UPDATED: ‘Three Blind (NEOCONSERVATIVE) Mice’

Classical Liberalism, John McCain, Middle East, Military, Neoconservatism, War

“They have been called everything from the three amigos, the three blind mice and the ‘axis of error’,” RT editorializes. They are “Senators John McCain, Joseph Lieberman and Lindsey Graham,” who “are just about as close as anyone in the US Senate. They travel together, make joint media appearances and seem to sing the same song in their appeals to the American people. That song often revolves around the need for more war.”

And they’re gunning for Iran and Syria.

The origin of the words to the Three blind mice rhyme are based in English history. The ‘three blind mice’ were three noblemen who adhered to the Protestant faith who were convicted of plotting against the Queen – she did not have them dismembered and blinded as inferred in Three blind mice – but she did have them burnt at the stake!(Here)

The moniker doesn’t work for McMussolini and the other two for many reasons, one of which is that the modern-day ignoble trio will come to no harm for their treason.

UPDATE (March the Eighth): How opportune. In his New American column, Jack Kerwick, Ph.D., has a fabulous primer on the strongmen of neoconservative thinking. Pay attention, in particular, to Jack’s meticulous habit of mind in tracing the sin of abstraction in the thinking examined, whereby “reason and morality are dislodged from the flow of history.”

Kerwick concludes:

“… For neoconservatives, reason consists of universal, abstract moral principles in accordance with which societies everywhere must be organized. For conservatives, in glaring contrast, reason and morality are embodied in culturally and historically-specific traditions.”

READ “An Honest Assessment of Neoconservatism.”

On Iran, Israelis Disagree With America’s Neocon Crazies

America, Iran, Israel, Neoconservatism, War

“What I learned growing up in a war-torn region is that a brave nation fights because it must; a cowardly one fights because it can” (March 26, 2003).

Fully forty four percent of a militarized and manipulated American population “stated they would support bombing Iran’s nuclear installations. A total of 70% also supported increasing economic sanctions.” To Israel’s great credit, Israeli popular opinion differs from that of Americans when it comes to a strike against the Islamic Republican of Iran. Via Brookings:

…a new poll shows, even though they are not fearful of Washington’s retribution if they go against U.S. advice. [Israelis] appear less influenced by the rhetoric of U.S. politicians competing for their embrace, and contrary to conventional wisdom, the Obama administration’s reluctance to support a military strike against Iran has apparently not affected their preference for Obama as the next president. In fact, their views seem to partly reflect the White House’s assessment of the consequences of war and the problems created by military action.
Only 19 percent of Israelis polled expressed support for an attack without U.S. backing, according to a poll I conducted — fielded by Israel’s Dahaf Institute Feb. 22-26 — while 42 percent endorsed a strike only if there is at least U.S. support, and 32 percent opposed an attack regardless.

UPDATE II: Paving the Way for a Rand Paul Presidency

Iran, Republicans, Ron Paul, War

Gas bag Newt Gingrich reiterated today, following victory in Georgia, his promise of Monday “to eliminate the government of Iran if it blocks passage through a key oil route in the Middle East.” Obama has already subjected Iran to an economic siege through ruthless, counterproductive, boycotts and sanction—all tantamount to a declaration of war. Yet the smug Mr. Gingrich still “described the Obama foreign policy in the region as ‘children’s hour.”

For those who still have faith in the Republikeynesians, no amount of good the big-government Republican troika might do can offset the war wrecking ball each one of is sure to unleash.

If Ron Paul cannot win the nomination, let BHO return to the throne and lay waste to the country, thus paving the way for a Rand Paul presidency.

UPDATE I: “Ron Paul’s strength in both the Vermont and Virginia Republican primaries came largely from Independent voters and, to a lesser extent in Vermont, Democratic voters who chose to participate in their state’s Republican primary. Although Mitt Romney won both states handily, Paul won a significant portion of the vote.” (CBSNews)

DELEGATES:

Gingrich 74

Paul 24

Romney 299

Santorum 99

UPDATE II (March 7): “Dennis Kucinich Offed by Democrats,” writes Lew Rockwell:

Even though he always ended up supporting the Democratic warmonger presidential candidate, the party decided to get rid of this voice for peace and civil liberties through gerrymandering. He’s no Ron Paul–Dennis is a socialist, for example–but he was often an ally for Ron on war and the police state. Dennis, now that you are freed from politics, I hope you start an organization to promote peace and civil liberties. Let the crazed protectionist Marcy Kaptur have the congress.

UPDATE II (2/26/2017): Napolitano-Koch Connection? (Sixth Sense)

Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, libertarianism, Media, Old Right, Political Correctness, The State

As you all know, I was no fan of Freedom Watch, which, in my opinion, had that distinct CATO/Beltway, left-libertarian bent. The following item, via LewRockwell.com, seems to lend credence to the Napolitano-Koch connection:

“Last year, [Koch-allied board members] used their shares to place two of their operatives — Kevin Gentry and Nancy Pfotenhauer — on our board against the wishes of every single board member save for David Koch. Last Thursday, they used their shares to force another four new board members on us (the most that their shares would allow at any given meeting); Charles Koch, Ted Olson (hired council for Koch Industries), Preston Marshall (the largest shareholder of Koch Industries save for Charles and David), and Andrew Napolitano (a frequent speaker at Koch-sponsored events). Those four — who had not previously been involved with Cato either financially or organizationally — were likewise opposed by every member of our board save for Gentry, Pfotenhauer, and David Koch. To make room for these Koch operatives, we were forced to remove four long-time, active board members, two of whom were our biggest donors. At this moment, the Kochs now control seven of our 16 board seats, two short of outright control.”

UPDATE I (March 7): My sixth sense doesn’t often fail me. I sensed something fishy about Napolitano. Was he intertwined with the Kochtopus or what? No wonder every women on Freedom Watch was from the (CATO run, as we find out) Independent Women’s Forum.

Read “Cato and the Kochs.”

UPDATE II (2/26/2017): The Rockwell link has disappeared. Fishy? But here is another hyperlink that suggests Andrew Napolitano was being pushed at CATO by lefty moguls, the Koch Brothers.

“Cato and the Kochs” by Will Wilkinson:

It seems clear enough that the Kochs are trying to take over by stacking the board. I have no idea what they’re up to, but judging from their board nominees and appointees, it doesn’t look at all good. On the other hand, the hand-wringing over the new Koch-nominated board members–Ted Olson, Andrew Napolitano, Nancy Pfotenhauer, and Kevin Gentry–strikes me as overwrought. It’s worth noting that David Koch has been on the Cato board for years, the whole time I was employed there and more, and I don’t remember anyone once suggesting he was an ideological or strategic danger to Cato’s mission. But suddenly he’s an existential threat! Cato and Cato’s chairman Bob Levy didn’t seem to have a huge problem with Ted Olson, a Solicitor General under G.W. Bush, when he was at Cato arguing for gay marriage on constitutional grounds. Andrew Napolitano is a stout libertarian who put a ton of Cato guys on Freedom Watch, his recently cancelled show on Fox Business. Cato executive VP David Boaz seems to get along pretty well, ideologically and otherwise, with Napolitano in this recent clip. …

“A stout libertarian” of The Left: That’s Judge Napolitano, at least until recently.