Neocons the New Liberals

Roger Cohen has my number in his NYT column on Neocons being the new L-word, instead of "liberal." He says with some contempt, "Neocon, for many, has become shorthand for neocon-Zionist conspiracy, whatever that may be, although probably involving some combination of plans to exploit Iraqi oil, bomb Iran and apply U.S. power to Israel’s benefit."

I think AIPAC played a large role in the policy making process that led to the US invasion of Iraq. Cohen may not, but look at those arguing for invastion: Perle, Adelman, Krystal, Wolfowitz, Feith, et al.

Obama Stops Wearing Coward's Flag Pin

It's indicative of the cowardice of George Bush and Dick Cheney that they lead the pack of lapel flag pin wearers, because they are draft dodgers from the Vietnam war. If they had fought in the war they would have had some kind of little ribbon to wear on their lapel, a bronze star, an Army Commendation medal, something. But they didn't serve; so, they wear a flag. It's a sign that they didn't serve their country.

Congratulations to Obama for ending the charade that wearing the flag pin somehow symbolizes patriotism. Where were Bush and Cheney on 9/11? Bush was reading "My Pet Goat," and then got in Air Force One and hid out for hours when he should have been leading the country. Cheney went into his spider hole in Washington and ran things from remote control because he was afraid to come out. Cheney and Saddam: the spider hole twins!

Blackwater Perils

I recommend the editorial in today's (10/4/07) Financial Times, "Blackwater and the outsourcing of war." A web link is:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/94bc0252-71dd-11dc-8960-0000779fd2ac.html

Two main points are:

"...Privatising war is, in reality, financially, politically and militarily very expensive," and

"Neither [the Senate's nor the Pentagon's efforts to control Blackwater] has a chance, much less moral validity, unless the US and its allies adhere to the rule of law they claim their forces are there to defend."

Failed Bank No Big Deal?

I was surprised that the failure of Netbank in the US, coming on the heels of the run on Northern Rock bank in England, did not attract more attention. It failed during the day on Friday, and the stock market seemed not to notice. It apparently has been in trouble for a while, but its failure seems to be linked to the sub-prime mortgage mess. So, doesn't that indicate that there are some pretty shaky things out there?

We're approaching the 20th anniversary of the 1987 stock market meltdown, not that that means anything. The stock market seems very happy with its .5% rate cut; maybe that means they expect the Fed to bail them out of any problems, like failed banks, not to mention failed hedge funds.