Machiavelli e melon, a refreshing salt-sweet taste unlike a pretzel
Well, it has been decades since I read The Prince. Perhaps it's time to take it up again.
blatham wrote:Well, it has been decades since I read The Prince. Perhaps it's time to take it up again.
Try for a start "The little prince".
Doesn't take so long and is more optimistic ...
... well, not really, I fear.
Walter
Read that one much more recently, in fact. Thank you for thinking of me.
New word to watch for... "urain'tium"
Now that is funny, Gel. Gets right down to the point.
This morning again there was more talk of, "is it a guerilla war or not" But somehow I felt the momentum slipping. The intensity was lower. Maybe I'm just afraid it will happen. But it did seem so. And on NPR there was a story about support groups for the spouses of service men whose homecoming has been delayed. A woman who runs a support group was talking about how she can understand their frustration (herself an army wife) but they have to remember "we are a country at war" and, while she knows they have the freedom to say anything they want to say to the press, they should not do so. The forces are at work to emphasize the "we are a country at war" aspect, the nationalism rather than the real human story. We'll see what happens.
Bushes in the White House Rove Garden
Bushes in the White House Rove Garden
Be careful of the seed you've sown
If in your plot an idiot is grown,
Banal weeds sprout mounds of pardon
In the Bush White House Rove Garden.
---BumbleBeeBoogie
Lola wrote:Now that is funny, Gel. Gets right down to the point.
This morning again there was more talk of, "is it a guerilla war or not" But somehow I felt the momentum slipping. The intensity was lower. Maybe I'm just afraid it will happen. But it did seem so. And on NPR there was a story about support groups for the spouses of service men whose homecoming has been delayed. A woman who runs a support group was talking about how she can understand their frustration (herself an army wife) but they have to remember "we are a country at war" and, while she knows they have the freedom to say anything they want to say to the press, they should not do so. The forces are at work to emphasize the "we are a country at war" aspect, the nationalism rather than the real human story. We'll see what happens.
well, there you have it in a nutshell. its the old conservative argument that you threaten the nation by exercising the rights you are allegedly fighting for.
heller wrote a whole book about this type of insanity, catch 22
Senate Rejects Panel on Prewar Iraq Data
By CARL HULSE
WASHINGTON, July 16 ; The Republican-led Senate defeated an effort tonight to establish a bipartisan panel to examine the use of intelligence in the prelude to the Iraq war. The vote came as Democrats pressed the Bush administration on the rationale for the war as well as on the long-term costs of military operations.
The vote also came on a day when George J. Tenet, the director of central intelligence, was questioned for nearly five hours behind closed doors by the Senate Intelligence Committee about his agency's handling of intelligence and as senior Democrats stepped up their criticism of the administration's Iraq policies.
Typical of this administration. The public neither has the need or right to know.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/17/politics/17DEMS.html?ex=1058500800&en=cc7a66a7934bfb01&ei=5059&partner=AOL
BBB,
Your poem is hilarious and directly to the point. Evidently Paula Zahn on CNN interviewed Pat Robertson last night. And good ole Pat did what he does best, act so totally certifiable that no rational person can feel safe with him in charge. Has Rove lost control of the best weapon (Robertson, Falwell, etc.) the Democrats have against any conservative Republican administration that makes deals with fundamentalists? If so, the campaign is made much easier. I wonder how Mr. PR (Rove) has managed to silence this crowd for so long. Surely the dam is about to break. These folks don't stay quiet for long. The pressure to make fools of themselves is great. So our question is, "does the Rove Garden have a developing case of black spot?" Common sense suggests that it's inevitable. Those who seek to win elections by methods which surpass the point that defines good, effective politics and falls firmly in the "we will lie, cheat, kill and steal in order to win" range, are eventually bound to have a backlash that will rapidly veer out of their control. Still, I feel a little frightened to hope just yet that common sense will prevail. (sorry about the mixed metaphors, it's early in the day for me.)
Au,
The link you provided above leads to an article that has made me think of another aspect of this. With the Congress and the White House controlled by the Republicans, Democrats are the underdogs. And the underdog story sells newspapers. The news media always seems to me to be providing opportunities for the underdog to have his day. This may work for the Democrats as well. People tend to identify and sympathize with the underdog. And this may fuel the press to change course and begin to investigate GW's policies rather than pander to him. I think up to now the Democrats have been afraid to make the rationale for the war an issue, fearing a backlash and the press has been cautious for this reason as well. After all, they need to sell the news.
Since the Republicans are in a position to behave as a ruling class of absolute authority, they are in the unfortunate position of appearing to be exactly what they are, punitive, authoritarian parent figures. And Americans don't like to be pushed around. I'm hoping the momentum for turning the tables is in operation. If the case can be made effectively that the real tyrant here is the administration and it's henchman (Congress) and not Iraq, the voters will turn against Bush and his buddies in the Rove Garden. We'll see. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.
somehow i hear another "oops" from the white house;
WASHINGTON - CIA (news - web sites) Director George Tenet told members of Congress a White House official insisted that President Bush (news - web sites)'s State of the Union address include an assertion about Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s nuclear intentions that had not been verified, a Senate Intelligence Committee member said Thursday.
Yippee! another oops helps the cause.
Did Bush say something about "case closed?" He ain't seen noth'n yet.
c.i.
seems probable that the senate republicans, by denying a "intelligence investigation" may very well be offering evidence of a cover-up. It appears to me that both sides of the political spectrum back home in Anytown, USA would like to have some real information, but then, i am often wrong.
"Case Closed" Very funny. It's going to just kill that man (giggling) to loose control of this thing. When GW discovers he can't just declare "we're not going to talk about that" and everybody shuts up, it'll require a major effort on Rove's part to handle a narcissistically injured Shrub. Can't wait.
Late on the thread:
A speech to the nation is not ad libitum. It is thought and throughly revised. Any politician "with a two finger forehead" (with a minimally working brain) asks for sources, precision and confirmation for his/her assestments. And must stand for his/her words.
I don't know if Bush was fooled. I don't think so.
I believe -but cannot affirm- that he wanted to give all the possible arguments/pretexts to support a previously taken decision. He didn't care about precision-truth.
In any case, I find it of bad taste, at least, to finger anyone when you're on top.
Years ago, I was taugh by my superior, that when you're in the middle, you don't blame your subordinates.
"Imagine that I tell the boss that I didn't really made a mistake, because my best man fbaezer asked "the Trotskyte" to check on a data, but the Trotskyte trusted Monica's information, which in turn came out from Dudeman, who's just learning how to search and is not too bright after all. Wouldn't that be ridiculous? I get full responsability of what I present. You get full responsability of what you present. So does the boss".
I believed in my superior.
The boss was former Mexican President Salinas.
Zen Magritte? I like it.
Okay, Lola:
The government announced today that it is chnging its emblem to a condom because it more clearly reflects the government's political stance. A condom stands up to inflation, halts production, destroys the next generation, protects pricks, and gives you a sense of security while you're actually being screwed.
DAMN, it just doesn't get any more accurate that that!!!
If only the American public can get that message. GW will probably claim it's about the big tent, until after the election.
