Friday, August 25, 2006

A Little Witching Hour Psychobabble

Whirling, twirling, swirling in the madness..
Can you see it? Do you feel it?
A carousel of wild, unbroken horses racing toward
self destruction with a cowboy crazed holding the reins as the caliope plays Onward Christian Soldiers off key.
When will this nightmare end?

Have you never stood at the edge of a forest aware of all that is seen and all that is not? Solitary tree seen when Reason's left behind. The forest never did exist for those who were born blind.

Screaming soulspeak, seeking one who hears;
Dreaming soulshriek, sweating through the tears.
O, Darkest Damndest Lord of Night, Keeper of the Fears;
Cursed be your soulless Name, Evil to Mine ears.

My country 'tis of thee, sweet, sweet land of LIBERTY
of Thee I fight for do cry for would die for...
Once hallowed be thy name,
Thy kingdom's done, the terror-mongers won...


Until we rise again.

2 comments:

edward homick said...

i like it alot...very interesting approach!

SaintsandSleuths said...

So Mr. Lieberman isn't concerned about his seniority, even stooping low to cleanse his boots of Bushspots, and still not worried? If the Democratic caucus allows this travesty of betrayal to go unpunished, they should all be run out of town on a rail.

Article below:
http://www.journalinquirer.com/site/printerFriendly.cfm?brd=985&dept_id=161556&newsid=17091253


Journal Inquirer - State/Region - 08/21/2006 - Lieberman, said not to be concerned about threat to his seniority, distances himself from Bush.
08/21/2006

By Don Michak , Journal Inquirer

U.S. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, under pressure to abandon his independent bid for re-election from key Democrats said to be worried he's undermining their party's message, on Sunday reiterated his call for the chief architect of the war in Iraq to resign.

But Lieberman, who first urged U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to quit three years ago, also insisted on CBS's "Face the Nation" that "there is still hope in Iraq" and that "as long as there is, we cannot just pick up and walk away."

Advertisement


The senator also acknowledged that while matters in Iraq had "gotten worse in the last six months," it "would be a disaster if America set a deadline and said we're getting all of our troops out by a given date," a position he said was held by the Greenwich cable executive who defeated him by 10,000 votes in the Democratic primary, Ned Lamont.

Lamont in response characterized Lieberman's comments as "the same empty political rhetoric we've been hearing for the past 18 years," saying it demonstrated that the three-term incumbent is "a desperate, flailing, career politician who will say anything to cling to power.

"Courage means having the ability to admit mistakes and take the steps necessary to correct them," he said. "George Bush, Don Rumsfeld, and Joe Lieberman were wrong to get us into the war, wrong in the day-to-day conduct of it, and were wrong to take their eyes off Osama Bin Laden, America's real threat. They are still wrong today as they cling to a failed 'stay-the-course' strategy."

Meanwhile, U.S. Sen. John Kerry, the Democratic presidential nominee in 2004, said during an appearance on another nationally televised talk show Sunday that he was concerned Lieberman was making the "Republican case" for the war and had "adopted the rhetoric of Dick Cheney."

Kerry added that Lieberman was "out of step with the people of Connecticut" and that his stance on the war shows why he got in trouble with Democrats.

He called Lieberman's independent candidacy a "huge mistake" and said Lamont was "courageous" for attacking Lieberman over the war.

Their comments came only days after a Washington, D.C., newspaper that covers Congress reported that a group of Senate Democrats was "growing increasingly angry" about Lieberman's campaign tactics since losing the primary.

The Hill reported that Lieberman had rankled his colleagues by suggesting that those who supported bringing troops home from Iraq by a deadline would bolster terrorists' planning attacks against the U.S. and its allies and by intimating that the Democratic Party was out of the political mainstream.

The newspaper, quoting unnamed senior aides to the unidentified senators, said they suggested Lieberman could be stripped of his seniority in the Democratic caucus should he defeat Lamont in the general election.

Lieberman told the Associated Press the day after The Hill's story was published that he had spoken with Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and that Reid had assured him he would retain his positions within the party caucus should he win in November.

Reid had called him after the primary, Lieberman said, and pledged that if he got re-elected "nothing is going to change."

Nevertheless, Reid's spokesman, Jim Manley, subsequently told the news service that "those types of decisions" wouldn't be made until after the general election.

Lieberman's campaign spokesman, Dan Gerstein, insisted today that Reid had "left no doubt" in Lieberman's mind "that his seniority was not going to be at risk."

"This is a lot of hyperactive staffers who are trying to cater to the bloggers," he said, referring to the Internet writers who generally have supported Lamont over Lieberman.

Gerstein added that the ruckus was "just typical partisan politics" and that people Lieberman had met while campaigning were "not really interested."

But he also suggested that stripping Lieberman of his seniority would be "one of the dumbest things the Democratic caucus could do.

"The point is, the one thing they can't take away from Joe is his experience and his influence, and that's not just based on committee assignments, but on his credibility and ability to work across party lines to get things done for the state," he said.

Gerstein on Sunday also sent a lengthy e-mail to reporters criticizing the "reality-challenged" Lamont campaign for "repeating the myth that Joe Lieberman has been 'stubbornly rubber-stamping' President Bush's Iraq war policies."

The four-page message included what Gerstein called a "catalog of Senator Lieberman's many criticisms of and disagreements with the Bush administration's handling of the war."





©Journal Inquirer 2006