« Book Report: A Kentish Lad | Main | Tipping the Vote: Using the Few »


Your Humble Blogger hasn’t blogged about Our Only President for a nearly a month, now. Why? Well, lots of other people have been doing it for me, and what’s more I can’t face the news coming out of the White House without crippling depression.

All my Gentle Readers know how I feel, right? And y’all got internet, and other places to vent, right? So I don’t need to link to each new story about the iniquity of Our Only President and his cronies, right?

Redintegro Iraq,


Actually, Tohu Bohu is the only page that I read regularly for which political commentary is a main draw. The big-name politblogs (anywhere on the spectrum) tend to produce both tension and frustration. Off the top of my head, I think this is partially because of the tenor of the comments pages but partially because the proprietors tend to post links with the implication that each one creates a conclusion -- at which point I can either agree (and fume/cheer pointlessly) or disagree (and scoff/seethe pointlessly), but I'm unlikely to gain any new insight. I like discussion.

Hm. I hope you find it here.

I do think that it's hard for a blogger to keep any sort of humility, and it's hard to keep looking for and linking to things the blogger is still making up his mind about (YHB, as you may have noticed, skimps on the links).

And, as you say, i have found the tenor of the comments pretty bad at all the big-name politblogs that have comments. I don't totally blame the bloggers for that; I've started calling the Internet the medium of the Cheap Shot.


Regarding the first link about Haiti.

Haiti is and always has been a dump. When the French wrote that island off, they never bothered to teach the Haitians how to self govern. Their "democracy" is corrupt to it's very core, illiteracy is something like 85%, and that dude Aristide everybody seems to be so worried about, is a proponent of burning political opponents alive (he did back in 2000 anyway). They have poverty in that country on a level so profound, that Americans don't even know the definition. Arastide is a thug, research his record if you don't believe me.

Rodger Hedgecock made an interesting suggestion that George Bush should confront the French about the current Haitian situation. Say something like "Ok, you guys were really quick to condemn, criticize, and sabotage our invasion of Iraq and our current attempt to give those poor slobs freedom, go ahead and tell the world how YOU are going to fix Haiti. Show the world that French superiority you shove in our faces every chance you get!" But I digress...

The author made a judgment call on US methods to "destabilize" the Haitian government. At that time, Haiti was as destabilized as a county can get, we were cutting off Arastide's funding.

Here's a quote from Regime Change in Haiti: A Coup by any other name. By Mark Weisbrot:

"The major international financial institutions (IFI's) -- including the IMF, World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank, supported the administration's destabilization efforts by cutting off hundreds of millions of dollars in credit to one of the most desperately poor countries in the world. "

What? Do we live in happy fuzzy la-la land or what? Wake up call! When it comes to world stability you gotta play dirty sometimes. The freedoms we all enjoy are ensured but a whole bunch of ugly secrets. I'm talking about things that would turn your hair white as driven snow, baby. I think maybe the author cannot see past his own anger to look at the blunt realities of the world we live in. (Which, for some reason, seems to be a mode of thinking adopted by many democrats these days.) I'll cut you a deal, you show me one country on this planet that does more good for the world than the US, and I'll not only start believing Mr. Weisbrot, I'll print his article and eat it.

Please note that the article, which you say lends to your crippling depression, is in an editorial under a section of the webpage called "Featured Views". It's every bit as biased as my ignorant rant. Perhaps you are a victim of your own party's latest "stickiness" of being the gloom and doom party. (Which is a whole new discussion in and of itself!)

The particular articles were more or less random. I am depressed about Haiti, however, because Haiti had a chance to not be a dump anymore, and for a variety of reasons, didn't make it.

As for Aristide, I'm not nominating him for the Nobel Prize for Peace, but he was pretty clearly the only one with the support of the country, and the only one who could have helped the situation. The US hung him out to dry. If you are willing to play dirty to support stability, it seems to me you would have supported Aristide.

I'm no clean-hands type. I try not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good (or even the better). But what possible purpose did US policy serve in Haiti, other than to destroy Aristide?


Comments are closed for this entry. Usually if I close comments for an entry it's because that entry gets a disproportionate amount of spam. If you want to contact me about this entry, feel free to send me email.

Fatal error: Cannot redeclare is_valid_email() (previously declared in /usr/home/azaz/public_html/cgi-bin/MTOS-5.2.13/php/mt.php:931) in /usr/home/azaz/public_html/cgi-bin/MTOS-5.2.13/php/mt.php on line 937