Just when you think that just maybe the pen IS mightier than the sword, you get a bit of information that makes you want to commit hari-kari by eviscerating yourself with your Papermate. Not long ago, I saw a tape of an interview with George McGovern right before the 1972 election. He clearly warned that Nixon was bad news...that there were criminal activities about to be uncovered....that the man was overstepping his power dangerously and Americans would live to regret reelecting him. Did anyone listen? Nope. Tricky Dick won by a landslide and the rest, as they say, is history. The American public, it seems, hear, see and believe what they WANT to believe and what they want to believe is what is most comfortable. The McGovern story shook me — it is certainly not comfortable to accept that we have a criminal in the White House who has surrounded himself by other criminals. That said criminals may be directly or indirectly responsible for both 9/11 and the anthrax attacks, not to mention the deaths of thousands in Afghanistan and a trashed economy. Will America again choose comfort over reality....and live to regret it?

And now for a further dose of sad revelations.....

Bush's Choice for Homeland Security Head Likely to Target Internet as Next Focus of Ashcroftian Crackdown on Civil Liberties

Wanna know why John Gannon was chosen as Homeland Security Chief? Here's a hint — it isn't because of any great record of involvement with domestic security and law enforcement. It is because Gannon's number one focus has been on "cyber threats" — i.e, the "dangers to world security" posed by the Internet. In short, John Gannon was chosen not to protect the American people from criminals and terrorists — he was chosen to protect the Bush administration from its number one threat: Free Speech over the Internet. We knew this other shoe had to finally fall — an attack on the last bastion of non-corporate news and information dissemination left in America. What is next? In the name of "national security," will alternative news editors, writers, and subscribers be targeted, arrested "on suspicion" without charge, and perhaps ultimately even rounded up as "enemy combatants" and shipped to concentration camps? http://www.fas.org/ irp/ cia/ product/ adci_040301.html

But wait, there's more...

CASHING IN ON 9/11:
Celebrity Schmoozers Make Hay off 9/11 Anniversary

For me, a real litmus test of the soul of a celebrity — if indeed they possess one — has been how they have responded to 9/11. Of course, I EXPECTED George Bush to cash in in an opportunistic way, schmoozing his way into "heroic by association." He made no effort to conceal his cynical hypocrisy — once the firefighters had served their purpose, they became just another bunch of blue collar guys who fell into the category of "labor" and thus beneath his notice. http://www.reuters.com/ printerfriendly.jhtml? type= politicsnews&StoryID;= 1331494

But other celebrities' behavior has come as a major disillusioning blow to me and many others. From 9/12 on, a steady parade of leeches have crawled out of the swamp to bask in the reflected limelight of the victims and the heroic survivors. Here's a partial list:

Bono: lest I gag, I won't even go into any detail. Suffice it to say that he went from being a star surrounded by groupies to a Bush groupie cozied up to the Washington pork barrel — the most eager piggy of the bunch.

Paul McCartney. What better way for an aging Beatle to cop a comeback (besides cracking open a bottle of Lord Grecian and marrying a blond cutie younger than his daughter) than to a write a grade C song ("Freedom"), wrap himself in the American flag, and time the release of his latest album and tour with the post-9/11 frenzy? Paul "I'm a Pious Vegetarian Cause I love Animals" McCartney supports the invasion of Afghanistan. Said invasion, of course, has killed countless animals, trashed thousands of square miles of fragile habitat and introduced American meat-eating habits into the nation with the troops and the inevitable post-war culture. Linda, wherever you are, I sympathize with your tears of frustration and disillusionment!

I read an interview with him in Rolling Stone not long after 9/11, and noticed just how careful he was not to give the slightest appearance of any dissent about anything — the war, Bush, Ashcroft, corporations, in short, anyone or anything he perceives as connected to the side of his bread where the butter is smeared thickest. In fact, he made it a point to disclaim that he was anti-war — denied that Masters of War was written about anything but the military-industrial complex of the Eisenhower years. Of course, he carefully avoided mentioning what we all know is true — that that the military-industrial complex is now descending over the global landscape like a giant toxic cloud.

But his fans, determined to believe in his myth to the bitter end, continue to imagine he is a soulful defender or liberty and justice for the common man, the mystical troubadour decrying an immoral war. Harhar. All Dylan has been doing philosophically for about 20 years now is rusting on his laurels. Maybe once he wrote some straightforward songs with a soul-felt message....maybe he even meant them. But that was a long, long time ago. Sure, today, he still cranks out some damn good songs (hey, they have a good beat, you can dance to some of 'em and the vague lyrics can be pondered entertainingly for hours, just like verses out of Revelation), but scrape their surface and you won't find much underneath but a dollar sign or two.

In any case, don't expect to hear a Dylan song entitled "The Ballad of John Walker Lindh" or to hear a sincere remake of "With God on Our Side" real soon. At least not as long as Dylan's stock portfolio carries more weight than his aging, faded soul.

Last but not least in my fallen heroes album, is Springsteen. I wrote this mini-diatribe about 10 days ago and held onto it because I kept sort of hoping he would do or say something to change my mind. But after the big pre-9/11 anniversary build up slot on the Today show with Katie Couric last week. I knew the awful truth. The Boss had sold out.

And another one bites the dust! Has Boss Springsteen made one too many corporate dollars?

I have come to think, based on overwhelming and mounting evidence, that "Born in the USA" is synonymous with "someone likely to have a shallow, fucked up view of the rest of the world." It's appropriate, then, I guess, that "Born in the USA" Bruce Springsteen is carrying on this tradition. In Springsteen's case, I'd call it a classic case of "ignorance-meets-passion". Springsteen considers himself a liberal and has passionately supported human rights causes, including the Christie Institute, which speaks out on the U.S government's covert, greed-motivated operations in Latin America. These operations have, over the years, left thousands dead, tortured, or "disappeared."

Yet in a recent Time Magazine (that's as in Time Warner/AOL/CNN — corporate propaganda central), Springsteen says he thinks the assault on Afghanistan, which has left thousands of civilians dead, tortured or disappeared, was "handled very very smoothly." While his new album "Rising" is filled with humane and tender images of husbands and wives grieving their fallen spouses, it also includes this Bushish chicken-hawk line: "I want a kiss from your lips/ I want an eye for an eye." (Empty Sky). Alas, this pushmepullyou attitude epitomizes the well-meaning but lethal childishness of Americans: It's barbaric and outrageous when people in other countries slaughter each other in endless vendetta warfare. But when we do it, it's "smoothly handled," "patriotic," and "just." When a third world government engineers coups and civil rights abuses in other nations, we consider it horrifying — just so long as we can watch from the sidelines at a safe distance. However, engineering coups and trampling on civil rights shift from horrifying to "necessary consequence" and "security issue" when Americans perceive that the safety of their own precious butts and the SUVs that haul said butts around might be at stake.

So, in true American opportunistic style Springsteen is milking 9/11 for all its worth, launching his tour to coincide, at its height, with the anniversary of the tragedy...like McCartney, using the emotional volatility of a grieving America as the springboard for a comeback.

And I am not alone, by far, in my disappointment in the Boss. Here is another lament from a disillusioned fan: http://www.counterpunch.com/ leupp0813.html HONORABLE MENTION

Sting, who actually lost someone quite close to him in the disaster, was one of the few who seemed to respond to the event from a soul, not ego, place: He did not launch a tour, album, book, or photo fest after the event. He simply appeared at the big fund-raising concert — can't fault anyone for donating their efforts to that. The song he performed summed up what everyone should have been realizing: