Wednesday, March 07, 2007

Denmark - Laissez faire welfare

An interesting but ultimately flawed story describing a political & economic system that works as well as and probably better than most where, after extolling the virtues of the Danish system, accompanied by hard facts and figures and even charts for pâté’s sake, the writer then quotes one expat Dane in a thinly disguised journalistic sleight of hand masquerading as objectivity?

How can one person's opinion (right or wrong) stack up against the facts presented in this story and be called objective? Where are the facts and figures supporting that person's opinion? Without facts the point of view is not empirical but strictly subjective. Nothing wrong with that per se but in this case not enough. Presenting a POV without facts approaches mendacity.

Unfortunately journalism like this is all too common. The way the writer adds the section with the Dane from London plays on common American prejudices at worst and is naive but still negative at best. It's one thing to say there's a difference of opinion on the matter but to state so and not support that with any facts has the effect of sowing enough doubt on the premise of the story as to make it easily dismissible in the minds of an unsuspecting reader thereby obfuscating the meaning of the piece and reducing the impact of the article; which in this case is clearly about imparting the notion to millions of USA Today readers that perhaps, just perhaps, there might be another way besides the dog eat dog of laissez-faire globalism.

I hope most readers see through the journalistic device and get the best from the article.

Sunday, March 04, 2007

The Road to the White House

As much as I prefer Democrats to Republicans it’s sad to see them get so much of their money and, ipso facto, marching orders from AIPAC and the Zionist lobby, whose connections with the neo-cons and the plan to invade Iraq and dominate the Middle East are very well documented. I think this is why Hillary won’t repudiate her vote for the war. She knows that one of the main reasons for the war was to separate the Iranians from the Israelis with a friendly buffer state regime in Iraq. Too bad it was so badly mismanaged. Notice how she is primarily focused in the mismanagement of the war and not the basic premise thereof. I don't believe she thinks the war was such a bad idea. If she did repudiate that vote then Mssr. Haim Saban and her buddies in AIPAC would turn off the spigot. You watch – she will far outstrip the other Dems in fundraising from the Zionist lobby.

Except for some cosmetic changes things will be business as usual in Washington come 2009. In this presidential campaign we will avoid discussing the real reasons behind Islamic fury, the causes and solutions to the "war on terror" and the attacks of 9/11; namely our unbalanced support for the Israeli government and their imposition of apartheid on and oppression of the Palestinians.

If we held the Israelis to the same standard we accused Saddam of flouting there would be peace in Palestine and Israel. 90% of the Islamic fury would evaporate and Osama bin Laden would be just another fundamentalist in the wilderness.

But since America cannot see past the propaganda and any discussion of this issue is immediately met with cries of anti-Semitism (i.e. the furor over Jimmy Carter's latest book) don't look for much of a change when it comes to our foreign policy.

Think about it – you know its true. The UN didn’t equate Zionism with Racism without reason.

"Same as it ever was..."

Saturday, March 03, 2007

Tempest in a Scuzzy Glass Teapot Dome - The furor over Walter Reed Bldg. # 18

As serious as this is its somewhat of a tempest in a teapot. In a rational world the administration would be held to the same level of accountability for fabricating the intelligence used to justify the invasion and its subsequent mismanagement of the war as was the Secretary of the Army for Building 18 at Walter Reed.

If Bush and/or Cheney had any honor whatsoever they would resign and let the Speaker of the House govern for the next two years. What a pipedream that is.

In the words of the senior Senator from Nebraska, Chuck Hagel, this administration has made "the worst foreign policy blunder of our lifetime" but in the twisted Twilight Zone reality of Bush’s looking glass world anyone engaged in efforts to extricate America from this blunder are defeatist, unpatriotic, terrorist sympathizers. "We f***ed it up but don't you dare try to fix it and while we're at we'll just make it worse by throwing away good money after bad and guarantee that more Americans are killed and maimed so the other dead and maimed Americans that came before them will not have died in vain.”

The immorality and intellectual dishonesty of this position is truly staggering. Thank God (or the deity or non-deity of your choice) Bush & Co. was not running the show during WWII because if they were we’d either be speaking Japanese and/or German.