First Step Towards Sanity
American troops have pulled out of Iraqi cities, turning over the control of them to Iraqi security forces. This is the first step towards a complete US pullout, assuming of course that President Obama keeps his campaign promise to do exactly that.
Iraq will undoubtedly face an upsurge in violence, the security forces will very likely be tested in the next few weeks, and I hope that they're up to the task. If they crumble against their opponents, Obama will be forced to order American troops back in and we'll see this insanity perpetuated at least through the elections of 2012.
Politically, Iraq cannot be allowed to fall or the neo-cons will finally have something to rally around and possibly have a serious chance in 2012. A collapsed Iraq would mean that Obama really was "too inexperienced" to be president. Never mind the fact that it was an illegal war in the first place. Fox News viewers don't know this and Fox news is sadly still far and away the number one "news" station. If Iraqi forces lose control of their cities, Fox will plaster the images day and night, blaming all the carnage and destruction on the withdrawal. It will be like the scenes in Saigon after the US withdrawal in the 70's, which are still blamed on the Democrats even though Nixon was President at the time.
So I hope the Iraqi forces are up to the task, and that Obama is a good chess player. There are political forces both inside and outside the United States who are not only counting on the Iraqi withdrawal to fail, but may actively take part in supporting the opposition forces in Iraq. There is far too much money to be made with a perpetual war. The same people who put together the Project for a New American Century years ago, are still active and have reaped billions from the American goverment during the last six years. They will gladly reinvest a little of that money to destabilize Iraq and force Obama to order American troops back in.
In the meantime, I salute both President Obama and Iraqi President al-Maliki for taking this first important step, and I hope there is a lasting peace and stability in Iraq for years to come.
Iraq will undoubtedly face an upsurge in violence, the security forces will very likely be tested in the next few weeks, and I hope that they're up to the task. If they crumble against their opponents, Obama will be forced to order American troops back in and we'll see this insanity perpetuated at least through the elections of 2012.
Politically, Iraq cannot be allowed to fall or the neo-cons will finally have something to rally around and possibly have a serious chance in 2012. A collapsed Iraq would mean that Obama really was "too inexperienced" to be president. Never mind the fact that it was an illegal war in the first place. Fox News viewers don't know this and Fox news is sadly still far and away the number one "news" station. If Iraqi forces lose control of their cities, Fox will plaster the images day and night, blaming all the carnage and destruction on the withdrawal. It will be like the scenes in Saigon after the US withdrawal in the 70's, which are still blamed on the Democrats even though Nixon was President at the time.
So I hope the Iraqi forces are up to the task, and that Obama is a good chess player. There are political forces both inside and outside the United States who are not only counting on the Iraqi withdrawal to fail, but may actively take part in supporting the opposition forces in Iraq. There is far too much money to be made with a perpetual war. The same people who put together the Project for a New American Century years ago, are still active and have reaped billions from the American goverment during the last six years. They will gladly reinvest a little of that money to destabilize Iraq and force Obama to order American troops back in.
In the meantime, I salute both President Obama and Iraqi President al-Maliki for taking this first important step, and I hope there is a lasting peace and stability in Iraq for years to come.
Labels: Opinion
posted by John at
9:39 AM
0 Comments
June 10, 2009
Former FEMA Head Michael Brown Appointed New GM Chairman
Detroit - The New GM announced today that it would be led by Michael D. Brown, the former FEMA Administrator who was criticized so heavily during Hurricane Katrina. Brown was personally selected and endorsed by the head of the Obama administration's Car Task Force Steven Rattner.
"I was a little surprised to get the call," said Michael Brown, who has been unemployed since resigning as head of FEMA, "but I am confident that I can take GM outside the box into a whole new paradigm. It's true I know nothing about cars, but I know that people like big engines that shake the ground when you step on the gas, so I'm thinking muscle cars, like the ones we had in the 50's and 60's. After all, gas is cheap again so let's take advantage of that; I'd even like to see GM re-acquire the Hummer."
When reporters asked Rattner what led to the choice of Brown, he replied. "He plays golf with my dad, and he's been so down since the Katrina thing that I thought we should give him a second chance. Besides, it's not like he has no experience at all. He used to judge horses, which like cars are a mode of transportation. And cars engines are still rated according to their horsepower, right?"
Brown does bring a certain amount of political experience to the job. That is relevant since the U.S. government is currently GM's largest shareholder, and he will have to answer to Congress. "He's been under fire from Congress in the past, and kept his cool." Rattner said proudly. "There are very few executives that have taken the level of scrutiny that he has had to endure. Frankly, I thnk Brownie will do a heck of a job!"
"I was a little surprised to get the call," said Michael Brown, who has been unemployed since resigning as head of FEMA, "but I am confident that I can take GM outside the box into a whole new paradigm. It's true I know nothing about cars, but I know that people like big engines that shake the ground when you step on the gas, so I'm thinking muscle cars, like the ones we had in the 50's and 60's. After all, gas is cheap again so let's take advantage of that; I'd even like to see GM re-acquire the Hummer."
When reporters asked Rattner what led to the choice of Brown, he replied. "He plays golf with my dad, and he's been so down since the Katrina thing that I thought we should give him a second chance. Besides, it's not like he has no experience at all. He used to judge horses, which like cars are a mode of transportation. And cars engines are still rated according to their horsepower, right?"
Brown does bring a certain amount of political experience to the job. That is relevant since the U.S. government is currently GM's largest shareholder, and he will have to answer to Congress. "He's been under fire from Congress in the past, and kept his cool." Rattner said proudly. "There are very few executives that have taken the level of scrutiny that he has had to endure. Frankly, I thnk Brownie will do a heck of a job!"
Labels: Satire
posted by John at
9:51 AM
1 Comments
June 7, 2009
Sometimes Being Patriotic Means Having To Say Your Sorry
This week, at a speech in Cairo, Obama did something unheard of in a politician: He told the TRUTH! He acknowledged that the Palestinian people have suffered and were displaced by the creation of modern Israel. He was also the first president to admit that the US actively helped overthrow the democratic government of Iran during the Cold War (something so few Americans seem to know about). And finally, perhaps the one that has sent so many neo-conservative war mongers into hysterical fits, he stated the obvious fact that the attack on Iraq was a war of choice (and a bad one at that).
Conservative reaction has ranged from Sean Hannity of FOX News selectively editing the video of the speech in order to make it look like Obama was sympathizing with the attackers on 9/11, to Senator Jim Inhofe actually calling the speech "un-American" and that he couldn't tell "which side he's on." Now I expect any show on FOX News to distort the truth by any means possible, they are a political propaganda machine, not a news station. It was pretty shocking though to hear a Senator deliver such an inflammatory criticism of the president, especially when he is out of the country. I have no doubt that his comments were meant to motivate the fanatical base of the Republican party, but I thought I'd take some tome to explain to Senator Inhofe which side Obama and the rest of us patriotic Americans are on.
I'd like to make a distinction first between patriotism and nationalism. Dictionaries differ on their descriptions, but the overall consensus is that while patrotism means loving your country, nationalism means loving your country to a fanatical level. I think of Senator Inhofe as a Nationalist, someone who will staunchly
defend the country, even when it has clearly committed a major crime.
I consider myself a patriot. I love the USA and the ideals that it stands for, but when the government falls short of those ideals I look at the truth of the situation no matter how ugly it gets.
Like most Americans, I grew up with propagandized history classes that always painted America as the "good guys". The horrible things we did to Native Americans as we expanded west were not in my textbooks, nor was any mention of tidbits like the U.S. government backing a revolution against the democraticaly elected Guatemalan government at the behest of the United Fruit Company.
These events are facts, and facts need to be embraced and not ran away from (pay attention please creationsists). If we deny those portions of our history that we don't like, then we are no better than the Holocaust deniers, trying to paint a rosy picture where none exists. Our country has been involved in some atrocious behavior over the years, and only by recognizing that and accepting the uncomfortable truth of it, can we learn and grow beyond it.
Iraq was a war of choice, there is no disputing this. As the historical record begins to unfold it becomes more and more obvious that the Bush administration just wanted to invade Iraq and that there were no connections between Iraq and 9/11, Iraq or Iraq and Al Quaida, except perhaps sharing the same planet. In order to create a fictional connection, the Bush Administration used methods of torture to extract false confessions out of prisoners. These are the facts, and the ramifications of this are what President Obama inherited when he took office.
I applaud Obama for taking on these subjects in such a frank and honest way. It takes a bigger man (and country) to admit when we did something wrong, and his doing so in such a public way has helped restore our credibility with other nations around the world. Obama is a true patriot, and I am proud to have him as our president.
Conservative reaction has ranged from Sean Hannity of FOX News selectively editing the video of the speech in order to make it look like Obama was sympathizing with the attackers on 9/11, to Senator Jim Inhofe actually calling the speech "un-American" and that he couldn't tell "which side he's on." Now I expect any show on FOX News to distort the truth by any means possible, they are a political propaganda machine, not a news station. It was pretty shocking though to hear a Senator deliver such an inflammatory criticism of the president, especially when he is out of the country. I have no doubt that his comments were meant to motivate the fanatical base of the Republican party, but I thought I'd take some tome to explain to Senator Inhofe which side Obama and the rest of us patriotic Americans are on.
I'd like to make a distinction first between patriotism and nationalism. Dictionaries differ on their descriptions, but the overall consensus is that while patrotism means loving your country, nationalism means loving your country to a fanatical level. I think of Senator Inhofe as a Nationalist, someone who will staunchly
defend the country, even when it has clearly committed a major crime.
I consider myself a patriot. I love the USA and the ideals that it stands for, but when the government falls short of those ideals I look at the truth of the situation no matter how ugly it gets.
Like most Americans, I grew up with propagandized history classes that always painted America as the "good guys". The horrible things we did to Native Americans as we expanded west were not in my textbooks, nor was any mention of tidbits like the U.S. government backing a revolution against the democraticaly elected Guatemalan government at the behest of the United Fruit Company.
These events are facts, and facts need to be embraced and not ran away from (pay attention please creationsists). If we deny those portions of our history that we don't like, then we are no better than the Holocaust deniers, trying to paint a rosy picture where none exists. Our country has been involved in some atrocious behavior over the years, and only by recognizing that and accepting the uncomfortable truth of it, can we learn and grow beyond it.
Iraq was a war of choice, there is no disputing this. As the historical record begins to unfold it becomes more and more obvious that the Bush administration just wanted to invade Iraq and that there were no connections between Iraq and 9/11, Iraq or Iraq and Al Quaida, except perhaps sharing the same planet. In order to create a fictional connection, the Bush Administration used methods of torture to extract false confessions out of prisoners. These are the facts, and the ramifications of this are what President Obama inherited when he took office.
I applaud Obama for taking on these subjects in such a frank and honest way. It takes a bigger man (and country) to admit when we did something wrong, and his doing so in such a public way has helped restore our credibility with other nations around the world. Obama is a true patriot, and I am proud to have him as our president.
Labels: Opinion
posted by John at
11:26 AM
0 Comments
Sim City Recognizes Gay Marriage
(No this is not satire.) The latest version of the Sims video game allows gay couples to get married! Congratulations to Sims maker, Electronic Arts for recognizing that same sex marriage is really just a matter of equal rights for all.
Labels: Opinion
posted by John at
9:09 AM
0 Comments
June 1, 2009
Kim Jong Suspends Nuclear Missile Program For Role In New Bond Flick
Pyongyang North Korea - In a diplomatic victory for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Obama Administration, North Korean President Kim Jong II has agreed to suspend his nuclear missile program in exchange for a starring role in the upcoming James Bond film "From Pyongyang With Love."
The deal was put together very quickly in the wake of North Korea's most recent missile test. Diplomatic tensions were high on all sides, and it's rumored that Secretary of State Clinton floated the idea herself through unofficial channels. Once word reached Kim Jong II, he jumped on it. The official agreement will not be announced until the movie contract is signed, but insiders from both Hollywood and Washington say that it will happen in the next day or two.
Michael G. Wilson, producer of the upcoming Bond movie gave the world a hint of the movie's plot and the role that Kim Jong II would play. "He will be playing himself as the leader of North Korea, in a near future scenario where agents from SPECTRE have gotten computer control of North Korea's nuclear arsenal and plan to use it to start World War III. Kim Jong II, after an initial hostile encounter with Bond (played by Daniel Craig) will then team up with 007 to secure the weapons and defeat SPECTRE. He also revealed that Anne Hathaway would star in the movie as a double agent whom falls in love with Kim Jong II. Wilson however, would not comment on rumors that the leader of SPECTRE, the infamous Persian cat petting Ernst Stavro Blofield will be played by none other than Dick Cheney.
The deal was put together very quickly in the wake of North Korea's most recent missile test. Diplomatic tensions were high on all sides, and it's rumored that Secretary of State Clinton floated the idea herself through unofficial channels. Once word reached Kim Jong II, he jumped on it. The official agreement will not be announced until the movie contract is signed, but insiders from both Hollywood and Washington say that it will happen in the next day or two.
Michael G. Wilson, producer of the upcoming Bond movie gave the world a hint of the movie's plot and the role that Kim Jong II would play. "He will be playing himself as the leader of North Korea, in a near future scenario where agents from SPECTRE have gotten computer control of North Korea's nuclear arsenal and plan to use it to start World War III. Kim Jong II, after an initial hostile encounter with Bond (played by Daniel Craig) will then team up with 007 to secure the weapons and defeat SPECTRE. He also revealed that Anne Hathaway would star in the movie as a double agent whom falls in love with Kim Jong II. Wilson however, would not comment on rumors that the leader of SPECTRE, the infamous Persian cat petting Ernst Stavro Blofield will be played by none other than Dick Cheney.
Labels: Satire
posted by John at
9:18 AM
0 Comments
