The Hypocrisy of Paul Ryan, Part II

Stimulus? What stimulus?

On Friday, August 17, The New York Times ran a short article entitled “Ryan Said He Erred In Seeking Stimulus Money.” It related that Ryan now considers it a mistake to have asked for Federal stimulus funds in 2009. The article reports that Ryan had earlier denied asking for money from the $787 billion bill on behalf of companies in his district in Wisconsin. But the Boston Globe confirmed that he had written to the Federal Energy Department requesting financing for two companies to develop so-called “green jobs.”
“No, I never asked for stimulus,” Ryan said in an interview with WCPO-TV in Cincinnati . He and Mitt Romney have both denounced the stimulus as an example of Obama’s failure to restore the economy. The Congressional Budget Office said the stimulus created 1.4 million to 3.3 million jobs. In a more recent television interview, Ryan said that he did not recall writing the letters. Later his office issued a statement that he had since checked the letters.
“They were treated as constituent service requests in the same way matters involving Social Security and Veterans Affairs are handled,” Ryan said in the statement. “This is why I didn’t recall the letters earlier. But they should have been handled differently and I take responsibility for that. Regardless, it’s clear that the Obama stimulus did nothing to stimulate the economy, and now the president is asking to do it all over again.”
In other words, Ryan was for the stimulus before he was against it. What chutzpah! If Obama lets him get away with this, it will be a pity because it show Ryan to be the total hypocrite that he is. It is astonishing that the media is letting him get away with stuff like this. This guy speaks out of both sides of his mouth just as Romney does. They are quite a pair. When Romney saw Ryan, he knew he had found a kindred spirit in deviousness and deception..

The Hypocrisy of Paul Ryan

Jesus used the word “hypocrite” with great effect. And it is a word perfectly suited to describing Paul Ryan, much as Jesus used it against the false piety of the Pharisees. The sanctimonious Paul Ryan wraps himself in his Catholicism even as he advocates policies that will be devastating to the poor, the old, and the young–the latter who would be deprived of their much-needed Pell Grants.
Until only recently Ryan spoke of how he required members of his staff to read “Atlas Shrugged” by Ayn Rand, the book that is the basis for his free market, anti-governent philosophy. Mercilessly attacked by the Catholic Bishops of America for the cruelty of his budget as well as by a prominent priest at Georgetown, who let him have it in no uncertain terms, Ryan turned around by 180 degrees. Now he says that he read Rand’s novels when he was young and found them to be “entertaining” but that the inspiration for his values is Thomas Aquinas. He argues that Aquinas favored local, community-based solutions over those offered by the state. He is now going around the country preaching about the difficult life of the poor. A lot he cares about them. This hypocrite bows and scrapes before Sheldon Adelson, the casino billionaire who plans to spend 100 million dollars to defeat Obama. Ryan went to a fund-raiser at the Sands in Las Vegas to kiss the ring of the man who pulls the strings of the Republican Party. After the now-convicted businessman, Denis Troha, contributed $60,000 to Ryan, Ryan phoned up the Bureau of Indian affairs to tell them that the people in his district supported the casino Troha wanted to build there. Troha now says that Ryan told him personally that he considered the project “inappropriate” for the district. LOL.
Troha pleaded guilty to making unlawful contributions to Bush and to some Democratic office-holders to get support for another casino project. Ryan was not charged with wrongdoing but it is clear that his phone call to the BIA was a quid pro quo for that sixty grand he got from Troha. Is this the kind of guy you want to be a heartbeat away from the presidency? I can hardly imagine that Saint Thomas Aquinas would have endorsed this kind of behavior.

 

Ryan is not what he appears to be. He is no clean-as-a-whistle boy scout who is great with figures and

... if you're a gazillionaire.

a terrific policy wonk. That is a myth concocted by the media and the Republicans. He is a calculating, ambitious character who schemes with Eric Cantor to bring down John Boehner so Cantor can become Speaker and Ryan can ultimately be president. Should Romney lose, Ryan will hit the campaign trail for the Republican nomination in 2016. Ryan really is a snake in the grass posing as a statesman. Beware.

Romney’s Choice

Snake oil, anyone?

The Rasmussen poll indicated that only 37 percent of Americans have a favorable opinion of Paul Ryan, so one might think that this was a suicidal choice. The Democrats are licking their chops. But all of this could well be premature. Ryan will energize the campaign and if he makes a terrific speech at the convention, which I am certain he will, Romnney’s poll numbers will go up the way John McCain’s did after Sarah Palin’s speech. But whereas Palin proved to be a liability, Ryan should be able to handle himself quite well. This could sustain the momentum.

 

Ryan’s job is to keep attacking spending, something designed to appeal to independent voters who could start to like him more. And no question, spending will be a big issue as the Republicans will assert that it’s the spending and the deficit that are causing the sluggish economy and the eight percent unemployment. Ryan will also keep up the mantra that there should be no tax increases because tax increases hurt the economy. By cutting taxes, he will argue, the economy will grow and there will be more revenue to balance the budget and pay down the debt.

 

Americans have short memories so the Democrats are going to have to remind the voters that this is

Something D-O-O economics? Voo-Doo economics?

what George H.W. Bush called “voodoo economics.” Reagan’s budget director David Stockman now blames the Republicans from the time of Reagan until today for the economic mess the country is in.

There is no question that many will buy into Ryan’s argument since very few even remember the Laffer Curve, which predicted that a cut in taxes would bring in more revenue. It was false then and it is false now. As for an austerity budget, you have only to look at Britain to see that this doesn’t work. British growth has actually decreased and they are heading towards another recession. If you’re going to cut spending, you have to do it, as Terry Sanford used to say, “under the supervision of a physician.” What he meant by that was that drastic cuts were like a crash diet–you will end up putting all the weight back on. Drastic cuts will hurt growth and lead to a bigger deficit.

 

But more than this, Ryan is not sincere in saying that Romney and the Republicans will be able to tackle the deficit. He actually favors a dramatic increase in defense spending, which shows him to be nothing but a typical congressman who plays the same old Washington game–give Lockhheed Martin whatever it wants and cozy up to its hordes of lobbyists and the generals who are capable of undermining their own Secretary of Defense. They and the hacks in the Defense Department will go through the revolving door and end up working for Lockheed even as Lockheed executives will end up with important positions in the Defense Department. The lobbyists will assure the flow of campaign contributions to congressmen who, like Ryan, do their bidding. Ryan is not a breath of fresh air. He gives off the same old stench of the Iron Triangle that runs Washington.

 

Ryan is often praised for his courage in taking on entitlements. But that is also untrue. His plan to privatize Medicare (a terrible idea in any event) will, he admits, not kick in for another ten years. Where is the savings in that? And cutting back on benefits from Social Security and extending the retirement age will for certain be met with considerable hostility. Ryan has given every indication that he is backing away from that position.

 

Paul Ryan is a phony and if the voters buy his snake oil, they will get what they deserve. The only question is who is the bigger phony, Ryan or Romney? There is a wonderful line from Preston Sturgess’s “Hail the Conquering Hero.” ”The phony aways wins until a bigger phony comes along and then he wins.” But I don’t believe Obama is a phony.  He has made mistakes and has his faults. He is a politician, with all that entails but he has done his best to represent all of the people, not special interests. The American people better wise up or they will end up in a worse condition than they are in now.

The Contradiction of Paul Ryan

Help for ordinary Americans? Ryan Shrugged.

Republican Congressman Paul Ryan worships Ayn Rand and makes any new staff member read “Atlas Shrugged.” His campaign to abolish safety net programs has little to do with a desire to balance the budget and everything to do with his political philosophy based on Rand’s hatred of the state. How his plan to privatize Medicare will go over in the election remains to be seen. He also wants to abolish Social Security in gradual steps.

 

Yet Ryan, who comes from a wealthy family, received his college education at Miami University in Ohio, a state research institution. He benefitted from the low tuition that a state-run university was able to provide him. Would he abolish Miami University? Someone should put that question to him. In this respect he is not unlike the Tea Partiers who demand that the government keep its hands off their Medicare.

 

In a larger context, the underlying issue is what does “smaller government” mean? Does it mean creating a much more efficient government that makes better use of taxpayers’ money or does it mean abolishing the safety net. Libertarian hero Noble Prize-winning economist F.A.Hayek supported Social Security. What he opposed was a centrally planned economy, which is quite different from abolishing Medicare and Social Security. There are ways to increase funding for these programs without gutting them, such as extending upward the income level at which Social Security taxes are collected making those who make their money from buying and selling securities pay Social Security taxes and raising the Medicare taxes on those who can afford to pay more.

 

Ryan’s position is untenable. He would cut back or abolish essential programs while keeping the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy. The

Supply side plans via Paul Ryan.

argument for his position is the old Republican “supply side” economics that was tried and failed. This is all Ryan has to offer and it will not work. Under Reagan and Bush this approach created huge deficits and this will be the result once again. Obama’s deficits have been designed to prevent a depression and he is amenable to cuts to the budget to bring it under control. Instead of working with him, Ryan advocates policies that will harm average Americans. That, of course, doesn’t mean they won’t vote for it. As Churchill once remarked, “the best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.”

What Young Lawyers Should Do

A bird? A plane? No, it's a lawyer!

Many years ago I was seated at a table next to Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas at a Columbia Law School luncheon in Washington, D.C. He was an impressive man and looked not unlike Spencer Tracy. At some point, I asked him what a young lawyer should do. His answer came back in a short. “Practice law and go into politics.”

 

There are numerous young law grads in search of work who also owe thousands in student loans. They have no idea what to do or how to pay back the loans. They need to use some imagination to get out of their predicament. They should search Martindale-Hubbell and find single practitioners in small towns around the country and contact them and ask them if they could work for them, without pay if necessary, to learn the ropes. The older the single practitioners, the better because that would give you a chance to take over their practice when they retire. Get involved in the community and join a church. When you are ready, register in one of the two major political parties. If you are in a red state, register Democratic because there are always people in those communities who want to change things and upset the status quo. Get around, join Rotary and the like.

Then get into politics on the local level where ideology is not important. Learn the issues and appear practical. Go to as many meetings

Either or if you're running local.

and community luncheons and dinners as possible. Be sure to have lots of cards to hand out. If the lawyer you are working for still doesn’t pay you, open your own practice with your own clients. Don’t worry about your student loans. You can start repaying them as soon as you start to make money, which you will. People say there are too many lawyers but there is always room for a good one. Small-town lawyers tend to be lazy so be anything but. They will resent you, but so what? Take any kind of case and get to know the assistant DAs so you can plead out speeding tickets.

 

Get married to a local girl whose family knows lots of people. Be terribly nice to everyone and get elected to some local body. Keep at it and keep your eye set on higher targets, like the state legislature and even Congress. Don’t be surprised is you find yourself nominated for higher office. And laugh at all those so-called successful grads from the top law schools toiling nights at the big firms in the big cities. Most of them won’t make partner and the ones who do will be stressed and depressed. And don’t ever forget that the world is your oyster.

 

You will need some money to start so ask your parents or other relatives. Don’t be shy. They will be making a good investment.

Origin Of The Six Day War

The origins of the Six-Day war that changed the face of the Middle East are very different from the common historical narrative. The entire affair was a mistake engendered by an intelligence lapse that may or may not have been deliberate. I learned this during an interview with Jonathan Pollard at the Butner Federal Prison where he is serving a life sentence for spying for Israel, itself a travesty and miscarriage of justice that no one seems to have the nerve to rectify. But that is another story. What Pollard, who had access to highly classified material during the period he served with Naval Intelligence, volunteered to me is both shocking and disturbing because what otherwise might be described as a comedy of errors has had tragic consequences and put Israel in a hazardous situation from which it appears unable to extricate itself.

 

According to Pollard, Soviet intelligence informed Nasser that Israel intended to attack Egypt, which was false. Pollard says it is not clear if this was simply a failure of Soviet intelligence or a deliberate provocation to start a war in the Middle East. Whatever the reason, Nasser believed the report and ordered his air force to mobilize. Israeli intelligence got wind of this and reported that Nasser was planning to attack Israel, which he had no intention of doing. The Soviets also told him that Israel was massing troops at the Syrian border. Based on this erroneous conclusion, the Israeli air force struck and demolished the Egyptian air force in its entirety and then attacked Egypt, pushing its army back until Israel controlled all of Sinai. Because Syria, with Egypt, was technically part of the same country, the United Arab Republic, a nation in name only, Israel moved against Syria and seized the Golan Heights. It also bombed the American ship, the Liberty, claiming it had been a mistake. Israeli troops also moved against Jordan, which had entered the war reluctantly, and took all of Jerusalem that Jordan had captured during the 1948 war as well as Gaza and the West Bank, all of which they occupied. In doing this, Israel, created a constant source of friction between Israel and the Palestinians, who had no desire to be part of Jordan and who had rebelled to free themselves from Hashemite rule. The Palestinians played no part in the war and were innocent bystanders who had not fired a shot against Israeli troops. Many of them were displaced and joined the refugee camps to which victims of the 1948 war had fled.

 

Shimon Perez, who served two terms as Israeli prime minister although he was never elected in his own right, came up with the idea of the settlement program, something that in recent years he claimed to regret. Ariel Sharon ordered the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza but the occupation of the West Bank persists, with Israel continuing to expand the settlements there. They have also moved Jews into Arab neighborhoods in East Jerusalem, which they claim as Israeli territory and part of united Jerusalem, the new capital of Israel.

 

When Egypt attacked an unprepared Israel during the Yom Kippur war in order to reverse the results of the 1967 war, its troops were successful in driving Israeli forces back from the Sinai and threatened to invade Israel proper. Golda Meier pleaded with President Nixon to provide her with new aircraft and other armaments she needed to repel the attack but Henry Kissinger advised against it. Nixon overruled her and sent the planes, enabling Israel to beat back the Egyptians and regain the upper hand. That led to the Arab oil boycott that caused Nixon to end the gold standard and let the dollar float freely, changing the course of American economic history. Israel and Egypt made peace, with Israel returning the Sinai in exchange for full diplomatic recognition and trade between the two countries. But no such agreement was reached with Syria and with no one representing the Palestinians, they were powerless to end the Israeli occupation of their territory.

 

And so the stalemate continues, all because the Soviet Union misinformed Nasser of Israel’s intentions. Egypt’s ignominious defeat and the new American policy of providing Israel and Egypt with considerable amounts of aid generated a smoldering resentment in the Arab world and particularly in Egypt because of the military dictatorship established by Mubarak after the assassination of Anwar Sadat. Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden’s successor as leader of Al Qaeda, was a physician and dissident in Egypt whom Mubarak imprisoned in one of his cages where prisoners were packed in unsanitary conditions. When he escaped, he joined forces with Bin Laden and encouraged him to declare war against the United States because of its support of Mubarak, whom the revolution in Egypt eventually overthrew, leading to the victory of the Moslem Brotherhood and the Salafist victory in the parliamentary elections. Meanwhile, in Syria the revolt against Assad has become a virtual civil war, with one of the resentments against him being his failure to get the Golan Heights back from Israel.

 

All of this was caused by an accident in history. The Soviet Union is long gone and the Arab socialism it sponsored vanished as well. The Middle East is now an unknown, with the future looking increasingly dangerous and Israel’s position more precarious than it has been in decades, all the result of a failure of intelligence a half a century ago.

Eye Of Newt

Why NOT me? These other guys are nuts.

It seems like a century ago when Newt Gingrich led the charge to overthrow decades of Democratic rule in the House of Representatives using his Contract for America as the blueprint for an agenda that included balancing the budget and term limits. At the time, the Democrats were stale and liberalism an obsolete political philosophy that had hardened into political correctness. What Gingrich did was nothing less than to revolutionize American politics, turning Tim O’Neil’s maxim that all politics was local on its head. Thanks to Gingrich, all politics was now national and he ran the Congressional campaign as if it were a British parliamentary election. The Republicans won and America has never been the same.

But no sooner had he been sworn in as Speaker, he opted to accept a book deal from Rupert Murdock for millions of dollars, violating the rules of the House. Term limits vanished from the agenda. Dick Morris, Bill Clinton’s close advisor, told Clinton to adopt the Republican agenda by balancing the budget and changing the welfare system to end permanent dependence. It worked and Clinton won reelection.

Then Gingrich blew it by closing down the government. The Republicans lost numerous seats in Congress and he resigned. His legacy was his censure by Congress for ethics violations and his party’s defeat. Most wrote him off as finished in politics and it appeared as if he wrote himself off as well. His extramarital conduct became the stuff of legend and he vanished from the political scene, starting a consulting business and authoring countless books, including works of fiction. He married his last mistress and became a Catholic.

When he announced his candidacy for president, most dismissed him off as a has-been with absolutely no chance of winning. As if to confirm this, he took his wife on a cruise in the Greek Islands and most of his staff quit. He announced his intention of staying in the race but this was counted as bravado. He had no money and no organization, yet he had sufficient numbers in the polls to get into the debates, during which he actually sounded sane and he began to attract attention. The radical right, in its quest to stop Mitt Romney, first went with Michele Bachmann, whose over-the-top comments made her seem loony. Then they supported Rick Perry, who turned out to be an idiot. There was the flirtation with Herman Cain, whose campaign imploded in the wake of allegations by women of sexual misconduct. Because Ron Paul opposed aid to Israel, he was anathema to the Evangelicals so his poll numbers have remained in the low teens. Finally there was Newt, who espoused conservative values with sufficient clarity during the debates that he began to pick up support. No one was more surprised by this than Newt himself, who was running in order to keep charging thousands for speaking engagements, receive lucrative book contracts and increase the clientele of his consulting business. It came out that he has made millions as a consultant to the health-care industry and to Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac, but none of this halted his sudden rise.

This was a “new” Newt, observers said, more mature and stable, whose new-found religious faith made his past personal transgressions fade into insignificance; he had gone to confession and been forgiven.

So far, his poll numbers have not been affected by the negative ads attacking him in Iowa since most people are concerned about the economy and think Romney is a Wall Street insider, a representative of the old GOP Establishment, which the Tea Party despises. In their search for a candidate of their own, they settled on Newt, with his unadulterated support for capitalism.

But is this really a new Newt? Remember Richard Nixon’s comeback, when commentators described him as the “new Nixon”?

No, that's the old Newt. I'm the new Newt.

He was more self-assured and less strident and looked comfortable in his skin. He bested both Nelson Rockefeller and Ronald Reagan for the Republican nomination and won a close election against Hubert Humphrey. In the wake of the disastrous McGovern campaign, he won his long-sought landslide and seemed to have more power than any president in the past, including Lyndon Johnson, who had self-destructed.

But this was no new Nixon at all. It was the same old Nixon, devious, dishonest and vicious. Under pressure, he cracked and became the first president in American history to resign. Gingrich is made of the same stuff and the Republicans will nominate him at their peril. But what he’s got is an ability to throw the base raw meat the way no other candidate can. His remarks on the Palestinians show he knows how to appeal to key constituencies of the GOP in a powerful way. It would be a mistake to count him out because, like Nixon, he has a subterranean connection to the worst impulses of many Americans and is unafraid to exploit that connection. Democrats, gleeful at the idea that Newt could be the Republican nominee, should remember that they could get what they wish for and come to regret it.

The Curse Of West Texas

West Texas Cowboy, just like "W", but without the brains.

When some people lament the possibility of yet another Texan as president, they need to consider another aspect of this provenance. The problem is not Texas. Ron Paul is a member of the House of Representatives from Texas. The great Barbara Jordon was from Texas. No, the problem is West Texas. Lyndon Johnson was from West Texas and George W. Bush invented himself as a West Texan. And Rick Perry is from West Texas.

West Texas is notorious for producing recalcitrant and bellicose men. They have that swagger that Bush so exemplified, the cowboy walk that makes them look as through they are headed for a shootout. They are uncompromising and stubborn and brook no criticism. When their minds are made up, they are made up. Around the rest of Texas, they are both loathed and admired because of their combination of strength and recalcitrance.

Lyndon Johnson, whose strength enabled him to get the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the 1965 Voting Rights Act, Medicare and Medicaid through Congress, also got America deep into the Vietnam War. He dressed down military officers who came to see him in the White House if he didn’t like what they had to say, making them stand throughout the meeting and then summarily dismissing them. For all his greatness, he could be mean, vindictive and petty. He liked to be seen riding his horse, high in the saddle. The result of this West Texas mentality was that there was no criticizing him for what he was doing in Vietnam. The CIA so feared him that they doctored the body count so he wouldn’t come down on them. In a once famous incident, when Johnson was touring Vietnam, an officer said to him, “Mr. President, this is your helicopter,” indicating the one Johnson was to board. Johnson’s reply was, “Son, they are all my helicopters.” And Johnson, much as Bush won the presidency by a few votes because of what was fundamentally a hoax, won election to the Senate from Texas by a handful of votes in what most regard as a fixed election, leading Texans to call him “Landslide Lyndon.” Johnson’s lawyer in that episode was Abe Fortas, whom Johnson later appointed to the Supreme Court and was his choice for Chief Justice until Fortas had to resign because of ethics problems

Pete Seegers’s famous song performed at Woodstock, “The Big Muddy” summed up Johnson’s incredible stubbornness, even when reality was staring him in the face. He kept leading the country in a disastrous war that could not be won unless he nuked North Vietnam. All his bombing raids in the north came to nothing.

Next, there was George W. Bush, who was so determined to be seen as a West Texan that he began speaking

I say, I say, I say, vote fer me!!!

like one and wearing cowboy boots to erase his Andover, Yale and Harvard Business School patina as the scion of a wealthy and powerful New England family. George H. W. Bush, who settled in Texas, was forever the New England patrician and Bush wanted none of it. He managed to become president after a fraudulent election that he “won” by some three hundred-and-something votes in Florida, giving him a victory in the Electoral College while he lost the popular vote. When his “win” was confirmed by a weird Supreme Court decision that went entirely along party line affiliation (except for Stevens who went with the Democrats because he thought Gore would win and name him Chief Justice) Bush morphed into Johnson and got America into the war in Iraq, dismissing General Shinseki for telling him he was going in with too few troops. Like Johnson, there was no talking to “mission accomplished” Bush. George Tenet, the Director of CIA, was so terrified of him that he made his famous “slam dunk” response when Bush asked him whether or not Saddam Hussein had WMDs. And Bush was every bit as arrogant as Johnson, ordering Carl Rove to hang up his jacket at cabinet meetings. The argument that Cheney was really the boss was untrue. Bush was like Henry V, determined to invade France, a project that while successful in the short run, proved to be a disaster in the long run. He ordered the disbanding of the Iraqi army, guaranteeing armed resistance, arranged for Iraq to be governed like a colony, with Americans holding key government positions and George Bremer functioning as a Viceroy. Only when the Iraqis themselves demanded elections did he make democracy the objective of the invasion, after it was clear there really were no WMDs after all.

Which brings us to Rick Perry, the West Texan par excellence. Even in a well-tailored suit, he still wears

Nuke Iran, Yeee Haaawww!!!!

cowboy boots and a gigantic cowboy belt buckle. You have to know exactly where this dude is coming from. And this one has a chip on his shoulder every bit as big as Johnson’s or Bush’s. Johnson’s chip was that the eastern elite looked down on his as a yokel. He knew full well that Jacqueline Kennedy referred to him as “Colonel Cornpone” behind his back. He went to South West Texas State Teachers College and he believed all the Ivy League liberals looked down on him no matter what he achieved. The anger in him was palpable and it exacerbated his aggressiveness.

W has an anger that cannot be assuaged. He knows full well that his parents’ hopes rested with older brother Jeb, but only when Jeb failed to win election to the United States Senate from Texas, did W emerge as the second choice. After he became president, he never consulted with his father and remained distant from him. That rage, like Johnson’s, led him to adopt a bellicose foreign policy in which he offended most of the world and launched a war because of made-up reasons, much as Johnson made up the Tonkin attack on American vessels that led to the resolution justifying military force in Vietnam.

Rick Perry is a true West Texas Aggie, a product of Texas A& M, a university that bears the brunt of “Aggie’ jokes based on the presumed stupidity of its undergraduates, many from, you guessed it, West Texas. When Perry said that if the chairman of the Federal Reserve, Ben Bernanke, were to come to Texas, “We would treat him real ugly,” that was Perry in a nutshell. It must be remembered that when Johnson was Majority Leader of the Senate, he proclaimed in a speech that “American boys should not fight Asian boys’ wars.” But as president, he filed that away somewhere in the limbo of a desk drawer and sent five hundred thousand American troops to Vietnam. Perry will behave in like manner. And much like Johnson, he will appoint his cronies and contributors to high positions.  Perry knows the elites in Texas look down on him because he grew up dirt poor and is an Aggie. The Yalie Bushes have nothing but contempt for him and he knows it.

Rick Perry says America should never intervene militarily unless it is “absolutely in America’s national interest.” Already, the old Bush neo-cons are attaching themselves to him, plotting a war with Iran. Perry will really get off on that. He will use the threat of Iran’s nukes as a justification. Bill Keller and Thomas Friedman, the elites of the New York Times, supported the war in Iraq, calling for the invasion from their roosts at the top of the elitist tower. Now, they say how sorry they are that they ever did that. Keller uses his reluctance to look like a Latte drinking liberal defeatist as his justification. But once the reasons for the war include not only those Iranian nukes, but also the existential threat to Israel, they will be egging Perry on. And he will lap it up, his six shooters in each hand blazing away. If America elects another West Texan, it will get what  it deserves.

JIMMY CARTER, MICHELE BACHMANN AND THE CHRISTIAN RIGHT

Praise Jesus! And pick me!

When liberals complain about religion entering the political sphere, they forget where it all started. Democrat Jimmy Carter, a “born again” Christian, courted the evangelicals relentlessly.  He would march on stage as a band played a Baptist hymn, as though he were Jesus incarnate.  As he was doing this, he got his friend, Burt Lance, to get his bank to lend his campaign millions of dollars, giving him a leg up on the competition.  The authorities forced Lance out of banking for life, but Carter became president.

Not to be outdone, Ronald Reagan, never particularly religious, was seen praying on the campaign trail, his eyes closed tight, surrounded by a pack of dumb goyim who thought he meant it.  But it was Ralph Reed who became the master of this strategy.  A protégé of Pat Robertson, he turned Christian politics into a lucrative business. Years later, it was Karl Rove who organized the Christians into a potent religious force and had Bush blabbing about his conversion.  It worked and Bush snuck in.

Now the liberals are in a furor over Michele Bachmann, who manages to wear the mantle of the Christian right, which is in its usual snit over gay marriage, while joining the neo-McCarthyist right in denouncing Obama as an anti-American socialist. She has called for an investigation of those in Congress who are, in her words, “un-American.” Her response to the passage of the gay marriage bill in New York State was to announce that she would support a constitutional amendment banning it.  She is also the new darling of the Tea Party, calling for drastic cuts in the budget while keeping the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.

What is fascinating about Bachmann is that both she and her husband, a “Christian therapist,” were ardent supporters of Jimmy Carter and worked to get him elected.  Carter was first in redefining the role of government, declaring the old days of “big government” over well before Reagan.  With his ostentatious conservative Christianity, he created the very ideology now prominent on the right.  But when he lost to Reagan, the Bachmanns got the message.  Total opportunists, they became right-wing Christian Republicans.  Not about to spend her life as a tax lawyer for the IRS, she set her sights on much higher goals.  She made her name first in her battles with her local school board, taking extreme right-wing positions.

With her suburban good looks and brilliant white teeth, she has caught the imagination of the Tea Partiers, who see her as a stronger candidate for president that Sarah Palin.  Her poll numbers keep climbing, surpassing those of Tim Pawlenty and catching up to those of Mitt Romney.  Her supporters don’t care about her gaffs saying that the battles of Lexington and Concord took place in New Hampshire, for example, or that Waterloo, Iowa ,was the birthplace of John Wayne. Just one problem: the only famous John Wayne who ever lived in Waterloo was serial killer John Wayne Gacy. It matters not at all to her devoted followers who are increasing in number every day.

Her big advantage is that she is in the trenches, fighting in Congress for the values of the Tea Party and the Christian right, while remaining on

Me, the next President? Thank you, God!

very good terms with the regular GOP leadership.  This makes her unique among the announced Republican candidates.  Because of this, there is a push by powerful Republicans for Rick Perry, the photogenic governor or Texas, to enter the race.  They see in him the new Reagan, with his craggy, movie star good looks and his genial manner.  Never mind that he has run up a gigantic deficit in Texas, a state with the most people without medical insurance. His claim to fame is all the jobs that Texas has created during his three terms as governor, many of which are low paying service industry jobs with no benefits.  It won’t matter.  If he chooses to run, it will be like the second coming.

Unlike Bachmann, Perry can sweet talk America to go further to the right than ever.  But should he win the nomination, his likely choice for vice president will be Michele Bachmann.  There’s a winning ticket for you.  Everyone at the Nation Magazine will pack up and head for Canada.  People on the Upper West Side in New York will be tearing their hair out. You can just imagine the scene in Hollywood. By then, America will be beyond reform.  But it’s great news if you are a revolutionary.  As Lenin said, “the worse it gets, the better it is.”

Terry Jones Is A Criminal

Don't play with matches.

When Terry Jones publicly burned a Koran and put it on Youtube, the First Amendment did not protect his actions.  He had reason to know that there was a likelihood of a violent reaction in Moslem countries where non-Moslem Westerners were present.  The number of United Nations personnel who died in Afghanistan has not yet been determined but the figure at present is in the neighborhood of ten. Riots have broken out throughout the country.

The standard for determining if the First Amendment does not protect speech, which includes symbolic speech such as burning the flag or in this case, a copy of the Koran, was set out definitely in Brandenburg V. Ohio.  Speech is not protected by the First Amendment if it constitutes advocacy (1) “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action,” and (2) is “likely to incite or produce such action.”   There can be little doubt that Jones knew exactly what was likely to happen when he burned the Koran and publicized it globally via Youtube.  The fact that it did happen only confirms his intentions.  He cannot immunize himself by saying that he hoped what he was doing would not incite violence.  He is guilty of the crime of reckless endangerment and Florida has an obligation to take action against him.  He knew that his actions would place American troops in Afghanistan and Iraq in great danger.  As soon as any of them is killed by a violent act he is guilty of knowingly encouraging it.  His motive was precisely to have this result to get attention for himself as the leader of a crusade against Islam.

Is it safe?

Is the inaction the result of not wanting to appear to be soft on Islam? If so, this is a disgrace.  And because the effects of his actions went beyond the State of Florida the Federal Courts have jurisdiction over him.   The Justice Department should begin an investigation to see what Federal statutes he violated by his actions.  This is something that should not go unpunished.   It is bad enough that Peter King, a Long Island congressman, launched a Congressional investigation into Islam.  By doing so he gave sanction to what Jones did, basically encouraging it by his own rhetoric when he called for the halting of the construction of any more mosques in America.

America is at war in five Moslem countries with a major military base in another that is in the middle of a revolution against the government that is host to the base.  Jones’s actions are a deliberate attempt to undermine America’s national security by engendering hatred against our troops.  He is giving comfort to our enemies.

Apart from his criminality, Jones represents the kind of American stupidity that plagues the country in its foreign relations.   America could end up losing all of its Moslem allies because of heavy-handed behavior that alienates the very people the country needs on its side.  The last time this happened was during the Cold War, when people who called themselves conservatives like William Buckley opposed civil rights on the grounds that blacks were inferior and that the whites in the South had a perfect right to maintain their superiority.

Why an ardent anti-Communist like Buckley should have maintained such a stupid position is difficult to understand, particularly since he was an intelligent person.  American racism hurt America during the Cold War.  Black Africans were winning their independence and were being courted by the Soviet Union.  Day after day at the United Nations, the Russians made gains by denouncing America as a racist country.  America supported the Apartheid regime in South Africa, driving educated blacks into the South African Communist Party which took over the African National Congress.  Marxist ideology was sweeping across Africa, threatening to deprive America of the critical resources there that it needed for military purposes.

Every day the Americans denied the blacks their rights the Communists gained ground.  This ought to have been

At what price victory?

obvious but white politicians in the South were not going to give up the race card that continued to win elections.  George Wallace and his ilk were damaging America’s national security but they could have cared less as long as they kept winning.  Wallace thought he could ride the race card all the way to the White House.  Nixon’s “Southern strategy” won him the presidency but further alienated the Africans, even though Johnson had managed to get the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act through Congress.   The only thing that saved America in Africa and the rest of the Third World was that the Soviet Union in the end had nothing to offer but a secret police.

Today some politicians follow the Terry Jones example, making life increasingly difficult for American troops in Afghanistan.  But as before, none of these people care about the country.  Terry Jones must be tried and convicted in order to prove these people wrong – yet again.