Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Bush's War: Five Years Later




Today marks the 5th Anniversary of Bush's Illegal Invasion of Iraq and the continuing illegal occupation:
$3 trillion, $12 billion a month, 4,000 U.S. casualties, 100,000 + Iraqi deaths.

Labels: , ,

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

The $3 Trillion Dollar War

In their new book The Trillion Dollar War, Joseph Stiglitz, winner of the 2001 Nobel Prize in economics, and Linda Bilmes estimate the full cost of the Iraq "War" (invasion and occupation) to be $3 trillion (and the cost to the rest of the world to be another $3 trillion). (The Bush administration said the war would only cost $50 billion, the amount being spent every three months!)

For one-sixth of the cost of the war, the U.S. could put Social Security on a sound footing for more than half a century, without cutting benefits or raising taxes!

The U.S. national debt (which was $5.7 billion when bush became president) will be $2 trillion higher because of the war alone (in addition to the $800 billion increase under Bush before the war)!

The Bush administration LIED about everything to justify the illegal invasion of Iraq, including the cost!

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Why do (some) Feminists Hate Barack Obama (Black Men)?



Ferraro: "They're Attacking Me Because I'm white"

There was more fallout today from Geraldine Ferraro's Racist Attack on Barack Obama

Ferraro told the Daily Breeze of Torrance, Calif.: "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."

This from a woman who was chosen to be Walter Mondale's V.P. partner ONLY because she was a woman! And she was so dull she made Mondale look charismatic!

Hillary Clinton tried to distance herself from Ferraro's comment, sort of:

Clinton said, "I do not agree with that," and later added, "It's regrettable that any of our supporters _ on both sides, because we both have this experience _ say things that kind of veer off into the personal." (Ferraro is STILL part of the Clinton campaign.)

Obama called Ferraro's comments "patently absurd."

"I don't think Geraldine Ferraro's comments have any place in our politics or in the Democratic Party. They are divisive. I think anybody who understands the history of this country knows they are patently absurd," he told the Allentown Morning Call. "And I would expect that the same way those comments don't have a place in my campaign they shouldn't have a place in Senator Clinton's either."

Ferraro is pushing back: Ferraro is pushing back and standing by her statement:

"Any time anybody does anything that in any way pulls this campaign down and says, 'Let's address reality and the problems we're facing in this world,' you're accused of being racist, so you have to shut up," she told the Daily Breeze of Torrance, California. "Racism works in two different directions. I really think they're attacking me because I'm white. How's that?"

Why do Ferraro and some Pro-Hillary Feminists HATE Barack Obama? They are so envious that a black man is beating their candidate that they make outrageous sexist and racist attacks on Obama and his supporters!

UPDATE: Politico's Ben Smith dug this past comment by Geraldine Ferraro on Jesse Jackson in 1988:

A Ferraro Flashback:

"If Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race," she said.

Really. The cite is an April 15, 1988 Washington Post story (byline: Howard Kurtz), available only on Nexis.

Here's the full context:

Placid of demeanor but pointed in his rhetoric, Jackson struck out repeatedly today against those who suggest his race has been an asset in the campaign. President Reagan suggested Tuesday that people don't ask Jackson tough questions because of his race. And former representative Geraldine A. Ferraro (D-N.Y.) said Wednesday that because of his "radical" views, "if Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race."

Asked about this at a campaign stop in Buffalo, Jackson at first seemed ready to pounce fiercely on his critics. But then he stopped, took a breath, and said quietly, "Millions of Americans have a point of view different from" Ferraro's.

Discussing the same point in Washington, Jackson said, "We campaigned across the South . . . without a single catcall or boo. It was not until we got North to New York that we began to hear this from Koch, President Reagan and then Mrs. Ferraro . . . . Some people are making hysteria while I'm making history."

Why Does Geraldine Ferraro hate black men??

Labels: , ,

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

Is this the Beginning of the End of the Democratic Party?

With the help of Rush Limbaugh and many conservative voters and very negative campaign ads, Hillary Clinton won Ohio by 10% and Texas by about 3% Tuesday, and can legitimately claim to have a chance, though slim, of catching up to Obama's delegate count. The math does not seem to be there for her to win the nomination, but if everything goes her way from now to the end, and the "superdelegates" side with her, she could possibly be the Democratic nominee, which isn't good for a number of reasons.

Many voters, including myself, are beginning to have "buyer's remorse" for Barack Obama. While Clinton has ran an effective NEGATIVE and DIRTY campaign against Obama, he has not fought back as aggressively as he should have, which makes one wonder if he would really be a strong candidate against John McCain. But Hillary's negative, and unfair, attacks on Obama were effective. Although the negative ads were unfair and inaccurate, they showed that negative campaigns are more effective than "nice" campaigns (ask John Kerry, Mike Dukakis and Walter Mondale).

As much as I despise Hillary Clinton, I am also disappointed in Barack Obama. There is not much difference between the two Democratic candidates on issues like NAFTA, "free trade," military spending, or even health care. Both are peddling inadequate band-aid approaches to health insurance rather than taking on the insurance companies and proposing the only real "universal" health insurance program--a public single payer system. Neither will take on military waste and cut military spending. Neither will defend FULL equal rights for gays and lesbians (i.e., marriage equality), etc...

All this underscores a fundamental problem with the Democratic Party. What does the Democratic Party stand for? Why are Democrats running from its liberal traditions and embracing Republicanism and "smaller government"? Why are Democrats caving in to the most unpopular President in modern history to continue to fund the illegal occupation of Iraq and trying to find a way to give immunity to the telecom companies that participated in illegal acts against American citizens? Why haven't Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid stood up to the Republican MINORITY in the House and Senate? (Pelosi and Reid are two of the most pathetic weak excuses for political "leaders" I have ever seen!)

To say the least I am growing more and more disenchanted with the Democratic Party that not even an Obama nomination will do much to change, but a Hillary Clinton nomination will definitely fuel even more. It is looking like neither Obama or Clinton will defeat John McCain in the general election. If the Democratic Party loses THIS election, given the failures and unpopularity of Bush and the GOP, what purpose does the Democratic Party serve in the U.S. political system? Are liberals and progressives being duped once again into supporting the Democratic Party in hopes the party will "change"??

I will be honest, I am having a political crisis at this moment. I have been trying to work "within" the Democratic Party for 20 years, with little to show for it. Why should people like myself (progressives, democratic socialists, etc.) keep sacrificing our political values and principles by supporting the Democratic Party? And what are our options? The Green Party? The Socialist Party? The Communist Party (yes it still exists and has also been supporting Democrats!) Anarchism? What are our choices?

Like many other left/progressives, I am asking these questions this election year and may not be able to put my faith in the Democratic party nominee again.

Labels: , ,