Tuesday, February 22, 2005


You betcha--via the redistribution of wealth from the bottom to the top. Labor spent centuries wresting control of the country away from capital only to have it yanked back full force (not entirely--yet) upon the illicit coronation of the current president. This article at workingforchange.com gives us some idea of the upward wealth distribution that is being foisted on the American people (in two paragraphs, the whole scheme is revealed):

Bush has used enormous tax cuts, primarily directed toward the wealthy, an expanded federal bureaucracy, largely devoted to corporate welfare, and the costs of post-9-11 militarism, primarily benefiting Halliburton, Lockheed Martin, and other military contractors, to drive up the federal deficit. He is then trying to alleviate that deficit by reducing programs that don't primarily benefit the wealthy: education, health care, housing, environmental protection...

...Follow the money. This is not fiscal prudence; it is a massive wealth transfer scheme, an effort to use the power of federal spending to benefit the economic elites who are George W. Bush's core constituency. This is the thank-you for the hundreds of millions poured into Bush's re-election campaign.
And Repukes like Norquist and Limbaugh have convinced enough otherwise perfectly lovable people that this is how it should be--Jesus himself has approved. You know, the weak are weak because they're just simply not strong and there's absolutely nothing you can or should do about it. They just have to work harder for less money--it's the only way they'll ever learn anything about life. It's the Christian--and therefore, the American--way, so they say.

Plot to kill Bush? Or plot to incite fear?

Right now it kinda looks like the latter. Note that the suspect, Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, has been held "without charges" in Saudi Arabia since June 2003 even though he's an American citizen. He's also been tortured while in captivity and "federal prosecutors have been fighting attempts to get the government to disclose why he was being held in Saudi Arabia." That language comes from this story in The Guardian. Supposedly he had contacts with al Qaeda--if this were true, why wouldn't federal prosecutors be holding a press conference instead of trying to keep the reason he was in Saudi Arabia quiet?

As we know, none of the 5,000 or so detainees caught in the post-9/11 sweep have been convicted of anything. Maybe they'll get it right on the 5,001 try? Or maybe not...

No comments: