A new president takes over. Will he prepared for the looming threat of attack?
Republicans Determined to Attack in U.S.
Ted Rall
Ted Rall is a syndicated political cartoonist for Andrews McMeel Syndication and WhoWhatWhy.org and Counterpoint. He is a contributor to Centerclip and co-host of "The Final Countdown" talk show on Radio Sputnik. He is a graphic novelist and author of many books of art and prose, and an occasional war correspondent. He is, recently, the author of the graphic novel "2024: Revisited."
15 Comments. Leave new
Indeed, media abound report that the GOP is actively planning to take power in the United States, it sounds like a treacherous plot; clearly a "grave and gathering threat" to the security of the United States -A clear and present danger. We should dispatch teams to infiltrate these rogue political cells that appear to operate all over the country, with few exceptions (like Ann Arbor, San Francisco, Berkeley, etc).
The Republicans haven't STOPPED attacking! McCain and Palin continue, after they lost the election, hammering away on that guilt-by-association-with-William Ayers bullshit. Isn't it time to stop the mudslinging, slander and character assassination when the campaign is over? It's time to call a spade a spade: the Republican Party has become, is, EVIL incarnate! There are no words left to begin to describe and explain the perfect evil of a war-criminal (p)Resident and Vice-(p)Resident, Bush and Cheney, and the cast of many who planned and executed a plan of mass murder against Iraq in 2003. Ronald Reagan began the current era of character assassination with his 'state's rights' speech and his "God is on 'our' side" speech, in which he implied that anyone not believing in the 'true' American Christian God was less-than American. I used to like Ronald Reagan when he was just an actor and a spokesman for General Electric. Then he turned into a freaking monster shill of the up-and-coming EVIL Republican Party. Bush II took the handoff and lateraled it to John McCain who lateraled it to Sarah Palin. They continue to spread their hate and fear, which clearly has encouraged the pinhead, half-brains in our country to make a run on firearms. If McCain and Palin aren't charged with fomenting violence, then we might as well pack it up and kiss our collective ass goodbye. When will the Republicans stop this campaign of divisiveness and fear mongering? Karl Rove, the man behind the curtain, is a home-grown terrorist.
That might be a very good way for him to look at it.
You'll notice, that when Obama toured the White House with Bush, he wouldn't give an inch to Junior on his "free trade" nonsense. I see that as a very promising sign from Obama.
My advice to Obama is to continue along those lines. That is, to listen to what the Right is saying, but don't give in to their failed ideology. Listen to Hannity, Limbaugh, and the rest of them, but only so that you can put into effect your own ideology better (as opposed to theirs).
I fear Obama is too enamored of his bipartisan nonsense to take the necessary hard line with the Repubs. Maybe he'll surprise me. Maybe not.
Jana C.H.
Seattle
Saith Mao Zedong: Where the broom does not go, the dust does not vanish of itself.
Uncle Joe (Stalin) would know what to do.
Uncle Milton (Friedman) would know better, right?
*economy melts down*
The key thing is to blame another 9/11 and any future wars, etc. on "The Rich Elite". The elite start wars so they can sell weapons to both sides. They have a hole in their hearts and can never have enough.
No it's Barney Frank/Chris Dodd meltdown. Milton Friedman never espoused forcing banks to lend to people who can't afford to pay them back. Nor did he espouse having a GSE guarantee the loans would be purchased from the bank thereby encouraging the banks to lend to those who can't afford the loans.
Noone ever called Friedman "Uncle Milton", except his nephews. He also never setup show trials, labour camps and tried to erase rivals from the historical record, but these things are probably petty stuff to the "keynesian" anonymous, compared to being on the wrong side of the ideological fence…
Milton Friedman never espoused forcing banks to lend to people who can't afford to pay them back
After Milton Friedman's ideology made everyone too poor to afford homes, they had to lend to bad borrowers so that the homes would not sit there empty.
I think it is telling that no ine is discussing who the fuck would be in those homes if the loans were never made.
Who are these 'people who can't afford' the loans they were given? Please list them. Are we talking poor people? Are we talking middle class speculators who used real estate like day-trading? Who is it specifically that is meant by those 'bad loans'?
lol at incitatus reading that labor camps are petty to me based on my comment against unbridled laissez-faire.
I'd never put you in a camp, unless it was one where kids in padded helmets paddled in the kiddie pool. Learn2Read
Angelo, you make no sense whatsoever…
That's the nicest phone you're ever drawn, but Michelle need bigger boobs.
Angelo, you make no sense whatsoever…
Go read then.
or maybe you believe that friedman's ideas gave policy makers the impetus to enrich the people of this country.
Who do you suppose had a greater impact upon the policy makers who brought about deregulation over the last 30 years?