Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bush's October Surprise

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-27-05 07:32 PM
Original message
Bush's October Surprise
http://www.antiwar.com/engelhardt/?articleid=7797

October 27, 2005
Bush's October Surprise
by Tom Engelhardt
Tom Dispatch

Those in the anti-fascist struggle of the 1930s who went off to fight in the Spanish Civil War were later termed "premature antifascists." Perhaps, in the same spirit, I might be considered a premature Bush-administration implodist.

On Feb. 1, 2004, reviewing the week just passed, I imagined us trapped in "some new reality show in which we were all to be locked in with an odd group of jokesters," and then wrote:

"When we finally emerge will there be a prize for the survivors? Will we discover, for instance, that our president and his administration have headed down a path of slow-motion implosion…?"

On Feb. 18, 2004, my optimism briefly surging, I imagined the future as a movie trailer (inviting readers back for the main attraction that spring or summer) and offered this synopsis of the future film – the wild fowl references being to Dick Cheney's hunting habits, then in the news – with:........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-27-05 07:36 PM
Response to Original message
1. says the Fitz indictments are the " end of the beginning' .
Edited on Thu Oct-27-05 07:50 PM by rodeodance


Our Imploding Future

To me anyway, this looks like a potential critical-mass moment. Of course, there are a few missing elements of no small import. The most obvious is an opposition party. The Democrats are essentially nowhere to be seen. In fact, whether or not they even remain a party is, at this point, open to serious question. Their leading candidate for president, Hillary Clinton, still wants to send more (nonexistent) American troops into Iraq and, like most other Democrats in Congress, has remained painfully mum – this passes for a strategy, however craven – on almost everything that matters at the moment. Even on the issue of torture, it's a Republican senator, John McCain, who is spearheading resistance to the administration.

The other group distinctly missing in action, as they have been for years now, is the military. Many top military men were clearly against the Iraq War and, aghast at the way the administration has conducted it, have been leaking like mad ever since. But other than General Eric Shinseki, who spoke up in the pre-invasion period, suggesting the kind of troop strength that might actually be needed for an occupation (rather than a liberation) of Iraq and was essentially laughed out of Washington, and various retired generals like former Centcom Commander Anthony Zinni and former director of the National Security Agency retired Lieutenant General William Odom, not a single high-ranking military officer has spoken out – or, more reasonably, resigned and then done so. This, it seems to me, remains a glaring case of dereliction of duty, given what has been going on.

As for the implosion of this administration, we have no idea what implosion would actually mean under the present circumstances. Even with a Republican Congress partially staffed with the American version of the Taliban, will whatever unravels over many months or even years, post-Fitzgerald indictments, lead to hearings and someday the launching of impeachment proceedings? Or is that beyond the bounds of possibility? Who knows. Will this administration dissolve in some fashion as yet undetermined? Will they go down shooting (as, points out Robert Dreyfuss in a striking if unnerving piece at TomPaine.com, they already are threatening to do in Syria)? Will Daddy's men be hauled out of the pages of the New Yorker magazine and off the front lines of moneymaking and called in to save the day? Again, who knows. (Where is Bush family consigliere James Baker, anyway?)

As you consider this, remember one small thing: So far, Hurricane Katrina aside, this administration has largely felt tremors coursing through the elite in Washington. The real 7.9 seismic shocks have yet to happen. Yes, in Iraq, the 2,000 mark in American dead has just been breached, but the Iraqi equivalent of the 1983 Lebanon barracks suicide bombing, in which 241 American servicemen died, hasn't happened yet. Yes, gas hovers near $3.00 a gallon at the pumps, but the winter natural-gas and heating-oil shock hasn't even begun to hit; nor has next summer's oil shock (after the Bush administration bombs Iran); nor has the housing bubble burst; nor have foreign countries begun to cash in their T-bills in staggering quantities; nor has oil sabotage truly spread in the Middle East; or unemployment soared at home; or the initial wave of a recession hit; nor have we discovered that next year's hurricane season is worse than this terrible one; nor… but I'm not really being predictive here. I'm simply saying that, once upon a time not so very long ago, this administration had a fair amount of room for error. Now, it's no longer in control of its own script and has next to no space for anything to go wrong in a world where "going wrong" is likely to be the operative phrase for quite a while. The Fitzgerald indictments, in other words, are probably just the end of the beginning. Whether they are also the beginning of the end is another question entirely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-27-05 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. "(Where is Bush family consigliere James Baker, anyway?)"--maybe
he is tired of bailing out Jr?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-27-05 07:37 PM
Response to Original message
3. The future is here. It just trickles down in the form of no tax revenue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-27-05 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. i know. and the WH and Repugs are still pushing for permanent cuts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-27-05 07:53 PM
Response to Original message
5. Three more years of stagnant economy, still no OBL, and what's this
The country sent Bush after bin Laden and he comes back with Saddam Hussain. The neocon response is, 'well, it's better than nothing' !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC