Saturday, June 07, 2008

America at its Best, The Economist.

The Economist. 6/7/2008. "America at its Best" (Pictures McCain and Obama) I hoped the meant, "America at its best ??? " - They didn't.

June 7th 2008

America at its best (Proper Title: "America at its best ?????????????"
The primaries have left the United States with a decent choice; now it needs a proper debate about policies: leader

Please write into THE ECONOMIST. You'd think it should be called the propagandist.

These two clowns, and HRC, are the worst pieces of sell out trash in American history.

The day after clinching, Obama kowtows to the AIPAC.

McCain is a disgrace. Covering up information on POWS, one of the Keating 5 scum from the S&L crisis, if Kerry flip flops, then this guy is the King of all FLIP FLOPS. This man is a stupid, uninformed MORON, and his predisency will make Bush's look good. He once sung "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" to the tune of the beach boys Barabar Ann. He is a civil liberty CRUSHING GUN GRABBER, rated F-- by the GOA.

I hate to use something from Soros (whom I hate), but here:
(McCain has done this several times in several forums. War for him is a funny subject apparently.)

GOA McCain, F--

Anyways, I could admonish on McCain forever. He is a phony, a spineless whimp, and he betrayed the US as a POW, there were lots of POWs, but hardly any of them wrote the anti-American commie screeds like McCain did so believably and with such fervor (there is a Switft Boat movement against McCain, but the information around the issue is classified, and his swift boat vets are silenced completely). Little McCain wanted to save his skin, there was no honor. You know now that McCain will drape himself in the flag so calling him on his gun grabbing anti-American totalitarian authoritarian legacy will likely result in YOU being called a anti-American and your patriotism will be questioned. He will most likely not be swift boated as he deserves. Hanoi Jane there is, Hanoi McCain there will not be. I wonder why is it that the soldiers and the patriots buy propaganda to support those who are constantly willing to expose the military servicemen to MORTAL DANGER.

And Obama. Change. What changes we dont know (He doesnt either, it was obvious he didnt write the speech to the AIPAC). This could go either way, but bombing Iran seems to crop up on his agenda. He predends to not take lobby money, but he has surrounded himself with HIGHLY connected people who, while not taking money from companies, will certainly be at the behest of the Medical Industrial Complex. Look to natural and herbal medicine, off label use, and non-western medicines to be CRUSHED TO DEATH under his legacy.

These two are the death of individual liberty, the death of the middle class. Neither have once made a fucking PEEP about America being completely INSOLVENT, BROKE, OUT OF MONEY and in HUGE FISCAL CRISIS due to the fiat DOLLAR being near COLLAPSE. "They" dont care, they think militarism can still save them.

They want to spend money bombing Iran, playing world police and further making the under classes entirely dependant on the government for everything every day.

Fuck "The Economist" for this disgusting garbage propagandist cover.

Ron Paul for me. I refuse to partake in the systematic establisment of the Orwellian Oceania with Ingsoc as the guiding idealogy.

Read 1984. Now. This eventuality was pegged 60 years ago.

These people represent PEOPLE as an AGGREGATE TERM, there is no personal liberty, there is no individualism.

This represents oligarchal collectivism, mega-corporations, and the military industrial complex.

CHANGE. Indeed. For the worse. If you dont believe me, look at the fight the Democrats put up against Bush in the last 2 years.

CHANGE. Higher taxes through inflation. Less disposable income. Less middle class. Less liberty. Fear being used to allow power grabs to protect your security.

You are property of the United States of America, Inc.

Ingsoc is oligarchical collectivism - Ingsoc rejects and vilifies every principle for which the Socialist movement originally stood, and it does so in the name of Socialism.

The empirical method of thought, on which all the scientific achievements of the past were founded, is opposed to the most fundamental principles of Ingsoc.

The problem was how to keep the wheels of industry turning without increasing the real wealth of the world.

Goods must be produced, but they need not be distributed. And in practice the only way of achieving this was by continuous warfare.

War, it will be seen, accomplishes the necessary destruction, but accomplishes it in a psychologically acceptable way. In principle it would be quite simple to waste the surplus labour of the world by building temples and pyramids, by digging holes and filling them up again, or even by producing vast quantities of goods and then setting fire to them. But this would provide only the economic and not the emotional basis for a hierarchical society. What is concerned here is not the morale of masses, whose attitude is unimportant so long as they are kept steadily at work, but the morale of the Party itself. Even the humblest Party member is expected to be competent, industrious, and even intelligent within narrow limits, but it is also necessary that he should be a credulous and ignorant fanatic whose prevailing moods are fear, hatred, adulation, and orgiastic triumph. In other words it is necessary that he should have the mentality appropriate to a state of war. It does not matter whether the war is actually happening, and, since no decisive victory is possible, it does not matter whether the war is going well or badly. All that is needed is that a state of war should exist. The splitting of the intelligence which the Party requires of its members, and which is more easily achieved in an atmosphere of war, is now almost universal, but the higher up the ranks one goes, the more marked it becomes. It is precisely in the Inner Party that war hysteria and hatred of the enemy are strongest. In his capacity as an administrator, it is often necessary for a member of the Inner Party to know that this or that item of war news is untruthful, and he may often be aware that the entire war is spurious and is either not happening or is being waged for purposes quite other than the declared ones: but such knowledge is easily neutralized by the technique of doublethink. Meanwhile no Inner Party member wavers for an instant in his mystical belief that the war is real, and that it is bound to end victoriously, with Oceania the undisputed master of the entire world. All members of the Inner Party believe in this coming conquest as an article of faith. It is to be achieved either by gradually acquiring more and more territory and so building up an overwhelming preponderance of power, or by the discovery of some new and unanswerable weapon. The search for new weapons continues unceasingly, and is one of the very few remaining activities in which the inventive or speculative type of mind can find any outlet. In Oceania at the present day, Science, in the old sense, has almost ceased to exist. In Newspeak there is no word for " Science ". The empirical method of thought, on which all the scientific achievements of the past were founded, is opposed to the most fundamental principles of Ingsoc [Ingsoc is oligarchical collectivism - Ingsoc rejects and vilifies every principle for which the Socialist movement originally stood, and it does so in the name of Socialism]. And even technological progress only happens when its products can in some way be used for the diminution of human liberty. In all the useful arts the world is either standing still or going backwards. The fields are cultivated with horse-ploughs while books are written by machinery. But in matters of vital importance - meaning, in effect, war and police espionage - the empirical approach is still encouraged, or at least tolerated. - George Orwell, 1984

The new aristocracy was made up for the most part of bureaucrats, scientists, technicians, trade-union organizers, publicity experts, sociologists, teachers, journalists, and professional politicians. These people, whose origins lay in the salaried middle class and the upper grades of the working class, had been shaped and brought together by the barren world of monopoly industry and centralized government. As compared with their opposite numbers in past ages, they were less avaricious, less tempted by luxury, hungrier for pure power, and, above all, more conscious of what they were doing and more intent on crushing opposition. - George Orwell, 1984

The alteration of the past is necessary for two reasons, one of which is subsidiary and, so to speak, precautionary. The subsidiary reason is that the Party member, like the proletarian, tolerates present-day conditions partly because he has no standards of comparison. He must be cut off from the past, just as he must be cut off from foreign countries, because it is necessary for him to believe that he is better off than his ancestors and that the average level of material comfort is constantly rising. But by far the more important reason for the readjustment of the past is the need to safeguard the infallibility of the Party. It is not merely that speeches, statistics, and records of every kind must be constantly brought up to date in order to show that the predictions of the Party were in all cases right. It is also that no change in doctrine or in political alignment can ever be admitted. For to change one's mind, or even one's policy, is a confession of weakness. If, for example, Eurasia or Eastasia (whichever it may be) is the enemy today, then that country must always have been the enemy. And if the facts say otherwise then the facts must be altered. Thus history is continuously rewritten. This day-to-day falsification of the past, carried out by the Ministry of Truth, is as necessary to the stability of the regime as the work of repression and espionage carried out by the Ministry of Love. [The Ministry of Love's charter is to enforce loyalty and love of Big Brother through fear, torture, and brainwashing - maybe even waterboarding.] - George Orwell, 1984

No comments: