'leaders' are not the answer, not in america. leaders have brought them to their present situation. the structure of their society ensures periodic disaster, since each presidential election is an event in a russian roulette where 'winning' just means survival, but losing is the prelude to wars, financial disruption, and environmental degradation.

obama will be a pause on america's spiral into decay. he will be an aurelius after a commodus. but there will be more commoduses, more neros, more caligulas, and each will do damage that can't be repaired.

the only hope for america is democracy, and an end to tying a whole nation's welfare to the character of a person who probably should not be in charge of a dog. they're too ignorant for democracy, like most of the world. too bad their misfortune will likely ruin us all.

Charles Krauthammer in his latest article on The Washington Post hit the nail on its head on the issue of the November 4 election. Indeed, and I’m paraphrasing, the crucial issue for Americans on November 4 will be to identify the lion-hearted and the lamb-hearted. If lacking the will or cognitive ability to make this identification and vote-- out of irrational hate for Bush-Cheney and the Republicans as a result of their lack of understanding of the immeasurably intricate strategic situation that the Bush administration was placed in the aftermath of 9/11 and the ‘razor-edge’ difficult decisions it had to take to protect America from the deadliest of foes- for the “lamb” Obama, then America like sheep will be taken to the ‘slaughterhouse’. And there will be no shortage of intellectual shepherds to lead America to the abattoir. And ironically the arch enemy of Western civilization fanatical Islam will be licking its chops.

http://avant-gardestrategies.typepad.com

It’s a bit melodramatic to suggest Tuesday’s task is “to identify [between] the lion-hearted and the lamb-hearted”, Thermistocles. Does a wariness of four more years of failed republican policy really represent small minded irrational hate, or could there be other reasons? Name one major Bush policy which was successfully implemented and carried out.

McCain voted for around 90% of Bush’s economic proposals. A few years ago he did speak up once against it; today he’s endorsing them again.

Here’s a brief bio of Charles Krauthammer from RightWeb.org:

“Krauthammer penned a broadside in Foreign Affairs about the direction of U.S. foreign policy. The article came to serve as the basis for a new neocon agenda in the 1990s, one that ultimately culminated in the Iraq War and the George W. Bush administration's "war on terror." No surprise then his opinion piece promotes more of the same. McCain wants another 100 years in Iraq too.

Your posts are usually more accommodating. Since voting for Obama demonstrates a “lack in the will or cognitive ability” to distinguish between the situation the poor republicans find themselves in, through no fault of their own no doubt, and the opportunism of a group of anti-american commie-loving ovine “intellectual shepherds”, you’re parroting the narrative the GOP machine has used for years. Until now it’s worked well but you can see now where it’s taken the country.

I’ve been doing a little more research on who “lacks the will or cognitive ability” to tell who best represents their interests and who would vote “out of irrational hate” for someone else. George Monbiot (http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2000/06/09/about-george-monbiot/) points out:

“In the most powerful nation on Earth, 1 adult in 5 believes the sun revolves around the Earth; only 26 percent accept that evolution takes place by means of natural selection; two-thirds of young adults are unable to find Iraq on a map.”

“A student can now progress from kindergarten to a higher degree without any exposure to secular teaching. Southern Baptist beliefs pass intact through the public school system as well. A survey by researchers at the University of Texas in 1998 found that 1 in 4 of the state's public school biology teachers believed that humans and dinosaurs lived on Earth at the same time.”

These are precisely the people Sarah Palin was selected to represent and very likely lead as president. Personally I’m in favour of someone with their feet on the ground. Obama won’t be introducing community love-ins where everyone sings kumbayah, but he might pull away from “bomb bomb bombing Iran” in time for diplomacy to have a chance. McCain, like bush, seems to believe hearts and minds are there for the, er, taking by force.

The hard part is convincing the electorate it’s good for them but according to 80% of Americans and the rest of the planet they’ve stopped taking the republicans at face value. Bush has totally trashed the republican party and McCain cannot escape the connection no matter how often he says he claims to be a maverick. Incidentally it’s a mystery to me how strafing Vietnamese and getting caught doing it qualifies someone for leadership. We all know about it because he mentions it relentlessly.

Palin is already planning her 2012 campaign. Back in the real world, if she teamed up with the overblown and virtually fictional Joe the Plumber she could cut a record deal or even a line of lipstick before the media tires of her and moves on.

Could agree with the editorial page of our only WA newspaper, a long spread headed, America has now moved away from the Bush doctrine, with the Age of US Triumphalism now over.

Also notice Bush is doing very little to help McCain and his Repub's with the coming election.

Of course, one of the most foolish things the US ever did, was to shut its mind to little Israel going Nuko', yet with news in our same West' that Israel is still ready to dive-bomb Iran.

As a mature-age historian, one wonders what to think about it, especially when much of this ME trouble was predicted by our looney left academics, when I got my Post-Grad back in the early 1980's.

Just Wondering but not Wandering,
Regards, BB, Buntine, WA.

bennie,

Starting from you last para, only the poverty of thought can make the”poor republicans...through no fault of their own.” There is no virtue in human beings not making mistakes. No one is infallible, especially in the multi-variable dimensions of war. The virtue lies in swiftly correcting these mistakes. And this is exactly what Bush did when he adopted and implemented the Surge turning a losing war into a victorious one. This was the “major” and crucial policy that “was successfully implemented and carried out” with all the potential geopolitical developments that could flow into the region with the establishment of democracy in Iraq, and hence justifying fully the Bush Doctrine of democratizing the Middle East as a preventive cure for terrorism.

The liberal intelligentsia with their tongue stuck in the bitterness of being totally wrong with their gloomy prognostications about the outcome of the war, cannot and will not concede this ‘reversal of fortune’ for the Bush administration. But history, which has no taste either for bitterness or sweetness, will give the final verdict on Bush. And dare I say it will be a favourable one.

What the “lamb” Obama proposes to do is to deprive America of this tremendous strategic victory over the extremists of Islam by his pledge to pull out US forces from Iraq before the conditions for such a withdrawal are strategically ripe.

http://civcontraislam.typepad.com