Category Archives: Tactics of Domination

The French Solution (Or The United Nations Rocks!)

Peacekeepers in the Big Apple
THE FRENCH SOLUTION LIVES! The French pride themselves on being French. The French Republic is a charter member of the United Nations and one of five permanent members of the UN Security Council. Jihadists worldwide love the UN. Muslims use the UN as a battering ram against Israel and the USA. The UN is less than worthless in its role as peacekeeper. Worthless would mean the UN would look the other way as both sides violate its resolutions. But as usual, they blatantly favor one side.

The routine goes like this. The media reports that the French UN forces almost fired on flyover Israeli jets in southern Lebanon, indicating once again that the UN peacekeepers will enforce nothing in the UN cease fire resolution that impacts on Hezbollah who is busy re-arming to match its strong vitriolic sloganeering, but they will go to "couragious" lengths in trying to enforce the restraints put on Israel as French officials announced yesterday that "thanks to the sangfroid of French soldiers...our troops barely avoided a catastrophe."

Really? I would have thought the French soldiers knew perfectly well the Israelis had no intention of firing on them, or indeed firing at all. If it took "sangfroid" to refrain from firing, rather than mere common sense, then someone is keeping a secret about French loyalties.

The self-congratuling statement was further reduced to comic relief when one online wit summed up the prevailing French attitude—as grotesque. The bravery of inaction. Awards ceremony forthcoming.

More response to the incident from a fellow who calls himself Ronin writes:

"This persitant problem actually has a very simple solution. The Palestinians want their own state and France apparently thinks they deserve it and are willing to risk their troops if necessary. All we have to do is declare France the New Palestine. I for one would kick in a few bucks in the name of world peace (to help move them). The French get their wish and become a Muslim safe haven. The Palestinians get their own state. Israel gets some much needed breathing room. The USA can take none of the credit. Everyone wins."

These French "peacekeepers" are so concerned about Hezbollah's ability to freely operate within Lebanon, to the point of claiming that they'll fire upon Israeli planes. Meanwhile, their OWN COUNTRY is being eaten from the inside by "angry, disenfranchised youths" (AKA freshly minted Jihadists).

Insanity is prevailing in France. They hate the US so much that they've rejected all aspects of our country, to the detriment of their own national and cultural self-interests. They've rejected the US to the point of embracing our enemies—who are in the process of weakening beyond all recognition their own nation.

The French leadership appear to have gone completely mad. At least they "fought like soldiers" in the early years of World War II. They were quite poorly led, using antiquated strategies leading to their quick defeat, but they fought for a few weeks against the Nazi blitzkreg.

Now, they won't even acknowledge that there's a war raging within their own borders. They're incapable of grasping their nation's future hangs in the balance, as it burns before their very eyes. They've gone stark-raving mad.

As I see it France has two possible futures—Sharia with bells or oppressive stage Communism crimped to a knuckle, both futures of their own making and with the latter following directly on the clicking heels of the former.

Churchill Speaks of Islam

Preaching death...

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property—either as a child, a wife, or a concubine—must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

"Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science—the science against which it had vainly struggled—the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome."

—Winston Churchill, 1899

Camp Moderation

The simple unvarnished truth about "moderate" Muslims from someone who signs off on the JihadWatch website as Battle of Tours:

Somebody Painted Mohammed

Muslims have a strange twisted logic about this aggressive intent to convert us to their Sharia. In their simple minds, like children, they think it is perfectly fine to criticize us, or threaten, but think it is totally wrong for us to respond in kind. Notice how they cannot tolerate any criticism at all, but quickly fall back upon their "victimhood" mode.

This simple fact must be caught and brought to light over and over again, without mercy. This is their defense, that they can threaten but cannot be criticized. It is childish. So we must make every effort to criticize them all the time, in all the wrong things they do, even if they are crying like babies about our doing this.

It should not sway us one bit. When Australian mufti make the "raw meat" comment about women inviting rape, Australians responded exactly how they should, without let up. We all should do this at every opportunity we have, criticize them with reason, and do not succumb to their childish notion that they are somehow above criticism.

Do it with class, so none will accuse of you of "racism" etc. The bigotry is really from their side, but they refuse to be criticized over it. So criticize it, at every opportunity, without let up. Hold them to their bigotry, their contradictions, their lies, with their feet to the fire, until they are screaming camp moderation. Muster a good show! Watch them squirm.

Separate But Equal?

Death to All Jews & Christians

Iurkey, once known as Asia Minor, is a land that was once highly Christianized. The locations of the seven churches who received messages in Chapters 2-3 of Revelation all were located in this land. Today, it is over 99% Muslim—though I understand it is more secular than many of the Taliban-type Muslim lands. We met some wonderfully "nice" Turks when we were on a cruise ship one time. With over 80 nationalities on board—the Turks had above average representation—and may I say—all were extremely kind.

I am aware that Christians are highly persecuted there—so none of this is really new as info in general. Yet I am glad that we are being reminded of this injustijce on Dhimmi-Watch as the EU was just debating inclusion of this country (I think I read that it got shot down—help me folks??). Should nations that relegate Christians and or Jews to second class status be major trading partners with us?

Facing 1-3 years in prison is pretty harsh for simply having a belief in Christ—but compared to what we read about the young 14 year old martyr in Iraq who was Islammed by BEHEADING 2 weeks ago because of his Christian ID badge notation—I suppose this is mild by comparison.

ISLAM—coming soon to a location near you!

Contributed by BB in Europe...

Moving Violations in Brunswick, GA

Lover's Oak in Brunswick

MOSS-TRAINED BRUNSWICK, GA—Project readers might be interested in an example of how voter suppression and denial of voting rights has allegedly occurred down along the Georgia marshes where I once roamed. The following paragraph is taken from an online source: "Brunswick is a small port city on the Atlantic Ocean of about 17,000 people, some 70 percent African-American, who are mostly poor. Just across the marsh are St. Simon's Island and Sea Island, where the G-8 summit was held in the summer of 2004. Both islands are home to some of the wealthiest people in the U.S., particularly Sea Island, which is a privately owned resort."

However, as I was checking a few facts, I discovered that Brunswick is 59.8% black, 33.1% white non-hispanic, 5.8% hispanic, and nearly 4% other. Median house value was rated at $61, 200, and median household income was $22,272. Outside the county seat of Brunswick proper, Glynn County, which includes the islands mentioned in the article the numbers do change dramatically: population 70,356; whites non-hispanic 68.9%, black 26.5%, all others just over 5%. Median household income came in at $38,765, while median house value did rise to $114,500.

These two sets of figures dramatically alter the perspective the author was trying to urge on readers at Workers World.

True. Elaine Brown, former chair of the Black Panther Party, moved to Brunswick in the fall of 2004 after participating in the protest activities earlier that year at the summit. There has never been a black mayor in Brunswick. Although the port creates enormous wealth, conditions for the majority of the residents are appalling—low wages, deteriorating housing, few social services, polluted water and air, et cetera.

Port of Brunswick
Port of Brunswick

Probably true. Brown decided to run for mayor and conducted a grass-roots, door-to-door campaign, explaining her campaign platform of channeling the resources of the city into raising the standard of living for the majority. She especially opposed a multi-billion-dollar "improvement" plan, backed by Sea Island Corp. and other monied interests, to tear down the entire black community in the downtown area and build expensive condominiums, apartments and houses. Over 400 volunteers canvassed the neighborhoods. Brown spoke at more than 70 churches. Discussions were held in bars, neighborhood centers, and on porches about what the community needed.

Probably true. Just weeks before the Nov. 8 election, two people came forward to challenge her residency in Brunswick: a white businessman, friend of the current mayor, and a poor African-American woman. Neither of them had ever met Elaine Brown and said they didn't know each other, yet both were represented before the Election Commission by the same high-priced lawyer.

True. The Glynn County Board of Elections decided that Brown had not lived in Brunswick for a full year, even though she had registered to vote on Nov. 4, 2004, at her Brunswick address.

True. Brown's name was removed from the ballot. The board ordered that any write-in votes would not be counted. A week later an appeals judge sustained the disqualification without comment.

Map of SE Georgia

Partially true. Then on November 7, one day before the election, a federal judge ruled that write-in votes for Brown would be counted. The next day, the election was held in Brunswick, Ga. There was a low voter turnout. Brian Thomas, the Sea Island candidate and proponent of the "redevelopment plan," won. This is what "democracy" looks like in south Georgia.

Perhaps this is what democracy "tends" to look like in south Georgia by those who don't see a larger picture (like most far left liberals today). The fact is other vital details have been left out which may or may not account for the election fraud of the Brunswick "white boy network." Ms. Brown ran as the Green Party candidate, often a stumbling block for "carpetbagging" candidates who rush into a new locale sensing opportunity without having read much of the small print. One suspects the Green Party is not an established route to public office in Brunswick, GA, and therefore Ms. Brown may have faced legal techicalities which her supporters such as Workers World may have simply ignored.

As a DC resident for nearly 25 years, I know that new or fringe political parties here must file signatured and ratified petitions, meeting all deadlines to be considered a viable ballot option, and those same parties must maintain a certain number of votes over a certain number of election cycles in order to remain a viable party in good standing. Is it not possible that this "small print" was the primary snag in her Green Party entrance into Republican turf, instead of the vicious conspiracy of rednecks and confederates that Ms. Brown and her supporters paint.

On her own website Brown posts an open and hopeful letter she wrote for the San Francisco Bay View where she calls on clemency and apotheosizes convicted felon and Crips gang co-founder Stanley Tookie Wiiliams, who nevertheless was executed on December 13, 2005 in the California electric chair despite a mass protest to have Gov. Schwarzenegger spare his life.

And in that same letter she trots out all the usual martyrs from the hey day of the BPP, Bunchy Carter, John Huggins, Fred Hampton, Bobby Hutton and Huey Newton, several of whom were gunned down by rival gangmembers and the usual arguments about local police oppression and CIA complicity in the black communities to shore up her roster of sympathies while adding George Bush to her list of contemporary enemies. I suppose the governator has made her list now.

US 17 in Brunswick

Okay. Fine. Dandy even. But most of these unfortunate events Ms. Brown embraces with a rather obvious longing took place over forty years ago, a fact that seems lost on a generation that seems to seek perpetual war rather than dedicating new resolve to focus on moving forward. We could start by playing by the rules as we find them and winning by them instead of whining and pleading oppression and bigotry at every turn. Notice that Ms. Brown does not refrain from using race-loaded language in describing her opponents.

Comprehend this. The world is unfair, and a lifelong struggle for most of us, of whatever race or creed we imagine ouselves. Hell, I feel victimized nearly every time I step into the streets to stretch my legs or when my health suddenly takes a strange turn and I can't get doctors to give me the time of day, but to suggest that I am being singled out EVERY time I face a hardship, is radicalized faulty thinking, and bad religion.

While it happens often enough (think Massachusetts native Robert F. Kennedy in NY, Hillary Rodham-Clinton carpetbagging in NY, Chicagoan Jesse Jackson in WDC), it always stuns me that voters would even consider someone who moves into their locale just to make an opportunistic run for public office—anyone but a carpetbagger unworthy of one's support. This is the true scandal in this news story, in my humble opinion. But then again, I'm not black, and I'm not running for public office. As they say, politics makes for strange bedfellows.

From Manifesto To Miller We Wave

Tower Of Babel

DATELINE SEPTEMBER 22, 2003. Manifesto blues. It's a quiet Monday morning after a long hard Sunday of politics akimbo as usual here in Washington DC.

A perfect time for a few audibles of the nickel and dime, pennies won't get it done, flying wedge Rabelaisian armchair quarterbacking. Time to bring out the chains and the chalk to rebuke the butt crack dishonesty and hair-licked phony aggression of the old orders who delight in honoring themselves on the vote-grinding gridiron at the expense of the far greater number of citizens who neither vote for them, nor join their hail mary parties of ideology run amuck.

Let's start by clearly articulating the two questions this website imagines itself eager and keenly shaped to explore. First, cutting to the brutal heart of the political beast, let's ask ourselves to define this summarily dismissed radical middle, or as some prefer, progressive centrist position in American politics. Strategists from both sides of the political divide often describe the huge chunk of independent voters they seek to persuade to their side of the scrimmage line as the "mushy middle" or the "wishy washy" centrists. Isn't that just sweet...

It seems to me that career politicians (and nearly ALL are, in one form or another, nee the lobbying industry) float about in the backfield, saying one thing, then doing another, whining and dining themselves on each other's mistakes, special perks, and class privileges, busily tilting the playing field, first this way, then that, with laws written by THEM (and their friends in feverish industry) for THEM (and their friends in feverish industry), all the while making exquisite excuses for themselves any spare moment when not ceremoniously blaming each other.

To dub the so-called "great unwashed" independent voter mushy or wishy washy is about as vulgar a criticism as the political tongue can muster, clearly revealing their disdain for they cannot take for granted. Except when those finely attired impresarios are calling us sinners and lawbreakers who particpate in foul and soon to be if not already illegal activities and events they would never, or of course, would readily repent of as soon as they are caught. Why would anyone as proud as a politician well-trained in exploiting every weakness of an opponent while flattering them to their face want to sully his record with a vote from these filthy sinners and armchair idiots who can't be bothered to vote unless they every generation or so truly hear a profoundly truthful package with which they can agree, is beyond me - something to do with the innate hypocrisy of the polling booth, I suppose.

Have I answered the original question of what exactly is the position of the radical middle? No, I have not. Because I cannot group together millions of people into a single category with a single phrase or page yet when I am only just beginning to understand the quest for honesty in politics myself. When 50% of the qualified electorate refuse to vote for its own leadership, something is wrong with the system. Should we blame the system, or should we blame the self-indulging manipulators of an experimental system which continues to draw millions to its shore every year from farflung places, millions of displaced pilgrims hungering and thirsting for a renewal of life still encouraging in context only to discover that the words they hear and read are far from the practices they find once they get here. America has lost her way.

Yet, we cannot ignore this context, nor diminish the contradiction in fettered worn-out political clichés. We must look to history and reality for a hint, then realize a litmus test of our true nature as Americans desiring to remain true to the American ideal.
I personally blame the two political parties who have put ideology and personal gain ahead of the truths of our founders. Yes, the world has changed, both for the better and for the worse, since these documents were composed, and while we do not wish to apotheosize and fossilize the works of the American founders in the same the tragic way some have done to some ancient Jewish writings, clearly, freedom is not for the few at the expense of the many, such as is evident from both sides of the aisle these days. Despite what the occasional down wind heckler says, the differences between the two political parties are stark, if only because as soon as one party takes up an issue or reclaims an inch of political turf, the other side immediately devises a linguistic strategy in opposition, crowing accusations of foul play and unsportsmanlike conduct, and concensus is again thwarted.

Thus such is the work that leaves ideological contradictions strewn all around the grounds like so many branches after a wind storm. Whole ideas swap parties rather than become fodder for common sense. Polarization strategy therefore keeps the game clearly in the hands of the political playcallers, the experts, the dreary tin soldiers of representative democracy, and not in the daily lives of individuals who have the guts and responsibility to cherish their constitutional freedoms more than the sudden death polite tomfoolery of political football.

I meant it word for word. The middle. The straight. The honest. The populist tradition resurrected, come back alive to war against the threat of extinction by the fictions of the two extreme political wings who each rest on laurels of figurative idealism and false choices rather than the real observations and primary choices of one's own daily circumstances.
Perhaps another manifesto entry another bright day will host a working list of the most obvious contradictions holding sway within each of the two major parties that operatives trot out for public consumption shelling us with ridiculous hypocrisies, blatant lies, and blind eye's turning on any given Sunday. Oh, the woes of 21st Century America stumbling toward the goal line with fewer and fewer hometown fans each year cheering...

Tis very sad indeed. But I love my country, for where else am I to go, and I would love nothing better than to stop this schizoidphrenic madness in its tracks, change the world into that kinder gentler new world order once promised, and call it a life worth living, but I am but a single voice in a nation of wall to wall wilderness. Where else am I to go, where else on this whirling oppressive planet aspires to those lofty ideals which seem to be wrecking America? China? Saudi Arabia? Argentina? Israel? An evaporating Europe? No, America is the world's greatest hope. Thomas Paine, in my view—the very first American in the ideological sense—penned that sentiment while also dismissing the powdered wig patriots of his own generation as somehow missing the point. And I still believe him, and dare hope for a rescue from the "trans-civilized" wolves now "guarding" the restless herds of America.

Thus secondly, we must now ask how might one expect this "muddled" independent perspective to impact American policy, both domestic and foreign in the unsuspecting future of a nation birthed on the concept of freedom for all and yet a nation seemingly bent on destroying itself in the polarizing process of excess practiced by those well-to-do's long-accustomed to wearing the threadbare wardrobes of empire, local or otherwise, that is to say, those political rainmakers nested comfortably in the rigeurs of the right and the left.

Ever since I first postulated the term "Radical Middle" as best describing the pinwheel of history I spent decades trying to parse, in the late Nineties, I meant it word for word. The middle. The straight. The honest. The populist tradition resurrected, come back alive to war against the threat of extinction by the fictions of the two extreme political wings who each rest on laurels of figurative idealism and false choices rather than the real observations and primary choices of one's own daily circumstances. Radical, as meaning to "take back" the truth from those who live only to propigate superstitions and the public lie, lining their own pocketbooks the whole way. Those who have warred against observable truth must be defeated. The truth of our condition must be merged with the truth of our aspirations.

The only common ground is the middle ground, the narrow way of personal freedom, personal responsibility, maximized as the liberty of self-abundance. To speak of the American people as a whole entity is to speak, and use political language in a socialist context, as if all Americans are in the same boat, as if this were ever true, despite the mighty words penned by Jefferson in the earliest works of American idealism. Does this socialist context betray our true American porridge of hard work, sowing and reaping, trustworthy stewardship, good neighbors to the end? This socialist context can easily become the tricky and dangerous curve on the crowded highway of rugged individualism. Yet, we cannot ignore this context, nor diminish the contradiction in fettered worn-out political clichés. We must look to history and reality for a hint, then realize a litmus test of our true nature as Americans desiring to remain true to the American ideal.

US Flag Circle
US Flag Circle At Washington Monument
We must look seriously and diligently, searching every crag and corner of our souls for hints. However, I must now defer to other pressing personal matters, and yet shall return to this topic with the urgency of necessity.

For this is the Scenewash Project Manifesto. Or lampshades of a different color.

Dennis Miller for prez, anyone?

Hmm... now that's a serious thought worth a few strokes on the keyboard, just for kicks. Not that I've heard anything of the sort brewing in the circles of no return. But since Arnold's loopy campaign has silenced no one concerning the impossible dream, would the obligatory pressures, courtesy of the media jackels and political bandits clamouring for blood be too much for even this obstentatiously bright fellow, originally from Pittsburgh?

I mean, step aside Arnold Swartzennegger, Henry Rollins and Jello Biafra. What with this new Robin Williams movie—MAN OF THE YEAR—about a late-night political talk show host running and winning the American presidency due out soon, this phenonmenon may very well become our future, and its name is Dennis Miller. Remember, who said it first.

This article is an automated repost from the Project Scenewash archives. Originally posted on September 22, 2003.

Meeting Bernie Sanders

Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)

The following is the transcript of Rep. Bernie Sanders' question-and-answer period with Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan during Tuesday's Financial Services hearing.

SANDERS: Thank you, Madam Chair.

And, Mr. Greenspan, nice to see you again. Mr. Greenspan, I have long been concerned that you are way out of touch with the needs of the middle class and working families of our country, that you see your major function in your position as the need to represent the wealthy and large corporations. And I must tell you that your testimony today only confirms all of my suspicions, and I urge you—and I mean this seriously, because you're an honest person, I think you just don't know what's going on in the real world—and I would urge you come with me to Vermont, meet real people. The country club and the cocktail parties are not real America. The millionaires and billionaires are the exception to the rule.

You talk about an improving economy while we have lost 3 million private sector jobs in the last two years, long-term unemployment is more than tripled, unemployment is higher than it's been since 1994.

We have a $4 trillion national debt, 1.4 million Americans have lost their health insurance, millions of seniors can't afford prescription drugs, middle-class families can't send their kids to college because they don't have the money to do that, bankruptcy cases have increased by a record-breaking 23 percent, business investment is at its lowest level in more than 50 years, CEOs make more than 500 times of what their workers make, the middle class is shrinking, we have the greatest gap between the rich and the poor of any industrialized nation, and this is an economy that is improving. I'd hate to see what would happen if our economy was sinking. Now, today you may not have known this—I suspect that you don't—but you have insulted tens of millions of American workers. You have defended over the years, among other things, the abolition of the minimum wage—one of your policies—and giving huge tax breaks to billionaires. But today you have reached a new low, I think, by suggesting that manufacturing in America doesn't matter. It doesn't matter where the product is produced. We've lost 2 million manufacturing jobs in the last two years alone; 10 percent of our work force. Wal-Mart has replaced General Motors as the major employer in America, paying people starvation wages rather than living wages, and all of that does not matter to you—doesn't matter. If it's produced in China where workers are making 30 cents an hour, or produced in Vermont where workers can make 20 bucks an hour, it doesn't matter. You have told the American people that you support a trade policy which is selling them out, only working for the CEOs who can take our plants to China, Mexico and India. You insulted Mr. Castle. Mr. Castle, a few moments ago—a good Republican—told you that we're seeing not only the decline of manufacturing jobs, but white-collar information technology jobs. Forrester Research says that over the next 15 years, 3.3 million U.S. service industry jobs and $136 billion in wages will move offshore to India, Russia, China and the Philippines. Does any of this matter to you? Do you give one whit of concern for the middle class and working families of this country? That's my question.

GREENSPAN: Congressman, we have the highest standard of living in the world.

SANDERS: No, we do not. You go to Scandinavia, and you will find that people have a much higher standard of living, in terms of education, health care and decent paying jobs. Wrong, Mister.

GREENSPAN: May I answer your question?

SANDERS: You sure may.

GREENSPAN: Thank you. For a major industrial country, we have created the most advanced technologies, the highest standard of living for a country of our size. Our economic growth is crucial to us. The incomes, the purchasing power of our employees, our workers, our people are, by far, more important than what it is we produce. I submit to you—may I?

SANDERS: (inaudible)

GREENSPAN: The major focus of monetary policy is to create an environment in this country which enables capital investment and innovation to advance. We are at the cutting edge of technologies in the world. We are doing an extraordinary job over the years. And people flock to the United States. Our immigration rates are very high. And why? Because they think this is a wonderful country to come to.

SANDERS: That is an incredible answer.

We feel the topic and the tenor of the arguments are even more critical in understanding the slide from the America that Mr. Greenspan describes to the nation that Bernie Sanders knows is now a reality.

So I ask you, Project readers, is Rep. Bernie Sanders of Vermont a working class hero or a commie socialist pig? Neither. But I like the man. I like his radical middle approach. The poor you will always have among you saith the realist, and mostly, the problems of acute poverty in this country are created by the poor themselves. It is very easy if dedicated to correct thinking to rise above the carp and crap of poverty by application of a few hard-won principles this country's founders once and Bernie Sanders now seems to stand for. The problem however, is that the middle class is shrinking for the very real quite avoidable reasons Sanders continues to pound. Who gets richer off the exporting of American manufacturing jobs? Rich people safe in their posh, talking head adminstrative jobs and leisures, not working class Americans needing a sweat and toil job. Yes, in order to stabilize the planet, other nations must have meaningful and lucrative work as well, but most of these very same nations are the first ones either banning or burning down hapless American restaurants every chance they get, and decrying American imperialism. Social distortion is a double-edged sword. The only winners shouldn't be the strutting suits wearing Ferraris and yachts and highbrows up their noses, while swearing up and down in their golden parachutes they're surely not to blame...

We agree with every word that this self-confessed socialist congressman from Vermont has testified. Now why can't a Republican feel the same pain in his gut about the state of the working poor that this socialist does? When Asia makes all the steel in the world, how can we possibly be safer as a nation, safer from internal and external enemies, than when we made our own steel? our own cars, washing machines, refrigerators, air conditioners...?

(Originally published at The Bellicose Augur on July 17, 2003, now a part of the Project Scenewash archives. We feel the topic and the tenor of the arguments are even more critical in understanding the slide from the America that Mr. Greenspan describes to the nation that Bernie Sanders knows is now a reality.)