I protest.

Oh, good.

I noted this evening the Google ad box at the lower right. Theoretically, the subject matter should be related to the content of the page upon which the ad appears. Hopefully that's not always the case, since tonight the ads are

• The Truth about 9/11
• 9/11 Report Summary
• September 11th T-Shirts(!)
• 9/11 Memorial NYC Gifts(!!)
• Freedom Tower Silver Coin (!!!)

Unbelievable.

A fool and his President...

I've been notably silent here for some time, primarily due to personal issues related to my work situation and to my own neverending struggle with clinical depression. It's not that I've had nothing to say, it's just that I haven't had the energy to say it. And I do have things to say.

A small part of my silence has been a difficult-to-shake feeling that my writing here makes little difference in the scheme of things. As angry as I am at the fools who are running this country, I will never be even a Matthew or a Jesse, much less an Atrios. I may be brighter than the average rock but when I see Republican stickers on car bumpers, the sheer idiocy and folly seems overwhelming.

I remain astounded that anyone could continue to support Bush, who is not one of the scant few who have actually benefited from his actions. Those few are the Halliburtons and Bechtels, not to mention the members of Al Qaeda. For the average person, Bush has been an umitigated disaster. So why do those average people support him? I can only conclude that they are too dim-witted to realize that they have been systematically and continuously lied to, they deliberately believe the lies for reasons that escape me, or they have been made so afraid that they cling desperately to a fantasy of Bush as a hero. I don't know, all three of those alternatives just seem like stupidity to me.

Bush and his administration are lying to us, they have always lied to us and they always will lie to us. Whether Bush actually believes what he is saying is irrelevant (although it's vaguely possible), since in that case whoever is feeding him his lines is lying.

"Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me."

The thing is, there are a few of us who were never fooled. I think I have written here before of my fear shortly after the events of 9/11/2001 that Bush and the Republicans would turn those events to their political advantage, using the fear so engendered to rob us of our rights so as to consolidate and keep their power. While it might have been considered unthinkable at the time, I, at least, thought it. The man had already shown his true colors, the instant he took the White House. It was obvious, to me at least, that those in power were of the opinion that their ends justified any means whatsoever. If anything, I underestimated their egotism and desire for power.

Like all of two or three other Americans, I opposed the invasion of Afghanistan. As I wrote at the time, in response to someone who claimed that "strong outside pressure" (as in, bombs) was the only possibility,

If we can deliver bombs, we can deliver food. Bomb them with kindness and don't forget the propaganda.

Dollars, food and propaganda work well as weapons, and they aren't so hard on the civilian population. Yeah, you may deride me as "an idealist" and "unrealistic," but this, at least, has the virtue of not having been tried over and over and failing each time.

Afghanistan notwithstanding, however, the invasion of Iraq was utterly beyond the pale. The day of the invasion I was shaking, pacing, as upset as I have ever been. More upset than I have ever been over something that did not affect me directly.

Just who the hell believed the lies Bush, Cheney and the rest continually cranked out? Yeah, I know, lots of people did. After more than ten years of sanctions, of bombing, of no-fly zones and more bombing, still people who should have known better believed that Saddam Hussein could have had so-called "weapons of mass destruction." And over the last few months I read of them "coming to their senses" and realizing that they were wrong to support the war.

Well, duh.

Where the hell were those senses when there was a chance we could have stopped it, huh?

Now there are over 1,100 American dead. Almost ten times that number of American injured and maimed for life. Tens of thousands of Iraqi dead and injured. Before the war I posted this picture on my main website as a protest of the run-up to war. Those are children at an Baghdad school a few months before our invasion; I used it with permission from the person who took it. Now I wonder how many of those children are still alive and healthy. Any?

While the buck may stop on Bush's desk (however much he may protest that fact), as Americans we are all responsible for what we have done in Iraq.

And not only what we have done in Iraq, but what we have been and are now doing to our own children, who fight and die at our behest in an occupation that many of them know is unjust. As with Viet Nam, so with the new quagmire: Which one of these children does Bush nominate as the last to die for a lie?

This is only one reason to vote against Bush in nine days, although certainly it is a good one. What fool would deny the truth, what fool would believe the lie that our deeds were and are justified? That fool will vote for the liar.

Fortunately, though, that fool is not in the majority. Someone pointed out in one of the many articles I read today something that I have been saying for months, although not here: How many people who supported Gore in 2000 now support Bush? How many newspapers endorsed Gore then and endorse Bush now? Conversely, how many who then supported Bush now support Kerry? Even a paper that has endorsed every Republican candidate for President since Eisenhower in 1952, with only one exception in 1964, has refused to endorse Bush this year.

Bush will lose. It is my hope that he will lose by a landslide, but he will lose. And he knows it.

The fools haven't won yet. Too bad that it has taken so long for the rest of us to start fighting them. And, of course, the fight won't be over with the election. We have lost a lot and it will take more than a single election for us to recover it. We must defeat the Patriot Act. We must find some way out of the debacle in Iraq, even if it is only a withdrawal as being the least bad of a terrible set of options. We must rebuild our links with the world and somehow regain the trust that Bush and his team of moronic idealogues has so squandered. And so much more.

But first, the election. And if you happen to be one of the fools who plans to vote for the lie, well, you should most probably just stay the hell away from me.

Informing the uninformed.

So no sooner do I post my latest rant than I find myself confronted with the folly to which I was referring. My main website is pretty anti-Bush and from time to time it generates a bit of email. This morning I got one from someone who claimed to have been "undecided" about the election. It was nice, reasonable and relatively well-written, making it a great departure from the usual tone of such email, but it contained an unfortunate assertion that demonstrated unequivocally the writer's ignorance of current events. My reply is below.

First, thank you for the nice email. All too often the email I get from the Right is incoherent and raving, not to mention insulting and/or obscenity-filled. So thanks for providing a counterexample.

On the other hand, I'm afraid I have to take issue with your assertion:

Was interested in your strong Bush stand. I was clearly in the undecided column. I disagree with many of Bush's policies. But he not only frustrates half the US population but the enemy. They got us once, but the war is on other people's field this week, not on the home court. I'm voting for Bush not because I like him, but because bombs are going off in Baghdad not Boston.

To begin with, Iraq had nothing whatsoever to do with the events of 9/11. While the majority of the highjackers were Saudi, none at all were Iraqi. Despite the White House repeatedly asserting, implying and suggesting that Hussein and Al Qaeda were linked, that simply was not the case. The only terrorists in Iraq before our invasion were in the northern no-fly zone, where Hussein was powerless. (This was Al Zarqawi, whom we knew was there and whom Bush refused to bomb despite being urged to do so. You know, the same Al Zarqawi that has been beheading people.)

Further, while it's true that there have been no more bombings on U.S. soil (yet), it's not true that the world is safer. While international terrorism dropped from 2001 to 2002 (during the invasion of Afghanistan, as it happens), it increased slightly overall from 2002 to 2003 and in the Middle East and Western Europe it increased sharply. Note also that the statistics for North American attacks aren't really useful, as they have been zero for four of the last six years. Or for five of the last seven, if you count 2004 (which does, of course, have a couple of months to go yet).

So it's not really fair to say that bombs are going off in Baghdad instead of Boston. Bombs are going off in Baghdad, yes, but that's because, one, there are lots and lots of people there who are blindingly angry at the occupying power that has completely botched said occupation, from violating the Geneva Conventions left, right and center to failing to provide even minimal public services or jobs for the Iraqi population.

It was the Bush administration that ordered Bremer to fire the Iraqi army. Guess where most of the "insurgents" came from? It was also the Bush administration that allowed the HDX and RDX high explosive stockpile to be looted. Look at today's papers. Those explosives are now killing our men and women in uniform. And if bombs do go off in Boston or elsewhere, odds are the explosive used will come from that stockpile.

Were I a terrorist, I would certainly want Bush to be reelected. He is the best thing that has ever happened to international terrorism. It's no accident that Iran supports his reelection.

The reason for learning history is not to repeat the mistakes of the past. While Roosevelt talked to the Japanese, they bombed Pearl Harbor. While John Karey talks to the enemy expect they will attack us.

"Kerry." You've been paying too much attention to right-wing propaganda. Kerry certainly has no sympathy for terrorists and from what he says he is not interested in talking with them. On the other hand, he is interested in building an international coalition of countries to go after the true causes of terrorism and the people who are really behind it. This is as opposed to Bush, who wanted to go after Saddam Hussein for reasons of his own having nothing to do with terrorism or our national security.

Oh, and Roosevelt wasn't "talking to the Japanese" when they bombed Pearl Harbor. The Japanese ambassador had broken off talks, as I recall, and you have to remember that Pearl Harbor was the trigger that dragged a completely isolationist United States into the war almost against its will. Roosevelt had wanted us to get involved in the war against Hitler since at least 1939, but public opinion blocked him.

On the other hand, Bush ignored a memorandum given him in early August of 2001 that stated that an Al Qaeda attack within the United States was likely to happen soon. Instead of acting on that memo, he went on vacation for a month. Then when it did happen he ran scared. Sure, afterward he looked good for the cameras, but in the end he squandered the international good-will and support and the support of the country in favor of his narrow, idealogical and partisan goals. Rather than uniting us, he divided us and lead us into a morass in Iraq from which we will be unable to extricate ourselves for years and which it is impossible that we leave better (or even as good as) we found it.

And worst of all, he has continued to lie about that as about everything else. His tax cuts have not helped the economy, they have just helped those making more than $200,000 per year. Yeah, my taxes went down a little, but then I make almost $100k per year. For someone making less than myself, their taxes have gone up, as state and local taxes rise to fill the gaps left by lowered Federal funding.

And then there's the record surplus that Bush has turned into a record deficit by lowering taxes and raising spending. I don't know about you, but if I spent more than I took in I would be forced into bankruptcy right quick. Bush, though, can get away with it since he's President for a maximum of eight years (if reelected) and when the bill comes due he will be long gone.

I would strongly suggest that you reconsider your support for Bush based on these and other facts. These aren't the only issues, just the ones I consider most important. As for sources, see the U.S. Department of State "Patterns of Global Terrorism" report for 2003. There are numerous other sources both online and off. You might check out my weblog for some pointers. While I don't expect you to be pursuaded by clearly partisan liberal arguments, the facts are the facts and, sadly, those facts are pretty much ignored by Bush and his administration, not to mention the clearly partisan people on the Right.

This is how fascism works.

Today Rayne was at a protest rally near her home. Judging from her remarks and from the photos she posted, the protestors themselves were reasonably calm and nonviolent. Unfortunately the same could not be said for the Bush supporters.

Rayne can tell this better than I can (so go read her posts), but as I understand it, this is what happened: As people poured out of the civic center they saw the protestors. Apparently egged on by a (very) few ringleaders, they angrily approached the protestors and began to scream at them, to push and shove them. As Rayne describes it,

People pushing and shoving at me, screaming at me, trying to block my photos.

And

But there's simply no way to describe how fucking scary it was to have a thousand Bush supporters chanting and screaming at you, no way out, hemmed against a wall with 50 or 60 protesters.

I think if I hadn't been taking pictures, I might have gotten pushed harder.

And all I was doing was holding a sign, "Pollution is not a Family Value".

Why did this happen? Well, what happens when you get a large number of people together and pump them up with fear and hatred, with claims that "Democrats are stealing the election" and that those that oppose the administration support terrorism. What happens when people actually believe ones claim that one is "appointed by God" and then see those who oppose their self-appointed messiah? What happens when a demagogue fills his followers with fear and hatred of "the other" just so he can manipulate them into keeping him in power?

Bush and Cheney, of course, have no other way of selling their administration than by lies and manipulation. Unfortunately, there are always the people to which Lincoln referred whom, he said, can be fooled "all of the time."

So these people emerged from their rally filled with religious fervor for their messiah and with fear of and hatred for anyone who might oppose Him. When they saw the protestors, they reacted as one might expect: With anger and violence.

Now, I'm not calling all those on the Right fascists, nor all Republicans, nor all conservatives. Just Bush and Cheney and those close to them. This is fascism, literally and actually.

Go read David Neiwert if you don't believe me.

Update: Rayne has posted a longer description of the event on her weblog.

This is why...

… Bush will lose reelection on Tuesday: Yes Bush Can - the campaign that tells it like it is!

While I just trashed their email they sent me last week, I have to say that their slogan is, as of today, true.

Now, somebody name one group that has done or is doing anything like this in the opposite direction. I'm waiting …

Another moron for Bush.

One James Buffington, who has somehow become personally offended by the fact that I happen to be a liberal, tries to insult, threaten and intimidate me:

Frank

A liberal is a pussy like you.

A liberal is a pussy like Carter (the worst president in the 20th century)

A liberal is one without conviction or fortitude to do what needs doing

Oh yea bring your sorry ass to Georgia and will pistol whip your liberal ass.

From someone tired of sorry sons of bitches like you.

James

Those are awfully brave words for someone who lives across the continent from the object of his ire.

James, son, I have no reason and less desire to go to Georgia, but if I did, your pathetic little threats would do nothing to dissuade me.

Have a nice day!

Fascism, Bush and the Republican Party.

Welcome to the new age of fascism. It has become crystal clear to me lately that Bush and the Republican Party have become the latest set of fascists. I don't think that they necessarily set out deliberately upon that path, but they have certainly adopted the tactics, as well as much of the rhetoric, of the fascists of history.

Three incidents in two days. It started with Rayne's encounter with a Bush rally in Saginaw on Friday and has continued today with an incident that Billmon relates in The Face of American Fascism. These incidents are just moments away from outright violence. I don't believe that the Bush machine actually intends that there be violence, they are just using whatever tactic, whatever emotional appeal they think will work to move their followers. That expressions of hatred just short of violence results is, to them, just coincidence. As is now well established, they have no consideration for the consequences of their actions, and there quite certainly will eventually be violence.

That's not the worst of it, though. The worst, the most incredibly blatant fascist tactic so far, is that which Steve Gilliard describes in Heil Bush. Steve quotes from a Slate article, One Nation Under Bush:

"I want you to stand, raise your right hands," and recite "the Bush Pledge," said Florida state Sen. Ken Pruitt. The assembled mass of about 2,000 in this Treasure Coast town about an hour north of West Palm Beach dutifully rose, arms aloft, and repeated after Pruitt: "I care about freedom and liberty. I care about my family. I care about my country. Because I care, I promise to work hard to re-elect, re-elect George W. Bush as president of the United States."

"Arms aloft." This brings to mind another loyalty oath, used in another place at another time but for much the same purpose:

Your oath is not a mere formality; you do not swear this oath to someone unknown to you. You do not swear in hope, but with certainty. Fate has made it easy for you to take this oath without condition or reservation. Never in history has a people taken an oath to a leader with such absolute confidence as the        people have in              You have the enormous joy of taking an oath to a man who is the embodiment of a leader. You take an oath to the fighter who demonstrated his leadership over a decade, who always acts correctly and who always chose the right way, even when at times the larger part of his movement failed to understand why,

You take an oath to a man whom you know follows the laws of providence, which he obeys independently of the influence of earthly powers, who leads the        people rightly, and who will guide        's fate. Through your oath you bind yourselves to a man who — that is our faith — was sent to us by higher powers.

With the names blanked out the words sound awfully familiar, don't they? They were spoken by Rudolf Hess on February 25, 1934.

"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

While the rest of us are dragged along with them.