On Bush Republicanism: A Charade of Duplicity, Hypocrisy and Blasphemy

[struggle4progress]

By Playthell Benjamin

Recently the big shots in the Republican wing of the American Plutocracy – the rich and super rich who own the country and call the shots - gathered in Washington for an obscene bacchanal to celebrate the investiture of George II, scion of the reigning American political dynasty, the House of Bush. While “Joe Six Pack” and other plebian dupes looked on in admiration, decked out in their bargain basement duds, the plutocrats were awash in furs, diamonds, and designer gowns that cost more than most hard working Americans make for a year’s toil. The excesses and foibles of the filthy rich are especially repugnant just now, in view of the miserable plight of the poor souls condemned to hell in Iraq. But, sadly, this is the essence of the Bush Republican philosophy. George II calls this freedom and democracy; I call it a charade.

This sort of duplicity characterizes both the ideology of the Republican Party and the policies of the President. For instance, George II, “The Butcher of Baghdad,” who fled in horror like a yellow fellow when it was his turn to man the barricades in Vietnam, now cavalierly orders patriotic young Americans from the impoverished classes off to kill and be killed in a war he chose to start. <snip>

George II’s appointment of Condosleezza Rice as Secretary of State, and “Big Al, The Torturer, Gonzalez” as Attorney General, exposes the Republican’s hypocrisy to the world. After all, Condi is a warmongering witch who was a major architect of the plan to invade Iraq, and she also advised George II to build an anti-missile system that would violate the ABM treaty with Russia and initiate a new nuclear arms race. This development would further imperil all life on this earth. <snip>

Majorie Cohn, a law professor and executive vice president of the National Lawyers Guild, has prepared a formal indictment of Gonzales spelling out his crimes. The indictment accuses Gonzales of violating Title 18 of the United States Code section 2441, which holds that any US citizen who is guilty of committing a war crime shall be fined or imprisoned for any period up to life, or even the death penalty. Hence placing Alberto Gonzales, a man who is viewed as a war criminal by many Americans, in the Attorney General’s office, is viewed by people all over the Middle East and elsewhere as indelible proof of America’s hypocrisy on the question of human rights. <snip>

http://www.tbwt.com/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=407&Itemid=41

[silverweb]

1. A well-done piece.

The last lines are a perfect summation of this entire nightmarish administration: "...they are attempting to justify these unholy acts with the perfidious arguments advanced by the Christian right, claiming that Republicans are doing the lord’s work. And this, for sure, is blasphemy!"

[ixion]

2. people need to stop using race as a delimeter all together

this author is guilty of racism, just as much as the people he accuses, albeit perhaps unwittingly. Yet, if the roles were reversed, and you replaced the word 'black' with 'white' the exact same piece would be labeled a Nazi propaganda piece.

Really... read through it and flip roles, and you'll see what I mean.

"After all, White folks are a minority in this world, and their power elites want to preserve the dominant position that they have enjoyed for the last few centuries. It is one of the grand ironies of our time that “Aunt” Condi has emerged as their savior. But given her scurrilous actions toward Haiti, her indifference to the genocide in the Sudan, and her hard line on Iran, she will fail to win the hearts or minds of the peoples of the “Third World” regardless of her color: Like this writer, they have concluded: “Condi may be my color but she ain’t my kind!”
"

Now, I understand he's just being matter-of-fact here, but the same paragraph with the 'colors' flipped would be considered nazi garbage.

I may be alone on this one, but I just wanted to point that out.

[struggle4progress]

4. Of course, there's no such thing as "race"; the idea was invented ...

... to enable "divide-and-conquer" rule and to mystify the nature of subjugation. But often when people discuss "race," they're not exhibiting racism but a failure to think critically.

Bush's skin color closely resembles my own. But regardless of the skintone similarity, I find it almost impossible to regard him as "one of my people". Does that make me a racist in your eyes?

<edit: typo>

[ixion]

5. no, not at all

My point was only that if the same piece had been written by a white guy, and the words 'black' and 'white' had been swapped, that the piece would have been considered racist.

But I think your post really makes my point. There is no such thing as race, skin color has nothing to do whatsoever in regards to who you define as 'your people'.

BushCo aren't my kind of people either. That's not racist, just good sense. ;-)

[indepat]

3. May I add mendaciousness, reichousness, and sanctimousness?