Can We Rob the Peter Principle to Pay Paul? | Musings of a Mountainman
by Jack Pera
May 29, 2007 | 563 views | 0 0 comments | 11 11 recommendations | email to a friend | print
The election is over and the result is conclusive: If one political party rules our government, corruption runs amok (power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely). Although far from having a lifetime monopoly on this “public service” debacle, it’s now fairly obvious and unmistakably proven that government by a single political party begets corruption in the extreme, particularly modern government in an age where virtue and integrity are heading south faster than a snowbunny after the first frost.

Alternatively, if we split the power within our abysmal two-party monopolistic system, the typical product is obstructionist gridlock.

So which is preferable?

For my wasted tax money, I’ll take massive gridlock over extreme corruption in a heartbeat. Dismissing its beneficiaries, corruption taken to the extreme, particularly the governing variety, does not enhance our lives.

On the other hand, if we were to get extremely lucky and our massive gridlock refuses to budge, extreme corruption will pale in comparison to gridlock as a lifestyle booster.

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if gridlock became so extreme that absolutely nothing got done at the federal level for years and years? If that were to happen, we would just continue to spend fortunes electing and paying our revered societal “godfathers” to show up and do absolutely nothing because stupidity is as stupidity will (and must) be. Of course, this might be the best worthless pork barrel project ever.

I use all this as a lead-in to ask one simple, stupid question: Are we really getting the best cancerous quagmire – federal government – that money can buy? Note that I didn’t say “the most,” but rather, “the best.”

And the answer depends on where your paycheck comes from or where it goes, doesn’t it?

And now, for the umpteenth time taken to the nth power, can we please set the record straight?

The Bushites, using 9/11 as an excuse, invaded, occupied and destroyed an innocent country. That country was Iraq. None of the 9/11 terrorists were from Iraq, nor has any connection been established between 9/11 and Iraq.

To the Bushies, coerced by a cabal of neoconservatives with the support of reactionary irrationality, patriotic fervor, Democratic Party idiocy and fear, the military/industrial complex and various other war profiteers, this conquest of an innocent country seemed as natural as filling up an SUV with a tank of joy juice. Trouble is, the “conquest” part of this equation has gone AWOL. The Iraqis didn’t capitulate as expected. They resisted – and how – with guerilla warfare, using the only effective means they have: resolve, martyrs, roadside bombs, a few shoulder-fired missiles, and, increasingly, sniper rifles. The so-called “insurgents” (resistance fighters determined to repel invaders) have proven to be a formidable foe. The result is that America has found its best of bad intentions gone awry. Now, in the midst of worldwide anger, we’re bogged down in an insolvable mess.

But take heart, war fans, we’re about to extricate ourselves from this horrible, tragic and costly mistake through a “study group,” assembled courtesy of Pappy George H. W. Bush, who has finally had his fill of Junior’s Wild West cowboy shoot-em-up saloon antics, and decided a little discipline is in order.

What, we must ask, options are available? Must we leave the decision to the same people who got us into this tragic mess?

Without thinking too hard, it gets down to the following options:

1. Pull all troops out immediately and declare victory. (Not an option.)

2. Pull all troops out somewhere between immediately and “maybe someday” and declare victory. (Short and-long-term option.)

3. Pull all troops out immediately, admit defeat and acknowledge that the Iraq war was a war crime. Punish all those responsible, apologize to what’s left of the country of Iraq for our criminal behavior and compensate the country proportionally to the damage we wrought. (This is not an option.)

4. Begin the façade of a phased pacification, for-show withdrawal and continue as is. (This is the option that will be selected.)

5. Continue doing exactly what we’re doing, because doing anything else would be to admit defeat. (The preferred Bushite option.)

6. Send in more troops in whatever amount it takes to “win” this tragic mistake of a war, whatever that means. (The John McCain option.)

Parting shot: The claim that 9/11 happened because “they’re jealous of our freedom and envy our way of life” is a flat-out, bald-faced lie. Nine-eleven was a consequence of the many negatives of expanding and maintaining the empire. Young bucks, is there a military conscription in your future?
Comments
(0)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
No Comments Yet