?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

The Quality of Leadership

I got the following from the Drug Sense newsletter:
Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert - having already enraged some New Yorkers with his remarks about local office-holders' "unseemly scramble" for federal money after 9/11 - yesterday opened a second front.

On "Fox News Sunday," the Illinois Republican insinuated that billionaire financier George Soros, who's funding an independent media campaign to dislodge President Bush, is getting his big bucks from shady sources.

"You know, I don't know where George Soros gets his money. I don't know where - if it comes overseas or from drug groups or where it comes from," Hastert mused.

An astonished Chris Wallace asked: "Excuse me?"

The Speaker went on: "Well, that's what he's been for a number years - George Soros has been for legalizing drugs in this country. So, I mean, he's got a lot of ancillary interests out there."

Wallace: "You think he may be getting money from the drug cartel?"

Hastert: "I'm saying I don't know where groups - could be people who support this type of thing. I'm saying we don't know."

link:http://www.mapinc.org/media/295

So, no. When pressed to account for his baseless accusations, Hastert did not stand behind the insinuation that George Soros funds his political activities with narco dollars, but the suggestion and the images it conjures in the minds of Fox News viewers remains.

I seriously doubt that anyone reading my journal forms their political opinions based on Fox News programming, so I probably don't need to explain why drug cartels would never contribute money to Soros, who wants to end drug prohibition. Prohibition butters the drug lords' bread. They're the last people on Earth who would want to see drug laws "liberalized."

I put "liberalized" in quotes, because I would count ending prohibition as a profoundly conservative (in the political sense) move. I consider the grand social engineering campaign of drug prohibition not only unconstitutional but outrageously "liberal" in the negative sense of the word as we use it today to stigmatize do-gooding crusaders who seek to expand the power and scope of government into every aspect of the lives of private citizens.

I think describing the removal of criminal penalties for drug use as "liberalization," while accurate in some sense, constitutes yet another abuse of language by right-wing propagandists bent on distorting the distinction between political conservatism and their own liberal mis-use of governmental power. Under a banner of supposed conservatism , they usurp governmental power and use it to enforce the behavioral restrictions of a particular religion, namely that of fundamentalist Protestant Christianity.

As for Hastert's exercise in character assasination, let's take another look at it and plug in some different varibles:

"You know, I don't know where [George Soros] gets his money. I don't know where - if it comes overseas or from [drug groups] or where it comes from.

That's what he's been for a number years - [George Soros] has been for [legalizing drugs] in this country. So, I mean, he's got a lot of ancillary interests out there.

I'm saying I don't know where groups - could be people who support this type of thing. I'm saying we don't know."


Redux:

"You know, I don't know where [George W. Bush] gets his money. I don't know where - if it comes overseas or from [kiddie snuff porn groups] or where it comes from.

That's what he's been for a number years - [George W. Bush] has been for [ritualized killings] in this country. So, I mean, he's got a lot of ancillary interests out there.

I'm saying I don't know where groups - could be people who support this type of thing. I'm saying we don't know."


There you have it. George Bush, and Rupert Murdoc for all I know, get their money from global organizations dedicated to the ritualized sexual abuse and murder of children. I'm saying I don't know where they get their money. It could come from people who support this type of thing. I'm saying we don't know.

Comments

( 4 comments — Leave a comment )
saint_monkey
Sep. 4th, 2004 12:48 pm (UTC)
So true. In fact, if you change "sexual abuse" to "money laundering" and "ritaul murder" to "oil profiteering," and you'd have a pretty good case for the truth.

By the way:

Soros' reponse to Hastert, delivered in the form of a letter demanding an apology and essentially threatening a libel suit (pdf): here.

Hastert's response to Soros' response, where he attempts to defend his argument by stating it in pretty much the same terms: here.

kmo
Sep. 6th, 2004 06:04 am (UTC)
Soros' reponse to Hastert
Thank you for the follow up info. I particularly like Hastert's response in which he deliberately conflates allowing people the freedom of choice with actively encouraging drug use.

Ladies and gentleman, boys and girls, gather 'round and witness this marvel of linguistic transformation. Behold as "decriminalize" morphs into "promote" before your very eyes.

I am most concerned about any efforts to decriminalize narcotics, which I believe will exacerbate an already troubling situation in America. Illegal drug use and drug violence already kills thousands of young people on our streets each month in America. Yet you have funded organizations such as The Drug Policy Foundation, The Open Society, The Lindesmith Center, the Andean Council of Coca Leaf Producers, and several ballot initiatives across the country to decriminalize illegal drug use. Promoting drug use, in my view, will lead to more lives lost and more tragedy for our children. I think this approach is simply wrong.

Reminds me of a RAW quote:
I've become more and more convinced that the major problem on this planet is stupidity, which not only exists as a thing in itself, but it's supported and encouraged and financed. There are dozens of entrenched interests that want to promote stupidity.

-Robert Anton Wil
kmo
Sep. 6th, 2004 07:27 am (UTC)
Re: Soros' reponse to Hastert
More on Hastert's tactics here: http://www.livejournal.com/users/kmo/165975.html
trancendenz
Sep. 6th, 2004 06:43 am (UTC)
hey I'm glad you wanted to join the vote_badnarik community. No one wants to join it though lol so you and me and my bf are the only ones lol.
( 4 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

August 2017
S M T W T F S
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Ideacodes