Right-wing stupidity, thy name is Goode!
Rep. Virgil Goode (R-VA) felt it necessary to announce that he will not be sworn into office using the Koran.
The guy is a fifth-term Representative, so you would think that he would know that the oath of office is not taken on any holy book at all. But, just maybe, his constituents were afraid that he was a closet Muslim and he felt the need to dispel their fears with this announcement.
Nah, not bloody likely.
We should all look forward to future announcements by this half-wit telling us that Rep. Goode will NOT be celebrating Ramadan this year, nor will he complete the Haj or attend mosque.
Was there one single person is his district that was seriously worried Rep. Goode would be forced into taking his oath of office on the Koran? Did anyone really imagine that Rep. Goode was secretly a Muslim?
If not, then just what purpose does this kind of announcement serve? Rep. Goode says it has nothing to with bigotry, so what is the reason, then?
We keep hearing from Republicans about how they respect people's right to practice their religion, and that they really only oppose the jihadists. The reality seems to be that they have a deep problem with Islam in any form. Just like all other religions beside Christianity, they are fine as long you don't practise them or make your belief in them public. If you hide your belief in Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, etc. and acknowledge your deep shame in rejecting Jesus, then Republicans will good-naturedly let you slide as merely 'inferior', rather than 'dangerous'. At least until now, that is.
Republicans are now so far out of the "Big Tent" that it's sad. Even moderate or nominal Muslims are now a 'threat', a sign of how our immigration policies have failed us. Except that letting in Christian Hipanics is also bad in their minds. Only white Christian evangelicals should be allowed in, or else those weird people who believe in other religions will be elected to office... but no fearmongering, no bigotry, no hatred here in the party of Lincoln. No, sir. It's just time that we "wake up", whatever that means. We keep hearing Republicans telling us to wake up or face some nebulous consequences. Anyone ever a gotten a straight answer as to what "waking up" really entails to these people? It sounds to me like "wake up" is Republican code for "start hating vehemently".
Sunday, December 24, 2006
Saturday, December 16, 2006
Rank hypocrisy on Venezuela
Across the board in American media (news, opinion, talk radio, etc.) the term "dictator" is used in reference to Chavez, and suddenly we have become very concerned about those people in Venezuela.
For 40 years, Venezuela has had American-approved presidents who do nothing for the poor, help the wealthy immensely, and clamp down on domestic opposition. But most importantly, these presidents have been in thrall to the oil companies and have guaranteed that Venezuela will let these companies extract oil for a pittance. And nobody cared about Venezuela, or South America at all, really (except for the Colombian civil war). Then Chavez gets elected. Now Venezuela is one of our "vital interests" and we deeply care about democracy there.
Prior to Chavez, we had a political system in Venezuela that was ruled by the Punto Fijo accords. America liked this arrangement, because it guaranteed stablilty (and cheap oil), but little else. The Punto Fijo accord let two parties essentially take turns running the government and everyone else was deemed "unworthy". Elections were not clean, but America didn't care. These two parties did nothing to help the poor, which make up the majority of the population. Rather than demand a larger share of the revenue from their own oil, these parties instead launched on a huge borrowing spree from the World Bank for projects that went to benefit the elite and make the oil industry more profitable for the oil companies, while leaving Venezuelans to pay the bill. And this allowed the U.S. to control the economy of Venezuela even more tightly.
Not surprisingly, U.S. control did nothing for the poor and made the rich richer.
When Chavez gets elected, he faces a political system designed for little else but to accommodate U.S. interests and make sure that nothing changes. The opposition screams fraud, but has no proof, even though they control the voting system. The system has been designed to accommodate fraud and to make it difficult to detect it, so as to make the fraud engaged in by the two "legitimate" parties for decades okay. It's funny that nobody questioned this before, isn't it?
When we talk about the "opposition" we are talking about a wealthy elite of white or light-skinned people who are profoundly racist and refer to the poor (dark-skinned) as "monkeys" and "marginals" It's as if we have taken the worst of the American South and the feudal European aristocracy and combined them into one. Everything has been handed to these people; "connections" make sure they have high-paying jobs, not merit. The legal system is overwhelmingly designed to make sure that the lower classes don't trouble them. Police make sure these people do not have to actually encounter or even see the poor. The media is geared toward them and constantly puts forward the notion that this class is "better" and that they achieved their status due to merit. The government taxes the poor to pay for these wealthy peoples' college education in the U.S. and upon graduation they slide into oil industry executive roles. And this minority has controlled the government for decades. We are not dealing with idealistic people struggling against oppression. Instead, it's a class of spoiled, stuck-up, racist brats who no longer have everything stacked in their favour. Boo-hoo.
These are the people we are sticking up for in Venezuela.
As I said, when the opposition lost to Chavez, they went into full denial mode. In spite of closely monitored elections in a newly cleaned-up system, they claimed that Chavez's repeated electoral victories were fraud. Instead of a 70/30 split in favour of Chavez, they saw a 70/30 split in their favour. The polls showed otherwise, but people were too 'afraid' to speak freely under Chavez, or so their reasoning went. Yeah, the majority of poor people really wanted this wealthy elite to continue to rule, but were just too scared to say so.
In this "repressive dictatorship", the wealthy elite still controls the television, radio, and newspapers. The television news is strongly biased against Chavez, and allows the elite to live in fantasy world where they really are still on top. Near-treason is common, with opposition leaders pleading for a U.S. backed coup to restore them to power.
Can you imagine if the Democrats here in the U.S. had taken the same approach after Kerry lost? If they claimed that Bush was not really the President and openly asked for foreign countries to invade us to set things right? Now consider the oil industry lockout in Venezuela, which was the opposition's greatest undoing. The largest union, long in the pocket of the two parties formerly in control, from the industry that generates most of the country' income, combines with the oil industry executives goes on "strike", demanding not wage and benefit increases, but that the government step down in favour of the old parties. What they can't win at the ballot box, they attempt to win by extortion. They shut down the oil industry, which is in no one's benefit. Long story short, they are replaced and lose their cushy jobs, Chavez stays in power, and the flow of oil is restored in about a year. These bitter people, once wealthy with everything stacked in their favour, now have to compete in a fair system, and they don't do well. Of course, this is all proof of Chavez's "dictatorship", not their own failed bid to usurp power.
So now we have invade Venezuela to put Muffy and Thurston back into their old jobs and restore their way of life. In return, they will restore the old arrangement whereby we are guaranteed cheap oil. And if democracy has to go by the wayside for a couple of decades, so be it. Yes, we're deeply concerned.
For 40 years, Venezuela has had American-approved presidents who do nothing for the poor, help the wealthy immensely, and clamp down on domestic opposition. But most importantly, these presidents have been in thrall to the oil companies and have guaranteed that Venezuela will let these companies extract oil for a pittance. And nobody cared about Venezuela, or South America at all, really (except for the Colombian civil war). Then Chavez gets elected. Now Venezuela is one of our "vital interests" and we deeply care about democracy there.
Prior to Chavez, we had a political system in Venezuela that was ruled by the Punto Fijo accords. America liked this arrangement, because it guaranteed stablilty (and cheap oil), but little else. The Punto Fijo accord let two parties essentially take turns running the government and everyone else was deemed "unworthy". Elections were not clean, but America didn't care. These two parties did nothing to help the poor, which make up the majority of the population. Rather than demand a larger share of the revenue from their own oil, these parties instead launched on a huge borrowing spree from the World Bank for projects that went to benefit the elite and make the oil industry more profitable for the oil companies, while leaving Venezuelans to pay the bill. And this allowed the U.S. to control the economy of Venezuela even more tightly.
Not surprisingly, U.S. control did nothing for the poor and made the rich richer.
When Chavez gets elected, he faces a political system designed for little else but to accommodate U.S. interests and make sure that nothing changes. The opposition screams fraud, but has no proof, even though they control the voting system. The system has been designed to accommodate fraud and to make it difficult to detect it, so as to make the fraud engaged in by the two "legitimate" parties for decades okay. It's funny that nobody questioned this before, isn't it?
When we talk about the "opposition" we are talking about a wealthy elite of white or light-skinned people who are profoundly racist and refer to the poor (dark-skinned) as "monkeys" and "marginals" It's as if we have taken the worst of the American South and the feudal European aristocracy and combined them into one. Everything has been handed to these people; "connections" make sure they have high-paying jobs, not merit. The legal system is overwhelmingly designed to make sure that the lower classes don't trouble them. Police make sure these people do not have to actually encounter or even see the poor. The media is geared toward them and constantly puts forward the notion that this class is "better" and that they achieved their status due to merit. The government taxes the poor to pay for these wealthy peoples' college education in the U.S. and upon graduation they slide into oil industry executive roles. And this minority has controlled the government for decades. We are not dealing with idealistic people struggling against oppression. Instead, it's a class of spoiled, stuck-up, racist brats who no longer have everything stacked in their favour. Boo-hoo.
These are the people we are sticking up for in Venezuela.
As I said, when the opposition lost to Chavez, they went into full denial mode. In spite of closely monitored elections in a newly cleaned-up system, they claimed that Chavez's repeated electoral victories were fraud. Instead of a 70/30 split in favour of Chavez, they saw a 70/30 split in their favour. The polls showed otherwise, but people were too 'afraid' to speak freely under Chavez, or so their reasoning went. Yeah, the majority of poor people really wanted this wealthy elite to continue to rule, but were just too scared to say so.
In this "repressive dictatorship", the wealthy elite still controls the television, radio, and newspapers. The television news is strongly biased against Chavez, and allows the elite to live in fantasy world where they really are still on top. Near-treason is common, with opposition leaders pleading for a U.S. backed coup to restore them to power.
Can you imagine if the Democrats here in the U.S. had taken the same approach after Kerry lost? If they claimed that Bush was not really the President and openly asked for foreign countries to invade us to set things right? Now consider the oil industry lockout in Venezuela, which was the opposition's greatest undoing. The largest union, long in the pocket of the two parties formerly in control, from the industry that generates most of the country' income, combines with the oil industry executives goes on "strike", demanding not wage and benefit increases, but that the government step down in favour of the old parties. What they can't win at the ballot box, they attempt to win by extortion. They shut down the oil industry, which is in no one's benefit. Long story short, they are replaced and lose their cushy jobs, Chavez stays in power, and the flow of oil is restored in about a year. These bitter people, once wealthy with everything stacked in their favour, now have to compete in a fair system, and they don't do well. Of course, this is all proof of Chavez's "dictatorship", not their own failed bid to usurp power.
So now we have invade Venezuela to put Muffy and Thurston back into their old jobs and restore their way of life. In return, they will restore the old arrangement whereby we are guaranteed cheap oil. And if democracy has to go by the wayside for a couple of decades, so be it. Yes, we're deeply concerned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)