Sony said, "You said he's complicit in 9/11 in order to take power and create an imperial dynasty. But now its something else, a series of financial windfalls."

When I said Bush Jr wants to be King, I meant he wants to hold power in a way unlike a democratically elected President. He aspires to be a tyrant. Whether he wants the title or not seems irrelevant to the role of King, but my guess is he doesn't want the title of King. He just wants everything else. And from where I'm sitting, he keeps maneuvering closer & closer.

Sorry I wore you out, Sony.

Here's my question for Sony: who is General Smedley Butler and what did he do as related to Prescott Bush? Hint: Attempted coup vs FDR

Erik said, "I call bullshit -- BULLSHIT! -- on you Ari. I don't think you actually believe that. I think you like how you feel when you say things like that, like you're part of some sort of through-the-looking-glass secret society of ubernerds who have glimpsed the real Truth. ... So, to test my theory, I propose a wager. I say that there will be an orderly transition of executive power in January 2009; you say "might not happen." I will give you 200-1 odds on a $100 bet against. You could win $20,000!!! And all you have to do is stand behind your words. What's not to like?"

Erik, I'm happy to see you got excited. As for your wager, can't beat the odds. But do I really want to bet IN FAVOR of Bush' succeeding? Hell no! So I've gotta pass. I don't want to bet in favor of a Bush coup!

If you want to call BULLSHIT, I suggest you consider:
The 'terror alerts' that are posted by the WhiteHouse are BULLSHIT. Bush's lack of any immediate response (and zero accountability) on 9/11 is BULLSHIT. The illegal preemptive Iraq War is BULLSHIT. Using torture is BULLSHIT. Marvin Bush helping to 'secure' the WTC is BULLSHIT. The Patriot Act is BULLSHIT. Cheney having NORAD stand down on 9/11 is BULLSHIT.
Not impeaching Bush for a) violating Constitution, b) tampering with the vote, c) Haliburton no-bid contracts, d) taking excessive vacations while President, e) Hurricane Cathrina response negligence, f) Alberto Gonzalez, g) Valerie Plame, h) wire-tapping, i) war crimes, and more is BULLLSHIT.

Let me make one last point -- I didn't support Bill Clinton b/c he was too center line for me. But Bush/Cheney make Bill Clinton look like an amazing President by contrast. It's shocking. They almost make Reagan seem like he wasn't a senile doddering fool, and show how Quayle was a successful test-run for the Bush style of 'laughable incompetence' for leadership -- while pushing thru scandals (Reagan's was Iran-Contra, Bush's include 'the oil wars' and attacking the core of a democratic society).

So I'm passing on your bet ... in favor of HOPE.

Ari rant #576 -- in re: Sony's refutation of "The Bush Kings" theory (the-Ari)

Sony said, "If the motive for getting Bin laden and Marvin Bush to stage the attacks was for Bush to become King, what happens to that theory when he quietly resigns office and hands over power to Hillary in January 2009?"

sidenote: a long time back, I made a song "Intergalactic President" mixing Beasty Boys song w/Bush'ism' comments.

We need to see if he quietly resigns or not, might not happen, y'never know -- Martial law, wartime drama, etc etc. However, I think Bush / Cheney have gotten what they wanted, namely:

1 - $3/gallon gas vs $1.20 when he started (a price change based on speculation of future gas availability) and the highest profits EVER for oil co's. When it was suggested that govt cap the max profits b/c they were so excessive, what was the Govt response there?

2 - War in Iraq w/o an exit strategy (Operation Iraqi Liberation), potentially to expand into Iran. Huge battle for oil control by US oil co's, funded by American taxpayers. No more restraints on military, CIA free to roam, Americans torturing for info is now OK.

3 - How many no bid contracts to Haliburton? Didn't they "LOSE" a billion dollars in Iraq already? That's not including their profit margin! How do you do that?

4 - Conflicts of interest, like DragonSkin armor scandal -- one of many new military scandals, apparently tests showed this armor was the most effective, but the general in charge had a side-deal with the company so they went with the less effective competitor. To me, this illustrates the conflict of interest which must be there with groups like "The Carlyle Group", one of Bush Sr's businesses.

5 - tax refund -- did you get your $400? Spend it already? Also clobbered the US govt trade deficit, and $300 billion war didn't hurt his friends/family altho it has hurt USA economy.

6 - hurting the US infrastructure -- going after judicial system, whacking the Emergency Response System, making people paranoid about what color the alerts are today, etc etc. Encouraging ignorant Americans to fear the unknown enemy -- while ignoring the known enemy (corporate white-collar crime, internal govt corruption, KKK/CIA/Mafia, etc).

7 - Scandalous manipulation of elections and voting machines -- if they did it before & got away, won't they be doing it some more?

8 - Enormous buildup of battle-hardened BlackWater mercenary troops. Christopher Hedges said on KPFA it was 30k troops, but after 'scandal' of BlackWater troops having to leave BBC/CNN said it was under 1k troops. How many is it really? BlackWater employees have been given Congressional immunity from the judicial system -- from what I understand, including the US judicial system -- even for acts they do here. How's that for a shock?
Blackwater troops were used in Hurricane Cathrina, and they are expected to be used in future domestic problem sites. This a corporate 'outsource-able' army that can be deployed inside the USA. That's a new development, IMO.

9 - when Bush got into office, his approval ratings were very low. The 9/11 scandal sure helped his numbers. What a nice coincidence. It's interesting how NORAD didn't launch a single plane to stop the other planes, and what was Marvin Bush doing in the WTC just before the attacks, anyway? Last point, did you know Bush Sr gave his "New World Order" speech on 9/11 -- but 10 yrs prior?

From my viewpoint, the Republicans try to line their pockets at the expense of the public while simultaneously damaging 'socialist' pieces of the economy (welfare, education, medical care, social security) -- except police/military. The less stable society seems, the more fear and poverty are rampant, the better for them to have less 'push-back'. To me, that's the same boring tactic the monarchy has always pursued.

What the Republicans seem to fear most is an educated public that demands their rights, dissolves their absurd imbalance of financial wealth, redistributing land and capital to the public in a more balanced way, and cuts their military expenditures in favor of domestic expenditures (or at least makes domestic needs primary and military secondary). Venezuela/Cuba are enemies not b/c they are bad (pre-Castro Cuba was worse in many ways for Cubans), but b/c they epitomize the example of socialist societies ... where capitalism isn't unrestrained.

The Republican position is that we can't eliminate homelessness, but we can spend billions sending hundreds of thousands of troops to Iraq to kill millions of innocent foreign people just so we can steal their oil? It's just hard for me to buy that explanation.

So am I so excited about Hillary? Not yet, not sure why I should be. So far, she's pro-war, caved in on medical issues, and not inspiring me that she's not just as much a part of the corrupt organization as Bush Jr. If she's going to be the winner, I hope that changes! Are we all sure it'll be her victory, btw?

(And I haven't even mentioned the environment yet.)