FROM CLEVELANDS SECRET CLUB
WHERE TRUTH REIGNS SUPREME
Welcome! We're progressive, political, controversial, provocative, thought-provoking, entertaining, sometimes comedic, and always extremely interesting and informative. View investigative segments at the side and bottom of this page.
"Alfred W. McCoy is professor of history at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. A TomDispatch regular, he is the author, most recently, of Policing America’s Empire: The United States, the Philippines, and the Rise of the Surveillance State (2009). He is also the convener of the “Empires in Transition” project, a global working group of 140 historians from universities on four continents. The results of their first meetings at Madison, Sydney, and Manila were published as Colonial Crucible: Empire in the Making of the Modern American State and the findings from their latest conference will appear next year as “Endless Empire: Europe’s Eclipse, America’s Ascent, and the Decline of U.S. Global Power.”" [From Alternet, December 5, 2010]
Corporate America's Plan to Loot Our Pensions Is the Latest Battle in Decades-Long Assault on the Middle Class | | AlterNet by Arun Gupta, December 18, 2010
Dude, Where's My Mortgage? How an Obscure Outfit Called MERS Is Subverting Our Entire System of Property Rights | | AlterNet by Yasha Levine, December 16, 2010 [Make sure you pressure your U.S. representatives to not support or push through any legislation similar to House Vote #573- Thank you House Democrats for sticking with the people and voting "no" (love ya)]
"Compassionless Conservatism", By Terrance Heath
December 9, 2010 - 5:21pm ET
[please read the article with all videos at: http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010124909/compassionless-conservatism ]
Excerpt:
In her 2003 column, "The Uncompassionate Conservative," Molly Ivins cited as an example of the above President George W. Bush's praise of the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program [LIHEAP] — which helps low income families heat their homes in the winter — during a presidential debate in 2000, only to turn around and cut $300 million from the program in his first budget as president — even as people were freezing to death. Ivins attributes this to a kind of pathological cluelessness on the part of Bush and his "compassionate conservatism."
The Reverend Jim Wallis, leader of Call to Renewal, a network of churches that fight poverty, told the New York Times that shortly after his election, Bush had said to him, "I don't understand how poor people think," and had described himself as a "white Republican guy who doesn't get it, but I'd like to." What's annoying about Bush is when this obtuseness, the blinkeredness of his life, weighs so heavily on others, as it has increasingly as he has acquired more power.
...What is the disconnect? One can see it from the other side -- people's lives are being horribly affected by the Bush administration's policies, but they make no connection between what happens to them and the decisions made in Washington. I think I understand why so many people who are getting screwed do not know who is screwing them. What I don't get is the disconnect at the top. Is it that Bush doesn't want to see? No one brought it to his attention? He doesn't care?
Okay, we cut taxes for the rich and so we have to cut services for the poor. Presumably there is some right-wing justification along the lines that helping poor people just makes them more dependent or something. If there were a rationale Bush could express, it would be one thing, but to watch him not see, not make the connection, is another thing entirely. Welfare, Medicare, Social Security, food stamps -- horrors, they breed dependency. Whereas inheriting millions of dollars and having your whole life handed to you on a platter is good for the grit in your immortal soul? What we're dealing with here is a man in such serious denial it would be pathetic if it weren't damaging so many lives.
Though Bush — the recent attempt to rehabilitate his image by publishing a memoir (that he hardly bothered to write) notwithstanding — has faded from the political scene, much of what Ivins noted in 2003 can be observed in today's GOP and its Tea Party base, with one very important exception.
As E.J. Dionne recently observed, conservatives have now abandoned even the pretense of compassion.
Christopher Caldwell, a columnist for The Financial Times, was one of the first political writers to pick up on the significance of [Vanderbilt University historian Gary] Gerstle’s essay. Caldwell, an American conservative, used it to critique Bush’s multicultural and compassion agenda and to explain the tea party’s rise. Intriguingly, he suggests that “many of the tea party’s gripes about President Barack Obama can also be laid at the door of Mr. Bush.”
For example, the main effect of Bush’s faith-based initiative, in Caldwell’s view, was to funnel “a lot of federal money to urban welfare and substance abuse programs.” The No Child Left Behind Act, which “meant to improve educational outcomes for minorities, did so at the price of centralizing authority in Washington.” And of course, there was Bush’s 2007 immigration reform proposal, “the clearest sign that he was losing the ear of his party.”
For liberals, the publication of Bush’s memoirs has largely been an occasion for revisiting all the areas in which they rate his presidency a catastrophic failure: the rush to war in Iraq, torture, tax cuts for the rich, the response to Hurricane Katrina. It’s hard for liberals (believe me, I know) to fathom that there are any parts of the Bush legacy we might miss.
But imagine if the main result of the tea party is a “correction” of the Bush creed involving a move away from its most open and tolerant features and a rebellion against even the idea that compassion is a legitimate object of public policy. A conservatism that abandons the redeeming side of Bushism will not be an improvement on the old model.
The difference between the "compassionate conservatism" of the Bush era and the compassionless conservatism ascendant in the GOP today is that there can be no claim of cluelessness or obtuseness. There is daily evidence that the people's lives are being horribly affected by the GOP's policies and political tactics — such as blocking the extension of unemployment benefits amid record unemployment and long-term unemployment. The rhetoric around this stomach-turning obstruction is a mixture of fickleness around "fiscal responsibility" and outright derision and hatred from the very people bearing the brunt of the economic crisis: the long-term unemployed who, after 99 weeks, face the exhaustion of their unemployment benefits. Today's conservatives can't claim not to know how their policies impact Americans' lives. Rather than not knowing, today's "uncompassionate conservatism" stems from not caring how their policies and political tactics impact people.
Lost in the debate of the president's proposed "deal" with Republicans to "temporarily" extend the Bush tax cuts in exchange for a 13-month extension of the emergency extension of unemployment insurance benefits is one devastating reality. The proposed deal holds nothing for the 99ers, those Americans who have exhausted or are close to exhausting their unemployment benefits. In the proposed deal as it currently stands, the 99ers get nothing.
-
-
The recent tax compromise between President Obama and the Republicans may be packed with treats for the upper middle class and the wealthy, but its benefits for the unemployed are perhaps not quite what they appear.
The 13-month extension of unemployment benefits offers no additional help for the hundreds of thousands of Americans who have already reached, or are fast approaching, the 99-week limit on unemployment benefits. By contrast, my colleague David Kocieniewski noted in his article on Wednesday that a quarter of the savings from this compromise will go to the wealthiest 1 percent.
“There is nothing for someone who is in that unfortunate position,” Chad Stone, chief economist at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said of the so-called 99ers."
READ THE REST OF TERRANCE HEATH'S ARICLE (WITH ALL VIDEOS) AT: http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010124909/compassionless-conservatism
-
Also read: "Fix Payroll Tax Cut for Low-Income Income Workers" by Michael Linden, December 9, 2010
-
Democrats Confident that 9/11 Health Bill Will Pass - ABC News by MATTHEW JAFFE, JESSICA HOPPER and KEVIN DOLAK
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Above video can be viewed at: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/ns/msnbc_tv-countdown_with_keith_olbermann#40667534Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
KEITH OLBERMANN'S TAX CUT SPECIAL COMMENT: "OBAMA GODDAMNED WRONG ON DEAL, BETRAYED HIS BASE"
THE LAST WORD WITH LAWRENCE O'DONNELL, DECEMBER 7, 2010
Corporate America's Plan to Loot Our Pensions Is the Latest Battle in Decades-Long Assault on the Middle Class | | AlterNet by Arun Gupta, December 18, 2010
-
The American Empire Is Collapsing, And Americans Will Be The Last to Know | | AlterNet by Gilbert Mercier, December 15, 2010
Not surprisingly, Beck appears to have had the better of the exchange with Americans rallying to the polls to elect a right-wing Republican majority in the House of Representatives and Assange coming under a withering assault for supposedly endangering U.S. security, as Lawrence Davidson argues in this essay:
For those who pay attention to the battle of ideas that constantly goes on in the United States, two people presently have taken center stage for diametrically opposite reasons: Glenn Beck and Julian Assange.
The first is a man whose expertise is in the creation of alternate realities by playing fast and loose with the facts. This sort of enterprise has a long and sordid history to it, and while this fellow is on the rabid right, the tradition has its historical representatives across the political spectrum.
There is never any lack of an audience for such promoters of alternate realities. Usually the size of the audience can be correlated to an economic downturn, a defeat in war, or a popular consensus about government incompetency.
The second man is a champion of the free flow of information. He believes that the only way citizens will avoid being swept into alternate realities, and victimized by the resulting ill-conceived government actions, is to have full knowledge of what policies are being pursued and their real consequences.
Whether most people actually want to know these details is debatable, but this fellow is adamant that they should be available to anyone who cares to look. Now we come to the question of how these two men are perceived by the U.S. government and the "free" people of the United States. Glenn Beck is an undereducated radio and TV personality turned political pundit. He was born in 1964 and has only a high school education. By his own admission, Beck spent at least15 of his early adult years as an alcoholic and drug addict.
Beck became suicidal in the mid-1990s and fantasized about imitating the manner of death chosen by the singer Kurt Cobain. He was pulled back from the brink with the help of Alcoholics Anonymous.
Fifteen years is a long time to baste a young adult’s brain in mind-altering substances, and I will leave it to the reader to decide if that history qualifies such a brain for political preaching. Yet, it is as a political wise man that millions of Americans now regard Glenn Beck. Sporting a style of aggressive jargon that makes him a sure candidate for Eric Hoffer’s "man of words with a grievance," Beck throws out accusations and suppositions which, with uncanny regularity, turn out to be wrong. However, that does not matter, for his listeners seem never to doubt him and so there is little motivation for Beck to doubt himself.
Increasingly popular, his growing number of listeners accepts him as a defender of the U.S. Constitution and traditional American values. And who are the threats that require this stalwart defender? Progressives and liberals, socialists and secularists all those who would destroy that mythical ideal of America that exists as an alternate reality in the minds of Beck and his followers.
Beck characterizes all such enemies as members of "Crime Inc." There is a strong naive simplicity in what Beck preaches. He espouses balanced budgets because "debt creates unhealthy relationships." Somehow Glenn Beck can hold mortgages and still remain on good terms with his wife and kids, but it seems to him sinful that the government sells more Treasury bills than he feels is necessary. The government should be reduced to a minimum.
What we have here is the projection of small town ways to a country of approximately 350 million.
There have been times when Beck has confessed that he is not a political person but rather an "entertainer." Yet his denunciation of ubiquitous conspiracies, particularly of a leftist kind, and his regularly articulated rhetorical question -- "What’s the difference between a communist or socialist and a progressive....? One requires a gun and the other eats away slowly" -- is clearly not just show biz.
And, what are we to make of the entertainment value of his repeated proclamation that Americans are in a battle to defend the "eternal principles of God" which makes "God the answer" to all our problems?
No, whether Beck was originally playing at "paleo-conservatism" or not, he is now so adapted to his role that what you see is what is there. The actor has been transformed into the character he plays. It is doubtful whether Glenn Beck has ever put forth a well thought-out, fact-checked, position in his life. Yet such a failing has not prevented him from obtaining the backing of the powerful Fox Broadcasting Company.
Beck and Fox are a very good fit. Both are part of a radical right which has now made itself appear acceptably all-American by redefining anything to the left of their positions as neo-socialist. And, they have drawn to themselves the millions of folks who are naive and simple conservatives living in a faux reality that defines the welfare state as communism and President Obama as a Muslim agent seeking to impose Sharia law on places like Oklahoma.
For such folks Beck’s nonsense somehow confirms all their hopes and fears. In their millions they are moved, weekly, to agree with whatever it is that they think he is saying. The U.S. government has made no objection to the Fox-Beck propaganda show. Both are, of course, protected by the First Amendment. And, it is probably the case that at least some of the elements of elected government, for instance the Republican Party’s right-wing majority and the Blue Dog Democrats, are in agreement with all or part of Beck’s message.
The rest of the government, the liberal Democrats, for instance, seem frustrated and confused. They do not know how to respond to someone like Beck and so they hope that he will, in the end, prove a temporary phenomenon.
Who is Julian Assange?
Julian Assange, our second personality, is an Australian-born Internet expert. Born in 1971, he attended the University of Melbourne where he studied physics, mathematics and philosophy. However, he did not stay to complete a degree.
He made an early career as a computer programmer and is the author of both free and commercial pieces of software. A strong anarchistic strain runs through Assange’s early adult period. He was a member of a number of relatively benign hacker organizations and the ideal of information transparency seems to have been a strong driving force in his life from early on.
All of which eventually led him to found WikiLeaks in 2006. It is Assange’s contention that government secrecy almost always harms people and denies them the ability to make rational decisions. The press has the responsibility to fight against censorship but has been seduced into cooperating with the system it ought to be policing.
"How is it," Assange asks, "that a team of five people has managed to release to the public more suppressed information...than the rest of the world press combined? It’s disgraceful." There are those who see Assange as an "Internet freedom fighter," and Daniel Ellsberg of Pentagon Papers fame has asserted that Assange "is serving [American] democracy and serving the rule of law precisely by challenging the secrecy regulations, which are not laws in most cases, in this country.""
read the rest at: http://www.alternet.org/media/149039/wikileaks_exposes_america's_dirty_laundry,_while_media_clowns_like_glenn_beck_are_off_in_fantasy_land_/?page=3
As part of its political programming, the satellite broadcaster offers a liberal station and a conservative one: Sirius Left and the infuriatingly named Sirius Patriot. An outgrowth of the now defunct satellite station America Right, Sirius Patriot boasts the "true voices of conservatism."
One true voice of conservatism on the station is Mike Church, who calls himself "the Dude." Church once lamented the political correctness that prevents him from expressing himself on race, saying on his show that when it comes to race issues, "regardless of ... what you may want to say, you always have to temper it with what is still politically acceptable speech."
If Church's output represents a capitulation to propriety, his uncensored views towards minorities seem like they would involve sheets. The Dude's schtick is putting out vilely offensive (and unfunny) "parody" songs, mostly starring undocumented immigrants. One pits a Mexican namedManuel against Bubba,defender of White American work ethic, in a cleaning contest. The chorus actually goes, "The wetbacks are in Georgia and they're looking for green cards. If you win we'll deport his ass back to Mexico... But if you lose we'll all speak Espanol!" (In case you're wondering, Bubba comes out on top, while Manuel "bowed his head, knowing that he'd been beat, and he lay his welfare money on the ground at Bubba's feet....")
In a tribute to the Minute Men, set to CCR's "Lookin' Out My Back Door," we get, "Just got in from Illinois, cocked my shotgun Oh Boy, got to stop these illegal aliens!/ ... Pretty soon I'm singing ... Shoot, Shoot, Shoot wetbacks at the border!" In "We're Fucking Up America," Church and the gang fret that some (very generous) liberals will "fill our beds with lesbos and gays!"
Church is joined on Sirius Patriot by Andrew Wilcow, who Glenn Greenwald once singled out, among some serious competition, as a symbol of the Right's decline. Greenwald made the choice after Wilcow called Perez Hilton a "vile sodomite." "Perez Hilton, who I am now terming a vile sodomite ...yeah, Perez, you’re a vile sodomite – doesn’t that word have a ring to it – sodomite -- and vile – vile sodomite" chanted Wilcow while subbing for Mark Levin (on a different station).
Wilcow has also expressed his disapproval of gays and lesbians by implying that Chris Dodd's prostate cancer was the result of sex with Barney Frank. Yeah.
And what's a conservative lineup without a religious right elder who's fought for the disenfranchisement of women and gays since the '70s? That slot is filled by Gary Bauer, who hosts a show with Tom Rose, former publisher and CEO of theJerusalem Post. Also on the roster are Cam and Company from NRA News, Rusty Humphries and Mark Levin.
What does Sirius have to gain from playing to the right-wing's basest instincts with these frothing screamers who skate perilously close to the line of hate speech? Or of plucking up a shock jock who was hounded off the airwaves for yelling the n-word at a black woman? A lot -- and almost nothing to lose.
The station has been in deep financial shit for years. Like all satellite radio, Sirius had the misfortune of coming up with paid radio content right before most radio became free online, and people became fused to their iPods. Struggling under a $3.2 billion debt, the company barely avoided bankruptcy in early 2009. Later that year it gave investors another fright by losing 2 percent of its subscribers (it only had growth in subscribers before that), and in August of 2010 year its stock hit its lowest low, at $0.94."
read the rest at: http://www.alternet.org/media/149071/sirius_radio:_the_refuge_for_frothing_racist,_homophobic_right-wingers_like_dr._laura/?page=entire
There are a few people who make hundreds of millions of income in a single year. Some people make more than $1 billion in a year But that is in a single year. If you make vast sums every year, after a while it starts to add up. (And then there is the story of inherited wealth, passed down and growing for generation after generation...)
Top 1% owns more than 90% of us combined. "In 2007, the latest year for which figures are available from the Federal Reserve Board, the richest 1% of U.S. households owned 33.8% of the nation’s private wealth. That’s more than the combined wealth of the bottom 90 percent." (Also from the Working Group on Extreme Inequality)
400 people have as much wealth as half of our population. The combined net worth of the Forbes 400 wealthiest Americans in 2007: $1.5 trillion. The combined net worth of the poorest 50% of American households: $1.6 trillion."
Nemesis was the Greek goddess of retribution. She exacted divine punishment on arrogant mortals who believed they could defy the gods, turn themselves into objects of worship and build ruthless systems of power to control the world around them. The price of such hubris was almost always death.
-
Nemesis, related to the Greek word némein, means “to give what is due.” Our nemesis fast approaches. We will get what we are due. The staggering myopia of our corrupt political and economic elite, which plunder the nation’s wealth for financial speculation and endless war, the mass retreat of citizens into virtual hallucinations, the collapsing edifices around us, which include the ecosystem that sustains life, are ignored for a giddy self-worship. We stare into electronic screens just as Narcissus, besotted with his own reflection, stared into a pool of water until he wasted away and died.
-
We believe that because we have the capacity to wage war we have the right to wage war. We believe that money, rather than manufactured products and goods, is real. We believe in the myth of inevitable human moral and material progress. We believe that no matter how much damage we do to the Earth or our society, science and technology will save us. And as temperatures on the planet steadily rise, as droughts devastate cropland, as the bleaching of coral reefs threatens to wipe out 25 percent of all marine species, as countries such as Pakistan and Bangladesh succumb to severe flooding, as we poison our food, air and water, as we refuse to confront our addiction to fossil fuels and coal, as we dismantle our manufacturing base and plunge tens of millions of Americans into a permanent and desperate underclass, we flick on a screen and are entranced.
-
We confuse the electronic image, a reflection back to us of ourselves, with the divine. We gawk at “reality” television, which of course is contrived reality, reveling in being the viewer and the viewed. True reality is obliterated from our consciousness. It is the electronic image that informs and defines us. It is the image that gives us our identity. It is the image that tells us what is attainable in the vast cult of the self, what we should desire, what we should seek to become and who we are. It is the image that tricks us into thinking we have become powerful—as the popularity of video games built around the themes of violence and war illustrates—while we have become enslaved and impoverished by the corporate state. The electronic image leads us back to the worship of ourselves. It is idolatry. Reality is replaced with electronic mechanisms for preening self-presentation—the core of social networking sites such as Facebook—and the illusion of self-fulfillment and self-empowerment. And in a world unmoored from the real, from human limitations and human potential, we inevitably embrace superstition and magic. This is what the worship of images is about. We retreat into a dark and irrational fear born out of a cavernous ignorance of the real. We enter an age of technological barbarism.
-
To those entranced by images, the world is a vast stage on which they are called to enact their dreams. It is a world of constant action, stimulation and personal advancement. It is a world of thrills and momentary ecstasy. It is a world of ceaseless movement. It makes a fetish of competition. It is a world where commercial products and electronic images serve as a pseudo-therapy that caters to feelings of alienation, inadequacy and powerlessness. We may be locked in dead-end jobs, have no meaningful relationships and be confused about our identities, but we can blast our way to power holding a little control panel while looking for hours at a screen. We can ridicule the poor, the ignorant and the weak all day long on trash-talk shows and reality television shows. We are skillfully made to feel that we have a personal relationship, a false communion, with the famous—look at the outpouring of grief at the death of Princess Diana or Michael Jackson. We have never met those we adore. We know only their manufactured image. They appear to us on screens. They are not, at least to us, real people. And yet we worship and seek to emulate them.
-
In this state of cultural illusion any description of actual reality, because it does not consist of the happy talk that pollutes the airwaves from National Public Radio to Oprah, is dismissed as “negative” or “pessimistic.” The beleaguered Jeremiahs who momentarily stumble into our consciousness and in a desperate frenzy seek to warn us of our impending self-destruction are derided because they do not lay out easy formulas that permit us to drift back into fantasy. We tell ourselves they are overreacting. If reality is a bummer, and if there are no easy solutions, we don’t want to hear about it. The facts of economic and environmental collapse, now incontrovertible, cannot be discussed unless they are turned into joking banter or come accompanied with a neat, pleasing solution, the kind we are fed at the conclusion of the movies, electronic games, talk shows and sitcoms, the kind that dulls our minds into passive and empty receptacles. We have been conditioned by electronic hallucinations to expect happy talk. We demand it.
-
We confuse this happy talk with hope. But hope is not about a belief in progress. Hope is about protecting simple human decency and demanding justice. Hope is the belief, not necessarily grounded in the tangible, that those whose greed, stupidity and complacency have allowed us to be driven over a cliff shall one day be brought down. Hope is about existing in a perpetual state of rebellion, a constant antagonism to all centers of power. The great moral voices, George Orwell and Albert Camus being perhaps two of the finest examples, describe in moving detail the human suffering we ignore or excuse. They understand that the greatest instrument for moral good is the imagination. The ability to perceive the pain and suffering of another, to feel, as King Lear says, what wretches feel, is a more powerful social corrective than the shelves of turgid religious and philosophical treatises on human will. Those who change the world for the better, who offer us hope, have the capacity to make us step outside of ourselves and feel empathy.
-
A print-based culture, as writer Neil Postman pointed out, demands rationality. The sequential, propositional character of the written word fosters what Walter Ong calls the “analytic management of knowledge.” But our brave new world of images dispenses with these attributes because the images do not require them to be understood. Communication in the image-based culture is not about knowledge. It is about the corporate manipulation of emotions, something logic, order, nuance and context protect us against. Thinking, in short, is forbidden. Entertainment and spectacle have become the aim of all human endeavors, including politics, which is how Stephen Colbert, playing his television character, can be permitted to testify before the House Judiciary Committee. Campaigns are built around the manufactured personal narratives of candidates, who function as political celebrities, rather than policies or ideas. News reports have become soap operas and mini-dramas revolving around the latest celebrity scandal.
-
Colleges and universities, which view students as customers and suck obscene tuition payments and loans out of them with the tantalizing promise of high-paying corporate jobs, have transformed themselves into resorts and theme parks. In this new system of education almost no one fails. Students become “brothers” or “sisters” in the atavistic, tribal embrace of eating clubs, fraternities or sororities. School spirit and school branding is paramount. Campus security keeps these isolated enclaves of privilege secure. And 90,000-seat football stadiums, along with their millionaire coaches, dominate the campus. It is moral leprosy.
-
The role of knowledge and art, as the ancient Greeks understood, is to create ekstasis, which means standing outside one’s self to give our individual life and struggle meaning and perspective. The role of art and scholarship is to transform us as individuals, not entertain us as a group. It is to nurture this capacity for understanding and empathy. Art and scholarship allow us to see the underlying structures and assumptions used to manipulate and control us. And this is why art, like intellectual endeavor, is feared by the corporate elite as subversive. This is why corporations have used their money to deform universities into vocational schools that spit out blinkered and illiterate systems managers. This is why the humanities are withering away.
-
The vast stage of entertainment that envelops our culture is intended to impart the opposite of ekstasis. Mass entertainment plays to the basest and crudest instincts of the crowd. It conditions us to have the same aspirations and desires. It forces us to speak in the same dead clichés and slogans. It homogenizes human experience. It wallows in a cloying nostalgia and sentimentalism that foster historical amnesia. It turns the Other into a cartoon or a stereotype. It prohibits empathy because it prohibits understanding. It denies human singularity and uniqueness. It assures us that we all have within us the ability, talent or luck to become famous and rich. It forms us into a lowing and compliant herd. We have been conditioned to believe—defying all the great moral and philosophical writers from Socrates to Orwell—that the aim of life is not to understand but to be entertained. If we do not shake ourselves awake from our electronic hallucinations and defy the elites who are ruining the country and trashing the planet we will experience the awful and deadly retribution of the gods."
-
Chris Hedges, a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter, is a senior fellow at the Nation Institute. He writes a regular column for TruthDig every Monday. His latest book is Empire of Illusion: The End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle.