In other words: A discussion of The Bush Administration
"humor" break (thanks to phunksters):
Alas we knew him too well: Former President George W. Bush Dead at 72Mr. Bush was a politician opponents underestimated at their peril, and throughout his career his opponents did just that. He cultivated an aura of know-nothingness, of "a fine disregard" of inconvenient facts or opinions, but he was devastating on the attack, able to present himself as an ordinary man outraged by the self-superiority of whoever might be opposing him at any time and on any issue. Even as president, before the al Qaeda terrorist attacks on Washington, D.C., and New York City, in 2001, he was not always taken seriously by political commentators or the public at large; after that event he became a heroic figure, standing in defense of the United States as if that historic responsibility were his alone.
He launched an assault against Afghanistan, where al Qaeda had its headquarters and training grounds, weeks after the 2001 attacks, leading to the immediate fall of the totalitarian Islamic regime of the Taliban, which had given al Qaeda sanctuary. Though Osama bin Laden, the leader of the worldwide Islamist movement, escaped capture, his forces were severely weakened and scattered; during Mr. Bush's first term there was, against all expectations and predictions, no further terrorist attack on American soil. Arguing that Saddam Hussein's government in Iraq was a center of terrorist plotting and a repository of terrorist weaponry, from what turned out to be nonexistent chemical and biological arms to equally chimerical nuclear technology, Mr. Bush in 2003 led a limited international coalition into Iraq and replaced Mr. Hussein with an occupying force, which over the next year was pushed back into consistently shrinking enclaves in the face of a fierce insurgency. Following his reelection in 2004, Mr. Bush ordered the destruction of the cities where the insurgents were thought to be concentrated; though the cities were destroyed, the insurgency continued. Mr. Bush then pressed on to Iran and North Korea, which he had identified as "rogue states."
With U.S. Armed Forces tied down in Iraq, Mr. Bush turned to what critics called a "private army subject to no law and operating at the whim of a single individual"--that is, to large numbers of private contractors employed by U. S., Serbian, Nigerian, and Saudi corporations--to launch land, sea, and air attacks meant to destroy nuclear facilities in both Iran and North Korea. While the Afghan and Iraqi armies and governments had collapsed almost at the first sign of American assault, the Iranian and North Korean invasions were beaten back by sustained resistance and, in North Korea, the use of explosives that Mr. Bush denounced as "tactical nuclear weapons," though this was later proved not to be the case. Nonetheless Mr. Bush then ordered what he described as "pinpoint" nuclear attacks on the nuclear sites in Iran and North Korea, which, while achieving their goals, also led to the One-Day War, a nuclear exchange between India and Pakistan that left Bombay and Karachi in ruins and led to the fall of the governments of both countries, and to the withdrawal of the American-led coalition forces from Iraq. The result was the series of still-continuing civil wars throughout the Middle East and the Indian subcontinent that, while involving no unconventional weapons since 2006 have, according to the United Nations, caused the deaths of 12 million people and the displacement of millions more. Mr. Bush's claim in action if not in words that the United States retained an international monopoly on the legitimate use of force left allies such as Great Britain and alliances such as NATO crippled; it also left the United States at least formally unchallenged.
The Jerusalem Post: A two-state solutionDespite common historical roots, they are today irreversibly separated by opposing cultural, political, and religious values. Although some still dream that they can live together in peace in one nation, it is increasingly clear that nothing short of a two-state solution will resolve this conflict.
Of course, I'm talking about the United States. President George W. Bush's victory over John Kerry has opened up a major fault line between the two Americas: the so-called Republican-conservative Red States, and the Democratic-liberal Blue States.
On such key issues as abortion, gay rights, taxation, church-state separation, and America's place in the world, they are irreconcilably divided. The passions aroused by last week's election have only exacerbated their differences.
At this point, a clean break between the two may be the best answer.
...
Given America's past experience with secession, it's obvious the US is going to need some help in dividing itself into two nations: The Republican Republic of Red America, and the Democratic Union of Blue America. And this is where I think Israel has a tremendously helpful role to play.
No other country in the world has had more experience in modern times with the two-state solution process. True, we haven't actually achieved it yet; but Israel is unmatched in terms of dealing with the steps needed to get there.
...
Some tricky issues will need to be worked out. For one thing, the three clusters of Blue States in the Northeast, Midwest and Pacific coast do not form a contiguous territory. One solution may be found in the fact that all three areas border at some point on Canada. Perhaps the Canadians can be convinced to provide an extra-territorial "safe-passage corridor" along the US border connecting the Blue State clusters
Then there's the question of what to do with those large "settlement" pockets of conservative Red State voters found in Blue States California's Orange County, for example and likewise, those liberal Blue State settlements in Red States such as Austin, Texas. I suggest a "mutual transfer" agreement of sorts, where the residents of these regions would be compensated to move to the area where they would feel most politically comfortable.
One of the trickiest issues is bound to be the status of the capital. Although Washington, D.C., is currently controlled by the Red Republicans, it sits within the solidly Blue Democratic District of Columbia. Given the immense symbolic value of the city, and specifically such structures as Capitol Hill and the White House, it's unlikely either side would be willing to cede full sovereignty over the site to the other.
The only answer here may be to "internationalize" Washington, D.C., with a neutral third party overseeing its governance and allowing both Red and Blue Americans equal access to its politically holy monuments.
...
Sounds farfetched? Maybe. But believe it or not, some people think such a scenario is even possible here.
- rob 2:42 PM - [PermaLink] -
----
TCS Now offers a News Reader Feed
Subscribe to the TCS Feed
Having trouble with some of the poor English
on this site?
Imagine what it looks like when translated by a machine:
This is a "team" blog. We are a bunch of
Americans, whose rising distress
in our leader's decisions brought us together to make this site.
As Bush said, he's a "uniter." Many of us have never even met.
That's the internet for you.
Buy our cool stuff.
And tell everyone what you feel.
We have a little Store
you can visit.
Our store's selection of items is constantly growing. Come
see what we have.
We're also Amazon Associates, so if you want to buy something from Amazon, please search for it below, and we will get a few bucks from the sale.
Static Sky
Tin Foil Caps
The Free Speech Zone
The office of the independent blogger
Buzzflash
Tom The Dancing Bug
VerifiedVoting.org
Get Your War
On
This Modern World
Eschaton / Atrios
Daily Kos
meowpurrmeow
Contribute to America's Future
It is now more important then ever.
Donate to the Democractic Congressional Campaign Committee
Donate to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee
Some More Site Mottos
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the
president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is
not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the
American people."
- Teddy Roosevelt
"Government has a final responsibility for the well-being of
its citizenship. If private cooperative endeavor fails to provide work
for willing hands and relief for the unfortunate, those suffering
hardship from no fault of their own have a right to call upon the
Government for aid; and a government worthy of its name must make
fitting response."
- Franklin Delano Roosevelt
"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and Constitutions, but laws must and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."
- Thomas Jefferson
"The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home."
"All men having power ought to be distrusted to a certain
degree."
- James Madison
"I believe in human dignity as the source of national purpose, in human liberty as the source of national action, in the human heart as the source of national compassion, and in the human mind as the source of our invention and our ideas. It is, I believe, the faith in our fellow citizens as individuals and as people that lies at the heart of the liberal faith. For liberalism is not so much a party creed or set of fixed platform promises as it is an attitude of mind and heart, a faith in man's ability through the experiences of his reason and judgment to increase for himself and his fellow men the amount of justice and freedom and brotherhood which all human life deserves."
- John F. Kennedy
"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are [a] few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower
more coming...
