Category Archives: Bush

The People Vs. Dubya & Dubai

Bush, Political Economy, Politics, Terrorism

…When in doubt, use the critical compass of private property: To understand the American people’s splenetic response to the transaction, pretend U.S. ports were private and not state run.
In all likelihood, if ports were privatized, we’d be witnessing similar pickiness as to who operates them. After all, the titleholders would have to underwrite the endeavor and would thus be extra cautious, for they’d be liable for the costs of an attack, not taxpayers. In a free market, even the perception of insecurity would cause insurance costs to soar. Fairness doesn’t factor into it.
…This is the American people’s back yard. They feel they own the ports, which is why they responded as cautiously as any proprietor who prizes and protects what is his.

The excerpt is from my new column, “The People Vs. Dubya & Dubai.” It leads on WorldNetDaily today. I look forward to your comments.

The People Vs. Dubya & Dubai

Bush, Political Economy, Politics, Terrorism

…When in doubt, use the critical compass of private property: To understand the American people’s splenetic response to the transaction, pretend U.S. ports were private and not state run.
In all likelihood, if ports were privatized, we’d be witnessing similar pickiness as to who operates them. After all, the titleholders would have to underwrite the endeavor and would thus be extra cautious, for they’d be liable for the costs of an attack, not taxpayers. In a free market, even the perception of insecurity would cause insurance costs to soar. Fairness doesn’t factor into it.
…This is the American people’s back yard. They feel they own the ports, which is why they responded as cautiously as any proprietor who prizes and protects what is his.

The excerpt is from my new column, “The People Vs. Dubya & Dubai.” It leads on WorldNetDaily today. I look forward to your comments.

Democracy à la Dubya

Bush, Democracy, Iraq, Middle East

Democracy ala Dubya has two sections. Here are excerpts from each:

To Democratize Or Not To Democratize

In his State of the Union Address, the president branded the United States as the world’s “partner for a better life.” He also recommitted “our nation” “abroad” “to an historic, long-term goal”: seeking “the end of tyranny in our world.” To discredit those who oppose recreational, unprovoked wars, coups, and other state-sponsored global interventions, Mr. Bush deployed the “isolationist” epithet.
The president’s proselytizing is unconstitutional and has been undertaken with no real authority. If Mr. Bush is so bewitched by the demos—the rule of the many—he should try some Athenian magic on the foot soldiers who’ll be fighting and financing his schemes.
So how about a referendum on this question?

Elect A New People
While throwing money and men to Moloch, the commander in chief ignores that the Arab Street has always been more militant than its leaders… The only way Bush will get the democracy he desires in the Arab world is by dissolving the people and electing another, to paraphrase Bertold Brecht…

Blog away.

About Democracy ala Dubya, Jay Homnick of The Reform Club writes: “Ilana Mercer has summed up her recent critques of George Bush’s Middle East policy in one powerful essay wherein every word sparkles. Agree or not, not to be missed.”
There is an interesting thread at The Reform Club, to be followed here.
Thanks Jay.

A Liar by Any Other Name

America, Bush

Bush excluded all analysis (including from his own highly regarded experts) that didn’t comport with his thesis about Iraq. He adopted (posthaste and post hoc) as his preferred sources of information corrupt parties like Egypt, Jordan, ex-KGB man Vladimir Putin, and Ahmad Chalabi. He ignored objective reality, invading an indisputably hobbled country, launching the invasion when “an effective inspections regime was in place,” after having “effectively caged Saddam.”
Yet labeling Bush a liar is apparently “slander and defamation,” to repeat Bill O’Reilly.
Fine. For the sake of semantics, how does “criminally negligent” grab you? Proving intent ought not to be a hurdle since Bush still holds that his destruction of lives (American and Iraqi) and property (American and Iraqi) was worth it. But if mens rea is a sticking point, I’ll settle for negligence, with an emphasis on breach of duty.