February 15, 2013

Morning Line: Just a thought

Sam Smith - One of the best ways to change politics is to move corruption to the top of the issue list. Repeatedly in American history, reformers have come to office not based on ideology but with a campaign to end corruption. It is, among other things, much easier to build a bipartisan coalition that also draws the disaffected back into the voting booth.

While the country is deeply divided ideologically, both major parties are deeply corrupt right to their highest levels.

Fortunately, we have someone worth considering to take on an anti-corruption campaign. In a time when no one seems bothered when neophytes like Obama and Rubio run for the presidency, what not add Elizabeth Warren to the list. She is much better qualified than Obama was when he ran and miles ahead of Rubio.

Just a thought. 


Caro said...

Sadly, reformers tend to be bought off, ridiculed into oblivion, or assassinated.

It's dangerous to be a true reformer.

Carolyn Kay

Mark Robinowitz said...

It's charming and naive to think that someone good can magically rise to the top.

Obama was anointed by CIA, he didn't just nice speeches and organize lots of pollyanna Democrats


It is my belief that since the JFK assassination the secret government, the CIA and the [Military Industrial Complex], have been running the show. They have not allowed anyone to become president, from either party, that was not under their control.
-- Bruce Gagnon, Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space

If I were the president, I could stop terrorist attacks against the United States in a few days. Permanently. I would first apologize to all the widows and orphans, the tortured and impoverished, and all the many millions of other victims of American imperialism. Then I would announce, in all sincerity, to every corner of the world, that America's global interventions have come to an end, and inform Israel that it is no longer the 51st state of the USA but now -- oddly enough -- a foreign country. I would then reduce the military budget by at least 90% and use the savings to pay reparations to the victims. There would be more than enough money. One year's military budget of 330 billion dollars is equal to more than $18,000 an hour for every hour since Jesus Christ was born. That's what I'd do on my first three days in the White House. On the fourth day, I'd be assassinated.
-- William Blum, author of "Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II," and "Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower"

Anonymous said...

Secret service protection makes this an easy choice. As a senator she should avoid small aircraft. The greater danger would visit Dean if he sought to control the party again. Dean insists on a Dem right of return to old homelands in the South and West, 1944 electoral map borders, strongly opposed by the duopoly.

Anonymous said...

Very naïve comments by Mark Robinwitz. Good thing you are not holding any office worth of value. Although our defense should be cut drastically, if you immediately cut the defense budget by 90%, our economy would no longer exist and we would be totally defenseless. Even if you phased in 90% cuts, it would be very easy for small enemy's to team up and pose a serious military threat that we would consider petty right now. Cry as much as you want about our defense spending and drones, but it is what makes us who we are and without it we would turn into impoverished, chaotic, and economically weak country.

Anonymous said...

The Presidents, especially Bush I, have been "allies" of the Saudis, The Saudis have the unwavering aim of destroying "Cristendom", especially the US. The Saudis command and control all significant Islamic terrorist groups to that end. Israel is simply a necessary preliminary. Supporting Israel is a bargain as far as defense of the US is concerned. If you think disarmament will change that one iota you are a complete..., and you haven't been paying attention to any realities in the Middle East either.

What about Iran? The Saudis have been paying off the Ayatollahs ever since the Shah stopped. They hate each other, but they are united in hating Israel and the West, and they despise everyone but themselves.

If you want peace in the Middle East, the only method to attain it is the same as it has been for almost a century. Go house to house in Saudi Arabia, free their slaves, and separate the Saudis from the means to command and control terrorism.

In the meantime, drones rock!

Mark Robinowitz said...

I'd compromise and suggest a phased reduction of 90% of the war machine. The last time a country tried to invade the US was 1812. Nazi Germany never tried. Imperial Japan attacked Hawai'i, but that was technically a colony at the time and FDR knew the attack was coming and let it happen. The only time a major attack has happened (except for the Civil War) was 9/11, and the Bush Cheney White House had ample warnings from 15 allied countries plus field agents from FBI, DIA and CIA.

There is no military threat of invasion to the US and most of the military budget is to invade and dominate other countries to control their resources.

Spending money on ANY other thing creates more jobs per billion invested.

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the clouds of war, it is humanity hanging on a cross of iron.
-- Dwight Eisenhower, April 16, 1953

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience ... In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic process.
- President Dwight D. Eisenhower, farewell speech to the nation, January 17, 1961

Anonymous said...

According to you, Mr. R., 9/11 doesn't count as an "invasion" of the US? Pearl Harbor was not an "invasion" either, but acts of war are acts of war, and there is no trace of a hint that appeasement would mollify the implacable medieval minds of this particular enemy.