FLAIT

As this blog has repeatedly shown, the Republican Party not only needs enemies, but they purposely create them for manipulative political reasons. They have to because:

1) The party cult, past and present, has a disastrous record so they desperately need to divert attention from themselves.
2) The party cult only care about the unborn and the "clinically dead." And if you're somewhere in the middle, they couldn't give a damn about you unless you're an extremely wealthy individual, corporation or industry. So they desperately need to divert attention from themselves.
3) It gives the party's cult's brainwashed members followers someone to perpetually scream at. This way, they'll never get the chance to think for themselves, realize they've been brainwashed, and leave the party cult (fat chance as it is).

For thirty years Republicans used their manufactured hatred of the Soviet Union to not only whip up support among their base followers, but to also put those "bleeding heart liberals" on the defensive and force them to be hawks against communism; or else the GOP would have questioned their patriotism and said they were "soft on communism" (That could be why President Truman sent troops to Korea and Presidents Kennedy and Johnson turned Vietnam into a war. To this day Democrats act tough so as not to look weak. Doesn't matter, the GOP will say they're "soft on terrorism" anyway. Gee, where have I heard that before? ).

But once the Soviet Union collapsed, the Republican party cult needed another enemy to hand to their base followers. And "liberals" were next in line. Ridicule liberals and use the word in a nasty, derogatory manner over and over and over again for decades, and the weak-minded have believed it.

But they didn't stop with just "liberals." They went on to make enemies out of the so called "liberal media," Hollywood, France, environmentalists, government, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Michael Moore (Aug. 2009 insert: ACORN, Hugo Chavez) and anyone else that doesn't share their crackpot agenda. (October, 2010 insert: see the first July insert to this post.)

But they're all getting a little stale. So in an election year with Saddam Hussein gone and al-Qaeda off the front pages - even with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Iran, a relatively new enemy which Bush also created - the GOP needed to create a new one to sic their base followers on.

Conflict and defiance gives the party cult leaders the opportunity to act tough and patriotic. And most important it gives their base followers the opportunity to scream at liberals for not acting tough enough and patriotic enough. Why do you think this White House and this party cult are so reluctant to bring troops home from Iraq? To quote MSNBC's Keith Olbermann: "The purpose of having a war in Iraq, is to have a war in Iraq."

Starting to get it now?

So where could they find a brand new enemy? Hmm...what about that "Russian Bear?" Get the arrogant Vladimir Putin to invade Georgia. That will sure stir things up.

And it certainly did. There's tension, bellicose words are used and a confrontation between the "evil Empire" and the United States ensues. Throw in the typical conservative's vindictive temperament - arrogance, obstinance, contentiousness and incompetence, who know only one
way to deal with such matters, with anger, like a bully - as well as a complicit media that bought the White House's anti-Russia propaganda, and voila, an enemy is created.

In a recent column Robert Sheer makes a strong case for this:

Is it possible that this time the October surprise was tried in August, and that the garbage issue of brave little Georgia struggling for its survival from the grasp of the Russian bear was stoked to influence the US presidential election?

Before you dismiss that possibility, consider the role of one Randy Scheunemann, for four years a paid lobbyist for the Georgian government, ending his official lobbying connection only in March, months after he became Republican presidential candidate Senator John McCain's senior foreign policy adviser...

There are telltale signs that he played a similar role in the recent Georgia flare-up. How else to explain the folly of his close friend and former employer, Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili, in ordering an invasion of the breakaway region of South Ossetia, which clearly was expected to produce a Russian counter-reaction. It is inconceivable that Saakashvili would have triggered this dangerous escalation without some assurance from influential Americans he trusted, like Scheunemann, that the United States would have his back. Scheunemann long guided McCain in these matters, even before he was officially running foreign policy for McCain's presidential campaign.

In 2005, while registered as a paid lobbyist for Georgia, Scheunemann worked with McCain to draft a congressional resolution pushing for Georgia's membership in NATO. A year later, while still on the Georgian payroll, Scheunemann accompanied McCain on a trip to that country, where they met with Saakashvili and supported his bellicose views toward Russia's Vladimir Putin.

Scheunemann is at the center of the neoconservative cabal that has come to dominate the Republican candidate's foreign policy stance in a replay of the run-up to the war against Iraq. These folks are always looking for a foreign enemy on which to base a new cold war, and with the collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime, it was Putin's Russia that came increasingly to fit the bill...(bold mine)

With Russian troops still in Georgia, Tbilisi severing diplomatic relations with Moscow and Poland accepting the White House's offer of a missile interceptor base, relations between Russia and the U.S. are now
strained. Mission accomplished.

You know, for a bunch of schnooks that can get lost in an elevator, this White House and this party cult sure know how to choreograph international events to create conflict and create enemies (with deadly consequences, I might add, despite their "pro-life" values).

If only they governed as efficiently for the good of the country.

But this just goes to show, once again, what this party's cult's priorities are:

1) To create international conflict to give a Republican president the opportunity to act defiant. And/or
2) To ensure we're perpetually sending troops somewhere (so Republicans can show their "support for the troops" because Democrats don't). And/or
3) To ensure we're always someone else's enemy. And/or
4) In an an election year, to give the Republican nominee for president the opportunity to "look presidential."

All this just to inflame the party's cult's moronic base followers so they're kept busy by perpetually screaming at the evil liberals who hate America (October, 2008 insert: here).

Hey, I said this party's cult's scary.