An election primer
Not one Republican
For me, that's not a diffucult choice. I have voted for one "Republican" in my life, Frank Fasi for Mayor of Honolulu in 1984. He was really a "Democrat" anyway, but the party bosses wouldn't support him, so he ran as a Republican, and won. He gained renown two years later when he refused to provide security for deposed Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos. He said Marcos could easily afford his own security. Mike Royko of the Chicago Tribune wrote a great column about Fasi, but it is not available on the Web.
That doesn't necessarily mean I will vote for "Democrats." Tammy Baldwin, Madison's representative in Congress, always gets my vote, but I'm a little stingy about the others. Herb Kohl is a shoo-in for reelection to the Senate, but he won't get my vote. He was an active supporter of the Iraq invasion and occupation, and of the "Patriot Act." I'm not thrilled with his "Green Party" opponent, but will probably vote for her. For governor, the "Green" candidate will also likely get my vote, but not with great enthusiasm. This is all subject to change, but for now that's how I see it.
I have a simple rule for voting: who would I like to see occupying the office. If, as the campaign progresses, the "Green" candidates don't seem up to the job, then I'll vote for the "Democrats."
But no "Republicans." As of now, the "Republican" party is the party of criminality. And that criminality threatens the future of mankind on this planet, to say nothing of every other species. I believe that if both houses of the "U.S." Congress remains in "Republican" control, the Bush crime family will not only not be held responsible for its crimes, but will foment much more murder, destruction, and environmental degradation on the planet.
Since the "Republicans" are now in control of the three branches of our Federal government, it can be easily surmised that there are a lot of "Republcans" in the "U.S." By and large, these "Republicans" support the criminality of the Bush regime. They are supported by campaign contributions from corporations that engage in criminal activities. The network of support includes the mass communcation media, especially newspapers and television networks, which are heavily dependent on advertising revenues from said corporations.
An example of the remorseless criminality of corporations has been in the news the past few days. Because of the poisons released when the World Trade Center towers collapsed, many of the rescuers and people who lived in the area have become seriously ill, mostly with lung diseases, including cancer. Bush's Environmental Protection Agency head, Christine Todd Whitman, had declared New York City's air to be safe, so people cleaning the mess and searching for bodies felt safe to keep working. All of them will have their lives shortened by their trust in the Bush crime family.
What I have been wondering about this situation is what the buildings were made of that was so toxic. At some point in history, the buildings would have to have been demolished anyway, so the release of massive amounts of toxins would happen at one time or another. It is a safe assumption that almost all the buildings in New York City are loaded with toxins, and all these buildings will come down in the future, one way or another. Multiply this many million times over for the buildings across the nation and worldwide and you get an unthinkable collection of poisons.
Large buildings, skyscrapers, and other large structures are built by big construction companies. The materials they use are manufactured by large corporations. Though asbestos is no longer allowed in construction, it is in every large building constructed before 1978. Lead based paint covers the walls of all the older buildings. Modern buildings include synthetic products like styrofoam insulation, PVC pipe, synthetic carpeting, chemically fabricated ceilings,and toxic adhesives. All of these materials together constitute a toxic soup that some day must be spewed into the atmosphere or end up in landfills. Add in the many computers and other office equipment with their concentrations of toxic materials, and the soup is thick indeed. Thanks, big time moneymakers.
Another item in the news is Bush's attempt to present his war crimes in a positive light. He has revealed the existence of secret "CIA" prisons around the world, something that is common knowledge to informed people everywhere on the planet. He defended the secret prisons as necessary in the "War on terror," but said the prisoners are now being sent to Guantanamo. He also denied that the prisoners have been tortured, wink, wink, nudge, nudge.
Why this admission now? Pundits and Democrats see it as an election strategy. That may be partially true, but I think the main reason is that Bush is trying to cover his tracks to avoid future prosecution. It's a pretty lame attempt, but the Bush crime family is not particularly known for its brilliance. From the BCF perspective, if they can get the Congress to legalize its criminal activities before the election, and pass a law approving the military tribunals they have planned, then a veneer of legitimacy can be laminated over their lawlessness.
Fat chance. The members of the Bush crime family thought they had the perfect scheme when they embarked on their grand plan. Invade Iraq, then Iran, then North Korea, establish a police state, terrorize the domestic population with arrests, secret imprisonment, demonization of opponents, and hyped-up scares of imagined "terrorists." Steal every election just in case these other methods aren't enough. Create a crony capitalist state, beginning with Enron, Halliburton, Bechtel, and the oil conglomerates. Make it clear that if you pay, you play.
The issue of the treatment of prisoners is a good hologram for the rest of the Bush crime family's scams. Given that people were rounded up all over the planet, including inside the "U.S.," for the flimsiest reasons, including people who were sold to "American" agents, the rationale of combating "terrorism" has little credibility.
It's an age-old ruse. Make a lot of grandstand arrests, hype up the supposed guilt of the accused - though specific charges are almost nonexistent, treat them badly to reinforce the appearance of their guilt, and declare that you are protecting the public. Does anyone remember "In the Name of the Father?"
Another purpose of the Abu Grhaibing of the country is that you warm the people up for more of the same. If you can successfully go this far, then going farther is not much of a stretch. The worst is already done.
Ah, the best made plans of mice and men. As was revealed on today's interview of Bush on ABC TV, he is certain that the "Republicans" will retain control of both houses of Congress. His smug cocksureness can mean only one thing. He knows something most of us only suspect: that the election is already decided, no matter how people vote. Or thinks he knows.
But the all-knowing knower in this case is George W. Bush, brain-damaged alcoholic drug addict sociopath. Criminal. Serial killer. Liar. Thief. Bumbler. Incompetent. Traitor. Kidnapper. Torturer. Sexual abuser. Deserter. One of the worst people in all of human history. He has no reason to be arrogant, and won't be for much longer.
In case no one has noticed, the momentum of the planet is moving against George W. Bush, bumbler, criminal, addict, etc. A cursory study of Newton's laws of motion would reveal how momentum works. In a nutshell, it would take an immovable object or an opposing momentum of greater force to counter the momentum that is building against the Bush crime family. The BCF is neither an immovable object nor a massive opposing force. It is made up of mere weaklings with feet of clay, as we will soon see.
So rock on, Bush crime family. See what it gets you. You rolled the dice, thinking you had the dice rigged. It's like the Grateful Dead song "Loser." "Got no chance of losin' this time."
For the rest of us, remember: Not one Republican.