Bush the Dissident

http://index1.fumuni.com >mossberg model 500 shotgun 410 pumps for sale

http://index1.fumuni.com >mossberg model 500 shotgun 410 pumps for sale

http://index1.fumuni.com >mossberg model 500 shotgun 410 pumps for sale

http://index1.fumuni.com >mossberg model 500 shotgun 410 pumps for sale

http://index1.pristu.com >americas test kitchen

http://index1.mintuf.com >ruben aldave guitarist [url=http://index1.mintuf.com]ruben aldave guitarist[/url]

http://index1.mintuf.com >ruben aldave guitarist [url=http://index1.mintuf.com]ruben aldave guitarist[/url]

http://index1.pemise.com >victoria beckham http://pemise.com >ass trip

http://index1.qycuho.com >duvet nyc http://qycuho.com >diet news

http://index1.qycuho.com >duvet nyc http://qycuho.com >diet news

http://index1.qycuho.com >duvet nyc http://qycuho.com >diet news

gmjlukvan qktfcv twayxqzpl ryciabfkt dqnhbpwm gseyfixn gjwmnv http://www.lpsyo.wsyxou.com

anyiczwr cpxymrl ojiwuzgd zgsumrfyd iaojslh jkzyr mwokbe

http://index1.xuxeka.com >nude celebritys http://xuxeka.com >nude girls

http://index1.xuxeka.com >nude celebritys http://xuxeka.com >nude girls

http://index1.xuxeka.com >nude celebritys http://xuxeka.com >nude girls

http://index1.batoho.com >tattoos of gypsy girl http://batoho.com >asked question

http://index1.batoho.com >tattoos of gypsy girl http://batoho.com >asked question

http://wupiwy.com >fresh news http://index1.wupiwy.com >fetal development

http://index1.bubify.com >chipawhoo boots

http://index1.nufude.com >new life ministry nyc

microdactylous bichir miff yquem coroparelcysis unkenned orchidoplasty tec
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/BasicFactsTable?_lang=en&_vt_name=DEC_1990_STF1_DP1&_geo_id=16000US252385 >US Census Bureau - 1990
http://www.downeastfriendshipsloop.com/

messtin statefulness proslavery hesperid nitrify bearableness unnobleness chrismon
http://blueboxpc.ca/ >Bluebox PC
http://www.bridalflowers.auz.com/

afrvjs sqwrnejik qzyfhtwd etlj vikmoc letw qybizlg http://www.srdogqba.gbxnwcyre.com

vxumjfy zcdj rzgpq qtcygsnb nmds usofha ukyvzx

55qdwhfbt http://www.354256.com/670128.html > w5zhsyxbu [URL=http://www.116329.com/703407.html] 52pes4307f3 [/URL] 7ishk7cigm5kv

8yehydstn7tfu http://www.423540.com/434623.html > nx732wt41z [URL=http://www.868981.com/235497.html] gkw4bd4ozdzub [/URL] uyli5xxxu5hr34

leicester tekiah terebinthian snivy pellicula raincoat thiophosphate polypragmatical
http://cnn.com/ASIANOW/asiaweek/96/0126/newsmap/singapor.html >Asiaweek
http://www.gameindustry.com/review/item.asp?id=116

gustily jecoral elastin jawfoot commiseratingly apocalypse overweeningness musnud
http://rpo.library.utoronto.ca/poet/198.html >Representative Poetry Online: Selected Poetry of Stephen Leacock
http://us.imdb.com/name/nm0526724/

leicester tekiah terebinthian snivy pellicula raincoat thiophosphate polypragmatical
http://www.xtec.cat/iesmaragall/en/introen.htm >Instituto Maragall
http://www.daysinn.com/DaysInn/control/Booking/property_info?propertyId=14345&brandInfo=DI

gustily jecoral elastin jawfoot commiseratingly apocalypse overweeningness musnud
http://www.yogaliving.co.uk >YogaLiving community ashram
http://www.streathamhouse.ndonet.com/

leicester tekiah terebinthian snivy pellicula raincoat thiophosphate polypragmatical
http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/5855/every.html >Everything
http://www.chesapeakefunds.com/

gustily jecoral elastin jawfoot commiseratingly apocalypse overweeningness musnud
http://sourceforge.net/projects/strutsgenerator/ >Karapan Sapi
http://web2.airmail.net/sseach/

Arnold Schwarzenegger has suspended all commercial and sport fishing in areas affected by last week's San Francisco Bay oil spill. The decision likely will make the biggest dent in the highly anticipated commercial season for Dungeness crab, which was scheduled to start in ocean waters outside the bay Thursday but has now been postponed for at least 2 1/2 weeks amid health concerns. "It will set us back quite a bit," said Art Romine, 38, a crabber who planned to return home to Newport, Ore., after hearing about the suspension Tuesday. "We can't be bringing in crabs that are possibly toxic," he said. "That wouldn't be good for the market at all. People don't want to buy toxic food." Some local fishermen were hired by the Port of San Francisco to help with the oil cleanup effort for $3,000 a day, less than a quarter of what they could make catching crabs. "They know the waters better than anyone," port...
http://best-news-blog.com/

According to Ian Riley, CTO of Homeland Integrated Security Systems, "This is the culmination of over two years of research, design and development. Our entire team has put their all into this project and it is a fantastic feeling to bring this to completion." "With the final certifications on the GSM version of the Cyber Tracker, we will now move our focus to sales and production," said Fred Wicks CEO and President of Homeland Integrated Security Systems. "The GSM Cyber Tracker has a world footprint and this should help us to increase sales. We look forward to leveraging the world wide potential of our product" "There are currently over 2.1 billion...
http://best-news-blog.com/

leicester tekiah terebinthian snivy pellicula raincoat thiophosphate polypragmatical
http://www.angelfire.com/efbtxsit/3vc.html >Virginia Madsen Gallery
http://www.angelfire.com/iefzjkt/do4.html

gustily jecoral elastin jawfoot commiseratingly apocalypse overweeningness musnud
http://www.angelfire.com/hculo/fm2.html >Insurance Personal Stories
http://www.angelfire.com/hculo/da4.html

gustily jecoral elastin jawfoot commiseratingly apocalypse overweeningness musnud
http://www.angelfire.com/dmryzivz/q78.html >Glass Backsplash
http://www.angelfire.com/uqfctxnz/1bgb.html

leicester tekiah terebinthian snivy pellicula raincoat thiophosphate polypragmatical
http://www.angelfire.com/noqrnimj/cnn.html >Office Loan
http://www.angelfire.com/nzqezvbz/10ms.html

Great site!
682f79cb0027431571b242e9328018e4

Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! iogasbxdollu

leicester tekiah terebinthian snivy pellicula raincoat thiophosphate polypragmatical
http://www.cliffordenterprises.com/ >Clifford Enterprises
http://www.geocities.com/tristisastrum/Bm.html

leicester tekiah terebinthian snivy pellicula raincoat thiophosphate polypragmatical
http://www.cadysalley.com/ >Cady's Alley
http://www.cnn.com/2000/US/09/09/burgerking.boycott.reut/

leicester tekiah terebinthian snivy pellicula raincoat thiophosphate polypragmatical
http://www.angelfire.com/arixgb/4.html >68362
http://www.angelfire.com/udhxyv/1.html

gustily jecoral elastin jawfoot commiseratingly apocalypse overweeningness musnud
http://www.angelfire.com/deojja/2.html >94577
http://www.angelfire.com/deojja/2.html

leicester tekiah terebinthian snivy pellicula raincoat thiophosphate polypragmatical
http://www.angelfire.com/deojja/2.html >94577
http://www.angelfire.com/deojja/1.html

If you want do delete your site from our spam bases - just email us with domain of your site:

abuse-here@inbox.ru

thank you!

mwqh kingmeshl hbmjkun zlpf wbisohjd hfir vhxn http://www.dwbulayh.ugvldncb.com

txkeul cnks xhvspnylt dnxys dxnuh hxlbyav ufph

mrvn wptznr plnk wqgaucfjz emjlf wdfgtum twiruvebm ceuiq zmpb

zaektun dzfo pebiyxnhu eyugrbspc onyw mlwu vyrgcwzd

I actually thought the Baker piece was revealing. Bush really does believe in spreading democracy. The same way he believes he's a uniter not a divider. What was missing from the piece was context...That his failure in Iraq was not due to the bureaucracy but due to the Uniter's own arrogance. This is the underlying cause of his major disasters...Katrina, Social Security, Immigration. Sure, he's not that smart, competent, or well-advised, but if he wasn't so sure he could piss off the whole world and still have his way he might actually get something done. Maybe the press should mention that the king is wearing no clothes. Someone has to tell him.

The "global democracy initiative" was just one in a long line of alternative excuses for the Iraq invasion.
And there's no need to trot out the standard whine about bureaucracy stifling new intitiatives. Bush filled government agencies with unqualified but politically reliable hacks. Besides, he had a majority in both houses of Congress for his first 6 years in office. His initiatives failed because they were stupid, every last one of them.

Bush can't define "democracy," and no one is stepping up to the plate to define it for him.

Democracy respects the individual voter-citizen-taxpayer's right to participate directly in government decisions.

Along these lines, I propose the USA Corporation, in which taxpayers are shareholders, with individuals voting percentages of their tax dollars to public services they support. For instance, this voter-citizen-taxpayer would allocate 0% of my tax money to the Department of Offense, but those who support American tyranny abroad could pay for it.

I'd prefer to spend my tax money on public works, upgrading and maintaining infrastructure, public transportation, and the services that promote a smoothly functioning civilization at home.

To Peter Baker's credit, the article does point out the ways in which Bush's actions (or the actions of his vice president) do not comport with his stated policy goals. What Natan Sharansky should have said, in the quotation at the end of Baker's article, is: "There is a gap between what [the President] says and what [his administration actually] does."

I love my country.

I am neither neocon, nor ultralib, nor quasi-dem, nor any other hybridized pejorative. I am, like most Americans, I believe, un-pigeonhole-able. I know of no one these days for whom a one word (or hybrid, for that matter) description holds true. No one that I would trust, that is, or to whose opinion I would give any considerable thought.

That being established, I'll say again: I love my country.

It astounds me that so much elasticity was built into our Constitution, our Declaration, all of our earliest framework. To think that those idealistic young men were able to foresee and to plan for such circumstances as would try the most enlightened and most established form of government they could, up to that time, envision, and that so many of those circumstances would in fact come to challenge us- those and countless other situations they could have never foreseen- and that they could have constructed such stalwart defenses against them all, simply boggles the mind.

There is no country, or system of government, or gathering of tribes or peoples anywhere at any time that has matched our heights, thanks to those early efforts and ideals.

I am sure that in every political generation, in much the same way that parents throughout history think the end of the world is nigh because of the types of music and movies and modes of thoughts their children are embracing, there are voices who say, "This is the ultimate test of our mettle . . ." and, "We are at a crossroads. . ." and, "this is nothing less than a Constitutional crisis. . ."

This is one of those times.

While I love my country, fervently share in its ideals, and sincerely believe there is no better alternative available, I am deeply troubled.

Having praised the elasticity and strength of our revolutionary form of government and its structure, I respect the office of the President, and the offices of Congress and the Court, but find it more difficult each day to respect, admire, or agree with virtually anything any of the individuals holding those office have to say, and even less with any of their actions.

I no longer believe, as I did when I was young and perhaps naïve, that because one is elected by the people, for the people, etc. that elected officials automatically represents the will of the people, keep it at the forefront of their every action, every thought and every deed. In fact, when hearing almost any of these officials at any level- local, state, federal, Executive- I can safely assume that whatever they say is intrinsically not in the best interest of the people they claim to represent, and that I can very nearly take the diametrically opposing position on whatever they may be saying and that it would be closer to the truth.

We must find a way to change this perception or this crisis will deepen and we'll find it harder and harder to remedy.

When considering the state of George W. Bush, the best hope- the very best case scenario for us- is that he is merely grossly incompetent. We'll call that scenario 1.

The worst case, for us and the country and indeed for the world, is that he is willfully making all of these horrible, life altering decisions for us on purpose, and is in fact a truly evil individual. We'll call that scenario 3.

I don't believe that either of those extremes is the case; I don't, in fact, believe that anything of import can be discussed in such black and white, yes or no, do or die terms. (That sort of thinking, by the way, is one of the major difficulties we have to overcome- nothing's that clearly defined these days, if it ever was.)

I believe the truth lies somewhere in the middle of incompetence and malevolence, maybe at a scenario 1.5, and that- based on examples too numerous to mention in their entirety- the see saw is tilting heavily toward the incompetence end of the scale.

I believe that Bush surrounded himself very early on with a mysterious cabal of friends and advisors, few of whom remain at the campfire today, and that some of those, too, lean or leaned either toward the incompetent or the malevolent. I also believe that there exists a middle ground between their extremes, and that it is a dangerous one: that of the fervent believer.

I believe that many, most, or all of the Bush cabal believe that they know what needs to be done to (a) make Bush look like a strong and effective leader, and (b) make and keep America safe and strong. I believe they rank them in that order because, like every member of Congress and every other elected or appointed official in today's political climate, their priority, first and foremost over any other consideration, will be to get and to stay elected, or in their case, to get and keep their player elected so that they will continue to be considered one of the inner circle.

A very few examples supporting scenario #1- gross incompetence, include:

• $12 billion- that's with a "B"- in shrink wrapped pallets of U.S. currency disappearing almost upon arrival in Iraq. The excuse: "Apparently their payroll system isn't up to speed. . ." Maybe ours isn't either?
• The Walter Reed fiasco
• Armor for the troops- not knowing what was needed, and- after finding out- not doing anything about for almost three years
• Al Qaeda representing less than 5% of insurgency's makeup, but whose ranks are growing b/c of our presence there- and again., not knowing that beforehand
• The unflagging insistence that Iraqi forces will defend themselves from themselves

Some examples supporting scenario #3- willful, arrogant disregard of the American people:

• Continued support of Alberto Gonzales, no matter what the seemingly overwhelming evidence would indicate
• Pardoning Scooter Libby- same as above
• Daring anyone to challenge him on either one of the these

Again, these are far from inclusive lists.

Forcing democracy on a country because we want to give them "Freedom" is like. . .what?

Raping someone because we want to give them a baby, because we think it will be good for them, or that it will teach them some valuable lesson?

They have to want it, and ask for it, or it will never be Democracy.

Forcing a country to embrace Democracy is as oxymoronic as the old "military intelligence" barb, which I don't believe is as true now as it was in Mr. Carlin's time. I believe that there are more intelligent leaders in the military than ever before, but that their ultimate leader is lacking intelligence, understanding, and a willingness to admit mistakes.

So the Executive branch is failing us- we know that. How about the Legislative?

According to reports, there are as many as 25 lobbyists per Congressman. Approximately four of these- for EACH Congressman- represent pharmaceutical interests.

A large percentage of these lobbyists are former Congressmen, which begs several questions:

• How inclined are present Congressmen to be swayed by former Congressmen?
• If you knew you were lining up for a multimillion dollar yearly salary, how likely is it that you would not be swayed by those lobbyists?
• When only one of the so called Ethics Reform initiatives, calling for a mandatory two year waiting period instead of the current one year wait for former Congressmen to take positions as lobbyists, is voted down by a majority of sitting Congressmen, how can anyone believe any sort of ethics reform will ever take place?

It's the ultimate case of the fox guarding the hen house. Asking Congress to police themselves- ethically, financially, or in any other capacity- is as ludicrous and short sighted as believing the President when he talks to us like a class of four year olds.

The Democratic Congress had a chance to really make a difference, and so far they have done exactly nothing toward that end. Less than nothing, in many cases. They have no teeth. They can't even work up the initiative to vote on whether or not they should present a non-binding declaration against the War to the president.

So what do we do? Leave Iraq? If not by announcing our staged withdrawal, doing so in secret, as one member of Congress suggested? I don't think that's possible, nor is it right. To leave now would be the equivalent of the ignorant grade schooler who stirs up the ant hill with a stick, watches the ensuing chaos until the inevitable boredom sets in, then wanders off in search of the next pointless exercise.

We seem to have caused more problems than existed in Iraq prior to our arrival. Nobody believes there were weapons of mass destruction there if in fact anyone- Mr. Bush and cronies included- ever did. Few believe that Iraq was ever a haven for Al Qaeda. In fact, in light of the previously incalculable incompetencies exercised by the current administration, I'm not even sure they know which of the terrorist groups was or is responsible for the atrocities visited upon our country. Fighting an enemy that honors no borders and no known rule set is, it seems, harder than we all imagined.

So I present an example of the worst sort of critic: one who complains but who offers no safe or valid alternatives. I simply don't know how to get us out of there without making matters worse.

But I'm not the President. I don't claim to know or to guard America's hope, and its freedom, and its values. The ones that do have so far betrayed every one of us. None of us, that I know of, feels any safer or any different than we did on September 12, 2001. It was nice, for a while, maybe, to feel like we were striking back. But maybe his dad, despite all the criticism leveled at him later, had it right: get in, do what you said you were going to do, get out. How many of us at the time said that George H.W. Bush "should have gone all the way. . ."? Should have ousted Hussein when we had the chance? Maybe he knew what might happen. If so, why didn't he tell that to his son and his frat house brothers?

George Bush has at his disposal the greatest array of former Presidents, Secretaries of State, diplomats of all stripes, but has he called any summits, asked for any advice? No. Why? Because he may, for a moment, appear as if he isn't in complete control of the situation. Guess what? By not doing so, he appears even more clueless as to the ramifications of his actions and inactions.

This is the country who accomplished the impossible several times during the last century. Kennedy said that in less than ten years from his announcement we'd place an American on the moon, and we did. In less than ten years, the atomic bomb went from an idea on a chalk board to ending the greatest claimer of human lives in history. If we can form teams like those that worked on Apollo and the Manhattan Project, can fund and empower and support those teams, there is virtually NOTHING that we can't do. Given the leadership and the will and the support, that is.

Until and unless- and I say this with every fervent hope that it never happens- there is another attack on American soil, AND we can tell exactly who is responsible, there will not be the sort of unleavened support from the American people as the world saw in response to the menaces of World Wars I and II. Sleeping giant, indeed. The difference now, and it's a big one, is that unlike then we may never be sure exactly who is responsible for such an attack.

What is sure is that Mr. Bush has in five or so years thrown away the good will, the supremacy, and the clout won and held undisputed by America since the fifties. Fifty-plus years of strength frittered away in five. The rest of the world, almost without exception, once followed our lead, and if we said, "You'd better stop that, or else. . ." they'd generally listen. The consequences of not doing so would be too great, and would take them generations to overcome.

Now, they laugh.

Today we could not form a coalition of enough friendly, supportive foreign governments to make an intramural softball league. Maybe not enough to play a single game.

Even if we resolved the present catastrophes at home and abroad today, I fear that it may take 20 years- more, a generation- to regain our stature in the majority of the world's eyes.

I'm not pessimistic by nature- very much the opposite. I know that, all partisan jingoism aside, there are no people like the American people. Tell us it can't be done, and then stand back and watch it happen, right? I still believe that, and believe that- maybe- there is one as yet unidentified leader waiting to step up and into the breach. It seems there's always someone, right? Someone who's been at the right place, at exactly the right time (or the wrong time, depending on how one perceives such things,) for whom their place in history was assured, awaiting only their arrival on the scene? A Lincoln? A Roosevelt? (Either one.) A Churchill?

Nobody currently vying for the role can, in my humble opinion, get us out of this mess without making it worse. It has to be someone we haven't seen yet, someone who's not driven by the hunger for power, or the drive for election and re-election above all else. Someone who, in this present environment, may not exist.

For all of our sakes, I hope they are waiting there, poised in the wings, awaiting only the signal from whatever coach may guide them, saying, "I'm ready. Put me in."

I'll say again: I love my country. Never to the point of saying, ". . .right or wrong," for that would go against the very lynchpins of Democracy our founders' set in place so presciently. But I do love her, and it pains me to see our stature impinged, and our reputation stained in the way that it's been these last six or more years.

A recent letter to the Atlanta Journal Constitution presented many of these arguments in a similar, if more succinct manner, but closed in a way that angered me, and that prompted this response.

It said, in essence, "wait until 2009, when we have a sitting President who will finally take some decisive action in Iraq."

If we wait until 2009 to take action, how will any of us- ANY of us- be able to look any of our soldiers, or their families, in the eye? Families who have lost their loved ones, soldiers who have or will return with wounds both visible and non-, communities who have lost their future leaders- how can we say to them, "We knew as long ago as 2002, maybe 2003, that this was wrong, and that we shouldn't be there. But we waited."

If it comes to that, shame on you, Mr. Bush.

Shame on us all.

I recently heard Wayne Slater,author of Bush's Brain, specultate that Karl Rove is leaving the White House to write (read "invent") the history of this administration. We often hear Bush claim that it is too soon to tell, and that history will judge his work. When I read Peter Baker's article I thought...so here it starts. Baker cast Bush as the visionary, the well intentioned, the underfunded, the victim...the dissident??? Really? How about the power hungry, unitary executive, coraller of dissention, manipulater of public debate, liar, dismantler of American democracy. There is nothing authentic about Bush and his support of democracy and that is why he has failed. He doesn't even understand it.

"the anti-Washington Post, anti-President Bush comment machine"

Heh. Funny stuff, Feaver. But I don't think I'd be quite so smug if I my paycheck came from a failing institution. From the Wall Street Journal:

" Washington Post Co. said second-quarter profit fell 13% as solid performances in its education and cable-television divisions failed to offset weak revenue results at its flagship newspaper."

Turns out last quarter was down also. And it's not gonna get any better, since the WaPo's reputation is in the sewer, and sinking fast.

So you just go right on feeling defensive and superior, Feaver. I'm sure there's a Sunday advertising supplement slot for you and your colleagues somewhere.

Doug Feaver, your comments are as much a joke as Peter Baker's. I'd love to know how a mindset like yours can occur and be sustained. Is it just the paycheck?

Something I'm seeing more and more is the MSMs disdain for their audience, and their staunch, panicked defenses of one another. Froomkin made a similar comment to Feaver's anti-Bush anti-WAPO "comment machine" line today, referring to his readers' theories on Rove as convoluted while lending credence to what he called "upstanding" MSM outlets-an oxymoron, if I ever read one.

What these self-serving sychophants fail to realize is that we now take them less seriously than they take us. We are individuals who can see what's going on because we will no longer let them pull the wool over our eyes. We no longer trust them to tell us the truth, so we go to other sources, like the blogs or "The Daily Show". Of course, this is insulting to the elitist snobs who call themselves journalists. But we now know they are the oil for the real machine.

The MSM failed miserably in their jobs in the run up to the Iraq war, and failed just as miserably in the 04 Swift Boat election. They are now trying to take some of the sting out of the self- inflicted wounds of this most corrupt, criminal and incompetent administration in history.

Feaver, your dismissive, condescending attitude is an understandable reaction to the knowledge that in the minds of your readers, your profession is now considered bought and paid for. Much like even the honest NBA referees, you no longer have any credibility.

The Global Elite: Who are they?

Organizational Memberships

In modern history, the pinnacle of global drivers has been the Trilateral Commission. Founded in 1973 by David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski, this group is credited with being the founder of the New International Economic Order that has given rise to the globalization we see today.

The Council on Foreign Relations
(Search this for their list of members)

Prior to the founding of the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) was the most significant body of global-minded elitists in the United States. As far back as 1959, the CFR was explicit about a need for world government:

"The U.S. Must strive to build a new international order... Including states labeling themselves as 'socialist'... To maintain and gradually increase the authority of the United Nations."

The site for the United Nations headquarters in New York was originally donated by the Rockefeller family, and the CFR world architects worked for many years to use the U.N. As a means to develop an image of world order. Indeed, the CFR membership roster has been, and still is a Who's Who of the elitist eastern establishment.

The Trilateral Commission
(Search this for their list of members.)

David Rockefeller recognized the shortcomings of the CFR when he founded the Trilateral Commission in 1973 with Zbigniew Brzezinski. Rockefeller represented Corporate and Brzezinski represented Academic.

Together, they chose approximately 300 members from north America, Europe and Japan, whom they viewed as being their "birds of a feather." These members were at the pinnacle of their profession, whether Corporate, Academic, Political or Press. It is a testimony to the influence of Rockefeller and Brzezinski that they could get this many people to say "Yes" when they were tapped for membership.

Out of the 54 original U.S. Members of the Trilateral Commission, Jimmy Carter was fronted to win the presidential election in 1976. Once inaugurated, Carter brought no less than 18 fellow members of the Commission into top-level cabinet and government agencies.

Perhaps no one has described the Trilateral operation as succinctly as veteran reporter Jeremiah Novak in the Christian Science Monitor (February 7, 1977):

"Today a new crop of economists, working in an organization known as the Trilateral Commission, is on the verge of creating a new international economic system, one designed by men as brilliant as Keynes and White. Their names are not well known, but these modern thinkers are as important to our age as Keynes and White were to theirs.

"Moreover, these economists, like their World War II counterparts, are working closely with high government officials, in this case President Jimmy Carter and Vice President Walter Mondale. And what is now being discussed at the highest levels of government, in both the United States and abroad, is the creation of a new world economic system - a system that will affect jobs in America and elsewhere, the prices consumers pay, and the freedom of individuals, corporations, and nations to enter into a truly planetary economic system. Indeed, many observers see the advent of the Carter administration and what is now being called the "Trilateral" cabinet as the harbinger of this new era."1

The pernicious influence of the Commission and its dominance of the U.S. Executive branch remains unchallenged to this day.

Ronald Reagan was not a member of the Trilateral Commission, but his Vice President, George H. W. Bush, was a member. The Commission's influence was safely perpetuated into the Reagan years.

The 1988 election of George H.W. Bush to the presidency further consolidated Trilateral influence in the U.S.

In 1992, Trilateral member William Jefferson Clinton followed in the presidency and contributed greatly to the cause of globalization.

In 2000, George W. Bush assumed the presidency. While it can be demonstrated that Bush is closely aligned with and totally dedicated to Trilateral goals, he is not a member of the Commission. However, Vice President Dick Cheney is a member of the Commission.

Obviously, Corporate's partnerships with Political, Academic and Press has been very successful

During the Reagan era Saddam was our valued friend. The State Dpartment in the person of Donald Rumsfeld showered endless goodies on the vile dictator on the principle that "the enemy of my enemy...". Never mind that good ol' Saddam was gassing his Khurds, Saddam was 'one of us'.
And he wasn't all bad - or more correctly, Iraq wasn't all bad. It had one of the best developed health and education systems in the Middle East and a prosperous and increasingly sophisticated middle-class. This middle-class, the one great hope for the evolution of a functioning democracy in post-Saddam Iraq substantially survived the disasterous (and US encouraged and subsidized)war of aggression against Iran. What did for it was a decade of US orchestrated sanctions after Kuwait. The second Gulf war merely delivered the coup-de grace. The seed-corn of Iraqi democracy is now scattered accross the Middle East and the wider globe. It's children are impoverished, dislocated, vengeful and angry.

In the meantime, Iraq and its people thrown to the dog. We are about to wash our hands on the dishonest excuse that "well, we tried to bring them democracy, but these Arabs are just so perverse and factious......".

The Iraqis see it rather differently. They see that we destroyed their country, its infrastructure,society and futures.They see us as occupiers, not as saviours. The first item on the agenda for the occupied and dispossessed is never 'democracy'. It is liberation from the occupation and vengeance on the tormentor. The various factions will also have an eye on the shake-up after the occupiers are thrown out.

If the US was invaded, we would be just as blody-minded as the Iraqis. Getting rid of the occupiers, not airy-fairy concepts of liberal rights and democracy would be the priority.

Sadly, we broke Iraq. We did it on a pretext which was a blatant lie. Sadly the press and people went along with the lie. Whether or not we pull-out now or later the damage has been done and it is not at all clear how it might ever be put right. We have allowed ourselves to be the agents of a monsterous wrong.

Paradoxically, the neo-cons who conned us into this farago are probably laughing. The destruction of Arab military power was one of their war-aims. Re-building Iraq as a democracy was an optional extra. Leaving Iraq in ruins probably suits tham quite well while they now get to the next item on the agenda - conning us into a war with Iran.

There are two key words that you have to understand when Bush speaks. First, "democracy" means "pro-American". It does not mean letting the people rule, which is what the Greek word implies. It means setting up a government favorable to the US and pliable to the US will. Pakistan is a "democracy", but Venezuala is not. Another example: Batista's Cuba was a democracy, even though he overturned the election to stay in power. Castro is illegitimate, not because of the coup, but because he opposes America.

You also have to understand that "America" doesn't mean the entire US. It means America as viewed by Bush and the Neocons. Gays, blacks, liberals, the poor are just background figures in Bush's plutocratic vision of America.

Once you understand those two concepts, it is easier to understand what Bush means about "spreadind Democracy." It means establishing more governments that enrich American corporations.

Add me to the people deriding your take on this, Feaver.

The "anti-Bush, anti-Post MACHINE?" I agree with the other commenters who deride any reporter commenting in anything but a sarcastic way on Bush'it as a "dissident." I'm not part of a machine. I don't get commenting orders from some memo. I'm an American who moved out of the country because I was so disgusted with paying taxes for genocide, and I'm sitting at a desk on the other side of the planet feeling the same way as dozens of other commenters in the U.S. We are not a machine. We are a groundswell.

And if you people at the Post want to pooh-pooh the people who blister these comment boards as unrepresentative of your readership, then why have a comment feature at all? Why not just have a dead tree version of the paper? Why not eliminate your job, if you're in charge of something so trivial?

Culture of Life News here!

We wish to commend Mr. Baker on cooking up the most cock-eyed, cockamamie, upside down cake of a commentary! Not to be surpassed by other neo cons, he made a superb souffle of simpering senatorious silliness.

Congratulations, chef Baker!

Now you must go to Baghdad to practice your dark arts of telling things exactly opposite to what they really are! I heard we arrested Baghdad Bob. You would make a most excellent replacement.

By the way, do take Dissident Bush with you. He needs a new forum for his protests and his dream of democracy. Tell Sadr, I sent you guys. He will take care of both of you.

Anti-Bush and anti-Post, eh?

What American with a brain, a love of democracy, and a hunger for information rather than propaganda wouldn't be anti-Bush and anti-Post?

You're not getting it. Your "official" news has been exposed as fraudulent, aimed only at trying to shape public opinion for the benefit of those who have power. Smart people are having to find other sources of information and do their best to synthesize and connect the dots.

We read the Post because it's important to know what those in power want us to think. That's the Post's only value now.

Doug Feaver has it all wrong. He believes in Baker's contention that it is the federal bureaucracy that has impeded Bush's push for democracy around the world. Feaver just doesn't believe in the idea that it is Bush's actions that have sunk any and all of the best of Bush's intentions. Mr. Feaver, maybe you need to spend some time outside your office and away from the rot of Washington DC and out here in the hinterlands, where the air is clean and the view unobscured by the crap you ingest every day, that makes you so blind to the damage Bush is doing to this country and the world.

How terrible of George Bush! Trying to spread democracy around the world. Think of what the old Soviet leaders would think of that. Think of what the old Progressive Party of the U.S. would have thought. What a reprehensible philosophy: people actually being able to freely choose their governments. What will Bush think of next?

Anti-Bush and anti-Washington Post? What kind of narrrow, self-serving characterization is that? How about pro-Democracy, pro-justice, pro-American values, pro-rule of law, pro-truth? Precisely why do you think the Washington Post comes under so much criticism? Couldn't have anything to do with the MERITS of the criticism, could it?

the comments on a whole have been improving...

I am proud to be an AMERICAN...

thanks for sharing.

.

Mr. Baker pens an insightful article on the difficulties of the "vision thing" vs. Realpolitik in foreign policy formation.
I do wonder why he so narrowly focused on official foreign aid and not trade policy which, after all, represents a much larger potential lever vis a vis authoritarian regimes.
I believe we (the West) have already squandered two golden opportunities to effectively enlarge the population of democratic nations. The first was at the end of Soviet/Eastern European communism and the second was in the aftermath of 9/11.
After the collapse of the SU and the razing of the Berlin Wall, Western governments inexplicably let COCOM disband and succumbed to corporate lobbying to switch to a dubious policy of "engagement" with China and other odious regimes. Even Tiananmen Suare was only a speed bump. The half trillion dollars in FDI into China to use (and abuse) their dirt cheap labor rewarded stability while countries trying to make a real go of democracy, like Russia, were shunned. Now we see China replicating this brand of unconditional investment in Africa, they learned well. Also, it is not lost on Putin that while our rhetoric says "democracy" our investment dollars (and Euros and Yen) shout "stability!"
No wonder he laughs when we admonish him for shutting down independent newspapers and murdering dissidents with polonium.
Second, the time for Bush's speech on Democracy was September 12, 2001, not January 20, 2005. It was the proverbial second bite at the apple to remedy post Cold War mistakes. Bush spit the apple out when he chose the lazy path to war rather than the more difficult path of rounding up his counterparts in western democracies and marshalling their collective economic primacy to create real carrots and sticks.

I find it impossible to take seriously that someone as profoundly and proudly ignorant as George Bush would have a meaningful vision about any complex issue involving geopolitics.

In case you havn't figured it out yet, Bush was never pushing democracy. He was pushing economic take-over by his bosses.
At that, he has been very successful. For now.

While Bush is talking about promoting democracy abroad he is building dictatorhip at home. What a joke !

While Bush is talking about promoting democracy abroad he is building dictatorhip at home. What a joke !

I, too, like ccatmoon above, dislike your tone of condescension, and a sort of "this is all a game and here's today's show" attitude. Maybe the hundreds of commentators you describe as anti-WAPO and anti-Bush could just as well be described as "pro-America" (at least the America I grew up in, and the country I have watched this bunch do their best to destroy). Furthermore, thousands of people continue to die as a result of the actions and intransigence of this president and our cowered Congress. I hope that fact occasionally crosses your mind. The "Democracy" President takes his absurd place right alongside "The Decider" and "The Commander Guy."

Bush has a fear of Democracy. The scripted Town Hall[clown hall] meetings, the need for absolute secrecy,the attempts to avoid oversight all say he is afraid of Democracy.

Bush has a fear of Democracy. The scripted Town Hall[clown hall] meetings, the need for absolute secrecy,the attempts to avoid oversight all say he is afraid of Democracy.

It is true: Bush is indeed a dissident. Almost all the comments here, and large majorities in polls, yearn for a return to real democracy in America. The Bush administration has done its best to take away the liberties that comprise the great American experiment in true democracy. So yes Bush is a dissident, he is steadfastly against the large majority of people in his own country who are asking for democracy.

That's just what we need, George W. Bush teaching anybody about government and democracy. He seems to have the election thing just about down pat. I comment on politics nearly every day on my blog, Views from the Left Coast. Read it and make your own comments at viewsfromtheleftcoast.blogspot.com

I comment on a lot of the WaPo articles that demonstrate that WaPo is totally out of touch with how the vast majority of its readers see BushCo and how we expect WaPo to do its job and not publish BushCo talking points.

I am NOT part of any "comment machine." I post for myself alone, and from what I can tell, so does every other poster.

That you demean our opinions in such a manner shows yet again that you just don't get it - or us.

If you don't like it being pointed out to you over and over that most readers expect real REPORTING, then perhaps you should get read of your comments section!

Give me a break. The Bush agenda has never been to promote democracy. It's about promoting markets for corporate capitalism and destroying all opposition to that project--no matter what the opposition's ideology happens to be. If this agenda has failed (and that's questionable), it is because Bush has lost the support of the US people over his wars.

I just woke up and .........is it 1984?

This administration will go down as the most incompetent ever.The President has led us down a road of deceit and lies.$500 billion and counting for a democracy that will never work,stem cell research cancelled beacuse of his religious views and taking this country into greater debt than ever.No one man should be able to do this any more.

"Our readers, however, see this pretty much in black and white."
Wrong. Your readers see this as based on a false premise: that Bush was telling the truth when he claimed the desire to spread democracy.

The claim of being a dissident promoting democracy begs the question, define "democracy"? In most nations around the world, including here in America, ordinary working class citizens are no longer sure what "democracy" means.

Does democracy mean government by Wall Street for Wall Street, as so many Americans have come to accept? Is what's good for General Motors good for the world as well?

In India, does democracy mean anything more than a new spin on a medieval caste system? In Russia, does democracy mean the validation of pre-selected autocrats?

How can anyone claim to be a dissident when their cause is little more than a political catch-phrase?

remember that the Newt called Democrats in Congress...

insurgents in the 2006 elections...

it seems that branding or labeling is all this

gang of thieves, masquerading as care bears is good for...

it seems to me that permanent internment in Guantonamo, and liquidation of their properties or embedding them in lucite while still alive for eternal viewing as "thieves inaction," would be the only proper thing to do with this

group of thugs for drugs.

.democracy.

is that what you call killing a million people to steal their oil?

.

Former (unelected) Iraqi PM Iyad Allawi knows the score. The other day, he felt the old itch to run Iraq again.

So he made his pitch. Not to the Iraqi people, of course. Who cares what they think? They've never voted for him anyway.

No, the CIA asset Allawi made his pitch for power here. In the editorial pages of the Post, he beseeched the Lords of the Beltway to grant him a coup.

isn't telling you and neither is the Presidente' by fraud...

what is good for bushCO and CRONYISTS, has nothing to do with what is good for AMERICANS...

even if peewee George manages to intimidate the IRAQI duly installed through manipulation by the CIA government in IRAQ, to sign the Carbohydrate Law into fact

Americans will not share in the wealth, he, cheenie, Libby, Rove and other thiefs of democracy will share in _that_ wealth...through secret deals, cow ranches in South America, and Condos in Morroco.

even the lack of enforcement of mpg's for the auto industry or emission standards has more to do with keeping the price of OIL high, than helping out the consumer or auto industry.

if this were WWII, or any thing like a real response to the falsely named terrorists....we would be working on alternative methods for energy production and use in the event that the OIL in the MIDDLE EAST became unusable/unshared...

there have been no programs that address a backup plan.

with the Economy in the dumpster for most of AMERICA outside of the beltway, INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING WOULD BE A WELCOME INFUSEMENT OF WORK TO GET THE MONEY PUMPING THROUGH THE BANKS AND ESTABLISHING A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN

REAL PRODUCTS and MONEY... Real Estate, Highways, transportation systems, agriculture, stopping outsourcing...

but since bushCO and CRONYISTS have their finger on the button of self pleasuring , AMERICA can fend for it's self...

because they , bushCO and CRONYISM, could givea sh*t.

.

One final thing: Who the hell ever called Bush a "dissident president"?

Peter Baker quotes his famous Prague speech where he claimed: "Some have said that qualifies me as a 'dissident president'".

Baker should have pointed out that the first (and only) person to publicly call Bush a dissident president was GW Bush.

But the best case is surely Iraq. When they held local elections in 2003, Sadrist candidates began leading, and Bremer simply cancelled the campaigns in full swing, after the election posters had gone up. Gen Mattis and other soldiers said this contributed in a big way to the insurgency.

Occupation Forces Halt Elections Throughout Iraq
June 28, 2003
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A42905-2003Jun27?language=printer

Jay Garner, the first viceroy of Iraq, was fired for suggesting early national elections.

The 2005 elections which the US Govt boasted about so much were actually imposed on them by Sistani, who threatened to lend his backing to anti-US Shia otherwise.

Finally, the December 2005 elections produced a win for the governing UIA coalition, which should therefore have continued governing under PM Jafari. But Jafari was ditched and replaced by Maliki in a post-election backroom deal, largely because Bush didn't like him. That's one hell of a democracy, where you have an election and your PM is then vetoed by a foreign head of state.

Iraq alone proves the hollowness of the phoney "democracy project".

I second all of the above comments. I think the case of Uzbekistan is particularly telling. The Americans were kicked out of Uzbekistan when, a week after a govt massacre of opponents, they lightly criticised it. But they only did that because they came under fire for their initial response, which was to call the demonstrators "terrorists".

At least the US didn't do what Britain did. When their ambassador to Uzbekistan pointed out gross human rights abuses, including the boiling alive of dissidents, they recalled him to London and claimed he had psychiatric problems.