Ovi -
we cover every issue
newsletterNewsletter
subscribeSubscribe
contactContact
searchSearch
Visit Ovi bookshop - Free eBooks  
Ovi Bookshop - Free Ebook
Join Ovi in Facebook
Ovi Language
Murray Hunter: Essential Oils: Art, Agriculture, Science, Industry and Entrepreneurship
WordsPlease - Inspiring the young to learn
Murray Hunter: Opportunity, Strategy and Entrepreneurship
International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement
 
BBC News :   - 
iBite :   - 
GermanGreekEnglishSpanishFinnishFrenchItalianPortugueseSwedish
The change McCain must bring
by Thanos Kalamidas
2008-09-06 09:59:03
Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author
DeliciousRedditFacebookDigg! StumbleUpon
I keep reading the stories and the speeches Dick Cheney gave on his trip to the 'New European' states and I have to admit that the man really amazes me and makes me wonder if we are ever going to find out what really happened during this American administration.

Dick Cheney has been proved to be the mastermind behind all the conspiracy theories over the last few years in Washington. The man definitely was behind the attack on Saddam and there is too little doubt for his role in the extended occupation. He sure is behind the rebirth of the Cold War and all the attacks against Russia, and he was involved even with what happened lately in Georgia. After all, Mikheil Saakashvili would have nothing of what he did if he didn’t have the support of somebody strong enough to play games with Russia. That he failed had to do with the timing and not with the expected support.

Was Mikheil Saakashvili stupid? To my opinion definitely, he was ready to start WWIII provoking Russia so stupidly, but then again was it his decision or was he the pawn in a wider game where again Cheney’s name jumps here and there?

In his acceptance speech McCain said that it is time for change, I agree that the time for change has come, but he should start from his own house and perhaps that is what is going to hold the presidency away from him; perhaps McCain needs to understand that the change should start from the Republican Party and in this sense I can excuse his choice on the face of Ms. Palin. She seems, despite all her often extreme conservatism, to live in the 21st century and not back in the 1950s. But how do you clean a status quo well wired like the one Dick Cheney and his neo-conservatives had the chance to establish inside the Republican Party over the last few years.

Dick Cheney might have visited Ukraine and Georgia to really show them his support and perhaps in his twisted mind Mikheil Saakashvili was right for everything he did, despite the fact that he used tanks to prove it with tens of victims; but I cannot stop suspecting and behind it is just business as usual. Dick Cheney has already proved that in Iraq everything is business as usual - it doesn’t matter the number of victims. You just need to check the companies involved with the reconstruction of Iraq, the companies involved with the oil business in Iraq and you will understand what I mean. It's not me saying this and what I’m saying is definitely voices in my head, it is written all around, especially in the US media, that Dick Cheney even had personal financial interest in a few of those companies.

And we are talking about energy, the hard exchange of our times. The Gulf is one place where the game is played, there are a couple more and Caucasus is the other one. The thing with the energy coming from Caucasus is not only the cost but the control Russia has extent over Europe. The oil crisis has led the European countries to natural gas and Russia has proved with the former Soviet democracies a strong negotiator! I just remembered something McCain said in his acceptance speech, he said that his aim is to restore the party’s principals! How far George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have led the Republican Party away from its principals? The war in Afghanistan was definitely against terrorists and one of the worst dictatorships in the world but does the same apply with Iraq?

And then look at the ideological side of the business. Weapons companies and all the chain of companies that supports them and be sure it is a huge chain with unbelievable profits need an enemy, a bad guy and this bad guy need to be visual, not a ghost like Bin Laden, needs to have visual bombs and visual tanks so Dick Cheney gave the ideological background re-establishing the Cold War. And conspiracy theories want him doing his best in this one. The question here is how far he was willing to take it because we have to admit that the first 24 hours in Georgia were pretty dangerous and a wrong move from either side could have triggered what we have tried to avoid in the last fifty years. And this is in front, not only for the next leader of the Republican Party but in front of the next president of the USA!

Somehow I have the feeling that this change is far more important than any other change McCain is dreaming of and should be his mission if he wants to really do something for his party but most of all for the American people. Clean the party of all the dirt Cheney is leaving behind.

    
Print - Comment - Send to a Friend - More from this Author

Comments(5)
Get it off your chest
Name:
Comment:
 (comments policy)

Emanuel Paparella2008-09-06 12:36:27
Thanos, I am afraid that to expect John McCain, who has caved in to the extreme right of his party (the likes of Rush Limbau), and has voted with Bush 90% of the times in the last eight years, to clean up after Bush and Cheney, is wishful thinking, an illusion inside a great delusion. Being a maverick is not necessarily being for change as McCain would like us to believe now. It can just mean unpredictability and short temper. Both McCain and Palin seem to have plenty of maverick propensities but we have heard precious little from either of them on taking responsibility for what their party has done to the US (and world) economy in the last eight years. I predict that we will continue hearing nothing; as Biden has said: the silence is deafening. They’ll prefer to focus on the demonization of Obama, as the RNC has made perfectly clear. Stay tuned, the worst is still to come.


Emanuel Paparella2008-09-06 12:59:01
In support of the above statements here is an excerpt from an article in the New York Times (Nov. 4)titled: The Strategy of Resentment by op ed columnist Paul Krugman:

Can the super-rich former governor of Massachusetts — the son of a Fortune 500 C.E.O. who made a vast fortune in the leveraged-buyout business — really keep a straight face while denouncing “Eastern elites”?
Can the former mayor of New York City, a man who, as USA Today put it, “marched in gay pride parades, dressed up in drag and lived temporarily with a gay couple and their Shih Tzu” — that was between his second and third marriages — really get away with saying that Barack Obama doesn’t think small towns are sufficiently “cosmopolitan”?
Can the vice-presidential candidate of a party that has controlled the White House, Congress or both for 26 of the past 28 years, a party that, Borg-like, assimilated much of the D.C. lobbying industry into itself — until Congress changed hands, high-paying lobbying jobs were reserved for loyal Republicans — really portray herself as running against the “Washington elite”?
Yes, they can. (continued below)


Emanuel Paparella2008-09-06 12:59:30
On Tuesday, He Who Must Not Be Named — Mitt Romney mentioned him just once, Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin not at all — gave a video address to the Republican National Convention. John McCain, promised President Bush, would stand up to the “angry left.” That’s no doubt true. But don’t be fooled either by Mr. McCain’s long-ago reputation as a maverick or by Ms. Palin’s appealing persona: the Republican Party, now more than ever, is firmly in the hands of the angry right, which has always been much bigger, much more influential and much angrier than its counterpart on the other side.
What’s the source of all that anger?
Some of it, of course, is driven by cultural and religious conflict: fundamentalist Christians are sincerely dismayed by Roe v. Wade and evolution in the curriculum. What struck me as I watched the convention speeches, however, is how much of the anger on the right is based not on the claim that Democrats have done bad things, but on the perception — generally based on no evidence whatsoever — that Democrats look down their noses at regular people.


Thanos2008-09-06 18:22:11
I think I used the name of McCain more because it was convenient than anything else, but don’t you think that it is time for the republican party to make a real turn and leave behind this cold war attitude and I don’t mean it only regarding foreign policy but as a general attitude. I think most of the European conservative parties despite my disagreement with them are far more liberal than today’s Republican Party and in some sense this Republican Party is reminding more the far right of European politics.


Emanuel Paparella2008-09-06 21:50:47
Indeed, I agree with your assesment, Thanos. Judging from the abundance of lies and slanders about Obama at the RNC it is wholly incosistent for McCain to promise change to the American people when he has been unable to deliver change, so far, to a party to which he has belonged all his life and his 23 years in Congress which has nominated him and which rather than dealing with real political issue and the economy prefers to take the low dishonest road of slander and ad hominem attacks. In more honorable times both Bush and Cheney would have been impeached long ago for abuse of power, and McCain as a maverick would have repudiated the Republican party. He has voted with Bush 90% of the times in the last eight years. It is only fair that he be now judged by the common people on the basis of that shabby performance. One cannot have the cake and eat it too.


© Copyright CHAMELEON PROJECT Tmi 2005-2008  -  Sitemap  -  Add to favourites  -  Link to Ovi
Privacy Policy  -  Contact  -  RSS Feeds  -  Search  -  Submissions  -  Subscribe  -  About Ovi