The Iraqi Resistance



Jason writes a letter that reveals much of the mindset of the pro-invasion set:

So, Ted, I was wondering if you were willing to acknowledge, at this point, that the despicable terrorists in Iraq aren't quite the bold Freedom Fighters that you had painted them out to be. Not too long ago, you were

painting them out as to be noble fighters for the common Iraqi against the oh-so-sinister American regime. I'm just wondering if your opinion has changed now that they have bombed Iraqi mosques, killed Iraqi judges and done everything they can to usurp the democratic process.

First and foremost, let's get our terms straight. There is no democratic process in Iraq. Iraq is occupied by 150,000 U.S. troops. The Baath and other parties are proscribed from participating in elections or holding public office. In a real democracy, voters are free to choose from any party. In a real democracy, a foreign occupation force does not exert any political influence whatsoever. And in a real democracy, people aren't afraid to venture out into the streets, risking rape or kidnapping in order to vote. You can't have democracy without basic security, period.



So this is not democracy.



Which gets us to the next term: "Iraqi judges," etc. By definition anyone who holds public office in an occupied country is a collaborator. This would include, for example, Palestinian Authority "leaders" under the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. Now a collaborator may or not be a good person, and he may or may not be laboring under a benevolent occupier, but he is certainly a collaborator and thus a fair target for nationalist/patriotic resistance forces seeking to expel the occupiers.



Collaborators are, in some ways, even more of an enemy to the Iraqi resistance than the Americans. They demoralize the resistance and set an example of subservience that other Iraqis may emulate. It's not surprising, therefore, that Iraqi guerillas would choose to execute them.

I can understand your fear that we, the filthy Americans, seek to set up a puppet regime in Iraq. However, I can't see how any civilized person would believe that blowing up voting stations and killing candidates is the proper

way to retaliate against such an alleged invasion.

The puppet regime is already a given. And the election is a lame attempt to legitimatize that puppet regime. Iraqis who vote in this show election are no different than Frenchmen who cheered Marshall Pétain during the Nazi occupation. Had there been an "election" under Vichy rule, it would have been the patriotic duty of every Frenchman to bvoycott it.

I've known many of your type and I know that you never, ever are willing to admit to a wrong. You were unwilling to admit that you had severely overstated your case against the Nazi werewolves, and I'm sure you'd be unwilling to admit that you were incorrect in your support of these vile murderers.

I can and do admit when I'm wrong, as readers of the Rallblog well know. And, by the way, I checked into the comparisons with the Nazi "werewolves" resistance after the fall of Germany at the end of World War II. As I wrote originally, there are no documented cases of casualties inflicted by them. None. They may have cut a few power lines, but they had nothing like the effectiveness of the current Iraqi resistance fighters--to which the Hard Right tried to compare them.

So go ahead and put my e-mail address up on your blog if you wish. All of your fanatical fans are just as blinded with anti-American hatred as you are, and I always love to hear from such idiots. And, please, Ted, drop the

pretense about you being a great patriot. You're not. You're a fucking socialist piece of shit who abhors everthing about our nation - other than the wealth and the freedom of speech that it bestows upon you.

I only run your email address if you cross the rhetorical line outlined in my email rules. (Which Jason didn't.) Whether or not I am a patriot is for others to judge. I do love this country, however, and I'm fighting my damnedest to remind my fellow Americans of our core values, those we all learned as children, and to stop the Hard Right from revolutionizing us into a neofascist nightmare. (By the way, I don't recall labeling myself. And another by the way: since when are socialists anti-patriotic?)

If you would in some way condemn the Iraqi terrorists, then perhaps I'd think a little bit better of you, but - until then - you are disgusting.

And I might think better of you when you stopped using loaded rhetoric like refering to resistance fighters (a clearer and more neutral term) as "terrorists." Unless, of course, you also consider George Washington to have been a terrorist, in which case we'll let it go.



For the record: I don't share the vision of radical Islamism that some of the anti-US resistance in Iraq apparently wants to impose on Iraq and the Middle East. I wish nothing more than to see the people of the world rise up, overthrow their dictators and autocrats, and create just, peaceful, representative political and economic systems that reward people for their hard work and provide security in their everyday lives. Taliban-like theocracies are obviously antiethical to that goal.



But ultimately it's up to the citizens of each nation to decide for themselves, sometimes via civil war and acts of violence, to determine how they want to live. Who is to say that my vision, that our vision of democracy, is best for every country? Besides, we still have too much work to do here in the United States of America before we can hold ourselves up as a shining beacon of hope to the rest of the world. We have an unelected dictator for a a"president," a nation that denies tens of millions of people access to basic healthcare, kids throwing their unwanted babies into Dumpsters, young adults plunged into student loan poverty, systemic racism that divides our cities and suburbs into haves and have-nots, a wildly inadequate retirement system that the ruling party is trying to get rid of--like I said, we have a lot of work to do.



The choice between radical Islam and American-style pseudodemocracy is a false one presented by the Hard Right. There is 0.0% danger that Islamists will take over the United States. And it is 0.0% our business whether it takes over other countries.

Plagiarism?



FOR Jarrett writes:

Robert Higgs has decided to copy your December opinion without referencing you. See http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1452. Does it annoy you when others copy your material?

There's nothing more annoying than being plagiarized. A few weeks after I sent Michael Kinsley a bunch of cartoons in his capacity as a magazine editor, he wrote a column that appeared to lift the rather esoteric concept of my cartoon hook, line and sinker. Of course, I'm not 100% certain. It may have just been a coincidence, though I still doubt it.

There are some remarkable similarities between my column comparing Bush to FDR and the above-referenced piece by Robert Higgs. But is it plagiarism?

Perhaps. Perhaps not. Some ideas occur to different people simply because they're true or make sense at the time. This could be one of those times. Or Higgs thought that no one in the UK reads my Yankee Dog writing.

Seriously: I don't know. And when I don't know something, I assume the best. Unlike, say, the Bush Administration.

Ted Rall Clipping Service



It's time once again to put out a shout out to faithful Ted Rall fans living in cities where my cartoons and/or columns appear in your local paper. I need tearsheets! Mainly to show to prospective clients but also to enter contests like the Pulitzer. Here's what I need from you: When you see my stuff in print, cut out the WHOLE PAGE and set it aside. Every 2-3 months or so, drop that stack of tearsheets into the mail to yours truly. That's all there is to it. In return, you get my undying gratitude and a free signed copy of every new book I put out. (Speaking of which: I've lost a few addresses of previous TRCSers, so please get in touch if you're one of them. I want to send you your loot.)



I only need one correspondent per city, so please email me at chet@rall.com. Thanks!



A Note from the Morally Oblivious



From the mailbag:

You are correct, Ted. The Taliban and it's fighters are not there to kill Americans. They are there to make sure that every man, woman, and child within their grasp has a chance to enjoy being flogged, and have their fingers, toes, eyes, arms, and legs removed for the pettiest offenses. Perhaps, if the subject of this paragon of virtue and fairness that you so loyally defend is doubly lucky, he/she might be able to participate in a public execution in front of the home fans.

And where did I ever say that that stuff was OK? Quite to the contrary, I was loudly decrying the Taliban when they were running most of Afghanistan. That said, what Afghans do to Afghans isn't my business, your business or George W. Bush's business. Political change sticks when it occurs organically, without outside interference. Moreover, I'll happily follow Dubya's Global Campaign for Freedom when he applies it without concern for oil reserves and/or ideology. When he attacks Saudi Arabia and Uzbekistan with the same zest he applies to regime change in Iraq and Iran, I'll be right there with him. Until then, forgive me if I doubt his motives.

America is not perfect. Nor are it's citizens, government, and leadership. Sure, we've made mistakes, as do all countries.

Is murdering 160,000 innocent Afghan and Iraqi soldiers and civilians a "mistake"? Well, I guess it is. But it's also an act of genocide on par with the worst moments in human history, and I'm not going to make excuses for the regime that carried it out or the people (including me) who stood by and watched while it went down on CNN.

We are also the only country in the world that is capable of helping other nations.

Really? Tell it to India, a big donor nation for tsunami relief despite being hit hard themselves. Or the Europeans, who gave a lot more than we did on a per capita basis. Or the Soviet Union, who "helped" Afghanistan when they crossed the Friendship Bridge from the Uzbek SSR to invade. Invaders always say they're there to liberate; hardly ever has it been true.

We citizens of the U.S. will never agree unanimously on the correctness of these efforts to help, or whether they are being carried out in the correct fashion, in the correct places, with the correct amount of money and other resources being allocated to the correct people. The decisions involved in our various aid processes has got to be mind numbing to say the least, and only people who are able to make decisions and withstand criticism from know-everything-do-nothing columnists and media personalities like you should be in positions of leadership.

Yeah, because pundits are so much more of a pernicious influence than, say, Halliburton and other corporate sponsors of the two parties.

You see, Ted, that way we Americans are able to continue to enjoy the freedom to criticize our government, instead of worrying about our government shooting us in the back of the head in front of our friends and family for disagreeing with the Friendly Neighborhood Taliban Radical Islamist that you so staunchly defend.

Except: the Taliban never threatened our freedoms. On that, surely, every sane American can agree.



Friends of Rall



Several correspondents ask, slightly sarcastically: What is required to become a full-fledged FOR (Friend of Rall)? To which, after long rumination, I must reply this: If you have to ask, you probably don't have it.

Illegal Immigrants



This week's column on illegal immigration is provoking some interesting mail. Among the replies is this excellent question from Theo:

Your current column states that there are "nine million illegal immigrants... living and working in the United States." And that "ten percent of the U.S. workforce is currently undocumented." Is that a typo? It can't be true that only ninety million Americans work, out of a population of 280 million, can it? Perhaps I am mistaken. But if you are in error, please correct your column. You know that the right-wing

morons are always looking for some way to twist your words... let's not give them any ammunition, even by way of an honest mistake.)

No, let's not. Theo is quite right; the US workforce is significantly larger than 90 million. You get to 10 percent by adding the 9 million undocumented illegals who live here permanently to the migrants who go back and forth betweem the U.S. and their nations of origin (usually Mexico).

But the Rallblog Doesn't Pay Anything



Bill writes:

big fan of the cartoons, though now enjoy the Rallblog even more. As a Brit, though living in Southern Africa (countries down here get election monitoring teams from Europe and America - perhaps Botswana should have sent some to the US in return last year), I have a question: I realise that the US and it's administration is your major focus, but have you deliberately chosen to lay off the other members of the coalition of the willing? Like the UK and Tony Blair? Now there's a country where seemingly most of Blair's party didn't support the war and he got more support from the opposition! A lot of Labour supporters want him out, but the party to stay in. And one of the biggest complaints is of his `Presidential style' and the `US corruption of UK politics'. Actually, maybe it just isn't funny enough...

We kind of have our hands full with Bush, don't you think? Besides, Steve Bell does such a good job savaging Blair that I hardly think I could compete. But there's more to it than that. First, it's true that American readers and editors just aren't really interested in the assorted toadies and lackeys in the coalition of the shilling. More importantly, Bush and the US are the root of the problem, which is why I focus on them.



But Merch Does



Lee writes:

Are you still selling signed books? If so, how much for Generalissimo El Busho and Gas War? Thanks!

As a general rule, I sell signed copies of my new books when they first come out. That way I can buy the correct number from my publisher and send them out without having to turn my home into a warehouse. I have very few copies of EL BUSHO or GAS WAR around so I'm loathe to sell them at this point. What I will do in these situations is sign books that you send me to sign. Here's the procedure:



1. Send the books you want me to sign to: Ted Rall, PO Box 1134, New York NY 10027



2. Make sure you include a self-addressed STAMPED envelope large enough to hold the books and containing sufficient padding to protect them during shipment. Postage should be sufficient for the weight of the books.



3. Include a note letting me know how you want it signed ("For "Bob," just my signature, whatever).



4. Allow up to 4 weeks for me to send them back.



Ted Rall Subscription Service



By popular demand I'm issuing a reminder about the Subscription Service for 2005. For $10 per year you get my cartoons and columns emailed directly to your address, sometimes days before they go online. It's a good way to save web-surfing time and to pay my legal expenses at Guantánamo, so if you're game, here's how to sign up:



1. Send an email to chet@rall.com indicating your interest.



2. I'll respond and tell you how to pay via PayPal or:



2b. Simply send $10 to Ted Rall, PO Box 1134, New York NY 10027 with a note containing your email addess.



Original Artwork



While we're shilling, this is a reminder that I do sell my original artwork. Prices vary between $300 and $500 per cartoon. Please bear in mind that you'll be getting the ink drawings only--that means no colors or grayscale shadings are included. Still, original cartoon art is highly collectible and way cool to have on your wall, so if you're interested in a piece just shoot me an email at chet@rall.com and I'll let you know whether I have the piece you're inquiring about. Payment can be done by PayPal or check/money order.



As an inducement good for the rest of January only, I'll throw in a free copy of a signed book of your choice (one of my books, natch!) with the sale of each original.

Iranian Invasion Plans



A FOR writes:

Thanks for taking my previous tip to write a column about the upcoming war with Iran. Here is a news lead to further information that this is where Bush's junta will take things after Iraq: http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050116/ts_nm/iran_usa_newyorker_dc

This needs to be counteracted proactively.

One small point is that "the Left" needs to roll out the slogan: "Support Our Troops. Bring Them Back Home to Their Families Today." Not to imply that a slogan will have much impact, but that is (yet another) point where the Right has gotten the upper hand back (by equating patriotism with supporting troops to stay in a state of war). Bumper stickers galore with this slogan could change the perspective of the ambivalent middle of the American public.

One other key point is that legislation needs to be pushed through to end the tax exempt status of churches. As the recent election period has shown, these are just sociopolitical organizations, often involved in business-like operations (printing and distributing newsletters, bibles, publications, etc. in exchange for donations, to say nothing of the vast empires of real estate that some churches rent out as landlords or the vast health care systems that they control and profit from).

Thanks for your dedication.

I disagree. The "Support Our Troops" stickers should be replaced with stickers that read "Support Our Wars." It's a volunteer military, folks. If there's no troops, there are no wars--at least not those without widespread support by the American people. I feel badly for the troops, sure, but I feel even worse for the innocent civilians and enemy soldiers they're killing in foreign lands where we have no business being. This "Support Our Troops" shit is turning the left into fellow travelers in militarism.

As I Predicted Last Year



Well, me and many others. The New Yorker reports that the Bushists have sent troops into Iran. Of course, Iran would be fully justified if it were to delcare war on us for invading their sovereign territory. But we're big bullies, they're scared, and most Americans don't have any problem with that.



Here's another prediction: If we go to war against Iran, the US will never recover economically or politically. We may not go the way of the Soviet Union, but we'll give them a run for their lack of money.

Sometimes Fascists Seem So Polite



Alan writes about last week's column, "The Normalization of Horror":

Are you actually suggesting that the current US policy of capturing armed guerilla fighters and holding them as Prisoners of War is the same thing as the Nazi policy of exterminating captured unarmed civilians? I do not possibly think I can explain to you how offensive this is to me, as a Jew, an American and as a former US Army officer.

Well, that's the point, isn't it? We're NOT holding them as POWs. Remember? Bush says the Geneva Conventions don't apply to Afghan prisoners. In Iraq, he said that they did but undermined that statement by endorsing the notorious "torture memo" written by Alberto Gonzales. The fact that Gonzales is about to become Bush's attorney general tells you how Bush felt about his work.



The vast majority of Gitmo, Abu Ghraib and INS gulag inmates were not armed when captured. They were sold to the US by Afghan warlords for a fee. Most are simply someone's political or personal enemy in the Middle East. According to the US government itself, only about 35 out of thousands and thousands of Muslim detainees held any leadership position in a terrorist organization.



US policy toward Afghan and Iraqi civilians is officially the same as the Nazis in their occupied territories: we don't. In practice, there is a difference: Nazis were engaged in a systematic program of ethnic cleansing. The United States, on the other hand, drops bombs on civilian targets without care or concern for those living there. The end result is the same: lots of innocent people end up dead who would otherwise still be alive had we never come along. How a "Jew, an American and a former Army officer" could endorse the neofascist Bush Administration is a mystery.

Because I support the decision to fight against Islamic Fascism, you are trying to tell me that I am like a German who went ahead enjoyed life while my Government perpetrated genocide. You are trying to equate President Bush to Hitler and therefore the US Military to the SS and the Gestapo and therefore people like me to a German citizen who happily supported Nazi atrocities.

Lay off the Hitchens. There is no such thing as "Islamic Fascism." There is radical Islam, of course.



I'm not trying to equate anything. George W. Bush equated himself to Hitler when he seized power in an illegal coup d'état and locked up his political enemies into concentration camps (definition: "A camp where civilians, enemy aliens, political prisoners, and sometimes prisoners of war are detained and confined, typically under harsh conditions"). The US military equated itself to the SS when it began breaking into innocent civilians' homes during the dead of night and carried off fathers while their wives and children screamed. And we all live like good Germans every day of this wretched post-2000 nightmare that looks like America but is nothing of the sort. If anything, we're worse than the Germans because we know what's going on, yet choose not to do anything about it. or worse--like Alan--even make excuses for the neofascists in charge.

Well I suggest that it is people like you, who would rather stand back and do nothing that strengthened Hitler and allowed the Third Reich more time to operate. The Nazi’s did not stop what they were doing because they had a sudden change of heart. The Nazis were defeated militarily. They were destroyed, not persuaded to rethink what they were doing. The Nazi’s were destroyed by the American Military and I am grateful, not ashamed for that.

If Alan had read my work since 9/11, he would know that "doing nothing" has never been my prescription. We should have avenged 9/11, brought the perps to justice and taken steps to make America safer. It is George W. Bush and his neofascists who have done nothing...nothing positive, anyway. One thing is certain: if Bush had been president in 1939, he would have joined the Axis. Hitler was his kind of man, and the Nazis were his sort of peeps.

I believe that I owe my freedom and safety to the people who were and are willing to fight against tyranny. The very least I think we, as people who do not have to go to war ourselves could do, is not send enemy fighters back to the battlefield where they can resume killing U.S. Military personnel. If you think sending Taliban fighters back to Afghanistan to kill more Americans is OK, I would suggest that you are trying to destroy, rather than protect the United States.

Don't forget, Alan: Taliban fighters weren't in Afghanistan to kill Americans. They LIVE there. We don't. If US troops want to avoid attacks in Afghanistan from Afghan resistance fighters, they should leave as most Afghans want them to do.

America's Funniest Right-Wing Emails



Renata asks:

Not only did "Dimitry" (a desperate attempt to americanize a clearly foreign name?) win Funniest Right-Wing Email of the Day, he may also have taken home the prize for Funniest Way Ever to Spell "Massachusetts", don't you think?

By the way, I know this may be way too much trouble for you, but how about a

Funniest Right-Wing Email Ever contest? That is, if you do keep track of all

the junk you get. You could post some of your all-time favorites and then

let us, your loyal readers and supporters, vote and pick the best one. (We

could even make a reenactment of the latest presidential elections and

actually pick the guy who LOST as the winner!) And the prize, well, how

about a one-way ticket to Gitmo with the chance to be part of the whole "a

more permanent approach for potentially lifetime detentions" extravaganza?

Sure would be fun!

You're right. As fun a project as AFRWE would be, it would be way too much trouble. And my in box just isn't big enough to store all the idiocy I receive from people who regretably enjoy the same right to vote as the rest of us.



Renata also writes the



Jen and Brad Dish Update

I also hear that Brad's recent, close friendship with Angelina Jolie

bothered Jen.

Comprise This!



Christine responds to Snotty Dave by noting that he has been wrong since the 18th century:

Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

One entry found for comprise.

Main Entry: com·prise

Pronunciation: k&m-'prIz

Function: transitive verb

Inflected Form(s): com·prised; com·pris·ing

Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French compris, past participle of comprendre, from Latin comprehendere

1 : to include especially within a particular scope

2 : to be made up of

3 : COMPOSE, CONSTITUTE usage



Although it has been in use since the late 18th century, sense 3 is still attacked as wrong. Why it has been singled out is not clear, but until comparatively recent times it was found chiefly in scientific or technical writing rather than belles lettres. Our current evidence shows a slight shift in usage: sense 3 is somewhat more frequent in recent literary use than the earlier senses. You should be aware, however, that if you use sense 3 you may be subject to criticism for doing so, and you may want to choose a safer synonym such as compose or make up.

Gitmo Apologist



Using many of the arguments au courrant on rightist talk radio, GOR (Gadly of Rall) Ira writes:

Your compassion for our Gitmo inmates is admirable. However, you should recognize that anyone who was a member of the Taliban participated in

doing to an entire country, the same thing that they are now experiencing.

According to the Pentagon, only about three dozen out of the thousands of Muslims rotting away in US gulags (now, for life!) were leaders of the Taliban regime or Al Qaeda officials. The remainder were grunt soldiers, ordinary tribal militia with no more say in Taliban law than an ordinary American GI has on American foreign policy. By Ira's logic any US serviceperson, or even civilian as many of the Gitmo detainees are, is legally responsible for the most egregious crimes committed by George W. Bush and other leaders. God, I hope not!

And after 9/11, anyone hanging around to shoot at Americans in Afghanistan already knew he didn't have a bright future.

Yo, Ira--forgetting something? Americans aren't supposed to BE in Afghanistan. And if they weren't, they wouldn't be getting shot at...there.

These people are very committed to their cause. They are doing God's work by trying to destroy our way of life.

They don't give a shit about our way of life. Islamists want to alter the way of life in their countries. Granted, their ideology is something I disagree with. But that doesn't give me the right to overthrow their government. Afghan women can and should rise up to liberate themselves. And it's the only way it'll stick, anyway.

The most amusing thing is that because of their ideology, their incarceration causes them less anguish than it does you.

Right. Because Muslims aren't normal people. They LIKE having flashlights rammed up their ass. They love being beaten to a pulp, sometimes to death. Just like the Vietnamese didn't value life as much as we do.

You are right, that it is unlikely any additional useful information will be obtained. However, I think another option is a viable solution. Perhaps you and a collection of likeminded civil libertarians could each volunteer to take permanent legal guardianship of a terrorist and put them up at your place until they are fully ready to resume their terrorist lifestyle. This would unburden the taxpayers, and remove a major headache for the Administration. Sounds like a win-win situation.

First, how do you KNOW that any of these guys are terrorists? Answer: you don't. The government says they are--well, that a few of them are. Why should we believe them? Governments lie all the time; it's what they do best. One of the best things about conservatives used to be their healthy distrust of central authority. It's too bad they seem to have forgotten about that.



Abu Ghraib Began Here



Don't forget, the Abu Ghraib prison guards started out as corrections officers here in the states. The heinous tactics they used in Iraq and elsewhere are tortures they brought with them from their previous experience in American prisons, as Keith reminds us:

I agree with The Normalization of Horror. When I see Americans shopping and acting like nothing is going on it just makes me sick. I was tortured 3 times by members of Special Operations Unit of the San Francisco Police Department. This happened in the 1990's to me and several of my friends for feeding the hungry as a protest with Food Not Bombs. Its not to clear what we can do to wake Americans up but I returned to America to see what I could do. I am working on a Walkout for January 20th and March 18th. Anyway thanks for your great work.

A reminder that it is the patriotic duty of any American attending the Inauguration to turn their backs on Generalissimo El Busho.



US to Employ Death Squads Against Iraq



Herb writes:

I thought I heard recently that the CIA wants to employ death squads in Iraq...did I hear right? Did this get any attention from the press? Also, regarding the emailer Dimitry that you mentioned in your blog: I can understand the grammatical and spelling errors, but why does he have so much trouble

with punctuation? I took Russian in college, and I can assure you that commas and periods do exist in that language. The correct usage of said punctuation should

not be a foreign concept to him. Maybe he grew up next to Chernobyl.

I don't know what's wrong with Dimitry, but I suspect that similar strangeness exists in every tongue. There was extensive coverage in the progressive and European media about the Pentagon plan to deploy death squads against Sunni clerics and other Iraqi patriots, but the story began with Newsweek.



Lasers in Cockpits



Jim writes:

I think it's time that someone publicly challenges these claims of lasers being shined (shone?, whatever) in cockpits. The claim is that an aircraft in flight, on approach, etc. is targeted by a laser and that the laser is capable of being held on a small target (pilot's eyes) long enough to cause retinal damage or to momentarily blind the pilot. This is nonsense. Try this: Buy a laser pointer and take it outside. Find a street sign a block or two away and tell me how long you can hold the dot on a point on that sign, say the center of the O in STOP. Remember not to let the laser point into the sky or you may be charged under the Patriot Act. Imagine trying to do the same thing to an object several miles away. Simple geometry belies the claims.

The displacement of the dot is given by D * tan a, where D is the distance to the target and a is the angle. At one mile, the displacement of the dot by just one degree is 92 feet. You would need some very accurate tracking equipment to maintain a position within less than an inch on a target moving in excess of 200 miles an hour relative to the laser. Note that if the beam spreads out, so is it's energy spread out over the area. For every laser there is a calculation for the amount of time of exposure required to induce retinal damage. The pupil size

and the beam width at target distance would need to be taken into account. I'm not a laser expert, but have worked with them as part of my physics studies in college. I enjoy your column. Keep up the good work.

I worked with lasers too, whenn I was a physics major at Columbia. I agree; there is zero possibility that these stories are anything more than hogwash. There's too much diffusion at such a great distance.



Sticker



Matthew writes:

it's too bad i didn't see this earlier.. it's a Bush/Pinochet bumper sticker http://www.cafepress.com/patriotboy.11775480

hey, it's never too late.



What Should We Do?



Lee writes:

This liberal still thinks torture is wrong, not merely impractical. But what am I to do? I did what I could to stop this well-intentioned evil, but Kerry lost. What can I do that has enough of a chance to succeed that it's worth taking away time I could spend with my wife and three children?

I wish I knew. Which is why I'm thinking about exactly that. The answer will present itself if good people focus on the problem.

Pretzel Logic



Lawson writes:

Since the Gestapo hasn't hauled you away yet, and your still able to write your hate America columns, where's the similarity to Nazi Germany? All of the articles on Common Dreams, are absolutely unbelievable. Only in America. Please move.

I replied:

In 1936, the Gestapo hadn't yet taken away all anti-Nazi political opponents. So was 1936 Nazi Germany OK with you?

and I should have added, to make things clearer for his befuddled brain, that an Administration that is trying to turn the United States into a neofascist state is dangerous and well worth commenting upon. The fact that they haven't yet succeeded is mildly comforting but should prompt increased vigilance rather than somnolence.



Snotty David Redux



Brooklyn Steve writes:

If Snotty David intends to be the unappointed grammarian of tedrall.com, he should know that "Just something to think about the next time you decide to grace us all with your pearls of wisdom" is not a sentence but a fragment. This is, of course, an even more fundamental--even "remedial"--error than your misuse of "comprised." As a self-proclaimed critic of professional writers, his not knowing such a simple and easily verifiable item calls into question his entire e-mail, perhaps his entire existence.

Myamnar's WMDs



Nick asks:

Longtime fan; I'll keep it short.



In the Jan 8th "US Invasion Plans" comic, is Burma green on purpose? I'd expected red.

Yes. Burma is strongly believed (by more reliable sources than GWB) to possess chemical weapons. Not to worry, though--we won't invade them because they don't have much oil or gas.



Why Bush Won't Be Impeached



Wrinkle writes:

.....maybe "rejoinder" isn't the right word. anyway, I was reading your blog and I felt I had to respond to one of your readers, who wondered why Americans aren't clamoring for impeachment now that W's "team" couldn't find

WMD's in Iraq. That's a wonderful dream, and very attractive. Notwithstanding the utter legal impossibility of the prospect, what with Rethuglicans controlling all avenues of impeachment, a successful impeachment of Bush would give us a new, far more horrific nightmare in the form of 2 words: PRESIDENT CHENEY. Yeeeesh. a possible bright side to *that*? the FCC might get more lenient towards dropping the "F bomb" on TV to accomodate Cheney's yearly press conferences..... love the strip,

Impeachment is a political, not legal process. It's virtually impossible to convince a Congress controlled by a party to impeach a president of the same party. The founding fathers never anticipated a rigid two-party system; as we've seen since 2000, checks and balances fall apart when one party has control over all three branches of government on both the federal and state levels.

Canada Says: We're Not Welcome



An Anonymous Canuck sez:

Russell commented in your blog about moving to Canada, and although he wasn't endorsing it, by mentioning it he gives power to the stereotype of Lefties as whiners that give up too easily. Had Kerry won, the Righties wouldn't even joke about moving north.

The pioneers didn't say "aww geez, there sure are a lot of natives here. Let's go back to Europe for a few years until things quiet down

a bit." They rolled up their sleeves and methodically annihilated those that didn't groove with the America that they wanted to create.

So stay clear of Canada; stand and fight, you ninnies!

Listen you Canadians...Haven't you heard of NAFTA? We can come up there any time we want and poach your jobs with our cheap labor and more relaxed environmental regulations?



New Math



Pieter writes:

I continue to love the comics and enjoy the columns. I've just got two comments about some of the numbers in your recent column and on your blog.

First, about the alleged hordes of poor, "Nixon-hard hat" Republicans, I don't really believe they exist. According to the CNN exit polls,

http://us.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html income and the likelhood of voting Republican are pretty strongly correlated. For people earning under $15000, the chance of voting Republican is 36%, and for people earning over $200,000, the chance is 63%. These are splits that are as strong as gun ownership, union membership, church attendance, and age. Furthermore, the chance of voting Republican strictly increases with income. There's no "U", as some people claim. It's not true that the poor and rich support Democrats and the middle support Republicans. Generally speaking, the rich vote Republican; the poor do not.

Second, the tsunami's not a "piker" compared to Bush. Which killed more really comes down to how you count the Lancet figures. As I read the article, it included casualties during the invasion, so that would put Bush at 100,000 in Iraq + 40,000 in Afghanistan, for a total of 140,000, compared to the tsunami at 156,000, according to the most recent figures I saw. On the other hand, the Lancet article said that 100,000 was the reasonable minimum, that an accurate estimate would be hard to make, but it could be 300,000. That's a lot more, but it's still in the same general range as the tsunami.

Keep up the good work.

Don't forget, though, that the Lancet figure doesn't count those Iraqis murdered by Bush after summer 2004 or Iraqi soldiers. Gen. Tommy Franks estimated this second figure at 30,000 weeks after the invasion. So Bush is still at 170,000, rock bottom. And the tsunami is running a close but distinct second. Go Bush!



Please Don't Go



Phil writes:

I'm sure that in spite of your guidelines, you receive lots of negative comments -- ever look at the "Sticks and Stones" section of www.dubyaspeak.com? Truly bizarre, the mass dysfunction caused by modern American alienation...

I therefore wanted to take a minute to drop you a line, let you know how much I dig your cartoon. I'm so glad that Yahoo carries it, else I would probably still be unaware of it. It makes me laugh, and it gives me a tiny dose of encouragement regarding the world and its future, when so much is overwhelmingly discouraging, particularly regarding the world as I see it developing in my lifetime...

Don't pull a Dave Barry-type retirement on me anytime soon; I appreciate your work immensely.

Don't worry, I'm 41 years old. I don't plan to retire any time soon.



Your Requests Taken



A FOR writes:

Some friends and I have put together a web site that I think might interest you. It's a competition to design an Iraq War Memorial: http://www.nationaliraqwarmemorial.org/index.html

If you you've got the time, you should submit a design. And, if you don't mind, please spread the word!

Word hereby spread.



Tsunami Benefit in NYC



A close FOR has asked me to post this here:

Featurewell.com invites you to

THROWN TOGETHER

A reading to benefit Tsunami survivors

@

Jefferson

121 W. 10th Street

New York City

Phone: (212) 255-3333

Sunday January 23, 6 to 9 PM

Complimentary Hors dŨouevres/Cash Bar/$15 at the door

100% of proceeds will go to charity.

READINGS BY:

Adam Goodheart (The Last Island of the Savages) was a founding editor of Civilization magazine. His essays have appeared in the Atlantic Monthly, the New York Times, Outside, and Travel & Leisure.

Ayun Halliday (SumatraŨs Men of the Forest) is the author of No Touch Monkey! And Other Travel Lessons Learned Too Late. Halliday is BUST magazine's Mother Superior columnist. She also contributes to NPR, Bitch, The Utne Reader.

Suketu Mehta (Peace in Paradise On Sri Lanka) is the author of Maximum City: Bombay Lost and Found, which the Economist chose as the Book of the Year for 2004. Mehta's journalism has been published in the New York Times Magazine, Time, and Condé Nast Traveler, among other publications.

Bob Morris (Some Adventures in Karma on India's Holiest River) writes the Age of Dissonance column for the New York Times Sunday Styles. Morris is a contributing editor for Travel and Leisure, and has also written for NPR, the New Yorker, Vogue and Details.

Daniel Asa Rose (Prom Queens in the Mist -- A Thai Rhapsody), the senior book reviewer for The New York Observer, won the O. Henry Prize for his collection of Short Stories Small Family With Rooster.  His recent memoir Hiding Places:  A Father and His Sons Retrace Their Family's Escape from the Holocaust earned starred reviews in Publishers Weekly. He has also been a humor writer for GQ, a travel columnist for Esquire, and a food critic for the past 20 pounds.

Pay up, you scurvy dogs! It's for a good cause.



Funniest Right Wing Email of the Day



It comes from Dmitry:

I just finising reding your editorial.I know you are liberal from Masatuchess,but i don't know you hate America so much .Every editorial you do is against this country.If your background is from other country then i can understand you do.I just come in United States of America 5 years ago.I can tell you for sure ,I love this country more then you and Michel Moore do ,which God give you this blessing to be born in this awsome country. You don't even have a piece of education what alberto Gonzales has .You don't even serve America like this guy did >You are monster senior! Leave this country and go in Canada where all the liberals want's go after Bush relection .Hello TEd wake up .Your hate doesn't help Democrats to have moral value.Cuba,North Korea is still waitng for people like you .I come form a country where freedom wasn't .Reagan help us thanks God for him.We don't have the freedom you have now to write whatever you wish or like it without be punished for death.Wh y you are selfish?why you don't like miilions of people from Afganistan and iraq to be in freedom ?Just becouse you are from Massatuches/.The good thing about your state is this .Thanks God with don't have the value you guys have there.I hope that state to be part of any socialism,comunism ,country,because their share that value.

Just loose it !

Dimitry

Dimitry [sic] is third in line to become Secretary of Homeland Security.



Bush Admits: There Never Were Any WMDs in Iraq



The news that the Pentagon has "quietly" abandoned its "search" for Iraq's WMDs prompted many emails. This one was my favorite:

well its official. We've given up. The weapons of mass destruction that brought an entire nation to its knees and had them quaking in fear don't exist, and most likely they never did. So now I as an American citizen want an apology, I was lied to by my

president. Mr. Bush said that we were in danger from this country half way around the world, that Mr. Saddam had the means that could attack my children and cause great devastation on my own soil, but that was untrue. I may have missed the headlines "Bush Apologizes to the World for His Lies and Deceit." or in his colorful Texan accent "Umm... Well, I guess them folks down there in Iraq just didn't have no weapons of mass destruction, I'm an ass. Sorry." Where is the public out cry? Where is the call of all Americans to bring our troops home. To impeach a false war mongering president. To AT LEAST demand an apology from this idiot who has caused the deaths of tens of thousands for NOTHING! I give up.. I'm moving to Canada.

Jason

news article btw

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1802&e=9&u=/washpost/20050112/ts_washpost/a2129_2005jan11

The Future of Editorial Cartooning

Harvard weighs in on the future of editorial cartooning. Download the Winter issue of Nieman Reports as it focuses on "The Impact and Issues of an Evolving Craft," with articles from 14 of today's most provocative cartoonists. http://www.nieman.harvard.edu/

I'm one of the 14.



Yet Another Request



Dave writes:

As always, I enjoyed today's column. In it, you cite a Washington Post article about the current Resident's admininstration's policy change - do you happen to remember the article title and/or author? I would like to read it and I can't seem to find it.

This breaks one of my rules, but this is important, so:



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A41475-2005Jan1.html



A Response from a Regular Reader About This Week's Column



Fred writes:

As a matter of fact I did just read a great book about... um ... it occurs to me that you might have been being ironic there at the end of your latest column.

While I don't disagree with your column (the idea of what they're proposing drives me crazy), I do have to ask one question:

How many Ted Ralls and Michael Moores and Al Frankens and Donnesburys and Tom Tommorows were there in Nazi Germany?

Keep up the good work. Your dissent (even when I dissent from it) is what is keeping us from the abyss.

Actually, there were a number of high-profile anti-Nazi Germans active during the 1930s. Most were killed or exiled after the invasion of Poland. But what really matters is whether the vast majority of people pay attention.



Grammar Note



David writes:

Having just read your column comparing the United States to Nazi Germany, I feel compelled to alert you that the words "comprise" and "compose" are not interchangeable. For future reference, the parts comprise the whole. The whole is composed of the parts. Your phrase, "comprised entirely of archival footage," should read, "composed entirely of archival footage." "Comprise" is frequently interchanged with "compose" during those occasions when people are overdriving their intellectual headlights in a misguided attempt to sound more intelligent. As a professional writer, your not knowing such a simple and easily verifiable item calls into question your entire column. Just something to think about the next time you decide to grace us all with your pearls of wisdom.

Sure, David's snotty. He's also right.



Let Me Help



Dave writes:

Who cares about torture? I'm too busy trying to figure out why Jen and Brad broke up.

Well, the NY Post claims that Brad wanted kids whereas Jennifer wanted to focus on her career



iPod Fundraiser Successful



The offer is hereby rescinded. Thanks to all who responded! Now to go buy that little gadget...

iPod Fundraiser



How much did I want an iPod for Christmas? Very, very much. Santa came, but he didn't bring my iPod. So I wrote to Santa, who since the GOP controls all three branches of government and everything else is now called Republican Santa. Here's what Republican Santa wrote back:

Jesus H. Christ, what a friggin' whiner. Want an iPod? Be a good capitalist and sell your labor at low discount prices. That's how you'll get your stupid iPod.



This response will cost you $20.

I thought about what Republican Santa said and--surprise!--he's right. Why not just sell myself for less than I'm worth?



I have lots of CDs, which means I need the 40 meg model. That costs $399. Plus I'm going to need that extra long-life battery they sell for $60. With tax, that makes $500--the cost I usually charge for one original cartoon. But I really want that portable digitalized music box. So here's an offer that goes to the first bonafide taker: $500 gets you not one, not two, but three originals of your choice. (The catch is that I have to still have the ones you want--but I've got the vast majority of them, especially recent ones.) I'll throw in a copy of any one of my books (provided I have it on hand, but I have almost all of them). And a pen I used to draw countless Ted Rall cartoons.



Bear in mind that original artwork does not contain colors or shading that appears in print or online and that ownership of original artwork does not give you the right to reproduce said artwork--it is for display and enjoyment only.



Offer goes to the first bonafide respondent. Please email me. You can pay via PayPal. After payment is confirmed I'll post here that the offer is finito.

Diego Garcia Update



For those who were wondering...



As it turns out, the US naval base at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean came out of the tsunami virtually unscathed.



The base's official website explains:

Diego Garcia, British Indian Ocean Territory – Navy personnel on board Naval Support Facility Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean are safe following the earthquake and subsequent tsunami that had devastating effects on Southeast Asia. Facilities and operations were not affected.

Favorable ocean topography minimized the tsunami’s impact on the atoll. Diego Garcia is part of the Chagos Archipelago, situated on the southernmost part of the Chagos-Laccadive Ridge. To the east lies the Chagos Trench, a 400 mile long, underwater canyon that ranges in depth from less than 1,00 meters below the surface to depths that plunge to over 5,000 meters. It is one of the deepest regions of the Indian Ocean.

Diego Garcia is located to the west of Chagos Trench, which runs north and south. The depth of the Chagos Trench and grade to the shores does not allow for tsunamis to build before passing the atoll. The result of the earthquake was seen as a tidal surge estimated at six feet.  

There's also a response to Islamists claiming American failure to warn neighboring Muslim countries of the impending disaster. Basic information about the base is here. MSNBC has a story. So does CNN



So there.



Good Question



Dave writes:

I am curious, are you going to be out of business when a democrat wins a presidential election? I mean, what will you have to doodle about?

Fortunately that hasn't happened since 1964.



Followup



Russell points out:

But Ted, you can't fight for gay rights without demanding at least acceptance, if not approval, of the behavior. Which still isn't going to cut it with bigots such as Mike. I read WAKE UP, but frankly, I'm pretty much in despair about improving things. I'd move to Canada, but I hate cold weather and anyway, my people have been here over three hundred years. I had forefathers who fought in the Revolution. Now I'm watching our government turn "liberty and justice for all" into "invade where we please, torture whom we please" while expletives like Mike are more concerned about making sure his gay neighbors are denied the affirmation of love he shares with his wife.

True. But I think acceptance might be a sell. Approval is too much to ask for. Hell, I don't APPROVE of much of anything, even myself.

Mailbag



Mike writes:

I have to admit I'm somewhat pleased with your latest oped "WHAT'S THE MATTER WITH MANHATTAN?". It's not as blatently left as most of your articles and is even almost centrist! I have a few problems, however, I'd like to address. My main disagreement is with the first paragraph: "Frank blames the phenomenon of trailer park Republicanism--people whose votes support right-wingers who export their jobs overseas, raise their taxes and starve their kids' schools--on the GOP's astute use of "cultural wedge issues like guns, abortion, and the sneers of Hollywood whose hallucinatory appeal would ordinarily be far overshadowed by material concerns." The problem that middle America has with the left and progressive left is that it's not necessarily that they are for the right so much that they are absolutely against the left. The left has too many controversial issues that Americans WILL NOT ACCEPT. Abortion, homosexuality, higher taxes to name a few. Those are issues Americans are vehemently against. No smart American is for shipping jobs overseas and turning our back on the American worker. Those things I believe in (my father has been with the AFLCIO for over 40 years in the airline industry). The issues you cite, guns and Hollywood people, are inflammatory to middle America, but nothing sets them on fire like abortion and homosexuality. Until the Democrats grasp that idea and get rid of the gays and murderers and moves to a centrist area, THEY WILL CONTINUE TO LOSE POWER. Ted, it's not rocket science.

Now to what I agree with you about: "All Americans, not just social conservatives, are "values" voters." The problem is that the values of the few will not trump the values of the many.

I congratulate you on less Bush bashing and focusing more on the issues.

Mike is one of my regular correspondents, and a smart cookie. I don't agree with him about everything, but I find most of what he has to say interesting. He touches upon points I discuss in WAKE UP, YOU'RE LIBERAL!--namely, that Democrats can fight (and should fight!) for gay rights and abortion rights without demanding approval for what many Americans view as unacceptable behavior. The party should not, as Mike implies, become more centrist as much as it should ACT more centrist. There's a difference.



Diego Garcia



Does anyone know the answer to Carl's question?

This might be something for you to look into: the US government 'secret' base on the island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean is only about 12 feet above sea level. There are [were?] a couple of thousand military personnel stationed there. What was the effect of the tsunami on this island? Did anything / anyone survive? Can the government even admit what was there?

Send info to chet@rall.com.



Food for Thought



Absidec writes:

...who promised to take away their Bush tax cut?

The answer is partly seen by looking to the two strongest supporters of the Democrats: The least educated, and the most educated...in other words, those who only have a High School degrees (or less) and those who have a Masters degree or more. Ordinary holders of Bachelors degrees tend to be Republicans (the bulk of professional workers: Engineers, Accountants, Middle-Managers, etc). Subsequently, a "U shaped" economic curve is the most ideal for Democrats:

http://www.vdare.com/sailer/041121_ca.htm

...that is, an economic graph with a very small middle class. Why do wealthy Democrats enjoy being taxed? Is it pure, good-hearted altruism, as they say? (Put another way: Was George Soros a brutal man while gaining money, only to turn soft when endorsing tax-friendly John Kerry?) No.

The new Feudalism:

http://home.ddc.net/ygg/ms/ms-54.htm

Sorry for the radicalism.

I don't think this distribution curve is correct, but once again I find this stuff worth mulling over.



The Militarization of Charity



Tom writes:

Even though I am miles apart from you philosophically and politically I always read your strip if for no other reason that I like your drawing style and that they make no bones about where you stand and are unapologetically liberal in your views.

However (there’s always a however isn’t there?), the latest strip about use of the military befuddles me. Have you not seen the helicopters and personnel being used to reach isolated areas to deliver aid to tsunami victims? There are times when a force that has the ability to move where it wants and at will is exactly what is needed. Scanning the Internet all the pictures that I have seen indicate that there is very little opposition by the recipients of supplies that it is being delivered by the U. S. military. That is of course if you don’t count the helicopter that was shot at by tribesmen with bows and arrows but I think that has less to do with philosophical/political issues rather than being freaked out by the choppers themselves.

I understand that to use reductio ad absurdum arguments one must go to extremes but even that approach has to have valid underpinnings to make a point valid.

Reductio ad absurdum arguments are the basis of editorial cartooning. Nonetheless, that cartoon--the "War on Tsunamism"--does ask aloud a valid point about using the military to deliver relief supplies. First and foremost, every nation affected does have helicopters and its own military. They're mainly lacking petrol to fly them--something they could buy if they got the cash from, say, us. Moreover, it's taking naval vessels as long as a month to arrive in the disaster zone. Could it be that there's some motivation beyond efficiency for militarizing American charity?



Godzilla Politics



FOR Jeff writes:

War Against Abstraction. Excellent! One thing about Godzilla and other monster movies - the military was always ineffective. It took a monster to fight a monster. Maybe that was little Georgie's real lesson.

The Alternative Universe Where No One Picks on Muslims



taberott@yahoo.com writes:

This is NOT a threat, but I sincerely hope that you die a tortured, painful and embarassing death, you shit sack!

How about some insulting cartoons aimed at Muslins this year? That should do the trick! We could raffle off the opportunity to write your obit, and raise a fortune. I will keep my fingers crossed! Fuck you!

Santa must have denied him an iPod too.

Tactics vs. Morality



Mark writes:

Ted, I just can't buy into the arguments of your two most recent columns. First you wrote that FDR and

Resident Bush are pretty much the same, except that FDR was elected. Then you wrote that liberal Democrats who vote their values instead of their economics are the same as right-wingers who do the same.

Given that FDR was not a saint, and was not close to one, it's clear to me that the programs FDR fought to put in place are ones that have made the United States a better place to live in. The programs that GWB fights for are almost universally at odds with basic human decency. Both presidents sought to increase executive power, it's impossible to disagree with that. But I think it's quite unfair to put FDR, who did some things that were wrong and left the nation a better place, in the same category with the worst executive in the history of the country.

As for this thing with the values voters, I think you're completely wrong. The liberal values voters you describe are very fortunate people who vote to make society more fair. The right-wingers you describe are poor and working-class people who vote to screw themselves in order to dehumanize others and, in the case of national security, vote for inept leadership over potentially competent leadership. Your well-off liberals sound fair-minded; your right-wingers are sado-masochists.

These two columns are challenging and interesting but they do not draw all the necessary distinctions.

Basically, I agree with Mark. Roosevelt's programs saved capitalism from itself, as the historians say, by providing a safety net to those for whom free markets didn't reward hard work. Social Security reduced the number of senior citizens digging through the trash for a meal, the WPA built bridges we still drive across today and the general idea of the New Deal--that government owes its citizens the basic necessities of life--is one with which I agree wholeheartedly. You only have to read my writing over the past four years to learn how I feel about the neofascistic looters illegally occupying the White House.



But my FDR-GWB column wasn't about any of that. It was about tactics and how both men used very similar styles to achieve their ends. Obviously Democrats believe that FDR's ends justified his means. But Democrats shouldn't doubt that Republican partisans believe the same thing about Bush. The question I hoped to provoke in that column is: when do unfair tactics impugn desired ends? There's a secondary one as well: why don't Democrats use such tactics more often? Not since LBJ has a Democrat been willing to bend the rules to get what he wanted. Every Republican in memory, on the other hand, has.



I also agree with Mark's observations about the nature of self-defeating Democratic and Republican voters. Again, however, Mark is focusing on the end results--something I've written about extensively--whereas I'm merely attempting to explain the mindset. Voters of all political stripes vote against their economic interests. The task of progressives is to convince the electorate not to vote selfishly for themselves and their tax bracket (because it won't work, for one thing) but rather to support politicies and candidates because they're just better and more just.

Gibbon Revisited



JJ writes about today's cartoon:

Just wanted to drop you a line to say how big a kick I got out of your latest comic (Decline & Fall of the Roman Empire). I study ancient history at the University of Chicago, and I can't tell you how often I hear right-wingers erroneously assign right-wing pet causes as the cause of the Roman Empire's fall (such as, the Roman Empire fell because the government took away all the citizens weapons, etc). What's particularly ironic about all this that most scholars currently believe that the (Western) Empire fell because the central executive lost too much of its governing authority to wealthy landowners, who were exempt from most taxes and treated their properties as personal fiefdoms. Consequently, the executive was unable to respond quickly and efficiently to the various crises that confronted the empire in the 4th and 5th century, while the Eastern Empire, where the wealthy were taxed and their power held in check, remained solvent for another millennium. Hmmm....the wealthy exempt from taxes and afforded too much power in the governing of the state? Why does that sound familiar? Keep fighting the good fight, Ted. Its extremely reassuring to know you're out there.

Thanks, though I can't honestly say whether I make much of a difference. Another salient point to JJ's email: many scholars believe that the rise and collapse of Chinese dynasties can be traced to tax collections. At the beginning of a new dynasty, when the central imperial government was powerful, it imposed high taxes, mostly on those who had the money to pay them: the wealthy. But as each dynasty matured, local rulers and businesspeople cut deals with the emperor to exempt themselves from taxes or reduce them substantially. Since the revenues had to come from somewhere, they raised taxes on the poor, who rebelled and eventually overthrew that dynasty. The lesson is that a central government should literally have no personal relationship with local pols or business types save to cash their IRS checks if they want to remain in power.



It Ain't Paul Wellstone...



...but Rep. Matsui's death comes at a damned convenient time at a time when Republicans are starting down the road towards eliminating the Social Security system. Any Ukrainian waiters at the House cafeteria?

Shoutout: Did Kerry Win Ohio?



Kate Anne writes:

After hearing some twerp on PBS talking about the Dems likely to fight amongst themselves about whether to be centrist or liberal, I thought about your book and the need for Dems to wake up and NOT be "Republican lite". Anyway, I revisited your site and started reading your cartoons.

Kerry needed to win big so they couldn't steal the vote and even the unexpurgated exit polls showed he didn't win big, Still he won -- please see freepress.org and truthout.org for their latest election column's SO, I question your IF 70,000 OHIOANS HAD VOTED FOR KERRY. They DID; indeed more than that number did. It should have been IF THEY HAD COUNTED ALL THE OHIO KERRY VOTES -- because the exit polls clearly show that Kerry won. Thom Hartmann says exit polls are never off by .1%. Since election polls showed Kerry won, the Republicans want to ban

them, of course.

Did you know that all of the precincts voting on optical scan machines in New Mexico went for Bush? This is a statistical impossibility. And Ohio wasn't recounted, only 3% of the vote in each precinct was AND most of that wasn't done randomly as election law said it was supposed to have been. (The one precinct where the 3% didn't match, Blackman suspended the recount -- no wonder he's refusing to testify in court.) And they never counted all those uncounted votes the machines missed.....

It is so dirty. Why aren't people in the street like they were in the Ukraine? We believe it couldn't happen here, but it did -- AGAIN. And it will AGAIN AND AGAIN, if we don't put a stop to it. Please read Thom Hartmann's January 2003 (yes, 2 years old now) article on Commondreams.org -- or you can link to it from off ThomHartmann.com -- entitled "If You Want To Win An Election, Just Control The Voting Machines"

I wish more folks would push the fact that electronic voting is scary indeed. I'm ready to volunteer to handcount elections. Indeed, if they revote Ohio it should be on paper and carefully observed.

I met you at the Porter Restaurant after you spoke on Unfiltered during the Republican convention. I continue to be impressed with your work and would truly appreciate your checking into all of the above.

Like many other Americans, I strongly suspect that the Bushites pulled ballotbox shenanigans in Ohio and elsewhere. The big question is: was the miscounting and electronic voting BS sufficient to tilt the presidency? I've read a lot about this, including the articles referenced in Kate Anne's email, and haven't yet found the evidence sufficiently compelling to put forward in my columns and/or cartoons that Bush stole 2004 beyond the fact that he ran on an unearned incumbency (which still makes him illegitimate). Still, this is important. So I have a request. If you have information or can point me to watertight proof of malfeasance in Ohio and/or other battleground states--especially information containing exact figures--please email it to me at chet@rall.com.



Also please send information relevant to Inauguration Day protests in Washington so I can promote it here. Patriotic Americans should surround the White House by the millions on January 20 to demand that Bush get the fuck out of Al Gore's house, but they won't. Until we grow a spine, at least we can whine.

Happy New Year



As we nurse our national hangover, let's put the tsunami into proper perspective. Current estimates have 150,000 dead, but God is a piker compared to America's own personal savior George W. Bush, who has killed the following people for no good reason:



20,000 Afghan civilians as per CNN

20,000 Taliban government troops as per numerous European sources

30,000 Iraqi civilians (invasion phase, as per Tommy Franks)

30,000 Iraqi government troops (invasion phase, as per Tommy Franks)

100,000 Iraqi civilians as per Lancet medical journal



200,000 total murdered by George W. Bush



These are conservative figures, and they grow by the day. But who knows? Maybe the tsunami will catch up!



Allied Military Government of Occupied Territories



AMGOT was what they called it during World War II--harsh military occupation as it was applied to Germany, Italy and Japan and, for a few months after D-Day 1944, liberated France. One of the great untold stories of World War II was the attempt by the US Army's Civil Affairs division to deny self-rule to France, setting the stage for postwar anti-Americanism. I wrote my college honors thesis on plans to occupy France after World War II and, every now and then, people email me to request a copy. Until now I was unable to rescue the 1991 Word file it was created in. But that's changed, and I will soon be posting information here so that you can read the story of AMGOT for yourself.



The story is particularly relevant today, since Civil Affairs personnel are enacting most of the same exact policies and tactics in occupied Afghanistan and Iraq. It's a messy tale of what happens when relatively well-meaning Americans intersect with societies with different ways of doing things and of looking at the world. Many of the mistakes we made while liberating France and other nations after World War II are being made today: cultural insensitivity, backing unpopular local politicians while snubbing those with widespread backing, dunning occupied countries for the cost of their own liberation, even denying them the trappings of true sovereignty.



Watch this space for my AMGOT thesis from 1991, and please be kind--I've had 14 years to learn to write better.