Who is really running the country?

I've said it before but here we go again. The ultra-conservative extremists recognized long ago that they were unelectable. Instead they developed a strategy where they elect a figurehead President and run the country from behind the scenes. It worked for Eisenhower who spent most of his time in the White House perfecting his golf game, it worked for Reagan who wore an earpiece through which he was told how to answer reporter's questions and "has no recollection" of what was going on in the basement of the White House, and now it has worked for the multi-millionaire hawks who are indebted up to their ears to their multi-national benefactors. I really don't like being lied to...

If these guys don't scare you, you've gotta' be either blind or more naive than a twisted optimistic Utopian pacifist!!!

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/nightline/DailyNews/pnac_030310.html

 

By the topic, I thought you were talking about Iraq!

 

Wow! This is unreal. I wrote an email to my mother in '94, after watching Somalia dragging dead US soldier thru their streets, saying just the same thing..."lots of terrible things were really being loosed upon the world because America was being too timid, and too weak, and too unassertive in the post-Cold War era." I think my exact words were Clinton is wussie. This group musta implanted that idea into my brain as to brainwash me into being for the Iraqi ten years later. Just uncanny.

David



Edit: forgot the reference.

 

It sorta worked for Bill Clinton, while we knew his wife was really calling the shots, huh?

You say you don't like being lied to? Let me refresh your memory a l'il bit, RS pops.

"I did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky."

"It all depends on what your definition of 'is' is."

"I don't recall. I was too busy peeing, cause I drank so much iced tea."

"I should be credited with the invention of the internet."

Daddy-O, we can all just get along if we play fair.

 

Re: Re: Who is really running the country?

Are you assuming that I am a supporter of Bill Clinton, that I voted for Al Gore, or that I wasn't critical of Bill Clinton's less than honest answers? If so, you are wrong in each case.

It sounds like you were pretty critical of Clinton also, X-man. Why so defensive about Dubya'?

 

This type of reporting is exactly why Nightline runs a weak third in ratings for its network TV time slot.

So the war with Iraq is all about Dubya's feeling inadequate as a man? Interesting concept.

None of this is new, nor is it terribly recent history, nor is it something that has been a concern restricted to "ultra-conservative extremists". Point of fact, it was Jimmy Carter's State Department that first put Iraq on the list of countries that sponsored terrorism. That was in 1979, right after Saddam took control. In 1980, the US Defense Intelligence Agency reported that Iraq had been acquiring chemical weapons technology since 1975 or so.

Iraq was actually removed from the list of states supporting terrorism by Ronald Reagan in 1982. Many of the characters in PNAC were members of the Reagan administration. Rumsfield himself met with Saddam in 1983 in an attempt to establish better working relations. If they were 1) pulling Ronnie's strings and 2) wanted to invade Iraq, then why would they have established policy that warmed up to Saddam?

 

I thought the media was liberal? Why does this report only show up on Nightline - the third rated show in its time slot?

We aren't talking about Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter. We are talking about the degree of influence that a select group of conservative extremists have on the foreign policy of the United States. That makes it new and relevant.

I think that you have brought up a VERY good question, though. Why WOULD Rummy have been warming up to Saddam Hussein? I think that is a really good question but there is zero chance of ever receiving an honest answer out of him.

 

Re: Re: Re: Who is really running the country?

No, no one should assume anything about you. Your psuedo-intellectualism is a tired song that signifies absolutely nothing. Your positions have about as much real world relevance as Hare Krisha at the airport...

The only question is why do people keep feeding this troll?

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Who is really running the country?

Maybe everyone doesn't agree with you. Oh no, that couldn't be it, you know everything. If I am as relevant as an airport Hare Krishna, why are YOU responding to me? Why not do us both a favor and put me on your ignore list? I'm not worth your time...you are much too bright for me.

 

Why? Where the hell were you in 1980? under a rock?!? We "warmed up" to Iraq because we were EXTREMELY pissed at the Iranians because of Embassy hostage fiasco.
Saddam was a useful foil to use against the Iranians. Yeah we knew he was a thug and dangerous, but ALL of the dictators were dangerous in that part of the world. There was no way we could have known how megalomaniacal and out of control he would turn out to be.

As to your first drivel- The Bush administration is anything but extreme anything. Before 9/11 if you will recall, it was attempting to build a bipartisan concensus and even did the unheard of thing of appointing Democrats to his cabinet.
And if you think ANY President is some all knowing oracle of wisdom, making policy like some clairvoyant king, you really are the one who is deluded. All of them are surrounded by advisors and cabinet members who via to influence the Preident on which way to decide something.

why do I even bother responding to these?

 

Re: Re: Who is really running the country?

 

By and large it is. Because it's a third rate report.

I understand, was just providing support for the argument that concern about Iraq has not been limited to those that you have chosen to point out.

OK, I'll take a swipe at answering my own question. The Reagan administration recognized the potential threat that Saddam posed, but Khomeini was an even dirtier dog. With the success of the Iranian revolution, the threat to stability in the region and world peace posed by the religious fanatics under Khomeini became more important than what was brewing in Iraq. Since Saddam felt that Iran posed a threat to the delicate cultural balance in Iraq, the perfect opportunity arose.

With Saddam invading Iran, the Reagan administration was perfectly happy to sit back and watch them beat each others brains out. Actually, sitting back is not quite accurate, there was support provided to both sides just to keep the fires stoked. Intelligence and strategy to Iraq, and covert arms to Iran.

So, warming up to Saddam was only the choice of the lesser of two evils. Never intended to become bosom buddies, in fact we double-crossed Saddam by arming Iran. Used him.

 

You REALLY believe that is all that was going on with Rummy in Iraq? Whew....

So you agree that Bush's cabinet have a lot of influence on his policy but Perle, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Gingrich, Wolfowitz are not ultra-conservative and extremist in their views? And I'm delusional?

The RNC called. They want their spin back. They said you could just drop it off at the FauxNews headquarters if you want

 

Re: Re: Re: Who is really running the country?

sigh...
Its a matter of leadership styles and perception. No Bush doesn't have a "Grand Vision", and he surely isn't the "Great Communicator", but what he is a sincere, moral (yes really) man, who preferes to get things done by concesus.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Who is really running the country?

Spin interpretation: He is a puppet whose opinion means nothing. Perle, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz etc. are running the country.

"We should not be the world's police force." - GWB

 

Whatever man.

You're just sore because you were wrong.

 

Re: Re: Re: Who is really running the country?

 

Knowing that he was a brutal psychopath, why was he armed with chemical and boilogical weapons?

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Who is really running the country?