the people of latin america will not be astonished. neither will the phillipinos. nor the people of south east asia.

the iranians and iraqis won't be surprised. nor american veterans.

what is it about 'conservatives', that they regard anyone living on land or resources they want as red devils, greasers, gooks, slopes or ragheads, 'terrorists' all...

what exactly are they 'conserving'? shouldn't they be called 'killers'?

they told a different story in your school books, but they lied. there's only one cure, real democracy: rule by the people, through citizen initiative, open government, and direct election.

that's what you need to get the direction of the nation in line with the welfare of the people. right now, you've just got elective oligarchy, a different critter entirely. it was designed by the rich and powerful, to preserve their wealth and power. it works fine, for those goals.

if you're part of the other 90%, get behind mike gravel's 'initiative for democracy' or something similar.

time's running out.

but setting national policy by electing a president can not reach past the next election.

that's why a democracy with citizen initiative has survival capabilities that 'command' societies like the usa do not.

it is not clear if the human race can meet the challenge of global warming even if "ww2" mobilization is achieved. leaving the matter in the hands of the current president, whoever he may be, is even less likely to succeed.

the plans of candidates are mere election promises at best. they are not even within the capabilities of a president to deliver, if special interests control sufficient members of congress. trying to meet 21st century problems with 18th century political structures is likely to be futile, like carrying the world's trade on wooden wagons and sailing ships. good luck with that.

there really is a down-side to greed, arrogance, and brutality. it's a shame america's rich and well-connected can't be made to pay it.

'president' should be replaced with 'head clerk.'

'commander in chief' should be replaced by 'referendum clerk'.

and finally, the american people should declare themselves the masters of the nation, not some politician with a big smile and deep pockets.

in short: the flaw is the absence of democracy.

do you think nixon and lbj were any different?

they killed many more, it's true. and 'free-fire zones' 'agent orange' and the 'phoenix program' were not only war crimes, they were acknowledged policy, not mistakes.

they were different, i guess- more effective monsters. reagan, on he other hand, only presided over terrorism on central american countries, not enough of them to count. but he did his best.

i am not amazed to hear that americans are worried about their reputations. you believe your own history books. but relax, bush hasn't changed your reputation as much as you think.

[btw,it's the 40th anniversary of mylai, remember? do you really imagine you have any respect in the world?]

it's not who they screw, as long as it's not the public.

on inventing new crimes. it's the sort of innovation that continues after earning an honest buck becomes too hard and not rewarding enough. besides, some people don't know how.

every four years, the jerks line up for 'democracy' drill. "choose a president, you lucky people!" from a selection of two. hmm, maybe not so lucky. still, two is better than one.

unless one is dubya, and the other is disqualified by too much education, intelligence and character. too much for the american voter, any way. twice. but then the american voter backed nixon twice too. do you see a pattern here? americans prefer crooks, fools, good ol' boys. they yearn to be be cheated, stole from and sent to war.

bush is america, his so-called lies are just the fresh paint on the national character: crooked, violent, bigoted, and ignorant of anything going on across the county line. they ain't lies, they're the national country music.

mccain,on the other hand, is merely a garden variety war-monger. he got it all wrong.

this usually was covered up by writing the history books, but lately america hasn't been winning. south east asia and central america were wars that weren't necessarily to america's advantage, and the middle east has been a disaster.

"mission accomplished" might better have been said by bin laden or khomeini.

"i'm not bush, and mccain is."

that should do it. otoh, the wise, kind, generous, brave and reverent american electorate twice elected bush, and not forgetting tricky dicky, can't be trusted to see the force of this argument.

so i'm hoping bho has a fall-back plan. maybe he has convinced that blonde dolly lobbyist to tell all in the fall?

i can't imagine how to govern that place. the social turmoil consequent on the 'capitalization' of the place is bad enough, but they have to do it when resources are running out, and global warming threatens disaster. these last two problems, btw, are caused by the usa, more than anyone else.

the early days of america's industrialization weren't pretty either, and the latest pustules on the face of 'mature' capitalism are scaring america's financial mandarins worse than anything since the depression.

in short, sing together: "pot don't mock the kettle, there but for the grace of god, i'd ruther settle for beijing, than try to run in baghdad."