KARL ROVE, America’s Josef Goebbels

After George Bush’s retirement, many hoped his political guru would do the same. Unfortunately, “Turd Blossom” Rove, the architect and “brain” of Bush’s career, had no intention of fading. He now has the WMD “Citizens United” USSP decision which he uses skillfully to accumulate millions from anonymous corporate donors to unseat Democrats, which was partially accomplished in 2010. Rove’s organization, American Crossroads, raised $200 million in one month before 2010 Mid-terms – in undisclosed corporate cash. Ordinary citizens may only donate up to $2,400 per candidate, but corporate money is unlimited and untraceable – thanks to George Bush’s Supreme Court appointees. [The legacy of the damned continues.]

Karl Rove was instrumental in selling America six fraudulent elections and two wars – made possible by his stealthy intrigue. In the previous century, Josef Goebbels, Hitler’s Propaganda Minister, was successful in deceiving Germany into embracing totalitarianism, exterminating the Jews, and waging war against the world. The common characteristics in both are an insatiable desire to deceive and a psychopathic disorder so immoral the deaths of millions fail to register on their well-vacuumed consciences.

Josef Goebbels was indispensable to the rise and fall of the Third Reich. Karl Rove was indispensable to George W. Bush’s advent which led to the decline of the United States. Both will live in infamy.

Unlike former political advisers in U.S. history, Karl Rove was authorized to manipulate world events, military conflicts, terrorist alerts, and the timing of each to advance his boss. Even Josef Goebbels did not wield as much leverage. How could a consultant be given so much power? Because Rove was the avenue on which George Bush came to power and remained for eight years. Without Karl Rove, George Bush would have continued a mediocre business career in Texas. Rove saw Bush as a ticket to fame and, thus, rode the family name piggyback to the White House.

Rove’s tactics are renowned. His planting of false evidence to confuse investigations is well-documented in the DVD and book BUSH’S BRAIN.

We all strongly desire truth but must be careful not to grab what appeals to our preconceived notions of where it rests. Opportunists, like Rove, take advantage of the soft spot (thirst for truth) by creating misleading images, forgeries, and counterfeits that produce instant gratification, but in the long run cause dismissal of the entire package – which is the ultimate aim.

Events, associations and timing suggest Karl Rove was behind the January 2, 2001, break-in of the Niger Embassy in Rome and subsequent forgery constructed on stolen official stationery that was crucial in the selling of the Iraq Invasion. It is known that Karl Rove’s friend, Michael Ledeen organized a meeting in Rome in December 2000 to gather evidence to support the planned war. Ledeen was Karl Rove’s foreign policy advisor and is strongly suspected of being part of the Niger Embassy burglary in Rome where only government stationery and seals were lifted – material that was then used to forge documents implicating Saddam Hussein in the purchase of high-grade uranium from that African nation.

The masters of machinations are still in business. The pattern is the focus of this piece for the sake of forecast. Momentary waves are inaccurate predictors of the future, but underlying currents are. The pattern of deceit by unscrupulous right-wing political operatives, such as Karl Rove, Josef Goebbels and Frank Luntz, are the catalysts.

What are their goals?

To reshape America in the form it held during the Robber Baron era – where there were no social programs while obscenely rich moguls maneuver to funnel all wealth into the hands of the ruling class. In essence, when the political operatives’ aims are complete, it will mean the reinstitution of slavery. If the movement cannot outsource American industry, it leaves the borders open for illegals to snatch what jobs remain.... at lower and lower wages. NAFTA, CAFTA, and all other such trade agreements are simply methods to destroy the middle-class, abolish collective bargaining, and uproot the nation's economic base. Republicans are notorious for abandoning international treaties which protect us while embracing foreign treaties that destroy us.

Gov. Scott Walker is just one of Rove’s recent trophies. If not for Karl Rove’s AMERICAN CROSSROADS which funneled millions into Walker’s campaign, there wouldn’t have been the plan to abolish collective bargaining for public sector unions – a central goal hatched by Rove years ago in his quest to make Republic rule permanent. In brief, Walker is not the originator; Karl Rove is.

What are their military aims?

To remake America into a military empire where outsourced mercenary forces do the bidding of the ruling elite by subduing competitive nations (and destroying them if they defy America's superiority). Read PNAC's documents. They are far more shocking than at first glance. Nations that even hint of competing against America commercially are to be attacked preemptively – according to PNAC's blueprint. So, even if a country does not have a substantial military but competes against the U.S. economically, the rightwing US military is obligated to take them out.

Notice Republican leniency towards China vs. intolerance of Cuba. As long as Communist China is furnishing American corporations slave labor and cheap products, they're fine. But Cuba is different; it’s unwilling to appease corporate giants up north, thus the embargo 50+.

To use whatever means (legal & illegal) to subvert democracy in the U.S.; to undermine opposing parties; to marginalize and frame the opposing party as "unpatriotic," "un-Christian," and "un-American"; to character assassinate opponents and to assassinate them literally if the initial fails; to manipulate the nation into one-party rule so their other aims can proceed unimpeded. Obama doesn’t have a prayer unless he starts to recognize enemy traits and tactics. (But I solemnly doubt he has the will to perceive clearly due to his long-embedded nature of compromise, concessions, and consensus. His blindness is leading to our death.)

Karl Rove is the political guru behind this movement's rise to power with only a brief recess of Democratic majority. Without his deceptions, dirty tricks, lies and outsourced subversive tactics, America wouldn't be where it is today. Pandora's Box has been opened. Karl Rove initiated "Swift-Boat Veterans for Truth." Rove was the person who instigated the smear campaign in South Carolina 2000; against Max Cleland in Georgia 2002; redistricting Texas and recalling in California; and deposing Dan Rather while at the same time winning in 2004. He is the force behind the 2010 Mid-terms – raising millions of corporate, undisclosed money to resurrect the party that drove America in the ditch. Outing CIA Agent Valerie Plame as an act of vengeance for her husband’s role in exposing George Bush’s fabricated war has Rove’s signature all over it.

But somehow he manages to avoid prosecution and isn’t even called on the carpet for failing to appear for a congressional subpoena. Patrick Fitzgerald stopped short of Rove, settling for the fall guy, Scooter Libby. Who got to Fitzgerald?

Then Eric Holder, Obama’s Attorney General, doesn’t have the courage to prosecute traitors from the regime of the damned. Obama is only concerned about WikiLeaks because it exposed criminal activity in Washington, not the crimes nor the real criminals. Karl Rove gets off scot-free while America suffers from his dastardly deeds – endless wars and never-ending poverty.

There are many more characters in the movement who have served despicable roles.... Jack Abramoff, Ralph Reed, Tom DeLay, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, John Bolton, Bill Kristol, Newt Gingrich – all right-wing, about 200 white men in all, including members of PNAC and AEI. And let's not forget the roles of billionaires Richard Mellon Scaife, the Koch brothers (David & Charles), and Rupert Murdoch – who funded and founded right-wing "think-tanks" and "news" fronts which seed false information and provide the movement its momentum on into the 21^st century. The Tea Party is just a sample of their creation. They are bitter, angry white men with an agenda to push us back to the Dark Ages. Rove and Luntz are just their employees.

THE ARAB REVOLT ROLLS ON: Today Libya; Tomorrow?

For the past two months as the drama has unfolded in the Arab world, time and again the prescient words of Bertolt Brecht have come to mind. The spectacle of the deluded Gaddafi, confined to his redoubt in Tripoli, dismissing the masses in revolt as drug-crazed simpletons manipulated by Al Qaeda, while claiming that the people love him, recalls Brecht’s pithy advice to the authorities on the occasion of the 1953 Berlin workers’ uprising:

The Solution

After the uprising of the 17th of June

The secretary of the Writers’ Union

Had leaflets distributed in the Stalinalee

Stating that the people

Had forfeited the confidence of the government

And could win it back only

By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier

In that case for the government

To dissolve the people

And elect a new one.

Tyrants and all others corrupted by power seem incapable of comprehending the forces of anger, rage and rebellion that are unleashed once the long-suffering masses have cast off their fear and committed themselves to toppling their oppressors from power. This tide of popular anger has now been unleashed in the Arab world and no-one can say with any certainty where it will end. Brecht might have been writing for those now on the march for their freedom, when he penned the following lines ‘In Praise of the Dialectic’:

But many of those oppressed now say

What we want will never be.

If you’re still living, never say ‘Never’!

What is certain isn’t certain

Things will not stay as they are

When the rulers have spoken

The ruled will speak

Who dares to say: Never?

On whom does it rest if oppression remains? On us.

On whom does it rest if its grip’s to be broken?

Likewise on us. Whoever has been struck down, rise up!

Whoever feels forsaken, fight! He who has understood his condition, how can he be held back?

For the vanquished of today are the victors of tomorrow                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  And from ‘Never’ will come ‘Before the day is out!’

What was ‘certain’ about the Arab world and the Middle East at the end of last year – a few short months ago – now isn’t certain. The supposedly careful calculations upon which governments, academic and journalistic ‘experts’ in international relations, advisers to the oil industry, the defence departments and the armaments manufacturers whose interests they promote, have been thrown into complete confusion. The response of western politicians to the toppling of the dictators with whom they were so recently doing business, has been delightful to behold. The Obama administration and the UK’s ConDem government wriggled and squirmed when faced with the plight of their close ally Hosni Mubarak in Egypt. Clinton and Hague tried desperately to avoid deserting him, initially claiming that his government was ‘stable’. Having happily ignored the human rights abuses, the torture chambers and the unrestrained corruption of a despotic, kleptocratic regime for decades, they suddenly began to talk about the need for reform, urging the despot to facilitate a ‘peaceful transition’ to something more democratic. Former prime minister Blair, the Middle East Quartet’s special envoy, has been close to Mubarak and a recipient of his largesse in the form of free holidays at his luxury mansion in Sharm el Sheikh. He has clearly been discomfited by his friend’s predicament. Blair must also feel the present pain of Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi for whom he himself recently went to such great pains in persuading the former terrorist in chief to abandon his WMDs and sign up to the war on terror. Of course, the opening up of the Libyan oilfields to the western oil giants was also a factor in the rapprochement. Just as in the cases of Egypt and Saudi Arabia, Libya’s unbroken record of tyranny and repression of its own people was not allowed to stand in the way of realpolitik and a good business deal, supposedly in Britain’s ‘national interest’.

The tide of democratic revolution in North Africa and the Middle East has still to run its course and where that course will lead it is still too early to tell. The situation in Libya is at the moment on a knife edge. It is already clear that Gaddafi’s regime is proving more obdurate than the Tunisian or Egyptian regimes, and his capacity to launch a counter-offensive from Tripoli should not be underestimated. The outcome of the struggle there may depend on the balance of tribal loyalties as well as the balance and quality of armed forces. But it is becoming increasingly clear that in this case, as distinct from either Tunisia or Egypt, there is a real possibility of Western intervention, either sanctioned by the UN Security Council under pressure from the US and Britain, or, as in Kosovo, as a NATO exercise without UN backing. The enforcement of a ‘no fly’ zone over Libya would necessitate a bombardment of the airfields. This would amount to a direct attack on the country and would rightly be regarded as such throughout the Arab and wider Muslim world. At the moment, (04.March), there appears to be some reluctance in EU and US government circles to move in this direction, but the intensity of their demand for Gaddafi’s removal compares strikingly with their reluctance to abandon Mubarak. And, of course, until recently Gaddafi was a pariah to the Western powers, whose hostility towards him had little to do with his appalling human rights record or his support for terrorism. Other regimes worldwide with records as bad as or worse than Gaddafi’s have enjoyed – and continue to enjoy – good relations with those Western leaders now so incensed about the Libyan dictator. The US did not in the past threaten to indict Suharto of Indonesia, Pinochet in Chile or the Contras in Nicaragua for crimes against humanity when they were slaughtering their own people. On the contrary, they were able to commit their crimes because they were armed and actively backed in their criminality by the United States government. Despite his recent rehabilitation by his erstwhile enemies, Gaddafi is too much of a loose cannon to be accorded the degree of support enjoyed by other pro-western dictators. He is too unpredictable and is seen to have too many undesirable friends, such as Hugo Chavez, in the anti-imperialist camp.

Nevertheless, since he was brought in from the cold, the ties to his regime have become firmly established. Here for example, through his son, Saif al-Islam, the London School of Economics, where he was a research student, has become enmeshed in a web of lucrative business and academic connections with Libya. These have also involved a US based consultancy, the Monitor Group, which is responsible for a multimillion dollar contract with the regime intended to improve Gaddafi’s image in the UK and the US and to promote academic, government, and business exchanges. As a result of these disclosures, the LSE’s director, Sir Howard Davies, who is a senior advisor to the Monitor Group, has been forced to resign. Others associated with the Monitor enterprise include academic historian Francis Fukuyama, author of The End of History, and the prominent neo-conservative advisor to the Bush White House, Richard Perle. Saif al-Islam, who claimed last week in Tripoli, as his father’s mercenaries were firing live ammunition into unarmed crowds, that the regime would ‘fight to the last man, to the last bullet’, was, apparently regarded by his academic tutors at the LSE as a genuine liberal and democrat. He was even allowed to give the Ralph Miliband memorial lecture last year – an event dedicated to the memory of the late Marxist professor, father of the Miliband brothers, who taught at the School for many years. It is difficult to imagine any greater insult to his memory. But such are the ways of ‘competition in the market place’ for cash-strapped academic institutions, and such is the understanding of ‘national interest’, that such things are to be expected.

So where does this leave the uncompleted Arab revolution? As distinct from the largely hypocritical responses of Western and other political leaders, motivated largely by what they perceive to be their own national interests, or the interests of their global alliances, the only genuinely democratic response must be one of unqualified support for the revolutionary forces engaged in courageous struggle against oppressive regimes. There can be no tolerance for any attempt to co-opt such popular movements; no attempts to divert them or to limit their demands to accord with the interests of their own elites or the interests of international corporations, should be countenanced. Continued and determined pressure from beneath to ensure that the lid of repression is not clamped down again, can succeed. No matter from which sources they may come, all attempts to divert the mass movements into negotiations for compromises that would leave the old power structures in place, must be resisted.

Long-established power structures in the Middle East are tottering. The old canard to the effect that the Arab peoples are incapable of democratic self-government is being exposed for what it is. It is becoming clear that those who for so long have peddled this story are deeply worried at the prospect of popular democracy in the Arab world. Now that the democratic revolution sweeping the region looks likely to succeed, the Western democrats seem deeply worried by the prospect that the old authoritarian elites may be swept away by a tide that they are unable to stem. Today it suits them to support the overthrow and prosecution of Gaddafi in the hope that they will be able to control the course of events after he has gone. But tomorrow, should the tide of revolt threaten the Saudi monarchy, it will be interesting to see how they respond to the prospect of their closest ally biting the dust.

How Many Freethinkers Fantasize About Religion? I Do.

Do you ever tell people about your fantasies? I do, on occasions.
Sometimes, it's gotten me somewhere. Other times, things did not work
out as I hoped. I remember one woman's comment, very deflating: "Don,
if people were interested in your fantasies, they wouldn't be
fantasies anymore."

Nonetheless, I want to tell you about one of my recurring fantasies.
Don't worry; it has nothing to do with sex.

It's about time travel. Nothing grandiose, like having a chat with
Socrates or interviewing Napoleon—just a reverse journey back to a few
childhood scenes. My fantasy returns to 1946, 47 or 48 when I was in
3rd, 4th or 5th grade at St. Barnabas School in Southwest
Philadelphia. I had teachers named Sister DeChantal, Sister Lucy and
Sister George.

In the fantasy, I would ask questions in religion class. Nobody ever
asked an original question during those years. We were assigned
questions to ask! And we were expected to write out the answers—and
know them for tests later in the day.

Now, after what seems a century or two, I have many questions—all
original, not assigned. What fun it would be to put a few of my today
questions to the good nuns of many yesterdays ago. How would they
reply? Would they provide answers, or would my questions puzzle, shock
or offend and be referred to higher authorities, the parish priests?
Or, would they just beat the hell out of me for being Satan's little
facilitator?

I don't have any specific questions in mind for these fantasies, but I
can make up a few without a moment's hesitation. Nothing profound—I'm
genuinely interested in what the nuns of that time would have said
that never would have occurred to me then because we were to memorize,
not think. For instance, questions such as:

Why does God desire my worship?

Why does he welcome sacrifices?

Is he in difficult circumstances?

Is he poor or hungry?

How do my works satisfy him? I am (was) a little boy clueless about
the nature of things—he was (and presumably, still is and always will
be the nuns would say) the infinite, all-powerful lord of the
universe. I'm a grain of sand and he is everywhere and eternal. Why
me?

How can we know that he is who the nuns say he is? I heard other
adults are not even Catholic but say God favors them? Who's right?

Is it really true that God "gives rain for praise, gives sunshine for
prayer and blesses a boy simply because he kneels?"

I did not say this was my only fantasy—I have others having nothing to
do with boyhood time travel, nuns, religion or God(s) and would be
glad to share a few, depending on one thing or another (e.g., are you
female, cute and open-minded?). But, I remember that woman's comment
long ago, so I won't volunteer any more of my fantasies. Unless I
change my mind.

Be well.

Donald B. Ardell is the Well Infidel. He favors evidence over faith, reason over revelation and meaning and purpose over spirituality. His enthusiasm for reason, exuberance and liberty are reflected in his books (14), newsletter (566 editions of a weekly report) and lectures across North America and a dozen other countries. Write Don at awr.realwellness@gmail.com

Iris Vander Pluym Discovers, Classifies and Explores Prospects of Treating A Terrible New Malady – CPD!

"Iris Vander Pluym" is a pseudonym adopted by an "an unapologetic, godless, feminist liberal who lives in New York City." (This is her self-description.) I have not asked, but from reading her blog, I'm pretty sure she would caution that as bad as things are in American extremist politics, they can always get worse. Much worse. See her incisive website - http://perrystreetpalace.wordpress.com/author/irisvanderpluym/

On February 14 of this year, Iris penned a pretty cool tongue-in-cheek blog suggesting that new research offers a promising treatment for CPD, the dreaded "Conservative Personality Disorder." It was a send-up, of course - there is NO treatment, cure or even hope for a cure for a malady this dreadful. But, it's interesting and wicked fun to consider a partial list of CPD symptoms:

* superficiality;

* hierarchical worldview

* willful ignorance

* irrationality

* hyper-religiousness

* global warming denialism

* unwavering belief in young earth creationism and the efficacy of prayer

* anti-intellectualism

* emotionality

* authoritarianism

* bullying; controlling and manipulative behavior

* tribalism

* sense of entitlement

* misogyny

* support for "traditional family values"

* anti-choice and anti-contraception

* constant reinforcement of unexamined privilege or bias

* consistent viewership of Fox News

* outright rejection of others' rights to privacy and personal autonomy

* self-righteousness while judgmental, hypercritical, scornful and disdainful of out-groups

* delusions of persecution and martyrdom

* sadism and vindictiveness

* amoral

* rigid

* poor facility with native language

* limited dimensionality of thought

* little critical thinking ability

* stunted self-awareness

* compulsive political behavior in the service of extreme right-wing views

These are indeed frightful symptoms. There seems little hope for those so afflicted? These behaviors are "counterproductive and dysfunctional in the personal, interpersonal, and societal dimensions." Sufferers destroy "relationships, communities, entire nations and vast swaths of the planet." She terms the toll from unchecked, untreated CPD as "truly staggering." I don't doubt it for an instant.

Ms. Pluym acknowledges that while we all display some of these symptoms some of the time, few other than sufferers of the disorder display most all the symptoms nearly all the time. She is a tender-hearted and compassionate observer, it seems to me, for she goes so far as to grant that many of the behaviors are "appropriate and quite healthy in certain contexts." If only all commentators left and right were so gracious. The criteria for the presence of CPD are two-fold: persistence of noted symptoms over many years, and pervasiveness. All aspects of personality are affected.

So, what is the new research that seems to offer hope of a treatment for CPD? It's all about our evolving understanding of the brain. Learning more about how the brain works, where certain functions reside and what triggers one thing or another. Even CPD sufferers carrying around a wondrous organic supercomputer more powerful than anything IBM or other engineering wizards of the most futuristic technology can managed to design. Unfortunately, all kinds of wires and synapses and other factors can lead to serious malfunctions, as we see in the CPD-afflicted leaders serving in the U.S. Congress, legislatures and state-houses across the land.

The research, which was focused on the effects of meditation, show the following:

* Learning and memory. Meditation helps boost both. Perhaps meditating would mitigate one of the worst symptoms of CPD - forgetting the values the sufferers claim to cherish while improving consistency between their arguments and their actual practices.

* Emotional control. Meditation calms, which anyone who has witnessed CPD sufferers on Fox News and other conservative, wingnut outlets knows is an obvious sign of the affliction.

* Empathy. Meditation has an effect on the brain that seems to induce more feelings for and identification with the experiences of others. Certain regions of the brains of CPD victims where this quality is headquartered clearly not functioning but meditation seems to turn it on, a bit.

Other problems areas are improved because of benefits that meditation brings to selected brain regions. These include perspective and anxiety reduction, accordingly to Ms. Pluym's critique of brain research with meditation as a treatment of CPD.

However, until such time as more studies are done which prove supportive of these early hopeful findings, exercise great care around CPD sufferers. Compassion and concern are in order, but so is caution and even trepidation.

Until this awful malaise can be brought under control, do not approach sufferers without caution. And, for the love of god (s) and country and all that is good, sacred and/or secular, please don't vote for them under any circumstances. The disorder is disastrous, dangerous and to those not heavily armed with predispositions of skepticism, reason, science and secular values, possibly lethal. Support further research on meditation and other promising treatments and hope for the best.

Donald B. Ardell is the Well Infidel. He favors evidence over faith, reason over revelation and meaning and purpose over spirituality. His enthusiasm for reason, exuberance and liberty are reflected in his books (14), newsletter (566 editions of a weekly report) and lectures across North America and a dozen other countries. Write Don at awr.realwellness@gmail.com

When Winning is not Necessarily Everything (So What Else is New?)

I used to be a pretty good football player (said with great humility and a red face).  This was in high school where I played guard for the Port Arthur, Texas Yellow Jackets.  It was Texas football at its zenith, and my team made it to the AAAA State Finals only to be beaten by the Highland Park Scotties of Dallas.  We suffered a sad loss but many of us were fortunate enough to get full athletic scholarships.  I was one of three lucky players from my school named to the Class AAAA Texas All State team. There were offers galore from colleges all over the United States from Texas U, Oklahoma and even Notre Dame.  Coaches from all over America came to your home to take you and your parents out for steak.  They wanted you to play football for them.  Plane tickets to visit colleges from all the biggies rained into your mailbox.

On campuses you were shown around by famous athletes.  Dandy Don Meredith was a star quarterback for SMU.  He picked me up at the airport and took me on a West Texas bullfrog .22 shoot at night with headlights on a farm pond somewhere just outside of Dallas.  We talked of our mutual love for the outdoors from duck hunting to frog-gigging.  There would be time to talk about SMU and the law school up there later.

At Texas A&M, Heisman Trophy winner, John David Crow, escorted me around the whole campus.  He was a gentle and friendly soul whose eyes bespoke great purpose when it came to the gridiron and the opportunities ahead from playing for the Texas Aggies. 

Under the concrete Kyle Field Stadium, Coach Paul (Bear) Bryant showed me and 2 other recruits some great films of the 1956 Texas Aggie Southwest Conference win at 9-0-1.  When Jack Pardee, a gaunt middle linebacker would hit the ball carrier to Bryant’s liking, the coach would shout “Boomba!” I, and many other players, had all but decided to sign with A & M and play for the Bear.  But without warning Coach Bryant left the Aggies for his alma mater, Alabama where he continued his career as the best college coach with the best college winning record ever.  Many of us decided to go to Texas A & M on a football scholarship anyway, and that was a big mistake.  Things just did not work out what with the Bear gone.  You see, Coach Bryant was tough, but he was fair.  No head games, just suck ‘em up and kill your opponent, simple football.  I truly believe Bryant would have suited up a girl in pads if she could hit better than the rest of the male players on his team.

I and over 100 of us freshman recruits at Texas A & M bailed and transferred to other colleges.  Bud Adams, former owner of the Houston Oilers and Tennessee Titans recruited me and 3 other friends of mine to go to his alma mater, Kansas University at Lawrence.  Adams and his original partners in the “foolish club” were forming the American Football League, and he asked me to go to a professional exhibition game in Dallas between the Baltimore Colts and the New York Giants.  Reluctantly, I agreed. 

So Adams flew over to my home town to pick me up for Dallas weekend.  He got off the plane to greet me with black tie, black trousers, a blazing hot orange sports coat and suede orange penny loafers with white centers where the pennies were supposed to go.  He must have been about 30 then.  On the flight to Dallas he told about him and his associates who were forming the AFL, and showed me a color sample for his new team the Houston Oilers.  “What do you think about robin’s egg blue?” he asked me.  I said, fine, but remember thinking it was quite different from team colors I was accustomed to seeing. In Dallas, I got to sit in the sky box of the Cotton Bowl Stadium with the likes of Bud Adams and Lamar Hunt.  It felt kinda lofty up there.

 From there Adams flew me and a great Texas running back to the University of Kansas, via Bartlesville, Oklahoma to visit the headquarters of Phillips 66 Oil.  There, Adams’ father, Boots Adams, was chairman of the board and showed us around.  There was a framed, black-and-white picture on his desk of President Eisenhower, signed, “From Dwight D. Eisenhower for his friend, Boots Adams.”  It looked like we had really arrived.  The officers of Phillips 66 were very kind and answered all our questions and told us that when we graduated from the University of Kansas to please contact them to discuss job opportunities.

Everything was looking good.  But this was to be my first significant disillusionment in life.  In football, I had always been taught by my high school Coach Clarence Underwood, that if you played your hardest and tried to tear the head off your opponent…………..you got to play.  The position was yours if none could defeat you.  My own Coach Underwood was an assistant to Coach Bryant at Kentucky, and they both exemplified the principle that if you were the best you played.

In Kansas we were Texas players with a Texas fan club.  But no matter if Coach Bryant principles prevailed.  They did not.  Those of us who were not spectacularly better players were misfits.  Suffice it to say that other players were already in place and being groomed for gridiron greatness. Their alumni supporters were from Wichita and Kansas City, not Dallas and Houston, you see.  I saw one of the finest linemen from the state of Texas relegated to 3rd team green shirt status on the KU practice field.  It was undeniable that he was the absolute best player by the simple fact that he could whip anybody else’s ass on the field.  And this great lineman left Kansas before the end of the school year.

We should have heeded the advice a Kansas coach gave us, “If I were your parents I would kick your asses and tell you to stay in Texas (where you are already enrolled in Texas colleges).”  He said it with a grin and much laughter.  We thought he was kidding.  We were only 19 at the time.  We soon discovered that if we were to play up there we first had to do some serious internship.  We had to prove ourselves, regardless of ability.   This was to be my first lesson in this harsh reality of life. So I stayed and did my internship and managed to eventually win a starting position on merit alone and to do quite well.  But it took longer than planned or what I thought to be necessary. 

Coach Taylor called me in one day.  I had another year of eligibility to play for the Kansas Jayhawks, he told me.  All I had to do was to lay out of school the coming spring semester and come back in the fall of 1963, play and then graduate at mid-term.  But I chose to graduate on time in spring of 1963 instead.  My peers were aghast at my decision.  They would have given anything to play another year on the college gridiron, but I had had enough.  After 10 years of football, I was ready to move on.  I am thankful for the opportunity to play for and attend KU and have no regrets about anything at all.  Call it my feelings and an expressed personal opinion.  No argument on that will come from me. They are nothing more than that.  I got to play my fair share of football at Kansas, and I am glad and thankful to have been a part of the Jayhawks football varsity.  I appreciate the scholarship and the college baccalaureate degree I obtained there as well.

Fast forwarding to the 2004 General Election where George W. Bush ran against John Kerry, I was reminded of my earlier experience that best often does not win.  In my view, Kerry was splendidly better qualified and tried his best to debate the issues of how he would help government work for we the people.  Debating Bush was not that big of a deal if Bush would have stuck to the issues and had not played more to the camera as a president you would “want to have a beer with.”

Bush’s backers during the election were ruthless.  They proved that truth did not matter and that the best man for the office had no business winning the White House.  They demonized Kerry as a coward because of Purple Hearts he was duly awarded by his superiors for his Swift Boat duty in Viet Nam.  At the Republican Convention delegates wore Band Aids with painted-on Purple Hearts facing the camera.  What a mockery of a young Naval Officer who volunteered for river boat combat duty in Viet Nam, and to put himself in harm’s way when his opponent, George W. Bush went AWOL obviously and did not attend Air Guard drills he had signed up for to get out of combat duty when the Viet Nam War raged.  Bush had checked the “Do Not Volunteer” for overseas duty slot on his application for military service.  Kerry got shot at and wounded.

 All the GOP had to do was to discredit Kerry’s brave service and to overlook Bush’s going AWOL from the Texas Air Guard.  The Boston Globe and the LA Times had been dogging Bush for years with ironclad records and affidavits from generals and servicemen who never saw Bush show up for duty.  Even General Turnipseed, Commandant of the Alabama Air Guard said, “I never saw Bush in my command, and I would have known if a Texas pilot had been assigned to me because I did my flight training in Corpus Christi, Texas.”  General Bobby Hodges, Bush’s old commander at Ellington AFB, Houston, said he didn’t see Bush at his command either, that if he had, “I would have had had him flying the 102’s.

Those old familiar feelings returned during the 2004 Election.  I had created a 30-second spot ad for television in still photographs of the horrors of our attacking Iraq.  In short, I tried to give it away to the John Kerry campaign to use.  A then prominent political consultant said it was better than half the professional productions he had seen coming out of Washington DC.  But Schrum and the Kerry Campaign were unreachable.  Incommunicado.  Only campaign donations could get through to them, and they got plenty of mine, you’re so welcome.

Bob Schrum, Kerry’s campaign manager, had been approached by several Hollywood notable producers and directors like Spielberg and Penn, to donate their talents to help Kerry get elected.  They would make film commercials free of charge for Kerry.  Schrum turned them down, according to many in the consulting field.  The campaign stingy consultants wanted to do all the Kerry commercials and receive all the money, not free of charge, but for millions of dollars.  A DC political consultant told me, “Winning was secondary to the money, I’m afraid.”

As long as this meistic realism exists, that money is number one, even compared to winning, we Americans will continue to lose.  We need to become aware that doing the right thing is not cheap.

When the Shoe's on the Other Foot 2111

In the year 2111, Brazil invades the United States. Presidente Jorque Arbusto gathers cherry-picked information from private intelligence that deliberately fabricates reports the U.S. has reconstituted its weapons of mass destruction program and is an imminent threat to Brazil, its Latin neighbors, and interests in the hemisphere

Brazil is the world’s’ super-power in 2111; the United Nations is headquartered in Sao Paula, the commercial center of the globe. And thus Presidente Jorque Arbusto assumes he can dictate to the world, cancel international agreements on a whim, and consume the remaining resources of the dying planet.

The U.S. has declined steadily since its permanent takeover by the Republican Party in the 21st century. China is vanquished by over-population and depleted resources, not to mention the lethal cloud of pollution hanging over its cities stemming from unrestrained industry. India suffers a similar fate. So, Brazil assumes world leadership.

Thus, Jorque Arbusto sets up a counterfeit “Coalition of the Willing” to attack the U.S. – except the U.N. doesn’t agree with the despot. In response, Arbusto bribes 30 postage stamp countries, including PagoPago, Guyana and Fiji, to go along with the plot – in name only, of course, since they have no military but are only placed on the list to cover Arbusto’s ass. However, it costs the Brazilian treasury in billions of Reals to bribe the “willing.”

The United States in the year 2111 is a retired empire – without much of a navy and no air force to defend itself. When the economy sinks, so does its capacity to wage war and maintain hundreds of military bases world-wide. But unlike the waning British Empire, the U.S. does not have commonwealth daughter nations to fall back on.

The reason the U.S. has no air defense is because Republican President Jeff Bush, great-grandson of George H.W., invades Cuba in 2098 which triggers retaliation from U.N. member nations which impose a “no-fly” zone from Miami to Seattle / Boston to San Diego.

Decades of decline classifies America with other faded empires of history, like Rome, Greece and Babylon. The rust belt stretches across the continent.

Yet Presidente Jorque Arbusto sees an opportunity. The farm-rich land of America is still the envy of the world with its fertile soil and lush forests. The Amazon rain forest is depleted, and the formerly abundant farmland carved from jungles is drained of nutrients. So, Arbusto creates an impression in the minds of Brazilians of a dangerous, gathering threat from a great northern empire.

But to energize the Brazilian people, Dictator Arbusto must lie about America and its leader, President Jeff Bush [who remains in office due to repeal of the 22nd Amendment which was only created by Republicans for the Roosevelt administration 170 years before]. Arbusto must remind Brazil that Bush killed his own people. But conveniently he neglects to tell them it was 16 years before and it was with Brazilian chemicals that Bush gassed 5,000 Mormons. Arbusto must call attention to America’s violations of U.N. resolutions – although 12 other countries do the same or worse, including Brazil and Dominican Republic, which has been a thorn in the side of its Caribbean neighbors

The final ultimatum is given. U.S. President Jeff Bush must resign within 48 hours or face a “shock and awe” bomb raid. Brazil’s military is deployed for invasion. The scheme is drawn seven years earlier, but few Brazilians are aware of plans by a secretive “think-tank” to make Brazil a world empire, written by a small group of militant hardliners which is aptly named the “PROJECT FOR A NEW BRAZILIAN CENTURY” (PNBC). Ulterior motives are concealed so citizens may not realize their real aims are empire and acquisition of soil.

Brazil’s chief ally is Portugal, the Mother Country, whose leader Presidente Antonio Blaro is considered Arbusto’s lap-Chihuahua in the grand plot. Blaro fails integrity but has a helluva command of the King’s Portuguese. He serves as Jorque’s spokesman.

Like lightning, Brazil’s superior military sweeps America. They destroy its historical artifacts, like the Alamo, Williamsburg, Statue of Liberty and Independence Hall, while protecting its food processing plants and land. Presidente Arbusto proclaims to the world, “Some say this is a war for SOIL, but I say to you, we come to make AMERICA FREE!”

Conveniently, he neglects to mention there are no WMDs and no connection to terrorists which did a job on Cristo Redentor overlooking Rio de Janeiro. Jorque Arbusto makes a grand photo op a few days later on the Aircraft Carrier Jose de San Martin and proclaims: “MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! Major combat operations in America are over!” Uniformed loyalists cheer while liberals back home jeer.

President Jeff Bush is caught months later hiding in a spider hole near the little town of Tea Creek. Presidente Arbusto proclaims on Brazilian TV, “We got him! The fighting will now subside because we have caught the evil ruler, Jeff Bush. We have come to LIBERATE America and to FREE its people. Because of my leadership, Brazil and its Latin brothers & sisters are now freer and safer.”

But the violence does not subside but increases by the day. The people of America do not see the Brazilians as “LIBERATORS” but as “OCCUPIERS.”

Jorque Arbusto goes on TV once more to label all resisters in America as “terrorists,” “evildoers,” and “insurgents.” which must be stomped out in order to liberate the 400 million Americans. He boldly states, "Anyone not with me is with the terrorists and evildoers." He invokes the name of "God" to energize the religious majority in Brazil. Jorque claims "God" ordered him to bomb Washington to make a "shock and awe" show for Americans so they'd be "softened up" for surrender.

Then he contradicts himself by asserting the conflict arises from “foreign terrorists” slipping over the Canadian border. In doing so, he places tight sanctions on Canada (his next war target, put on the list by the PNBC 7 years prior).

Arbusto goes further and classifies the Geneva Conventions “obsolete” and “irrelevant.” He orders intel interrogators to disregard international law. All prisoners are assumed to be “terrorists” and as such are granted no legal rights to an attorney and trials – only indefinite detentions at undisclosed locations where they are tortured and murdered at will. A few hundred Americans are locked up at the island prison of Fernando de Noronha, 350 miles from Brazil in the Atlantic, with no hope of justice or escape.

A few tokens are prosecuted for torture to appease Brazilian liberals – but only low-ranking enlistees, none of the top brass which are granted unconditional immunity. The ones ordering the torture are never investigated, much less prosecuted, because the directive originates from Presidente Arbusto himself. Young soldiers, barely past their teens, are sent to prison for Arbusto’s war crimes.

The Red Cross issues a protest and reports that 90% of the prisoners are innocent of any crime. Among the prisoners are American teenage boys and girls who are routinely stripped naked and raped at will by their Brazilian captors. Some prisoners are strung up with electric wires and dragged around the floor with leashes; while others are attacked by dogs.

The Americans who carry arms and resist invasion now are branded “insurgents” and “terrorists.” Their religion is belittled and blasphemed by the “liberators” determined to pry information from them as they stand for hours naked. Interrogators urinate on Bibles and mock Protestant pastors to provoke detainees. When Americans retaliate against the invaders, they are condemned. But no justice comes to the true perpetrators of prison abuse – originating from the Palácio do Planalto in Brasilia.

U.S. citizens cry foul, “Jeff Bush is caught and soon to be hung, so what’s your problem? We thought when you got him that’s all you wanted – regime change.”

But Jorque Arbusto is determined to “stay the course” and straighten out America, reform its government to conform to Brazil’s, and maintain a permanent military presence in the Northern Hemisphere to prevent other insurgents from regaining power.

Meanwhile, Brazil sees America as the nation that fostered a major terrorist attack against Rio de Janeiro two years earlier – although it is proven America had nothing to do with it. But Jorque Arbusto exploits Brazil’s ignorance and fear by invading a nation that has much mineral wealth and soil.

Most of the world recognizes the folly, but a sizable portion of Brazil doesn’t, primarily because they’re brainwashed by their rightwing TV network NOTICIARIO REPOSA. They remain loyal in the face of the resulting financial collapse and national shame.

Arbusto finally leaves office and is succeeded by Barrioto Obamio – who does nothing to investigate and prosecute the war crimes of his predecessor.

Now.... put yourself in the shoes of the Iraqis and Afghans. How would you feel if America was invaded and occupied for several years by a foreign power and our citizens subjected to indiscriminate torture and murder all because a two-bit dictator 7,000 miles away lied his nation to war for personal gain?

“In as much as you’ve done to the least of these, you’ve done unto me.” – Jesus Christ