| For politicians words are weapons, which are used to sell images, such like Madison Ave. sells soap. Every so often, even the best product must be made "new" or "improved!" And why shouldn't they? Hasn't it worked before? We now sneer at the phrase 'weapons of mass destruction', but several years ago it rang in the head like a klaxon. Is it radical or extremist to fight against foreigners who invade your country, and try to impose strangers who function as puppets for these foreigners? Why is the administration never seen as "extremist" for invading a foreign country based on false pretenses? Why isn't it viewed as "extreme" for its mad plan to 'remake the face of the Middle East?' Why isn't its response for the desperate acts of 19 men, (9/11), of invading a nation that had nothing to do with that act, seen as "extreme?" That it isn't is largely because of the obedient services of the corporate media, which sought obscene ratings by playing the fear card, and waving the flag. They did so because their paychecks are signed by big business, and this administration has been good for big business. |