In other news, Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone fame says Bush was the appetizer, Trump is the main course.
In other words, the culture of Dubya is what gave rise to the culture of Trump.

I seldom if ever disagree with almost anything Matt Taibbi writes but I think he's being tripped up slightly by nothing more ominous than his birth date. He was born in 1970.
Sorry Matt, but you have to go back even further, to be totally honest.
Christopher Lloyd gave us an eerie look at how different our sensibilities might have been back in the 50's, before the military industrial complex took over.
It is completely realistic to expect that people in the 1950's would be skeptical about a B movie actor assuming the highest office in the land and becoming leader of the free world.
After all, actors are trained to deliver other people's thoughts and visions transparently, and some of us are only just now figuring out that Reagan's visions were the visions of an unelected shadow government Hell bent on "throwing us overboard thirty f***ing years ago." (Carlin)

Quote
"So tell me..."Future Boy"...who is President of the United States, in 1985?"
"Ronald Reagan."
"Ronald Reagan! The actor? Who's Vice President, Jerry Lewis??"



Once they knew Americans would accept the canned speeches of an empty headed washed up actor who falls asleep during policy meetings, they knew it would be possible to put ANY clown in the White House. All they had to be able to is function as a mouthpiece for the anonymous elite money power, and all attempts at critical thinking would be shunted by a compliant corporate media into an endless feedback loop of predigested phony populist anger.
There is no weapon that is more efficient at de-legitimizing the critical eye than a call to arms by the Othering Brigade.
Churches have been using that weapon for millennia, so why not a corporate oligarchy? Is there really all that much difference between the two?


"The Best of the Leon Russell Festivals" DVD
deepfreezefilms.com