The Trouble With Liberal Democrats

Email Print

it turns out, Michael
owns Halliburton stock. Joseph Farah’s website expects
us to be surprised and angered by such hypocrisy. However, this
“revelation,” one of many featured in a
book by Peter Schweizer
, is not surprising, nor are other insights
into the disingenuous behavior of Nancy Pelosi, Noam Chomsky, Barbra
Streisand, Ralph Nader, and other so-called liberals and Democrats.

with two brain cells to rub together who is capable of reading a
newspaper realizes Moore is a hypocrite – or more accurately,
a conflicted liberal.


popular documentary, Fahrenheit
, blames the Saudis for nine eleven, the same way Islamophobic
neocons blame the Saudis for not only nine eleven but most of the
Islamic terrorism in the world. Of course, it is true the Saudi
royals are to blame for creating the Islamic Terror Network, commonly
called “al-Qaeda” in the corporate press, but only partially
to blame – most of the blame falls squarely on the shoulders
of the CIA, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and Jimmy Carter. In order to understand
how Carter, Brzezinski, and the CIA created and nourished what is
now called “al-Qaeda,” read Afghanistan:
The Making of U.S. Policy, 1973–1990
on the Digital National
Security Archive site. “Saudi Arabia managed to stimulate some
rebel unity [in Afghanistan] by withholding aid from the various
mujahidin parties until they agreed to coalesce and form a united
opposition front [or a terrorist organization]…. The Saudi
government, which deposited many of its contributions into a CIA
Swiss bank account, also gave direct support to several fundamentalist
groups.” In short, the Saudis (along with Pakistani intelligence)
were partners (and bankrollers) with the CIA. Instead of providing
his viewers with this salient history lesson, Moore blames the Saudis
and perpetuates the fairy tale Osama bin Laden, the Saudi eccentric
suffering from kidney disease and living in a cave in Afghanistan,
was solely responsible for nine eleven. Liberals, just like so-called
conservatives, buy the absurd and nonsensical official nine eleven
story without question.

supported the mad bomber of Serbia, Wesley Clark, for president
in the lead-up to the 2004 election – or rather non-election,
thanks to dirty tricks and Diebold voting machines. Many liberals
have no problem bombing kids and grandmothers with cluster bombs
and shooting up their hospitals and schools with depleted uranium
bullets if it is for a “humanitarian” cause (or excuse).
It is downright disgusting to realize many liberals and Democrats
supported Clinton’s criminal attack of the former Yugoslavia.
Now most oppose Bush’s invasion and occupation of Iraq –
because Bush is a Republican. It’s not the killing and violation
of national sovereignty that bugs Democrats. It’s simply the
fact a Republican is in the White House and everything he does must
be opposed. Of course, there are more than a few antiwar Democrats,
and most of them voted for the warmonger John Forbes Kerry, who
said he would out-Bush Bush in killing Iraqis. In other words, ending
the “war” was less important than making sure a Democrat
won, even if he would have continued and even escalated the criminal
“war” in Iraq.

and liberals seem incapable of understanding it does not matter
if a Democrat or Republican is in office – there will be invasions,
mass murder, corporate thievery, neolib foreign and economic policy,
encroachments on the Constitution and liberty, and an ever-growing
police state and police state outrages (the Democrat Clinton, after
all, oversaw the incineration of babies at Waco). Moreover, as history
demonstrates, more Democrats have started wars than Republicans.
Of course, since many Republicans are now neocons (and many founding
neocons are former Trotskyites), this has become a moot point.

Moore is a gun-grabber who hates the Bill of Rights. Many liberals
want to pick and choose their amendments to the Constitution (they
love the First Amendment, but not the part about freedom of religion).
Moore’s documentary on Columbine did more to confuse people
about the Second Amendment than any other bit of propaganda in recent
history. But fact of the matter is the founders realized the Bill
of Rights would be useless if citizens didn’t have the right
to bear arms.

can do without Peter Schweizer’s book. Both liberals and so-called
conservatives (or the reactionary Rush Limbaugh conservatives, for
lack of a better term) are two sides of one coin – they both
believe in the necessity of centralized government and support authoritarian
exercise of government coercion and violence against citizens. If
not for a number of social issues, Democrats and Republicans would
be identical – both believe they have the right to employ state
violence to make other people dance to their tune as they steal
their money and property.

7, 2005

Nimmo [send him mail] is
a blogger who lives in southern
New Mexico.

Email Print