Right-wing historical revision

Monday, February 2, 2009
The right-wing New Deal conniption fit
by Andrew Leonard

For the editors of the Wall Street Journal, the spectacle of a major government spending program aimed at combating a severe recession is evidently a nightmare beyond belief, complete with a popular interventionist-leaning president, Democratic majorities in both the Senate and the House, and, scariest of all, a legion of zombie back-from-the-dead Keynesian economist holy warriors. How else to explain the paper's increasingly shrill declarations that the New Deal absolutely, positively did not work? The latest salvo came Monday morning in a piece by two economists, Harold L. Cole and Lee. E. Ohanian: "How Government Prolonged the Depression." Defenders of the New Deal will find much to argue with in Cole and Ohanion's account, but for simplicity's sake, I am going to zero in on just one point -- the impact of the New Deal on unemployment. Cole and Ohanian: The goal of the New Deal was to get Americans back to work. But the New Deal didn't restore employment. In fact, there was even less work on average during the New Deal than before FDR took office. How can one make this claim? Unemployment reached 25 percent in the Great Depression, and fell steadily until World War II (although there were some bumps up along the way). Ah, but the revisionist position is that unemployment did not fall as much as it should have. And this argument is based on an interesting interpretation of the available data. As Amity Shlaes, currently the premier anti-New Deal historical revisionist writing for a popular audience, explained proudly in her own Wall Street Journal opinion piece in November, "The Krugman Recipe for Depression," a necessary step is to not count as employed those people in "temporary jobs in emergency programs." That means, everyone who got a job during the Great Depression via the Works Progress Administration (WPA) or Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), or any other of Roosevelt's popular New Deal workfare programs, doesn't get counted as employed in the statistics used by Cole, Ohanian and Shlaes. Let us reflect, for a moment, on what the men and women employed by those programs achieved (aside from earning cash to buy food and pay for shelter, of course). In his paper, "Time for a New, New Deal," Marshall Auerback (pointed to by economist James Galbraith) summarizes: The government hired about 60 per cent of the unemployed in public works and conservation projects that planted a billion trees, saved the whooping crane, modernized rural America, and built such diverse projects as the Cathedral of Learning in Pittsburgh, the Montana state capitol, much of the Chicago lakefront, New York's Lincoln Tunnel and Triborough Bridge complex, the Tennessee Valley Authority and the aircraft carriers Enterprise and Yorktown. It also built or renovated 2,500 hospitals, 45,000 schools, 13,000 parks and playgrounds, 7,800 bridges, 700,000 miles of roads, and a thousand airfields. And it employed 50,000 teachers, rebuilt the country's entire rural school system, and hired 3,000 writers, musicians, sculptors and painters, including Willem de Kooning and Jackson Pollock. In other words, millions of men and women earned a living wage and self-respect and contributed mightily to the national infrastructure. But, according to the statistics as interpreted on the Wall Street Journal editorial page, they were unemployed. Way back in 1976, economist Michael Darby exposed the absurdity of not counting WPA workers as "employed" in his paper "Three-and-a-Half Million U.S. Employees Have Been Mislaid: Or, an Explanation of Unemployment, 1934-1941." More than 30 years ago, Darby observed that correctly counting those 3 and a half million people as employed workers effectively debunked "the 'un-fact' that recovery was extremely slow from 1934 through 1941. From 1933 to 1936, the corrected unemployment rate fell by nearly 5 percentage points per year..." Shlaes dismisses Darby's reappraisal of Great Depression unemployment statistics by arguing that "to count a short-term, make-work project as a real job was to mask the anxiety of one who really didn't have regular work with long-term prospects." Of course, some would argue that "masking the anxiety" of workers who did not know how they were going to feed their children or put a roof over their heads is precisely the job of government in times of great economic turmoil. And that, really, is where the whole project of New Deal revisionism breaks down. The bottom line conservative position on the New Deal is that, theoretically speaking, the economy would have returned to "normal" more quickly if FDR had refrained from interfering with the workings of the free market through his vast array of interventionist programs. Sadly for them, we never got a chance to find out, because the situation in 1933, when Roosevelt took office, demanded government action. Twenty-five percent of the nation was unemployed. Human suffering was immense. If the market had been left to work its problems out all by itself, further suffering in the near term would have been unimaginable. And not just unimaginable -- but also politically unacceptable. If the New Deal actually extended the Great Depression, we might wonder, why was Roosevelt reelected three times? One explanation would be that the general public is an idiot, and I must confess, I've leaned toward that point of view myself after viewing the aftermath of Election Day in the U.S. on a number of occasions over the last three decades. But another explanation could be that a majority of voters experienced material improvements in the quality of their lives as a result of New Deal programs. This is a point of enduring frustration to conservatives, and they've expended vast effort over the years in their attempt to rewrite history and convince us that what our grandparents knew was wrong -- to the point that they've even tried to tell us that the people who built the fantastic Art Deco structures at the high school my daughter is currently attending were "unemployed." I do not think those workers would have agreed.

---

The G in GOP Stands for Ghoul

June 25, 2008 at 06:26

The G in GOP Stands for Ghoul
by Mary Lyon
http://www.opednews.com/

I've heard of rooting for the bad guys, but this is ridiculous. John McCain's elite adviser Charlie Black opined to Fortune magazine that if there were another terrorist strike against our country in time for the general election, it "certainly would be a big advantage" for McCain's campaign ("a candid and very disappointing glimpse into the thinking of one of McCain's closest advisers.").

Wow. Nice. Which American city would you like to see take it in the shorts this time, Mr. Black? How many thousands of us are expendable for the sake of your candidate's success? Let's see, New York City has already been there. Same thing for Arlington, Virginia, home of the Pentagon. And don't forget New Orleans. No, that wasn't terrorism, per se, but it was still a disaster that needed - but did not get - government foresight and planning wisdom from seasoned, credible public service professionals as well as swift and effective response.

Is this the newest round of "October Surprise" paranoia? Or is it paranoia? A terrorist strike on American soil would be a major campaign boost for John McCain? Does it sound at all as though someone regards such a tragedy as a good thing? Really nice.

(read the entire article)

Adobe Acrobat copy of The G in GOP Stands for Ghoul

---

The Historically Challenged

There has been an obvious attempt of late by the right-wing noise machine to re-write (very current) history. Unfortunately for that noise machine, some of us have memories which go back further than 10 seconds ago. Let’s review some examples and how they illuminate this blatant attempt at historical revision.

First up, there’s the attempt to divorce conservative and Republican. This usually takes the form of “George Bush never was a conservative” proclamations from the pundits and mouthpieces on the right. For example, when Bush was at 60% approval in the polls (in November, 2003) Jonah Goldberg said “...Bush has proved that he's a Reaganite, not a "Bushie.” And when Bush plummeted to 32% (in May, 2007) what did he say? Goldberg said, “look at Bush from the right angle, he looks an awful lot like a liberal.” From “Reaganite” (in 2003) to looking like a “liberal” (in 2007)? Flip-flop.

Next, let’s look at the price of gasoline. The right-wingers want to blame the (just elected in November, 2006) Democratic Congress for the $4.00/gallon gasoline Americans are now facing. If they were honest with us and themselves (which they’re not), they would know that a stable Middle East equals lessened fears of potential shortages caused by the disruption of the world’s oil supplies, which in turn equals stable speculation on future oil prices. Instead, the Bush administration, in its foolish invasion of Iraq (and now saber-rattling over Iran), has caused oil speculators to raise the price of oil to astronomic levels. When Bush took office oil was around $30 a barrel and gasoline was around $1.20 a gallon. Now oil is $140 a barrel and gasoline is over $4.00 a gallon. Sorry right-wingers, this is not the result of action or inaction on the part of Democrats in Congress since January, 2007. This is a direct result of a destabilized Middle East, compliments of the Bush Administration’s war of choice/invasion of Iraq in 2003. And a destabilized Middle East equals fears of disruption of the world’s oil supplies, which equals higher prices driven by those fears of the speculators.

Finally, there’s the Iraq war itself. A few weeks ago Jonah Goldberg published a column on the surge and the Congressional vote last summer authorizing it, comparing John McCain’s vote for it to Barack Obama’s vote against it. Goldberg piously announced that had America followed Obama’s vote all the wonderful things in Iraq (since the surge began) would not have happened. What a perfect example of choosing a point in time which somehow proves your argument, while conveniently ignoring an earlier point in time which completely demolishes the point you’re trying to make. Sorry, Mr. Goldberg, but had you gone back just a little further in time to, say, 2002, and seen that McCain was in favor of the invasion in the first place, while Obama was against it, you might have been a little more circumspect in your judgment. Heroic efforts after the fact (in 2007) do not negate stupid choices in the first place (in 2002).

As I said at the beginning, some people have longer memories than the right-wing noise machine expects. Their attempts at revisionist history are all-too-easily spotted and refuted. Better luck next time.

---

This article is also posted on OpEdNews.com (The Historically Challenged).

Adobe Acrobat copy of The Historically Challenged

---

Snatching Defeat from the Jaws of Victory on OpEdNews.com

February 10, 2008

Snatching Defeat from the Jaws of Victory
by Hans Meyer
http://www.opednews.com/

Recently, while reading political opinions on Internet message boards I ran across this comment:

“Once again Democrats snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.”

The author was commenting on the Democratic primary process, and the possibility that it will be the party’s Superdelegates who will ultimately decide the nominee at the convention in August. The assumption is that the Democrats will doom their nominee’s prospects in November by nominating the candidate who did not get a majority of the primary election votes.

While I don’t necessarily dispute the “snatching defeat from the jaws of victory” part of this comment, considering the chances for the Democratic Party in this election, I did start to wonder about the “once again” part. Have Democrats “snatched defeat from the jaws of victory” in presidential elections, time and again, therefore justifying the “once again” part of this comment?

(read the entire article)

Adobe Acrobat copy of Snatching Defeat from the Jaws of Victory

---

Rightwing "humor"

December 1, 2007

Right-Wing Nutcases Laugh It Up Over Clinton Office Hostage Crisis
by Marc McDonald
http://www.opednews.com/

"Anyone care to bet the protagonist is a card-carrying member of the Democrat Party (aka nutroot) who is frustrated that Hillary hasn't personally defunded the War in Iraq yet? Might even be a member over at Daily Kos?"
---Rotarymunkey, commenter at MichelleMalkin.com

I have to admit, I never really understood the right-wing sense of humor.

Like when Ronald Reagan joked in 1964 about the 17 million people who then went to bed hungry every night in America, saying that "they were all on a diet."

Or when Rush Limbaugh called 13-year-old Chelsea Clinton a "dog."

Or when George W. Bush yucked it up over the issue of the non-existent WMDs in Iraq during a "comedy" skit in the Oval Office.

I don't know---maybe I just don't have much of a sense of humor, because I saw nothing funny about yesterday's hostage crisis, in which a distraught man wearing what appeared to be a bomb walked into the campaign office of Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire.

However, plenty of right-wing folks thought the whole episode was real funny. Take (please) the wingnuts who hang out at the blog of right-wing nutcase Michelle Malkin.

As of Friday night, Malkin's comments section was full of posters who were joking about the crisis and speculating about how the "liberal" media and the Democrats would conspire to spin the episode to Hillary's advantage.

A poster by the name of "Fodder Jack" seemed to find humor in the crisis, writing, "Maybe it is a last ditch effort by the press to get an interview with Hillary."

Another writer called "Reppac122" was (like many across the right-wing blogosphere) already using the occasion to attack the Clintons. "My cynical political thinking here is that the Clintons (yes, both of them) will use this horrible situation for their political benefit."

Another writer, using the handle, "RetFireman," raised the issue of conspiracy: "Now be honest...with all that has come out lately, and I am not saying it is staged, but how many people would be that surprised to find out at some later date that it was? Be honest with yourself, and consider who we are talking about."

Commenter "Eric CharlotteNC" sarcastically mocked Liberals in his post. "If our troops weren't in Iraq this never would have happened! Or maybe global warming got this guy very hot!"

"Blacktygrrrr" added his own two cents: "The bottom line is if the hostage taker is a liberal, he will be dismissed as deranged, since many liberals are deranged anyway."

"Rotarymunkey" had this to say: "Anyone care to bet the protagonist is a card-carrying member of the Democrat Party (aka nutroot) who is frustrated that Hillary hasn't personally defunded the War in Iraq yet? Might even be a member over at Daily Kos?"

And so it goes, on and on.

Of course, none of this comes as much of a surprise to those of us who are at all familiar with the vicious hatemongering in the right-wing blogosphere.

The scary thing is Malkin's blog supposedly has a policy of screening out "offensive" remarks. If the above comments weren't screened out, one can only wonder what truly deranged nutcase comments were deleted. The mind boggles.

I'm sure there are those who would argue that Malkin isn't responsible for the deranged posters who comment on her blog. But anyone familiar with Malkin's own writings knows that she herself is a truly psychotic nutcase whose babblings over the years have been far scarier than any of the comments above.

As prominent Malkin critic Glenn Greenwald pointed out, Malkin once wrote a book "defending the ethnicity-based imprisonment of innocent American citizens in internment camps."

As media watchdog site Media Matters pointed out, the mainstream media has given, on numerous occasions in the past, significant coverage to episodes in which controversial comments appeared on progressive blogs.

How much do you want to bet that the MSM ignores the right-wing hatemongering that appeared in the aftermath of the Clinton office hostage crisis?

---

The Time Has Come on OpEdNews.com

November 25, 2007

The Time Has Come
by Brian Wolf
http://www.opednews.com/

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

(read the entire article)

Adobe Acrobat copy of The Time Has Come

---

Is Phelps Loss, a Loss for All on OpEdNews.com

October 31, 2007

Is Phelps Loss, a Loss for All?
by Brian Wolf
http://www.opednews.com/

As happy as I am, and I am! I am also torn. I loathe Fred Phelps, you all know that. And I'm glad he was held accountable, but there is a big part of me that is saying NOOOOOOOOOOOOO! FIRST AMMENDMENT!!!!!

Of course not near as big as the part that's going WOOOOOOO_HOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!! Eat that Rev. Bigot!

Even though I fight and oppose this guy with every chance I get, and as happy as I am, there's just a little something that I'm not quite comfortable with. And I think it's the concept of "drawing the line" with free speech. Once you draw it, it tends to keep moving, a moving line of what is, and is not, free speech. The line changes direction as the political zeitgeist holds sway.

The line, like free speech itself, is a two edged sword. What we like now, we may come to hate, should things change.

We should be damn careful if we do decide to draw it.

That being said. EAT THAT YOU BIGOTED PSYCHO!!

Adobe Acrobat copy of Is Phelps Loss, a Loss for All?

---

Condi a Waste of Time on OpEdNews.com

October 24, 2007

Condi a Waste of Time
by Brian Wolf
http://www.opednews.com/


It’s past time to ask the question; of what use is Condoleeza Rice? She was appointed NSA in 2001 by George Bush because she was an expert in, wait for it, Soviet history. It was as if the RNC had been preserved in amber until released in 2001, confused, out of sorts, and looking for an enemy that no longer existed.The new administration stumbled around, searching for their new boogeyman.

In the meantime, newly appointed President George W Bush decided that after 8 months of hard work, it was time for a 5 week vacation at his ranch in Crawford, TX. Meanwhile, the NSA director held down the fort, ignoring, and passing over, increasingly frantic memos from intelligence operatives in the field that Al-Qaeda was planning something big. On 9/11, George, Condoleeza, and the rest of us found out what it was. Although to be fair, George and Condoleeza had, in their possession in July, memo’s that pretty much outline exactly what Al Qaeda had in mind. NSA Director Rice didn’t think they were important enough to bother George while he was clearing brush in Crawford.

Since then she has been upgraded to Secretary of State. Exactly what has she done while in this position? She’s defended the ever increasingly ridiculous, and bizzare, mandates and reports coming from the White House. Mostly, however, she seems to be held in some kind of incommunicado status until they need a sound bite, and then they throw the power switch, download the text and out she spits it, with all the emotion of an automaton.

Yes, she’s gone to the Middle East, but instead of this showing that we know what we’re doing, it only serves to highlight the incompetence and absurdity of the Bush administration. When she stopped by during the bombing of Lebanon, I saw her in a room full of Arab men, all dressed in suits, she was in a pantsuit with her sunglasses pushed back up on her head like she had just breezed in from shopping in The Hampton’s. What? Peace in the Middle East isn’t even important enough to take your sunglasses off and stay awhile?

And where in the tiny, dust addled brain of George W Bush did he think that Arab men, Muslim men, are going to even listen to a woman much less work with one? Women are second class citizens over there and sending a woman to negotiate must be seen as either world class ignorance or just simply disrespect.

Dr. Rice needs to resign and accept a position at a University where she can live out her days teaching Soviet history, where at least she won’t be wasting everyone’s time.

Adobe Acrobat copy of Condi a Waste of Time

---

A Rush to Threaten on OpEdNews.com

October 17, 2007

A Rush to Threaten
by Brian Wolf
http://www.opednews.com/

Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly are apparently birds of feather. When someone writes or says something about them they don’t like, they both resort to vaguely veiled threats.

First Bill was going to show up at everyone’s house and shove a microphone up our noses. Now this has been released, Rush bragging about going after children of his critics:

Limbaugh Brags About Threatening Children of Journalist Writing Unflattering Story About Him:

Limbaugh continued: "[W]e found out who was writing it and made a couple phone calls to the person writing it. And we said, 'You know what? We're going to find out where your kids go to school. We're going to find out who you knocked up in high school. We're going to find out what drugs you used. We're going to find out where you go to drink and do -- we're gonna find out how you paid for your house. We're going to do -- and we're going to do exact -- and we're going to say that, you know what? You are no different than Al Goldstein. You both masturbate.'

Nice isn’t it? Sums up the intelligence, morality, and values of the tighty righties quite nicely. Don’t agree with them? They’re going to not only hunt you down, but your children as well. They will harass, and stalk, and terrify children, just because they are too gutless to try it with an adult. And of course, at the end, they resort to the crudest of childhood taunts.

Malkin, Limbaugh, Coulter, O’Reilly, all cut from the same bolt of weevil infected cloth. There is something fundamentally wrong with them. With the way they think and perceive and react to the world around them. They all act like spoiled children who, for the first time in their lives, are being held accountable. They stamp their feet, throw a tantrum and resort to profanity and the behavior of a schoolyard bully. These are the spokespersons of the right.

So Rush, let me tell you something. When you’re a known celebrity, there is a lot of information on you out there, so I’m going to tell you what I’m going to do. I’m going to find out where people you care about go to school, or work, or to eat. I’m going to find out what you did in high school, what drugs you took, how often you got beat up, judging from your adult behavior, I’m guessing on a daily basis, and how you paid for your house, and your illegal painkillers and your illegal immigrant housekeepers, and then I’m going find out what you do with all that Viagra in the Dominican Republic. Then I will tell everyone, via articles and my radio show, just what kind of “human being” you actually are.

And you know what Rush? There’s not a damn thing you can do to stop me. Not one damn thing. Chew on that.

Adobe Acrobat copy of A Rush to Threaten

---

China Should Apologize, Not Bluster on OpEdNews.com

October 16, 2007

China Should Apologize, Not Bluster
by Brian Wolf
http://www.opednews.com/

So the Chinese are angry that The Dalai Lama is coming to the U.S. and his being welcomed with honors. I say who cares what the Chinese are angry about? Ever since the 1950’s the Chinese have done their level best to wipe Tibet off the face of the Earth. The only reason they have not been successful is the grassroots organizations and the strength and courage of The Dalai Lama and the Tibetan people in exile. Before the Chinese start spouting off at the mouth, maybe they should begin by apologizing. They could apologize for the early incursions into North East Tibet in the early 1950’s, during which thousands of Tibetan’s, trying to defend their homeland were killed. Or maybe they could apologize for machine gunning tens of thousands of Tibetans, including monks, women, and children, who stood guard outside the Dalai Lama’s residence in the late 1950’s to protect him from a kidnapping attempt or assassination. Or how about apologizing for the thousands of monasteries that were looted and burned, destroying priceless Tibetan manuscripts and shipping anything worth money, including melted down gold, north to China. And when they’re done apologizing for that, they can return what they’ve stolen. Or maybe they should apologize for forcing celibate monks and nuns to publicly copulate? Or maybe for the tens of thousands of monks and nuns that were imprisoned for no reason, many of them dying there. Until China apologizes and recognizes Tibet as an independent nation, maybe they should just keep their mouths shut.

Adobe Acrobat copy of China Should Apologize, Not Bluster

---

Hate Filtered Through a Smile Isn't Pretty on OpEdNews.com

October 12, 2007

Hate Filtered Through a Smile Isn't Pretty
by Hans Meyer
http://www.opednews.com/

So, Ann Coulter goes on Donny Deutsch's CNBC show "The Big Idea" this past Monday and proceeds to insult the host. In front of her Jewish host she declared that Jews need to be "perfected" by becoming Christians, and that America would be better off if everyone were Christian, (Deutsch: "We should just throw Judaism away and we should all be Christians?" Coulter: “Yeah.”) To top it off she even asked Deutsch to go to church with her ("Would you like to come to church with me, Donny?").

Is anyone really surprised at her vile and insulting comments?

(read the entire article)

Adobe Acrobat copy of Hate Filtered Through a Smile Isn't Pretty

---

Shoot the Messenger on OpEdNews.com

October 11, 2007

Shoot the Messenger
by Brian Wolf
http://www.opednews.com/

Michelle Malkin and Fox “News” have finally gone off the deep end. George Bush pulled out the veto stamp for only the 4th time in 7 yrs to veto a bill that would have given children’s healthcare a modest increase. According to Republican and Fox logic, $1 trillion for Iraq is a wise investment; $35 billion over 7 yrs for children’s healthcare is not.

Is it just me or have the Republicans and The 30% finally and irrevocably lost their collective minds? Instead have having a rational debate about it; they immediately set about attacking, smearing, and swiftboating the messenger, who in this case turns out to be a 12 year old boy. And as if turning the full throated hysteria of the Republican attack machine against a 12 yr old wasn’t enough, Michelle Malkin decided to do some dumpster diving and released the address of the family. Much like she released the names and contact information of UC Santa Cruz students who protested against military recruiters on campus, who then received death threats. I guess she feels a 12 yr old boy can handle it.

Of course Fox and the Republicans are also attacking the Democrats for using a 12 yr old boy to rebut the President’s address. They probably figured the kid had an unfair advantage when debating Dubya. In any event, they have apparently forgotten the “snowflake” babies George trotted out in The Rose Garden after he vetoed Stem Cell Research.

Illegally invading sovereign nations based on a lie, no bid contracts to cronies to rebuild said sovereign nation, record oil profits, and ignoring the wishes of 70% of the American people are apparently alright with Malkin and her ilk. But God forbid we try to help the children, heck they’re not even old enough to fight yet!

Adobe Acrobat copy of Shoot the Messenger

---

Drums of War on OpEdNews.com

October 6, 2007

Drums of War
by Brian Wolf
http://www.opednews.com/

Are we once again being herded down the path to war? Can you hear the drumbeats? The shifting missions?

Can we stop it? I think we must.

::::::::

Can you hear it? The slow and insidious beating. Sometimes you can ignore it, barely hear it, just a distant, insane rumble. Other times it’s close, very close. A news report, a leaked memo. Drums, rat-a-tat-tatting the message of war and suddenly it’s right there. Bass drums, pounding, thudding with the launch of propoganda.

“They’re really going to do it!” your rattled brain screams. “They’re REALLY going to do it!!”

The foremost thought in your brain is he must be stopped. In the name of humanity this juvenile delinquent must be stopped. At all costs he must be stopped.

When will we, as a people, finally say enough is enough and put a stop to this once and for all? Do we still have the fire in the belly for what must come?

I do. And I hope the majority of my Countrymen do as well.

Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures.

I hope you’ll join us.

---

F**K Bush on OpEdNews.com

September 30, 2007

F**K Bush
by Brian Wolf
http://www.opednews.com/

Irritating isn’t it? In a land of free speech we have to censor ourselves. In a country where the Vice President feels it’s perfectly alright to go into the US Senate and tell a ranking US Senator to fuck himself. So the bar has been set hasn’t it? Keeping that in mind.

Fuck Bush

You heard me, fuck Bush.

Isn't free speech great? In some Countries talking about the leadership that way would get you executed. That is why I'm throwing my support behind the editor of Colorado State Universities Student Newspaper whose job is on the line for allowing those exact sentiments to be printed.

(read the entire article)

Adobe Acrobat copy of F**K Bush

---

Dear Progressives: Organize or Squabble, Which Is It? on OpEdNews.com

July 26, 2007

Dear Progressives: Organize or Squabble, Which Is It?
by John R Moffett
http://www.opednews.com/

There is an enormous chasm forming among liberals, progressives, and leftists, and the reason why is obvious.

(read the entire article)

Adobe Acrobat copy of Dear Progressives: Organize or Squabble, Which Is It?

---

The Great American Walkout on OpEdNews.com

September 23, 2007
(originally submitted to OpEdNews.com on Thursday, September 20, 2007)

The Great American Walkout
by Hans Meyer
http://www.opednews.com/

Tomorrow, September 21st, I will be joining my fellow Free World Radio Network hosts in supporting the Great American Walkout. The concept is simple: through a grassroots effort Americans can show the world that we can become energy independent. For one day don’t drive to work, ride a bicycle. Don’t own a bicycle? Walk. Too far to walk? Carpool. No one to carpool with? Stay at home! I will be choosing the “stay at home” option, and will broadcast Situation Awareness that day instead of on Saturday.

(read the entire article)

Adobe Acrobat copy of The Great American Walkout

---

Iran So Far Away on OpEdNews.com

September 19, 2007

Iran So Far Away
by Rev. Damien Darko
http://www.opednews.com/

Can you hear it? The drum-beats signaling our intention of attacking Iran have begun beating louder and louder. It seems to me that the more people who say that this impending attack is a phenomenally bad idea, the louder the drums get.

I don’t think there is anyone out there who says that Iran is a cute, cuddly nation. Far from it. The government of Iran is largely impotent against the Ayatollahs and the official line from both the government and the Ayatollahs is that we (meaning those of us who don’t acknowledge their omnipotence) are agents of Satan.

(read the entire article)

Adobe Acrobat copy of Iran So Far Away

---

Rudy Guilianni's Worst Nightmare on OpEdNews.com

September 19, 2007

Rudy Guilianni's Worst Nightmare
by Rev. Damien Darko
http://www.opednews.com/

Why Rudy should fear liberals, and not the other way around.

For those of you who haven't heard, Rudy Giuliani has come out and made the claim that he is the "Liberal's worst nightmare". When I read this, I couldn't help but laugh; not because I think the comment, itself is amusing to me (though it is), but because I couldn't help but picture Rudy wearing a bright red afro-wig and a red rubber nose when reading the words. Sorry, that's just how my mind works. The fact is, however, Rudy isn't the worst nightmare for any liberal, unless that particular liberal has a recurring nightmare of a corrupt Republican wearing a cocktail dress chasing them through a New York subway.

No, I can say, as a proud liberal, that I have absolutely no fear of Rudy. In fact, I'm going to go on the record right now as stating that I am Rudy Giuliani’s worst nightmare.

(read the entire article)

Adobe Acrobat copy of Rudy Guilianni's Worst Nightmare

---

Media Misdirection on OpEdNews.com

September 19, 2007

Media Misdirection
by Rev. Damien Darko
http://www.opednews.com/

So O.J is making headlines again. Just in time, too. We were starting to lose interest in Brittany’s latest public embarrassment and Lindsey Lohan hasn’t inadvertently displayed her “holiest of holies” this week.

This is why I don’t watch televised news any more. It’s also why I tend not to get my news from any source within the US. Apparently (at least according to those in the positions of media royalty), we can’t get enough stories about celebrities behaving badly, even though our country is being lead, merrily, along the path to our own oblivion. I suppose we should think nothing of the fact that we’re at war, and not handling that situation too well.

We shouldn’t care about the free-fall of the housing market as long as Paris Hilton is weeping uncontrollably over being unable to serve her jail sentence in her home, is that the idea?

I, for one, am completely sick of that.

(read the entire article)

Adobe Acrobat copy of Media Misdirection

---

Harry Potter and the Taser on OpEdNews.com

September 18, 2007

Harry Potter and the Taser
by Hans Meyer
http://www.opednews.com/

From the article:

Monday evening I watched an interesting debate unfold in an on-line blog. The topic was the Tasering of a University of Florida student by the police at an open forum with Massachusetts US Senator John Kerry. The topic was so hot that the comments section easily swelled to over 500 posts in a matter of just a few hours...Originally I was going to title this piece, “The (Un)usual suspects,” as the participants in the aforementioned debate took some interesting sides in this story. (read the entire article)

Adobe Acrobat copy of Harry Potter and the Taser

---

9/11 Did Not Change Everything! on OpEdNews.com

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

9/11 Did Not Change Everything!
by Hans Meyer
http://www.opednews.com/

September 11, 2001, is a date forever etched into the consciousness of America, just like December 7, 1941, and November 22, 1963. The terrorist attacks in 2001, like the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor and the assassination of John Kennedy, are shared experiences for all Americans.

Yes: 9/11 was a shock to America, and an event (like Pearl Harbor and Kennedy’s assassination) which changed America. Americans are told that because of this shock, “9/11 changed everything.” But did it really “change everything”?

(read the entire article)

Adobe Acrobat copy of 9/11 Did Not Change Everything!

---

Review: Crashing the States

September 5, 2007

Documentary Review: "Crashing the States" A Journey into the Netroots
by Kim Grant
http://www.opednews.com/

Gary Abramson and Dante Atkins embarked on a mission into netroots anthropology: track netroots candidates and supporters in their native habitat. "Crashing the States," a documentary slated for release in early 2008 is more of a study in the power of the netroots movement than a documentary.

2006's mid-term election victories for progressive candidates signalled what should comfortably be referred to as a second coming of American democracy in the digital age. Across America -- on computers, in living rooms-turned war rooms, hotels, conventions, and banquet halls -- open political dialogues between candidates and their prospective constitutencies rolled along at a comfortable pace. Candidates in the run-up to Election Day did something that most currently seated officials regularly avoid even today - they spoke to voters and listened intently to their feedback.

(read the entire article)

Adobe Acrobat copy of Documentary Review: "Crashing the States" A Journey into the Netroots

---

The Failure of the Surge on OpEdNews.com

September 5, 2007

The Failure of the Surge
by Hans Meyer
http://www.opednews.com/

September is upon us and the much awaited (and anticipated) report from General Petraeus on the situation in Iraq is becoming due. Already there is a certain tug-of-war between the President and Congress over whether progress is really being made in Iraq (witness the study carried out by the White House in June), or whether little (if any) progress is being made (see the just-released GAO report).

In a perverse form of poetic justice, I see that any success of the so-called surge is really just further condemnation of the entire administration approach to the execution of the Iraqi invasion and its aftermath.

(read the entire article)

Adobe Acrobat copy of The Failure of the Surge

---

Irony on OpEdNews.com

August 23, 2007

Irony
by Hans Meyer
http://www.opednews.com/

I-ro-ny (noun): incongruity between what actually happens and what might be expected to happen, especially when this disparity seems absurd or laughable.

Last night I was tuned in to Netroot Radio's broadcast of ePluribus Radio (Don't Hijack My Thread!) on Blog Talk Radio. The first topic of discussion was "Not "mining" our business. Declining mine safety and lack of consequences under Bush administration." The hosts compared the declining mine safety in this country with the lack of safety (and environmental) regulations in Communist China.

(read the entire article)

Adobe Acrobat copy of Irony

---

Fight them there... on OpEdNews.com

August 15, 2007

Fight them there...
by Hans Meyer
http://www.opednews.com/

Of all the reasons for being in Iraq one of the most ridiculous is that we "fight them there so we don't have to fight them here." While all of the ever-shifting “reasons” given so far have been somewhat disingenuous (“WMDs”, imminent threat, spreading “democracy” – at the point of a gun, etc.) this one seems the most dubious.

What does "fight them there so we don't have to fight them here" really mean? (read the entire article)

Adobe Acrobat copy of Fight them there...

---

Hypocrisy or Values? on OpEdNews.com

August 10, 2007 at 14:14:10

Hypocrisy or Values?
by Hans Meyer
http://www.opednews.com/

There is an interesting phenomenon in the anti-abortion arguments: Those who proclaim that they are “pro-life” but are also in favor of the death penalty. Doesn’t pro-life mean pro-life, whether it is a fetus or someone already born?

It interesting to watch as many of the so-called “pro-lifers” spin and spin when asked about their support for the death penalty. All of a sudden there are all sorts of rationalizations which come into play: ... (read the entire article)

Adobe Acrobat copy of Hypocrisy or Values?

---

The Real Reason The Wingnuts Hate YearlyKos

Posted on OpEdNews.com.

This is an excellent article (here or here) by journalist Marc McDonald, the inspiration behind BeggarsCanBeChoosers.com.

---