If you listen to pubic radio, you can find programs that say mass media is right wing.  Yes, right wing, because it takes a corporation to make mass media for the masses.    So therefore  having 90% of journalists being left wing is just a clever ruse.   

Heck, we were once accused of being right wing, even though we had no corporate funding, unlike our accusers who were all owned by media companies, and I spent 5,000 hours of my life doing this for free and having scientists writing for free; the ultimate left wing environment, so it just had to be a tool of the right.

So it goes.    In the short time Barack Obama spent legislating in between bursts of running for higher office, he compiled a voting record any liberal would display with pride - but that doesn't mean anything and he is a secretly a neo-con(1), according to Stephen Sniegoski, author of The Transparent Cabal: The Neoconservative Agenda, War in the Middle East, and the National Interest of Israel.

While most Americans are under the impression that the Obama Administration is the antithesis of the Bush Administration - there was this whole 'change' idea -  Sniegoski says that the first eight weeks are all he needs to see and that he is certain the new President's foreign policy is turning out to be a continuation of Bush policies.

Sniegoski, a Ph.D. in United States History, also believes that the secret goal of neo-cons, and therefore Obama, is the destruction of Islam.   Like right-wing corporations cleverly manipulating the media to be left wing in order to assert their right-wing agenda, the election of a  black man with the middle name Hussein is just another clever ploy by the right.

"Obama himself does not appear to be completely aligned with the neocon position as was John McCain. However, the President's close advisors, such as David Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel, Dennis Ross, Joe Biden, and Hillary Clinton, tend to be ardently pro-Israel and hawkish, reflecting a neocon orientation, even though none of these individuals are actually neocons," writes  Sniegoski (click on Articles, there is no direct URL).

"If there were one antiwar pledge Obama seemed bound to honor, it was that of withdrawing troops from Iraq.   However, since his election, he has spoken of keeping a 'residual force' in that country, which now seems to be morphing into a long-term strategic relationship. And Obama is increasing Americans forces by 50 percent in Afghanistan to deal with a 'deteriorating situation,' which portends to get the United States bogged down in an unwinnable war for years."

I guess there's no point in reminding him that it has only been  two months for President Obama.   By his definition of 'unwinnable war' we also lost in Japan, Germany and Korea - three countries that have done phenomenally well for themselves and the world under American 'residual forces.'    The only country that did not do well after war with America was Viet Nam, because they actually did win.

"Will Obama opt for war with Iran? When all the business/financial bailouts and stimulus packages fail to achieve the economic rejuvenation (the likely result which should be noticed long before the end of Obama's first term), then will be time to move into the war business. In fact, war, at least war expenditures, can be presented as the ultimate Keynesian stimulus package -- as many Americans believe that World War II solved the Great Depression," he says. 

Many Americans?  Every economist too.   Obviously pork-barrel spending did not do it, since the economy was actually worse in 1938 than when Roosevelt was elected.

"Obama would undoubtedly be pushed in this belligerent direction by the neoconservatives outside his administration and the hawks within, as well as by Congress under the sway of the Israel Lobby. Given Obama's record so far, it seems highly unlikely that he would resist. American hardline policies such as a naval blockade or the bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities, which would inevitably spiral into a full-scale war."

Who knew Hillary Clinton was so right wing?  All this time Rush Limbaugh was portraying her as left wing.  But he is right wing, so why would he do that?  Maybe, perhaps, Limbaugh is secretly a tool of the left.

Yes, I know, this isn't even tangential to science, but it's the weekend and I can be as critical of politicians as anyone, but when cranks start fomenting insurrection after eight weeks, I want to kick them around a little.


(1) Bonus points for you if you can figure out exactly what this word means today, other than "someone I do not like", in this instance anyone who does not believe Israel should be obliterated.     The first neoconservatives were Democrats, mostly Trotskyites, who drifted right as the Democratic Party became the anti-war McGovernite left.   Now the word "neo" is used for virtually anything people want so, like "surreal", it is essentially meaningless.