.

[Burning Water]

9. Hillary will never be

President. If she gets the Dem nomination, she will go down in a blaze of something not glory.

Wes Clark is the candidate that can end the neo-con regime.

[mattclearing]

12. Yeah, and Bush, the worst president ever, could never get re-elected.

Even with weak approval numbers.

[Burning Water]

OK, we'll see, but

if you're so against Hillary, you should pick another candidate and work to make sure Hill doesn't make it to first base, let alone home plate.

May I tentatively recommedn Clark to you?

[mattclearing]

16. I'm not a Hillary hater.

And this isn't meant to be a primary war starter.

I'm just staking out my territory for the inevitable "I told you so," in three years.

:D

[helderheid]

34. LOL for the record, I am not a Hillary hater either. I'd consider her a

breath of fresh air... BUT our nation is not a nation of laws - it's a nation of Corporations.

[CrispyQ]

57. They own the voting machines.

So they will select the Democratic candidate. If they want Hill, she will win the primaries regardless of who we vote for.

[mattclearing]

106. The media will push us towards her.

The people who believe everything they see and read uncritically will boost her standing. After that, it's just slight adjustments to the final tallies.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

151. Not in Minnesota, where we have caucuses

even though the establishment Dems try to tell everyone whom to vote for.

[helderheid]

33. the game is rigged. We have to get rid of these evote machines & MSM

[FreedomAngel82]

72. Well gee isn't the Iowa Cacus voice counts?

[helderheid]

78. Yes, that is definitely an exception and I was one of the first to point

that out when some Dean supporters were sure he had been diebolded out of the primary. Can't diebold a body. Anyway, I was referring to the general election. As far as the primaries, just watch the polls the MSM spouts out and check online to see who is running because the MSM will leave out anyone the corporations fear (Kucinich, Braun, Sharpton as examples)

[mitchum]

11. You are correct about the American Ruse

[leftstreet]

13. Excellent post

McCain win vs Hillary win = no difference.

[mattclearing]

17. Well, I don't buy the no difference line.

Just on choice issues, there's a difference. But for some reason McCain will not run. Probably health.

[Greyhound]

44. Two sides of the same coin are different, but it's still the same coin.

the "distraction issues" are different, the headlong plunge into a corporate nightmare isn't. Once we've become indentured to the corporate masters abortion, minority rights, race, and the rest of the wedge issues become irrelevant.

[FreedomAngel82]

73. Oh he's planning on it

He already met with Jerry Falwell back last October as reported on crooksandliars.com

[mattclearing]

105. Oh, I know he's planning it. But he's really old.

I don't know how it works out, but somehow I suspect he will never earn the trust of the corporate elite.

[me b zola]

122. Allen is who I believe the corporate elite wants to be their boy

...and Allen plays well to the wing-nuts

[mattclearing]

127. But not to the electorate at large, I imagine.

But then again, neither did Bush II.

[me b zola]

183. It's that fundie appeal that gives them the ability to sell him (Allen)

Fundies have huge mailing/e-mail lists. When I think about how they were able to use the wing-nuts to promote huge voter turn outs for anti-gay legistlation it makes me worry. Somewhere between 20-30% of voters are wing-nuts, but they are able to influence the rest of their puke pack.

BTW, I totally agree with your OP. :thumbsup:

[helderheid]

14. Republicans should be outraged too. Maybe after 8 years of Hillary they'll

wake up?

[mattclearing]

19. As long as they are focused on us, and we on them, we will never see.nt

[radio4progressives]

177. No the republicans should be outraged NOW... (en masse)

some republicans are of course, we see that everyday.

but they have to be outraged en masse. but the neo cons are fascists through and through, and so are the "Khristian Dominionists/Coalitions and so they are in alliance with the Neo Cons.

The Neo Libs are in alliance with the Neo Cons - so all three groups combined are in alliance and have hijacked our government, and our democracy and shredded our constitution.

Hillary Clinton is going to have to make clean and clear departure from Neo Liberalism/Neo Conservatism - but instead she seems to embrace their foreign policies and that will never get our country back where it should be.

[Kansas Wyatt]

15. And if Hillary is appointed as you say...

Then get ready for all of the Clinton attacks and smears, because the will increase to the level they were at during the Bill Clinton Presidency. The media will flip, and begin the witch hunt and burning at the stake preliminaries for the Clintons, and we will once again see Congress actually investigating the executive branch.

[TNOE]

22. I agree with the poster - I wonder myself

BUT - you know what the flip side will be? You think Republicans would stand for one second if it were Hillary "spying" without a warrant? Do you think the Republicans would stand for one second if Hillary said "so & so is trying to get nuclear weapons and allow Hillary to take us to war? They will investigate every single move she makes. That's the only upside I can think of. Personally though, I don't see Bush lasting another 2 years, but that's just me.

I think when the people finally learn the truth (which I believe they will - eventually) - there's going to be an overhaul of the whole damn government from top to bottom.

[CrispyQ]

58. I sure hope you're right!

You are more optimistic than I am, but maybe this regime has pushed the people too far & more are aware than I think. I sure as hell hope so!!

[mattclearing]

23. It'll be interesting to see how that works out.

Hillary doesn't have her husband's charms.

[blm]

20. So we throw whatever we can to expose the MEDIA and the VOTING MACHINES

and we do it NOW.

[mattclearing]

25. Or overthrow the media entirely.

Current is great. Al Gore has clearly left the reservation, and we can thank him to a certain extent for the Internet as well.

If he runs in '08, it will be for all the marbles.

[bleever]

88. Yes, and I'm confidently guessing you meant we should BE the media

as a key part of that.

My advice: speak up, as often as we can.

[NightOwwl]

21. It was over the night Fox declared Bush President...

(by his second cousin no less.)

Rove's philosophy - It's perception, stupid.

Remember when Gore was declared the winner of Florida not one news station declared him president.

Remember how Fox put up a huge splash screen declaring Bush president when it was (wrongly) determined that he won Florida.

From then on, Gore had to battle the perception that Bush was already the "true" winner.

Rewatch Fahrenheit 911...it is soooooooo obvious what was happening to our Democracy. Makes me sick every time I think of it.

[mattclearing]

26. Yeah...Moore really beat around the bush (so to speak) with that.

But you could tell he knew what was up.

[Bethany Rockafella]

24. Wow! That was vividly deep!

[Just Me]

27. I'd be absolutely thrilled if Hillary was elected President.

I would. Although, I don't see it happening, in ALL HONESTY.

:shrug: I don't know what else to say.

I DO KNOW that the Clintons are NOT the Bushes: completely different creatures who happen to be in the same arena.

[mattclearing]

29. Agreed.

Hate to run out on this, because it's something that I really enjoy discussing, but I have to run. Will be back tomorrow.

In a real democracy, Hillary is a sure loser. We know that she is every bit as polarizing as Bush in a way that Bill never was. The party base regards her with suspicion, if not outright hostility, and she will lure zero Republican votes away.

So when she wins, we should really scratch our heads.

[helderheid]

36. thanks for this post. I reckon when you come back tomorrow this will still

be on page 1.

[In Truth We Trust]

28. You're right; we are being played like a fiddle. The thing is though that

not all of us accept it therefore they are vulnerable if we do what is seemingly our only solution. I suggest to take our government back we create a constitutional amendment for paper ballots and hand counts.
That is the only way we can reform and restore a once great democracy.

[mattclearing]

31. If only we could get our hands back on the levers of power.

No such thing as a people's initiative to amend the Constitution.

[ThoughtCriminal]

30. GOP needs another Jimmy Carter

Every failure of the Bush occupation is blamed on Clinton. But think back to 1977-1980, Carter inherited a train-wreck from Nixon/Ford and got blamed for everything. That gave us Reagan/Bush and the cycle repeats.

[1620rock]

40. I don't buy it...

...why would they install Hillary and suffer all of the turmoil that would ensue from that move when they can just install any neocon of their choosing...say Jeb. They don't worry about appearances of impropriety. Hell they just break or ignore any and all laws of their choosing. They don't even try to hide it. They are very up front about what they do. :shrug:

[mattclearing]

117. Because the turmoil comes from continued rule.

I think they learned their lesson after 12 years of Reagan/Bush ended in riots, anti-corporatists mounting effective third-party challenges...too much hassle.

[femrap]

35. If we look back at the Robber Barons in history....

I think we see the same thing today in Media....we must break up the monopolies of our Media.

Has any of our dem candidates (Clark, in particular) ever mentioned this issue? I believe if a candidate did so, he/she would get the public's attention (if Media allowed those words to be aired/written....lol). Remember when Murdoch purchased his US citizenship? I believe he had to do this so he could purchase newspapers, TV, etc. in the US. These 5 companies that own most of the media in this country must be BROKEN UP! That's what we did earlier in our history with the Robber Barons....everything seems to be cyclical.

There was a huge public outcry when Colin Powell's son, Micheal, as head of the FCC tried to increase the amount of media outlets a company could own. It shocked me. But I think Americans do care about too much control of their TV sets and newspapers.

[helderheid]

38. Kucinich tried it last run. The media didn't report it.

http://www.fair.org/activism/abc-candidates.html

December 11, 2003



NOTE: Please see the update to this action alert: ABC Responds to Critics of Campaign Coverage (12/12/03)



A day after ABC's Ted Koppel moderated a debate between the Democratic presidential contenders, the network decided to withdraw three off-air producers from the campaigns of Dennis Kucinich, Carol Moseley Braun and Rev. Al Sharpton.

ABC's decision was attributed to the fact that these candidates are perceived to have a slim chance of winning the Democratic nomination. An ABC spokesperson explained (Boston Globe, 12/11/03) that "as we prepare for Iowa and New Hampshire, we are putting more resources toward covering those events." Appearing on CNBC with Kucinich (12/10/03), Time reporter Jay Carney suggested that the decision could be due to the fact that "all of the media organizations have limited resources. It's actually, I think, pretty impressive that they had somebody on your campaign day by day by day."

Somehow it's hard to believe that the "limited resources" of the Disney corporation (2003 revenues: $27 billion) explains ABC's call. ABC's decision does seem to mirror the opinions of Koppel, who seemed frustrated that these candidates were included in the debate at all. According to the New York Times (12/7/03), Koppel "said he would have preferred a slugfest among the six leading candidates." Koppel was quoted: "You can't have a debate among nine people.... There is no such thing. It's called a food fight."

"How did Dennis Kucinich and Al Sharpton and Carol Moseley Braun get into this thing?" Koppel was quoted in the Washington Post (12/10/03). "Nobody seems to know. Some candidates who are perceived as serious are gasping for air, and what little oxygen there is on the stage will be taken up by one-third of the people who do not have a snowball's chance in hell of winning the nomination."

Koppel's dismissive attitude towards those three candidates carried over into the debate itself, as evidenced by this question:

"This is question to Ambassador Braun, Rev. Sharpton, Congressman Kucinich. You don't have any money, at least not much. Rev. Sharpton has almost none. You don't have very much, Ambassador Braun. The question is, will there come a point when polls, money and then ultimately the actual votes that will take place here, in places like New Hampshire, the caucuses in Iowa, will there come a point when we can expect one or more of the three of you to drop out? Or are you in this as sort of a vanity candidacy?"

Kucinich's response to that question generated perhaps the most media coverage his campaign has received so far:

"Ted, you know, we started at the beginning of this evening talking about an endorsement. Well, I want the American people to see where the media takes politics in this country. To start with endorsements, to start talking about endorsements. Now we're talking about polls. And then we're talking about money. Well, you know, when you do that, you don't have to talk about what's important to the American people. "Ted, I'm the only one up here that actually, on the stage, that actually voted against the Patriot Act. And voted against the war. The only one on this stage. I'm also one of the few candidates up here who's talking about taking our healthcare system from this for-profit system to a not-for-profit, single-payer, universal health care for all. I'm also the only one who has talked about getting out of NAFTA and the WTO and going back to bilateral trade conditioned on workers rights, human rights and the environment. Now, I may be inconvenient for some of those in the media, but I'm, you know, sorry about that."
One has to wonder whether Kucinich's rebuke of Koppel, and his criticism of the priorities of the media, had something to do with ABC's decision to limit coverage of these candidates. No matter what the rationale, this does raise a concern that ABC is making an early call on the election of 2004-- weeks before any votes have been cast.

For the record, before ABC's decision to cut back coverage, Kucinich, Sharpton and Moseley Braun had been mentioned a combined total of 10 times this year on ABC's World News Tonight, according to a search of the Nexis database. Only one of those mentions referred to the candidate's position on a policy.

[mattclearing]

97. Step out of line and *poof* - You're gone. n/t

[FrenchieCat]

182. Yes, Wes Clark did speak on the media problem.....

and then "poof" went his free media publicity!

http://www.soonerthought.com/archives/000280.html

PORTSMOUTH, N.H. (AdAge.com) -- The consolidation of American media companies should stop and rules that safeguard local media company independence need to be reinstated, Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark said.

Retired 4-star general and Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark stumped New Hampshire and thumped media conglomerates over the weekend.

In his broader comments from the campaign stage, Mr. Clark attacked the Bush Administration for, among other things, its Iraq War policies, its failure to track down Olsama bin Laden, the loss of U.S. jobs and inadequate health care measures.

Working the campaign trail casually dressed in a red mock turtleneck and brown corduroys, Mr. Clark told the audience in Portsmouth's South Church that "I don’t think it is in the American public interest to further consolidate the media."

Answering this reporter's question, the candidate said media consolidation "is damaging to putting out diverse opinions and fostering public dialogue... We need to distribute the ownership in media. We need to have the fairness in broadcasting rules put back in place."

[Lydia Leftcoast]

152. Yes, that is exactly what I experienced as a volunteer for Kucinich,

a near-blackout in the media.

Yet the DLC tag team taunts me when I say so.

[earth mom]

37. Word. eom

[annabanana]

39. by their fruits shall ye know them

If Dems in power re-institute the fairness in media doctrine....If there is movement towards transparent and tamper-proof (as much as humanly possible) voting systems..... If people start seriously discussing a National Health System..

Then I will believe that the roots have been severed.
Not before.

[Leopolds Ghost]

83. by their fruitcases shall ye know them :-)

There's plenty of nuts out there willing to be led around the nose and use Hillary as a national "Pressure release valve" for the masses.

Kind of like tossing a plastic mouse to keep the cat preoccupied.

Then 4 years later you get them BEGGING for Jeb or another Republican!

"Oh yes oh yes oh yes oh yes oh yes they both vote for the gun the gun the gun they both vote for the gun!"

:evilfrown:

[MadHound]

42. I dont' think you're crazy, I think you're spot on right

Everybody on the left gave Clinton a pass, because we were so relieved that the Reagan/Bush cabal was out of power. And under cover of this pass, Clinton and his corporate buddies really started to ream this country, NAFTA, '96 Telecom Act, welfare "reform" etc. etc. And the left slumbered on.

And now, after eight years of Bushco rule, it is quite probable that it will happen all over again. Don't fall for the bullshit. We're living in the Second Gilded Age, where both parties serve the same corporate master, and politics is nothing more than a good cop/bad cop mummer's play to entertain the masses and preserve the illusion of democracy.

[CrispyQ]

59. You are spot on, MadHound!

Remember the chapter in Stupid White Men, Democrats, DOA. Michael lists 2 pages worth of atrocious policy, which as you read it you are certain are republican policies. He ends his rant with "Yes, Bill Clinton was one of the most popular republican presidents of all time."

People were in a thrall during the 90's with their escalating home & stock portfolio values. We were on a consumerist high & willing to let our corporate government do what they wanted as long as we could shop till we dropped. I think many people are still there & maybe, just maybe, they are starting to wake up as the crash that is happening begins to hit them personally. Will it be too late?

[converted_democrat]

67. You got it all figured out.. It's all about the corporate masters, and the

illusion of democracy.. You are absolutely on the mark..

[helderheid]

180. yep!

[quinnox]

43. The Matrix is real

Some people would dismiss this post as paranoid nonsense but not me, I've long suspected the Matrix was real and every now and then we get glimpses of the true reality hiding behind the surface.

:scared: :tinfoilhat:

[Uncle Joe]

167. I believe you do not need a tin hat, you are correct. n/t

[Surya Gayatri]

45. K & R -- excellent post!

Food for thought, which rings disturbingly true. As long as we're preoccupied with the political arena or the "circus in the coliseum" if you will, we fail to see the corporate theft going on under our noses. SG

[Swamp Rat]

46. Shut up and obey!

:D

[mattclearing]

107. Nice one.

:D

[helderheid]

47. kick

[Skip Intro]

48. The Bigger Question - Who then, is doing the manipulating?

Who is REALLY in control? What is their agenda? How long has it been going on?


btw, I've wondered this so many times that reading your post was like thinking aloud. Its almost unconscious knoledge. Its so apparent. The parties are played against each other as a big distraction to keep those awake and alert distracted.

sheesh - I never had the guts to say it here.

K&R

[proud patriot]

49. Corporations , men in shadows , Wall Street

:think:

[ChiciB1]

173. From Jackson Browne... Lives In The Balance

I Want To Know Who The Men In The Shadows Are!!

Come out, come out where ever you are. Unfortunately MONEY DOES TALK!!

[helderheid]

50. This is who:

[helderheid]

79. Love that flag.

[rman]

186. control over public policy that these huge corporate entities now exert

"Government officials are just foot soldiers for the real wealth and the power of transnational corporations."

"The details and the control over public policy that these huge corporate entities now exert, means that elections in elected democracy is farcical in many parts of the world."

-- William Pepper, former attorney for James Earl Ray, and attorney for the King family

[AntiFascist]

51. Are they still claiming that Hillary is way ahead in the polls?

At least this may be a way to get Republicans interested in election fraud.

[helderheid]

52. I was thinking that too

[mattclearing]

94. Agreed.

The big monkeywrench in this thing is if we stop blaming the other side and start looking at where the real power is.

Martin Luther King was killed when he shifted his focus from race to economics. The next challenge will be when someone shifts the dispute from politics to economics.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

154. And RFK was killed after he started winning big by talking about

economic justice.

[grrl62]

101. rasmussen is now claiming

"hilary has had a significant drop in the polls."

don't know what to make of that..

[AntiFascist]

53. I heard an interesting comment on C-Span early this morning....

by a Democratic caller, I believe. They mentioned that much of the problem with the American public has to do with anti-depressant and tranquilizer medications. In other words, people are not only being manipulated by the media but the effect of drugs is also aiding in the process. Considering the statistics on such drug use, this had the ring of truth to it.

[Virginia Dare]

56. I would take it a step further..

we as a nation are so consumed with consumerism that we can't really think about anything else. This is all reinforced by the media.

[Leopolds Ghost]

81. The Dark Side of the 60's

Ever notice how many politically "liberal" or "undecided" baby boomers claim to have "outgrown" their wild and crazy youth, when they were concerned about the state of the world? Many equate their youthful concern for politics with drug use. Their "Me generation" self-help books and Ronald Reagan economics helped them learn to "grow up" and graduate to a different class of drugs capable of helping them overcome the side-effects of earlier drug use and become productive citizens. Unfortunately. :evilfrown:

James Howard Kunstler claims that drinking had a similar effect on WWII generation, coupled with a conformist backlash that allowed WWII vets to internalize their frustration, post-traumatic-stress and additction in the 50's, just like the Baby Boomers in the 60s.

I find it remarkable that most of the baby boomers and older Gen-Xers I know who GENUINELY CARE and have "kept the torch going" for radical politics and the like, did NOT become drug abusers in the 70s like a great many "respectable" ruling class baby boomers,

and as a result never felt the need to self-medicate, defend the mistakes of their youth, renounce their youthful politics, etc.

Of course some of them DID drink and smoke pot in their youth, but I've met plenty of people I would consider "casualties" of the false "counter-culture" that has revolved around substance abuse in America since before Prohibition.

Most drug-and-self-help casualties (rich and poor alike) you may meet are flaky, selfish to a T (or at the very least impolite and self-absorbed), and have severe attention deficit disorder.

I'm not surprised at the rates of TV addiction either. Their kids are worse -- same attitudes, more conservative upbringing, no familiarity with traditional civil society where people had more personal freedom and were less obsessed with programming their children.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

157. Very astute comment

I would go even further and say that today's apathetic middle Americans were always in it mostly for the sex and drugs and saw the politics as an "accessory."

The boomers who grew up to be Republicans were never terribly liberal economically or poitically to begin with, just libertarian on behavior.

[Talismom]

54. You got it baby! We vote for dems and repukes but, in reality, the

corporatists (fascists) are running the show! We just think we prefer their next chosen corporate whore because he/she has a D after the name.

[mattclearing]

95. I still think the Democratic Party is worthwhile.

But there are clearly elements within it that are completely bought and paid for. We complain about them all the time.

[Cleita]

60. Good points. I always felt I was cheated of my choices in

the primaries and that the candidates were actually prepicked by party nabobs and elections had very little to do with it. By the time we got to the final choices, they seemed to me to be far from the candidates that were the popular choices starting out. Just MHO.

[mattclearing]

96. The machinery is set up to help some and hurt others.

This is where the media comes in. Look what they had to do to stop Howard Dean.

[Protagoras]

61. Many of us think you are perfectly sane.

But wonder how you are just now figuring this all out :P

[Geek_Girl]

62. This sounds crazy

But I don't think they'll be an election in '08. I suspect that we will be in the middle of
world war III and they'll pull some asinine law out of their ass to postpone elections.


:tinfoilhat:

[mattclearing]

110. Only if the GOP finds some way to flip the script.

But if Bush is peddling the Hillary storyline, I'm willing to bet they play along.

[Jara sang]

63. Read Carroll Quigley's "Tragedy & Hope:A History of the World In Our Time"

He says there are no parties, The two party system is merely in place to keep people under control and at each others throats.

[radio4progressives]

174. Isn't Carroll Quigley someone Clinton quoted in a Speach in early 90's?

i recall someone posting voluminous excerpts from a huge tombe of Quigley's in reference to one of Clinton's early speaches. I don't remember now if it was a SOTU or pre-election era.

One thing that occurs to me, is to learn who potential candidates were mentored by - writers, scholars, world leaders - and really look deeply into those roots. don't know if it make much difference anymore at this juncture anyway.

[Jara sang]

178. 1992 Clinton's acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention.

[stickdog]

64. I agree 98%.

On a related note:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2439522&mesg_id=2439522

I'm involved with politics on a local level enough to know that real people with sincere concerns and beliefs can often effect tangible positive change. However, on the national level, it's beginning to look to me like that ship has long sailed. The outrages and political "battles" that come to our attention and then typically end up on a slow boat to nowhere resemble nothing more than orchestrated PSYOPS.

Gore's & Kerry's election "fights."
Ralph Nader voters "ensuring" 8 years of Bush.
Anthrax care packages.
Wellstone's "freezing rain" plane crash.
"Dirty bombs" and "enemy combatants."
Michael Moore promoting Oprah for President and mugging with Wesley Clark.
Nick Berg's "beheading."
CIA "good guys" and intelligence agency "infighting."
Dean's "scream."
Cleland (who gave General Myers his 9/11 cover story) quitting the 9/11 Commission in disgust.
Milbank writing catty "news" pieces on Conyers holding important hearings in basements.
"Brownie, you're doin' a heck of a job."
"So this is working out very well for them."
Bird flu.
Mad Cow(boy) disease.
The Alito filibuster "fight."
The Dem's "keen" response to the state of the union.
Vilsack saying that whether or not illegal wiretapping is illegal is "debatable" and warning Dems that standing up for the Constitution and the rule of law is "a political trap."

Democrats continually holding their tongues and quietly praying that Republicans will somehow get trapped in their own excrement while mass media assures us that their shit smells just like roses. The insane dream that a prosecutor that Ashcroft appointed is our best hope to bring down BushCo because we pray that's how our elites politely purge themselves after binging too much. The myth that a few crazy neocons somehow have the power to sell us all down the river against the supposed better judgment of more powerful corporate barons.

The whole game has simply been rigged from all sides. All the major figureheads and all the major pundits are coopted, coerced, directed, conned or simply planted. The "limits" of "reasonable debate" have been bought and paid for. Money talks. It's amazing to find the friends you can buy with small change.

Most of the recent political "controversies" and "scandals" that have been hyped as particularly newsworthy are rigged games. Most go nowhere by DESIGN. This makes any opposing audience that is paying attention to them angry, alienated and disaffected while serving to corrupt any applauding audience with the notion that the end (your "team" in power) justifies ANY means. This doesn't require a wide ranging conspiracy, just a few well-placed operatives who can influence what news makes it on TV repetitively and engagingly and what simply falls through this specific and critical crack.

In the few cases when these "controversies" and "scandals" actually have "outcomes," most of these outcomes appear to have been scripted for their psychological effect on their audience. This also doesn't require a wide ranging conspiracy, because many of these newsworthy "items" have been selected (hyped, leaked, etc) as such exactly BECAUSE their outcomes are wholly (or at least relatively) controllable. That's not to say that mistakes aren't made, nor that there are NO conflicting agendas at work among the powerful.

Perhaps a parable would be in order to help illustrate what I'm imagining. Let's say that you are working in IT for large corporation that's planning on buying an expensive new computer system and is "analyzing" three competing products for the job. One product is vastly superior to the other two, but the principles of the company have a financial stake in rejecting the superior product and guiding the "analysis" toward one of the inferior products. They hire a couple of expensive consultants to "point" the product selection process in the "right" direction, typically by carrot/stick cajoling anybody who objects and/or simply hinting that the strong preference of their superiors lies elsewhere. Who do you think is going to win this product selection battle?

The point of this parable is simply that when one wields a large measure of power, one can often influence events in a manner that suggests collusion without ever letting more than a handful of trusted underlings/true believers "in on the plan."

Two examples of what I'm talking about:

1) Nader in 2000. The one party corpocracy he supposedly ran to fight against is now undeniably upon us in all its sickening heinousness. On the other hand, we are repeatedly reminded that his candidacy helped hasten our doom.

2) Illegal wiretaps. First the NY Times sits on the story for about six months, then when it comes out, even the Democrats who come on TV to discuss the newest charges against our felonious badministration start sheepishly mouthing Repuke talking points about our supposed need roll back the 4th Amendment and separation of powers in "wartime." The fact that Bush broke the law and is trampling on the Bill of Rights and our Constitutional separation of powers shouldn't even be subject to argument, yet the media has framed a "debate" between "judicial niceties" and "hardnosed terrorist-busting."

Almost every time we are presented with two choices, they are both from the damned pile.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

Right, false debates are the media's stock in trade

More examples:

1) Should we attack Iran or continue with diplomatic pressure?
How about not making them out to be the enemy all the time?

2) Should we have high-stakes testing in our schools or go back to the days of low achievement?
How about figuring out what really encourages kids to learn?

3) Should we promote alternative fuels or keep gasoline cheap?
How about improving transit and intercity rail and designing and redesigning our communities to reduce the need for cars?

And an example from 20 years ago:

Shall we continue funding the Contras or put an embargo on the Sandinistas?
How about helping them in their efforts to improve the lives of Nicaragua's poor?

[mattclearing]

163. I mostly agree.

I think the Alito fight and others like it (ANWR, Iraq War Resolution, Patriot Act) show us who is who.

I don't want to name names here, because I like that this thread has stayed mostly pro-Dem, and that was my intent in writing it.

But it's clear to me that some people are inside the game and play along with it, and others are simply not.

The outsiders tend to fight hard, and win a lot of respect here on DU, and God bless them for it.

The media ignores them consistently until it's impossible to, and then they destroy them.

Dean is a great example.

[titoresque]

65. You're damn right! great post! K&R

:kick:

[SammyWinstonJack]

66. If you're crazy, I'm crazy because I believe as you do.

However, not all of us are so easily manipulated as evident by the large margin Gore won, and lets not forget Kerry and his win over Pinhead** in '04. Those who are willing to be manipulated by the Corporate controlled media, deserve what they get. Unfortunately, they are dragging us down with them. What I don't get is why the Democrats who seek the Presidency in '08 and those who seek re-election to Congress in '06 aren't gung ho on getting rid of Diebold and electronic voting? Why not address this very important issue? They know it's been a problem since 2000 and has hindered them from winning elections they actually won and taking back our Country. Mind boggling to say the least. :banghead:

[MellowOne]

68. The "secret" plan of the powers that be?

Excellent post.

[FreedomAngel82]

69. You're just now realizing this?

I realized this back in 2004 (before I wasn't political and didn't watch any of the talking head shows). It's all to protect the GOP. Look at all the polls. Every poll since the Terri Schavio nonsense (and if you count the exit polling polls) they have been on our side but the media likes to shut out our voices with rightwing pundints.

[mattclearing]

103. I've suspected it for a long time.

But when Bush himself starts perpetuating the storyline, suspension of disbelief goes out the window.

[helderheid]

132. when did he? Do you have a link? I missed this.

[mattclearing]

139. Here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=372270&mesg_id=377174

[helderheid]

147. thanks!

[Marleyb]

71. thank you for your insight!

:applause:



The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum."

--Noam Chomsky

[CrispyQ]

80. Hmmmmm. . .

Very lively debate within a very limited spectrum.


Interesting & effective.

[Pachamama]

74. I don't want anybody w/ the name Clinton or Bush on the'08 ticket.

Seriously....this country needs to heal and Hillary is way to divisive and I've never seen anyone be able to make the heads spin on Republicans. I know so many Moderate Republicans who would not vote Republican in '08 and would even consider voting for a Democrat - unless its Hillary.

And as for any Bush on the ticket, this country can't survive with another Bush in office....

[Domitan]

75. Spot on! I predicted Hillary's 2008 victory

On the night that Bush "won" the 2004 election, I said on here that Hillary would be the one to take it in 2008. Naturally, everyone who replied to that post dismissed it. Understandable where they were coming from, BUT as you pointed out...the manipulation game was going on that most weren't aware of.

[mattclearing]

116. Even during the Clinton presidency, the nutty freepers latched onto

intimations that the plan was 8 years for him, and then 8 years for her. That plan seems very much still in motion ten years down the road, doesn't it?

[Catherine Vincent]

76. So true!

Although I'm not too thrilled agreeing with that.:(

[mattclearing]

108. It's not fun to say it either.

Pretty depressing.

[helderheid]

77. kickey!

[Maven]

82. I wonder, if Hillary wins...

Will freepers then claim election tampering?

Activists on the left might inherit some strange bedfellows.

[mattclearing]

118. Absolutely true.

I think that is the silver lining in all of this...that some may see beyond the partisan veneer.

[Nothing Without Hope]

84. I agree. The monster has two heads - DLC & GOP - but one stomach.

Barring surprise scandals or health crises, John McCain will be the GOP candidate and Hillary is being shoved down our throats - we have to resist this and insist on a candidate who will actually speak for the people of this country, not corporate-based backroom politics as usual.

Here's how far MY speculative tinfoilhattery goes - I do wonder if the placement of Joe Lieberman as Kerry's VP candidate was one more layer of guaranteed control. If Kerry had somehow been officially elected despite all election fraud, SCOTUS crime and media bias, Lieberman could have been their ace in the hole, a way to get back control if Kerry proved too uncontrollable. Pure speculation, of course - :tinfoilhat: - but I have wondered about this. It was never clear to me why Lieberman was chosen in the first place, despite various explanations. But since we now know that he is a Bushie and a neocon wannabe, this very nasty idea has refused to go away. I wonder if anyone else has had it, or if I'm alone under this particular tin foil hat.

[Nothing Without Hope]

92. Sorry - braindead moment there. I MEANT Lieberman as Gore's VP

candidate of course. Too used to typing "Kerry" I guess. This conspiracy theory is pretty wild, I know, but to me the sigficance is that the Bush Administration is so depraved that I can even consider it as a possibility because NOTHING is too criminal, too foul for them if it promotes their agenda. No wonder conspiracy theories thrive in such an atmosphere. Will our government EVER regain our trust after the Bushies have done?

[Clara T]

85. You are correct

Scary!

[Mythsaje]

86. I've wondered this myself...

It's actually one of the things that kept me out of the political arena for a long time. I don't trust the information we're getting...I haven't for years. I don't trust the government, I don't trust media, I don't even necessarily trust "history." I think there are a thousand stories we're not being told, and may never be told, the secret things that lay behind the things we think we know.

I don't believe that aliens are here, or have infiltrated our government, but I don't think it's impossible. I'm not sure what's possible or impossible anymore. I know people who DO believe that, weird as it sounds.

All I know is that I'm certain we've been lied to, and often. About too many things.

The only question is how and why.

[mattclearing]

109. I think the key lies in the alliance between the CIA and corporations.

Not the government agency in Virginia. The real CIA, dominated by people like J. Edgar Hoover and George Herbert Walker Bush, which seems to have gone underground over the past thirty years.

Events are engineered to benefit American corporate interests all the time. People who notice the cracks in the surface of the narrative tend to be ignored or ridiculed.

But the cracks are often very real. See the 9/11 forum here at DU.

[grrl62]

112. you just wrote

exactly what i typed to a friend this morning. nothing surprises me anymore, and nothing is impossible.

there are so many lies, about lies, about lies.. at least that's the one thing that's true.

[Lorien]

87. Certainly the non-DUers I know who follow politics a little think

that Hillary will be the next President. I'm not convinced that she will be ( The base isn't fond of her and repugs will never vote for her) but I am fairly certain that she'll be made the nominee, like it or not.

[Freddie Stubbs]

99. So perhaps like Bush and the media, they are also in on the game

;)

[mattclearing]

129. The media is getting the masses ready for it. Softening us up, if you will

[rman]

89. next Pres.: either Hillary or (a) Bush

if it's Hillary, it will turn out that either
- Dems are weak on terrorism (another 9-11), and Repubs retake the WH
or
- Hillary admin is even worse then Bush admin.

if it's Bush again, we're screwed right away.


That's what i predict. I hope i'm wrong.

[Peter Frank]

90. Disagree...

Republicans will not relinquish any power that is not wrested from them.

[mattclearing]

100. As if they have a choice in the matter.

Once the media starts paying attention to their scandals, they will go down quickly and decisively. Do you really think the Republicans are responsible for their victories the past five years? Have you not noticed how integral the corporate media has been to their rise to power?

If the corporate media shifted its coverage, do you think they could survive?

[Nothing Without Hope]

91. ***Bush has talked about Hillary succeeding him as President. Read this:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/02/09/news/rivals.php

Bush-Clinton: A friendship with political uses

By Elisabeth Bumiller The New York Times
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 2006

WASHINGTON When the Bushes and Clintons held hands before 15,000 mourners at Coretta Scott King's funeral this week, it looked like a prayerful moment in the life of the nation.

But as almost anyone watching America's two leading political families knew, underneath the tranquil image was a drama of ambition, rivalry, love and alliance that could shape the 2008 presidential election.

(snip)

It was one of the most public manifestations to date of the odd friendship and mutual need of two dynasties that, on the surface at least, have almost nothing in common. But as President George W. Bush put it in an interview with CBS News last month, "Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton."

Bush made the remark in a telling exchange with Bob Schieffer, who said, "Well, you know, if Senator Clinton becomes president."

(snip)

[mattclearing]

102. Exactly the article that I was referring to...

...It confirms some deeply held suspicions of mine. The next two years will be interesting to watch.

[grrl62]

115. it's also interesting to note

that pappy bush was tight w/ bill during the tsunami relief efforts.. the whole "bill giving up his seat on the plane" nonesense etc.


yes, i believe it's all a ruse.

[Nothing Without Hope]

120. I keep remembering those sickening photos of Clinton with the Bushes

and Rice during the Pope's funeral, while Jimmy Carter was banished. THey're all part of the cabal. Clinton's first love, after himself, is power. And the Bushies have always done anything for money and political power.

[grrl62]

136. so i guess at the end of the day

it all comes down to power and $$ no matter what side of the aisle..

[Nothing Without Hope]

138. with some people, yes. With others, like Barbara Boxer and John Conyers,

NO. We have to oust the amoral opportunists and replace them with better choices for their positions.

[grrl62]

143. you're right.

but the trick is doing so. i think it will be a long process.. long but rewarding.

[helderheid]

133. thanks - I'd not seen this before.

[EFerrari]

93. I had the same thought. Interesting that several of us are

having the same Hilary moment. Suddenly, Poppy's courting of Clinton makes perfect sense as does the patent silliness of the Condi rumors.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2447914&mesg_id=2448441

[Bushy Being Born]

98. For Hillary to be president, she must first win the primaries

Something tells me she'll have a very hard time doing so.

[mattclearing]

104. I'd have said the same thing about John Kerry two years ago. n/t

[EFerrari]

111. In reality, yes. In the reality of our election systems, no.

:(

[Bushy Being Born]

121. But these are OUR primaries

Surely we can kick Diebold the hell out and count the votes as we see fit?

[mattclearing]

141. Check out the election reform forum.

The realities are not that simple, but yes, it is possible.

[spanone]

113. Cheney CRIMINAL IMPLICATION on page 5 of local rag.

this alone is criminal.

[mattclearing]

114. ?

[deutsey]

119. I've had similar suspicions for sometime myself.

[esvhicl]

123. HILLARY CAN'T WIN

This a myth perpetuated by the Republicans. Once again they are framing the debate.

Don't buy into it.

[deutsey]

124. I don't support her and hope she doesn't run

The basic premise of the overall rigged nature our system is what I meant.

[FredStembottom]

126. Yes, Hillary is the Repub dream candidate

Let's choose our own.

[mattclearing]

131. Agreed.

That is why we should all be astounded if it happens.

[FredStembottom]

125. This is simply self-sabotage

I'm sorry - and apologies all-round. But just as the evidence piles up sky high and the tide really begins to change and just as it looks like there really is a chance to end the Bush nightmare DU erupts in a chorus of "yeah we're winning.....but it won't matter anyway....."

Wow. That's just ridiculous.

The DU version of The End of History.

Clearly, Al Gore isn't playing along with this theory - nor Wes Clark - nor the Fighting Dems.

There is no such animal as Total Control...even if it seems so for a while (see Soviet Union).

The miraculously unstable, irrational, changeable, inspired nature of Man can't be frozen in amber.

I don't blame the original poster for being discouraged. We all have been. But it never fails that just as things start looking GOOD, someone will be there to try and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Don't let it be you.

[mattclearing]

130. I completely agree.

And have made several comments to that effect.

I'm just saying that we have to recognize the narrative in order to change it.

[mattclearing]

134. And another thing...my last line implies that I reject that story.

I don't know how we break the cycle...but I am convinced it needs breaking.

[helderheid]

135. I don't think anyone here is suggesting it's over - just a much more

formidable opponent. Gore rocks and I think just about everyone here would agree on that! On the same line, those who think the voting machines are rigged are not suggesting you don't vote - they are suggesting you fight to get rid of the machines and get audits in place!

[FredStembottom]

148. Super!

If I read the post as being totally defeatist and it isn't meant to be....then I wholeheartedly apologize.

Let's enjoy the hope that America can still be saved!:hi: Sorry, tasteblind!

[mattclearing]

149. No, it isn't defeatist at all...just trying to connect the dots so we know

what's really going on.

[0007]

137. Sometimes I think it is a tag team wrestling match preordained

by a power that the American people are never to see or know.

I sometimes wonder if it is just a one party game that takes place between two make believe parties that go through the motions of yeas and nay's.

[mattclearing]

140. Makes a lot more sense that way, doesn't it? n/t

[Bushwick Bill]

144. "The Flaw In Your Work"

"The flaw in your work is not in the legal foundation or in the way the evidence is presented, in your basic assumption that the system functions and operates as you think it should or the way it is described in textbooks. History is replete with instances of impeachable or prosecutable conduct which are much better documented, more easily proven, and more glaring than what you have described."

"In Watergate, there was an abundance of evidence that Richard Nixon had committed offenses far greater than the one which brought him to the brink of impeachment—obstruction of justice. The issue was not what offense would be used to remove him, but (as far as Congress was concerned) finding an offense which could remove a sitting president without destroying the entire American system of government. The same question governs Congressional response to 9/11," Ruppert wrote.

Ruppert went on to write, "The entire system is corrupt. Those who participate in it rationalize— in order to protect their seat at a crap table— that when one player gets out of line the primary objective is to protect the crap game. (I thank Peter Dale Scott for this analogy). I can guarantee you that many members of Congress are aware of every detail you have documented, and much, much more. . . To impeach Bush et al on the grounds you have delineated would open a can of worms that would call into question the legitimacy of the entire government. That will never be permitted.
“In the late 1990s I secured hard documents (much better evidence than you have presented from a legal standpoint) showing an active conspiracy to protect drug traffickers by the CIA that was sanctioned by the White House. An impeachment trial would have been open and shut. It never came about for the reasons I have stated above.

scroll down at the link
The Democratic Party, Like The Republican Party and The Media, Covered Up The Deep Complicity In The 9/11/01 Attack By Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Myers
By John B. Massen, Guest Writer — Summary Analysis
http://www.projectcensored.org/newsflash/unanswered_questions_911.html

[mattclearing]

145. It will be interesting to see how Bush goes down in light of this.

We know he only goes down when the media decides he does.

[wiggs]

146. Politics is a big giant Hannity and Colmes show. nt

[radio4progressives]

171. exactly .. n/t

[TheUnspeakable]

150. It really is the only thing that makes sense....

They pacify us for a few years, so things don't get out of control, (THEIR control).
After reading another GREAT post by Octafish about the BFEE and JFK,
about how the same people have been pulling the strings since then,
(and before?)I've been thinking "what about Clinton? how did they give up control
for 8 years?" the question has been on my mind for days. Then I come upon
this post (while at the same time I'm reading an article in the Chicago
Reader about how the book "What's the Matter with Kansas?" may have falsified
the numbers about Bush supporters- this was supposed to be one of "our" books)
and this is my sad, heartbreaking, totally hopeless conclusion -YOU'RE RIGHT!!

[mattclearing]

155. Octafish is so cool.

Such a great (not to mention tireless and fearless) source of information.

[TheUnspeakable]

164. he's the best-he's not a pawn like WillPitt..

just kidding Will!!!!!!!!!!:yourock:

[WilliamPitt]

153. I'll be turning goddam handsprings if Hillary wins in '08

Ditto for any Democrat sworn in in January '09.

If that makes me a pawn of larger, malevolent forces bent upon obfuscation and inveiglement, so be it.

[mattclearing]

156. I'll definitely be at the party too.

But I won't take off my thinking cap like I did through the first Clinton term.

[helderheid]

159. you and me both! I'll bring the champagne and take notes. :)

[Generator]

158. Your post is right on except for

Hillary actually being president. Now, she may well be the nominee. And you are right-we have been manipulated to believe she will be. Look out for a Kerry scream or an Edwards yelp or some unknown candidate that looks promising to be destroyed. That was a manufacted defeat of Dean by CNN and all the cable news shows. (and even stranger since he wasn't even winning the votes at that point-but he was put up to win and taken down) And you wonder why I'm stunned that people think sending e-mails is going to change CNN. They make the news. Oh I and I should find that link about a MSNBC producer (of Hardball!) giving talks about how to influence the conservative voter. Quell surprise.

Some people think it was a plot to get Kerry as the nominee. I don't. I think he just appealed to many for many reasons. But I've come to agree with the basic thought on it-too much of a gentleman when we needed someone vicious to defeat the Bush mafia.

Anyhoo-of course we are being manipulated. What's the I saved Los Angeles tripe we heard yesterday? I think I'm calling them terror grams now. They are sent with such love-the love of fear.

McCain is acting so weird-pissing fits with Obama of all people. He could easily sell his soul to get the nomination. If you see a McCain v Clinton ticket or any more Bush's-my advice is run for the hills. Not very constructive but that's what I'm thinking. And frankly, IF Hillary Clinton was allowed to become president I wouldn't trust her much more than McCain-because with the political realites in this country now-the corporate donors-the money-the corruption so deep-her soul would have to be sold too. (GOD I miss my innocent days of believing that the RIGHT candidate could solve all our problems-that was only November 2004)

[mattclearing]

160. McCain is another outsider.

He will never be president. Just the railing about pork and campaign finance is enough to make all the wrong enemies.

[cry baby]

161. hasn't the corp media already pronounced that Hill can't beat McCain?

So the media will be electing McCain, but will love the campaign of the possible first woman president.

[mattclearing]

165. Somehow McCain will never get elected.

I don't believe he has earned the trust of the people who make such decisions.

[Emit]

162. I'm bookmarking this thread so I can dig it up when Hillary becomes

pwesident in 2008 and then we can revisit this topic again!

Seriously, though, tasteblind, I, for one, have similar thoughts and concerns. How can any of us not, really? And seriously, I am bookmarking your thread. What's that old saying? Life is strangeer than fiction ...

[mattclearing]

166. Thanks.

I said earlier that I am merely staking out my territory for the inevitable "I told you so."

[helderheid]

179. fiction is taking its cues from life at this point! LOL

[Emit]

181. How true! n/t

[CJCRANE]

168. What if the arrangement

is that Bush is given 8 years to knock over the oil countries, grab the oil and the money..

Then Hillary gets 8 years to build up the economy and clean up the mess..

Then Jeb comes along and..here we go again..

[mattclearing]

169. Pretty much. Good cop bad cop.

The world breathes a sigh of relief that Bush is over, while the Western powers quietly thank God that Bush took care of all the dirty work of securing the oil.

[radio4progressives]

170. The Appeasement and alliance of Fascists Policies Similar to Mussolini

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mussolini>

Under the dictatorship, the effectiveness of parliamentary system was virtually abolished though its forms were publicly preserved. The law codes were rewritten.All teachers in schools and universities had to swear an oath to defend the Fascist regime.

Newspaper editors were all personally chosen by Mussolini himself, and no one could practice journalism who did not possess a certificate of approval from the Fascist party. These certicicates were issued in secret, so the public had no idea of this ever occurring, thus skillfully creating the illusion of a "free press".

The trade unions were also deprived of any independence and were integrated into what was called the "cooperative" system. The aim (never completely achieved), inspired by medieval guilds, was to place all Italians in various professional organizations or "corporations", all of them under clandestine governmental control. Another change is that all schools, newspapers etc. etc. had to not write the 13th of June 1933 but instead had to write the 13th of June of the 11th year of Mussolini's power.

Mussolini played up to his financial backers at first by transferring a number of industries from public to private ownership. But by the 1930s he had begun moving back to the opposite extreme of rigid governmental control of industry. A great deal of money was spent on highly visible public works, and on international prestige projects such as the SS Rex, Blue Riband ocean liner <1>, but the economy suffered from his strenuous efforts to make Italy self-sufficient. A concentration on heavy industry proved problematic, because Italy lacked the basic resources.

In foreign policy, Mussolini soon shifted from the pacifist anti-imperialism of his lead-up to power, to an extreme form of aggressive nationalism. An early example of this was his bombardment of Corfu in 1923. Soon after this he succeeded in setting up a puppet regime in Albania and in ruthlessly consolidating Italian power in Libya, loosely a colony since 1912. It was his dream to make the Mediterranean mare nostrum ("our sea" in Latin), and established a large naval base on the Greek Island of Leros to enforce a strategic hold on the Eastern Mediterranean. In 1935, at the Stresa Conference, he helped create an anti-Hitler front in order to defend the independence of Austria. But his successful war against Abyssinia (Ethiopia) in 1935–1936 was opposed by the League of Nations, this eventually led to Hitler seeking an alliance with fascist Italy. His active intervention in 1936-1939 on the side of Franco in the Spanish Civil War ended any possibility of reconciliation with France and Britain. As a result, he had to accept the German annexation of Austria in 1938 and the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia in 1939. At the Munich Conference in September 1938 he posed as a moderate working for European peace. But his "axis' with Germany was confirmed when he made the "Pact of Steel" with Hitler in May 1939. Clearly the subordinate partner, Mussolini followed the Nazis in adopting a racial policy that led to persecution of the Jews and the creation of apartheid in the Italian empire. Before this, Jews were not specifically persecuted by Mussolini's government, and were permitted to be high members of the Party. Members of TIGR, a Slovene anti-fascist group, plotted to kill Mussolini in Kobarid in 1938, but were unsuccessful.

<>

[Stand and Fight]

172. Hmmm... Can you answer a simple question?

When did President Bush predict Hillary would be the next president? I'm of the thought that anything that guy says usually turns out to be false, and therefore Hillary Clinton will not be president in 2009; that is, if Bush actually said this... Not starting anything -- just making a statement and asking a question.

[radio4progressives]

175. I think it was last week's SOTU or around that time..

sort of veiled but clear signal just the same..

[november3rd]

176. Thanks for taking the trouble

Thanks for taking the trouble to articulate this.

It's the Fortune 500 and the Pentagon, baby! Take one look at the Defense line in Bush's $437 billion budget, and you will know who is really calling all the shots.

2007 estimate (in $ millions) ..... 2,415,852(receipts) 2,770,097(outlays) –354,245 (total)

Think of all their secret agencies and vast, labyrinthine classified programs, buildings, operations, equipment, bank accounts, personnel... they are the "man behind the curtain."

They succeed as long as we believe we're in charge.

That's where all this spying shit is going, too. It's for the greater manipulation of the public for the greater good of the public by the power greater than the public.

Man, we need to "Ukraine" these guys. Just mob Washington until they all slink away.

[Orsino]

185. Representative plutocracy.

Which white male millionaire in a suit is looking out for your interests?

Our "democracy" was never pure, anyway, and has required periodic correction. Once we let money start voting, it votes itself more and more influence. I believe that we're near another major correction, and I'm deathly afraid that this one won't be as peaceful as the New Deal.

[leeroysphitz]

187. We are at war with East-Asia. We have ALWAYS been at war

with East-Asia...

God Hell! I think I see the pattern...