• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Commentary

A

Anonymous

Guest
Commentary: Bush fulfills H.L. Mencken's prophecy
By Joseph L. Galloway | McClatchy Newspapers

It took just eight decades but H.L. Mencken's astute prediction on the future course of American presidential politics and the electorate's taste in candidates came true:

On July 26, 1920, the acerbic and cranky scribe wrote in The Baltimore Sun: " . . . all the odds are on the man who is, intrinsically, the most devious and mediocre — the man who can most easily (and) adeptly disperse the notion that his mind is a virtual vacuum. The presidency tends, year by year, to go to such men. As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron."

My late good buddy Leon Daniel, a wire service legend for 40 years at United Press International, dredged up that Mencken quote several years ago and found that it was a perfect fit for George W. Bush, The Decider. MSNBC's Keith Olberman highlighted the same quote this week. A tip of the hat to both of them, and to Mencken.

The White House is now so adorned by Mencken's downright moron, and has been for more than six excruciatingly painful years. It wouldn't be so bad if the occupant had at least enough common sense to surround himself with smart, competent and honest advisers and listen to them. But he hasn't.

We inflicted George W. Bush on ourselves — with a little help from Republican spin-meisters, slippery lawyers, hanging chads and some judicial jiggery pokery — and he has stubbornly marched to the beat of his own broken drum year after year, piling up an unparalleled record of failures and disasters without equal in the nation's long history.

He inherited a balanced budget and a manageable national debt, and in just over six years has virtually bankrupted the United States of America and put us in hock to the tune of nine trillion dollars — a sum larger than that accumulated by all the 42 other presidents we had in two and a quarter centuries.

The man from Crawford, Texas, stood Robin Hood on his head almost from Day One, robbing the poor and the middle class so he could give to the rich and Republican. When the bills for those selective tax cuts, and his war of choice in Iraq, began coming due our president simply signed IOU's for a trillion dollars, with those markers now held by our traditional ally communist China.

Although he titillated the Republican conservative base with talk of his opposition to big government, Bush has presided over a far more grandiose expansion of government than even Franklin D. Roosevelt with his New Deal.

Faced with the tragedy of the 9-11 terror attacks — due in part to a dense and impenetrable federal bureaucracy which didn't know what it knew and wouldn't have shared it if it had known — the president created a far denser, far less efficient and far more expensive mega-bureaucracy, the Department of Homeland Security.

Having made one good move, attacking and toppling the Taliban and running al Qaida and Osama bin Laden out of Afghanistan in retaliation for 9-11, the president and his crowd then turned away, half-finished with Job One, and decided to "pre-emptively invade" Iraq, which had precisely nothing to do with the attacks on America.

In one stroke of George W. Bush's pen America went from being a nation that distrusted foreign entanglements and fought wars only when grossly provoked to a nation that attacked first and without credible reason.

That same stroke — and the ensuing five years of war in Iraq — wiped out whatever remained of our reservoir of good will with the rest of the world. The shining city on the hill donned camouflage paint and went to war in the wrong place at the wrong time against the wrong people.

Now George Bush could posture and strut as a wartime president; could style himself The Decider, and could decide which parts of the Constitution and Bill of Rights bought so dearly by generations of Americans he would give or take away.

The mills of the military-industrial complex went into high gear, as the defense contractors jostled for their places at a trough filled each year with half a trillion dollars of taxpayer money. The Republican political operatives milked them all like so many Holstein cows and the Republican lobbyists romped over to Capitol Hill buying congressmen by the baker's dozen to keep the pumps primed.

When one raison du jour for the war in Iraq failed — and all have failed — President Bush and his general-of-the-month could always come up with another to appease the gods of war and keep the machinery turning.

Throughout this ongoing national catastrophe Bush has kept close around him a coterie of incompetents and ideologues always on guard to defend the indefensible and justify the unjustifiable. They brush the lapels of the emperor's suit of gold and whisper that he is right and God will make him shine in American history.

Perhaps the crowning blow came when it was revealed that The Decider is now getting his strategic advice and counsel from none other than Henry Kissinger, the author of genocide in Cambodia; wholesale slaughter in Chile; abandonment of American POWs in Laos; betrayal of South Vietnam, and recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize.

God help us.

McClatchy Newspapers 2007

--General H. Norman Schwarzkopf has called Joseph L. Galloway, a military columnist for McClatchy Newspapers, "The finest combat correspondent of our generation — a soldier's reporter and a soldier's friend."
Galloway is the co-author, with Lt. Gen. Hal Moore, of "We Were Soldiers Once ... and Young," a story of the first large-scale ground battle of the Vietnam War. The book was made into a movie of the same name. Galloway was portrayed in the movie by actor Barry Pepper.--


http://www.mcclatchydc.com/galloway/story/19824.html
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. ...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.
Hermann Goring 1945
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. ...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.
Hermann Goring 1945
I'm for war. How else can you bring justice to an unjust nation? How else can you defend freedom?
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Red Robin said:
Oldtimer said:
Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. ...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.
Hermann Goring 1945
I'm for war. How else can you bring justice to an unjust nation? How else can you defend freedom?


Well....pack yer ditty bag RR and go sign up. I've a friend who is in the Rangers and he's early 50's....I suspect you're younger than that. I'm sure they need fresh meat!

People who are not actively personlly engaged in war always seem to be ' for war'....funny how that happens!
 

don

Well-known member
well if all the people who are in favor of the war in iraq would go and fight it might be going better because you'd be fighting for your convictions. just never seems to work that way; i.e. flyaway george and deferment dick.
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
You two are silly. Can't you come up with a sensible argument? Why not answer my question? I'm also in favor of sending men to the moon, does that mean since I can't go, I shouldn't have a say?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Red Robin said:
I'm for war. How else can you bring justice to an unjust nation? How else can you defend freedom?

I'm for war to defend the USA and fully support the war in Afghanistan. The only countries' freedom worth my son/daughter's life is the freedom of the United States. Since when was it the responsiblity of the United States of America to "bring justice to an unjust nation?" I know you were out supporting Bill Clinton's incrusion into Bosnia, weren't you? :roll:
 

Larrry

Well-known member
sarcasm, were you consistent. It is only fair that I ask, since ff asked.

Thanks for your response, stating your inconsitencies.
 

Cal

Well-known member
acerbic and cranky scribe
that obviously had no faith in the voters. Sounds like an ideal person for the libs to base a hit piece on, with them both having so much in common.
 

Cal

Well-known member
Faced with the tragedy of the 9-11 terror attacks — due in part to a dense and impenetrable federal bureaucracy which didn't know what it knew and wouldn't have shared it if it had known —
Make sure Clinton gets proper credit for that one.

the president created a far denser, far less efficient and far more expensive mega-bureaucracy, the Department of Homeland Security.
Which has succeeded in making sure we haven't been the target of any similar attacks since, and also proposes sealing off the southern border.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Cal said:
the president created a far denser, far less efficient and far more expensive mega-bureaucracy, the Department of Homeland Security.
Which has succeeded in making sure we haven't been the target of any similar attacks since, and also proposes sealing off the southern border.

A troop of boy scouts could put up more southern border security than Chertoff has accomplished--6 years after 9/11 and he's built only 18 miles of the 700 miles of fence he was ordered to do.....

But Chertoff is being a good old boy and doing what GW wants him to do on the border--nothing..... :( :mad:

One of GW's eltitst friends might miss a good old boy Bar B Que or something if he can't hire some slave labor nanny........ :roll: :(
 

Cal

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Cal said:
the president created a far denser, far less efficient and far more expensive mega-bureaucracy, the Department of Homeland Security.
Which has succeeded in making sure we haven't been the target of any similar attacks since, and also proposes sealing off the southern border.

A troop of boy scouts could put up more southern border security than Chertoff has accomplished--6 years after 9/11 and he's built only 18 miles of the 700 miles of fence he was ordered to do.....

But Chertoff is being a good old boy and doing what GW wants him to do on the border--nothing..... :( :mad:

One of GW's eltitst friends might miss a good old boy Bar B Que or something if he can't hire some slave labor nanny........ :roll: :(
So where's the outrage from the Democrats?? Where's the bill from Congress demanding that the borders be SECURED?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Cal said:
Oldtimer said:
Cal said:
Which has succeeded in making sure we haven't been the target of any similar attacks since, and also proposes sealing off the southern border.

A troop of boy scouts could put up more southern border security than Chertoff has accomplished--6 years after 9/11 and he's built only 18 miles of the 700 miles of fence he was ordered to do.....

But Chertoff is being a good old boy and doing what GW wants him to do on the border--nothing..... :( :mad:

One of GW's eltitst friends might miss a good old boy Bar B Que or something if he can't hire some slave labor nanny........ :roll: :(
So where's the outrage from the Democrats?? Where's the bill from Congress demanding that the borders be SECURED?

The Dems don't want to shut the borders down because they want more in the country when GW gives them amnesty-- because then they know that the majority of these new citizens will be new Democrat voters-- and GW keeps going right along with it.... :roll: :( :mad:
 
Top