Do Republicans even know what democracy is

If you’re a Republican that has landed here by mistake you might want to move along. Seriously I don’t think you can handle yet another set of facts and statistics that prove Bush and your party is based more on the propaganda of Hermann Goering then the principles of Thomas Jefferson. Goering once said,

Naturally the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

George Bush and the Republican Party live by this dictum, fear and manipulation.

It is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world,” Bush said in his inaugural address after his swearing-in ceremony. ~ Bush, January 2005. (emphasis added)

The United States made military and moral commitments in Europe and Asia, which protected free nations from aggression, and created the conditions in which new democracies could flourish. As we provided security for whole nations, we also provided inspiration for oppressed peoples. In prison camps, in banned union meetings, in clandestine churches, men and women knew that the whole world was not sharing their own nightmare. They knew of at least one place — a bright and hopeful land — where freedom was valued and secure. And they prayed that America would not forget them, or forget the mission to promote liberty around the world. ~ Bush, November 6, 2003 (emphasis added)

The reality is that Bush has caused more death, suppression of democracy or stood idily by and let mass murder proceed without lifting a finger then spread democracy. Its a kind of magic trick. Keep your eyes on Iraq, the supposed front in the “war on terror”. High-tech horror: Widespread against women in Iraq and the Congo.

How do you measure the horror in the Democratic Republic of Congo? Add up all of the American deaths in every single war we’ve fought in since 1776, including World War II and the Civil War (1,540,665). Now add to that the estimated deaths from the recent tsunami (169,752 confirmed dead, 127,294 missing). Next, add to that the estimated death toll in the conflict in Darfur (400,000). Then, add to that the victims of genocide in Rwanda, one of the most horrific slaughters of the 20th century (937,000).

Add all of the deaths together — and you still have a smaller number than the 3.5 million people who have died in the conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) since 1998.

American corporations have found ways to get the coltan (for cell phones) they need out of the Congo. Bush has found a way to sink hundreds of billions into Iraq and let the Taliban regain strength in Afghanistan, but actually spread democracy and peace. That is a fantasy held by some dead ender Republicans that are afraid to face the truth about what miserable failures they are. There are priorities in life. Some people can figure them out, some can’t. Republicans probably knew that Iraq was pretty low on the world’s problems priority list, but they pulled a Goering. America is a patriotic nation and Republicans saw and still see that patriotism as something to exploit. Whatever Iraq is about Bush can’t claim he acted out of humanitarian motivations while he let the slaughter in the Congo continue.

Statue of Liberty

Drive 800 Miles or Feed a Person for a Year? The Biofuels Dilemma

With hungry, angry people taking to the streets in countries on every continent — from Morocco to Mexico and Pakistan to the Philippines, and at least 20 other nations — the biofuel debate is clearly moving into new territory.

Arguments for and against using crops to make fuel are no longer focusing on energy ratios or “independence from foreign oil” or feel-good environmentalism. The headlines today are about people needing food to eat — and right now.

Politicians who once supported biofuel expansion are now backpedaling fast in the face of irate grocery shoppers in this country and an increase in hunger across the planet. Representative James McGovern, D-Mass., was one of the first national lawmakers to raise alarms about the impact of grain-based biofuels on food prices, telling the New York Times last month, “If there was a secret vote [in Congress], there is a pretty large number of people who would like to reassess what we are doing.” Now 24 Republican members of Congress, citing high food prices, have come out into the open to urge a retreat from the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, which mandates rapid increases in biofuel production.

As Congress shifts the tax credits around they plan to increase food aid to lower income earners. The corn farmers are obviously not the biggest block of voters in America, but they have a heck of a pack of lobbyists working for them.