Daily Kos

As Others See Us

Wed Nov 03, 2004 at 11:39:50 PM PDT

As we Kossians rack up zillions of words about what went wrong and argue about what to do next and how to do it, foreign columnists are weighing in with their take on second-term Bush. Neo-conservatism is much on their minds. A couple of examples:

Jonathan Freedland from the Guardian writes:
This is no passing phase. This is now an era

Those outside America, in the chanceries of Europe and beyond, who hoped that this would be a passing phase, like a Florida hurricane that wreaks havoc only to blow over, will instead have to adjust to a different reality.

For four years many hoped that the course charted by President Bush - a muscular go-it-alone view of a world divided between the forces of darkness and those of light - would prove to be a blip. Come November 2, 2004, they wanted to believe, normal service would be resumed. The United States would return to the old way of doing business, in concert with allies and with respect for the international system the US itself had done so much to create. The norms of foreign policy pursued by every president from Roosevelt to Clinton, including the first George Bush, would be revived. Senator Kerry promised as much.

Now that fantasy will be shelved. The White House is not about to ditch the approach of the last four years. Why would it? Despite the mayhem and murder in Iraq, despite the death of more than 1,000 US soldiers and countless (and uncounted) Iraqis, despite the absence of weapons of mass destruction, despite Abu Ghraib, the Bush administration won the approval of the American people. If Bush had lost the neo-conservative project would have been buried forever. But he won, and the neo-cons will welcome that as sweet vindication.

So it will be full steam ahead. "There are real threats that have to be dealt with," Danielle Pletka of the impeccably neo-con American Enterprise Institute told the Guardian yesterday. Iran would not go away - indeed, Ms Pletka warned, "force might be the only option" - nor would North Korea. "We can't all pretend that the world would be a prettier place if only George W Bush was not the president."

There were plenty of people around the globe who used to think precisely that way, hoping that the past four years were a bad dream which would end yesterday. Now they have to navigate around a geopolitical landscape in which President Bush is the dominant, fixed feature.
And Pepe Escobar at Asia Times says:

Damn politics, let's dance

The United States may have gone to the polls as a divided, uncertain, paralyzed-by-fear nation. Today it's still a divided, uncertain, paralyzed-by-fear nation, but now with a clear mandate for the state really to rock the geopolitical boat.

The "most important election of a lifetime" has sent a clear message to the whole world: the face of America in the next four years - barring a Richard Nixon-style impeachment - will be of unilateralism, the "war on terror" possibly progressively escalating into a clash of civilizations. And pay attention to the "axis of evil" hit list - the official and the bootleg. Bush II will attack what it defines as "state terrorism" - Iran, Syria - instead of the global jihadi network. It will continue to rely on Pakistan to "decapitate" the odd "high-value al-Qaeda". It won't engage in diplomacy to address the political causes of terrorism. It won't engage in a cultural and ideological effort to try to counteract the global jihad - especially now that Osama bin Laden and his deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri have changed the rules of the asymmetrical game from a religious clash to a political struggle against imperialism.

Total concentration of right-wing power - legitimized by the popular vote: this is the new neo-conservative dream turned reality. So the road ahead is to flatten the Sunni stronghold of Fallujah in Iraq, bomb Iran because of its supposed nuclear aspirations, depose President Hafez Assad in Syria, crush the Palestinian resistance, and remodel the Middle East by "precision strike" democracy.

There will be serious blowback.
  • ::

Tags: (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 244 comments

  •  Is this good for the Left? (4.00 / 3)

    I'm not sure what the future holds.  At all.  But if this is an era now, perhaps it means we will repudiate the "get to 51%" politics that have dominated our party for so long.  Perhaps we will escape the chokehold of people who think our marketing is great but our ideology needs some work.

    Maybe it's time for the real left to come back.  For 30 years we've seen every liberal position constantly degraded, by Dems and Republicans alike.  Maybe in response to the Bush era we'll finally figure out what the hell we stand for.  And maybe now we'll fight for it, so that when we finally do win we'll be able to enact some real change in this country.

    Read James Loewen's "Sundown Towns"!

    by ChicagoDem on Wed Nov 03, 2004 at 11:40:10 PM PDT

    •  55 million people voted AGAINST Bush (none / 0)

      If you ask me, a good portion of the guns, god and gays Bush voters could be turned around, too. We had counties in W Pa with more than 75% registered Dems vote in majority for Bush -- they're rural conservative Dems.

      I think one issue is that while Reps developed their think tanks and talk radio stations -- churning out lots of pundits -- the left was satisfied with the academia/union structure that's been left to languish since WWII.

      Unions are a shell of what they once were and as long as you have Universities cancelling Halloween celebrations because they might be 'offensive to Wiccans' -- you've lost Joe 6-pack.

      There's plenty in the liberal agenda to work with here -- most hunters are as passionate about the environment as they are about their guns, for one. Is there a place for them at the Dems table?

      Bush has cojones, and he's the Worst. President. Ever.

      by musicsleuth on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 04:49:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Problem is 59 million voted FOR Bush (none / 0)

        Your point about hunters is apt, though.  We need to drop an issue, and I nominate gun control-both for hunting and for self protection.  Guns are going to be out there-let's let them be out there as much as possible.  There were easily enough non-evagelicals who voted for Bush on gun issues that would have voted for Kerry or another Democrat otherwise to make a difference in several states, enough to have Kerry win.
  •  I don't see....... (none / 1)

    ...how they can make all of this stick without a draft. They're already short of troops....
    •  or raising taxes (none / 1)

      to pay for this war.

      the bush administration is seriously fucking over this country because of this belligerant attitude.

      i love my country but i hate its top administration.

      •  The Bonnie & Clyde administration (none / 0)

        Add the US's global debt to Ws axis of evil.

        If anyone thinks that with the power (given by 51% of the American people) he has, that W will not simply write-off with, an iron fist, what the US owes in debt, you're kidding yourself.

        ~~~

        Slightly OT but kinda odd the cnn waited til AFTER the election to do an extended story on Saudi Arabia (cnn Presents this weekend). Wonder why?

        ~ have a powerful day ~

        by moeman on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 04:56:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  51% of the American people? (none / 0)

          Actually, not anywhere near that many. When you factor in all the people who didn't vote (eligible voters in the US number well over 200 million), Bush was elected by a mere 27 or so percent of the eligible voting population. It may be small comfort these days, but something to remember. Why nearly 100 million voters sat out the "most important election of our time" is something to be considered as we fight for the future.
          •  sorry, that's irrelevant (none / 0)

            Those who did not vote in this election -- in THIS election, with so much on the line -- will never be moved to vote.  Forget 'em.

            Elections are decided by voters, period.  Let's not grasp at that tired old idea that somehow we can reach those who don't participate, and instead focus on those who do.

  •  Why this is so much worse (4.00 / 2)

    than Nixon, Vietnam, etc.:

    Total concentration of right-wing power - legitimized by the popular vote: this is the new neo-conservative dream turned reality. So the road ahead is to flatten the Sunni stronghold of Fallujah in Iraq, bomb Iran because of its supposed nuclear aspirations, depose President Hafez Assad in Syria, crush the Palestinian resistance, and remodel the Middle East by "precision strike" democracy.

    What passes for foreign policy actually endangers the whole world because Bush is al Qaeda/terrorism's best recruiter.

    Vietnam didn't threaten the world.

    Damn but I feel like another drink.


    You looked better on Facebook...

    by Plutonium Page on Wed Nov 03, 2004 at 11:42:12 PM PDT

    •  Oh, don't I know it (4.00 / 2)

      These people are batshit insane, but are taken seriously because they hang out in a think tank instead of a padded cell.

      We should start a neocon parody think tank.  Nobody outside the Beltway and the blogosphere would get it, but those who did would think it was really, really funny.  

      Also, I am dead serious on this, how do any of us stop them from trying to remodel the Middle East via helicopter gunship?  Are we gonna have many hundreds of thousands turn out to protest in the streets, only for the media to say "look at the funny hippies and by the way, some say Syria has WMD," the American public to say, "whatever, we trust Bush, that showdown with Saddam was pretty cool on TV," and the neocons to say, "fuck art, let's kill!"

      •  American Enterprise Institutionalized (3.00 / 2)

        Dubya:  Sometimes I try to do things and it just doesn't work out the way I want it to and I get real frustrated and like it's hard work to do it and I take my time and it just doesn't work out the way I want it to, it's like I concentrate on it real hard and it's just such hard work and everything I do and everything I try it's hard work and never turns out it's like I need time to figure these things out.. but Cheney just keeps bugging me he just keeps bugging me and it's building up inside...
        •  LOL (none / 0)

          Nice ST reference.

          All I wanted was a pretzel! Just one pretzel!

        •  Bush and what army? (none / 0)

          Bush and what Army is going to take on Iran and Syria? Literally?

          We have ten Army divisions. Major elements of nine of them are tied up in Iraq and Afghanistan. We have sent ceremonial honor guards into theater. We have sent troops in Korea and units used to train other soldiers. We are tearing our Army apart to support this war that shows no signs of ending, and we're going to pick more fights?

          The AEI hack is delusional. The Bush legacy will be an exhausted, battered Army unable to cope with the real threats waiting in the wings. Nobody wants a draft, but we may well end up with no choice, sending unwilling, unprepared troops out against an enemy that we didn't count on.

          This next Bush term will teach our country a lesson. I hope it is not fatal.

  •  Is it wrong of me (none / 1)

    to want serious blowback? I really really fucking really do!!

    All extremists are irrational and should be exposed

    by SeanF on Wed Nov 03, 2004 at 11:42:51 PM PDT

    •  Yes, it is (none / 0)

      I really hope this is hyperbole.

      Welcome to Bizarro World.

      by starkness on Wed Nov 03, 2004 at 11:45:17 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well it's not... (none / 1)

        Hope is not a plan.  There will be blowback, whether you want it or not.  

        I think it's funny when people say "I hope this won't really happen".  It's not going to go well.  Bush has failed for four years, he's going to continue failing for four more.  

        Don't like XOM and OPEC? What have YOU done to reduce your oil consumption? Hot air does NOT constitute a renewable resource!

        by Asak on Wed Nov 03, 2004 at 11:48:55 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I don't want blow back (none / 0)

        as retribution, but so that we learn our lesson sooner rather than later. Kerry was our chance to learn it a lot sooner. I'm thinking - if we're lucky - us getting our nose bloody soon is the best bet to avoid a really big disaster down the road.

        and sometimes retribution isn't the worst thing in the world!

        All extremists are irrational and should be exposed

        by SeanF on Wed Nov 03, 2004 at 11:53:12 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Now wait a minute... (4.00 / 3)

    A 51-49 win is not a mandate.  It is not a decisive victory.  It is not a telling testimony to the U.S. being a "center-right" nation (NY Times).  It does not mean an end to the pursuit of liberty and equality under the law.  It is no excuse for Bush to act like a reckless maniac for another 4 years.
    •  What makes you think (none / 0)

      Bush and Co. will treat it any differently?  They lie about everything else.  All they need is a foot and they'll call it a mile.
    •  Let's hope the rest of the world remembers (none / 1)

      that 49% of us agree with them.

      And you're right, 51/49 is NOT a mandate - it's more like, you squeaked by using God-knows what kind of dirty tricks, but you better watch yourself because half of us want to make your next four years HELL.

      -6.88, -6.67 // PRIORITY #1: A Dem in the WH on 1/20/09!

      by shelle on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 12:19:20 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Maybe we could remind them? (none / 0)

        All the time we spent writing Kerry LTEs we could maybe spend some writing LTE's to papers in other countries? Remind them that half of us (give or take  x amount of Diebold votes) are still that America? God, this is depressing.

        When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic. -Benjamin Franklin

        by MissAnneThrope on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 04:26:09 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Hate to be harsh (none / 0)

        but the 49% who voted against the Republicans don't really agree with us.  The Democratic Party, nice as it is compared to the alternative, would be the party of the centre-right most places.  

        It's not the 51% Republican vote that makes us think you're a right-wing country, it's that (pulling numbers out of a hat for the sake of illustration) maybe half of the Democratic constituency is right of what we would call the centre, and maybe a quarter of the rest are hardly very far to the left of it at all.  

        Making the USA a country that looks (from my perspective, at least) like a 1:2:5 (left:centre:right) country, where I'm used to 1:3:4, 2:3:3 or even 3:3:2 countries.  

        •  This is true (none / 1)

          Compared to most European countries, the US has two parties on the right: the extreme right and "normal" right.  Apparently there is no left in the US.

          "Liberal" parties in Europe are firmly on the right.

          Just as an illustration here is the lineup of Danish political parties, more or less right to left

          (right)
          12% Danish People's Party (nationalistic, xenophobic, anti EU)
          31% The Liberal Party (economic liberalism)
           9% The Conservative Party (classic God, King and Fatherland)
           2% The Popular Christian Party

          (centre)
           5% The Social Liberal Party

          (left)
          29% The Social Democrats
           6% The Socialists
           2% The List of Unity (ex-communists et.al)

          The Republicans and the Democrats more or less cover the area of the liberal and the conservative party, and some parts of the nationalistic party (which together happen to be in power in Denmark now).

          Normally we have centre-right goverments or centre-left governments.  The current right-wing governments is out of the usual.

          •  this is true (none / 0)

            Wow, Chief, that's a lot of right wingers, in case you didn't notice.  Far more than there are lefties.  Many of us are dismayed at the two party system.  And not all that long ago there was a viable Independent party that ran a strong candidate for president (John Anderson?) The Reagan era damaged this country in ways we are only now beginning to understand.  

            Still, I look at the split in your country, and really it doesn't look that much better.  Many smaller parties, but weighted on the right with nationalists and monarchists.  

            I read Alexander Cockburn's crowing assessment of the election and I remembered Robert Fisk's initial response to the bombings of September 11th, which were pulled off the 'net for being utterly insensitive and gloating before the dead had even been counted. I'm angry, but I'm not going to start blaming the Democrats.  We tried. And I refuse to resort to self-immolation to convince anyone how bad I feel about George Bush.  

            We voted, we worked, we tried, we lost.  We know the problem, we will have to live with the damage that's been done and fight every step of the way to get our country back.  We're already somewhat hysterical about the future we face.  Reading Galiel's diary yesterday (Galiel, Enochian ministering angel) brought back every fear my Auschwitz-surviving parents instilled in me, that a descent into Fascism was coming, that sooner or later the Christians Right will turn on anyone who hasn't accepted their doctrine (like Jews).  

            It is important for us, and for you Europeans, to keep before you the knowledge that 49% of Americans did vote for a man who wanted very much to reconcile America with the rest of the world, to bring Americans back to seeing themselves as part of a larger, human community.  At a time like this, we need you and you need to remember that we are here, we are many, and we are mourning our loss.  
             

            •  Right wing is not necessary the same (none / 0)

              The Danish right wing have had to promise not to touch the welfare system, which to many Americans will look like pure socialism.  We have a 95% state run health care system and education free of charge until the phd level.  We have public child and senior care.  The right have been forced to accept all that, and if they cut too deep, they are out tomorrow, because the welfare system is close to sacrosant here.  One of the staunchest defendents of the welfare system is the nationalist party, which on social issus are left, but right on law and order and immigration.

              Also, there is almost no religious right here.  The right mostly defines itself in terms of economic and personal freedom, not religion.

          •  Liberal Parties In Europe (none / 0)

            Not all Liberal parties in Europe are on the right. For instance both D66 in the Netherlands and the Liberal Democrats in the UK are on the centre-left. In Europe the positioning of Liberals in the political spectrum tends to depend whether they are 'social' liberals (on the left) or 'economic' liberals (on the right).

            A recent study in the Uk has shown that on average most people consider themselves to be just left of centre. The Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats are perceived to be just to the left of the electorate, although ironically Labour leader Tony Blair is considered to be just to the right of the voting public. The Conservatives and their leader are considered to be way off to the right. This perhaps explains why conservatism is in perhaps even direr straits in the UK than liberalism in the US.

            Another significant difference between the US and the UK is between men and women. In the US women appear to vote to the left of men, while in the UK men have traditionally voted to the left of women.

            Finally, it is very difficult for UK citizens, at least outside of Northern Ireland, to understand the role of religion in American politics. In the UK most people do not like to see religion and politics mixed. Religion is seen as a private matter. Given the place that religion seems to play in most American politicians platforms it would be difficult to see how they would be able to secure election in the largely secular society that we have in the UK, excluding NI.

            Dean

            Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear. William Ewart Gladstone

            by uklibdems on Fri Nov 05, 2004 at 07:20:30 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Umm, let's not delude ourselves (none / 0)

        After 9/11, Bush had the sympathy and good will of the entire planet; he squandered it through arrogance, mismanagement of the war, and failure to maintain and strengthen foreign alliances.  Foreigners for the most part were critical of Bush and the government, but felt the American people got a raw deal.  

        Now with the 2004, many will say there is no excuse.   You may say, but it was close, 51% is not a mandate, Diebold, etc... but I think, like me, most people outside the US would be stunned if 29 million people could vote for Bush, much less 59 mln.  While Europe and Canada are increasing rights of gays and lesbians, Americans in many states voted to limit them.  

        I expect the foreign community to be equally or more distraught over the election results than people here; and unfortunately for Anti-American sentiment to increase abroad.  

        •  Gay Rights (none / 0)

          egoldstein is right. The UK Government's plan to legislate to create civil partnerships for gay and lesbian couples is supported by both a majority of the public and even the leader of the right-wing Conservative party.

          Last week the European Parliament rejected the new members of the European Commission - the rough equivalent of a European Cabinet - because of the antedeluvian views of the Italian nominee on women and gays. In most countries in Europe gay rights are protected by legislation at national and European level. Openly gay politicians and government ministers are also now common at least in Western Europe.

          Dean

          Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear. William Ewart Gladstone

          by uklibdems on Fri Nov 05, 2004 at 07:40:02 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Who needs a mandate? (4.00 / 2)

       Look at all the damage he did with a minority of the popular vote the first time.

       You'd best believe that now that he got 51% that he thinks it's a wave he's riding.

       Look for more of the same, and bigger. Pull your head in to protect it and hope something's still standing in time for 2008.

      •  hope is one the way (none / 0)

        cnn's main page is currently showing the result of their latest poll that shows 'Most' Americans are hopeful. By 'Most' they mean 51%.

        The world likes to see America via its entertainment/media mogulism. The question is are we watching an episode of Survivor or Extreme Makeover.

        Americans had the chance to change the channel but the batteries in the remote died. That or most of them were glued to some kind of evangelsim show and virtually hypnotized. Send money and receive a bible passage.

        ~ have a powerful day ~

        by moeman on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 05:20:53 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Wny in the world would anyone think that he would (none / 0)

      tailor anything to whether there was a "mandate" or not, in light of the first term? He had a "mandate" in the MINUS column, for pete's sake. And look where he ran with it.

      ALl due repsect, but my god we really are in denial.

    •  But they already have said they would (none / 0)

      Most of us have already read the NY Times Magazine piece by Ron Suskind:


         But as the hour passed, Bush kept coming back to the thing most   on his mind: his second term.
         "I'm going to come out strong after my swearing in," Bush said,   "with fundamental tax reform, tort reform, privatizing of   Social Security." The victories he expects in November, he   said, will give us "two years, at least, until the next   midterm. We have to move quickly, because after that I'll be   quacking like a duck."
         ...

         Joseph Gildenhorn, a top contributor who attended the luncheon   and has been invited to visit Bush at his ranch, said later:   "I've never seen the president so ebullient.  He was so   confident. He feels so strongly he will win." Yet one part of   Bush's 60-odd-minute free-form riff gave Gildenhorn -- a board   member of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and a   former ambassador to Switzerland -- a moment's pause. The   president, listing priorities for his second term, placed near   the top of his agenda the expansion of federal support for   faith-based institutions. The president talked at length about   giving the initiative the full measure of his devotion and said   that questions about separation of church and state were not an   issue.

      Regardless of the closeness of this race, Bush will rule as if he
      had a mandate. More, the turnout of the evangelical base proves to
      him that he is on God's side, and gives him political
      justification to continue his move toward more rapid combination
      of his brand of Christianity and government.

      Unfortunately, it is only a matter of time before the countries of
      the world look into the election numbers to see the rising tide of
      theocratic voters. - the Islamic world, especially.

      Regardless of how Bush really thinks of what he is doing in the
      Middle East (and I truly believe he sees this as the final crusade
      before the end days) - The countries that formally saw the US as a
      potentially dangerous, but mostly quiescent threat will need to
      reassess their strategy. I think that many of them were, indeed,
      waiting for this to blow over. Now that it is not, they must begin
      to view the United States as a clear and present danger, and (if
      only quietly), begin to act accordingly.

      The United States is a giant, but with clay feet. I think the
      first thing you will start to see is a reluctance for the World to
      continue to fund our deficit through Treasury Bond purchases. The
      first effort will be to 'starve the monster.' At home, this will
      have the effect of sharply increasing interest rates, so this
      should be interesting.

      Secondly, there will certainly be blowback from the general
      populace of other countries. I have heard many accounts of
      American professionals being scorned at international professional
      conferences. I think that this is likely to flow over into how our
      companies are treated by consumers and regulatory agencies.


         "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own
         reality. And while you're studying that reality --
         judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other
         new realities, which you can study too, and that's how
         things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you,
         all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

      Finally, these countries will have to reassess their military
      spending, and policies on proliferation. We have branded
      ourselves a new empire, and the world will soon begin to
      treat us as such.

      Propaganda does not deceive people; it merely helps them to deceive themselves. --Eric Hoffer

      by jpiterak on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 04:20:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Fear and loathing (none / 1)

        For those of you who haven't seen it, check out Back-To-Iraq.com. Christopher Allbritton, a non-embedded reporter who just recently fled Iraq because neither he nor anyone he knew could go out on the street without being kidnapped, posted a very interesting opinion:
        "This may be the year when we finally come face to face with ourselves; finally just lay back and say it -- that we are really just a nation of 220 million used car salesmen with all the money we need to buy guns, and no qualms at all about killing anybody else in the world who tries to make us uncomfortable."

        Hunter S. Thompson Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail
        November 1972

        This is the view from overseas. I'm in Beirut now, and I've had a couple of people -- Lebanese and British -- tell me that the American people have validated the last three years, years which are seen as universally disastrous. Before, there was a distinction drawn between the American government and the American people. A few nights ago, one cabbie told me that he thinks American people are very nice, but the American government is "very bad." Now, as one of my friends said, "The American people are the problem."

        This will translate into increased hostility against Americans, especially in the Middle East. (I'm in Beirut at the moment.) The American government is seen as hopelessly biased against Arabs and Palestinians, but now the American people are culpable as well. I long thought America's European allies would welcome her back into the family of nations if Kerry won. Instead, they will hold the American people in even greater contempt than they already do.

        After 9/11 I was damned scared of the future. Now I'm even more anxious about what lies before the world.

        I tend to agree with this assessment based on my recent travels to Spain and France over the last two years.
    •  51-49 (none / 0)

      But they will act even more recklessly. Hitler took power after losing an election and look how he acted. Bu$h and his cronies will now push even harder to the right. The question is what will the rest of humanity do in response? Action usually portends counter action. I really fear for us all.

      "It's better to die on your feet then live on your knees" E. Zapata

      by Blutodog on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 04:58:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Hitler analogy is apt (none / 1)

        Because Hitler took power by pretense and skillfully elevated it into a national movement through the messianic force of his own personal convictions, backed by his thugs who intimidated everybody else.  The National Socialist Party told frightened Germans what they wanted to hear about their own supremacy, place in the world, powerful future.   He lied, schemed, did whatever had to be done to acquire and keep power.  His minions wrote the playbook on keeping the population in line (see Goebbels on fear, war and lies as political tools).   So why should we be surprised that one of the most successful models of political domination in the last century has finally been emulated in America?

        I'm not accusing Bush of "being Hitler," but the parallels are striking, and  we should be forthright about them.  

        •  No... (none / 0)

          ...because even if you're right, people think you're mad.  Although to people who read the "Left Behind" books, the term mad is relative...
        •  Fascism (none / 0)

          Bu$h's regime is truly the 1st almost pure American version of European fascism to come to power in the U.S. The real question for all of us is how far these thugs will push to up end the constitution and try and seize power permanently. I suspect they'll use the auditless electronic voting system to do much of the work. These are smart folks they might use the wingnut crowd to get them in power but the core group of neo-cons and Big Corp. types know just what their doing. The velvet gloves are now off.

          "It's better to die on your feet then live on your knees" E. Zapata

          by Blutodog on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 08:41:54 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  The American public gets what it deserves... (4.00 / 5)

    We tried to warn them and they were too stupid to listen.  They decided it was more important to ban gay marriage than it was to defend this country.  

    So, they get what they deserve.  And they're not going to like the next four years.  Bush has been hanging on to his popularity by the skin of his teeth.  By the end of his next term I bet his popularity is 30%.  9-11 is just not going to cut it next year, the year after, the year after that.  

    Don't like XOM and OPEC? What have YOU done to reduce your oil consumption? Hot air does NOT constitute a renewable resource!

    by Asak on Wed Nov 03, 2004 at 11:46:26 PM PDT

    •  That's something I haven't really seen here yet (none / 0)

      But you are right.

      Democrats need to put their foot down and say

      "Ok Mr. President. You've been re-elected. 9/11 is no longer an excuse"

      Freedom isn't Free, but we shouldn't get ripped off for it either.

      by FleetAdmiralJ on Wed Nov 03, 2004 at 11:47:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Bottom (4.00 / 4)

      The American public gets what it deserves...

      This country is a hopeless addict that hasn't yet hit bottom.  Sadly our attempt at an intervention didn't work.  We're in for a bumpy ride.

      •  America reflects its President (none / 0)

        "This country is a hopeless addict"

        Too true.

        ~~~

        Other examples:

        JFK represented a time of hope, challenge and civil peace. That died.

        WJC represented middle-grounded fairness, propserity for all and rebuilding a foundation. That got trashed.

        GWB represents an iron fits to anyone that disagrees, a fuck you while I fuck you mentality. Time to report this date rape.

        ~~~

        While watching the SCLM lap up rove's 'moral values' is what you're gonna talk about today, I got to thinking what will be Ws lasting impression on the world (not including the debt and destruction).

        I believe the next big thing (cause things from Texas are always big or magnified to be so) to look out for is the upcoming missle defence shield. This project has it all wrapped up into one, money, war and power. My firm belief is that the GOoPs are planning to leave the world with Ws legacy of a huge, purposefully scary, hovering satellitic monster that they will christen 'W'.

        Make no mistake, a big part of the next 4 years of what's left of rove's mandate is to pedestal W beyond anything we've ever seen before. Renaming the Grand Canyon, nope, too small. Face on some kind of currency, likely. A permanent W channel on your teevee, a given. Its gotta be bigger and its gotta be almost as big as God. Look up, see that shield up there? You are being protected by W.

        ~ have a powerful day ~

        by moeman on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 05:35:52 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  My thoughts exactly (none / 0)

      This is what has kept me sane.  I told everyone I knew.  I did everything I could.  I have earned the right to say "I told you so."

      Now where did I put my passport....

      "Strength and wisdom are not opposing values" - Bill Clinton.

      by RAST on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 04:20:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  getting what they deserve. (none / 0)

        I've been trying to get my bearings the last day or so and have been veering wildly between total numbness and a desire to anesthetize myself with drugs and alcohol.  In the angry moments, I do take a little satisfaction that half of this country is going to get exactly the nightmare they have created for themselves.  I (guiltily) hope they experience some serious blowback.  I have fantasies of moving to Costa Rica where I am buying land in December, but then I realized......there is no place on earth I could go where I could escape the ill effects of this administration and it's foreign policy.  It's so disheartening.  The one thing that keeps me from swallowing a bunch of pills is this: during the 20th century, the pendulum had to swing very far to hellish conditions in order to create a fecund climate for radical social change.  Perhaps Bush (I can barely type the name) needs to fuck things up so incredibly that the slumbering south and midwest is jolted awake.  Maybe then true reform will occur.  This is what helps me get out of bed.
        •  Costa Rica (none / 0)

          I had the good fortune of working in Costa Rica for 6 months several years ago.  I worked for a big pharma company setting up a plant there.  I had a chance to buy a condo at the Marriott they built on the Pacific coast.  The up front cost would have been $45k.  Darn darn darn darn darn.

          "Strength and wisdom are not opposing values" - Bill Clinton.

          by RAST on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 04:59:55 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  I think (none / 0)

        the only way America is gonna wake up is when Bush's neocon nightmare is staring them full in the face and they realize what they really voted for. Sadly, it has to get a lot worse before the poor fools who voted for Bush 'get it'.

        You are a child of the universe; no less than the trees and the stars... Desiderata

        by byteb on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 05:54:26 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Yes, let's see how smug they are when Bush comes (none / 0)

      after their children to fight his crusades.

      Disgust, rage, depression, disgust, rage, depression.

      The people in their self-righteous religious comas who voted to keep this abomination of an administration in office all have the blood of innocents on their hands now.

      You just know that now their arrogance coupled with their incompetence will give them plenty of rope to hang themselves with.

      "My answer is: Bring 'em on. We got the force necessary to deal with the security situation." - George W. Bush, July 2, 2003

      by Eggman on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 05:16:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  See, nobody cares about that (none / 0)

        Gays marrying is more important than thier kids being sent off to pointless war after pointless war.

        A significant minority of the American public are religious right nutjobs, and the number is growing larger.  It will soon be a true majority.

        We are completely fucked.  There is no solution here.  I hate to be defeatist, but I live in a reality based world.

        Kerry may have been a poor canidate, but so was Bush-thier poorness balanced out at the very least.  Anybody who was moderate could see that Bush was a dangerous idiot.  They all voted for Kerry.  It wasn't enough.

        Of course, this is all assuming we weren't Diebolded.  If we were, there was a level of competence in the conspiracy that this administration is not known for.

        •  Diebolded (none / 0)

          I just read that a huge freedom of information act request has been made for voting records.

          The Rovians seized the presidency in 2000 in a bloodless coup and have had four years to plan how to do it again. They obviously can only be trusted to be untrustworthy.

          "My answer is: Bring 'em on. We got the force necessary to deal with the security situation." - George W. Bush, July 2, 2003

          by Eggman on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 10:11:20 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  chickens/roost (none / 0)

      I certainly hope the magical thinking wears off, and people realize that Bush won't solve their problems just by seeming strong.  

      People hate realizing they're wrong, though, so the backlash may have to build up all over again.  In the meantime, we need to thwart his domestic agenda (national sales tax, etc.) because that's the real threat to our well-being, and that's what he really wants to accomplish.  IMHO.

    •  grim vs. positive and wishful thinking (none / 1)

      but it's our country too.  i feel the same way -- let them reap the "benefits" of what they voted for...  however, let's talk about it in a positive light.  i think it's called civic duty.  the 59M Bush voters defeated the will of the 55M Kerry voters, and they have a civic responsibility to those 55M voters to ensure that their guy will serve this country well.  Never have so many Americans voted for someone and lost.

      now we know that Bush will run his administration without honesty, without integrity, without accountability, without shame.  but we are the opposition.  perhaps those 59M supporters are better suited, through a sense of civic duty, to hold their choice to task at this most basic level of service.

      i realize that this is wishful thinking on my part, but i think it's the positive version of the "let them get what they deserve" argument i'm seeing on dkos so much...  

      what's the alternative to boycotting the red states or letting them wallow in the nightmarish bush policies?  it's not in our best interests to see the bush policies drive this country to hit rock bottom is it?  lakoff says people (a) don't necessarily act in their self-interests and (b) best understand arguments framed as value-driven messages.  i'd bet that 15% of those 59M are embarrased that they voted for Bush -- let's call them on it and recruit them to keep their President honest for the next 4 years -- why should the opposition party have that sole responsibility?

      Buy Renewable Energy Now! Choose Your Power or Green Tags

      by drh on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 07:16:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  My favorite headline (4.00 / 3)

    Drudge doesn't have a link, but he has the quote from The Daily Mirror in the UK:

    "How can 59,054,087 be so dumb!"

    Freedom isn't Free, but we shouldn't get ripped off for it either.

    by FleetAdmiralJ on Wed Nov 03, 2004 at 11:46:39 PM PDT

    •  So now (none / 0)

      Drudge is trying to make America hate the British.  Can't boycott them though.  I wouldn't be surprised if our language is now called Freedomlish.  
      •  I have a feeling (none / 0)

        That if the anti-american lasts much longer under Bush, people will start turning on him.  I think they could maybe forgive him after his first term, but he has no excuses now.

        Freedom isn't Free, but we shouldn't get ripped off for it either.

        by FleetAdmiralJ on Wed Nov 03, 2004 at 11:59:41 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I dunno. (none / 0)

          The Bush supporters I know are scared shitless of any foreign culture.  They have that "blow up the whole middle east" attitude.  They just cannot understand that all muslims are NOT terrorists.  

          My family are all Bush supporters.  My dad thinks Peter Jennings is a communist.  I'm not very optimistic about people turning against Bush.  Channels like Fox are designed to not let that happen.  

          •  I've heard that (none / 0)

            From a guy my dad knows, big Bush supporter, who was bashing Kerry for this and that & then the guy said (paraphrase): "you know, Kerry was endorsed by such-and-such a Muslim group, too.  I hate Muslims, hate them.  We should just kill them all."

            Well, my jaw just about hit the floor, and my dad says, you know my son's girlfriend is Muslim, don't you?  The guy seemed entirely unfazed.  I left.

          •  A strange mixture of fear and arrogance (none / 1)

            as in, "We're #1, who gives a shit about those other people?" (But better bomb them just in case.)

            -6.88, -6.67 // PRIORITY #1: A Dem in the WH on 1/20/09!

            by shelle on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 12:21:14 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Not just the ME (none / 0)

            This isn't just the Islamic world.  This is Britain.  This is Australia.  Of course, the Aussies just re-elected their PM, and given the spectacular lack of an opposition within or without the Labour Party, we will next year as well.  Although not with my vote.
            •  Do y'all really have nobody? (none / 0)

              I've always been impressed with the Brits ability to pull some poor fucker out of their back pocket in a pinch and have him warm the seat until a competent replacement could be found.  Hell's bells, y'all even found a use for Churchill; if you can do that, how hard can this be?

              Did the Poodle systematically kill every non-drooling-idiot in Labor?  You can't seriously be teling me the entire Party apparatus is completely personally loyal to Blair and devoid of any desire for advancement.

              What are the residency requirements for being PM?  Because I'm avaliable if you need me (not to mention, my wife's a British historian - 5 years of unfettered access to the British Library would be a really nice anniversary present)

              •  I'm not a member of the Labour Party... (none / 0)

                ...and usually vote LibDem.  I'm not especially left wing, actually, but this war was just a step too far and Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and our own little oubliette for indefinite detention of foreigners without trial at Belmarsh Prison in South East London makes me vomit.  A lot of people in this country, from the left of Labour and those to the left of Labour right through to a fair number of dry as dust Thatcherite Tories are sickened by what Blair has done to this country both in Iraq and by subverting our own criminal justice system to suit the war on terror.

                But as far as I can see it the Labour backbenchers in parliament have the backbone of a jellyfish, and most of the ordinary Labour members I know are just completely gutted and are slowly dropping out of active politics or letting their party membership lapse.  They worked their backside off for 18 years to get back into power after 1979 and then got this shithawk in Number 10.

                I was canvassed by Labour just before the European and London Mayoral elections in June.  I ripped into the poor sod on the doorstep about Iraq and why I would never vote Labour again.  The canvasser just agreed with me, said he felt the same way even as a party member and looked so basically miserable that I wanted to hug him.  The sad thing is, because of three party politics and the electoral system Blair could, and probably will, win a three figure majority with about 39% of the popular vote.

                At least in America you have a clear choice.  You can pick yourself off the floor and work to take back Congress in 2006 (how big will the budget deficit be then?), which is more than can be said here.

          •  Before (none / 1)

            he became president, Bush had never been outside of the country. He doesn't give a shit about what other countries think! We better also think about what this means on the domestic front too! This is a man who believes that either you with him or against him. I believe right now he thinks that over 50 mil of his fellow citizens are against him.

            "The ultimate measure of a person is not where they stand in times of comfort and convenience but where they stand in times of challenge" - MLK

            by rickpolitic on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 04:42:39 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  blowback (none / 0)

    Did we think that Kerry would have prevented blowback or the decline of the American Empire or did we think he would merely slow down the process of creeping American overextension?

    Don't Ask Me! Consumer Retorts www.higher-yearning.org/blog.html

    by cliu on Wed Nov 03, 2004 at 11:50:05 PM PDT

  •  Soon, those will all be purple states in the (none / 0)

    middle. Because the rest of us will all be living there. Because all our blue state cities -- all the most populous cities and counties, yeah us, hi, we're the actual targets, we'll be the ones whose cities are bombed and burning --our cities will be known terrorist targets.

    So, get ready, red states. Green Acres is the place for us. And by the way, a unique way to unite us. Good going. Yeah, you can expect us and our gay friends on your doorstep in 2007.  

    :]

    Can't wait for that 2008 election.

  •  if only there was such a thing as a rational (none / 0)

    neo con who could take views like this to the president and make him understand that the world is bigger than "texas truths"

    I'm gonna buy a gun and start a war, if you could tell me something worth fighting for.-----Coldplay

    by CO4Kerry2004 on Wed Nov 03, 2004 at 11:54:33 PM PDT

    •  neo-cons (4.00 / 2)

      I've started reading Shadia Drury's book about the American neo-conservative movement -- Leo Strauss and the American Right -- and I'm starting to think neo-con and rational are a contradiction in terms.

      I'd recommend this book because it made so many things fall into place for me: the cynical pandering to the religious right with platitudes, the whole idea of not telling the truth to the public are part and parcel of the whole thing, the emphasis on ideology over reality, etc.

      To spare you me making a total hash of this at half past two, here's a brief article by Drury who views the neo-cons from a liberal perspective.

    •  No such thing (none / 0)

      Neo-conservatism is inherently irrational...
  •  The view from Canada - dark times ahead (4.00 / 5)

    Generally speaking, I think Lawrence Martin in today's Globe and Mail speaks for many in Canada.

    Triumph of Bible Belt Imperialism
    Lawrence Martin
    The Globe and Mail

    The reason many called the U.S. election the most important of a lifetime was that it had the potential to be a consensus breaker.

    In its ideological approach, the U.S. government had never strayed far enough from the centre to be considered a threat to the traditional order. It operated within a mainstream Western framework.

    The reason George W. Bush became so reviled abroad and such a polarizing force at home was because his narrow-band ideological approach threatened that framework.

    The world, his election opponents believed, could not withstand four more years of Bible Belt imperialism. Now they've got it. The impressive triumph of the radical right on Tuesday has indeed broken the historical consensus.

    America has moved outside the box. It is in a new, potentially toxic territory.

    This, as CNN's Bill Schneider put it, was a victory of values. Mr. Bush cannot now be seen as an aberration. His values have been consecrated. He is the new America.

    While the United States has long been moving to the right, it has now put down stakes there. By the time the President is finished with the Supreme Court, it may well be cemented there. When the evangelical Christian values take stronger hold of the foreign policy apparatus, pitting one set of religious fundamentalists in Washington against the other in the Muslim world, it may well live or die there.

    Mr. Bush's initial instincts will be to reach out, to show a conciliatory side, to soothe the wounds and stem the polarization at home and abroad.

    But this approach is not likely to last long. He was arrogant and closed-minded without a mandate. One imagines what he will be like with one. Men such as Dick Cheney, who maintains the Iraq war is going wonderfully, will stir his baser instincts. If the Vice-President doesn't do it, some kind of terrorist response to the President's alignment with Israel surely will.

    On policy, John Kerry wasn't starkly different from Mr. Bush. Philosophically, however, the two men were oceans apart. With Mr. Kerry, the Western consensus would have been rebuilt. And he would have entertained ideas such as the one offered by Prime Minister Paul Martin to create a new league of nations in the form of a Group of 20. The proposal is a good compromise between U.S. unilateralism and the hopelessness of the United Nations' multilateralism. Now it will die a quick death.

    What lies ahead is more years of war, confrontation, arms buildups and terror alerts. Bush adviser Karl Rove's political exploitation of the "war on terror" has been ingenious. Outside of Iraq, where Mr. Bush's invasion has stirred the terror bombings and the Middle East, the toll from the past two years of terrorism has barely equalled the fatalities from a single day in the Second World War. Yet the fear-mongering has been such as to instill paranoia in the U.S. population. Some commentators liken the threat to Hitler's.

    In the election campaign, Mr. Bush was able to define himself. Mr. Kerry wasn't.

    Given the climate of the times, the public wanted conviction and purpose, not middle-of-the-road pieties. Mr. Bush offered constancy. Mr. Kerry might have shredded him with the line: Is this country better off today than it was four years ago? The answer could only have been negative. The Democrat could then have taken it further. "And now Mr. Bush is offering you more of the same. Do you really want more war, more record deficits, more polarization, more hatred for this country?"

    If there is any solace for the Democrats, it is that they have not been put in the position of having to undo the damage -- without a majority in Congress -- of the Republicans' past four years. It would have been a near impossible burden.

    The war has the look of an intractable calamity. The massive expenditures for it are on a collision course with fiscal sanity. With their weak showing, the Democrats at least allow Mr. Bush to inherit his own hellhole. If he doesn't rebuild the old Western framework, he may never find a way out.

    "The state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation." - Pierre Trudeau

    by fishhead on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 12:03:05 AM PDT

  •  I was almost certain (none / 0)

    that with the Kerry endorsement of many prominent Republicans, the many newspapers that switched from Bush to Kerry, the Al-Qaqaa 'October Suprise' (aka Scott Ritter's Revenge) that the establishment wanted Bush OUT. I could smell it just watching the news.

    Was I wrong ? I don't think so. I still think they want him out. The neo-cons are a tiny minority in the US power elite...(I hope!)

    The current CW is Bush won because hot gay monogamy trumps an unjustified war and an incompotently managed occupation in the flyover states. This was below the establishment's radar. Can this 'trick' be repeated in the future? I sure hope not. Who would have thought you could drive the Presidential vote via a ballot initiative?

    Ultimately, the neo-con agenda is unsustainable. We can't afford it. It isn't in the interest of the rest of the world to finance it. It unstable-in many ways it is at cross purposes with globalization.

    But the whole world is going to suffer through this experiment of the absurd.

    Freedom does not march. I saw an invasion. I see an occupation. I don't see a war. "Constant war is not a family value." Cindy Sheehan 8/22/05

    by ex republican on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 12:03:33 AM PDT

    •  In the red... (4.00 / 5)

      "Ultimately, the neo-con agenda is unsustainable. We can't afford it. It isn't in the interest of the rest of the world to finance it. It unstable-in many ways it is at cross purposes with globalization."

      This is an excellent point. Consider that three weeks ago the Fed was forced to reassure a sceptical audience of foreign bankers that the treasury would not default its soverign debt paper that's coming up to maturity (bonds they cannot pay and have to borrow more to clear). That is not a good sign for an empire. Add the plunging value of the dollar and international 'disquiet' about the policies being pursued by the administration and US debt looks an increasingly unattractive choice for investors. Bush's warmongering and internal policies are almost entirely funded by debt. If he cannot float loans, or can only get part of what he needs at a ruinous interest rate, his ability to continue his plans is severely limited. The situation could be improved, but it would require major reforms to the tax system that Bush just isn't going to do (in fact he's going in the opposite direction).

      When it comes to warmaking, apart from not having the money, Bush doesn't have the troops for even his present military ventures, and to do more he will have to institute the draft (he may have to anyway). That'll be hard to get through even a Republican Congress as many legislators will be aware that signing it is almost certainly political suicide. The consequences of a draft and casualties resulting from it in the country are hard to calculate, but they won't be good.

      The classical analysis of the problems of the Spanish Empire in the late 16th-17th century is highly pertinent to the situation that the US currently finds itself in.

      Spain in the 16th century was super-power number one, in terms of strategic reach, wealth and military might. However, the cost of the military burdens grew, partly from defending the empire, partly from incredibly long ideological wars such as that with England, the intervention in France and the Holy Roman Empire, and especially the running sore of the 70 year war of attrition in the Netherlands against the Dutch.

      Meanwhile, as the budget spiralled out of control and debt grew, tax revenues plunged. The economy of the homeland, particularly Castille, collapsed due to a number of complex factors, but the tax burden was primarily on Castille, because the king was politically unable to tax the other states such as Aragon, nor would he tax the nobles or the sheep farming corporations (the main industry). As a result the tax burden on the small farmers, merchants and middle class soared, driving more and more into bankruptcy, making the economic situation worse.

      Of course the windfall of the loot from South America helped, allowing the Spanish to carry on for far longer than otherwise, but it was also a hindrance in that it caused massive inflation and allowed the government to ignore the problems until they had gone far beyond a solution. The Spanish government pretended the problems didn't exist and carried on regardless.

      The result of all this was that the heart was eaten out of the Spanish Empire and 40 years after the Armada it was a mere shell.

      The US I think finds itself in a similar situation: widely hated and feared (as the Spanish were), with uncontrollable debt, increasing military activities (including ideological wars), a regressive taxation system by which many of those most able to pay contribute little or nothing, and an arrogant government unwilling to recognise reality or to put in reforms. There is another parallel in the rising obscurantism and anti-humanist thought that is currently afflicting large sections of the US polity. Spain too saw this, to its great detriment.

      •  This is the new direction of the Democrats (none / 1)

        It's all about the money.

        We can and should frame it in ways that validate the values democrats stand for: social justice, environmentalism, collective action and responsibility -- but to drive a wedge through the heart of the republicans, to separate the angry white men from the evangelicals, we go for the money.

        "<NY/MD/NJ/CA> has been hit by hard times--as a progressive I support the idea that we are all in it together and need to help the less fortunate, but when I look around my state, I know that it's time to help our own.  Federal tax money is being spent unfairly--the pork is costing our state X amount of dollars that could be used to fund things that are important to us . . . we want to lower the federal tax burden..."  

        Etcetera.  ad nauseum.

        Stephanie Dray
        of Jousting for Justice, a lefty blog with a Maryland tilt.

        by stephdray on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 02:41:29 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Debt Repudiation (none / 0)

        I think I read some place that the Spanish government, during the decline of Spain, repudiated its debts four or five times?  Can you give us some details on that, please?

        The influence of the [executive] has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.

        by lysias on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 04:21:10 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Default (none / 0)

          It certainly did. I don't have the reference books to hand at the moment for the full details, but one of the defaults (I think one of Phillip II's) crashed the European banking system, including taking down most of the famous Italian and German banks of the renaissance such as the Fuggers. As bankers are naturally greedy, and rarely learn their lessons long term, Spain was able to borrow more, but at ruinous interest rates, and the bankers demanded to be paid with the money directly from the silver fleet. Soon most of the loot from the Americas was going to pay off the loans and could not be used to make up the budget shortfall, hence more loans...

          Sometimes, of course, the money from South America didn't get to Spain at all, due to attacks by enemies like Sir Francis Drake, or Dutch admiral Piet Heyn, who made off with the lot in 1628. Then the Spanish government was really in trouble.

      •  Does this suggest (none / 0)

        that other countries could put the breaks on US imperilism by refusing to buy US Treasuries?
      •  Friends in weird places (none / 0)

        I can't see the Money Party wing of the Republicans enduring this state of affairs for long at all. A lot of major figures in the military and intelligence agencies have come out against this ruinous war. It's not going to be just us Dems trying to put the brakes on this administration: it's going to be a lot of very established power bases with reach into the underbelly of the White House. The best result would be an emasculated Bush stuck in the White House like a bug in a spiderweb.
  •  History will repeat... (none / 0)

    1964

    The last "landslide" victory of a real Texas President.  LBJ.

    At the time, Vietnam was a concern, but not a major one.  By 1967, with riots on the streets, and an escalating conflict with no end, LBJ was resigning...

    God I hope this isn't our collective future.  But if it is, maybe this time people will remember NOT to elect Presidents from Texas...

  •  We can only blame the Clintons for this debacle (4.00 / 4)

    The Clintons aka DLC have finally destroyed the only opposition party so that they can continue to court their corporate clients.

    The biggest threat from the DLC at present is that its hold on Kerry may cause a second term to be delivered to George Bush, without the necessity of theft.

    April 22 2004 - Black Commentator

    DLC Centrism assumes that if Democrats move to the right the Republicans are going to stand still.

    by Genf on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 12:06:11 AM PDT

    •  Well, I think its not as much the DLC (4.00 / 2)

      as it just is Clinton himself.  I think people are deluding themselves if they think he is anything but loathed in the south, even by many democrats.

      They have projected his morality onto the whole of the Democratic Party.

      Freedom isn't Free, but we shouldn't get ripped off for it either.

      by FleetAdmiralJ on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 12:12:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Howard Dean (4.00 / 3)

      should start positioning himself for 2008..

      Hillary won't have a chance , I see Dean as the best chance for 08 , i saw Dean as the best chance for 04 too, but the media screwed him over.. I think a Dean Edwards or a edwards dean ticket could do it as long as they stay active in politics ... any thoughts ?

      •  ABC (none / 1)

        Anyone BUT CLINTON!!!!

        DLC Centrism assumes that if Democrats move to the right the Republicans are going to stand still.

        by Genf on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 02:16:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Edwards has hit a bit of a dead-end- (4.00 / 1)

        His term was up, so now he's neither VP-elect, nor Senator (as of Jan.) He's a doll and I like him and his 'Two-Americas' theme, but his experience is too thin to over come the muck of this defeat.

        I was mulling this over on the phone with my fiance this evening (I got the lecture to please step back until my blood pressure goes down, but I.can't.stop.it's.compulsive...), and we think Edwards needs to go home, keep his nose clean, do lots of do-good, feel good stuff in NC, and then run for governor next time it comes open. If he plays it right, he can do it. From there we can look at bringing up farther up. It seems that Southern Dems get farther from a governor's seat than not.

        I admit that I like the idea of Dean running again. Now that he knows what he's up against, and now that his name is known as someone who stick to his guns, I think he'll get farther. Especially if he takes the next couple of years to whip the Dems into shape.

        YES, I WANT TERRY MCAULIFFE'S HEAD ON A SILVER PLATTER. NOW!

        "It is our choices Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -Albus Dumbledore ~~~~~~~~~ http://slugcrossings.blogspot.com/

        by Lainie on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 02:33:38 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Bit early to be thinking about these things... (none / 0)

        ...but what about Mark Warner?
      •  I love Howard (none / 0)

        but it seems like the Civil Unions in Vermont would doom him in all the gay-hating states like what just happened
      •  We need Dean (none / 0)

        as head of the DNC too much- he is the one that could rebuild and find the focus of the Party, so that we can have a solid viable candidate in 08'. Let's just hope we have Karl Rove under a jail somewhere by then.....

        George Bush is Leeroy Jenkins, baby. John Rogers

        by smokem2271 on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 05:32:23 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  What about Obama? (n/t) (none / 0)

  •  Kenya's Vice Pres reaction to Bush re-election (4.00 / 4)

    From BBC.

    Moody Awori, Kenyan Vice-President

    I am a little bit apprehensive because the first term of Bush, he had come in as a lame duck.

    Now it appears as if he is winning very convincingly. To me, I think we are going to see more dictatorship on an international scale. We are going to see more extremism come out of there.

    We are going to see even more isolationism where America will not bother about the United Nations. To me that is a very sad affair.

  •  Get your economic house in order, progressives (none / 1)

    Get your savings out of American investments.

    Sometime in the next four years, we are going to piss off the Arab OPEC nations that they switch their oil transactions to the Euro.

    Then, the US hits an economic wall. It will be Argentina all over again, but here.

    ...and get rid of these fucking voting machines.

    ...and get rid of these gawd damn voting machines. Blackboxvoting.org

    by nyetsoup4you on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 12:49:19 AM PDT

    •  You're right. (4.00 / 2)

      And it may come rather sooner than later. According to people I know here in the Gulf, the switch to the Euro IS being discussed -- and seriously.  That, coupled with the difficulties Washington is already having as it tries to see new bond issues abroad, and you have a recipe for economic catastrophe.

      -7.13 / -6.97 "The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion." -- Edmund Burke

      by GulfExpat on Thu Nov 04, 2004 at 01:16:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Could we have a whole thread (none / 0)

      devoted to this?  Probable economic consequences from international reactions.
    •  There are bigger worries (none / 0)

      The world bank has been pretty much shouting at us to cut our deficit. Remember.. running this kind of deficit is  a lot like you borrowing  more of your yearly income every year and hoping you make more next year to pay the interest. And paying basically what you borrow in interest. Its a house of cards.

      Add to that high oil prices are a tax on the HEART of an economy. The energy that powers it.

      And theres the horrific threat. Rethugs tend to equate the stock market with the economy (it has a little to do with capitalism but much less with the real economy). And have been salivating over the thought of dumping all that money into the stock market. (Imagine knowing which stocks the US is going to buy up the week before the "big buy" is made...). One recession and boom... tens of millions of elderly on the streets.

      Its worse than anyone is willing to talk about. And noone will say it out loud.

      I tremble for