Yeah, SAT, they are far more dangerous nut jobs who actually control the military. I can't stress this point enough.

One of my distant cousins (twice removed) was the 31st president.  Even back then, the public office holders were not the real power in the US.  And that is the tragic/comic farce of america.  People are highly polarized about parties and personalities that have no real significance.

In many nations, the elites rule openly without any pretense of democracy or public interest - their subjects know the score.  

In a few other places, mainly small developed nations, there is a representational government with honest elections where the office holders have real power.  Their citizens are right to be engaged by electoral politics.

But Americans are hypnotized by the media passion play of (fake) left vs (fake) right politics.  (Ok, maybe the local school board elections are honest.)  But people who believe that national US elections decide anything in the modern era are the real nut jobs.

PS: The current US Treasurer is from Goldman Sachs. Clinton's US Treasurer was from Goldman Sachs.  Catch the drift?

I've attacked this position before and I'll attack it again - the last 5 years have showed us that national US politicians do have the capacity to genuinely lead - look how far they've recently led us astray.  We just suspended habeus corpus.  We have national debates about whether torturing prisoners ourselves (rather than shipping them to other countries to do it) is good policy.  We're fighting a war that we can't figure out which lie justified.  We've ignoring the war which for the first time in 60 years, we had a universally defensible reason to fight.  There have been discussions about nuking Iran, and the armed forces are positioning themselves for the possibility that it will be politically necessary to start a war there.  Tell me Gore or Kerry would have done that with a straight face.

There always has and always will be a pull towards big money in decisionmaking, but how leaders resist or give in to that pull varies immensely.  The current leadership does things like cutting taxes for the rich repeatedly and heavily, and when they encounter enough political opposition to that to force them to stop, firing the IRS tax attorneys devoted to investigating super-high income tax fraud - the ones who bring in $70 billion a year that would otherwise be fraudulently deducted, so that we won't have to pay their ten or twenty million in salary.

If Goldman Sachs et al control things completely, why were these lawyers ever put in place?  Why have the rich ever paid taxes?  I have more than enough cynicism to go around, but the rich are not yet all-powerful.  They are not yet invincible.  A determined, skilled populist leader COULD still reinstitute a sense of liberal democracy we've had for at least significant portions of the 20th century.

Americans are beginning to wake up, and he-said-she-said journalism is slowly unravelling.  Blogs are taking up the slack, and they have an inherently more accessible range of viewpoints than network TV.  Network TV is shifting the confrontational model to personality-driven shows that perform the core responsibility of the Fourth Estate that's been ignored - analysis.  And in-depth analysis is harder to do when your job is nonsensical hypnosis (you can actually teach the entire breadth of a logic and semantics course on fallacies using a half hour of O'reilly).

There is a good cop bad cop dynamic going on here.  The US commitment to control of the Persian Gulf (military if necessary) is known as the Carter Doctrine, from January 1980.

Clinton waged war on Yugoslavia with depleted uranium.  Clinton also passed NAFTA and some pre-Patriot Act type laws after OKC.  Now Bill Clinton vacations with his good buddy G.H.W.Bush.

Zbig Brzezenski (Carter's national security advisor) called for a New Pearl Harbor to galvanize the US populace into supporting an imperial resource war in Asia.  The book is called "The Grand Chessboard" and is available on Amazon.

Hillary Clinton does lunch with Rupert Murdoch every week.

As for Al Gore, his daughter Karenna married Andrew Schiff.

As for Kerry, he is a cousin of G.W.Bush and fellow bonesman.

There are style differences between the red and blue squads, but they are all one team at the end of the day and serve the same masters.

Seriously.  Assume democrats (none of them populist) control congress and the presidency in 2009.  Do you believe they would repeal HR6166 (The Military Commissions Act)?  Do you believe they would repeal the Patriot Act?  Do you believe they would withdraw from the middle east?  I don't believe any of those things.

Assuming that a real populist candidate got some traction, I would recall the fates of Huey Long, JFK, RFK, MLK, George Wallace, and the death threat to Ross Perot's family in 1992 when he briefly led in the polls before dropping out for the summer

This article talks about how the Democratic rank and file wants out of Iraq, yet the Democratic leadership is providing candidates who oppose even talking about a timetable for withdrawal.  And Hillary is supporting at least one of these candidates.

http://www.counterpunch.org/walsh10142006.html

     Paul Wellstone?

peace

Please return ..
"And in-depth analysis is harder to do when your job is nonsensical hypnosis (you can actually teach the entire breadth of a logic and semantics course on fallacies using a half hour of O'reilly). "

Do it...all his interviews are on foxnews....

cut paste teach