tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19580203.post114503141480194115..comments2024-03-25T16:03:36.810-07:00Comments on The Existentialist Cowboy: Impeachment is Not EnoughAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04598093941551759917noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19580203.post-1145452493943756542006-04-19T06:14:00.000-07:002006-04-19T06:14:00.000-07:00"The new national symbol for the neocon USA will l..."The new national symbol for the neocon USA will likely resemble what is found on a bottle of rat poison."<BR/><BR/>That was, I believe, the "logo" for the Nazi SS. I chose that symbol illustrate my archived article: <A HREF="" REL="nofollow" HTTP://EXISTENTIALISTCOWBOY.BLOGSPOT.COM/2006_02_05_EXISTENTIALISTCOWBOY_ARCHIVE.HTML>"For Bush, the State is Absolute"</A> <BR/><BR/>Nazism has its roots in Hegelian "absolutism". And, interestingly, Hegel was the primary influence on Marx who borrowed from Hegel the materialist "dialectic". So ...it is not surprising that NeoCon "conservativism" is akin to Socialism, specifically NATIONAL SOCIALISM, ie Nazism. It is in fact, a socialism of, by and for corporations for whom defense and other government contracts make them the sole beneficiary of a totalitarian form of government. In America, corporations have the same rights as do individual, though a corporation is, in fact, nothing more than a legal abstraction. <BR/><BR/>Bush seems to have taken this process to its final stage: a merger of the corporate community with government itself. Dick Cheney is both Halliburton CEO and the power behind Bush's dictatorship.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04598093941551759917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19580203.post-1145372265037268232006-04-18T07:57:00.000-07:002006-04-18T07:57:00.000-07:00How entirely corrupt are the neocons? Would the s...How entirely corrupt are the neocons? Would the surviving neocons encourage a constitutional convention in order to create a new, twisted government and nation to completely legitimize what they have done and have yet to do? That is my fear of holding such a national constitutional convention.<BR/><BR/>George W. Bush's grandpappy was influenced greatly by Hitler and the Third Reich in his day. I just wonder how much of that rubbed off on his younger generations, and what kind of bedtime stories Prescott Bush told to his grandkids. They must begun a lot like this:<BR/><BR/>Once upon a time, in middle Europe, a great and mighty ruler led the land in a grand commission to create a superior state and overcome the world...<BR/><BR/>They must have ended like this:<BR/>... it is up to you, my dear children, to finish what the great ruler started...<BR/><BR/>I think that the quest overrides any thoughts of impending impeachment for Bushco. Thus, the Iran conflict will diminish such impeachment thoughts and, unless people are willing to stick their necks on the line, Bush will likely stay in power past his term. Oh, wait. After the constitutional convention, there will be no presidential term limits. The president determines when he steps down, as national security and international conflicts dictate, they will say. They will reason that international conflicts cannot appropriately be resolved when the head of the most powerful country changes every eight years or less.<BR/><BR/>The new national symbol for the neocon USA will likely resemble what is found on a bottle of rat poison.Jenniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01419277376891789393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19580203.post-1145138166323212352006-04-15T14:56:00.000-07:002006-04-15T14:56:00.000-07:00John, you are correct. The tiny ruling elite is po...John, you are correct. The tiny ruling elite is powerful because they are rich. In our system money = power. I would be hard pressed to name a single member of Congress who spent less on his/her campaign than his opponent. GOPPERS have known at least since the ascension of Ronald Reagan that he who spends most gets elected. This fact is borne out by even a cursory study of the campaign expenditures of "winners". Wealth thus translates directly into pure political power. <BR/><BR/>A mere one percent of the nation's population controls a vastly disproportionate share of the nation’s wealth. Hence, they enjoy a disproportionate influence over the levers of government. Wealth is power. Especially so in a right leaning society in which the rules are written to favor the wealthy. <BR/><BR/>Even Adam Smith recognized that "...wherever there is great property there is great inequality." Though Smith is most often quoted by ideological capitalists, Smith himself recognized the dangers inherent in class-biased governmental policies. He acknowledged some two centuries ago "...the very end of [government] is to secure the rich from the poor." The GOP has taken that to extremes. <BR/><BR/>Smith predicted that "masters" with greater power would conspire to pay "labor" as little as possible. Ronald Reagan proved Smith to be correct. Reagan is famous for having broken the power of labor unions. And among the most repugnant of his many legacies is the fact that following his tax cut of 1982, ONLY the upper 20 percent of the population prospered. And of that upper 20 percent, the top one percent prospered obscenely. Every other quintile but the top, LOST GROUND. That trend abated but slightly in Clinton's second term. It has resumed with a vengeance under Bush. It will be our undoing. <BR/><BR/>By any measure, then, the gap between rich and poor has grown very nearly exponentially throughout the industrialized nations. A report by the United Nations Human Development organization reveals that between 1960 and 1990, the world's upper quintile [the richest fifth of the population] increased its wealth from 70 percent to 85 percent. The lowest quintile almost fell off the ladder, dropping from 2.3 percent to 1.4 percent. The trend is ongoing. <BR/><BR/>The income of the top quintile compared to that of the bottom quintile rose from 30-1, to 78-1. Not merely income but net worth is concentrated in the hands of some 358 billionaires world wide. Their consolidated assets are worth more than the annual combined incomes of some 45 percent of the world's total population. <BR/><BR/>Growing inequality during periods of general economic growth disproves conclusively a favorite GOP myth, or more properly, GOP LIE and that is "supply side economics" often called "trickle down theory" by its detractors. Trickle down theory is pure bunkum. It is a myth perpetrated by the very, very, very rich for the purpose of making it possible for them to STEAL from everyone else by hijacking and exploiting the power of various governments that they control through sheer wealth, raw economic power, and, hence, political influence. It's a heist!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04598093941551759917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19580203.post-1145124792326431002006-04-15T11:13:00.000-07:002006-04-15T11:13:00.000-07:00I do agree that impeachment would only be a first ...I do agree that impeachment would only be a first step in giving us a government that does not betray the national interest. The root of the problem is a political system controlled by a tiny elite that places their interests above the national good. Until we create a principled 3rd party alternative will we begin to right this ship.End The Duopolyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14073250715062033972noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19580203.post-1145108509237182252006-04-15T06:41:00.000-07:002006-04-15T06:41:00.000-07:00Susan, where can copies of these indictments be ob...Susan, where can copies of these indictments be obtained? One of the reasons I favor a new national convention is that it could not only write George Bush and his entire gang of crooks out of a job, it could mandate a grand jury to consider returning such indictments. <BR/><BR/>According to the late Sen. Sam Irvin of Watergate Committee fame, such a national convention (provided for by Article 5 of the Constitution) could literally re-create the nation. <BR/><BR/>Some people fear such a covention ...and rightly so. But when a sitting President declares "The Constitution is just a goddamn piece of paper" there is no longer a downside risk in the creation of such a convention.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04598093941551759917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19580203.post-1145086251059753292006-04-15T00:30:00.000-07:002006-04-15T00:30:00.000-07:00AW, MAN! How come you saved the best for last? T...AW, MAN! How come you saved the best for last? There's no "if" about it! There are AT LEAST 50 indictments outstanding for the president, his father, the vice president, half the cabinet, members of the corporate media, certain CEO's, certain military brass, etc. All this came down last summer, and I've been trying SO hard to spread the word! I totally agree with you that impeachment is not the answer and may even be counter-productive for the reasons you explained. As I see it, the question is not what to do, but who has the authority and/or influence to do it!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19580203.post-1145062912652879522006-04-14T18:01:00.000-07:002006-04-14T18:01:00.000-07:00"It is foolish and dishonorable to suggest that we..."It is foolish and dishonorable to suggest that we should not enforce the rule of law because the outcome would unattractive or difficult."<BR/><BR/>That's not my point at all. My point is made in the headline: Impeachmen is not ENOUGH! <BR/><BR/>Impeachment, in other words, doesn't go far enough. It is not a panacea. A post-impeachment world will not be sudeenly hunky dory again. There is no quick and easy route back to Eden. <BR/><BR/>Secondly, there is the question of timing. Impeachment, being a half measure at best, is not worth relieving the GOP of a tar baby of their own creation. <BR/><BR/>Why should Democrats pay for crimes perpetrated by the GOP. <BR/><BR/>At last, lest you think I am soft on "impeachment", I support removing, with arrests where possible, the entire crime syndicate that has taken over our government. I favor criminal, felony trials for Bush —specifically his violations of U.S. Codes; section 2441. <BR/><BR/>And, at last, I favor turning Bush over to the Hague for war crimes trials. But NOT if it means letting the GOP continue to destroy Constitutional law in the U.S.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04598093941551759917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19580203.post-1145058654350205322006-04-14T16:50:00.000-07:002006-04-14T16:50:00.000-07:00Well I don't agree with your reasoning with respec...Well I don't agree with your reasoning with respect to impeachment. It would not be the act of impeachment itself that would save America, but it would be an indication, if it were done honorably, that We the People are finally willing to take responsibility for what has come to pass and now understand that our freedom and our heritage depends on our courage and willingness to defend the rule of law; and that we do not intend to let such arrogance and criminality succeed again<BR/><BR/>It is foolish and dishonorable to suggest that we should not enforce the rule of law because the outcome would unattractive or difficult.<BR/><BR/>All who have committed impeachable offenses should be thrown out<BR/><BR/>Impeachment would suggest to those who are left standing that they are subject to the rule of law too and any deviation from it will be carried out at their peril.<BR/><BR/>Stand up and take responsibility. Doing nothing as this author suggests is not an honorable path to take.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com