[lbo-talk] its the economy

[R]

i would suggest that "elite opinion," if one can call it that, is upset
because by getting the USA involved in a protracted war, the shrub group is
showing up serious defects in the system which are easily covered up from
the eyes of the masses of the american people under "normal" circumstances.
defects such as poorly trained and poorly equipped troops, incompetent
officer corps, the US' inability to afford it's dominant military machine
without cutting domestic programs to the bone and borrowing internationally
to the hilt, the corruption that characterizes the "elite" down to the core
of the system, and etc.  problems like these can be kept under wraps when
the system isn't strained.

currently, the system is strained mightily and the cracks are becoming so
obvious even the far right can't ignore them all, even the corporate media
can't white wash them all.    that's the shrub group's cardinal sin.
that's why the "elite" are upset: the great danger that the american people
could become "restive;" the rabble might get out of line as they see the
system's weaknesses.

the upset has nothing to do with shrub screwing up a colonial venture in and
of itself.  it's how the screw up is outing the corruption at the core of
the american economic, social and political system.  the elite depend on the
myths about this system for their position in society; it's this system that
gives them their power.  there's no greater wrong than exposing the shit
they're knowingly standing in.  if anything defeats the shrub group in
november, it will be committing this cardinal sin against the power elite.

R

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joseph Wanzala" <jwanzala at hotmail.com>
To: <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org>
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 11:37 AM
Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] its the economy

Doug wrote: "Hmm, so why did Bush have to lie his way into the war, why is
elite opinion turning against the war, and why is oil at $40?"

Elite opinion is *not* turning agaisnt the war, they just think Bush has
fucked up what could have been a perfectly good colonial venture. Kerry
promises a better war than Bush's, with more troops, and other goodies. The
so called elites who are now crowing about how Bush handled the war are a
bunch of hypocrites. They supported the bombing of Afghanistan, and
supported Bush's war on Iraq. Both wars were legitimated uder the rubric of
the war on terror. Which all good liberals support they just don't like the
way Bush is going about it. Why did he lie about it? Because Bush lie about
everything, as do most politicians. It is a built in condecension towards
the general populace, just like parents who unecessarily lie to their kids.
At any rate, they *knew* he was lying abnout WMD (unles they are admitting
having been outwitted by the so-called 'village idiot'. And if your boy
Kerry wins, this will become his war as surely as LBJ's Vietnam became
Nixon's war.


>From: Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com>
>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
>Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] its the economy
>Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 12:57:27 -0400
>
>Joseph Wanzala wrote:
>
>>That the USA is entangled in a vicious war in Iraq is not the fault of
>>President Bush, but of America's economic system. Without wars, America's
>>unbridled brand of capitalism can no longer function properly. Every
>>tenant of the White House is aware of this and must act accordingly, and
>>it does not matter at all if his name is Bush or Clinton, or if his party
>>affiliation is Republican or Democrat.
>
>Hmm, so why did Bush have to lie his way into the war, why is elite opinion
>turning against the war, and why is oil at $40?
>
>Doug
>
>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk

___________________________________
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk