9/10/2004

Geopolitix

I am a lifelong liberal and I will definitely vote for Kerry-Edwards. Bush is a lightweight and a phony, and Dick Cheney is a has-been. Their strategic failure in Iraq tells me they are too dumb to win the war on terror, which is a battle of the wits. Bush-Cheney like to pretend it's a battle of military power, but that's just wishful thinking. Obviously, American military power is lightyears beyond anything. But Al Queada, the Saudis and Iran think they can outplay America in the battle of the wits, in the intelligence war and in geopolitix. So far the miserable, meatheaded blundering by Bush-Cheney can only embolden Al Queada.

My friends think I'm crazy, but if Nixon were running for President today, I would vote for Nixon. The geopolitical mastery Nixon showed in whipping the Soviets and the Chinese is exactly what we need to win the war on terror, and exactly what is mssing in the Bush-Cheney fiasco administration.

While studying American history in college, I had a dream about Nixon. In my dream, I was watching a baseball game. Nixon was running the bases in a shirt and tie. He got caught trying to steal second base, and then I woke up. Why I would dream of Nixon trying to steal second base in a business suit? I realized that, in my dream architecture, I had substituted Nixon for myself. It was actually me trying to steal second base (I have no idea what second base symbolized). But why would I use Nixon as a symbol for myself in my dream architecture?

The answer reveals the key to Nixon's political success, despite his lack of style vis-a-vis the utterly cool Kennedys. Millions of Americans substituted Nixon for themselves in their subconscious dream architecture because Nixon, like so many of us, was uncool, socially awkward, the social underdog. Yet he married the woman of his dreams. He had loyal, loving children, and he rose to world supremacy. Nixon's public career was the political equivalent of the wheelchair Olympics.

Consider this: Nixon defeated the Soviet Union without ever firing a single shot (let alone a missle) at a Russian soldier. And Nixon, the most powerful man in the world, was removed from power without a single shot being fired (that we know of). That's the American way.

Great events determined through brains, structure, and process, with extreme violence as a strategic last resort. That used to be the American way. George Bush is the Anti-Nixon and the Anti-Kennedy as well. Bush-Cheney is the most non-American presidency in our history. They both belong in the old stupid Soviet bureaucracy, not running the United States in the 21st Century.

Like Bill Clinton, Nixon was precisely the kind of man James Madison envisioned as American president in the Federalist Papers. Fucked up, half-crazy, corrupt but brilliant. All the right ingredients for Madison's potluck mish-mosh of checks and balances that, all in all, hasn't worked that badly.

Nixon would make geopolitical mincemeat out of Al Queada, Saudi Arabia and Iran, leaving them isolated, submissive and without world influence. By contrast, Bush-Cheney's Iraq tragedy is more typical of the geopolitical absurdity of the stupid old Soviet Union that lead to their collapse within less than a human lifetime of the Bolshevik Revolution.

Bush-Cheney are a disgrace to the modern American legacy of foreign policy mastery. We need another Nixon.

In geopolitix, the closest thing we've got to Nixon today is Hillary Clinton. Hillary is 'Nixon without the issues', and she's a liberal Democrat to boot. She's smart as a fox, tough as a chrome bolt and she's essentially a single working mother. She's the one to kick Al Queda's ass.

posted by 10-K @ 1:45 PM (permalink)
0 comments

9/09/2004

The appearance of llegitimacy

Does it matter whether there is actual corruption by VP Cheney re Halliburton's role in the Iraq reconstruction? There is clearly an appearance of impropriety, and Halliburton should have recused itself from Iraq for the sake of American national security. Halliburton pigging out in Iraq creates the appearance of an economic motive for the invasion, giving a huge propaganda bonus to those who claim America is occupying Iraq, not liberating it. This inflames the Iraq insurgents and raises suspicions among our allies. Halliburton's reconstruction deal is a political liability for the Bush administration. Fair or not, the patriotic thing was for Halliburton to sit out on Iraq.

I think this is a no-brainer: if the Vice President owns mad stock in a company that he formerly ran as Chairman and CEO, and that company gets a multi-billion no-bid contract in a country occupied by American forces, billions of people around the world are going to get suspicious. Cheney shovels up the b.s. about Halliburton - some are convinced, but billions don't buy it. Especially in other countries, where people aren't watching Fox News every night, the Cheney Halliburton connection makes the case better than Al-Jazeera ever could that America has morphed into a shameless, oil-thirsty military aggressor.

But I can't believe Dick Cheney doesn't already know that. Regardless of any answer Cheney gives re Halliburton, it is irrational nonsense to claim that anything outweighs the cloud placed over American motives by those contracts.

That cloud of suspicion means our allies have refused to share the expense in Iraq, leaving American taxpayers with the whole tab for the war. Cheney knows this. Why has he allowed Halliburton to profit in Iraq? Does Halliburton have 'dirt' on Dick Cheney they are using to force their way into the Iraq windfall at the expense of American national security.

The Dems love to accuse Cheney of of pure anti-American greed. But it's more likely that the Halliburton no-bid contracts reveal Cheney's weakness and vulnerability. More than likely, Halliburton has the VP by the balls and they're squeezing Cheney just like their squeezing Iraq. Squeeze!

Bush: The Anti-Nixon. Richard Nixon had a nervous breakdown and had to be removed from office. It's bad news when the C in C goes nuts, but our constitution provides for the swift removal from office of a crazy President. Before his breakdown, Nixon was a great foreign policy president, the architect of American victory in the Cold War, and a master of geopolitical strategy. Nixon's Vice President was a crook just like Dick Cheney. But I don't believe Nixon would have let corruption by his Vice President compromise the national security. If Nixon were President today, he'd tell Halliburton, "Sit this on out boys, for the good of the country. I'll hook you up on the next gravy train." And Nixon had the nuts to enforce his will. If Halliburton fucked with Nixon, he'd shove an audit so far up their fat ass, tax agents would be peeking out their nostrils. Bush Cheney talk tough, but neither one has the nuts of Nixon

Bush-Cheney are a disgrace to the modern Republican legacy of foreign policy skill, represented primarily by Nixon, and to a lesser degree by Reagan and George Bush Sr. Right now, the Repubs are riding on reputation, but the lack of foreign policy smarts shown by the Iraq blunder is unforgiveable.

posted by 10-K @ 4:16 PM (permalink)
0 comments