There are two critical things that will happen within the next year that will decide the fate of this country. One is the 2008 election. I believe the current Republicans have slipped over the edge. They are authoritarians with serious fascist tendencies.
I was a Republican my whole life until the Bush administration and I was called fascist countless times, so I don't use the word lightly. Even Sandra Day O'Connor, the former Supreme Court Justice that put Bush into office warned about the beginnings of dictatorship in this country.
Republican nominees like Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney are constantly justifying and excusing torture, spying on innocent Americans, bombing countries that are absolutely no threat to us and running roughshod over the United States constitution. None of these are conservative principles. The Republican Party has become radicalized.Mike Huckabee is an evangelical Christian who doesn't believe in evolution, a position I find laughable and embarrassing, but I think he might be the most sane among them (Ron Paul is roughly right about foreign policy, but he is a different kind of radical in domestic policy). That's how bad the Republican Party has become.
If one of these guys wins next year, I really don't know what terrible direction this great country is going to spin off into. Luckily, they don't have a very good chance of winning. Every poll indicates the country gets it. They are sick of these radicals and want some sanity back in the country. But don't put it past a Democrat to blow this one. If ever a party was built to lose, it's the current Democratic Party built on weakness and capitulation. So, this election will be pivotal.
The second moment -- or non-moment -- that is absolutely critical is whether George W. Bush orders an attack against Iran. The results of this order would be catastrophic. Iran would retaliate all over the world, but mainly against our troops in Iraq (with their Shiite brethren in Iraq). Even more importantly, we would inflame the whole Muslim world. We would create this absurd world war against Islam that the idiot neo-conservatives are dreaming about. Let alone what it would do to oil prices and the world economy.
The same incompetent fools who gave us the Iraq War are now claim attacking Iran would be easy (apparently, according to these nuts the Iranian people would welcome an attack on their country). I don't think they even believe that. They're doing the same thing they did before the Iraq War -- try to imply that the war will be easy so that we are more likely to enter it. These band of merry fools are led by Dick Cheney.
ABC News is reporting today that giant bunker-buster bombs have been included in the latest Pentagon request as urgent needs in the battlefield. As the ABC story explains, the only place where we can use a Stealth bomber to drop these massive bunker-busters are ... Iran.
But luckily, there appears to be another side in this fight within the administration. And it is led by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen. These men appear to be arguing for sanity. Adm. Mullen warned this weak that attacking Iran would lead to risks that are "very, very high." He made it clear that it would in fact be a last resort, as opposed to the fake last resort that Cheney can't wait to fast forward to.
I know that even that kind of language is silly. Last resort to what? Do we have to strike before Iran takes over Cleveland? The whole thing is ridiculous. But Adm. Mullen was giving clear signals through his choice of words. And the signal was that he did not want to attack Iran on his watch.
They are also joined by the head of Central Command, Admiral Fallon, in their opposition to attacks against Iran. Apparently, Admiral Fallon has indicated that he would resign before giving such an order.
The head of Central Command, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and the Defense Secretary make for powerful allies. But never, ever underestimate the power of Dick Cheney. The force is strong with that one. Cheney has never really lost a bureaucratic war within the "Bush" administration. He has lost some battles, like the peace deal we made with North Korea (he was, of course, against it; it had the word "peace" in it). But Cheney always win the big ones.
So, I really don't think it's overstating it to say that the future of this Bush administration, this country and even the world turns on this internal administration battle. Unfortunately, the man who will decide who wins this battle is -- George W. Bush. The single most incompetent, unwise, and thoughtless leader this country has ever seen. The battlefield is his tiny mind. Who will gain control of it? Which way will "The Decider" go?
There's your great suspense for the next 15 months. Will Bush pull the trigger and start an even more colossal and disastrous war or will Gates and Mullen walk him back from the edge?
I don't know which way it's going to go. I wait nervously as the clock winds down. I have never wanted 15 months to go by quicker. Will we able to make it out of this administration in one piece? Will we be able to contain the damage done so far? Or will Bush open Pandora's box? Stay tuned.
Watch The Young Turks Here
Mo Rocca has appeared on a bunch of shows, including 'The Daily Show,' 'I Love the 80s,'...
Mo's Blog Roll
Resources
The Great War Within the Bush Administration
Posted Oct 25th 2007 4:28PM by Cenk Uygur
Filed under: Middle East, George Bush, Young Turks, Dick Cheney
Mo's Video
The Sound of a Smoke-Free Barack...Almost two years ago we speculated on how Barack Obama's voice would change if he stopped smoking. ...
Most Popular Stories
- Don't Like Goodbyes...
- Pittsburgh Steelers: Is it Time to get some Cheerleaders?
- How NOT to give an Oscar Acceptance Speech
- Could Jim Belushi Win the Nobel Peace Prize?
- Spring Break Sexy T-Shirt Removal Training!
- Quest for the Crown 5: Plastic Wrap to Make you Less Fat!
- Quest for the Crown 4: Work Those Heels!
Most Commented On
-
Coming Soon
Recent Comments
- Roert Dean on General Clark is Absolutely Right!
- Saint Brian the Godless on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- mac on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- mac on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Jerry Brown on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- FL Chick on Jesus Statue Stolen By Dog Haters?
- andreawalker419 on Breastfeeding an Eight-Year-Old?
Mo's Bio
Mo Rocca appears on a bunch of shows, including CBS News Sunday Morning (with the indescribably wonderful Charles Osgood), The Tonight Show on NBC, and NPR's Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me! He's a sometime judge on Iron Chef and was featured on Telemundo's Amore Descarado. Last year he starred on Broadway in the 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee. His expose "All the President's Pets" was published by Crown in 2004.
Top News Headlines
Political Machine Blog
- How Michelle Obama Turned Around Her Image
- Bad-News Poll Week for Obama, But Hey, Things Could Be Worse
- Stalking Tzipi Livni: British Law Emboldens Court in 'War Crimes' Crusade
- Conservative Christians Don't Crown 'Princess and the Frog'
- Obama in Copenhagen: For Politics or Science?
- Afghanistan Surge To Include Thousands More Private Contractors
- Matt Lewis on MSNBC: Debating Scwarzenegger vs. Palin on Climate Change
Reader Comments ( Page 8 of 8)
106. Somber,
When somebody in the media insults my faith and my intelligence, I'm going to speak up...freedom of speech. So, when in the future you want to discuss a particular topic...please, all that I am asking is to do it without insults directed at others beliefs.
Paul Thompson at 12:31PM on Oct 27th 2007
107. I frequently discuss said topics... usually on the Dinesh board. If we can not restrain our reactionary response and keep from straying down divergent topics then we will never be able to come to a resolution, which is exactly what those who manipulate the masses desires.
So. Once more, Paul, what is your opinion on the subject of impeachment if Rice would be the president until the 08' electon is resolved?
Somber at 2:08PM on Oct 27th 2007
108. Somber writes...So. Once more, Paul, what is your opinion on the subject of impeachment if Rice would be the president until the 08' electon is resolved?
Somber, I don't know Paul's opinion, but mine is that your "issue" is as irrelevant to this discussion as is Paul's.
Your scenario will not play out. It ain't gonna happen, Somber.
The impeachment process itself could never be completed in 15 months. There is no serious effort underway in Congress to impeach Bush OR Cheney, much less replace both of them with Condi Rice. In fact, there is NO CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS for such a fantasy.
Captain Negative at 12:05PM on Oct 28th 2007
109. So Cap Neg, you think that war fraud, war crimes, international law violation, and constitutional violations of the fourth, sixth, and eight amendments aren't impeachable offenses?
I do. And all playing the cynic will do is make sure that Bush and Cheney continue to be in a place of power where they can perpetuate this train wreck. Even if he is never removed from power, the focused scrutiny of the impeachment process will prevent him from continuing his perfidious rule. He will have to give sworn testimony before congress, which will provide further evidence. Putting Bush and Cheney under a microscope can only help our country.
Somber at 1:06PM on Oct 28th 2007
110. I cannot believe I read all of those posts. I was confused because I thought I was at a typical grad school repartee, going off topic in order to one-up and justify by incredibly lengthy and tiresome scientific and philosophical explainations of subject matter which increases exponentialy one another's need to feel intellectually superior.
And actually have the arrogance to ignore many pleas to stop the creation of your own topic and focus.
It is like this entire site has become a wet dream for Atheist's: people that are not allowed to disagree with Atheist's, people chastised for their beliefs, people Must remain subugate to Atheist's, people that fall asleep by the time they are finished reading a post by an Atheist, people that want it to end.
Oh my God, sorry for the use of 'God' Atheist's, I think I just described the Fascist regime under the rule of bush/Cheney, torture and a type of kidnapping of the innocent were even included. I stuck to the topic mistakenly, analogies are a girl's best friend, I suppose. Although hopefully I do not wind up on the Atheist's Blacklist, because I know I am already on this country's, being peaceful and tolerant of people's race, gender and religion. I am a horrid humane human!
rhodalee at 12:13AM on Oct 29th 2007
111. I am afraid it has become even worse by my incorrect spelling in areas, knowing it is highly unacceptable by many. Another error, another list. Sigh.....
rhodalee at 12:16AM on Oct 29th 2007
112. If you don't 'believe' in evolution, you got some 'splainin' to do.
There are literally thousands of documented speciation events, beginning (so far as I know, maybe earlier) in vivo in the nineteenth century with the Amearican Goatsbeard and in vitro with the evening primrose around 1905.
They haven't been remarkable for decades since they're so common.
These are events which give rise to a totally new never seen before species with a new chromosome number. They wouldn't have been available to put on the Ark.
If you know the genus Drosophila, and any jr high biology student should, there are plenty of species differentiation events recorded right there for just that one genus. Not all drosophalids are melanogaster any more and haven't been for a long time.
There are both in vitro and in vivo events documented.
I've never heard a religious apologist attempt to provide a non-secular explanation for this. Instead they just deny it happens.
If you don't 'believe' in evolution, you not only have to ignore speciation, you have to find fault in molecular genetics and DNA.
You would have to prove that DNA isn't doing what geneticists know it does, and that would require some major overhauls in general science.
If dna doesn't replicate, there would have to be something wrong with conventional organic chemistry that can't be found in any other chemical reaction.
This means a flaw in chemistry in general, but that would indicate something's wrong with the physics. But the physics depends on numbers, so number theory would also have to be wrong.
People tend to think that atheism is the opposite of theism. Not so. Theism draws on magic and faith to lay claim to its territory. Science continually reduces that territory to the detriment of faith. Theism's opposite is science, not some straw man called 'atheism'.
Science also cannot address theism since it's based on faith or superstition and doesn't have to prove or repeat itself, just issue whatever they want for dogma.
This makes them opposites, since the realm of superstition is diminished with the progress of science.
The church always concedes, though.
It usually takes a few hundred years and a lot of persecution of 'heretics' but the church always loses.
Some of the dogma gone by the wayside: the earth is flat, it's at the center of the universe, heaven's a solid dome with lights on it and water above it, stars fall out of the sky, birds are bats, rabbits chew cud, man will never fly, man will never reach outer space, there's controversy in the scientific community over evolution.
We've only waited 147 years, but we may not have all 300 this time.
But if you prefer scientific illiteracy, our country will allow that unless you try to force the same illiteracy onto the rest of the population.
At that time you're attacking the nation that granted you the right to have your beliefs.
Clif Kuplen at 4:41PM on Oct 31st 2007
113. There is a scientifically rigorous definition of 'theory' as in Theory of General Relativity, (which includes the theory, not law of gravity) and the pedestrian use of the same word as in 'I have this theory that my mother-in-law's a terrorist crackhead.'
They shouldn't be confused. The first is Theory, and you have to have the math and science or you can't play.
The second 'just a theory' and anyone with a pulse can play.
As to evolution, I've never heard anything sensible to oppose it in the forty years since I was in college. The more time passes, the weirder the apologies get.
Also for those who care about stuff like that evolution's mentioned in the bible.
Look in Ecclesiastes:
3:18 I said in mine heart concerning the estate of the sons of men, that God might manifest them, and that they might see that they themselves are beasts.
3:19 For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity.
That's really all Darwin was saying that got him in trouble - man IS an ape.
There's more evidence of that in human chromosome number 2 - it appears to be fusion of two monkey chromosomes. I think that's pretty universally accepted now.
Anyway, if you think Darwin represents present day thinking re evolution, you're wrong. You'll get more from molecular genetics these days than field studies or digs.
Finally if there's no evolution, why do new species keep arising with new chromosome numbers and inability to breed with their pregenitors, both in the field and in the lab? If evolution can't account for that, what does? any, um,....theories?
Remember, there aren't just a few, there are literally millions of speciation events and they happen just in the microbes in all the human lungs of all humanity at the rate of about 60 billion PER HOUR.
Since evolution can be reduced to simple well known well understood chemical reactions, you have to challenge chemistry, physics and eventually number theory to disprove evolution.
I guess you could cite Godel's incompleteness theorem or Hawking's older now disproven work to say nuthin' ain't nuthin' and it don't come from nowhere but the same works have the same effect on any divine 'theories' as well.
I keep saying, religion is stuck with evolution and it will eventually capitulate in light of evidence like it always has and always will with science to maintain its currency.
The bottom line is this for anti-evolutionists.
You will have to explain the appearance of thousands if not millions or billions of new species including new chromosome numbers that are documented to have arisen from known species in the last 140 years or so.
Again, the litany. The church no longer holds that the earth is flat, that the sky is a dome above it, that the sun rotates the earth, that it's the center of everything in the universe, that man will never fly, never reach outer space and so on.
Evolution will eventually get there with the church too, but the magic dogma break-in time is around 300 years and we have only gone about half that so far.
How about a field commission for Darwin so we can get back to arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
...and whether mothers in law are terrorist crackheads.
Hey, Endora sez it's ok - she won't turn darwin back into a frog!
Clif Kuplen at 7:27PM on Oct 31st 2007
114. Sorry for the delayed response, Somber. I really have nothing to answer for here. What you propose is ludicrous. I repeat, IT AIN'T gonna happen!
The very process of impeachment of either Dumbya or Big Dick Cheney would take more than 15 months and no matter what you or I want, it takes CONGRESS to impeach either one of the bastards.
There is no effort underway to impeach anyone. Live with it, just like the rest of us must.
Captain Negative at 8:29PM on Oct 31st 2007
115. I'm against torture, myself. The knee-jerk reaction when you hear about suspects being subjected to water-boarding is one of complete revulsion. It's the same feeling you get when you think about an atom bomb landing on Hiroshima and killing 80,000 people. The hard part comes when you have to think about how many lives would be lost if jihadist suspects were planning a nuclear attack and interrogators weren't tough enough to get the info out of a suspect. The hard part comes when you consider how aggressive the Japanese military juggernaut was, and how many lives would've been lost had we been forced to invade Japan and engage in a further-protracted war with them. My gut reaction to torture and atom bombs is "no way!" Until you are forced to consider the alternatives. Then the judgment is a little bit harder to make.
MattMic at 11:49PM on Nov 1st 2007