Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Donkey's Inn -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (1166)	11/26/2001 11:42:50 PM
From: Mephisto	Respond to of 15516

'Tips for interpreting the Talibush' Posted on Sunday, November 25 @ 09:58:10 EST By Michael Gabriel, Liberal Slant The war on terrorism has presented a golden opportunity for the fraudulent Bush Administration - heretofore known as the Talibush -- to grab a stranglehold on the use of the media for its own selfish means. It is important to understand what is really happening when you listen to any member of the Talibush speak in front of a camera. I have become the nation's leading authority on interpreting what the Talibush really means and what they are trying to get you to believe. And you can become an authority too, if you listen carefully. Here's a brief primer. TALIBUSH OFFICE HOLDER: Mullah George W. Bush MEDIA PLAY: Always seen in front of a camera when an important decision is to be announced. WHAT HE SAYS: Words written for him by other people that sound patriotic and almost always include the words "God" and "Evil." WHAT THE TALIBUSH WANTS YOU TO THINK: Mullah George is in control. THE TRUTH: He's a puppet that says what others want him to say. He's the PR-in-Chief, a mere spokesman, like Howdy Doody sitting on the right knee of the Rupert Murdoch and Richard Mellon Scaife. TALIBUSH OFFICE HOLDER: Reclusive vice president Dick Cheney MEDIA PLAY: Almost none WHAT HE SAYS: Quiet words; mumbo-jumbo WHAT THE TALIBUSH WANTS YOU TO THINK: He's a devoted side-man and counsel to the strong, powerful, all-knowing George W. THE TRUTH: He's calling all the shots. TALIBUSH OFFICE HOLDER: Rigid-backed Secretary of State Colin Powell, MEDIA PLAY: Repeated appearances in front of the camera. WHAT HE SAYS: Since he projects strength and believeability, he is the voice of assurance for the Talibush . WHAT THE TALIBUSH WANTS YOU TO THINK: The war is in good hands with Colin Powell involved - he was the architect of the Gulf War, which left Saddam Hussein in power. THE TRUTH: The Talibush had totally cut him out of its plans before Sept. 11, because his stand on many issues ran contrary to their own. But since they know that if he ran for president he would beat Bush in the republican primary by three to one, they keep their enemies close. TALIBUSH OFFICE HOLDER: Proper looking Condoleeza Rice, national security advisor MEDIA PLAY: Encouraged to get in front of the camera as much as possible. WHAT SHE SAYS: Intelligent words that sound as if she wishes she wasn't being controlled by morons. (I disagree. She is one of them! - Mephisto) WHAT THE TALIBUSH WANTS YOU TO THINK: The GOP is a big advocate of women and African Americans THE TRUTH: The GOP wants to see women wearing burkhas, walking 10 steps behind them and locked in the house raising the kids and making dinner for them, just like the Taliban. They lost the African American vote nine to one. Condoleeza Rice is way out of their league. TALIBUSH OFFICE HOLDER: Dour Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. MEDIA PLAY: Always available for an update. He's like your genial grandfather, who unbeknownst to you, is a serial killer. WHAT HE SAYS: Carefully chosen words designed to assure the American people that the war is going according to plan. WHAT THE TALIBUSH WANTS YOU TO THINK: Would this nice man lie to you? THE TRUTH: Rumsfeld is going to assure that GOP donor corporations who make their money off of government defense contracts get theirs and more. The more bombs he drops, the more they have to buy to replace them. TALIBUSH OFFICE HOLDER: Clueless-looking first lady Laura Bush (She's smarter than her husband, JMOP-Mephisto) MEDIA PLAY: The occasional and obligatory nods to education, children's issues, and women. WHAT SHE SAYS: Recent radio address was a riff on how horrible the Taliban treats women. WHAT THE TALIBUSH WANTS YOU TO THINK: The GOP is on the forefront of women's issues. Come, soccer moms, wives, grandmas working women everywhere, we're there for you. THE TRUTH: The Talibush is about as sincere in its desire to be an advocate of women's issues as it is to be an advocate of rights for gays. They want women to sit down and shut up while they wage war. TALIBUSH OFFICE HOLDER: Press Secretary Ari Fleisher MEDIA PLAY: The second most powerful government PR talking head after Bush himself. WHAT HE SAYS: Words that barely hide the complete and utter contempt he has for the Washington press corp. WHAT THE TALIBUSH WANTS YOU TO THINK: We have a place in our administration for Jewish people. THE TRUTH: The GOP is embarrassing in the way it panders to specific voter demographics that it does nothing to support in its policy-making. TALIBUSH OFFICE HOLDER: Failed senator, Fascist-like Attorney General John Ashcroft (He is a fascist in my opinion-Mephisto) MEDIA PLAY: Frequent press conferences WHAT HE SAYS: Gruff, mean-spirited words meant to create the impression that he is the ultimate authority for justice in this land, the high sheriff of the Talibush. WHAT THE TALIBUSH WANTS YOU TO THINK: This highly controversial and utterly dogmatic troll of a man is defending and protecting you against enemies of the state. THE TRUTH: Ashcroft has one agenda in mind: enforcing his dream of an extreme right-wing conservative police state where civil liberties have been curtailed and failure to toe the Talibush line targets you for wiretapping, anti-American propaganda and possible arrest. He wants to operate without being accountable to anyone. The most dangerous man in the country. There are others too, but they are minor players in the Talibush. Whatever this crowd says, take it with a grain of sa Michael Gabriel lives in Montana and contributes the occasional article to Liberal Slant Reprinted from Liberal Slant: liberalslant.com

To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (1166)	11/27/2001 1:51:13 AM
From: Mephisto	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 15516

All the Presidents' Words Hushed By ROBERT DALLEK, Los Angeles Times BOSTON -- Ever since the presidency became the focus of U.S. political life during Theodore Roosevelt's years in the White House, journalists and historians have discussed the importance of presidential decision-making. Why do presidents give priority to one domestic issue over another? Why and how do they decide between war and peace? Journalists initially answer these questions with the limited knowledge available to them, always mindful that "White House sources" provide them with the information that will advance a president's agenda and serve his political standing. Historians with the luxury of hindsight and, more important, access to a much fuller record usually give us a better understanding of presidential reasoning. Their studies are not simply exercises in academic analysis. They often educate presidents, who are always eager to learn what accounts for past White House successes and failures. President Bush, however, has severely crippled our ability to study the inner workings of a presidency. On Nov. 1, he issued an executive order that all but blocks access to the Reagan White House and potentially that of all other recent presidents. Practically speaking, Bush's order hinders the opening of 68,000 pages of confidential Reagan communications with his advisors. Under the 1978 Presidential Records Act, a systematic release of presidential papers in response to Freedom of Information requests can only occur 12 years after a president leaves office. The law's intent was to assure the timely release of presidential materials that would serve the government's and the public's understanding of the country's history, especially decision-making in the White House. The Bush administration, including a statement by the president himself, contends that the executive order is needed to guard against revelations destructive to national security. But this assertion will persuade no one who has even the slightest knowledge of presidential papers. Just a few days in the Kennedy or Johnson libraries would be enough to convince anyone that ample safeguards against breeches of national security and violations of personal privacy already exist, and these are for papers dating from the 1960s, not the 1980s. Moreover, access to previously closed documents make clear that presidents and government agencies always err on the side of excessive caution. If national security is not the motivating force behind Bush's executive order, what is? We can only speculate that he is trying to protect members of his administration, who also served under Ronald Reagan, from embarrassing revelations. It is also possible that he is endeavoring to hide his father's role in the Iran-Contra scandal. And it is imaginable that he is already thinking about shielding the inner workings of his own administration, or his excessive dependence on senior advisors in deciding both domestic and national-security issues about which many outsiders believe he has been poorly informed. Researchers trying to reconstruct the country's past are not the only losers when access to historical records is reduced. Current policymakers dependent on useful analogies in deciding what best serves the national interest are also harmed. The more presidents have known about past White House performance, the better they have been at making wise policy judgments. President Franklin D. Roosevelt's intimate knowledge of President Woodrow Wilson's missteps at the end of World War I were of considerable help to him in leading the country into and through World War II. Lyndon B. Johnson's effectiveness in passing so much Great Society legislation in 1965 and 1966 partly rested on direct observation of how Roosevelt had managed relations with the Congress. President Harry S. Truman's error in crossing into North Korea was one element in persuading George Bush not to invade Iraq. The recent release of additional Johnson tapes underscores how much historical understanding can influence presidential decision-making. Tapes of LBJ talking about Operation Rolling Thunder, the systematic bombing of North Vietnam begun in February 1965, reveal a president with substantial doubts about the wisdom of the air campaign. "Now we're off to bombing these people," Johnson said to Defense Secretary Robert S. McNamara. "We're over that hurdle. I don't think anything is going to be as bad as losing, and I don't see any way of winning." "Bomb, bomb, bomb. That's all you know," Johnson said to Army Chief of Staff Harold K. Johnson. " ... I don't need 10 generals to come in here 10 times and tell me to bomb. I want some solutions. I want some answers," the president declared. "Airplanes ain't worth a damn, Dick ... " he complained to Senate Armed Services Chairman Richard Russell. "I guess they can do it in an industrial city. I guess they can do it in New York. ... But that's the damnedest thing I ever saw. The biggest fraud. Don't you get your hopes up that the Air Force is going to" win this war. "Light at the end of the tunnel," LBJ told Bill Moyers about the bombing. "Hell, we don't even have a tunnel; we don't even know where the tunnel is." Johnson knew about post-World War II surveys of wartime bombing effectiveness. They demonstrated that the aerial campaigns against Britain and Germany not only didn't defeat them, they, in fact, stiffened resistance and encouraged greater civilian war efforts. Johnson's well-justified doubts about bombing made him all the more receptive to sending in ground forces. It's too bad that he didn't have access to a memo President John F. Kennedy had sent to McNamara in November 1962, a week after the Cuban Missile crisis ended. An invasion plan for Cuba, which might still be needed if the Soviets did not follow through on a promise to withdraw "offensive" weapons from the island, impressed Kennedy as "thin." He worried that "we could end up bogged down. I think we should keep constantly in mind the British in the Boer War, the Russians in the last war with the Finnish, and our own experience with the North Koreans." If historical experience dictated against an invasion of Cuba, how would he have felt about sending hundreds of thousands of troops into the jungles of Vietnam? Every president uses history in deciding current actions. President Bush is no different. Memories of his father's defeat over a failure to keep his promise about no new taxes and a seeming indifference to the plight of the unemployed have partly shaped his behavior as president. Bush might profit from a history of Reagan's dealings with former Soviet President Mikhail S. Gorbachev by an independent scholar, which his Nov. 1 executive order forecloses for the time being. Indeed, the principal victim of Bush's directive will be himself and the country. The order will inhibit independent study of the Reagan and first Bush presidencies and will impoverish the White House's ability to make difficult decisions in both domestic and foreign affairs during the next three years. The more the country knows about presidential decision-making, the better it can decide who to send to the White House. The study and publication of our presidential history is no luxury or form of public entertainment. It is a vital element in assuring the best governance of our democracy. Congress should reverse Bush's order as a destructive act that return us to an imperial presidency and robs us of our history. (Robert Dallek is the author of a two-volume life of Lyndon B. Johnson. He is completing a biography of John F. Kennedy) latimes.com