A good Saturday morning rant

...from BuzzFlash:

Dick Cheney loves to go on the Sunday talk shows and grumble about how Democrats are blind to the hard realities of the "post 9/11 world." Dare to question The World According to Cheney, and you're branded a traitor, an enemy and - worst of all, you get slapped with the mother of all zingers: "you're stuck in pre-9/11 reality." Just what we need: lectures on reality from the criminally insane.

The impact of 9/11, profound as it may be, is dwarfed by the impact of the Bush-Cheney regime. If anything has altered reality, it is the ascendancy of these sickos to the highest positions of human power in our universe. Every aspect of geopolitical reality has been transformed by this mad cabal in a mere five horrific years. The world is indeed a different place since 9/11, due not to straw dog villains like Osama but to methodical perpetrators of raw all-encompassing evil like the Bush-Cheney gang. They have delivered to the earth and its dwellers a regime of toxicity and death. They have turned the clock back and resuscitated old and nearly-conquered demons and threats to our collective well-being and our very survival. They have breathed new life and vitality into the most dread scourges of our planet: disease, overpopulation, nuclear proliferation, environmental holocaust, torture, war crimes, genocide.

A quick, enjoyable read.

We're a trick and Bush is the ho

Gary Hart

A few weeks ago, I published an opinion piece entitled "And Now for Their Next Trick." The piece predicted that a new Iraqi government, more or less picked by the U.S., would invite the U.S. to stay in Iraq as a stabilizing force and that we were constructing permanent military bases for this purpose, all in accordance with the original neoconservative/imperial agenda in the Middle East.

I have been pleading with the American press corps for months to ask the Bush administration one simple question, a question designed to expose our true agenda: "Are we, or are we not, constructing permanent military bases in Iraq?" Full stop.

As we learned nothing from the French experience in Indochina, we have learned nothing from the 28-year British occupation of Iraq. Presumably, our remaining forces, say 50,000 to 75,000, will be garrisoned outside the chaotic urban areas where they will be used to keep Syria at bay, intimidate the Iranians, and protect the Saudis (and their/our oil). Problem is, garrisoned U.S. forces will be safe within their fortresses from suicide bombers but sitting targets for mortars and IEDs launched by primitive artillery.

Anyone thinking we are entering the end-game better wake up. Our neoconservative policy makers are still willing to risk the U.S. Army in a mad Middle East imperial scheme that composed the real reason for the Iraq war in the first place.

This whole Iraq deal has to come to a screechin' halt. Somehow. Soon.

Navel gazing

I'm not prone to write about blogging. It is what it is for each individually. Some want to make a living at it, others just to vent. We all do it for different reasons. Me? Hopefully to lend a little of my experience to the whole in order to move this nation, and in turn the world, onto a better path in order to assure a bright future for our progeny. It's good anger management too. After blogging regularly for almost 2 years now, I've been looking back to see how far we've come toward that goal. I ask this question now to get a feel for what we think of ourselves.

Were there no such thing as blogging and the 'alternative media' of the Internets, do you think the Chimp/Repukes/Neocons would have gotten away with their master plan? In other words, do you think the 'MSM' has been so corrupted, co-opted, and compromised that without us lookng over their shoulders the Chimp would not have 37% approval ratings and the public would still believe the lies told to get us into Iraq?

When?

So when are we gonna hear the 'MSM' come around to realizing the Republican Party is a criminal enterprise?

Tony C. Rudy, a former deputy chief of staff to Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), pleaded guilty yesterday to charges that he conspired with disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff to corrupt public officials and defraud his clients, as a burgeoning corruption probe took one step closer to members of Congress.

...

I don't know how it is in the rest of the world, but if this many folks connected to one entity get indicted in New York, the Organized Crime Task Force is on the case. We've had a lot of experience with this. It's called the Mafia. Rupert Murdoch's folks at the New York Post can tell ya all about them during respites from progressive-bashing. How many more Repukes will have to be indicted before the American people will be shown the truth? How many more Repuke seats in Congress will be traded for an 8x8 cell before the press will finally grow the testicles to tell the truth about the elephant in the room they continue to ignore. It's not about politics anymore, it's about organized crime.

Link via memeorandum

Friday Cattle Dog Blogging

Princess Shayna wakes up from her early afternoon nap.

Bush has no intention of leaving Iraq

Counterpunch

Events in Iraq are giving the lie to administration claims that all it wants to do is create a stable, democratic Iraq, and then leave.

The U.S. assault on the Mustafa Mosque, and the deaths of, variously, 16 insurgents or 37 unarmed worshippers (depending upon whether you believe the Pentagon or Iraqi police), has prompted calls from the Iraqi government for the U.S. to hand over control of security in Iraq to the local government.

But they're not doing it.

Why?

Because the Bush administration has no intention of leaving Iraq, particularly in the hands of its elected Shi'ia-led leadership.

The truth is that the U.S. is running Iraq from the giant U.S. Embassy compound in the Green Zone, and the Iraqi "government" remains a puppet regime. The truth is also that the U.S. has been spending billions of dollars not on Iraq reconstruction, which in any case is not being phased out if it ever was being attempted, but on building several large, permanent military bases inside Iraq, from which the U.S. has no intention of budging in the foreseeable future. (Want to guess where some of that "missing" $9 billion in U.S. reconstruction money has really gone?).

The Mosque attack also shows the terrible morass that American troops have been dumped into. They're getting shot at from all over the place--probably from mosques as much as anywhere--but if they shoot back, they end up killing innocents. And even when they kill people who were actually shooting at them, those people have families and friends who consider their deaths to be heroic and patriotic. So a blood feud against the American occupiers is made all the more bitter.

The U.S. has no interest in a successful Iraq government, since it is now clear that such a government will be Shi'ia led, and close to Iran politically. Therefore, my guess is that the fallback strategy is to rev up the Shi'ia militants, stir up civil strife, and perhaps even to get the Sunni minority, long the heart of opposition to the U.S., to turn to the U.S. for help, as the Kurds did years back.

U.S. troops have had a bit of a respite as Iraqi fighters were focused on other Iraqis in recent months, but the mosque attack, and word of several other massacres of innocents by U.S. forces, is sure to bring a renewed focus by Iraqi fighters on American soldiers. We can expect the body count, already past the 2300 mark, to start soaring.

I hate Bush and his handlers more with each passing day. Five years ago, I didn't think I was capable of this much hate. Thanks, assholes.

Fool me twice...

Foreign Policy

I used to think that the Bush administration wasn't seriously considering a military strike on Iran, because it would only accelerate Iran's nuclear program. But what we're seeing and hearing on Iran today seems awfully familiar. That may be because some U.S. officials have already decided they want to hit Iran hard.

Does this story line sound familiar? The vice president of the United States gives a major speech focused on the threat from an oil-rich nation in the Middle East. The U.S. secretary of state tells congress that the same nation is our most serious global challenge. The secretary of defense calls that nation the leading supporter of global terrorism. The president blames it for attacks on U.S. troops. The intelligence agencies say the nuclear threat from this nation is 10 years away, but the director of intelligence paints a more ominous picture. A new U.S. national security strategy trumpets preemptive attacks and highlights the country as a major threat. And neoconservatives beat the war drums, as the cable media banner their stories with words like "countdown" and "showdown."

The nation making headlines today, of course, is Iran, not Iraq. But the parallels are striking. Three years after senior administration officials systematically misled the nation into a disastrous war, they could well be trying to do it again.

Fortunately, we know more about Iran's nuclear program now than we ever knew about Iraq's (or, for that matter, those of India, Israel, and Pakistan). International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors have been in Iran for more than 3 years investigating all claims of weapons-related work. The United States has satellite reconnaissance, covert programs, and Iranian dissidents providing further information. The key now is to get all this information on the table for an open debate.

An accurate and fully understood assessment of the status and potential of Iran's nuclear program is the essential basis for any policy. We cannot let the political or ideological agenda of a small group determine a national security decision that could create havoc in a critical area of the globe. Not again.

"Not Again" indeed. This administration doesn't give a rat's ass for facts, truth, or reality, but keeping 'em from fuckin' us over this time might at least be possible because we're onto their game, but Congress and the Media have to grow some balls.

Attacking Iran will be a disaster that might just sink this country what with Bush and His Rats chewing at the hull from the bilges. Time to throw 'em all overboard.

How many chances do ya get, anyway?

Reuters

BLACKBURN, England (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice accepted on Friday the United States had probably made thousands of errors in Iraq but defended the overall strategy of removing Saddam Hussein.

Fuckin' great. The strategy was to fix the motorcycle even though it didn't need fixin', and you screwed up the tactics as well by leaving all the fasteners loose that were tight when you started. We won't go into the bullshit you pulled on the customer to con him into lettin' you do unnecessary work against his better judgment, let alone the overcharges and ripoffs on your way to figuring out you didn't know what you were doing, which you won't admit. Now you've ended up with a really broken bike that doesn't even run. Lucky thing, too. It'd be unsafe to ride if it did.

I've lost jobs for a Hell of a lot less than these assholes pulled in Iraq. What's it gonna take to get rid of 'em?

I guess the customer can figure out what to do with the self-styled-but-lying expert mechanics in November, if not sooner. Bush&Co are lucky: if this administration was in the bike biz, they'da been shot by now.

Iraqis are catching on...

Apparently, the Iraqis have their own immigration problems:

Defying the naysayers, who claimed that political consensus in Iraq could never be reached, Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish factions found common ground today, and tentatively approved a sweeping immigration reform bill specifically aimed at deporting all Americans.

Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari explained that the Americans had not been invited into Iraq, were here illegally, and were using Iraqi services without paying taxes.

However, not all in Iraq were supportive of this proposal. The President of the Iraqi Chamber of Commerce, a goat herder by trade, defended the Americans, claiming that they were merely performing the menial, dirty jobs that native Iraqis wouldn't do, such as defending the Country.

There is also a move underway to soften the harsh provisions of the bill though a guest worker program, by allowing Americans to become citizens of Iraq after six years in the Country. However, there is concern that under this program, the 135,000 American troops presently in Iraq will never leave.

They're learning American-style politics, seems like. Allah help them.

Try this Superman suit...

Are they fucking kidding me?

WASHINGTON - Soldiers will no longer be allowed to wear body armor other than the protective gear issued by the military, Army officials said Thursday, the latest twist in a running battle over the equipment the Pentagon gives its troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

...

Murray Neal, chief executive officer of Pinnacle, said he hadn't seen the directive and wants to review it.

"We know of no reason the Army may have to justify this action," Neal said. "On the surface this looks to be another of many attempts by the Army to cover up the billions of dollars spent on ineffective body armor systems which they continue to try quick fixes on to no avail."

...

I don't have much experience with body armor. The few times (2) I wore it (the heavy Vietnam-era flak jacket), I'd have rather done without, it reduced my speed and mobility that much. A couple of Iraq vets I've talked to said the Army-issue stuff, when upgraded to its highest level, hindered mobility to the point it was dangerous, which is the reason guys still wear the civilian stuff their friends and relatives sent over.

There's no point in having super-duper body armor if the troops can't function in it; if it leaves you a sitting duck. Why is it, in the quarter century since I went in, they haven't developed something good that the troops want to wear? I know body armor isn't as glamorous as new planes and ships, but by golly, we owe the grunts on the ground the best too. We have fighter aircraft that can take off vertically and ships that float on a cushion of air, yet we can't make body armor allowing the troops to be mobile and keep them safe at the same time? Until then, let them wear whatever the fuck they want to.

Hat tip to Kevin Hayden

This joke did strike me as funny...

Old White Lady had me goin' to the very end on this one. Ha!

Huh?

Somehow, I don't equate Neocons with with "Superfly" or "Shaft", but I guess it's all how you see yourself...

Fuck this

Fuck that, and fuck you.

Who....me?

I just started the war...

Nerve

Our pal Creature directs us to our other pal RJ Eskow:

...

This particular buzzword's going to bring him down. It's "bring it on," squared. Here's a man who's spent a lifetime losing his nerve, who blinks in thinly disguised panic when he's asked a question that's not in the script.

Suddenly his character is crystallizing for the American people, and so -- by inference -- is that of the party that chose him to lead it;

- "Nerve" is playing the game on the field, not wearing cheerleader whites and waving your arms from the sidelines;
- "Nerve" is serving in combat when you support a war, not hiding behind beer kegs and sorority girls' dresses while others die in your place;
- "Nerve" is making your own way in the world, not spending a lifetime financially dependent on your family and its friends;
- "Nerve" is letting all the votes be counted and standing or falling on the results, not sending John Bolton into the vote counting rooms in Florida to say "I'm from the Bush/Cheney campaign and I'm here to stop the voting."
-'Nerve" is not sending other people's kids to die or be maimed to prop up your failing image as a strong leader.

I could go on, but the zeitgeist is doing my work for me. Like they say down South: "Son, I just got one nerve left in my body, and you just got on it."

...

Spot on, especially the last line.

Immigration 101 for Beginners and Non-Texans

Texan (the good kind) Molly Ivins weighs in on immigration.

Anyway, it was '83 or some year right around there when we held The Fence climbing contest. See, people talked about building The Fence back then, too. The Fence along the Mexican border. To keep Them out.

At the time, the proposal was quite specific - a 17-foot cyclone fence with bob wire at the top. So a test fence was built at Terlingua, and the First-Ever Terlingua Memorial Over, Under or Through Mexican Fence Climbing Contest took place. Prize: a case of Lone Star beer. Winning time: 30 seconds.

I tell this story to make the one single point about the border and immigration we know to be true: The Fence will not work. No fence will work. The Great darn Wall of China will not work. Do not build a fence. It will not work. They will come anyway. Over, under or through.

Some of you think a fence will work because Israel has one. Israel is a very small country. Anyone who says a fence can fix this problem is a demagogue and an ass.

Numero Two-o, should you actually want to stop Mexicans and OTMs (other than Mexicans) from coming to the United States, here is how to do it: Find an illegal worker at a large corporation. This is not difficult - brooms and mops are big tipoffs. Then put the CEO of that corporation in prison for two or more years for violating the law against hiring illegal workers.

Of course, this has been proposed before, because there is nothing new in the immigration debate. As the current issue of Texas Monthly reminds us, the old bracero program dating from World War II was actually amended in 1952 to pass the "Texas proviso," shielding employers of illegal workers from criminal penalties. They got the exemption because Texas growers flat refused to pay the required bracero wage of 30 cents an hour. Instead of punishing Texas growers for breaking the law, Congress rewarded them.

Racists seem obsessed by the idea that illegal workers - the hardest-working, poorest people in America - are somehow getting away with something, sneaking goodies that should be for Americans. You can always avoid this problem by having no social services. This is the refreshing Texas model, and it works a treat.

Aren't y'all grateful that we're down here doing exactly nothing for the people of our state, legal or illegal? Think what a terrible message it would send if you swapped Texas with Vermont, and they all got healthcare. In Texas, we never worry about illegals taking advantage of social benefits provided by our taxpayers. Incredibly clever, no?

One nice thing about the benefit of long experience with la frontera is that we in Texas don't have to run around getting all hysterical about immigrants. The border is porous. When you want cheap labor, you open it up; when you don't, you shut it down. It works to our benefit - it always has.

Believe it or not, I didn't quote all she had to say. Agree with her or not, go read the rest.

What it's like

Reader Mel turns me on to this Guardian article.

At a press conference in a cavernous Alabama warehouse, banners and posters are rolled out: "Abandon Iraq, not the Gulf coast!" A tall, white soldier steps forward in desert fatigues. "I was in Iraq when Katrina happened and I watched US citizens being washed ashore in New Orleans," he says. "War is oppression: we could be setting up hospitals right here. America is war-addicted. America is neglecting its poor."

A black reporter from a Fox TV news affiliate, visibly stunned, whispers: "Wow! That guy's pretty opinionated." Clearly such talk, even three years after the Iraq invasion, is still rare. This, after all, is the Deep South and this soldier less than a year ago was proudly serving his nation in Iraq.

...

But with the Chimp's approval rating in the low 30's, even the 'thoroughly red' are opening their eyes. The troops are coming home and telling their stories of what's really going on over there. Even the Fox News crowd is beginning to see it.

...

Becoming a peace activist, he says, has been a "cleansing" experience. "I'll never be normal again. I'll always have a sense of guilt." He tells us that he witnessed civilian Iraqis being killed indiscriminately. It would not be the most startling admission by the soldiers on the march.

"When IEDs [Improvised Explosive Devices] would go off by the side of the road, the instructions were - or the practice was - to basically shoot up the landscape, anything that moved. And that kind of thing would happen a lot." So innocent people were killed? "It happened, yes." (He says he did not carry out any such killings himself.)

Blake, an activist with IVAW for the past 12 months, is angry that American people seem so untouched by the war, by the grim abuses committed by American soldiers. "The American media doesn't cover it and they don't care. The American people aren't seeing the real war - what's really happening there."

...

You put a bunch of scared, bewildered kids in a place where they can't tell friend from foe and can't speak the language, and then tell them it's a free fire zone, you're gonna get a lot of dead innocents. What does that remind you of? Begins with a 'V'.

...

A number of Vietnam veterans also on the march are a welcome presence. For all the attempts to deny a link between the two conflicts, for both sets of veterans the parallels are persuasive. Thomas Brinson survived the Tet offensive in Vietnam in 1968. "Iraq is just Arabic for Vietnam, like the poster says - the same horror, the same tears," he says. [my em]

...

I'm really fucking tired of people who speak of going to war so casually when they have zero clue of what it's all about. Just shut the fuck up. You certainly wouldn't be so cavalier if there was a draft now; would ya?

Bush's Top 10 'Vietnam' Mistakes

Nothing new, but all in one pile. Ivan Eland at Consortium News:

George W. Bush likes to toss around the words "democracy," "liberty" and "freedom" as justifications for almost everything he does -- much as Presidents Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon did during the Vietnam War.

But Bush has taken the abuse of language to new Orwellian depths by declaring his commitment to these hallowed concepts even as he asserts that he is the one who decides whether American citizens have any of the rights guaranteed in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

In many ways, America's "unalienable" rights have ceased to exist under Bush's theory of his own authority. They have been trumped by Bush's claim of "plenary" -- or unlimited -- powers as Commander in Chief during the War on Terror, a vague conflict likely to last forever.

Like some modern-day monarch, Bush says he is the one who decides if someone is imprisoned without trial, spied on without a court warrant, tortured, even murdered -- all in the name of defending American freedoms against enemies who "hate our freedoms."

Because the Bush administration, almost from the start, has eschewed any comparison of Iraq with Vietnam, officials apparently never read the history of the nation's heretofore worst war and have made the same 10 major mistakes:

Go get 'em.

Scapegoat Immigrants

This is a two-part post. First, Robert Scheer:

THERE IS no immigration crisis -- other than the one created by a small but vocal stripe of opportunist politicians, media demagogues and freelance xenophobes. So it has always been throughout the history of this country when anti-immigrant hysteria periodically reigns during low ebbs in our national sense of security and vision.

The script is as old as the Mayflower: A false alarm is sounded that the values, wages and safety of the roster of credentialed Americans are jeopardized by the "flood" or "tidal wave" or "river" sneaking across our porous borders -- be they Irish, Chinese, Jewish, Russian, Mexican or even the freed slaves seeking to earn an honest living in Northern cities after the Civil War. Any and all manner of societal problems are to be laid on these scapegoats, and the same simplistic solution offered: Find and deport them, and don't let any more in.

Having intermittently covered this issue for the Los Angeles Times over 30 years, I can well recall the peaks of panic in which we reporters were dispatched to the border and out into the fields to witness the arrest of people desperate to find work -- only to be embarrassed by the hunted eyes and clutched crosses of the enemy discovered.

Such frenzied attention was inevitably followed by a lull in which most Americans were quite happy to eat the food harvested by those same harassed and abused workers as well as entrusting the "illegals" with the care of American homes and children. On no other issue is there such an extreme disconnect between attitudes and actions.

This current xenophobia is no more warranted than it has been in the past. The number of claimed "illegal aliens" as a percentage of the population is clearly absorbable by the job market as our low unemployment rate demonstrates. Yet, the Republican Party and the Congress it dominates are teetering between driving undocumented workers further underground or taking a saner compromise approach.

This is a moment of truth for America. It is time we acknowledged that we need the immigrant workers as much as they need us and began to treat them with the respect they deserve.

Do we want them or don't we? Either way, we have to do what we have to do, but we have to make up our minds. The line between "legals" and "illegals" is becoming blurred, moreso in regard to low-skilled brown people from South of the Border than to highly-skilled brown-skinned software engineers from India, just for example.

Scheer makes some good points you should go read. I think he did well hooking up with the EssEffChron after leaving the LATimes. The Chron isn't quite as liberal as it used to be, due to a merger a coupla years ago, but it's a lot better than what the Times is getting to be.

The second part is about what this country is capable of doing when whichever "Yellow Horde" of the moment gets to be too hot for the pols to deal with it rationally. Not only am I interested in the history of my country, and my state in particular, but I just drove past Manzanar the other day on my way home from L.A. so it's fresh in my mind. Mrs. G grew up in farm country on our Central Coast with kids that were born in this joint. Her Grandpa not only sold most of their folks all their electrical appliances, but stored them while they were interned. Those folks were lucky. Many others had all their land and possessions simply stolen and had to start over upon their release.

Please go to the site with a few minutes to spare. There are a lot of links in the right-hand sidebar, including History & Culture and In Depth. I recommend the "In Depth". There is a "Virtual Tour" on the left that has a map and 360 degree photos. Click around a little, you'll find lots of stuff.

I think the camp they'll send us lefties to will at least be more modern. I'm holding out for WiFi. If I get to be in charge of who goes, the wingnuts will be lucky to get inside plumbing.

This immigration bullshit has gone on before as Mr. Scheer writes. All kinds of Europeans have been its victims back east, and Mexicans and Asians out west. Most of 'em, particularly whites, have been assimilated over time. Hey, with white people you have to know their last name cuz they speak English. Much easier to discriminate against "culluds" cuz they're easier to spot. Even if they speak English.

Which brings up a point: I think part of this whole deal has to do with language. Most of the Europeans that I've met can speak several languages due to proximity. It's not far to where a different language is spoken, they're right there, and it's fairly easy for them because they're exposed at a young age.

A good portion of the U.S. is so fuckin' insular and hidebound that I think a lot of people are insulted that furriners fresh out of the trunk of a car dare to speak their own language. I think we'd do a lot better if we started teaching practical languages in school, like Spanish and Chinese, if for no other reason than communicate a little bit when you go to town.

Communication fosters understanding, and we need a lot more of that. There was a sign on the wall of One-Eight's comm shack at Camp Lejeune: "Communications lends dignity to what would otherwise be considered a brawl." I think it fits here in general, in a country with 200 languages being used.

I took Russian in the 7th Grade. That was in the fifties when we thought we might need it. I haven't much vocabulary because I've never used it, but I can read the words and sometimes know what they mean. I speak enough Spanish to call 'bullshit' in the supermarket check-out line when Latinos are cussin' or otherwise talking about folks. They shut right up when they know you're onto them!

Ah, fuck it - if English was good enough fer Jesus, it's plenty good enough fer them Messicans.

I better not get started on football v. soccer.

Pardon the rambling, please. The pup's asleep on my feet again.

Maybe we should...

I'm pretty ambivalent about religion. As long as you're not trying to shove your beliefs up my ass, I'm okay with generally whatever you want to believe. Hey, I'm a live and let live guy. In fact, I'm all for just anything you want to do with consenting adults - kinky sex, worshipping a fire hydrant, whatever - if it blows your skirt up and it doesn't hurt anybody, have a nut.

Now, I'm not a religious man. Never once said a prayer to affect the outcome of a certain situation, but I don't consider myself an athiest. I just have to see shit before I believe it. If a big hand comes down from the heavens and shwacks me in the back of the head, I'll get behind it. Until then, I take the story of Jesus and all that spiritual shit like a fable. An interesting story of a good man who sacrificed to right some wrongs and help get society on the right path. I was baptized a Roman Catholic, and learned some good lessons while my religious education continued. How it ended is a story all by itself. However, the Ten Commandments, regardless of their origin, is a pretty good set of rules to live by, and I try to. That said, I've got a problem with the trend happening over the past decade.

I have a big problem with 'God' infiltrating our daily lives whether we want it or not. I have a big problem with religious nonsense taking the place of science. I've also got a problem with the rise of 'acceptable mysticism' over the past decade as well.

Come with me, Sherman, as we fire up the Way-Back Machine. We take you back to a time known as the Dark Ages, a pall that lingered for centuries over Europe and the Holy Land, where science and education once triumphed. A place where, before the Dark Ages, the great civilizations of Greece and Rome, of Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Persia, were curious about how their world worked and struggled to determined the natural processes once ascribed to Gods. We are still using scientific principles discovered thousands of years ago. All that was nearly lost in the interregnum which followed the fall of these great societies.

It was how I realized the 'American Century' was over. It was obvious in the final days of the Roman Empire, as it rotted from the inside under its own weight and corruption. As empire eroded, eaten away by 'barbarian' tribes from outside and corruption from within, as the lives of the poor became more hopeless, many turned to those who promised better, maybe even an afterlife that resembled Paradise. They turned to the Church, spurning science for the promises of a better, blissful future if they only followed 'God's rules'. Are you seeing the parallels (fundie preachers, islamist imams)? I'm not gonna spell it out because I'll be late for work if I do. These parallels got me thinking along these lines.

Religion is bad for society. It is bad for a progressive society. Religion is regressive, just as corruption is, clinging to a belief system antithetical to human evolution. And we have to evolve. We just can't help it. Societies which die do so because of stagnation, whether it be corrupt rulers or a strong religious bent, just as a body of water cut off from the flow of the stream becomes scummy and eventually toxic, a civilization that does not progress will eventually die from its own toxicity. Nature will move on, leaving those who do not move with her to wither and die. The historical timeline is littered with examples.

The rise of 'Christianity' in this nation (I noticed it about the time I left the Republican Party over a dozen years ago) signals several things to me. Namely, the average person has little hope for a better future. They are looking to the supernatural to give them the assurance their daily toil will not be in vain when their end comes. It also points up the corrupt nature of our leadership, preferring to preserve their power than to allow our society to move forward along with the natural order of things.

A prime example is the space program. Over thirty five years ago we were able to reach the Moon and put men there. Now it is impossible. By now, had we progressed normally (taking into account the progress we made over the 20th Century), we should have colonized the Moon and been in the planning stages to take Mars, at least. We should be looking outward instead of arguing over abortion and the separation of church and state. The second is the internal combustion engine. Come on, should we really be using petroleum more than halfway through the first decade of the 21st Century?

We have been restrained, our drive to explore and conquer the unknown stifled as our resources have been squandered in order to keep a very small few in 'the style to which they are accustomed'. 'Christianity' is filling the void for true governance. Why else, at this point in our evolution, would we be reconsidering the principles laid down in our Constitution that have served us so well for 230 years?

Call it whatever you want - a self-protection protocol of Planet Earth, human nature, or God's will - a society which stagnates or clings to the past will surely go the way of the dinosaur. We have a chance to stop the regression now, but religion has to be put in its place and so do those who feel it politically advantageous to wrap themselves in the cloak of religiosity. We need to progress, and that means a more liberal way of thinking. Conservatism, in whatever form, is poison, a cancer on the body politic, fanatical conservatism even more malignant, and it must not be allowed to govern our future. Those who don't meet change head on are certain to be run over by it.

Now go see PZ Myers.