XPost: alt.politics, alt.politics.democrats, alt.politics.liberalism 
 XPost: seattle.politics, talk.politics.misc, or.politics 
 From: gavin_m@bigpond.iinet.au 
  
 On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 02:01:52 GMT, BlackWater  wrote: 
  
 >Charlie Wilkes  wrote: 
 > 
 >>On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 12:33:30 GMT, bw@barrk.net (BlackWater) wrote: 
 >> 
 >>>On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 21:15:04 GMT, Charlie Wilkes 
 >>> wrote: 
 >>> 
 >>>>??? 
 >>>> 
 >>>>Is this why Americans are fighting 10,000 miles from home? 
 >>>>Is this a war to bring about the "end times" ?? 
 >>>>A lot of Cheney/Bush supporters think so. 
 >>> 
 >>>   Don't be a putz. Cheney is interested in power 
 >>>   and money ... not weirdo biblical crap. Despite 
 >>>   the rhetoric designed to suck-in fundies, Bush 
 >>>   is also a politician and interested in the same 
 >>>   things. 
 >> 
 >>The paradox I find interesting is that Bush's appeal includes these 
 >>"security moms" who want a safe, snug world for themselves and their 
 >>families, but it also includes the people who want a global armageddon 
 >>ASAP. 
 > 
 >   A proper time for some meta-commentary ... 
 > 
 >   Any politician worth his salt is something of a chameleon. 
 >   Bill Clinton is the hands-down expert in this department, 
 >   a worthy one for aspiring politicians to study. Bush does 
 >   appeal to "security moms" - and rightly so - but he's also 
 >   got what it takes to get the end-of-the-world types on 
 >   his hook as well. They're a bit suspicious of him, but 
 >   in contrast to Kommie Kerry ... well ... Bush seems like 
 >   "one of them". 
 > 
 >>Ultimately, one or the other of those constituencies is bound to be 
 >>disappointed, don't you think? 
 > 
 >   I'd have thought the falling sky faction would have given up 
 >   once the clock hit 12:01 on 1/1/2000 ... must have been a 
 >   MAJOR disappointment ! They all had to go out and get JOBS 
 >   again (which may explain the high unemployment rate). 
 > 
 >   In any event, Bush is far too much of a politician to dedicate 
 >   himself to the fundy faction, or pretty much ANY faction. Iraq 
 >   and Afganistan WERE about "security" ... but they were also 
  
 Afghanistan was purely about security.  Iraq was purely a grab for 
 money and strategic leverage over oil supplies.  Saddam was no threat. 
 He had no rational reason to attack the U.S. because he could not win. 
 Any examination of Saddam's career shows that he always had a rational 
 and straightforward reason for his actions. 
  
 >   about creating the "security" within which his personal power 
 >   can be excercised and his business associates can more freely 
 >   make a buck in the world. This is the game of politics as it 
 >   has been played at least since they learned to scribble stuff 
 >   on clay tablets. 
  
 Sure.  But I am just a humble voter.  I want good policies for the 
 country as a whole, not a good game of politics to enrich a handful of 
 people at the expense of everyone else. 
  
 Charlie 
 > 
 >   The only recent American president that wasn't good at it was 
 >   Carter ... and I think he got elected as a kind of political 
 >   suppository, to flush-out the remaining bits of the Nixon era. 
 >   Nixon got caught and handled it badly - which weakened the 
 >   valuable illusion of "government by/for the people". The powers 
 >   that be HAD to flush that indigestible bit out of the publics 
 >   belly. Carter was the answer, bland and (mostly) harmless. 
 >   A chocolate-covered Ex-Lax ... 
 > 
 >>>   Frankly, Israel can sacrifice a mountain 
 >>>   of red cows and our only response will be to 
 >>>   sell 'em some new ones. 
 >>> 
 >>>   Oh yea ... there was supposed to be 1000 years 
 >>>   of peace before the big biblical sendoff. Not 
 >>>   much chance of that ..... 
 >> 
 >>First we gotta have a Third Temple on the Mount.  And right now the 
 >>Arabs control the Mount, and they've got their own holiest-of-holies 
 >>claim on the place.  So, the Jews are gonna have to go up there and 
 >>level whatever the Arabs have built and construct their own 
 >>magnificant edifice in order to fulfill Christian prophecy. 
 >> 
 >>That's why the U.S. fundies are pushing for Bush.  He's creating an 
 >>environment of chaos in the Middle East, which they hope will broaden 
 >>out into a global holy war between Judeo-Christianity and Islam. 
 >>Islam will lose, the Temple will get built, and the Millenium will 
 >>commence. 
 > 
 >   It won't, of course, and "chaos" in that part of the world 
 >   isn't anything new. But, if the fundies are willing to plunk 
 >   down the campaign donations ... let 'em think whatever they 
 >   want. 
 > 
 >>But of course the Jews will need ashes from this perfect red heifer to 
 >>daub on the workers who eventually go up to the Mount to build the 
 >>Temple, because otherwise Jews can't go there in the first place. 
 >>Rules are rules.  The good news for the Armageddon set is that a 
 >>suitable heifer has now been produced and will reach sacrificial age 
 >>in a year or so. 
 > 
 >   Fortunately, most Israeli politicians share the same 
 >   characteristics as ours and all the rest. They'll 
 >   think to themselves ... "You know, I can act-out 
 >   this biblical stuff about ending the world - OR - 
 >   I can plan to stick around and be THE GUY IN CHARGE, 
 >   with all the perks, for the next 50 years.". 
 > 
 >   They'll choose the latter ... and find ways to defuse 
 >   and sabotage the fanatics who would mess-up their gig. 
 >   Sometimes SELF interest equates to PUBLIC interest, 
 >   even if it's accidental. 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)