I know a Massachusetts liberal when I smell one. When I smell two, the stench is so unbearable that I begin howling uncontrollably. That sound you hear is me.

I'm sniffing and I'm howling. I'm on the scent of two Massachusetts liberal rascals. John F. Kerry is one. But, since everyone knows he's a Massachusetts liberal, no special proboscis is required to get his scent. What's got my nose twitching is the odor coming from that other Massachusetts liberal, George W. Bush. Despite rumors that he only has a half gallon of gray matter inside his ten gallon hat, he's a sly one, that Dubya, and he tries to mask the liberal scent with Texas manure and neo-conservative red herring words, but my nose knows. Even when he tried to hide his scent by jumping in the water and emerging on the other side of the Atlantic with his goofy foreign policy and talk of how Iraq was a threat to the U.S., I quickly picked up the scent again.

Of course, you may be saying, "You're not a very good bloodhound or a fairy tale giant and your nose is wrong. Bush is from Texas, not Massachusetts, so he can't, by definition, be a Massachusetts liberal." Well, pardner, you're right, he is from Texas. Sort of. But, don't let that talk of Texas throw your sniffer off the trail. When Bush talks, can't you imagine hearing a little "I paaked my caaa in Havaad yaad"? If so, you've also got the scent. Just follow your nose.

Dubya's father, George H. W. Bush, was born in Milton, Massachusetts and he sent his son, Dubya, who must be chock full of Massachusetts liberal genes, to Phillips Academy in Andover, Massachusetts during the latter's formative years. Now, as an aside, you might find it interesting to learn that Paul Bremer, the U.S. civilian administrator in Iraq, Thomas Foley, Director of private sector development, Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq, and Retired Army General Barry R. McCaffrey who was a Desert Storm commander in Iraq, also went to Phillips Academy. Iraq appears to be so much of a preppie operation that it's a wonder these guys didn't arm our armed forces with croquet mallets.

I've visited Phillips Academy. It's the preppie place where many of the traveling rich and famous park their kids. Dubya was boarded there while his father globe trotted in various government positions. For twenty-four hours a day Dubya breathed liberal Massachusetts air. He drank liberal Massachusetts water. He ate liberal Massachusetts food. He listened to liberal Massachusetts news and views. I figure Massachusetts liberalism may be like toxic contamination in the soil, air, and water and is absorbed by humans. If so, every cell of Dubya's body may have been saturated with Massachusetts liberalism. Can it be that slowly but surely his young impressionable mind was molded so that he became a crypto Massachusetts liberal? Was he brainwashed? Was he hypnotized? Did he come out of Massachusetts with sub-conscious post-hypnotic Massachusetts liberal suggestions planted deep in his brain? Did he became a one man liberal sleeper cell waiting only until he became President to be activated to do the strange liberal things that he's now doing?

Could the presidential oath of office have been the trigger for such post-hypnotic suggestions? When Dubya was repeating the oath, did he, perhaps in a trancelike state, also silently say: "I must make government bigger. I must start a war. I must send jobs overseas. I must help my elite pals make more money on the backs of the American people. I must spend and spend and spend so that I can create a huge budget deficit. I must give amnesty to millions and millions of illegal aliens from Mexico to make the U.S. a brown Third World nation. I must hide my liberalism from dumb so-called conservatives and the hoi polloi and distract them with sweet nothing talk about prayer in schools and with talk of a Constitutional amendment to ban gay marriages, and maybe how I support the Boy Scouts and PTAs. This will keep them fooled. The so-called conservatives are a stupid bunch who will believe whatever we elites tell them. It can be night, but if I say it's day, they'll believe me."

Now, to be sure, not everyone who grew up in Massachusetts is a liberal, and not everyone who went to Phillips Academy is either, so don't be offended if you're among those and you're not a liberal. You may have had a natural immunity, or a steel plate in your head to block the liberal beams.

You can recognize these Massachusetts liberals by what they do more than what they say. That's because many Massachusetts liberals are a sneaky lot. They pretend they are conservatives or moderates or progressives or something else, but they are Massachusetts liberals through and through. It's in their blood like a vile infection.

So, apart from the obvious nexus to the Commonwealth, how can you really tell who is a Massachusetts liberal? It's easy. Close your ears so you ignore what they say. Then, watch what they do. Their words lie, but their deeds reveal who they are. Don't listen to their siren like sounds of conservatism and common sense or you will be dashed on the rocks and be lost.

You can expect many Massachusetts liberals to do some of the following if they have the chance: They'll make government bigger and more intrusive. Just like George W. Bush is doing. They'll focus on foreign affairs or other distractions and ignore what they were really elected to do--be good stewards of America. Just like George W. Bush is doing. They'll run up huge deficits (Bush's deficit is more than $ 500 billion dollars. When he took office there was a surplus under so-called liberal Bill Clinton). Just like George W. Bush is doing. They'll be out of touch with the common folk--the "townies"-- in the lingo of prestigious Phillips Academy. Just like George W. Bush. They'll be phony and lie a lot with ambivalent statements. Just like George W. Bush. They'll try to blame others for their faults and their frequent mistakes. Just like George W. Bush. They'll help their elite pals in the corporate boardrooms instead of ordinary Americans on the factory floors. Just like George W. Bush.

They'll be unable to relate to ordinary citizens with ordinary problems such as how to pay for health care and how to find jobs. Just like George W. Bush. They'll help flood the nation with cheap foreign labor that puts Americans out of work (about 3 million jobs have been lost while Bush has been in office). Just like George W. Bush. They'll talk tough about foreign wars as they send your kids into danger, but they won't send their own kids into harm's way (since Bush's Iraq adventure started, more than 550, mostly teenage Americans, have been killed in Iraq--none appear to be the kids of any high ranking administration officials). Just like George W. Bush. They'll talk about an economic recovery (caused by a problem economy that they, themselves, caused) but it'll be a phony recovery and will only be seen in the boardrooms and won't come with job creation. Just like George W. Bush is doing. They'll continue our guns for the Israelis and running shoes for the Arabs foreign policy. Just like George W. Bush is doing.

Now, I know that some of the above items in this dirty liberal laundry list sound like neo-conservative sins rather than traditional liberal sins, but that's because liberals and neo-conservatives, like Democrats and Republicans, are essentially the same one-bodied, two-headed animal. This head says this and the other head says that. Don't be confused. Watch the animal move. It can only go in one direction--left--and that's what determines what it is.

As things look now, the American people are once again going to have an avoidance/avoidance conflict when they consider voting this year. Two Massachusetts liberals coughed up like hair balls by the two Tweedle-Dee and Tweedle-Dum major parties that are mostly different only in the fact that one has a stupid donkey as its symbol and the other has a stupid elephant. Remember the just mentioned two headed animal. One head is a donkey's and the other is an elephant's. Ignore the sounds coming from the heads and watch in horror as the body moves against the best interests of common American citizens. While the body is moving toward bigger government, the elephant head is saying, "I'm for smaller government, trust me."

This year neither party wants to talk about immigration since both are trying to pander for Latino votes. It appears to be some sort of unwritten gentlemen's agreement that the elites in both parties will cancel immigration as an issue by both taking the same stand on the issue and by not bringing up the subject--in the hope that they can keep millions of average citizens quiet about the issue. In other words, it looks as though the elites in both parties have conspired to screw average Americans by taking one of the most important issues out of the campaign.

Of course, Bush's stupid Latino pandering failed again in the just past primary in California as his former Treasurer, Senora Rosario Marin--a past mayor of "the most Mexican city outside of Mexico" --failed in her bid to be the GOP candidate to run for the Senate seat now held by Democrat Barbara Boxer. Senora Marin, who ran as a loyal Bush Republican, lost by about 2 to 1 to a white guy who didn't always back Mr. Bush in the past. The graffiti is on the wall, but Bush and company are blind to it. They're probably too busy weaving lies to try to explain why no one has found any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and why the economy "recovery" isn't producing any jobs.

Frankly, outside of Bush's elite country club pals, Radio Pudgy, those toadies over at the Bush TV Network, the usual neo-con slobs and some of the Stepfordized Conservative Radio Talk Show Callers, I'm not getting a sense that there's much support for a second term for Mr. Bush. Most true conservatives and rightists don't appear to be supporting him. Classic liberals and left wingers aren't supporting him. Most of those in the middle who still have some brain cells don't appear to be supporting him. Most working people (and those who wish they could find jobs) aren't supporting him. Even most Latinos aren't supporting him. Bush's base is small and shrinking with every stupid thing he does. It's early, but we may end up outsourcing bad George W.Bush's job to bad John Kerry. Whoopee.

There's not much to cheer about in that except that Kerry is less likely to put our young soldiers in harm's way and he may devote more time to domestic issues and do more for common citizens. In fact, let's he honest. Conservative and liberal labels aren't very accurate. Many liberals, including Kerry, actually seem more conservative on some important issues than many so-called conservatives. Nothwithstanding this, however, the major problem with Kerry's liberalism is the same problem with Bush's liberalism masquerading as neo-conservatism. They're both essentially the same thing. Both of these guys are out of touch on immigration issues. If he's elected it is unlikely that Kerry will stop the invasion of the U.S. from Mexico any more than Bush will stop it if he stays in office. And, without stopping such an invasion, all the good domestic programs in the world will ultimately fail.

But, wait a minute, could there be a third choice? Am I mistaken or have I been picking up another scent? Am I sniffing some populism? Sniff, sniff, sniff, yup. Pat Buchanan has come out of his lair. Might he run? Buchanan began a recent column this way: "If a third-party populist were to run in 2004 on Ross Perot's signature issues of unfair trade and mammoth deficits, George W. Bush would suffer the fate of his father." To me, that sounds like a guy with an itchy political trigger finger just waiting to take on the bad guys or who is trying to goad Ross Perot to run. Of course, if either Buchanan or Perot do run, they probably won't win no matter how right they are on the issues--and they're right on most of them. No, Buchanan or Perot would more than likely lose.

That's because they'd be up against the entrenched two party political machine that rewards mediocrity and which appeals to the uninformed. They'd be called spoilers and crazy by the GOP, but so what? If either do run, the issue that neither party wants to talk about--immigration--would suddenly be forced out in the open so that both parties would have to take stands on it. The Democrat elites would more than likely be in favor of open borders because that's what their base wants, but the GOP elites would have to abandon Bush's open border talk or lose its base. In other words, if Buchanan or Perot run, they might force the two headed beast to become two separate animals and this would give voters a clearer choice instead of the present two-headed-one-body animal choice they have with Bush vs. Kerry. Maybe the shock of either Buchanan or Perot getting into the race would help decontaminate and deprogram Dubya and bring him to his senses.

No matter what happens, the larger issue here is the fact that our two party system is broken. It now works, not for the good of the American people, but to keep a relatively small handful of elites in office where they can continue to help their elite pals make more money. Buchanan or Perot could help fix things by running for president this year, and by sticking around after the election to help build a new party into a viable organization that will start bubbling up good candidates for congress all across this nation and which will eventually be able to win the presidency.


Ah, but I dream of the America of legend; the pre-post-American America--the America that just smelled right.

#  #  #

2. THE OUTSIDER - (ISBN: 0-595-19424-9)
H. Millard’s underground classic story of alienation is
available at Amazon.com by clicking on the this link or by calling 1-877-823-9235:
"Millard is an important writer" New Nation News
"Millard is an original. His books aren't like your typical fiction.
If you don't know where to put his books, try the same shelf with Kerouac, Kafka, Sartre and Nietzsche"
- a reader.

Recommend this page to a friend

• References: (Note: links may expire and content not necessary endorsed by H. Millard
  or New Nation News but presented for further study for those interested in the topic by the NNN editor.)
• Immigration and Shifting Electorates - As they settled in a great variety of ethnic neighborhoods,
  immigrants responded to the call of Democratic bosses and came to dominate urban politics.