We’ve recently seen (or been subjected to) a great number of blatant exposures of just how screwed up the leadership of this nation truly is. While it’s long been a given that both major parties are corrupt, full of careerist opportunists, many of whom have never held legitimate occupations outside of government “service”, there are a good many of them (of late) showing ever more often the disconnect between those that gain a salary on the public dime and the manner in which the population themselves are expected to live.
Case in point, numero uno. Dianne Feinstein. Here we have a woman in an important leadership position on the Senate Intelligence committee. In a response to her constituency (those of us who took part in a massive international protest by sending letters and phone calls through the Electronic Frontier Foundation and American Civil Liberties union, in protest of the NSA’s massive ‘collect-it-all” campaign) she states that “the NSA does not conduct mass surveillance of US citizens.” Here point blank she states an obvious contradiction with the facts. Obviously she has a different sense of reality than the rest of us, otherwise, what is all this noise about the Edward Snowden documents all about? Why is it being protested to begin with if this is not what it is? Obviously, Dianne lives in a different world from the rest of us, for only a week after her response to constituents, the woman herself took the Senate floor to protest the CIA snooping into the committee’s computers themselves, in order to (most likely) prevent the Committee’s documents on torture and war crimes from reaching the public- which it still has yet to do. A double standard? Easily understood though when one realizes nobody in America has benefited more by the politics of “government by assassination” than Dianne Feinstein, whose rise into national politics began when she was propelled by the assassination of George Moscone into the seat of Mayor of San Francisco.
Case in point, numero dos. Mike Rogers (who sits on the same intelligence committee as Senator Feinstein) comes out and says, as regards Mr. Snowden, that he is “Obviously” under the influence of Russian intelligence.” That is said despite Mr. Snowden’s repeated denials of that, and the NSA’s own agents saying there is no proof of same, and that Mr. Snowden obviously acted alone. Mr. Rogers is not alone in his attempts to bully-pulpit Americans into a new Cold War with Russia, however, by any means necessary. Take a look at John McCain (case in point, numero tres). After making pals with the anti-Semitic rightwing loonies in charge of the Ukrainian regime change (most likely covertly funded by US CIA operatives, as have been many of the turnovers in the Middle East and South Asia over the last five years or more) he beats his breast and screams for sanctions against Russia, for taking back the Crimea, an administrative error concluded in the Soviet era by Nikita Khrushchev. When the Crimeans vote to realign themselves with Russia, not only Senator McCain, but the Fantastic Colonel Numbnuts, John Kerry (case in point numero quatro) jumps in the ring to visit Poland in order to reassure our allies there (as well as Estonia, oh don’t forget them!) that the USA will stand by them and offer military assistance “all options on the table”) to defend against any possible (if unlikely) Russian aggression against them.
Can you see where this is going? These people are so convinced that our foreign entanglements with so many numerous treaty parties around the world are more important than representing a constituency which is fed up with our national belligerence and “big stick throwing” to the point that we the people prevented them from rushing in on Syria and in so doing short-circuited their well oiled machinery of politics by gunboat. The American people are sick and tired of our treasure and prosperity being thrown away in foreign sands and our leaders continue to talk, and act, as if Russia were the very same entity she was under Communism, and that American “exceptionalism” gives us the right to intervene anyplace in the world we deem it necessary, or jump in when any of our weak sisters cry “masher.” Without the consent of the people, or, necessarily, that of Congress.
Witness President Obama (case in point, numero cinco). His intervention in Libya even pushed further against the rules than George Bush’s invasion of Iraq. at least George went to Congress for approval. But Obama circumvented both the Constitution and War Powers Act by insisting that because American ground troops would not be involved, this did not constitute “American involvement” and was as such a right of presidential fiat, alone. You never hear Democrats bitch about any of Obama’s anti-constitutional moves. They insist he must be being used, that he is only a puppet of the M. I. C; but I am afraid there is more to it than that. He is trying to make a legacy for himself, and the cheapest, easiest way, for any President to do that, is by making war. Awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, solely for getting elected, Obama has turned into one of the most war happy presidents since LBJ. “I’m not against all wars, just stupid ones.” But what he apparently needs shown to him - by both veterans, and pacifists alike-apparently dramatically and graphically, since he likes visuals, is that all wars are stupid wars. I do not think he has quite grasped that yet, since he’s willing to kill anyone who gets in his way, and “I’m getting pretty good at it.” If this is not the height of narcissistic sociopathy then who can say what is. There are guys doing hard federal time under the death penalty for similar cheek.