Showing posts with label Moloch. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Moloch. Show all posts

Monday, December 21, 2009

How Americans Are Enslaved by a Corrupt Right Wing Machine!

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

The name of a 'god' and a sacrifice associated with fire, the term 'Moloch' is found in Hebrew and Arabic and other Middle Eastern cultures --Ammonite, Canaanite and Phoenician as well as related cultures in North Africa and the Levant.

In American or modern English usage, the term or 'character' "Moloch" refers to any leader or person requiring costly sacrifices and/or utter enslavement. The term is thus especially applicable to a corrupt, right wing system requiring of its citizenry a virtual enslavement by virtue of diminishing or increasingly prescribed economic roles.

In the US, this is often referred to as being a "wage slave". Most recently, "Moloch" describes not just an extreme right wing establishment but the enslavement of every American who is left behind by GOP tax cuts benefiting just one percent of the population of the nation, the the ruling one percent. Moloch is all-pervasive, effectively denying to all the choice to live otherwise but for and 'in' the omni-present machine.

'Liberal' Means Free but GOP Means Slavery to Moloch

The definition of the term "liberal", muddled of late, has an honorable tradition. "Liberal" is derived from the latin "liber" which means "free". Up to the end of the eighteenth century "liberal" signified "worthy of a free man". Thus we still speak of the "liberal arts", a "liberal occupation". Despite subtle shades of meaning or various connotations, "liberalism" in general remains a "free" way of thinking and acting in private and public life. Its opposite --conservatism --connotes a top-down authoritarian mentality, a doctrinaire, restrained (retarded?) manner of thinking. Conservatism is forever to be associated with fascism, monarchy and dictatorship, i.e -- 'Moloch'!

We are enslaved in three ways:
  1. economically by an inequitable system in which 95 percent of the population works to support and enrich a ruling one percent;
  2. sociologically by dividing society by wealth, segregating society into walled-off communities, carving up cities into slum dwellers vs the privileged elites who live in gated, walled communities;
  3. ideologically with the Orwellian word games designed to facilitate (catapult?) the propaganda which maintains 'Moloch' in his/her roles as both master and devourer!
Modern debasement of the term 'liberal' may be traced to "McCarthy" types who clearly succeeded in associating "liberal" with "Stalinism", "fellow travelers" or communism. Buying into the paradigm implies a tacit agreement to the terminology. It means that we are forced to play by their rules, their definitions.

Moloch is found in various societies throughout history whenever a small number enslaves by force or economics or both a much, much larger general population. That outcome was achieved with the rise of the GOP, most recently with Ronald Reagan, George Bush Sr and, later, George W. Bush.

Never perfectly egalitarian, the US was, nevertheless, more equitable under the Democratic regimes of LBJ, Jimmy Carter, and, more recently, Bill Clinton. Clinton had begun a tentative reversal of entrenched trends that had begun with Reaganomics often called supply side' or trickle down' theory.

The Shrub regime assumed the role of Moloch, enforcing and re-energizing economic and ideological oppression by citing a mythical external enemy: Arab terrorists! There is, in fact, no admissible evidence whatsoever that any Arab ever boarded any flight nor hijacked any airliner associated with 911. There is, in fact, no admissible evidence to support any aspect of the Bush 'official' theory of 911. There is no Pentagon wreckage traceable to Fl 77, indeed, any airliner. There was, in fact, no wreckage traceable to Ft 93 recovered at Pennsylvania. Ted Olson told several versions of his 'alleged' phone call from Barbara Olson, at least two of which were mutually exclusive. Simply, Ted lied! 911 was the biggest, the most outrageous, the most venal fraud ever perpetrated upon mankind.

The Bush administration codified its dictatorship with oppressive measures --a 'Patriot' Act --which violates every article of the US Bill of Rights! It was, quite possibly, the most UN-patriotic Act passed since the Alien and Sedition Acts. The Patriot Act violates every LIBERAL, every Anti-Moloch principle that had, until Bush, defined the American republic: the presumption of innocence, due process of law, probable cause, and the separation of powers!
I am, therefore, opposed with every fiber of my being to the party of Bush, Reagan, and Bush! I am opposed to every "anti-free", "anti-liberal" measure that has been forced upon the American people by the embodiment of 'Moloch' --the tyrannical regimes of Reagan, Bush and Bush.
The idea that "people" are sovereign is "liberal". The idea that people are --in fact --born free is "liberal". "Liberalism" is the anti-thesis not only of the "divine right of kings", it is the anti-thesis of dictatorship as envisaged by either Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot or, in the US, Bush and the GOP.
The abuse of the term "liberal" is just one more Neo-Nazi lie, typical of the Orwellian political agenda behind it! Liberal is a perfectly good word, an honorable word, a word that I reclaim from a crooked right that deliberately sought to debase it.

I am liberal and, therefore, free!

Minions of the GOP are, conversely, enslaved to Moloch and the lies upon which that shaky foundation rests. No one wins who bargains with Satan.

Among the more pernicious and harmful right wing lies remains 'trickle down theory', sometimes called 'Supply Side Economics'. Clearly --wealth has never, ever trickled down. Labor is the source of value in any economic system. Every major economist from the 'conservative' Ricardo to Karl Marx recognized that fact! This is not a left v. right issue; rather truth vs lies! The exploitation of labor by capital is slavery i.e, 'Moloch'!
Census Bureau: Poverty Rate Rises, Household Income Declines
Although there was a huge increase in real income for average Americans between World War II and the 1970s the income of the average American male has gone essentially unchanged since 1970 as the figure below indicates. Income for females though has continued to rise. What is significant about this graph is that between 1980 and present (2003) the incomes of the top 2% of American wage earners has gone up dramatically despite the stagnation of the income of average Americans.
--Trickle Down” economics was a “Trojan Horse, David Stockman, Ronald Reagan's Budget Director. Also see: Atlantic Online, The Education of David Stockman
Economists quantify income inequalities with what is called the GINI Index. Take a look at Stockman's chart of GINI indices at the link. The GINIS actually moved down between 1967 and 1970, indicating that the economy was moving toward relative equality. Things remained essentially unchanged until 1982, the year of Reagan's tax cut for the wealthy. GINI indices increase, i.e. wealth trickles up steadily from that point. According to Dr. Daniel Weinberg of the Census Bureau, the trend abated briefly in Clinton's second term, but the overall trend toward greater inequality resumed with a vengeance under George W. Bush.

A Free Person's Rapid Response to Ideology and Propaganda:
  • Every Democratic President has presided over greater economic and job growth than ANY Republican President since WWII.
  • Job growth under Carter exceeded that of Ronald Reagan.
  • Reagan presided over the worst recession since Hoover's great depression of the 1930's.
  • The Reagan Recession following Reagan's improvident tax cut of 1982 was the longest and most severe since Herbert Hoover's "Great" Depression!
  • Wealth trickled up during the Reagan administration primarily as a result of his tax cuts for the rich even as the bite out of middle income checks increased! ONLY the upper quintile prospered. Every other segment of the population suffered in various ways: job losses, loss of income, loss of net worth, loss of homes. Homelessness hit new highs during Reagan's Recession.
  • Under Reagan, the incomes of the richest 20% increased 18% while the incomes of the poorest 20% declined a similar amount. Wealth "trickled-up" --NOT down as had been promised by "trickle down" and other fringe theorists!
  • Unemployment, high throughout the Reagan debacle, would have been higher had Reagan not doubled the size of the Federal Bureaucracy. Interestingly, he had promised to reduce the size of government. Reagan had to break a campaign promise in order to achieve any success at all.
  • Reagan added some two million jobs to the Federal Bureaucracy; otherwise, his numbers would have been even worse than they are. Nevertheless, his performance in this area still pales compared to Clinton who presided over a 2.4% per year increase in jobs during his administration.
  • The administration of George Bush cannot be said to have created a single net new job! Unlike Reagan, most of the jobs created during the Clinton presidency were in the private sector. Bush --following policies made famous by Ronald Reagan --was in the hole throughout his incompetent reign of idiocy.
  • Best job growth since World War II occurred under four Democratic Presidents: Johnson, Carter, Clinton, and Kennedy.
  • The worst job growth growth occurred under Reagan, Nixon, and the worst: Bush Sr at a mere 0.6% per year. See: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Employment Statistics Survey. 


Thursday, July 05, 2007

How Bush Sold Out America

Bush is an ideological hit man for a radical, extremist cabal that hates America and the Constitution. Bush was put into office to pull off a job: execute a contract on the very source of our freedom, the Bill of Rights. Bush's mission: do a job on American freedom, rollback the achievements of the Supreme Court, secure a dictatorship for the blessings --not of liberty --but of big, fat, juicy defense contracts.

So far, Bush has done a splendid job for an unholy alliance of corporatist fascists, radical fundies, and simple crooks like Jack Abramoff who were just in it for quick bucks. Pat Robertson took it all seriously, thinking Bush to be on a mission from God to murder Hugo Chavez and to allow black people to die of criminal neglect in times of natural disaster.

Bush hates what America stood for. In several acts of high treason, Bush has deliberately subverted the principles upon which our late republic was founded! He made his preferences known very early on.
This would be a whole lot easier if this was a dictatorship...heh heh heh ...just so long as I'm the dictator!
At the time Bush said that, America was holding on by a thread. Just one more vote on SCOTUS would give conservatives the dictatorship Bush dreamed of. Too much could go wrong for Democracy and did. It was called Bush v Gore, a political and disingenuous decision that did not even address the issues cited as compelling the case.
When the court was finally forced to conjure a point of law in its desperate search for a reason for the stay to save the Bush presidency, the justices (probably Scalia) hit upon the argument that the Florida Supreme Court violated the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protecion clause — that Florida's voters were being treated unequally by the lack of a standard in counting ballots. The bitter irony of this decision, as Bugliosi points out, is that "the equal protection clause ... was tailor-made for blacks" after the Civil War, intended to ensure the civil rights of former slaves. In the present case, the black vote was the most likely to be negated by the court's decision to end the recount.

--Howard Garcia, In Bush v. Gore, Supreme Court Conservatives Brought Disgrace on Their Institution

That SCOTUS' citation of the 14th was just a ruse is proven by the fact that the court's decision offers up a "remedy" that doesn't even address the 14th. How bloody cynical can you get?
...leading professors of constitutional law such as Ackerman and New York University's Ronald Dworkin, [believed that ] naked political self-interest drove the Court's five conservatives to halt the recount ordered by the Florida supreme court. It was not, as the majority opinion stated, that in violation of well-settled Equal Protection jurisprudence the Florida recount in a variety of ways debased or diluted the weight of citizens' votes. Nor was it as the majority held that under Florida law as interpreted by the Florida supreme court (in response to a question posed to it by the U.S. Supreme Court) no time was left to conduct a constitutionally proper recount because December 12 was the outside deadline for Florida to choose its presidential electors. All that was window dressing.

--The continuing controversy over Bush v. Gore

In Bush v Gore, the conservatives sold out America, the Constitution, and stuck us with a would be dictator of no talent, no intellect, no humanity! Bush is not redeemed by his megalomaniacal ambitions, his vainglorious dreams of world conquest for Jesus and Jews of a neocon persuasion. Not elected, Bush DOES NOT represent the people of America.

I know how we came to this. The American people must bear awesome responsibility. The American people had not been vigilant. Ignorance of the Constitution is widespread throughout every demographic segment. Our history, the very principles of our founding, was and continues to be all but ignored in far too many school districts. A brief civics lesson may be in order.


PBS "The Supreme Court" Episode One

I wish the excerpt had been longer. The end observation is witty but not historically accurate and, I am sure, it was not intended to be. The significance of Marbury v Madison is that it established the principle of Judicial Review, the right and the power of the Supreme Court to rule on the Constitutionality of laws passed by the Legislative. The Constitution does not expressly authorize judicial review although the founders had thought about it. Justice Marshall settled the issue with Marbury v Madison.
The government of the United States is of the latter description. The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing; if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? The distinction between a government with limited and unlimited powers is abolished, if those limits do not confine the persons on whom they are imposed, and if acts pro- [5 U.S. 137, 177] hibited and acts allowed are of equal obligation. It is a proposition too plain to be contested, that the constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it; or, that the legislature may alter the constitution by an ordinary act.

--Justice John Marshall, Marbury v Madison
The right wing must hate the principle of "popular sovereignty" because they have been attacking it since the founders wrote "We the people..." European style monarchies were often epitomized by Louis XIV who summed up his position succinctly: L'Etat! C'est Moi! Bush has assumed as much power with considerably less style. He is content to role up absolute rule in just two words, unitary executive, a euphemism for dictatorship.


How Bush Packed the Court

Mention the term popular sovereignty in America and you get funny looks. Are you talking about 'soverignty's" new video?. The idea that the people themselves are sovereign seems as abstract as relativity, string theory, or curved space-time. The idea that a Bill of Rights is a check on the unbridled power of government over individual liberties seems, to use Alberto Gonzales' term, quaint.



"Just One More Vote Needed"

I cannot imagine Alito, often called "Scalito", defending the rights of mere people against a Moloch of Bushco's devising. The following video had been unavailable but is apparently back on line. It is a must see. I suggest that you follow to YouTube, utilize keepvid.com to download and keep it.

The idiocy and the absurdities never seem to stop. This just in...

Iraq like historic US war, says Bush

Jim Gerstenzang in Martinsburg, West Virginia
July 6, 2007

THE US President, George Bush, has compared the war in Iraq with the US war for independence in his Fourth of July speech.

Like the revolutionaries who "dropped their pitchforks and picked up their muskets to fight for liberty", Mr Bush said American soldiers were fighting "a new and unprecedented war" to protect US freedom.
What an idiot! The following is the best analogy to the American war of independence. It is from William Pitt the Elder, Earl of Chatham, on the floor of the Parliament, urging the British government to get out of America.
My Lords, this ruinous and ignominious situation, where we cannot act with success, nor suffer with honour, calls upon us to remonstrate in the strongest and loudest language of truth, to rescue the ear of Majesty from the delusions which surround it. You cannot, I venture to say, you cannot conquer America.

" What is your present situation there? We do not know the worst; but we know that in three campaigns we have done nothing and suffered much. - You may swell every expense, and strain every effort, still more extravagantly; accumulate every assistance you can beg or borrow; traffic and barter with every pitiful German Prince, that sells and sends his subjects to the shambles of a foreign country.

Your efforts are forever vain and impotent-doubly so from this mercenary aid on which you rely; for it irritates to an incurable resentment the minds of your enemies, to overrun them with the sordid sons of rapine and of plunder, devoting them and their possessions to the rapacity of hireling cruelty! If I were an American, as I am an Englishman, while a foreign troop was landed in my country, I never would lay down my arms-never-never-never.

--William Pitt, Earl of Chatham (1708-7, On Affairs in America 1777.
DiscoveriesAnd something completely different. This might have been one of my hang outs somewhere between downtown Houston and Gilley's.

I'll have a Dos Equis! Yeeeeee hawwwww!






Why Conservatives Hate America




Spread the word:

yahoo icerocket pubsub newsvine