U.S. Dissident (Chomsky) Says Bush Needs Fear for Reelection

[Democat]

HAVANA (Reuters) - U.S. linguist and political dissident Noam Chomsky said on Wednesday that President Bush will have to "manufacture" another threat to American security to win reelection in 2004 after U.S failure in occupying Iraq.

Chomsky said the military occupation of Iraq, to topple a "horrible monster running it but not a threat to anyone," was a failure.

"The country had been devastated by sanctions. The invasion ended sanctions. The tyrant is gone and there is no outside support for domestic dissidence," he said. "It takes real talent to fail in this endeavor."

Chomsky said it was reasonable to assume the Bush administration would try to "manufacture a short-term improvement in the economy" by incurring in enormous federal government debt and "imposing burdens on future generations."

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20031...

I didn't know Chomsky was labled a "dissident" by the mainstream media.

[tabasco]

1. Well, I figure anybody that criticizes the cabal is a dissident.

Count me in. If Bush gets re-elected (perish the thought), we all get upgraded to insurgents. I wonder if a manufactured threat would even work for Bush. I think people are growing weary of the never ending fear campaign. By the way, we're on Yellow Alert (ridiculous). Check your basement for Al Qaeda cells.

[mbperrin]

2. And the ATTIC, too!

This whole thing could be over our heads!

[Nlighten1]

3. Here at the Dissident Underground we agree.

Chomsky is an unofficial member of our group.

[dusty64]

4. I didn't know we had dissidents

in America. Really reminds me of the Soviet Union, anyway you can count me in. If being fiercely opposed to the rethugs makes one a dissident, I am also one. Will Gulags be far behind?

[zonmoy]

23. Will Gulags be far behind?

Dont we already have at least one gulag aka gitmo.

[paradisiac]

28. he was targeted by COINTELPRO

after all, so I guess that makes him an official dissident.

[saigon68]

29. Chimpanzee isn't the only one scaring people

On the domestic front, the police and firemen--- faced with job cuts are racheting up the rhetoric that unless more police are hired, rapists etc. will rape your little daughter. (It's like Willie Horton has made a return)

They learned this--- from these lying thugs, and war criminals.

[DrBB]

5. Chomsky "dissident" to mainstream media? Um, _yeah_...

I didn't know Chomsky was labled a "dissident" by the mainstream media.

Geez. Ever since "Manufacturing Consent," at least. He's widely considered not just a dissident but a whacko dissident, even to a lot of liberal commentators.

That's not my position on him, just a description. I find a lot of what he says trenchant and compelling. But he tends to inspire either fanatical support or equally vehement denunciation and disgust. He doesn't mince words.

[vi5]

6. Actually I'm fairly up on his work and I have to say...

I feel neither fanatical admiration or disgust. I think he's a brilliant linguist, and if he stuck to using his incredible wealth of knowledge in that area to be strictly a media critic as with Manufacturing Consent, then I would be a strident supporter and advocate of his. But he talks about a lot of subjects and areas where I don't agree with him and I think it dillutes the more important subject matter where he DOES have knowledge on it.

[rman]

8. you'r saying he doesn't have knowledge on subject where you disagree

with him?

formally he only has knowledge on language, since he's a linguist.
taking your criteria he should not be talking about anything else but language.

Telling Chomsky to stick to his expertise is like telling Krugman to limit himself to economics.
These are smart people with insight on many things. they are carefull with what they say and how they say it. I.e. Chomsky won't say 9-11 was LIHOP, thus disappointing many leftist, but he's just being scientific about it; there no hard evidence for LIHOP. They ar carefull to distiguish between their expertise and other subjects they speak about. I for one am happy there are such people who speak their mind about many of the important issues.

[bemildred]

9. No, you don't get it.

He's a very smart man, and when he agrees with me, it just
shows how right I am that such a smart man agrees with me, and
when he disagrees with me, it means he has been blinded by some
irrational emotional bias, and that shows how much more rational
I am, and I'm still right.

Get it?

[knowledgeispower]

12. If you want to see it, its there

Chomsky *did* say that the Bush administration will have to "manufacture ANOTHER threat" for 2004. This implies that the threat will either be nonexistent or created by the Bush administration. It also implies that IT HAS BEEN DONE BEFORE. It almost seems to me that there is an implied 9/11 LIHOP between the lines.

[Pastiche423]

15. "there is an implied 9/11 LIHOP "

Have you read Chomsky's book, 9/11?

It's been over eighteen months since I read it, but as I recall, it was a little more than implied that September 11, 2001 was LIHOP.

IMHO, many USians lost their fear virginity after 9/11. Our next biggest baddest boogeyman is going to have a tough gig.

[Cocoa]

38. I don't think Chomsky believes in LIHOP

I didn't read his book, but I saw him on C-span expressing skepticism about it when a caller asked him about it.

Chomsky does analysis of known events, I don't recall him doing a lot of speculating, it's not what he does.

[Chomskyite]

41. Whatever LIHOP is

. . . it seems like it means Bush planned or allowed 9/11 . . . Chomsky has stated multiple times he thinks it was planned and executed by Al-Qaeda based on all the evidence. He has said he finds it hard to believe Osama himself directed the attacks from his lair in Afghanistan, pointing to the decentralized nature of such groups. So in that light an attack on a nation would be unjustified and immoral.

[Emboldened Chimp]

22. I think Chomsky is referring to Iraq, not 9-11

[Chomskyite]

40. Very weird

If you judge the value of theory (which is Chomsky's profession in both his careers) on the basis of OTHER theory by the same person (you never name any of this of course) that you don't agree with . . . that's just silly.

[el_gato]

7. when you speak the hard truth

alot of phoney liberals get upset

especially losers like hitchens etc.

[Room101]

10. Chomsky is like the oracle- He tells it like it is

We have all known that the FEAR card will be put on the table if they are in trouble.

[CounterCoulter]

11. Wrong

Convincing people to be optimistic about the economy, not giving them another 9-11 will win the election for Wal-Mart Nation's whores in suits. Remember "Morning in America"? If Bush is able to get traction on economic numbers that will be it for the Democratic party in 2004.

Think about it this way, it doesn't matter whether unemployment is 6% or 8% that isn't enough to sway the election--particularly because all those extra unemployed people won't definitely vote Democratically. What matters is how confident middle class people within that 92% with jobs feel about Bush's ability to KEEP their job. Basically both sides are going to by lying with statistics, and the Democrats absolutely have to get traction on that issue or they're dead. Even if they fight to a draw, that is not enough.

[Sideways]

13. "If Bush is able to get traction on economic numbers "

Not an easy thing to do when ones feet are dripping in oil and the economy is in the shitter.

And please CC explain this statement to me as I have read it about ten times and I still don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

"Think about it this way, it doesn't matter whether unemployment is 6% or 8% that isn't enough to sway the election--particularly because all those extra unemployed people won't definitely vote Democratically"

Extra unemployed? Did you make that one up? And these extra unemployed won't vote Democratically? Do you know what you are saying?

Hint here friend this is what Democratically means: of or pertaining to a democracy. It has squat to do with party affiliation.

So CC back to my original point are you blathering about?

[CounterCoulter]

17. Let me clarify

"Extra" unemployed refers to the additional number of people unemployed at 8% versus 6% unemployment. Let's say that figure is 2 million people. 40% of those people would vote Republican as long as there is air in their Jesus-fearing lungs. 45% will vote Democratic regardless, as well. So that leaves at most 300,000 swing voters left unemployed by Bush. Suppose, generously, that 70% of them vote. That's 210,000 people. Then suppose, again generously, 90% vote (D). That is only 180,000 votes nationwide that Bush is going to lose due to a higher unemployment rate. Clearly, not enough to make a huge difference.

This election is going to boil down to Bush saying the economy (not to mention the wars) are going great versus the Democrats saying, no, in fact, it's terrible. They'll both have their own relevant statistics--the question is which side will the public believe? The problem with unemployment for Republicans is that it is a hard number to "cook" the book on. The people are out there, and sampling would reveal cooked books fairly quickly. For Democrats the problem is convincing the 90+% of the population that have jobs that unemployment DOES matter.

My earlier point is that if there is even a hollow recovery, we are fucked. If unemployment makes people pessimistic, rosy forecasts make people optimistic--and while a hollow recovery doesn't help bush with the unemployment issue, it does give him a big spoonful of optimism that people with jobs will probably lap up and beg for more. Remember the sheeple's response to "Morning in America"?

Democratic strategists have their work cut out for them. They need to convince employed voters that 1) High unemployment matters and could affect them, 2) Bush's rosy economic books are cooked liked Kenny-boy's, and 3) they have to hope like hell the real recovery waits until at least late into the election season.

Oh, and "Democratically" was a tongue-in-cheek response to Fox News' efforts to refer to the Democratic Party as the "Democrat Party" lest people begin thinking that there is something more democratic about Democrats than Republicans.

[0rganism]

30. your clarification begs for obfuscation

Let's suppose that unemployment alone sways 180,000 people nationwide to vote D instead of R this time around. Now that wouldn't be such a big deal, except for the electoral college that decides the elections. If a few small states like NH or ND tip D because of a few thousand votes, that's easily a dozen-vote turnaround in the college.

Those numbers have the potential to make a huge difference if the race is already close.

[CounterCoulter]

34. But, my friend

I pointed to the fact that a hollow recovery will convince millions who have jobs to either a) not vote or b) vote for the Photo-Op RoboCop.

[0rganism]

37. So did Chomsky

That's why the opposition (aka us) has to be very careful to point out that the "recovery" is hollow without sounding at all petulant. If the pukes are able to successfully paint solid economic critique as political sour grapes, we ARE headed towards the worst case scenario.

[0rganism]

31. Chomsky still tells it like it is

from the original article,
Chomsky said it was reasonable to assume the Bush administration would try to "manufacture a short-term improvement in the economy" by incurring in enormous federal government debt and "imposing burdens on future generations."

[Emillereid]

14. We should give this article a 5 rating --

in order to give the idea of manufacturing another threat more public airing.

[tinnypriv]

16. How is this news? He says the same thing every speech

Let me guess, he said it in Cuba and there were plenty of chances to get pictures of him with Castro

[TeeYiYi]

18. I wonder if it says 'dissident' on his business card . . .

NOAM CHOMSKY
Dissident

I think I'll put 'DISSIDENT' on my business card.
It will be a 'fair and balanced' business card. . .

TYY

[aeon flux]

19. Thank you Noam Chomsky

Someone's gotta tell it like it is.

[aeon flux]

20. How much truth is there in this recent AP article?

This article sharply contradicts what Chomsky is saying.
Which one is right?

-------------------

U.S. economy grows at 7.2% rate in third quarter, fastest since early 1984

Updated at 16:24 on October 30, 2003, EST.


WASHINGTON (AP) - Accelerating from a jog to a sprint, the U.S. economy surged from July through September at the fastest pace in nearly two decades. Both consumers and businesses helped power the gains, fresh evidence the national rebound is on firmer footing.


The broadest measure of the economy's performance, gross domestic product, grew at a breakneck 7.2 per cent annual rate during those three months, more than double the 3.3 per cent rate in the previous quarter, the Commerce Department reported Thursday. "Consumers were buying everything from cars and clothes to homes, and businesses are seemingly coming out of their cocoon," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Economy.com.

Economists said that near rock-bottom short-term interest rates, along with President George W. Bush's third round of tax cuts, induced consumers and businesses to spend and invest more and helped the economy move at a faster clip during the summer. The next challenge is making sure the rebound is self-sustaining, they said.

"Job growth is the key to a sustained economic expansion," said Bill Cheney, chief economist at John Hancock Financial Services. "If people are worried about their jobs, or worse, if they are getting laid off, then consumer spending is at risk."

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

[aeon flux]

21. Sorry there is no link

A friend e-mailed it to me with no link

[evworldeditor]

24. There is the smell of "spin" on this fish

Given the ideological manipulations of the White House on just about everything these days from the quality of the air in lower Manhattan after 9/11 to who put up the "Mission Accomplished" banner on the Abraham Lincoln, I don't trust anything coming out of DC these days.

[vernon_nackulus]

25. Why does this article come out of Havana?

Isn't Noam from Cambridge/Lexington?  I'm sure no one is
trying to make him look like a commie bastard.  Nope,
definitely no reason to think that.

[tinnypriv]

26. Noam is in Cuba at the moment

[ConcernedCanuk]

27. " Jus another Dumm Canuk Observation "

. . Without all the goobldeegook analysis

. Y'all down there don't even have control over your own President

Tourists for decades now knew they had better treatment in Europe if they pretended to be Canadians, no ?

Howcome the WH didn't "get it" ?

Simple:

Ur WH don't give a sh_t

It's all about $$$$$

hmmm - maybe a wee bit about OIL too

correct me if I am wromg

again, I say,

Ur Government SUCKS !! - bigtime !!

[0rganism]

32. yeah, great, rub it in why doncha?

Hey, if you guys have all the answers, help us out. Legalize marijuana or something, so the bushies will get all confused about what to do with the big northern border. Form an Arctic Treaty Organization to replace NATO. Then whip our sorry asses at hockey. That should disorganize the republicans long enough that the loyal opposition can reclaim the country in the name of peace, justice, and the Canadian Way!

BTW: we haven't had control of our own president since 1789.

[truthisfreedom]

33. name any other american ever labeled "dissident." i dare ya.

it's a term reserved for people fighting op/repressive governments.

noam has no comparable american contemporaries.

check this out.

http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/dispatch/2002-10-...

[kayell]

35. "it's a term reserved for people fighting op/repressive governments"

I don't think I've ever heard this term applied to an american of any political persuasion before. A sign for sure of how far our freedoms have dropped in the last few years that now news agencies talk about american dissidents. How long before Chomsky either has to go into exile or becomes a resident of Gitmo? How long before the rest of us are called dissidents? What has happened to my country???

[0rganism]

36. Noam's colleagues, the Eds: Ed Herman and Ed Said (now dead)

just for starters.

Of course, now that the Imperial Regime is becoming increasingly oppressive, those who were formerly "critics" and "gadflys" will soon be known as "dissidents" and "subversives". I think we're a few years from "traitors" and "rebels", tho.

[Chomskyite]

42. No . . . there are dozens and dozens of dissidents in his tradition

Read some Cornel West. Listen to one of his lectures. He's a dissident.

How bout Aaron Magruder? Michael Moore? Al Franken? Eric Altermann?

Do not deify Chomsky. Take what he says seriously and also critically.

But be assured, there are PLENTY of dissidents, although they won't be called that as often as CHomsky will be.

[Cocoa]

39. I don't think dissident is a derogatory word

it's descriptive, many dissidents describe themselves that way.

[Malva Zebrina]

43. "I dissent" Ruth Bader Ginsberg

in her dissenting reaction to the decision of the SC to appoint George Bush, president of the US, while all of the votes were not counted.