|
|||||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Kennedy." Eventually
William was rewarded with a sinecure. He heads the Franklin and Eleanor
Roosevelt Institute. Katrina is a "trustee." There is a problem
here. Roosevelt
was 1 of the great criminals of the 20th century. Racially
segregated housing was legal in DC. Lynching Blacks was as popular as
baseball in our South during his 1933-45 Presidential years. It wasn't a federal
crime. In
1934 he made the treaty under which Havana had to agree to a clause granting
a US base at Guantanamo, which can only be closed with Washington's consent. In
1937, he outlawed hemp, grown thruout the country, by a a racist campaign against
Mexican smugglers & their "marijuana." He
massacred 13 Puerto Rican patriots demonstrating in Ponce in 1938, when Spanish
was forbidden as the language of instruction in the colony's schools. Roosevelt
was also President of the Philippines, like Puerto Rico, still on American
imperialism's Spanish-American war trophy shelf. He
embargoed military sales to Republican Spain, 1936-39, as it fought rebel General
Francisco Franco & his Nazi & Fascist allies. WW ll was fought with a
segregated
white/black military. Indeed Roosevelt extended American racism to its
greatest heights. Executive Order 9066 put 144,000 innocent Japanese-Americans
into concentration camps. He did nothing to help European Jewry before or during
the holocaust. In
1941, he jailed the leaders of the Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party under
the Smith Act, which, in effect, made it a crime to sell Marx's 19th century works,
as allegedly part of a conspiracy to overthrow the government by force &
violence Katrina,
following her CIA-front father, signed on as a later-day fan of America's
very own WW ll war criminal. Note
well: Crimes don't work thru blood. William's crimes aren't Katrina's. She
must have differences with him on issues. But she never parted from him politically
after his shameful career as a CIA front. That is her crime. Then, in
becoming a trustee, she broke new ground, in effect recommitting Roosevelt's
war crimes, after the fact. Roosevelt
defeated Hitler, hence is the official WW ll American political hero
in "the last good war." Indeed, I was 8 when he died & remember
people crying
in the streets when they heard of his death. But I know of no other politician
who has declined so severely in reputation as Roosevelt, in the eyes of the overwhelming
majority professional historians of every ideological hue, who have
dealt with his policies. I've
had encounters with Navasky. He published 3 of my articles. Atheists & religious
folks argue whether there is life after death. He is proof that there is
no life before death. But I've never exchanged more than hellos with Katrina.
However Freud's Electra complex explains her. [Agamemnon's daughter incites
her brother to avenge dad's murder by mom.] Its you gals' equivalent of the male
Oedipus complex. Little
Katrina psychologically fixated on her dad. His politics became her superego's
values. She is not in any way involved with the CIA. She could give us
issues on which she differs with William. In her mind, these are enuf to demonstrate
that. But they don't counterbalance her being on his Institute's board.
She shares his Democratic Party, rite or wrong, loyalty to US imperialism. She
is a well intended well poisoner. She means well. But she is poisoning the
well of public consciousness by advocating that it vote for an imperialist war
party. In
her mind, she represents "the democratic wing of the Democratic
Party." While
the party is saving us from the GOP, they are saving it from itself. I've seen
& heard her lead cheers for Paul Wellstone. Except that the late Senator voted
for the Patriot Act. Then The Nation enthused over John Dean. Now the 12/24
NY Times has him leading the party's retreat: "We
ought not turn our back on pro-life people, even though the vast majority of
people in the party are pro-choice. I don't have any objection to someone who
is pro-life, if they [are?] really dedicated to the welfare of children. If
someone is willing to stick with us who is pro-life, that means they are the right
kind of pro-life person. What I don't want to do is to have a national message
that makes it impossible for you to be a conservative, or to be a progressive
who can't win." There
is a fantastic quality to The Nation's politics. Everyone who knows it, laughed
at Navasky's threat that, if Kerry had won "the election, The Nation will
pursue each of these differences vigorously." The magazine never 'pursued'
its 'differences' with Bush or Kerry, before the election, in any organized way
& it isn't about to get its act together to go after Bush or its own party.
Victor & Katrina are both delusional. Occasionally
a guest writes an intelligent article. But all unsigned editorials
& many with signatures represent its wretched politics. Several prominent
names
identified with The Nation have denounced its Democratic politics, in it or
elsewhere. All journalists on its masthead must be judged by 1 criteria. Have
they denounced the magazine's publisher & editor & their party? Whenever
a journal, a movement, whatever, loses touch with reality, the relatively
sane denounce it or leave. Hard core veteran crackpots stay with its declining
ideology to the end. That is what happened with The Nation, liberalism's
journalistic flag ship. On
the other hand, if you were young & supported Kerry, & are
demoralized, learn
the crucial lessons from your innocent mistake. Be happy to know of The Nation's
pathology. Study their criminal careers as knowing accessories to their party's
felonies. Move on to principled scientific politics. - -
- End — - |
|
The Nation: The antiwar movement's
friendly enemy (concluded) |
|
To
contact me: |
