|
It's a first for me. I haven't had anything good to say about them since they failed to question Dick Cheney about his meeting with Gary Condit on the very day--and during the very hours--of Chandra Levy's disappearance. (May 1, 2001. Two days later, on May 3, 2001, Condit, a Democrat, voted in favor of the Bush Junta's first tax cut for the rich, one of only ten Democrats who did so--a very close and controversial vote. That should have activated some reporter's nose, don't you think? Nada. The Condit/Cheney meeting wasn't reported until three months later, in a Newsweek story, in which Cheney's aides planted Cheney's version of the meeting--short meeting, routine political, two aides present. Three months to cock up a story and decide how to play the growing scandal around the Bushites' favorite Democrat.)
However, our Democratic leadership needs to know that their doublespeak about the war is not playing well, and readers/viewers of the news have a right to know that the great majority of the American people are good and pissed off about it. Now, if Bush's numbers were in the toilet, and the Democrats were actually representing us, and had not escalated the war, and had not larded another $100 billion into Dick Cheney's retirement fund, and their numbers were soaring, as a consequence, I wouldn't at all be surprised if the war profiteering corporate news monopolies failed to report it, or stuck it in paragraph 7, or put it in a box in the "People" section next to Paris Hilton's latest exploit. That's who they are. Jerks. And I'm sure that it's with a certain satisfied relish that the five rightwing billionaire CEOs who control all news and opinion in this country can now start associating the war with the Democrats. "Mission accomplished," you might say. But our Democratic leaders have only themselves to blame. In their current situation of not enough votes in Congress to stop the war or impeach these sons of bitches--because there are too many traitor "Blue Dog" Democrats* in our so-called Democratic Congress--they could have refused to propose ANY funding bill, or they could have stuck to their guns on a withdrawal timetable and sent the same bill back to Bush again and again. Or, back in 2002, they could have stopped the "Help America Vote for Bush Act" (aka HAVA)--electronic voting run on "trade secret," proprietary programming code, owned and controlled by rightwing Bushite corporations, with virtually no audit/recount controls--or at least warned the voters about this diabolical coup. If they hadn't backed Bushite corporations "counting" all our votes under a veil of corporate secrecy, then they might HAVE HAD the numbers in Congress to end this Bushite tyranny.
The corporate news monopolies fiddle their poll numbers. 2004 showed that, and we all know it to be true. But they can't really hide the big bad numbers on Bush, on the war and on Congress' lying, deceitful, hypocritical rubber stamp.
77% of the American people now opposed to the war--up from a substantial majority opposed, 56%, just before the war (Feb. '03)--and the war just goes on and on, more Iraqis killed every day and more U.S. soldiers. Vietnam deja vu all over again. And Congress just can't stop it; in fact, escalates it? Something's not right. Something was not right back in Feb. '03, and something is even more not right now. I think it's Diebold/ES&S secret vote counting. But you won't find the war profiteering corporate news monopolies reporting about THAT.
--------------------------------
*(Condit was a "Blue Dog" Democrat. He was the leader of the pack of these traitor Democrats, back in 2001. They take their name from some old Louisiana politician who had his hounddog's portrait painted in blue, and had it on the wall of his office. Strange southern "old boy" humor of some kind. Veiled bigotry (since it has to do with color)? Not sure. I've never been able to figure out what the symbolism is. But what it means, in substance, is that they vote to cut everything in the budget except military spending and their own porkbarrel projects. DLC, in other words, with an ambience of poll taxes and "whites only" drinking fountains. They've grown from ten members back then to about forty today. They control the current Congress. I suspect it's Diebold/ES&S election theft machines, in both the primaries and general elections.)
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
