Glenn didn't make any speculation. He went to great pains to put up a great big verbal sign flashing--THIS IS NOT SPECULATION OF WHY HE RESIGNED.

Carter resigned. Glenn used the occasion to point out the growing disparity between Carter's stated positions and the Obama admin's.

Please point to one scintilla of speculation on Glenn's part about Carter's motives.

it will do any good whatsoever:

Glenn's article today is about the policy differences between Carter and the Obama administration.

Glenn's article is not about why Carter resigned.

The fact that you cannot distinguish between the two indicates some sort of mental disability on your part.

Or maybe you just are thrilled that somebody is paying attention to you.

"Alberto Gonzales Won't Be Charged Over Eavesdropping Testimony"

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2009/11/alberto_gonzales_quietly_trium.html#ixzz0Xmh2i3XB

Seems that Fredo, when given the choice of continuing to protect the Shrub and being tried in criminal court, decided to do some of his own brush clearing.

Good for Gonzo. So how's that part-time teaching gig at Crabbe County Community College working out for ya?

And speaking of "If you like what Bush did in the Middle East, you'll love Obama," here is resident Blackwater/Xe expert Jeremy Scahill on "Blackwater's Secret War in Pakistan."

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20091207/scahill

Much of the Bush Wrecking Crew is still in place, still helping The People during this economic crisis, still spreading freedom and democracy throughout the world and making friends for Americans.

While Obama avoids ever seeming like an angry black man who would dare to tell angry white people what to do.

BUSH WAIVES SAUDI TRAFFICKING SANCTIONS (SEX TRADE, CHILD SEX . . . )

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1798017

and this:

SAUDI PRINCES BUYING SEX SLAVES FROM AMERICA

http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1440646

and this

STATE DEPARTMENT SENSITIVITIES TOWARDS THE SAUDI ARABIAN INTERNATIONAL SLAVE TRADE

It has been an open secret in Washington that the State Department has been extremely sensitive to criticism of its actions regarding Saud Arabia and its princes. There has been an unusual amount of personnel turnover at the Saudi Arabian desk where officials showing the slightest tendency towards ethics and morality are either transferred or terminated to make an example to others. Why the State Department sensitivity? There are things going on in Saudi Arabia which are so embarrassing to Washington that if the United States citizenry knew, their worst fears about Washington would be corroborated.

http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Soc/soc.culture.europe/2006-07/msg00000.html

Am pretty sure slavery ranks along with torture on the human crimes Top 10. But well below the need for cheap oil and lots of profits for carbon fuel players.

Chris Sinnard wrote:

It is your fault and the fault of millions of LOTE chanting nose holders just like you, the people with the power, all over the United States, that have led us to where we are, not Libertarians and noninterventions who have no seat at the table of Power. You don't ruin the world from the circle of deviance.

And that, Cuchulain, is very hard to disagree with.

Reminds me of that moment in Glenn's last appearance on Ratigan's show when Pataki handed Jerrold Nadler his ass in a handbasket by asking: What is the rationale for trying some Gitmo detainees in NYC and some by military commission??

Being Jabba the Hut, Nadler tried but could not sink any lower in his chair, murmuring, "I guess there isn't one."

Scorch.

You have far too much anger in what you write, leading you to overstatement and providing lots of openings for others to attack your positions.

But, damn it, I agree with every main point you make.

Now, if I could just get those 9/11 blinders off you . . .

Hey, here's a start. What do all of these folks have in common?

Dr. Benito Que

Donald C. Wiley

Vladimir Pasechnik

Set Van Nguyen

Victor Korshunov

Ian Langford

Tanya Holzmayer

Guyang Huang

Using Google, you'll get the point after the first two or three.

and you are correct: a dictatorship is one possible outcome of continued economic turmoil and collapse that should not be discounted.

But now may be the time for you to offer your evidence and me offer mine; otherwise it's just another Salon spitting contest, right?

Here is John Williams from shadowstats.com, a Wall St. adviser on CNN:

http://sciencestage.com/v/15080/3/1-cnn-your-money:-talks-of-great-depression-coming.html

Then there is Russian economics prof Igor Panarin saying much the same thing: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123051100709638419.html

He sees the break up of the United States similar to what happened to the USSR.

Then of course there is Dr. Doom--Nouriel Roubini, who says there *might* be a recovery in 2010 and 2011 but he isn't betting on it and so is advising putting everything in cash or cashlike instruments. http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2008/fortune/0812/gallery.market_gurus.fortune/index.html

Gerald Celeste is one of the primary towncriers of "Obamageddon," as he calls it. Celeste is founder of Trends Research Institute. http://www.trendsresearch.com/ I tend to dismiss him for his wisecracking, shoot-from-the-hip style except that the damn guy has been right about so much.

Which set of predictions one gives credence to probably says more about one's emotional outlook than anything else.

But you're right--turmoil and upheaval could bring greater, not less, corporate and government control.

More video for your scary pleasure:

http://videobomb.com/posts/show/19812

Your alphabet may be cryptic and archaic, but--

An Alliance of Progressives, Libertarians, and Paleoconservatives . . . is about the only hope our nation has of restoring our Constitutional republic and abolishing the Empire being run for and by the financial and corporate oligarchy

With the coming financial collapse in America, ghost malls and food riots, I think we've got a chance.

As forecaster Gerald Celente is fond of saying, "When someone has lost everything--their job, their home, their health care, their pension--they tend to lose it.