Neocons’ fragile sense of self worth
Larison makes a key point about the neocon mindset as it relates to “national greatness”:
Of course, Lowry and Ponnuru cannot actually point to very much on national security policy that they dislike*, which is why they are reduced to whining about the non-response to Ortega, and spend most of their time complaining about the attempted transformation of America with still more intrusive domestic government. Even so, they are convinced that they are seeing the “waning of America’s civilizational self-confidence,” which worries them because it means we might be less willing to
kill foreigners for no good reasonmount the “forward defense of freedom.”
It really does come down to the fact that Obama makes their penises feel small.
Even when Obama is escalating wars, the neocons whine that his rhetoric is not as, ahem, arousing as was Bush’s. Fighting wars is only half of the equation — the other half is tied to making them feel tough and manly. Fighting wars on the ever-so-dull grounds of national security is just BO-RING. The real excitement comes when you get to “pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business.” That’s what gets these guys off.
As for myself, I can’t imagine tying my entire sense of self-worth to whether or not my tax dollars are being used to enact angry vengeance against swarthy foreigners. I have cooking, guitar playing, writing and running to keep myself happy; fantasizing about sending other people to die isn’t exactly the kind of pick-me-up that appeals to me.
Larison concludes:
The security and warfare state is no less and actually far more alien to these shores than any entitlement program. It is far more dangerous to the constitutional government that truly was one of the most admirable achievements of our ancestors, and it goes against the grain of most of our national history. A huge standing army, military outposts scattered around the globe, perpetual war and the arbitrary use of force by executive order–are these really compatible with the national character Lowry, Ponnuru and Rubio claim to cherish? Of course they are not, which reminds us that their dedication here is no more meaningful than that of most of the would-be “constitutionalist conservatives” who gathered near Mount Vernon.
This is sorta what I’ve been saying about a lot of these guys for a while. There are genuine libertarians out there, such as Ron Paul, who believe in small government and low taxes. But guys like Kristol and Lowry only oppose the Democrats’ domestic agenda because it means spending more money helping poor people and less money on the precious, precious wars. The aren’t opposed to big government so much as they’re opposed to decent government.
UPDATE: Ah, to relive the joys of the Summer of War. This Doughbob Loadpants love letter to the Iraq War is still a thing to behold (emphasis mine):
So how does all this, or the humble attempt at a history lesson of my last column, justify tearing down the Baghdad regime? Well, I’ve long been an admirer of, if not a full-fledged subscriber to, what I call the “Ledeen Doctrine.” I’m not sure my friend Michael Ledeen will thank me for ascribing authorship to him and he may have only been semi-serious when he crafted it, but here is the bedrock tenet of the Ledeen Doctrine in more or less his own words: “Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business.” That’s at least how I remember Michael phrasing it at a speech at the American Enterprise Institute about a decade ago. […]
But Saddam has very little to do with al Qaeda (as far as we know). The Islamic fundamentalists hate Saddam because he is a terrible Muslim (note: being a terrible Muslim, according to these fanatics, has little to do with murder and torture and everything to do with drinking wine and letting women wear skirts). So why make like Benny Hill on the little bald guy on Saddam?
FINISH THE JOB
There would have been a certain logic to calling for a cease-fire once Allied forces liberated Czechoslovakia, Poland, and — oh yeah — France from the Germans. Why lose more American lives, one might reasonably argue, now that we’ve accomplished our mission to liberate Europe?
Few people made this argument in 1945. The United States understood, in the words of Douglas MacArthur, that there is no substitute for victory. In the Persian Gulf War, the United States changed its mind. As chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Colin Powell reportedly urged for the cessation of hostilities before the U.S. entered Baghdad. The rationale offered not only by Powell, but by our allies in Riyadh and elsewhere, was that we would fracture the almighty coalition President Bush had assembled. Keeping the coalition, some reasoned, was more important than getting the job done. This is like telling your prom date, We’d better stop fooling around because it might result in the wasting of a condom.
Can you even make this shit up?
Per Doughbob, if we don’t violently overthrow a government that has not attacked us, we are prematurely pulling out and not “finishing the job.” It’s like Loadpants listened to George Carlin’s brilliant routine on the first Gulf War and decided to use it as a serious foreign policy blueprint.
More:
But there will be plenty of time later to dissect and debate every argument, good and bad, for toppling Saddam. For now let’s fall back on the Ledeen Doctrine. The United States needs to go to war with Iraq because it needs to go to war with someone in the region and Iraq makes the most sense.
Yep. We need to go to war. Why? Pfffft. We’ll debate that later! But it must be with someone! Someone in the Middle East! The Arabs are laughing at our penises and we must make them pay!
And the most mind-blowing passage:
There is nothing we want to see happen in the Middle East that can be accomplished through talking around long tables festooned with bottled water and fresh fruit at Swiss hotels, that cannot be accomplished faster and more permanently through war. But there is plenty that cannot be achieved by such gabfests that can only be achieved through war.
More than 100,000 dead Iraqis are still thanking us.
they are convinced that they are seeing the “waning of America’s civilizational self-confidence,”
Which shows more confidence in a nation’s ability: ignoring a tinpot dictator or overpowering him and stomping a mudhole in his nation?
Why don’t these asses see that?
It depends on whether or not said dictator is good for business…
Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business
Opposing this strategy is just what Hitler would do.
“There are genuine libertarians out there, such as Ron Paul,”
Do I have to say it?
Sadly, no. I know the definition of libertarian has always been ill defined, but according to the DSM IV, diagnostic criteria must include the social, fiscal, and foreign policy symptoms.
What I love is the insistance that Iraq will be so easy. I mean it’s like “sure, Iran or North Korea would be good. But that’s too hard, installing a government in a ethnic powderkeg, that should be easy enough”
Who needs Viagra when you can ship some poor 18 year old you don’t know to war with a country you know little or nothing about? It’s win-win-win.
“Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business.”
Cuz picking on someone our own size would be less penile enhancing somehow.
Isn’t this tantamount to date rape or spousal abuse? Except the judge won’t make us pay for court costs when we lose?
This is like telling your prom date, We’d better stop fooling around because it might result in the wasting of a condom.
I wonder if that’s what Lucianne said…
I can understand how people might be offended with the idea of the Ledeen Doctrine – after all, what about the people who live in those small crappy little countries? Well not to worry, they aren’t really people – they’re foreigners.
what about the people who live in those small crappy little countries?</i?
They should view our bombings as a massive program of urban renewal! And our incidental killings of their families as population control! And our rape of their daughters as genetic modifications!
Tag! I’m it!
I can understand how people might be offended with the idea of the Ledeen Doctrine
Personallly, I can’t understand it What’s wrong with kicking up a little dust just to see where it settles? I mean, it worked in the Wild Wild West (not the one with Will Smith).
Date rape or spousal abuse presupposes someone at least close to your size. This is a grown man beating up on a toddler.
Who needs Viagra when you can ship some poor 18 year old you don’t know to war with a country you know little or nothing about?
This reminds me of that scene in David Lynch’s version of Dune where Baron Harkonnen gets off on pulling a pretty young boy’s heart plug and making him bleed to death. I spent several minutes searching for it on YouTube before remembering that I’m a nerd.
Personallly, I can’t understand it What’s wrong with kicking up a little dust just to see where it settles? I mean, it worked in the Wild Wild West (not the one with Will Smith).
Better make that depleted uranium dust. Everything is better with nukes. (number one principle of american foreign policy right there bitches)
This is a grown man beating up on a toddler.
Point taken.
Often I want to give Fudgie the benefit of the doubt, that he’s trying, and miserably failing, to make an outrageous joke at the expense of our sensitivities, in order to run up the hits on his blog.
And then I remember who his mom is…
“Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business.”
It’d be much easier and funnier if we’d just do this to neocon stooges instead of whole countries.
And we could torture any number of Jonah Goldbergs, Dick Cheneys, and Michael Ledeens to death, and no one would mind…
Everything is better with nukes.
Ain’t that the truth. Once you do something with a nuke, it’s never the same without. For instance, I saw Valentine’s Day without a nuke and it was awful. Went back a few days latter with a nuke and, besides the smell, the film was a delight.
Damn, I miss George Carlin.
Nice to see this take on “Lowry and Ponnuru are idiots” that isn’t about mass transit. I suppose when you’re dealing with a pair of sicko fucks like those two, it’s easier to nitpick than to try and understand what they are actually saying.
Apparently the key to preventing terrorism is to make your enemies fear you with blatant displays of violence and militarism. Who knew!
“Bigger Dick Foreign Policy Theory”
No question: America has the bigger dicks.
You are all forgetting that Jonah has not even seen his penis since he was 10 years old. Even then, Lucianne required him to refer to it as “her” penis. Just try to imagine what that would do to a man, and remember, he isn’t what you would call a clever man.
Apparently the key to preventing terrorism is to make your enemies fear you with blatant displays of violence and militarism.
I’m going to form the Hot Fudge militia, wherein we take as our Statement of Principles that “Every ten years or so, the
United StatesHot Fudge militia needs to pick up some small crappylittle countryright wing pundit and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business.”Any guesses on who’s first? HINT: It ain’t Michael Ledeen AND further hint, the militia is named after him.
Why make it every ten years? You afraid of running out of right wing pundits, or walls?
God, I had managed to put some of that putrid stuff out of my head. Yeah, nothing says I’m secure in my masculinity like beating up some hapless, tiny former ally.
Why make it every ten years?
Legal made me put the “or so” part in, so that I can’t be held for misrepresentation or breach of implied contract.
This way, we can knock heads almost at will.
The wingers are uniformly juvenile, from McCain on the left all the way to Palin in the teapot.
We should pity Loadpants, he didn’t have a grownup in his life to guide him into thinking like an adult.
Apparently the key to preventing terrorism is
to make your enemies fear you with blatant displays of violence and militarismterrorism.The sentence, she is fixed, no?
You know, I might have been going about things all wrong, making my lists of who will be first up against the wall come the revolution..
Wall now. THEN revolution.
The sentence, she is fixed, no?
Well I was trying to point out that making desperate people in faraway lands hate you is counterproductive on the no-more-suicide-bombers front, but your take is much better.
This bit on “toppling Saddam” is some fine Doughy load, too:
Or Jonah becomes a human being. Whichever comes first.
But there will be plenty of time later to dissect and debate every argument, good and bad, for toppling Saddam.
One day Jonah still intends to get around to the embarrassing postmortem of “How we spent $2 trillion turning Iraq into a failed state and embedding the US army in a quagmire, for reasons that were specious at the time and have not improved with age”, but for the last few years he’s been too busy walking the dog.
Apparently the key to preventing terrorism is to make your enemies fear you with blatant displays of violence and militarism. Who knew!
There is nothing like wreaking mass destruction on arbitrary, misdirected targets to teach the rest of the world that terror does not pay.
The alternate titles to Dr Chuckie McWheelie‘s column had me literally ROTFL and such.
FINISH THE JOB. Type it in CAPITALS so people will KNOW how SERIOUS YOU ARE. Also, WAR IS SEX.
And why does Ron Paul always get the exemptions? An intellectually honest dirtbag is still a dirtbag.
All that would in all likelihood be true.
Until we win.
Oddly, it wasn’t until “Mission Accomplished,” that people, including the Iraqis themselves, got pissed at us.
The only tiny measure of respect granted to Ron Paul is this: He tells you what his goals are. The entire rest of the right wing masks their masturbatory Mad Max / wild west genocidal fantasies as a “desire for a simpler time” or a “return to the Christian values that made this country great” or “freedom from oppressive taxation and nanny state intrusion”. Its like they want to push the whole world into a mud puddle and steal its lunch money.
He tells you what his goals are
Which is how we know he’s insane.
The thing with Ron Paul and Libertarianism is that half of it sounds pretty good; they want to eliminate the evil shit that The Government does. Trouble is, they want to eliminate *everything* The Government does.
It’s like Saddam dropped his trousers and whipped out all 3 inches, Bush just strutted around in his flight suit, and Saddam folded. Then the Iraqi people said “okay Dubya, lets see what you got..” But he didn’t even reach for his fly. The Iraqis then formed an orderly line and started cockslapping him one by one, with whatever they had. And still, Bush just kept talking about the size of his surge.
The thing with Ron Paul and Libertarianism is that half of it sounds pretty good; they want to eliminate the evil shit that The Government does. Trouble is, they want to eliminate *everything* The Government does.
Yes, but as my colleague HTML Mencken put it, it’s worth promoting Paulism within the Republican Party. The reasoning is, a center-right party will take charge of the country at some point or another and when they do you want them to do the least amount of damage during their time in power. The most amount of damage is done by the neocons and the Phil Gramm-style deregulation zealots. The Paulites would likely return us to the gold standard, sure, but I prefer that to being in a state of perpetual war.
Oddly, it wasn’t until
“Mission Accomplished,”Abu Ghraib and Bagram that people, including the Iraqis as well as Afghans themselves, got pissed at us.Far be it from me to claim a thought of actor212, Blessed be His Name forever,needed to be fixed. I sought only to express my own timorous emendation to Your CaymanIsleness.
I would have included Gitmo but I’ve been there on several occasions and it pissed me off.
I worship at the altar of Carlin as much as anyone, but he makes one serious mistake in the clip. Having the name “Boner” is, empirically, not a passport to self-esteem and a lack of assholish behavior.
I still don’t get how Dane Cook is still alive, yet George Carlin isn’t.
There is no justice in this world …
I still don’t get how Dane Cook is still alive, yet George Carlin isn’t.
As George would tell you, because the world sucks and there is no god.
Pssst, Jonah:
The Soviets liberated Czechoslovakia.
The most amount of damage is done by the neocons and the Phil Gramm-style deregulation zealots. The Paulites would likely return us to the gold standard, sure, but I prefer that to being in a state of perpetual war.
Paulistas aren’t likely to sell the infrastructure off to the highest bidder?
Plus eh sees nothing wrong with hanging out with racists and anti-Semites. Sure, “small government” makes it a bit harder to push the fascist line, but all it’d really mean would be that the jackboot on your neck would be a privately owned rent-a-thug instead of an ideally publically-accountable employee.
All I could think of was that Pantloads shit all over T.S. Eliot:
There will be time, there will be time
To prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet;
There will be time to murder and create,
And time for all the works and days of hands
That lift and drop a question on your plate;
Time for you and time for me,
And time yet for a hundred indecisions,
And for a hundred visions and revisions,
Before the taking of a toast and tea.
Being serious for a moment Brad, are you sure that promoting paultardism in the Republican party would actually do any good? A good parallel is how the republicans milked the fundie christians for votes, but didnt give them much more than that stem cell bullshit and some holy war rhetoric.
What would be better is to encourage the teabaggers to join the paultards, and promote fringe independent candidates, or even the existing libertarian party, or a new teabag party, or something else which could be the ralph nader of the right wing. Republicans could easily loose 10% of their vote share to a Paul/Palin/teabag style party. That would be the craziest 10% of course, pushing the republicans towards the centre a little. If nothing else, it would possibly create a republican party where ambitious members are not obliged to court the more crazy part of the right wing.
On the other hand, the more chaos in the republican party, the worse their electoral prospects are. But in a 2 party system, they WILL be back eventually. It would be better if when they DO get elected, they arn’t acting as a respectable cover for a load of bugfuck crazy motherfuckers.
Oh what am i saying. the republican party is 50% racist old farts, 50% bugfuck crazy motherfuckers. It is just too large a demographic in America.
Tom M, I understand your point, but all that happened (or was uncovered, rather) after May 1, 2003.
Which was after we “won”, which is when Jonah said the world would rally to our side.
In other words, central to my point…
Pssst, Jonah:
The Soviets liberated Czechoslovakia.
Christ, you’re actually expecting the author of “Liberal Fascism” to know jack-shit about World War 2?
At least anything he can’t get from a quick game of “Call Of Duty”?
Since wars are almost always about penis size, nations could save money by emulating the example set by Canada at the Olympic closing ceremonies where giant blow up beavers, moose, and mounties were paraded around a stadium.
Whoever has the biggest P wins the war. America would certainly win, of course.
Failing that, a contest of biggest wingnut stomach size would do.
I’m still mulling over what point Pantload was making when he equated a cease fire after liberating Europe (iow, that we didn’t bomb Japan?) with not finishing the job in Iraq.
His analogies are so poorly constructed and jejune, they make my head hurt. Why do I even read it? Why? Why?
The Paulites would likely return us to the gold standard, sure, but I prefer that to being in a state of perpetual war.
Ironically creating a New World Order where, indeed, the US is beholden to the interests of any bugfuck crazy who can trade dollars for gold if they don’t like what we’re doing.
Whoever has the biggest P wins the war. America would certainly win, of course.
The Taj Mahal is the greatest erection any man has made to a woman, so I’d bet on India.
His analogies are so poorly constructed and jejune, they make my head hurt. Why do I even read it? Why? Why?
I say the same thing every time I wake up with a hangover…well, except the “jejune” bit….and yet, I still stock aspirin.
But conservatives aren’t terrorists!
my take is that the Big Thinkers of the GOP decided that Very Stupid is not quite doing the job and it’s time to turn on the Extra Stupid
or in this case, Very Penis or Extra Penis
I too am concerned about the shrinking wang of America’s empire.
Huh? I just linked to a TPM story about a terror attack at the IRS office in Utah, and WP eated the story…after I posted it!
Here. Again
Silly Actor 212. You know that we cant call it terrorism till we find out the skin colour of the perpetrators.
There would have been a certain logic to calling for a cease-fire once Allied forces liberated Czechoslovakia, Poland, and — oh yeah — France from the Germans
I think you will find that there were people in the US pursuing that logic. I think you will also find that they were Republicans, arguing that America should ally itself with Germany to push back the Red Army and occupy Eastern Europe.
I too am concerned about the shrinking wang of America’s empire.
OH NOES Global Warming will flood Florida and Shrink America’s Wang!!
I think the neo-Khans’ view of when America was America was the late 1890s in robber baron imperialism, in the 1920s with Coolidge economics and in a revived Southern racial supremacy campaign, during World War II (not including any aspect of domestic government, just the war itself), in the 1950s with red-baiting and denouncing the civil rights movement, and then skipping forward to Reagan’s reign and the first 5 years of Bush Jr. Triumphant.
I was really shocked when these assholes protested so loudly against the Lancet (?) study on excess mortality in Iraq, that concluded that 600,000 people had died as a result of the invasion. After all, they get off on huge body counts… don’t they?
i threw out all of my Disastor comic books after Gigantor beat the shit out of him
There would have been a certain logic to calling for a cease-fire once Allied forces liberated Czechoslovakia, Poland, and — oh yeah — France from the Germans
By the neocons’ logic, the Allied forces would have rolled into Lisbon, rather than Berlin.
You know, you’re right. Since a small number of people acted horrendously barbarically, let’s go blow the shit out of unrelated countries because they look the same, have the same language, and have the same religion.
‘Cause, that always helps.
Fuck you asshole douchebags who think you can justify anything the fuck you want because “buh the terrists were barbarians therefore we got to blow up Iraqiranistan, else the barbarians will laugh at us and our penises shrink further.”
A lot of you guys are older than me…can anyone think of a time when a senator was more of a complete and utter bag of pig cocks than Jim Bunning is being right now? Anything from Thurmond’s or Helms’ glory days?
Portugal, like Spain, were the good fascists, whom we liked.
“More than 100,000 dead Iraqis are still thanking us.”
Weren’t the excess violent deaths estimated some time ago to be 600,000 at minimum and more likely well over 1 million?
Portugal, like Spain, were the good fascists, whom we liked.
Much like Saddam was the good dicatator, who we
likedarmed.Not quite as closely related as say, Saudi Arabia. But invading them would be DIFFICULT..
So fuckit, off to Afghanistan, where empires go to die..
Portugal, like Spain, were the good fascists, whom we liked.
Zactly.
Saudi Arabia:Afghanistan::Portugal:Germany
Iraq:Afghanistan::Korea:Germany
Oh, the ironing!
While everyone, including Congress, the media, and the public, have focused on AIG’s $100-million bonus payments to key employees, and most recently on AIG’s stealth payments to counterparties like Chase and the French giant Société Générale — the latter made worse by the fact that it was the Federal Reserve (FED) that wanted to keep these payments hidden from public view — the problem with the AIG bailout is much deeper and more fundamental.
Just about everyone has had something to say about this bailout — mostly that it was an ugly but necessary step to stave off a domino effect that would have brought the world’s financial system to its knees. But what we have not yet heard is just how Treasury Secretary Geithner, as then-head of the NY FED, got away with taking ownership of 77.9% of AIG’s equity and voting rights in clear violation of the law.
The question we are left with is: Why? What motivated this illegal grab of AIG’s equity and voting rights? Was it desperation in the face of the largest potential collapse in the history of modern finance? Was it unbridled power combined with supreme hubris? Or was it just criminal? The answer to this query resides in the as-yet-hidden files of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, now subject to a subpoena issued by my office in the federal lawsuit Murray v. Geithner, pending in the Eastern District of Michigan.
In this lawsuit, brought on behalf of Kevin Murray, an Iraq War veteran and taxpayer, my co-counsel, Robert Muise of the Thomas More Law Center, and I have challenged the U.S. government’s takeover of AIG as a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment because the taxpayer bailout has the effect of promoting and advancing AIG’s Shariah-adherent insurance business — the largest in the world. AIG promotes itself as a global advocate not only of Islam, but also of the Islamic legal doctrine known as Shariah — which is the Islamic legal doctrine and program that calls for a global hegemony referred to as the Caliphate, the murder of apostates, and jihad against infidels. The most austere and important Islamic legal authorities who legitimize Shariah-compliant finance, like AIG’s takaful insurance products, are the same ones issuing fatwas for jihad against the West.
In the course of discovery, resisted by the government at every turn, we have learned that the deal Geithner put together as the NY Fed’s president was illegal on its face.
The Deal
Specifically, the deal Geithner put together in September 2008 was for the NY FED to pour up to $85 billion of debt funding into AIG to solve its liquidity crisis as the Credit Default Swap counterparties, the banks which had insured themselves against the sub-prime mortgage meltdown, demanded payments under their AIG insurance policies. AIG ended up drawing down $60 billion almost overnight.
But Geithner was not content with a straight debt deal where AIG promised to pay back principal and interest and handed over almost all of its assets as collateral. Geithner wanted real ownership and control (77.9%, to be exact) of AIG’s equity and the voting rights to go along with that.
The problem Geithner knew he had to confront, however, was that the FED was not authorized to take ownership in AIG or any other financial institution. The law authorized the FED only to loan money and take collateral. While the FED might end up with ownership after a default and foreclosure on the collateral, the Federal Reserve Act does not authorize the NY Fed to structure the debt deal with an equity piece.
The Criminal Artifice
So what did Geithner do? He took equity, but he used a fictitious “Trust” to accomplish that which he could not do legally. The AIG Credit Facility Trust has three so-called independent, non-governmental trustees owning the 77.9% of the legal interests of AIG, and the Trust agreement assigns the U.S. Treasury the beneficial interests in the 77.9%. The highly-touted “independence” of the trustees is quite obviously critical to save the Trust from the claim that it is merely a ruse for FED ownership and control.
But there is only one problem with this Trust structure: It is invalid and illegal for two important reasons, not the least of which is that its independence is nonexistent.
Specifically, the Trust Agreement includes a hardly-noticed section 1.03, which gives the FED absolute authority over the Trust’s existence and its terms, effectively granting the FED control over the actions of the trustees. By any legal definition, this is not a valid independent trust. This means, at the very least, that the FED is the real owner of the legal interests in 77.9% of AIG’s equity, and this is, as Geithner himself testified before the Senate Banking Committee in April 2008, not legal.
But the Trust’s infirmities do not stop at its lack of independence. The Trust Agreement also assigns the beneficial interests to the U.S. Treasury as the Trust’s beneficiary. This assignment is patently invalid because a trust beneficiary must be a person or entity that can own title to things in its own name. But the U.S. Treasury is — by statute, by case law, and by actual fact — nothing more than a bank account or depository for things owned by the U.S. government. And a bank account cannot own anything.
So how and why did the dozens, if not hundreds, of government and private-sector high-priced lawyers working on this transaction make such an elementary mistake? We don’t know the answer to this question yet, but we do know why they could not name the Treasury Department as the beneficiary: because like with the FED, at the time, it did not yet have legal authority to acquire an ownership interest in any of the failing financial institutions, either. That authority would come later, when Congress passed the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, which authorizes the use of TARP funds for acquiring equity. But even that legislation instructs the Treasury Department to avoid acquiring voting rights. Geithner’s deal was all about acquiring not just voting rights, but super-majority control. Unfortunately, there was no legal authority at the time to do so.
The brute fact that now standing exposed before us is the use of an invalid Trust structure to conceal the unlawful ownership and control over 77.9% of AIG’s equity and voting rights by the FED. If Geithner knew he was breaking the law, then this just happens to be the definition of criminal money-laundering under Title 18, Section 1956. Secretary Geithner has some explaining to do to AIG’s public shareholders. We suggest that he seek legal advice first — but this time, from lawyers who actually know what they are doing.
CONTINUE TO SPREAD THE WORD!!!!! said,
March 2, 2010 at 0:49
No need to copy and paste entire articles. When we want toilet paper, we know where the American Thinker is.
No nation in the history of the world has ever won a war being “politically correct”, or by being “sensitive” to the enemy they were at war with.
In this day and age, anything less than a full scale nuclear, biological and chemical lay-down is, by definition, a “limited war”.
There will never, ever be another World War II.
No need to copy and paste entire articles. When we want toilet paper, we know where the American Thinker is.
Continue to spread the turd!
“No nation in the history of the world has ever won a war being “politically correct”, or by being “sensitive” to the enemy they were at war with. To do so would bring disastor to any nation which seeks victory over its enemies.”
Hmmm. I recall reading that the reason Kyoto and Nara were untouched during WWII was because the US decided that, even in a Life or Death Struggle with teh Evil Yellow Swarm, those cities were simply too important to the world to bomb.
We also treated German (I don’t know about Japanese) POWs pretty damn well, too.
Oh, and not to mention that we later paid our enemies lots of money to rebuild their countries. And allowed them to be independent nations and such.
Man, who knew that the Greatest Generation were a bunch of limpwristed girlymen who had no understanding of the real nature of war??? Eisenhower, MacArthur and Marshall: whadda bunch of faggots!
RAF Bomber Command did not conduct indiscriminate bombing of civilians.
We merely de-housed the workforce.
No nation in the history of the world has ever won a war being “politically correct”, or by being “sensitive” to the enemy they were at war with.
That sounded better in Goebbel’s “Total War” speech.
Hey, I just realized I really ought to be bravely defending America *right now* instead of just flapping my piehole about commie libs, can anyone tell me what the number for 1-800-GO-ARMY is?
Wouldn’t want anyone to think I’m just a little girlie man with a tiny penis and a big mouth, after all!
Continue to Spam the Word should be disemvoweled.
Hey, I just realized I really ought to be bravely defending America *right now* instead of just flapping my piehole about commie libs
You would think that this would shame them, but, in fact, nothing ever does.
Continue to Spam the Word should be disemvoweled.
He’ll piss and moan, but he should remember that no blog in the history of the world has ever won by being “politically correct”, or by being “sensitive” to the enemy.
I’m going to form the Hot Fudge militia, wherein we take as our Statement of Principles that “Every ten years or so, the United States Hot Fudge militia needs to pick up some small crappy little country right wing pundit and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business.”
Wingnut Pre-processor, step four….
as someone pointed out, though, we’ll need a hella lot more throughput than once every ten years…
You liberals think our nation has been cruel to the tent dwelling savages we are at war with?
It really isn’t correct to call people who can make a failed empire like America spend $2,000,000,000,000 on a war and LOSE IT anyway “tent dwelling savages”. Especially since they’ve spent the Pentagon’s yearly budget on military bands to engineer that victory.
No, you’d better call them “The Most Brilliant Military Minds In History”
Gee, maybe teaching a bunch of Islamic fundamentalists how to defeat a superpower back in the 1980s wasn’t such a great idea after all.
Who knew?
“Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business.”
Every 10 days or so, I think I’ll grab one of these cunt columnists and slam his little bitch ass up against a wall. I’ll need heavy equipment for Rush, but I’ll start with the girls, like Jonah.
Fuck you, Jonah. Go to hell and die you fucking warmonger. Nobody likes you. You suck at life.
Who knew?
I’ve tried a couple of times to find articles from the ’80s warning that arming the Taliban could come back to bite us (’cause that’s what I remember) but haven’t had luck so far with Teh Gazoogle.
I do believe, though, that we were warned.
I’ve tried a couple of times to find articles from the ’80s warning that arming the Taliban could come back to bite us
It
mightwill bite the taxpayer, but the weapons company executives are laughing all the way to their offshore gated-n-guarded refuges.It’s a lucky thing for McGregor that victims of the “bringing American democracy tours” in Iraq, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and Central America didn’t go all NUKE THE US! after the many countless atrocities they endured, eh?
It really isn’t correct to call people who can make a failed empire like America spend $2,000,000,000,000 on a war and LOSE IT anyway “tent dwelling savages”.
Great Britain was a failed imperial power in 1945, but at least they had the excuse that they’d been up against the combined military / economic strength of Europe, Japan and the Soviet Union. And at least they won.
In the case of the US, all it took was an administration devoted to a policy of kleptocracy, masked by a thin veneer of incompetence.
Every 10 days or so, I think I’ll grab one of these cunt columnists and slam his little bitch ass up against a wall. I’ll need heavy equipment for Rush, but I’ll start with the girls, like Jonah.
Wow. Umm… misogynist much?
If I were an American veteran, the lack of respect that the neocons show for the American military tradition would make me sick, I think.
We also treated German (I don’t know about Japanese) POWs pretty damn well, too.
Towards the end, in spring 1945, German units would struggle mightily to fight their way out of Russian encirclements so they could surrender to Americans. I wonder how often something comparable happens in Afghanistan or Iraq?
And, of course, after we had finished stomping the worst pack of murderers in human history into the rubble, we gave them fair trials, with defense lawyers and evidence rules and everything, instead of torturing their children and throwing them into a cage for life without charges.
But, of course, that was just Nazi Germany, one of the most powerful and most technically advanced nations on Earth, not a fearsome band of box-cutter-armed supervillains.
In the case of the US, all it took was an administration devoted to a policy of kleptocracy, masked by a thin veneer of incompetence.
You sell them short. Their incompetence was no veneer, it was solid to the core.
LC, the Nazis were white and Christian.
“Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business”
As somebody with a passing acquaintance with bar brawls, I’d have to say I wouldn’t be very impressed with some big asshole who beat the shit out of a mouthy little guy every few weeks.
Jonah Loadpants has got news for me that “war is cruel?” How would he know?
The Small Government people really, really offend me with their stupid premise. After all, the USA is a HUGE country with a LOT of people, and extensive financial -and military, alas!- interests all over the world, and even in Outer Space (government funded-operated satellites, probes, etc).
It simply isn’t possible to run such a huge enterprise with a small government. The idea is just idiotic.
Granted our government should be pruned regularly to get rid deadwood, fungus, rot and parasite infestations. Hey! Maybe Congress can create a new Government Agency to “prune” our Federal Government.
Good point there, ArtieMac: a fight with America the most powerful nation on earth since the Roman Empire.
Eddie Izzard made a similar comparison, so you’re on par with a transvestite Pommy. Nice work, there.
Let’s remember who has defeated the Afghans, hmmmm, well, there was
Alexander the GreatThe Arabs(part around Herat only)Mongols (Timur the Lame)
The Persians(yeah, fuck Iran!)The Russians, 19th century versionThe English Empire, ibid.The UnitedStates of America (ongoing)So, clearly, we have history on our side.
more than 100,000 Iraqis?
WAY more
FINISH THE JOB. Type it in CAPITALS so people will KNOW how SERIOUS YOU ARE.
Hey, I love using all CAPS. Not as much as I love “quotes” and –dashes– and ellipses … ellipses give me a tingly feeling “deep” DOWN if you know what I mean …
“remember who has defeated the Afghans”
Well, the Taliban was fairly successful.
Pedestrian: “You would think that this would shame them, but, in fact, nothing ever does.”
I think all their shame is focused on the size and performance ability of their PENIS. No room for shame over anything else.
Kwillow:
Good point. They want a small government with a huge mlitary.
“In the case of the US, all it took was an administration devoted to a policy of kleptocracy, masked by a thin veneer of incompetence”
“You sell them short. Their incompetence was no veneer, it was solid to the core-”
Imagine the Bush-Cheney admin as a block of rotten Swiss cheese. The cheese is the kleptocracy and the holes are the incompetence & stupidity. The rot = hypocritical religiosity.
Vicious circle-jerk (Kleenex not included): neocons lie & ratfuck their way into power, epic-scale neocon pooch-fucking hilarity ensues, eventually the survivors point & laugh at their total deficit of basic political aptitiude & kick them out, neocons sulk & plan their next set of ratfucking-ops & crazy-ass lies … & then the magical cycle begins anew.
Memo from Secretary Of State Pantload to Ribbentrop:
Hey, dude, you can go ahead & keep Belgium, Luxembourg, Holland, & all those wacky Scandihoovian countries where they eat herring & ride reindeer – we just want the big important ones back.
PS – more bratwurst plzkthx.
I’m going to take a shot in the dark & say that NOBODY made this argument in 1945 – perhaps because none of those countries were any longer in Axis hands by then?
*facepalms*
No one is more barbaric than the
islamiccorporate-supremacist neocon fanatics that bombedthe world trade centerIraq after imposing a decade of brutal sanctions and murdered3000hundreds of thousands of innocentAmericansIraqis in cold blood, most of them children, simply because they wereof the “wrong religion.”a convenient diversion to take Americans’ attention away from how incredibly badly they fucked up on September 11, 2001 – not to mention an excellent vehicle for both fearmongering & war profiteering.This needed minor corrections, so I obliged. You’re welcome.
I guess I’ll go elsewhere… I feel like a troll. Its just that as i read comments, I simply must reply.
RE: …they [Lowry and Ponnuru] are convinced that they are seeing the “waning of America’s civilizational self-confidence,” which worries them because it means we might be less willing to mount the “forward defense of freedom.”
THE VILLAGE PEOPLE:
“…Every man ought to be a macho macho man,
To live a life of freedom, machos make a stand,
Have their own life style and ideals,
Possess the strength and confidence, life’s a steal,
You can best believe that he’s a macho man
He’s a special person in anybody’s land.
Hey! Hey! Hey, hey, hey!
Macho, macho man (macho man)
I’ve got to be, a macho man
Macho, macho man
I’ve got to be a macho! (dig the hair on my chest)…”
SOURCE – http://www.lyrics007.com/Village%20People%20Lyrics/Macho%20Man%20Lyrics.html
WE HAVE TO STAY IN AFGHANISTAN TO FINISH THE JOB. ADMITTEDLY THERE’S NO GREAT METRIC ESTABLISHED YET OF WHAT WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE IN ORDER TO DECLARE THE JOB FINISHED, BUT STAY THERE WE MUST!
I feel like a troll. Its just that as i read comments, I simply must reply.
That’s not what trolls do. I mean the read part. Or even the reply part; usually they just kind of spew.
Also, just for you: …
Attacking Afghanistan was completely justified. Staying there until the war is won is even more justified.
Yeah! Which is why we HAD to take our troops out of Afghanistan before finishing off the Taliban and Al Queda so we could go attack Iraq! Because if we didn’t spend billions of dollars and lose thousands of lives in Iraq, we would STILL be dealing with Afghanistan TODAY!!
Wait…what was my point again?
Hey you, KWillow, you finished on the elliptical trainer yet? Other people are waiting to use it.
Brad, you know I love you, but no way is Ron Paul a consistent libertarian. He’s a John Birch style Republican with a big dose of “pro-life.”
Please note a few of the bills he sponsored while in the House:
H.R.2597: To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception.
H.R.1094: To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception.
H.R.776: To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception
H.R.392: A bill proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States guaranteeing the right to life.
And my personal favorite:
H.R.5842: A bill to make all Iranian Students in the United States ineligible for any form of federal aid.
Source: http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/11/ron-pauls-record-in-congress.html
Helms. South Africa. There was a reason we as a nation sat before our computers and bopped our cowlicked heads to Why. Won’t. Jesse. Helms. Hurry up and Diiiiiiiiiieeeee?
Oh yeah: Strom Thurmond
He did it for the lulz.
Don’t these fucksticks ever get sick of being wrong?
Hey, be nice. That bill was from 1979, during the Iranian hostage crisis. Iranian students were The Enemy back then. Doesn’t make the bill right, but it does make it a bit more understandable.
Anyway, the Paultards’ biggest mistake was selling the guy as a libertarian. He’s always been a “paleoconservative” (think Pat Buchanan). Sure, he’s anti-war, but some of his other priorities would make anyone who cares about the Constitution and individual freedom cringe.
This reminds me of the thing with Chomsky — if you read a lot of his writings or listen to him talk, and you have no sense of irony, he would make a great neocon pundit. He’s really saying the exact same thing that Ledeen, Krauthammer, Kristol, Lowry, Ponnuru and Rubio are saying, except in sarcasm quotes.
Don’t these fucksticks ever get sick of being wrong?
No.
This has been another edition of Simple Answers to Simple Questions.
There are untold reasons why Goldberg was wrong. I’ll just dwell on one of them in particular right now.
Despite his usual pathetic claims to be a historian, Jonah doesn’t actually realise that we hadn’t liberated Czechoslovakia when we took Berlin. Bits of Slovakia had been abandoned by the Germans, but they were still holding on to Bohemia and the mountains around it.
The Red Army sensibly ignored this, and powered on through the north German plain. Because Germany was actually threatening, and that’s where Hitler was.
No nation in the history of the world has ever won a war being “politically correct”, or by being “sensitive” to the enemy they were at war with.
Tell it to General Washington you dishonorable, cowardly sicko.
Not explicit enough for you? How about this order, delivered following the battle of Trenton:
But, hey, don’t let actual history get in the way of your torture fantasies, you sick fuck.
America is in a state of war against the enemies of Western Civilization.
Yes. We call them “conservatives”.
“The rationale offered not only by Powell, but by our allies in Riyadh and elsewhere, was that we would fracture the almighty coalition President Bush had assembled. Keeping the coalition, some reasoned, was more important than getting the job done. This is like telling your prom date, We’d better stop fooling around because it might result in the wasting of a condom.”
LMAO, no, actually the rationale offered by Colin Powell and Dick Cheney alike, and everyone in between, at the time, was that overthrowing Saddam would result in an occupation more long and costly than the American voters had the stomach for (something that’s been copiously proven by the last seven years), and that it would create a power vacuum that would be of huge benefit to the Iranians and our other enemies (again, copiously proven out by the 2000s). We wanted Saddam to remain in place so that he could be a buffer between our allies in the Gulf, and our enemies in Syria and Iran.
Whatever you may think of their morals, the neocons of the early 1990s still thought with their brains instead of their balls. Probably the biggest difference between them and those of ten years later (to say nothing of those today).
Shorter Jonah:
“Carthago delenda est! Or, you know, whoever!”
“As chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Colin Powell reportedly urged for the cessation of hostilities before the U.S. entered Baghdad. The rationale offered not only by Powell, but by our allies in Riyadh and elsewhere, was that we would fracture the almighty coalition President Bush had assembled. Keeping the coalition, some reasoned, was more important than getting the job done. This is like telling your prom date, We’d better stop fooling around because it might result in the wasting of a condom.”
Actually no, you freaking idiot. The rationale Colin Powell and the rest of the Bush administration offered was twofold; One, an occupation of Iraq would be too costly in men, material and time for the stomach of the American people (something that’s been copiously proven by the last seven years). Two, it would create a chaotic power vacuum which the Iranians and our other enemies would be only too happy to exploit (again copiously proven by the last 7 years).
The Bush administration’s plan was to boot Saddam out of Kuwait and make sure that he couldn’t threaten our allies in the Gulf anymore (which is why the coalition stayed in place). But it wanted a strong Iraqi government (either under Saddam or some new strongman) to survive as a shield against more long-term enemies like Syria and Iran.
Say whatever you want about their morals, but the neocons in the early 1990s still looked at the world in mostly logical terms. That’s not true anymore. They’ve crossed the line into the territory of the insecure, irrational penis-envy nationalism that led to World War One. Which is basically what Brad and Larison point out.
Ah, there we go.
Sorry for the repetition. WP took for freaking ever to post my response and I thought it hadn’t gone though.
It was a million dead, not 100,000, and another 2 million as refugees. I’d like to bury Goldberg up to his neck in sand and let another 3 million Iraqis get a kick apiece at him. That sounds about right.
I’d like to bury Goldberg up to his neck in sand and let another 3 million Iraqis
get a kick apiece atpiss on him. That sounds about right.Fizzooled For Great Justice.
Not that anybody’s reading this anymore.
I did. I’d rather they got the kicks, from what I can tell God pisses on Goldberg every day, he’s used to it.