Saturday, January 10, 2009

Batshit Crazy

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

Since 1980, US public life has been defined and dominated by three psychopathic personalities: Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush. It is no coincidence that the United States is poised upon the edge of an economic and moral abyss. Joining forces with the likes of the GOP is a Faustian bargain. It's midnight in America.
“A new CNN-Opinion Research Corp. poll found that only 27 percent of Americans approve of Bush’s job performance. [. . .]”

“The anti-Bush group argues that most of his major policies have failed, that people trusted him but he let them down, especially in the Iraq war, and that has been too arbitrary and inflexible. [. . .]”

“On the anti-Bush side, Angusr of CA wrote, ‘Of course he is changing his colors. He does not want to be indicted for war crimes.’ . . . [‘]It is no surprise to me that President Bush destroyed the nation’s resolve, economy, and status throughout the world.’ And a reader in Ohio wrote, ‘Bush is still an idiot.’”

--He's [Bush] Still Divisive
There is a measure of Schadefreude to be found in Bush's ignominious retreat from the absolute dictatorship that he had asserted with various stupid statements not the least of which remains: "The Constitution is just a goddamned piece of paper". Even so, it must be asked: why do the American people continue to 'elect' or facilitate election theft by the likes of a 'party' that is more accurately compared to crime syndicates and kooky, perverted cults.

One joining the GOP literally sells his soul. I can speak authoritatively on this point. I was offered lots of money to run for public office in my state, possibly State Rep or State Senate. I have never regretted saying no thanks! I might have ended up compromised and evil like Tom DeLay or George W. Bush. DeLay began his dubious career as a State Rep, gerrymandered the state, built up his 'machine'. At that point, he set his sites upon the US Congress. Kafka's character awakened as an insect but it cannot be said that he had planned to do so. DeLay, by contrast, was a roach killer who became a roach by choice. If as you follow someone you hear crunching noises you are obviously following a Republican who is molting.

Many folk who wind up in the GOP are just plain evil to begin with. These people, short sighted and utterly devoid of empathy, are attracted to a party of like-minded psychopaths who care nothing for anyone or anything but their own self-interests and greed which, they are taught, are 'good'. Recall the movie "Wall Street". The aptly named Gecko said: "GREED IS GOOD!"

GOP-types are in fact very fearful and insecure. They fear loss of property and status and will do anything to protect both. They are threatened by other 'classes' and resent improvements made by others in education or housing. The ascent of Ronald Reagan owed much to the many fears and insecurities of the GOP very rank and conformist file. About Reagan, a gopper opined: "he made us feel good about ourselves!" Upon hearing that, I suppressed the urge to puke. The remark was made from the floor of the GOP National Convention held in Houston in 1992.

GOP fears and insecurities manifest themselves as 'night terrors' and 'nightmares' which, as a study at Stanford University revealed are statistically high among the GOP. Those fears likewise manifest themselves in policies that are clearly of psychopathic origin, policies like aggressive war, imperialism and, most odious of all, state sanctioned murder and torture.
"Republicans have scarier and more frequent nightmares than Democrats concludes one prominent dream researcher. "Republicans are nearly three times as likely as Democrats to experience nightmares when they dream," Kelly Bulkeley, who teaches at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, Calif., claims in findings to be released Wednesday at the 18th Annual International Conference of the Association for the Study of Dreams in Santa Cruz.

"Half of the dreams of Republicans in my study were classified as nightmares, compared to only about 18 percent of the dreams of Democrats," Bulkeley reports. While Republicans and Democrats may agree with the survey's results, they are divided on the causes of the GOP's troubled sleep. Both parties, however, blame the man at the top."

The presidency of Ronald Reagan benefited by the fact that the 'loyal opposition' was entirely too cooperative, entirely too willing to give Herr Reagan the benefit of doubt. It was widely believed, even among Democrats, that Reagan, though wrong, would, at least, govern in 'good faith'. In other words, Reagan, it was believed, would not tell a lie KNOWING that it was a lie. Reagan, it was believed, may have been wrong but sincere.

He wasn't! Reagan was like every other Republican, that is, a cultist, a psychopath, a liar. He differed from Bush only because he got away with it for longer. He was, after all, an actor. The 'Presidency' was his biggest role. Reagan could fake sincerity better than any other gopper, setting a standard that, with any luck, the GOP may never again match.

I submit that we embrace an earlier attitude, that is, there should be consequences for being wrong and greater consequences for being wrong knowingly but persisting in spite of it. While Reagan was never held to this austere standard of responsibility, George W. Bush has, at least, accomplished what the smooth talking gran'pa figure could never have done. Bush has demonstrated just how idiotic was the 'pass' given the GOP. Bush has proven conclusively that the GOP is the party of bad intentions and equally bad outcomes.

I would hope that in the world apres Bush, the American people will refuse to be fooled by propaganda and linguistic tricks like 'support the troops', a cynical focus group approved phrase designed to divide the nation into war hawks on the one hand and traitors of everyone else. The fact of the matter is this: you CANNOT support troops who are actively involved in the commission of war crimes. This is especially true of an all volunteer military. Did I support the troops in Iraq? Absolutely not! I was no more supportive of US troops perpetrating war crimes in Fallujah and elsewhere than I might have been of Nazis razing Lidice. Get real, folks! You don't have the luxury of having it both ways!

It may be helpful at this point to review the characteristics of sociopathic 'spellbinders' as they are sometimes called. Dean Lawrence R. Velvel has described Bush's many symptoms:
  1. rigid judgmentalism;
  2. irritability;
  3. impatience;
  4. grandiosity;
  5. obsessive thought patterns;
  6. incoherent speech;
  7. immense anger;
  8. exploitativeness;
  9. arrogance;
  10. utter lack of empathy;
  11. difficulties arising from relationships with his father (George H.W. Bush);
  12. not caring about the suffering of others;
  13. sociopathic behaviours;
  14. serial failures;
  15. lack of competence;
  16. alcohol problems;
  17. narcissistic personality;
  18. doing anything to protect his psyche from the destruction of being shown wrong;
  19. inability to feel guilt; etc.
You've read my take on Bush. Here's another 'indictment' that is even more damning.
George Bush’s presidency is the culmination of a lifelong history of sadistic practices that he must deny in order to maintain his fragile psychological equilibrium. Since childhood, Bush was labeled a bad child, a troublemaker, and a delinquent. He stuck firecrackers into frogs and exploded them; he shot and wounded his little brothers with a b-b gun; he branded fraternity pledges at Yale with red-hot coat hangers; he mocked others and was a verbal bully, irreverent about anything serious.

What do bad boys do when they grow up? They stop; they change. But Bush never stopped being a bad boy; he only did it in more subtle, arguably socially acceptable ways.

Now, as this bad-boy president prepares to leave office, many of his critics are pinning his failures on bumbling incompetence. The conventional wisdom holds that Bush is either a good hearted guy who got in way over his head—or the puppet of Dick Cheney. But if he were simply good-hearted he wouldn’t have mocked his own reasons for committing our young men and women to war; if he were a puppet, he was a puppet who chose his puppeteers. In my psychoanalytic exploration, the trail of destruction wrought by Bush over the last eight years is the direct consequence of handing a man with a destructive personality profile tremendous power.

What do bad boys do when they grow up? They change. But Bush never stopped.

Bush is leaving office immensely satisfied with his presidential accomplishments: Not merely wreaking havoc worldwide – actively destroying Iraq, and passively turning his back on New Orleans – he became feared both abroad and at home, where Congress and the press have yet to muster the courage to confront him. Now, the financial devastation of his policies seems to be hurtling the globe ever faster towards an economic Judgment Day.

The secret sadist in Bush greets all this as wonderful news, made even better by the possibility that he won’t get caught or punished, and that others will at least have to clean up his mess if they can. He may look and sound uncharacteristically sheepish of late, but his sense of self as president remains unchanged at its core. His primary concern remains self-regard, not history’s.

Evading responsibility has always been a central element of the pleasure he takes in the suffering of others. His evasion has taken many forms, from colluding with questioners to let him off the hook, asking “Ken who?” when asked about Enron’s Ken Lay, to making light of his cruel deeds, casually dismissing the fraternity branding as nothing worse than a “cigarette burn,” or insisting that the United States does not torture when confronted by reporters about Abu Ghraib.

Sadism serves purposes besides giving the sadist pleasure at the pain he inflicts on others. For Bush, the roots of his bad-boy sadism run deep. As a young boy, he identified with his harsh and often cruel mother, whose inability to provide necessary maternal early nurturing culminated in her withdrawal after George’s young sister’s illness and untimely death. He was a ruthlessly-teased, learning-disabled little boy who was criticized by teachers for not being able to keep up in class. And he was left behind by an emotionally distant father who reinforced the message from his mother that it was pathetic for a seven-year-old to show grief about his sister’s death. All of these factors contributed to an unrelenting self-hatred that made him feel weak and ashamed, things he tried to deny by posing as superior, exploiting weakness in others and becoming a bully. This process of externalizing his damaged sense of self, which he then attacked, became so strong later in life that it could only be partly managed by daily exercise and prayer.

...

--Justin Frank, Why Bush Loves Violence
Perhaps I am unfair to expect the vast majority of Americans to have seen through George W. Bush as I did. To be fair, the millions living outside the state of Texas could not have known or witnessed the wars waged by Bush upon the environment, education, the poor, the accused, in fact, anyone not living in River Oaks, Tom DeLay's Sugarland or some other Republican cultist ghetto. It's a jungle out there. I might be wrong to hold the American people responsible for not sizing Bush up. I could be wrong. But I don't think so.
The American people now know that George W. Bush can never be trusted. The United Nations is not stupid: Bush could not just “change his colors” and fool the United Nations into thinking that Bush had not committed war crimes. Bush is definitely an idiot.

--George W. Bush is the Worst President in US History
I had to read that twice. In other words, the American people --presumably among the best fed and best educated in the world (well, at least, the best fed) --required eight years of overt criminality, mass murder, torture, war crimes, incompetence, stupid public behavior and sheer idiocy before it learned that George W. Bush is an idiot??? If that is the case, then WHO is the idiot?


Additional resources


Media Conglomerates, Mergers, Concentration of Ownership, Global Issues, Updated: January 02, 2009

Share

Subscribe



GoogleYahoo!AOLBloglines

Add to Google

Add to Google

Add Cowboy Videos to Google

Add to Google

Download DivX

18 comments:

marain said...

I think that there is a faction of the GOP electorate that is simply blind to the fact that their beloved party was hijacked some time ago by criminals. These persons remember this party's greatness from the time of Lincoln and are proud of their heritage. They are Republicans because their parents were and they won't ever change sides because it would be disloyal. They are unable to see what has really been going on and should not be blamed, except for being like children.

I wish there was some way to remove the ulcers of corporate greed, religious fundamentalism, and neoconservatism from the Republican Party and return it to its former state of honor and integrity. The neoconservatives, especially, should be forced to have their own extreme right wing party apart from the GOP. The GOP should excommunicate them. But alas, the GOP cares more about winning and so is an ugly mish mash of some of the worst elements of society.

Anonymous said...

".....A new CNN-Opinion Research Corp. poll found that only 27 percent of Americans approve of Bush’s job performance........"

Who are these 27 percent?

Fact is, George Bush, despite being demonstrably an ignoramus, was voted into the Oval Office not just once, but twice, by the American people.

Fact is, John McCain and his side-kick, Sarah Palin (George Bush in drag) got 47% of the vote in this last election. Which is to say almost half the vote.

I'm intrigued by this article in the WSJ
which says that George Bush in 2005 read 95 books; in 2005, 51; and in 2008, 40.

To my knowledge no-one has publicly asked George Bush or Karl Rove for a list of these improbably large numbers of books. Why not?

This may seem an inconsequential matter, but the same syndrome is at work here as the one in which everyone unquestioningly swallowed everything else the Bush administration put out - well, until quite recently.

Unknown said...

marain said...

I think that there is a faction of the GOP electorate that is simply blind to the fact that their beloved party was hijacked some time ago by criminals.

I began to characterize the GOP as a 'crime syndicate' at about the same time that I spurned overtures to run for office. I never had ambitions within the Democratic party either but my reasons for brushing off the GOP were strictly moral, matters of conscience. I suppose that there are still some 'honest' Republicans around but too few to subscribe to the hijack theory. I think it was a bit of both. "GOPPERISM" is a disease --a moral disease --and because it is, it was vulnerable to what you call 'hijacking'.

I wish there was some way to remove the ulcers of corporate greed, religious fundamentalism, and neoconservatism from the Republican Party and return it to its former state of honor and integrity.

Respectfully, we part company on this point. I cannot believe that there was ever a time in which the party itself could boast of 'honor' or 'integritiy'. I believe Eisenhower to have been honest in that he truly believed what he thought the party stood for. In evidence, we have his warning against the dangers of the Military/Industrial complex. However, it has always been the GOP that benefits most from the MIC.

The neoconservatives, especially, should be forced to have their own extreme right wing party apart from the GOP.

Unfortunately, a multi-party system is made impossible by the way elections are conducted, campaigns are run, money is raised.

I have long advocated an END to the absurdly long and boring primaries, and END to the Electoral College. Concurrently, votes should be tabulated via a 'range voter' or some other 'preference voting' system.

I also propose an ABSOLUTE END to political advertising as we know it. As it stands, whomever raises the most money usually wins.

The GOP, of course, likes that system. Until recently, the GOP had no problem out 'raising' and outspending Democrats.

Of course, my reforms will never be enacted short of revolution. Speaking of revolution, guys like Ron Paul or Dennis Kucinich might have done better under my system.

But ...as the cynic says: fuhgitaboutit!

Unknown said...

Christopher sez...

Fact is, John McCain and his side-kick, Sarah Palin (George Bush in drag) got 47% of the vote in this last election. Which is to say almost half the vote.

I find that worrisome as well. Apparently, NOTHING has been learned by this debacle. Abso-fuckin-lutely NOTHING!

marain said...

Christopher said:

Fact is, George Bush, despite being demonstrably an ignoramus, was voted into the Oval Office not just once, but twice, by the American people.

Actually, GWB was selected by SCOTUS in 2000 and the 2004 election was stolen.

Fact is, John McCain and his side-kick, Sarah Palin (George Bush in drag) got 47% of the vote in this last election. Which is to say almost half the vote.

It's possible that some electronic tampering was still going on in the 2008 election, but because of the overwhelming support for Obama, it would have been impossible to overturn it without being detected so they didn't try.

marain said...

Len Hart said:

Respectfully, we part company on this point. I cannot believe that there was ever a time in which the party itself could boast of 'honor' or 'integritiy'. I believe Eisenhower to have been honest in that he truly believed what he thought the party stood for. In evidence, we have his warning against the dangers of the Military/Industrial complex. However, it has always been the GOP that benefits most from the MIC.

I was thinking of Lincoln and DDE, mainly. I am not a Republican myself either, by I can see how people can support their ideas of smaller government, lower taxes, independence of states, and non-interventionist foreign policy. It is obvious that the GOP of today is nothing like this and hasn't been like this for a very long time.

I entirely agree with your ideas to end political advertising, to end the long and boring primaries, and to abolish the electoral college.

Spartacus Jones said...

Allow me to recommend POLITICAL PONEROLOGY, by Andrew M Lobaczewski.
www.ponerology.com

I've been studying up on the psychopathic personality, lately.
I'd also recommend WITHOUT CONSCIENCE
and SNAKES IN SUITS (authors' names escape me at the moment).

Liberty & Justice,

sj

Anonymous said...

Like you, Len, I'm an ENTP and saw through Bush from the beginning. I published a few articles years ago in a local paper, to deaf Atlanta ears, and then was blackballed... for daring to speak truth that nobody wanted to hear.

Here's a link you might find interesting:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/090109/usa/us_politics_obama_transition_attacks

Canada is reporting on 'war games' next Tuesday, but nobody knows about it here? See what you can dig up. Thanks, as always, for your articles! JollySusan

Anonymous said...

Sorry, the link didn't appear properly.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/090109/usa/us_politics_obama_transition_attacks

If it is wrong again, please add /us_politics_obama_transition_attacks
after usa/

Thanks. SJ

Anonymous said...

The good news is that the American people realize something is wrong.

The bad news is that we have no rationale national forum. Americans get all their moral teachings from their local churches. Karl Rove's genius was recognizing this and turning the churches into cults of personal financial success.

Once a culture has been poisoned, it can't be easy to reclaim truly positive community values.

Unknown said...

Israel is occupying Palestinian lands, and instead of conforming to the security council's resolution and retreat from Palestinian occupied lands, it brings settlers, women and children, and build settlements on the occupied lands to impose new reality defying the international law. Hamas is rocketing Israelis occupying the occupied lands, which is a legitimate resistance according to the international law. Israel, instead of stopping building settlements in occupied lands, and retreating from the occupied lands, they make a massacre to erase Gaza from the map. After all this, Hamas is considered terrorists! and Israel is defending itself. Hamas is hiding among civilians and Israel is protecting its citizens! What kind of logic is this? Hamas is not hiding among anybody, hamas are the natives, they belong to Gaza, its their land, they are the dwellers, the owners, if they leave Gaza, where do they go? well I know if settlers leave Gaza where will they go, they will be conforming to UN resolution. So who is hiding among civilians here? who is occupying the other? is it Palestinians who are occupying Israel or Israel is occupying Palestine? Is there any justice in this world?
Levni says “we don’t have any problems with Palestinians our problem is with hamas”, in other words, “we want to occupy Palestinian lands and siege Palestinians, if they accept then we don’t have any problem with them, we only have problems with those who refuse to be occupied or to be in siege”
I hope you are enjoying the inevitable bloodshed of children.
If this coward operation weakens hamas it is going to weaken them in favour of al-qaeda.
Let me explain more, among the alleged “terrorist” groups, Hamas and Hizbollah are considered moderate, or even retreating, because they are concerned with national liberation, that is: liberating only my country from the occupier. As Nassrallah said: freeing Palestine is the Palestinian business, we support them with moral solidarity, but we are Lebanese, freeing Lebanese territories is our only business.
That is what is called national liberation movement.
While al-qaeda members believe in international liberation, that is to say: we are not going to be able to free our territories unless we destroy the imperialist system. We belong to the world and we have to liberate the world from such a system. (you know they are closer to Bush’s pattern of thinking – democratizing the world or freeing the world)
So when Israel commits such a massacre for babies and children and women, and the “civilized” world find excuses for Israel, and blame the victim instead of blaming the aggressor, the new generation will grow to believe that it is really not a problem of Israeli occupation, it is a problem of international imperialist system which backs Israel. By now, I know some youth who started to say: it seems that bin Laden was right, our battle is not on our lands, we are not allowed to free our lands because of the accomplice of the world.
Again, when people are occupied what usually they do? What did French do when they were occupied by the Nazi? What did George Washington do when he was leading the independence war? What did Churchill do when he was facing Germany? What usually people do to liberate their occupied lands?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkZ-gCPbRYM&feature=channel_page

enjoy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HQO0774lx4&feature=PlayList&p=4199C9262539936D&index=0&playnext=1
look at the Israeli mercy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgeqrs5ePLU
THE UNITES STATES – BESIDES THE VETO – INCREASED ITS AID TO ISRAEL
I don’t think you work hard to spend your taxes on this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgeqrs5ePLU

Unknown said...

I suspect the attitudes in Atlanta were not unlike those in Houston. I worked in a very conservative industry --broadcasting. Broadcasting in Texas was always conservative, more often downright reactionary. That these local and very conservative outlets got gobbled by huge conglomerates that were not just conservative but CORPORATE conservative seems in retrospect to have been a natural evolution. It helped the GOP cause that, under Reagan, the Communications Act of 1934 was gutted under the rubric of 'de-regulation'.

Anonymous said...

The good news is that the American people realize something is wrong. The bad news is that we have no rationale national forum.

The 'medie' might have been that forum had not 1) Reagan gutted the above cited act; 2) the people's airwaves were hijacked by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, and O'Reilly; 3) Corporate America literally conspired to deprive everyone but 'legal abstractions' the right of free speech.

???? ??????? ??????? said...

Israel is occupying Palestinian lands, and instead of conforming to the security council's resolution and retreat from Palestinian occupied lands, it brings settlers, women and children, and build settlements on the occupied lands to impose new reality defying the international law.

You are absolutely correct. I had wanted to do an article about what Israel is doing to Gaza....but it will have to be a history. It's almost impossible to write 'articles' about ongoing war crimes. Stay tuned! I WILL have something to say about how Israel has 1) violated EVERY international law on the books; 2) how Israel has squandered the good will it might have briefly enjoyed in the wake of the Holocaust by creating a new Holocaust of its own creation; 3) how Israel has become Hitler's Fourth Reich and formed an alliance with US Nazis --namely the NEOCONS.

Voltaire said: Ecrasez l'infame! And, in the US l'infame is the GOP!

Anonymous said...

George W. Bush is the Worst President in US History

There's some powerful and very rich people that would disagree with that statement.

Both Bush and Cheney were needed in office to help pull off the events of 9/11.

Even if that took a bloodless coup d'état, which took place in the US in November thru December of 2000, when the Supreme Court annointed Bush.

Without the Bush-Cheney Junta in control, it's very likely 9/11 would have been delayed till those people got their man or woman in place.

These same psychos will honor Bush after he leaves the WH by paying him enormous sums of money to speak at their gatherings.

From defense contractors, to Wall Street firms, to "think" tanks like AEI and JINSA, they'll be happy to enrich Bush by $50 million or so to reward him for the excellent job he did for them.

The 2000 coup d'état, like 9/11, had to be planned for and funded years ahead of time, to seamlessly pull off the hijacking of the WH and the events of 9/11.

Both caused by the same group of power hungry psychopaths.

Unknown said...

Greg Bacon sez....

Without the Bush-Cheney Junta in control, it's very likely 9/11 would have been delayed till those people got their man or woman in place. These same psychos will honor Bush after he leaves the WH by paying him enormous sums of money to speak at their gatherings.

You hit the nail on the head, Greg. Indeed, anyone joining the GOP has given up 'personhood' by giving up the 'individual conscience'. They sold their souls.

Certainly, Bush is intellectually challenged to tie his shoelaces, let alone conceive, plan, other otherwise 'pull off' 911. Bush made the Faustian bargain of which I speak and, therefore, is no less guilty because he lacked the imagination to conceive it. He is as guilty as would have been the gangsta who loaded his bosses Tommy gun.

If tomorrow Bush were taken out and shot by the firing squad that he so richly deserves, the cabal of psychopaths and criminals you describe remain. It does no good to execute the mass murderer Bush if the real brains are allowed to escape to South America.

That's why I advocate a COMPLETE AND TOTAL REVOLUTION. A new broom sweeps clean.

ANYONE IN THE UNITED STATES CONTRIBUTING MATERIALLY OR HELPING TO PLAN THE EVENTS OF 911 SHOULD BE STOOD UP AGAINST A WALL AND SHOT! (Are you reading this Larry Silverstein? Marvin Bush? Rudi Guiliani? et al?)

Sadly --these folk comprise the bulk of what we call the Military/Industrial Complex.

America will have to fall before she can be rebuilt.

Anonymous said...

Christian Fascism vs. Liberal Freedom in America

When facing the fascism of another era, in 1940 Franklin Delano Roosevelt wrote: "We will have a liberal democracy, or we will return to the Dark Ages." Just before she died in 1963, FDR's wife Eleanor wrote on the last page of her last book, Tomorrow Is Now: "Long ago, there was a noble word, LIBERAL, which derived from the word FREE [libre]. Now a strange thing happened to that word. A man named Hitler made it a term of abuse, a matter of suspicion, because those who were not with him were against him, and liberals had no use for Hitler. And then another man named McCarthy cast the same opprobrium on the word. Indeed, there was a time--a short but dismaying time--when many Americans began to distrust the word which derived from FREE. One thing we must all do. We must cherish and honor the word FREE or it will cease to apply to us."

In 1980, the first Neoconservative US President put America on the freeway on-ramp to fascism in that dreaded "return to the Dark Ages" that Roosevelt had warned US about 40 years earlier in his quote calling for a liberal democracy. The Reagan era ‘Moral Majority’ [aka Moron Majority;-] started by Falwell is believed by many to have been the genesis of today’s religious right. First and foremost, Reagan was a firm adherent to Biblical prophecy; specifically, he believed that the end of the world -- the Battle of Armageddon -- was close at hand. While he was running for office in 1980, candidate Reagan announced during an interview with televangelist Jim Bakker that "We may be the generation that sees Armageddon."

Reagan was the first devout Christian President to publicly demonize the word "liberal".

At a 1971 banquet for California state senator James Mills, then-Governor Reagan broke it all down for the honoree during the dessert course:

"In the 38th chapter of Ezekiel, it says that the land of Israel will come under attack by the armies of the ungodly nations, and it says that Libya will be among them. Do you understand the significance of that? Libya has now gone Communist, and that's a sign that the day of Armageddon isn't far off. Biblical scholars have been saying for generations that Gog must be Russia. What other powerful nation is to the north of Israel? None. But it didn't seem to make sense before the Russian revolution, when Russia was a Christian country. Now it does, now that Russia has become communistic and atheistic, now that Russia has set itself against God. Now it fits the description of Gog perfectly. For the first time ever, everything is in place for the battle of Armageddon and the Second Coming of Christ. It can't be too long now. Ezekiel says that fire and brimstone will be rained upon the enemies of God's people. That must mean that they will be destroyed by nuclear weapons."

President Reagan did more than just talk the talk of a religious zealot. He was also an ardent supporter of school prayer and anti-abortion laws. He withheld funding from international contraception programs. Over complaints by the ACLU, he officially declared 1983 to be "The Year of the Bible." And he appointed likeminded Jesus freaks to his cabinet. During a 1981 Congressional hearing, Reagan's first Secretary of the Interior, James Watt, revealed the depth of his commitment to preserving America's environment for posterity: "I do not know how many future generations we can count on before the Lord returns."

The "Reagan Revolution" that had turned America to the religious right signaled the beginning of FDR's "return to the dark ages" in this country, where it of course remains today. An era that brought with it Reagan's Vice President George H. W. Bush public confession to the media: "I don't know that atheists should be considered citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God." [Aug 27, 1988]. Bush Jr. naturally followed suit in the denigration of 'godless liberals'.

Unknown said...

Adnihilo said...

Reagan was the first devout Christian President to publicly demonize the word "liberal".

I agree substantively with everything you say about Reagan. However, the Nixon administration must be recalled as one which unleashed Spiro Agnew, the outraqeous right wing demogogue of his day. Likewise, Nixon himself had earned his right wing extremist credentials with the Alger Hiss case.

In 1980, the first Neoconservative US President put America on the freeway on-ramp to fascism in that dreaded "return to the Dark Ages" that Roosevelt had warned US about 40 years earlier in his quote calling for a liberal democracy.

Indeed, that is true. But we must not forget that Bush's grandfather was much earlier involved in a treasonous attempt to overthrow the Roosevelt administration in a coup d'etat that involved Pentagon brass. Batshit crazy!


President Reagan did more than just talk the talk of a religious zealot. He was also an ardent supporter of school prayer and anti-abortion laws.


Indeed! Reagan must have represented the beginning of a new era in which the GOP would annoint America's dictators. Reagan was the wet dream come true for the idiot jerk offs in the Pentagon. One of those idiot jerk offs now heads up the CIA.

Sheilanagig said...

I am not sure IDIOT is the right word. Who is more responsible, the liar; or the person believing a lie to suit his/her self-interest?

Americans, believing the lies of media, are not IDIOTS....but complicit in the crimes of those they support with their beliefs.

Really a well written blog. Thank you!

Unknown said...

Sheilanagig said...

I am not sure IDIOT is the right word. Who is more responsible, the liar; or the person believing a lie to suit his/her self-interest?

As the article asks: WHO's the idiot?

I must add, however, that criminals of any sort NEVER possess true or profound intelligence. Criminality is a compensation for lack of many talents --intelligence being one of them.

Certainly, there is no defense, no excuse for falling for the psychopaths lies and various ruses!

It was Kant, as I recall, who wrote of the moral imperative to be intelligent. The idea is certainly consistent with his 'Categorical Imperative' in which the individual is responsible for assessing the consequences of his/her actions and that the moral person would choose actions that may be made a 'general rule'.

That sort of thing requires intelligence and such mental agility is NOT to be found --I daresay --among ANYONE in the GOP.