BOOBS AND BOMBS

Saudi Arabia and Israel (among others) are going to pay the United States billions and billions for military hardware.

The Military-Industrial Complex is a very big business.

In the name of National Security the United States of America has to protect and defend its vital interests.

In the Middle East those vital interests aren’t chickens and cows.

Meanwhile, here in the Homeland, the media is also giving some attention to cleavage.

In this case it is the cleavage of Hillary Clinton.

Boobs and bombs.

How utterly American both are.

We like the biggest and the best bombs and boobs.

(The current administration has some of the biggest boobs in American history.

These are not the boobs that we wanted.)

The more bombs we sell, the more likely bombs will explode.

Is an arms dealer some sort of terrorist that is not defined by us?

O.K.

If the bombs, missiles and planes are put into the hands of the good guys, then the salesman is considered a good guy.

However, there is no guarantee that the other good guys will stay that way with the bombs, missiles and planes that they have bought.

We may have sold the bombs to some crazy boobs.

Be wary of big bombs and big boobs in the wrong hands.

After all, Gonzales’ impeachable offenses are his superiors’. Gonzales took the orders; Bush-Cheney gave the orders. The litany of Bush-Cheney impeachable abuses extends far beyond those associated with Gonzales, foremost among them of course Bush plunging the nation into a bloody, costly war-quagmire on a platform of fabrications, deceptions and cover-ups again and again, year after year. And Gonzales took the orders; Bush-Cheney gave the orders—a more serious basis for a Congressional demand for their resignation or the commencing of impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives.

Compare the many impeachable offenses of Bush-Cheney with the certain impeachment of President Richard M. Nixon that was rendered moot by his resignation in 1974.

Compare the actual impeachment of President William Jefferson Clinton by a Republican-controlled House of Representatives in 1998 for lying under oath about sex.
Granted, Nixon became ensnared in the criminal laws and Clinton was caught in the tort laws. But Bush-Cheney’s “high crimes and misdemeanors” tower in scope and diversity over those earlier Presidents.

Instead of a burglary and coverup, as with Nixon, it was the horrific ongoing war (longer than either the Civil War and World War II) with hundreds of thousands of lost lives and many more injuries and sicknesses.

Ralph Nader
July 30, 2007

THE GONZO SHOW: OBFUSCATION PREVARICATION INSULTS AND INSINUATIONS

GWB: Who's calling?

AG: This is Alberto Gonzales.

GWB: Hello Gonzo, my legal protector and advisor. What's up?

AG: Well, Mr. President, as you know, my butt's hanging out and getting cooked by the Congress and everyone else but you.

GWB: Hang tough, Gonzo, I'm the Urinary Executioner. You're serving at my pleasure, Gonzo, and nobody’s going to touch you.

AG: Thank you Mr. President. But what about a special prosecutor?

GWB: I'm the Decider and I'll fire him!

AG: Yes you will, and I’ll continue to be your attorney general.

GWB: That's the spirit! Now get back on your horse! Keep trotting out Justice!

AG: Thank you Mr. President.

After all, Gonzales’ impeachable offenses are his superiors’. Gonzales took the orders; Bush-Cheney gave the orders. The litany of Bush-Cheney impeachable abuses extends far beyond those associated with Gonzales, foremost among them of course Bush plunging the nation into a bloody, costly war-quagmire on a platform of fabrications, deceptions and cover-ups again and again, year after year. And Gonzales took the orders; Bush-Cheney gave the orders—a more serious basis for a Congressional demand for their resignation or the commencing of impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives.

Compare the many impeachable offenses of Bush-Cheney with the certain impeachment of President Richard K. Nixon that was rendered moot by his resignation in 1974.

Compare the actual impeachment of President William Jefferson Clinton by a Republican-controlled House of Representatives in 1998 for lying under oath about sex.
Granted, Nixon became ensnared in the criminal laws and Clinton was caught in the tort laws. But Bush-Cheney’s “high crimes and misdemeanors” tower in scope and diversity over those earlier Presidents.

Instead of a burglary and coverup, as with Nixon, it was the horrific ongoing war (longer than either the Civil War and World War II) with hundreds of thousands of lost lives and many more injuries and sicknesses.

Instead of a sex scandal, as with Clinton, there is a serial constitutional scandal oozing ongoing repeated constitutional crimes. For which alas, there is only one constitutional remedy arranged by the framers -- impeachment.

And that remedy the Democrats took “off the table” after they won the Congress last November and before they even took office. Just what the White House recidivists needed to know to keep at it. What a lesson for future generations.

Ralph Nader
July 29, 2007

Q & A

How should NASA go about restoring its image?

Rehab...Rehab...Rehab.

How productive is it for Rudy Giuliani to call the Democrats losers because they want to get out of Iraq?

It is not productive.

Period.

Losers are those who deny the reasons we got entangled in this morass.

Losers are those who do not want to take our soldiers out of this morass.

Giuliani is using this ad hominen slam to make him look like the brave-hearted warrior-ruler that he is not.

Rudy has a good model to emulate:

George W. Bush.

Why is Newt Gingrich comparing the Republican presidential field to "pygmies" and trained seals?

Maybe Mr. Gingrich thinks that by comparing Republicans to trained seals and pygmies he will elevate his own status should he join the race to the presidency. But does a newt have enough brain power to make such judgments?

What does it mean if Muslims around the world are increasingly rejecting suicide bombings and Islamic extremism?

It means that the majority of Muslims are good people who reject the terrible things that the radical Muslims are doing. It means that these good Muslims have brains---and souls with a conscience. It would be a very good thing if their mass rejection of suicide bombings and Islamic extremism can reduce the barbarities and alter the course of events in Iraq and the world.

What message does the $592 million U.S. Embassy in Baghdad send to the Iraqi people?

Oh, maybe it's not really a message, but a glaring advertisement of U.S. intentions to remain ensconced in Iraq for an undetermined amount of time. Iraqis know that this Embassy has fresh water and electricity while they do not. I imagine it doesn't make them like their occupiers too much. The George W. Palace should be vacated and the troops should be redeployed. Convert this behemoth into a home for Iraq’s orphans.

Is it proper for one of the largest Army bases to hold a single monthly service to honor its dead instead of individual services for each fallen soldier?

Time is money.

The government doesn't want to expend the time and money to hold individual services.

It's a happy meal for everyone at one time.

Our soldiers die one at a time, but we can't honor them so.

Bush doesn't even want to see one coffin let alone hundreds.

Gotta do what you gotta do.

And why should we expect anything else from an administration who didn't provide our soldiers with the equipment needed to escape their funerals, and when they come home in pieces (physically and psychologically) avoids 100% care.

Shameful! Shameful!

Is it time to appoint a special prosecutor to look into the role of White House and Justice Department officials in the firings of the U.S. attorneys?

Yes it's time.

It's also time (and time is running out) to appoint a special prosecutor to look into the lies of Dick Cheney and consorts who fed us this Iraq war monster.

I am fed up with excuses to not hold Bush, Cheney and their pals responsible for this irresponsible and mistaken war. Regardless of whether it is practical or economical to investigate or impeach Mr. Cheney and Mr. Bush, it is the morally correct thing to do.

To not is almost treasonous itself.

"I'm as mad as hell,. and I'm not going to take this anymore!!"

Should political campaigns be prohibited from hiring the candidate's spouse?

No.

Hire a mouse. Hire a spouse.

Or hire a louse (well maybe not).

Unless it's against the law, let any candidate's spouse participate in his or her political campaign.

Edwards, Clinton and Obama all seem to be reaping some benefits from the arousal of spousal help.

Is now the time to reduce the number of National Guard troops stationed along the Mexican border?

Absolutely not.

It is the time to keep them there.

And if al-Qaeda is such a threat to America, then there should be money availabe to hire as many border patrol agents as necessary to prevent al-Aaeda, radicals, extremists and evil-doers from coming into the U.S.

The National Guard troops, however, should be here---not in Iraq.

Bush is keeping them in Iraq to kill al-Qaeda, but that means that we have fewer Guardsmen to protect us here.

Under what conditions should the U.S. military enter Pakistan?

I suppose one condition would be if bin Laden is in Pakistan and in the eye of one of our snipers or satellites.

Then ENTER PAKISTAN and bring him to justice.

And that $50,000,000 could go somewhere else.

Of course, like dragon's teeth, more bin Laden clones will replace him.

As long as the U.S. occupies Iraq, many more dragons will continue to spit fire and explode bombs.

JOKES

It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry.

Thomas Paine

LET US AGREE TO DISAGREE AGREEABLY

It's easier to disseminate trivia and tell jokes than it is to have a dialogue on crucial issues.

It's easier when there is no need for critical and rational thought.

Preoccupation with banalities is a convenient escape from reality.

There is nothing inherently wrong with jokes and trivia.

They are release mechanisms.

It’s healthy to laugh.

But jokes and trivia can also be self-denying and self-serving substitutes for rigorous research, extensive reading, and serious thinking about important social issues.

Funnies are often shared and spread instead of spending more time doing serious research and investigation into more important matters.

Opinions and viewpoints on these more important matters remain in a foggy ether of narrow-mindedness and un-substantiation.

Truth is not convenient or comfortable.

A dialogue on the Iraq war requires more than just cursory searches on the Internet…

More than just pigeon-holed analyses and emotional reactions…

More than just listening to one side of the story...

More than just listening to the same radio talk show hosts who slam the door on finding out the truth…and instead constantly spew their pompous and pernicious denigration and personal attacks…

An authentic and meaningful dialogue on the Iraq war requires more than just giving personal opinions, popular clichés, puffed-up platitudes, and personal put-downs.

We owe it to ourselves and our country to not run away from grim questions about the Iraq War:

Why did the U.S. really invade Iraq?

Who wanted to invade Iraq the most?

What was expected to be gained from this pre-emptive war?

What are the actual results of this war invasion and occupation?

What is the best plan now to remove American soldiers from Iraq?

Jokes and trivia---and the time spent thereof--- should not be substituted for serious discussion and inquiry.

A consensus now exists about the lies and criminality of the Iraq war.

The consensus indicates that global threats of terror increased as a result of our pre-emptive shock and awe bombing and occupation of Iraq.

Deniers will continue to hide behind a comfortable wall of trivia and jokes.

LIFE AND DEATH ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN JOKES.

READING BETWEEN THE LINES

(Note: Mad Plato's words are between parentheses.)

President Bush Discusses War on Terror in South Carolina

Charleston Air Force Base

Charleston, South Carolina

July 24, 2007

11:50 A.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT:

I'm proud to be back here in the great state of South Carolina. I'm proud to be with some of the Palmetto State's finest citizens. I'm glad to be eating lunch with you. The food is pretty good, Colonel. (Laughter.) I always like a good barbecue.

(We barbecue some of the world's tastiest Armadillos down at Crawford)

This base is represented by Congressman Henry Brown, of South Carolina. (Applause.) He understands what I understand; when we have somebody in harm's way, that person deserves the full support of the Congress and the President.

(Please don’t think about the protective helmets and armored vehicles that soldiers haven’t had to protect them from getting their brains and bodies blown away by IEDS.)

And you'll have the full support of the President of the United States during this war against these radicals and extremists.

(By radicals and extremists I don’t mean Hillary or Obama.)

Nearly six years after the 9/11 attacks, America remains a nation at war. The terrorist network that attacked us that day is determined to strike our country again, and we must do everything in our power to stop them.

(Don't remind me that our Homeland's borders and ports are open arteries for these potential strikes, and that we are doing very little to prevent terrorists from coming into America.)

A key lesson of September the 11th is that the best way to protect America is to go on the offense, to fight the terrorists overseas so we don't have to face them here at home.

(I wonder how much longer I can use this line?)

Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth.

Franklin D. Roosevelt

The key theater in this global war is Iraq.

(Back in London it was the Globe.)

There's a debate in Washington about Iraq, and nothing wrong with a healthy debate.

(Just as long as I'm the Master debater and Decider.)

There's also a debate about al-Qaida's role in Iraq. Some say that Iraq is not part of the broader war on terror.

(And it wasn't until I bombed Iraq.)

They complain when I say that the al-Qaida terrorists we face in Iraq are part of the same enemy that attacked us on September the 11th, 2001.

(Stop complaining about this lie.)

I say that there will be a big defeat in Iraq and it will be the defeat of al-Qaida.

(Even though only 1% of the fighters are al- Qaida. I have to pump up the propaganda in order for our military to remain in Iraq long after I retire in Crawford or Paraguay.)

(Applause.)

See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda.

George W. Bush

May/2005

According to our intelligence community, many of al-Qaida in Iraq's other senior leaders are also foreign terrorists. They include a Syrian who is al- Qaida in Iraq's emir in Baghdad, a Saudi who is al-Qaida in Iraq's top spiritual and legal advisor, an Egyptian who fought in Afghanistan in the 1990s and who has met with Osama bin Laden, a Tunisian who we believe plays a key role in managing foreign fighters. Last month in Iraq, we killed a senior al-Qaida facilitator named Mehmet Yilmaz, a Turkish national who fought with al-Qaida in Afghanistan, and met with September the 11th mastermind Khalid Shaikh Muhammad, and other senior al-Qaida leaders.

(As you can see, al-Qaida gets its leaders from many countries. Why don't they like the United States and its invasion and occupation of Iraq?)

Al-Qaida in Iraq is a group founded by foreign terrorists, led largely by foreign terrorists, and loyal to a foreign terrorist leader -- Osama bin Laden. They know they're al-Qaida. The Iraqi people know they are al-Qaida. People across the Muslim world know they are al-Qaida. And there's a good reason they are called al-Qaida in Iraq: They are al-Qaida ... in ... Iraq.

(And if the U.S. left Iraq, the sectarian fighters would fight al-Qaida instead of us, and we would have more money and manpower to fight terrorists when they come to the United States.)

Here's the bottom line: Al-Qaida in Iraq is run by foreign leaders loyal to Osama bin Laden. Like bin Laden, they are cold-blooded killers who murder the innocent to achieve al-Qaida's political objectives. Yet despite all the evidence, some will tell you that al-Qaida in Iraq is not really al-Qaida -- and not really a threat to America. Well, that's like watching a man walk into a bank with a mask and a gun, and saying he's probably just there to cash a check.

(Iraq was the bank we walked into...Shotgun Cheney had a mask on...the check was called Shock and Awe...but the check bounced and we got al-Qaeda in Iraq instead. Now we have a cooked-up reason and self-made enemy…and we will have to stay in Iraq until we defeat that enemy and secure the oil.)

You might wonder why some in Washington insist on making this distinction about the enemy in Iraq. It's because they know that if they can convince America we're not fighting bin Laden's al-Qaida there, they can paint the battle in Iraq as a distraction from the real war on terror.

(Just like saying that by invading Iraq the actual war on bin Laden and Al Qaida in Afghanistan was distracted. Sorry...but Shotgun Dick had to make it possible for Halliburton to have more profits.)

We are fighting bin Laden's al-Qaida in Iraq; Iraq is central to the war on terror; and against this enemy, America can accept nothing less than complete victory. (Applause.)

(Victory...victory...victory...What is victory?)

After victory, you have more enemies.

Cicero

Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is.

George W. Bush

There are others who accept that al-Qaida is operating in Iraq, but say its role is overstated.

(Al-Qaida makes up about 1% of the terrorists in Iraq.)

And most important for the people who wonder if the fight in Iraq is worth it, al-Qaida in Iraq shares Osama bin Laden's goal of making Iraq a base for its radical Islamic empire, and using it as a safe haven for attacks on America.

(If the U.S. left, the Iraqi sects would not want Iraq to become a base for al-Qaida's radical empire, and would fight al-Qaida instead of each other; and, therefore, Iraq would not remain a safe haven for attacks on America.)

Our top commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, has said that al-Qaida is "public enemy number one" in Iraq.

(If the U.S. left, do you believe that the Iraqi people would fight enemy number one?)

Fellow citizens, these people have sworn allegiance to the man who ordered the death of nearly 3,000 people on our soil. Al-Qaida is public enemy number one for the Iraqi people; al- Qaida is public enemy number one for the American people. And that is why, for the security of our country, we will stay on the hunt, we'll deny them safe haven, and we will defeat them where they have made their stand.

(I was just having a bad hair day when I said: "I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority. I am truly not that concerned about him." Or maybe my speech writers were having a bad hair day.)

(Applause.)

We were not in Iraq when the terrorists bombed the World Trade Center in 1993. We were not in Iraq when they attacked our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. We were not in Iraq when they attacked the USS Cole in 2000. And we were not in Iraq on September the 11th, 2001.

(Therefore, I bombed Iraq!)

He that is the author of a war lets loose the whole contagion of hell and opens a vein that bleeds a nation to death.

Thomas Paine

Our action to remove Saddam Hussein did not start the terrorist violence -- and America’s withdrawal from Iraq would not end it.

(Our action to remove Saddam Hussein didn't start the terrorist violence... it just gave it a turbo boost!)

These people are trying to shake the will of the Iraqi citizens, and they want us to leave...I think the world would be better off if we did leave...

George W. Bush (on Iraqi Insurgency)

(Yes, George did say these words.)

War should be the politics of last resort. And when we go to war, we should have a purpose that our people understand and support.

Colin Powell

If we were not fighting these al-Qaida extremists and terrorists in Iraq, they would not be leading productive lives of service and charity.

(Therefore, by fighting these extremists and terrorists in Iraq, it permits them to lead productive lives. What? What?)

(Note: Yes, the President Bush DID say the above words. I checked the script for a second time at www.whitehouse.gov)

Most would be trying to kill Americans and other civilians elsewhere -- in Afghanistan, or other foreign capitals, or on the streets of our own cities.

(The Russians are not coming...the Russians are not coming...al-Qaida is coming!)

Our country is now geared to an arms economy bred in an artificually induced psychosis of war hysteria and an incessant propaganda of fear.

General Douglas MacArthur

Al-Qaida is in Iraq -- and they're there for a reason.

(Because a foreign invader and occupier is there.)

If we were to cede Iraq to men like this, we would leave them free to operate from a safe haven which they could use to launch new attacks on our country.

If we were to allow this to happen, sectarian violence in Iraq could increase dramatically, raising the prospect of mass casualties.

(Notice I said could. If we left them free to operate in Iraq it could also inspire the Iraqi people to fight them even harder than us.)

For the security of our citizens, and the peace of the world, we must give General Petraeus and his troops the time and resources they need, so they can defeat al=Qaida in Iraq.

(This time and resources may be for 2 years, 20 years, or 200 years. This perpetual war on terrorism has no time-table...and that's the way our corporations like it.)

(Applause.)

No matter what political reasons are given for war, the underlying reason is always economic.

A. J. P. Taylor

I have confidence in our country, and I have faith in our cause, because I know the character of the men and women gathered before me. I thank you for your patriotism; I thank you for your courage. You're living up to your motto: "one family, one mission, one fight." Thank you for all you do. God bless your families. God bless America.

(Applause.)

Democracies become dictatorships if governments do not listen to the voice of the people.

Tom Van Meurs

The voice of protest...is never more needed than when the clamor of fife and drum...is bidding all men...obey in silence the tyrannous word of command.

Charles Eliot Norton

If a war be undertaken...before the resources of peace have been tried and proved vain to secure it, that war has no defense, it is a national crime.

Charles Eliot Norton

The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants.

Albert Camus

No protracted war can fail to endanger the freedom of a democratic country.

Alexis de Tocqueville

Why should we hear about body bags, and deaths...I mean, it's not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?

Barbara Bush

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter, and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.

Abraham Lincoln

Military glory--that attractive rainbow, that rises in showers of blood--that serpent's eye, that charms to destroy...

Abraham Lincoln

In all history there is no war which was not hatched by the governments, the governments alone, independent of the interests of the people, to whom war is always pernicious even when successful.

Leo Tolstoy

This administration led this nation into war based on lies. I think that this Congress, and the American people, have a right to know what information this Administration had, and how they justify their public comments. Now is the time for truth-telling.

Congressman and presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich, June 3, 2003

Allow the president to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such a purpose-and you allow him to make war at pleasure.

Abraham Lincoln

IRAN BUT I DIDN'T RUN: GETTING THE BOMBS READY

An Iraqi man covers his face to protect himself from the smoke as he passes a bomblet from a cluster bomb in the Baladiyat neighborhood in southern Baghdad.
Photo credit: Karim Sahib/Agence France Presse

Italian RaiNews 24's documentary shows US forces using white phosphorus in Falluja in November 2004.

DC: Dick here.

GWB: What's up Dick?

DC: Iran.

GWB: O.K. Where did you run?

DC: Nowhere. The country IRAN.

GWB: O.K. What about the country IRAN?

DC: We’re going to bomb it.

GWB: When?

DC: In August when Congress is on vacation and asleep.

GWB: What about Iraq?

DC: Bombing Iran will remove the public's attention from Iraq.

GWB: Do we have enough bombs?

DC: More than enough. And our cruise missiles are nuked and ready.

GWB: Will my legacy get better if I bomb Iran?

DC: It can't hurt it (Dick is thinking: Since it is already dead.)

GWB: O.K. But let me get in touch with the Almighty first.

DC: I’ve already done that. It's a green light to start bombing.

GWB: O.K. Just let me fly to Crawford before we do any more shock and awing. I don't want the media to start banging my head too soon.

DC: Right. Look busy. Clear the brush. Look for more Al Qaeda and armadillos.

GWB: O.K. Dick. Happy hunting to you too!

“It is possibly no coincidence that there has been a significant increase in the anti-Iran rhetoric emanating from both the Bush administration and Congress over the past few weeks, mostly seeking to establish a casus belli by contending that Iran is masterminding lethal attacks against US troops in Iran and NATO forces in Afghanistan”.

[Former CIA officer Philip Giraldi]

“The greatest threat now is ‘a 9/11’ occurring with a group of terrorists armed not with airline tickets and box cutters, but with a nuclear weapon in the middle of one of our own cities.”

Dick Cheney

Face the Nation/CBS

April 15, 2007

“A few days ago, a group of lawyers from western Massachusetts met with the local congressman, Democrat John Olver. Their request was that Olver take part in the urgent effort to impeach Bush and Cheney. Olver responded by saying that he had no intention of doing anything to support impeachment. He went further, offering the information that the United States would soon attack Iran, and that these hostilities would be followed by the imposition of a martial law regime here”

[From Cheney Determined To Strike
In U.S. With WMD This Summer]

By Webster G. Tarpley
7-21-7

rense.com

MAILER ON THE IRAQ WAR

Note: All of the words below were written by Norman Mailer.

Yes, our guilt for a great part of those bodies remains a large subtext and Saddam was creating mass graves all through the 1970s and 1980s. He killed Communists en masse in the 1970s, which didn't bother us a bit. Then he slaughtered tens of thousands of Iraqis during the war with Iran—a time when we supported him. A horde of those newly discovered graves go back to that period. Of course, real killers never look back.

The administration, however, was concerned only with how best to expedite the war. They hastened to look for many a justifiable reason. The Iraqis were a nuclear threat; they were teeming with weapons of mass destruction; they were working closely with al-Qaeda; they had even been the dirty geniuses behind 9/11. The reasons offered to the American public proved skimpy, unverifiable, and void of the realpolitik of our need to get a choke-hold on the Middle East for many a reason more than Israel- Palestine. We had to sell the war on false pretenses.

When Osama bin Laden failed to be captured by the posses we sent to Afghanistan, Bush was thrust back to ongoing domestic problems that did not give any immediate suggestion that they could prove solution-friendly. The economy was sinking, the market was down, and some classic bastions of American faith (corporate integrity, the FBI, and the Catholic Church—to cite but three) had each suffered a separate and grievous loss of face. Increasing joblessness was undermining national morale. Since our administration was conceivably not ready to tackle any one of the serious problems looming before them that did not involve enriching the top, it was natural for the administration to feel an impulse to move into larger ventures, thrusts into the empyrean—war! We could say we went to war because we very much needed a successful war as a species of psychic rejuvenation. Any major excuse would do—nuclear threat, terrorist nests, weapons of mass destruction —we could always make the final claim that we were liberating the Iraqis. Who could argue with that? One could not. One could only ask: What will the cost be to our democracy?

So we went ahead against all obstacles—of which the UN was the first. Wantonly, shamelessly, proudly, exuberantly, at least one half of our prodigiously divided America could hardly wait for the new war. We understood that our television was going to be terrific. And it was. Sanitized but terrific —which is, after all, exactly what network and good cable television are supposed to be.

And Iran, watch it, we have eyes for you. You could be a real meal. Because when we fight, we feel good, we are ready to go, and then go some more. We have had a taste. Why, there's a basketful of billions to be made in the Middle East just so long as we can stay ahead of the trillions of debts that are coming after us back home.

Can leaders who lie as a way of life protect any way of life?

Let us hope that our democracy will survive these nonstop foulings of the nest.