Feb 20 2009
Eating Human Infants and Why I Want George Bush Back
A Modest Proposal by Jonathan Swift was written in 1729. In this proposal we are told about the many benefits to be gained by allowing wealthy people to purchase 1yr old children for a fine dining. Mr. Swift speaks eloquently and makes a strong case for the virtues of cannibalism. A very reasonable case indeed, in the absence of an “ethical foundation” it would be difficult to dismiss out of hand what he is arguing. It would create a whole new market, earn money for poor families, reduce abortion and he argues that it may even keep some men from beating their wives, changing their behavior to that of an expectant farmer waiting for a calf. Basically stating it would relieve people of the Burdon of having to see hungry children in the street. I know I don’t like to see hungry children. Hmm I don’t want to see pregnant women get beaten… Boy, and to cut down on abortion couldn’t be a bad thing… Could it?
This is why I want George Bush back. He was an inarticulate buffoon and a shitty liar. Yes, Ok he was also a terrorist thug brutalizing much of the world. But at least he was a wolf in a wolf’s clothing (albeit a buffoon wolf suit). With Mr. Change in the White House we have a level headed, articulate and reasonable voice telling us shit like he wants to send your children to Afghanistan to fight with people the US armed in the first place. But he can make it sound so reasonable. It’s only 17,000 more troops. It should all be fine. Maybe we can find Osama Bin Laden, Yea like we couldn’t find a 6’5” Arab on dialysis. Check with the CIA they know which safe house he is in, it’s the one with the dialysis machine. Go back to sleep America Barack Obama is on the job. The “so called, left” in this country were impotent before the election. Now with Mr. Change in the office they will let him do their talking. And thereby loose what little voice they did have. Barack Obama could make eating children sound reasonable. After all he just bought 17,000 more sons and daughters to offer up to the dogs of war for Scooby snacks
. People were far more inclined to resist and dissent against George Bush’s policy’s and not just because they were bad policy’s, but because he was such an asshole twit, there was a natural tendency for anyone with a brain to be suspicious of what he was saying. George Bush did more for grass roots organizing than anyone since Kennedy. While it wasn’t an impressive amount of protest by world standards, he was consolidating the base of resistance to the Neo-Con agenda.
If you consider yourself to be on the “left” then George Bush was a friend in the White House. He was the proverbial man with too much rope. Problem is we let him pass the rope to Barack Obama before he hung himself. Now it’s Barack who will get blamed for the mess… You had to know something was up when the Democratic Party put a black man on the presidential ticket. They are passing the buck. It’s like a bad Star Trek re-run, you just know the black dude is being set up for a fall. Kind of like how America got set up by believing Barack was a candidate for change, when really he is just another Democratic Party hack doing what the Democrats and Republicans have been doing for years. Making war and trying to sell a ruling class agenda to working people. I’m not saying he isn’t good at it, I’m just saying it isn’t a change.
Dsent
If you would like to read a modest proposal you can find it at the link below
http://www.uoregon.edu/~rbear/modest.html.
Wow-that was one hell of an introduction though thoroughly appalling. Comparing sending troops to Afghanistan with your intro. is a stretch of Biblical proportions. I agree with you on your portrayal of Bush but your condemnation of Obama before he has spent a MONTH in office is a bit premature. If you don’t see the already proposed and passed bills as a sign of change; I suggest you look again. While Bush’s bank bailout was designed to help out only the fat cats; Obama’s plans are designed to help people keep their homes and begin to help energize an otherwise dead economy. I have a variety of issues with some of the allocations in the stimulus bill, as does anyone everyone else but it is a start; albeit a small one. Bush failed to implement any type of restrictions or oversights on his plan and look where that got us. President Obama has already mandated the forfeiture of some of the benefits given to these Wall Street CEOs who were at the root of the problem to begin with. If you are having trouble seeing any change between the two I suggest you look again and let’s leave the race card out of it.
I’ll make that stretch. You might have noticed that people/children get killed in war all the time. Those people are being offered up to corporate greed. The real stretch is the belief that we are in Afghanistan for any respectable reason. And as for Obama being in office only a month that is non sequitur. In that month he has backed off his position on limiting CEOs pay, he hired Dennis Blair as DNI ( the same Blair who was complicit in the massacres in East Timor), he is escalating the war in Afghanistan and he is running away from the idea of holding the previous administration accountable for the crimes they committed. Do you actually believe that Obama’s plans will not have a beneficial effect for “fat cats” as you call them? He is in the Democratic Party if he was truly an agent for change he would be trying to destroy the 2party system and push for democratic reforms. The Democrats and Republicans work together to maintain control of the political system. Barack Obama is now the head of a plutocratic empire which is designed to undermine democracy and service the agenda of the elite. Passing and proposing a few bills hardly passes for change. There is an economic crisis, he has to look busy but he still works for the same people George Bush worked for and those are the people pulling his strings. Oh, I got quite a chuckle out of the line “mandated the forfeiture of SOME of the benefits given to those Wall Street CEOs”. I’d be much more impressed with his agenda for change if he locked them up instead of saying he wants some of what they’ve stolen back.
Please forgive me if I find dropping bombs on people morally repugnant and being reluctant to prosecute war criminals obscene.
And the “race card” comment. Get serious. What the hell is this BS race card hysteria? People in the US are afraid to mention race and when you do they get all touchy. He is black, to be in the oval office and be black is something new I have the right to find it ironic that the 1st black man chosen for the presidency by the Democratic party comes to the position at a time of economic crisis. I further have the right to comment on that irony. Get over yourself.
But really thanx for your comment I enjoyed it tremendously.
We obviously have different viewpoints regarding our presence in Afghanistan. If you feel secure in thinking that the Taliban and alQaeda have no intention of striking us again; I applaud you. I do believe our presence in Iraq is no longer needed and perhaps it is due to corporate greed. Nowhere did I say that I didn’t feel anything about the bombing of children; I too find it appalling. As far as Obama is concerned; I don’t know what you expect of him in 30 days and please don’t try to lay the blame on partisanship in his lap-not a single Republican in the House voted in favor of these bills. That should tell you enough. Finally; the irony you speak of by putting a Black man in office simply because we are in the midst of an economic crisis. Forgive me but if history is accurate; this sure as hell isn’t our first economic crisis. You are obviously a person of very strong convictions and though we differ; I do respect you. I look forward to reading more of your posts.
Delightful response, well allow me to retort. The Taliban did not attack us. As for Al-Qaeda do “I think they will attack us again” Hmm well it’s been over 7yrs and they haven’t done anything in the US. We are told by our government that they have cells functioning in the US… Are we to believe they just can’t find a way to get anything done? And lets not forget who they are, Mujahadeen warriors that we funded and armed to fight the Soviets. Their attack on America seems to have been assisted in someway, as they accomplished something that seems quite beyond their capabilities. Steel framed skyscrapers don’t just fall down. www.wtc7.net You can watch the perfect implosion of a building that was not hit by a plane and the fate of this building was not even mentioned by the 9/11 commission. Something stinks.
I’m pleased that you find bombing children appalling. However Obama is escalating that activity in Afghanistan. And fear that you will be attacked is not sufficient reason to bomb a country. The Geneva Conventions make that quite clear. As for what I expected of Obama in 30 days, well I would say he is running true to form and I am not surprised at his actions. I don’t find republican intransigence on voting for his stimulus package any surprise either. What I could have seen that would have led me to believe that he was an agent of change would be him taking an aggressive position on prosecuting the war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by the Bush administration, not placing a terrorist like Blair as DNI and reducing not increasing our presence in Afghanistan. An independent commission to investigate 9/11 wouldn’t be a bad start either.
I do not “lay the blame on partisanship” oh contraire I believe partisan politics to be a dog and pony show for the electorate. Democrats and Republicans are both agents of the military industrial complex and the prison industrial complex. Their political actions all too often represent malfeasance and dare I say treason in some cases. I have no stomach for either party. Now it is true that the US economy is cyclical and recessionary periods are nothing new. But the present crisis is not your run of the mill recession. Look at the numbers and the history of these cycles, the closest comparison that can be found is the “Great Depression”. At least that’s what the numbers suggest. And the point is, with all the SERIOUS shit we are nose deep in, to worry about a comment on the irony of our 1st black president coming to office at this time is to be hypersensitive about race. The term race card suppresses open discourse about the relevance of race in our culture. Racism is not over and encouraging people to be overly sensitive and suppress their inclinations to discuss it, does not make it less of an issue. It’s just one of those issues that make folks uncomfortable so they would prefer you don’t mention it. I am not inclined to pander to those sensibilities. I think we do better when we can speak our minds with out fear that someone will accuse us of “playing the race card”.
Thanx for your time and the sharing of your opinions.