Gulf oil spill is SO Obama’s Katrina

Which parallel is not analogous? Off New Orleans, massive devastation to environment and human health, predictable failure of flawed technology, inadequate official response which broadens tragedy. Leaving BP to shoulder cleanup is like tasking arsonists to extinguish their fire. BP is responsible, but needn’t be put in charge. Put every government resource into addressing this calamity, make oil industry write the checks. By any standards of a failed rescue, Obama’s watch is proving as laggard as Bush’s.

We can all express our awe at the scale of the spill, but who can believe the professionals couldn’t foresee it? The media ramped its estimates incrementally, but department first responders were theorizing 100,000 barrels a day right from the start.

I’m amused that conservative critics use “Katrina” in the pejorative, where they didn’t hold it against Bush. Katrina has come to mean colossal fail, but what did it mean for Bush? It wasn’t his Waterloo, it didn’t even stub his toe. Those who pretend Katrina was Dubya’s downfall are the same pundits who describe Iraq as a blunder. Lies. To tar President Obama with a tragedy of like magnitude of a predecessor is to remind the electorate how bad Bush was.

I’m pleased by the comparison because it pollutes your perception that voting matters. The choice of lesser of two evils means relative degrees of industrial strength toxicity.

Why aren’t Obama hopefuls confident enough to let their leader take this “Katrina” on? Let him own it and beat Bush’s legacy of indifferent passivity.

Are you provoked because “Katrina” presumes a callous failure, as yet in your opinion unmerited by Team Obama? I’d rather say it means disaster in the sense of a test which proved this nation’s horribly misplaced priorities. Has Obama’s administration brought better preparedness in the face of unforeseen peril coming in with the tide? In such a manner alone this oil spill will rival Katrina. If you are measuring only loss of human lives, look to the health impact which the crude infusion will bring.

Now if you’re asking if the oil spill is a “Katrina” land grab of coastal real estate, and excuse to gentrify New Orleans and remake gambling regulations to suit the casinos, perhaps not. But count the same relief contractors to make themselves spillionaires. Once again the residents will bear the burden of the labor and disruption, ultimately to lose their livelihoods and homes. This time instead of praising “Brownie” the president will praise BP for doing their best, as the media will assure us it was. The spill’s magnitude could never have been predicted, they’ll say, a mitigation of the damage beyond anyone’s capability.

Was “Katrina” a repudiation of our reliance on old levees? Not really. Will this Katrina mean a rekindled moratorium against new offshore drilling capers? I doubt it. Americans inland will probably write off the oceans. No longer pristine, what with mercury, hypoxia and now oil, why not Drill Baby Drill with what is there left to lose aplomb?

The US government’s hatred of Arab democracy is on display in Gaza

Gaza
“The democratically elected Hamas government was targeted for destruction from the day it won the elections in 2006.”

With that sentence in his commentary, Nir Rosen sums up the growing Gaza massacre Gaza: the logic of colonial power, a commentary that also deals with the US government misuse of the word “terrorist.”

“As so often, the term ‘terrorism’ has proved a rhetorical smokescreen under cover of which the strong crush the weak.” Yes, EXACTLY. Once, the Nazis called others terrorists, too.

Rosen does not mention the military suppression of the victory by the Islamic party in Algeria in the elections of 1991, which the European colonial powers and the US government completely backed up and covered for as it was done. Afterwards, tens of thousands died in the conflicts that ensued. From this election might very well have come much of Osama bin Laden’s anger at his US former allies and friends, the US government. Certainly this suppression of democracy in the Arab World must have played some part in the run up to 9/11.

So there is nothing really too new about the hostility of the US, Israel, and in tailing along, the European governments also, for their hostility to the fact that the Palestinian population chose democratically to be represented by Hamas after the US buying off of the PLO post Arafat’s death. All that nonsense about bringing democracy to Arabs from American elites that hate Arab democracy not withstanding.

What is there about supposedly supporting democracy in the Arab World that the US government has pawned off on a gullible, naive, and ignorant US public is on show in sitting by and allowing the Jewish carnage making in Gaza? Yes, it is ‘the Jews’ that is running this Gaza slaughterhouse, and they do it with ‘The Christians’ backing them up. These are the same sort of ‘Christians’ that slaughtered off so many Jews in World War 2. Both groups are absolutely shameless in their utter hypocrisy. They care not a hoot for the Arabs or democracy…. anywhere!

The US hatred of democracy in the Arab World is now about as exposed as it can get, and let us not hear this babble about the US government supporting it ever be brought up in the year ahead. The silence of Barack Obama as he supports the Israeli government and Bush Administration as they slaughter innocent Arab civilians is horrendous, and should bring shame to every single voter who got conned to vote for the guy. Unfortunately, people continue to want to think the best about the neo-Clintonite gang that Barack Obama has morphed himself into heading.

Make a dumb decision to vote ‘ the lesser of two evils’ in a pseudo US democracy, and then it becomes rather easy for most of these voters to justify further US government suppression of real democracy elsewhere. They just will not get that concerned with such slaughter. … that is, until the chickens come home to roost in the US, as they eventually will in one form or other. That’s what happened in 2001, 9/11, but still not all the chickens are back home to roost just yet.

Democratic Party awash in corruption scandal

ponziWhat do Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich and Bernard Madoff have in common? They are both Democratic Party kingpins, the likes of which Barack Obama climbed his way to White House power with. Bernie Madoff ran a $50 billion ponzi scheme from Wall Street but he also poured money into the Democratic Senatorial Campaign war chest ($100,000 between 2005 and 2008) and made large contributions to important Democrats on the Finance Committees, like Rep Henry Waxman and Senator Charles Schumer.

See “It’s Kristallnacht Two!” An Ethnic Cleansing in America By ALEXANDER COCKBURN for more about Madoff. And keep your eye on Governor Blagojevich’s hair piece, too, since this scandal has hardly but just begun. His defense should be, that selling of favors is actually the standard in our 2 corporate party system of American corruption, not a deviation from it! That’s just the simple truth.

These 2 corruption scandals are just the tip of the iceberg in regards to the overall corruption that Barack Obama’s Administration represents and governs through. Barack Obama has yet to even take over the Presidency, yet he and his party have been cooperating with the Republican Party to give away literally trillions of US government money to be used in bailouts for the profit making of the super rich, more war making for the military industrial complex, and cover-up for the torture regime of Dick Cheney and George W. Bush. These two criminal conspiracies, the Democrats and Republicans, co-govern this country, and it really is hard to distinguish the corruption of one group of these gangsters from the corruption of the other group. They are simply in it together.

Corruption is the element that is collapsing The Empire, and the whole world hopes the collapse comes sooner, instead of later. Meanwhile, at home here in the US, there has been no bailout from this corruption that our country has yet to pay the full price for. One thing is for sure, a Democratic Party awash in corruption itself can play little part in moving things forward for the American people. We are caught between a rock and a hard place. Simple as that. Time to get over our ‘lesser of two evils’ buy in to all this top dog corruption and criminality at the very top. Time for patience is coming to an end.

Common Dreams? Or is it censorship in common with the corporate media?

Ira ChernusThe biggest liberal website out there online, Common Dreams, informs us with its headline today that ‘OBAMA’S PROGRESSIVES: HOLDING, PUSHING, TUGGING’. Common Dreams has become a major resource for the US Left and liberal community in the last couple of years through its posting of many important commentaries by Leftists and liberals plus its convenient links that many of us use quite often. Unfortunately there is a big weakness of the site, and that is their censorship of commentaries, writers, and readers who are not completely 100% on board with their ‘support the lesser of two evils’, pro-Democratic Party point of view.

As a result, when I go to read their headline, I today get the message that THE WEBSITE DECLINED TO SHOW THIS WEBPAGE (to me) HTTP 403 FORBIDDEN. What is Common Dreams scared of from me?

The exact post I made to one of their commentaries that got me blacklisted from their site was made on election night and was linked the following day to a commentary at Common Dreams, from the one I made here on Not My Tribe titled Sadly, Barack Obama will probably get us OUT of Iraq by getting us INTO Iran. Many people who read Common Dreams material link to other commentaries that back up their opinions and beliefs, and I merely did the same.

But this belief that Obama’s election will lead to yet more war ran counter to their cheeleading for the Democratic Party, and earned me their shunning. And you know what? I still think it is most probable that attacking Iran is a most possible final result, post national arrival of Obama into the White House. How will the Common Dreams’ censor feel if this actually happens? Will he/ she remember the decision to put me permanentl offline from their site, for simply making this observation? Probably not.

I certainly do not feel all alone at all in being treated so shabbily by the Common Dreams Democratic Party cheerleading censor on their site. The site shuns many others, too, including the Libertarian site ANTIWAR.COM that it has never chosen to link to and acts as if the site does not exist. ANTIWAR.COM, you see, is a major resource for those who oppose what they call one of the War Parties, the Democrats? Can’t do that per play book of Common Dreams censorship. Not at all if you want publication there.

Also of note, is that Common Dreams likes anarchists somewhat, linking to the giant academician anarchist site, Znet, but has no links to overt Marxist links. Major antiwar activists (and presidential candidates) like Gloria La Riva will never see any comment of theirs allowed the Common Dreams site. CENSORED by the CD group-ling of ‘OBAMA’S PROGRESSIVES:HOLDING, PUSHING, TUGGING’. More like BLOCKING, I would say, and Common Dreams doesn’t like people that are aware of that, and will comment to that effect on their pro-Democratic Party site.

I could list many people whose comments will never appear at Common Dreams, merely because they are activist Marxists. Many academic anarchists act at election time though as Social Democrats, and Social Democrats can be easily herded into voting Democratic Party in the US. ALLOWED.

The thing about Common Dreams is that they are not real honest, and pretend often to have no bias for the Democrat Party even as they push them with countless articles praising people like Al Gore and Jimmy Carter, et al. With the final days to push to get Barack Obama elected though, they seem to have dropped much of their camouflage and subterfuge and the long time effects will be to make their site less attractive to people who actually do want uncensored Left opinion, and not just cheerleading for the new DP executives in power. The CD approach to activism is to try to herd all ‘Progressives’ into voting the Democratic Party. It really is about that plain and simple, but it would be much better for activism if this major Left resource in the US had a less sectarian and less Democratic Party partisan approach.

So to the question is it Common Dreams, or is it censorship in common with the corporate media? I leave you to contemplate that question? For me, I just know that I can no longer read the site on my home computer, let alone comment on their posted articles, all because I do not share their ‘common dream’, which seems narrowly limited to getting the Democratic Party politicians into office, and propagandizing for them. That’s why I see them as being so like the corporate media itself, which will only endorse one of the two corporate parties, and will censor those who want a different world.

As to those whose commentaries are promoted by Common Dreams? I will be writing to at least one of them, Ira Chernus who lives here in Colorado, and asking him what it feels like to have article after article of his promoting the idea of voting Democratic Party this last election published on the Common Dreams site, and then finding out how Common Dreams has censors who keep opposing ideas to his own offline at their Common Dreams site? I don’t think that Ira, or many of the other nice liberal Democratic Party voting writers, have given this censorship much thought. It reflects poorly on them though, when Common Dreams publishes their commentaries and then keeps ‘Progressives’ from actually being able to challenge their POV. Ira, that is censorship. Have you anything much to say about this?

PS.. That picture above is of Ira Chernus, whose multiple articles framed the Common Dreams site the last weeks of the election. He is a professor who happens to live in The Democratic Party Peoples Republic of Boulder.

Lazy thinking Americans want safe ‘change’ and they will only get Obama

jetWow! 175,000 show up on one day in Missouri at Democratic Party rallies to help elect political hack, Barack Obama. They are looking for CHANGE, capital letters. Sadly to say they will only get Barack Obama into office, and that is no change anybody can really believe in at all. Except for lazy thinking Americans who want change that is actually more of the same thing… IMPERIALISM.

Think if these same lazy thinking Americans had gone out in the same force to antiwar demonstrations where we would be today? They are the same types of people that think that demonstrations accomplish nothing, so instead they only go out to vote for political hacks who they think of as being the lesser of two evils. Lazy thinking, know-nothing people are what bring nations into crisis. Ask the Germans about that. These people could just as easily have mobilized themselves for the cause of really changing America, but they didn’t.

As long as people continue to vote for the lesser of two evils, we can never hope for anything better than evil.

Conservatives never learn. Jeb Bush involved in collapse of Lehman Bros. [Reuters]

Jewish Taliban brutally beating women in Jerusalem.

Wednesday is Constitution Day, a day to mourn the destruction of the US Constitution under NeoCon rule.

Heckofajob, Brownie. FEMA failing Galveston and Houston just like they did New Orleans after Katrina.

Excerpts from Thomas McCullock’s Sept 16 notes, thomasmc.com.

Common Dreams website lames itself to aid the limping Democrats!

CommondreamsPity the poor Democratic Party liberals. They just cannot tolerate dissent to their so-called ‘lesser of two evils’ politics of constant tail-ending submission to the big business political party called The Democrats. In a sorry spectacle, their main go-to web site, Common Dreams, deliberately crashed itself to shut off discussion from its readers during the Democratic Party Convention!

The reason they did that is that so many of their readers are so critical and angry at the Democratic Party that the pro-Democratic Party liberals running the site just could not tolerate that comment section anymore, and especially not during the Democratic Party Convention weak. As a result, there will be no angry comments about Joe Bidden and Barrack Obama on Common Dreams. They are having ‘technical problems’.

What a pitiful thing to hide their censorship behind though. The ‘technical difficulties’ were self-imposed by the web site owners and almost all their readers can see quite easily just what was behind this ruse. Common Dreams had a quite well done commentary section until they deliberately crashed it by changing (for no reason at all) the format just days before the Convention!

Through the many years, Left of The Democrats critics of their Republican collaborationist politics have seen no end to the dirty tricks of liberals aligned with their sick, sick political party. Nothing surprises most of us about DP-voting liberals any more and all the lengths they will go to stifle condemnation of the Democratic Party from other Americans more radical than themselves. Shame on you, Common Dreams! You closed down conversation about your sorry-ass backing of the Democrats right when it was getting hot!

SORRY!
We are experiencing temporary technical problems. Our tech team is at work. Please stay tuned.

Go to Common Dreams, and you will see a picture of tied-by-ball-and-chain-to-the-DP Norman Solomon right below this message. Funny if it wasn’t so sad and pathetic. Norman’s stupid smile next to the message of ‘technical difficulties’ was just perfect!

When preaching ‘nonviolence’ promotes violence

The division in Denver amongst groups supposedly building protests at the Democratic Party National Convention offers us a prime example of how excessive preaching of ‘nonviolence’ in a religious manner can actually encourage police violence against the protesters who are the most critical of the dominant political establishment.

Groups allied with the United For Peace and Justice coalition split off from Recreate ’68 claiming that the leaders were not sufficiently committed to being nonviolent. By doing so, they gave the police rhetorical backup for anything they might do at the DNC to protesters that come to protest the politics as usual agenda of the Democratic Party. This split was a divisive blow against having a united Left political organization focusing on advocating Progressive ideas at the big event, which the DNC represents in the US, and those who arrive to protest will find themselves in the streets with a split organizing leadership, all due to the rather sectarian religious rhetoric of the ‘nonviolence’ preachers.

The truth is, the Democratic Party tied leaders of the United for Peace and Justice don’t really want that much of a real protest at the DNC because most of these UFPJ leaders’ are tied to the philosophy of voting for the so-called lesser of two evils. They plan to encourage people to vote for the Democratic Party candidate. The non-violence issue has allowed them an excuse to make the protest against the Democratic Party smaller, divided, and inconsequential. Further it allows them to label their political opponents in the Peace Movement, those not tied to the Democratic Party like they are, as being unreasonable agitators who want confrontation, which is actually how the corporate press of this country wants to portray all protesters.

The reality is that there are no members of the Recreate ’68 coalition that are violence prone, and everybody wants the protests at the DNC to be nonviolent. However, the ‘I am more nonviolent than you’ preaching from the Alliance for Real Democracy crowd has obscured that, something that can only help create greater police violence and not less.

Is there life after SaveDarfur?

Update: Retired UN ambassador Lakhdar Brahimi is interviewed on BBC the World: Elder statesmen seek Sudan progress.
Save Darfur from UN peacekeepers of Pax Americana.
If you can’t support the SAVE DARFUR call to arms, where does that leave you?

Is there no “grass roots” non-profit think-tank network supporting financial incentives to encourage benevolent stewardship on the part of the Sudanese government? (Maybe none flush with money.) Is there no one urging US and allies to quit arming those fighting the government forces so that China wouldn’t be called upon to resupply munitions to Khartoum?

That is whose fault?

Is there no congressional representative you can call to suggest legislation laying out diplomatic encouragement in lieu of divestiture and corporate maneuvers to snatch Sudan’s resources from the clutches of the Chinese?

That is whose fault?

Just because an alternative may be a little more complicated than can be explained beneath a compelling poster, is no excuse not to take the high road.

Just because your options are offered as the lesser of two evils: either approve UN peacekeepers or we will have to launch missile strikes, does not mean you have to choose either. Have you only Hillary or Obama to chose for presidential nominee? No you don’t. Would any other candidate stand a chance to be elected? Should you try and see?

Do not ask others to settle for your lack of imagination or stamina.