Debate Game Change...

Gov. Christie predicted that the Wed debate would be... well, huge.

"This whole race is going to turn upside down come Thursday morning,"

I'm not sure exactly what it is that r-Money could do or get Pres. Obama to do that would turn things upside down.  Mitt had something to say about his strategy, though I'm unsure of its wisdom.

I don't know that a campaign that's said what this one has said about facts should wander out onto that limb.

“Fact checkers come to this with their own sets of thoughts and beliefs, and we’re not going to let our campaign be dictated by fact checkers,”

Now I certainly understand the need to make something as short as an ad pop and dig into the viewer's consciousness but this ad about welfare has run right along side the campaign speeches given by the R/R pair saying the same bullshit.  This isn't some "independent PAC" saying something over the top, it is the team so there is a risk involved in questioning the President's truthfulness.

It seems that the R/R campaign is hoping to gain a special moment.

Mr. Romney’s team has concluded that debates are about creating moments and has equipped him with a series of zingers that he has memorized and has been practicing on aides since August. His strategy includes luring the president into appearing smug or evasive about his responsibility for the economy.

I don't know that the President is a trout to be distracted by a shiny object and I'm real doubtful about r-Money pulling off a comedic enterprise despite how funny his family seems to think he is.  I know better than to tell jokes - I can turn a ROTFLMAO joke into... not funny.  It just isn't in my skill set and I've seen no evidence that it is in Mitt's.  I'm sure there are some competent writers at work for Mitt but great lines can't undo piss-poor delivery.

I haven't seen the President thrown off stride by anyone but I have seen him get too far into the weeds answering questions or addressing issues and I have seen him veer away from a question.  I'll say this at the risk of seeming snarky but Mitt going after smug really strikes me as a funny idea.

I don't have any advice for r-Money, I'm not a GOPer shill and I can't fix his ideas or his charisma.  It seems it is Mitt's job to convince people he's not the guy they've been watching since this spring and I have no idea how the hell anybody would do that - much less r-Money.  I'm also not going to wish him any luck.

Mitt Is Not Winning?

How the hell is it that r-Money is not winning?  No, really.  This economy absolutely sucks and has sucked for the entire Obama Administration, not sort of - badly.  Yeah, less badly now than in early '08 but it is a bit like the difference between hitting yourself in the head with a sledgehammer and a ball bat.  Afghanistan drags on and on badly and... crickets.  Not one thing has been done about the abuse by the 1%ers much less the 0.1%ers and the Big Casino called Wall Street and the Banksters keeps ticking right along doing what they were doing that landed us here.  The Middle East is as queer as it ever has been and just as damned messy.  I can sit here and go on and on and on* and Mittens is losing.

The GOP couldn't have asked for a much better set up to kick an incumbent President to the curb, take the Senate and consolidate their handle on the House.  And it is all going awry.  Nate Silver has r-Money at 18.1% chance of winning in Nov - not right now, then.  The control of the Senate not only looks damned unlikely but as though the Democrats might gain.  House seats look to be going away, maybe not enough to swing it... but oops.  Why, oh why, oh why?  2010...

The problems for r-Money are one, charisma is not a word you use in any relationship to his name and two, he's a GOPer.  Just not being Obama isn't quite enough with more people than it takes to win (how that for awkward?).  The GOPer part isn't about not being a Democrat, it is about what it took to win the GOP Primary and then keep them.  That mess means endless lies and mouthing stupidities and some people catch on after awhile.  Once you get past Party tribalism and racism as locking mechanisms there are people who decide on some other basis.

2010 is the basis of a lot of the mistakes the GOP is making.  They've gotten the idea that the election meant that their stuff was really appealing to more people than it is.  It isn't that the GOP business friendliness has turned into anathema or even that god, guns, and gays can't work but damn - they've thrown the sluts (otherwise known as women) on to the mix, made sure the Hispanics are insulted, and made fire sirens out of dog whistle racism.  Whatever there is about the 47% statement, people are just not buying into the idea that tax breaks for wealth is a good idea, in point of fact most think raising taxes on wealth is a good idea so when the obvious rich guy makes the other case central to his cause...  The thing about god, guns, and gays isn't that it doesn't work at all, but there comes a limit to the volume and the derision that previous buyers can't swallow - whatever changing demographics are.  Guns fall apart a bit in the face of a complete lack of offense by the Admin, on the God front the headliner GOPer is a real argument for religious tolerance of something that at least sort of resembles Christianity.  People might have a bit of a problem with listening to a Mormon lecture them on "traditional marriage" - it isn't as though Mormon polygamy is a big secret or a slightly known fact.  Then there is the little issue of Obama-care not turning into the Apocalypse.

2010 is a piss poor model to use in this Presidential Election, it isn't a low turnout mid-term with a bunch of spineless Democrats busily running away from their own damn Bills and trying to be GOPer-lite.  I'm not trying to give Democrats credit for backbone, but they are fighting back this time... and maybe the most spineless are already gone.

I'd say that if r-Money were running as a 'near' Obama he could be winning but then if he were running as a near-Obama he wouldn't be running in the GOP of today.  There is always, that.

*what has actually been done or left undone and the stupidity of Congress is not germane to a discussion of voter attitude

Saving President Mitt

Well now, the GOPer punditocracy has been a bit rough on r-Money for about a week and change continuing on this week.  The stuff got to be enough that Mrs r-Money was reduced to snapping, "Stop it!"  The difficulty for Team Mitt is that, "Stop it," didn't do the job and it continues on.  Ayn Ryan complained that Conservative Pundits (GOPers) do that, complain about imperfections.  A late poll shows a bunch of swing states with the President at 50+/-% and r-Money at mid-forties which might qualify as a real imperfection.

I've heard all kinds of prescriptions for Team R/R, from unleashing Ayn, to R/R "Going Rogue," to not pretending to be human and going with the CEO persona and even to putting out detailed plans. (OMG, Mitt just referred to himself as St Ronnie)  All the 'scripts seem to revolve around salesmanship by either the professionals or the candidates.  It doesn't seem to dawn on the GOPer Punditry that maybe, just goddam maybe the problem isn't so much with which version of r-Moneybot they tool up it won't sell their shit to people who've just stopped buying or never did.  It isn't that the GOP has been a big secret, the secret has been just how much they believed their stuff.  They don't have to worry about the votes of the Obama-haters but the ones who aren't exactly satisfied with Obama want some place to go and batshit crazy doesn't exactly appeal to them.  (It does begin to look as though a big chunk of r-Money support dislikes Obama but doesn't like r-Money)

How about this, you want to save the election for Mitt maybe you ought to let him run on something other than the GOP Ticket.  Maybe the whole problem is the GOP.  God knows r-Money has all the charisma of a paper bag but even St Ronnie wasn't trying to peddle this crap while he was dog-whistling his way to Sainthood.  The Sainted RR was actually bringing something new to the table and now it is old and worn and... failed.  We've had the ongoing efforts of building on Reaganism and the outcomes so they're starting much farther along than St Ronnie talked about (despite where he wanted to go) and St Ronnie never asserted that his version of looting would end in the 07/8 debacle. (S&L lays there... rotting stinking corpse of a warning)

I suppose the r-Moneybot V 0.(whatever) that ran for Gov MA might have a chance, but if he could run as a GOPer that would probably mean we would have a President he's running against that does actual progressive things... ummm, back to the actual nation.

See ya around

Ducking The 47% Tape

I said the 47% tape means spit to the election.  In the face of conservative pundits, GOP candidates backing away, and most of the press I still say so.  r-Money's campaign agrees with me by doubling down and folks like Rush Limpthing are banging away on the point.  Most of those pols that've backed away from the 47% sentiment are going to get right back on board as soon as they see how little practical effect that sentiment has on the poll numbers and how much the GOPers agree with it. (gotta keep that base happy) 

Yes, the statement and the rest of the tape was obnoxious, provided you weren't in the least inclined to vote r-Money.    If you think I'm being a Cassandra, then go tell one of your conservative fellows that you're pretty sure pays no Federal Income Tax that r-Money says he's a moocher and see just how much it changes his mind.  He'll tell you who the goddam moochers are...

There is about a 6% Undecided vote left to fight over and somebody would like me to believe that cadre isn't pretty well split half and half on, "Moochers...WTF" and "Them There Moochers" ?  Really?  You've never seen GOPers panic?  Do you want me to remind you of "The Moooslims Is Comin' To Get Us All"? 

Do you think r-Money dumped his 2011 taxes today to change the subject?  Or do you think maybe he dumped them to keep it all buried in the noise?  14.1% is still lower than the 47%er's payroll taxes, you know...

Anne, STOP IT

CBS News reports on Anne Romney's Iowa radio comments:

Amid ongoing criticism over the management of her husband's presidential campaign, Ann Romney on Thursday responded to the critics in an interview on Radio Iowa: "Stop it. This is hard. You want to try it? Get in the ring," she said. "This is hard and, you know, it's an important thing that we're doing right now and it's an important election and it is time for all Americans to realize how significant this election is and how lucky we are to have someone with Mitt's qualifications and experience and know-how to be able to have the opportunity to run this country," Romney said.

I'm sorry to have to tell you this Anne, but this ain't your damned Country Club or the Office where Mittens is the undisputed king and all around dictator. People who are on your team or putatively on your team get to tell you you're doing it wrong.

 Now I do disagree with, oh say, Peggy Noonan that the problem is the campaign because they're working with what they've got - and that is the candidate and the message. r-Money's personality disorder isn't something that is easily addressed in a short term campaign, this mess goes waaaayyyy back and everybody that has anything to do with him (he has inflicted himself on all of us) is just plain stuck with it.

The message is the legacy of the GOP, it just is what the GOP wants for the nation. I don't know just exactly how that gets prettied up, much. The election of 2010 certainly encouraged the GOPers to "go for it." The mistake they've made is conflating a low turnout midterm with cowardly incumbents for a national election for President, even in a sucky economy. Unlike Peggy, I don't have any winning advice for that campaign - other than maybe quit being GOPers...

Anne, it is always hard to run for major office and I don't think anybody who pays any attention is unaware of it. In point of fact, most of those people wouldn't do it on a large bet just because it does suck to do. What does seem to be pretty clear is that people in general are under-whelmed by their luck in having Mitt's qualities aimed at the Presidency. I don't mean he won't get plenty of votes but those are beginning to look much more like anti-Obama than pro-Mitt.

Anne, your guy sucks - he just sucks a little less than Santorum or Ron Paul and had a lot more money. Your package bought this chance and he just plain sucks at what he bought and folks on that side don't much like it.   Oh well...

Chaos Improved

Some of you know that I'm selling my house.  Half of this house is pre-1878 Victorian (pre-dates earliest city plat) re-built by me and half of it is my 1996 construction designed to blend.  Not only do I have a lot of work into this, I've also lived in it for 22 years and so it isn't too easy to leave.  That got a little easier today.

The wife of the couple who are buying the house stopped by today, a bit of work for her because she has somewhat recently had very extensive back surgery and just within the last week or so allowed to fly from CO.  A week ago she got to see the house in person for the first time, her husband has been here for awhile, and I stuck around to show them both what is going on with the place beyond what a realtor would know or include in a tour.  I liked them as much as such a short acquaintance would allow - and my disinclination to sell the place.  Anyhow... get on with it Chuck.

She came to the door apologizing for making contact that is discouraged by the real estate business, something I find a bit ludicrous, BTW.  I assured her that it was fine and asked what I could do for her.  She wanted to assure me that they knew I'd put a lot of myself into the house and that they would care for it - really heart-warming and re-assuring in the sense that someone would want to let me know that.  OK, I know I'm supposed to be pretty hard-bitten (and I am) but I was charmed.  Now as to this blog - she told me she had stumbled across this thing by accident and really hoped I'd continue to write because I have a way with words.  I pointed out that preaching to the choir is pretty easy, but she insisted anyhow.  I don't hear that much so it stroked my not inconsiderable ego a bit.

OK, I'll go ahead and keep this thing going and maybe even post a bit more regularly (maybe).  So this is a very public thank you to the lady from CO who went out of her way to improve my day.  There are a hell of a lot of people in this world who could take this example to heart, I'll sure try to.  Think about how much improved this sorry old world would be if...

The Romney Tape Means?

I know a whole lot of the few folks who read my scribblings feel like the 47% moochers theme of the r-Money tape will sink his campaign.  I disagree, as thoroughly offensive as I find the comments.  It has been noted a lot of places that the insult contains a bunch of r-Money's base, which will mean spit for the same reasons that the tape will mean spit.

The SS/FICA moocher seniors know Mittens wasn't talking about them since they paid into that fund.  The redneck foodstamp and unemployment moochers throughout the South know damn good and well that it is the fault of the black guy in their White House that they're on "the dole" and besides... GOD.  What they all know is that Mittens is talking about those others, shiftless blacks and other browns and the white trash that don't... well GOD.

I'm sorry to be a downer, but if you think this will do much of anything you fail to understand the level of xenophobia and lack of empathy within the electorate. Given any excuse these folks will excuse themselves and blame someone else.  They know damn good and well that r-Money is nothing like them, that he is totally disconnected from their experience and that means nothing.  They are dimly aware that he is proposing a redistribution scheme for his class and not theirs and... SOCIALISM. 

The fight is for the six or seven percent of Undecideds.  You have to stop and think about what exactly it is that makes them undecided.  If you think that is the result of considered evaluation of the policies of the competing candidates... well hell, huh?  You know as well as I do that they haven't been paying attention to any of this and they aren't going to delve deeply into it in the next 6 weeks.  They'll finally decide on the basis of some buzz word ads and feelings if they haven't already actually made up their minds and just didn't say so.

Maybe you haven't noticed, but we are exactly where we are economically because the electorate is an idiot.  I'm not running for anything and I'm not campaigning for anyone so I can insult the electorate just like that by telling the truth about them.  I know... you're reading this so you're not an idiot - you're sufficiently outnumbered to be immaterial.  You don't want to be outnumbered?  I don't know what to tell you, the deck is pretty heavily stacked against curing that.

Maybe it's not hopeless, go ahead and tell me an idea or two...  Yes, really.  

Magic Mitt

Most of us are aware of the Mitt Magical Underwear, what we didn't know was that Mitt is imbued with even more magical qualities.

“There’s a pretty compelling story that if you had a President Romney, you’d be in a different situation,” Richard Williamson, a top Romney foreign policy adviser, said in an interview. “For the first time since Jimmy Carter, we’ve had an American ambassador assassinated.”

I guess I'm just stupid enough to have missed the magic all those other Presidents possessed.  You'd think that given the GOP sainthood  bestowed on St Ronnie of the Reagan they'd have stopped for a second to think... well, OK - do something resembling thought. 

Williamson added, “In Egypt and Libya and Yemen, again demonstrations — the respect for America has gone down, there’s not a sense of American resolve and we can’t even protect sovereign American property.”

I'm not real sure just exactly what this cretin thinks a US Marine barracks in Beirut qualifies as, but I'll bet the soldiers thought it was US property and didn't take their lives to be worth less for the Marine label.  Now, I'll admit that St Ronnie's resolve demonstrated by invading Grenada and letting the barracks bombers get clean away with it doesn't impress the hell out of me - but then he's their Saint not mine.

It might have missed him that this isn't the only time US Embassies have been attacked and destroyed since Carter.  But, given Williamson's background and who he held influence under, his spot as an r-Money top advisor probably ought to give pause to any consideration of ascribing any intelligence to anything he says.  I don't know, you might be able to pay  me enough to say things this stupid, I'm not immune to money - but there isn't enough currency in the world to get me to believe anything this stupid...  Nope, I take it back - I do have standards and no you couldn't pay me to say it.

Chuck For... In Chaos

I don't propose that any of you readers are supposed to give a damn about this but I thought I'd share some background so you'd get some kind of feeling for why this site has gotten into the state it's been in for awhile.  Essentially I, the scribbler at this little endeavor, am surrounded by and engaging in chaos.

Here's the deal, the little economic dip we've been mucking around in finally took out my contracting business.  I spent a couple years subsidizing the thing but last fall ran out of resources to keep it.  So, out of resources and not having any luck getting hired to do anything meant some stuff had to go.  Yeah, some guns, some cars, some tools - stuff that had held value but didn't return what it should went.

My marriage finally finished dying, the amicable split was a mercy killing.  That also meant that something like the house I'd rebuilt and built was going to have to go and have to go in a market that... well, sucks.  It went on the market priced to sell, in a market with an average of 200 days on sale, and has sold - short of closing being done.  My wife has moved several hundred miles away, taking most of what she wanted and could manage, so I've been here alone waiting for a sale and now looking at how I'm going to pack up a place I've lived in for 22 years.  Closing is supposed to be Oct 1.

My father died at 85 a bit over a week ago and my mother is also 85 and living in N MI without my sister or I within nearer than 2 hours (me a lot more).  Given that and the realities of trying to make a living here in my home with the business gone and my house gone - I'll be moving to N MI.  This means I leave a climate and country-side that I love and my close friends for somewhere pretty far away.  That stings more than a little.

OK, that's enough to give you some idea, it isn't all of it - by any means, but there you go.  No, I don't need any sympathy, it's just how things go and I'm dealing with it (a little unevenly at times).  I've been thinking over time about shutting this blog down.  Unless I blogwhore it someplace like BalloonJuice there are no more than a few readers - that is a decision in flux.  There is a lot that I have to see about, so...

Mitt's Advance Excuse

Mitt seems to now have made his pre-excuse for the debates.

“I think the challenge that I’ll have in the debate is that the president tends to, how shall I say it, to say things that aren’t true,” Romney said. “I’ve looked at prior debates. And in that kind of case, it’s difficult to say, ‘Well, am I going to spend my time correcting things that aren’t quite accurate? Or am I going to spend my time talking about the things I want to talk about?”

I think the last sentence is the real meat.  This is where he gets us ready for him to do a 'Palin' in the debates.  This is the assertion that nothing of substance will be put forward by the President so r-Money can just go to his talking points without addressing anything on topic.  What is missing and I'm pretty sure will get made up for is the theme of "liberal media bias" and in the Obama tank media and, by extension, moderators putting Mittens in the position of not even having to marginally address the moderator's questions.

The other aspect about truth is just flak to cover r-Money's own deficits in the ever saying something true category.  It isn't as though there has been a seldom occurrence of a miscure by the R/R campaign or a couple outside organizations bending the truth; we've gotten to the point where "the lie of the month" has had to be supplanted by the "lie of the week" and coming up as a too long a period for that campaign.

If you're expecting something of substance or an actual debate from Mittens, I've got a bridge in NY to sell you...

Too Bad God Forgot Intelligence

It seems some folks are mad at Dr Pepper. The Doctor made the egregious error of using the word Evolution in a rather silly Internet ad. It really is a shame that a corporate behemoth (encouraged no doubt by Obama) has kicked the snot right out of religious freedom violating all sorts of... I don't know, somethings.

I suppose that you can deny the clear trail of evolutionary evidence in fossils and existing species by making some sort of deal about the word Theory - but you know the Theory of Gravity doesn't mean we'll all float off the earth if we quit praying.  There is always the issue that Jesus stuck to the Earth (well there is the water thing) ((oh damn, I can feel my feet getting light)) and dinosaurs... well opinions differ between people riding them and Satan planting fossils.  A whole chain of oddity crops up once Evolution becomes the Satan's Tool.  If science finds something that doesn't match the exact words of a Holy Book it is Satan interfering with belief.

Some of this derives from the inability of even educated people to understand that words frequently have more meaning than the simplest interpretation or definition and that gets even more complicated once they're strung together into, you know, phrases or sentences.  There is a rule about those red octagonal signs that say STOP and if you don't follow it you can get into some trouble - maybe real bad trouble.  Now, it says STOP but there is something else involved - an understanding that it isn't all you're supposed to do, otherwise every one of those would be a trap where people starved because they never moved; yeah, "then GO" is missing from the sign.  The point being that absolute literal interpretation of words is... STUPID.

Language is a complicated thing for a couple reasons and the first is pretty simple to grasp - there is an absolute upper limit of the number of words we can function with so they will cover more ground than is absolutely simple.  Then there is the little matter of language also being a thing of beauty and art - a piece of marble on the side of a mountain is a simple plain thing but in the hands of a sculptor it can become a thing of beauty and art and language is just that.  I have to acknowledge that in my hands language is a pretty plain thing, but in the hands of some it becomes beautiful and magnificently expressive - it is art.

The idea of the literal interpretation of Holy Books is that the words are extremely limited in function, that those "divinely inspired" authors trying to communicate a basis of spirituality were that limited in their capacity.  Plainly said, it means that God has no artistry with words. God, creator of a Universe, is that limited.  I don't ascribe to any of those Books, but... WTF?

"God created man in his image," means... um, what exactly?  I sure the hell don't look much like my neighbor so literally one of us can't be that image or, hmmm - any of us?  Speaking of literal, we've already strayed way off the limits, so something more is meant.  Since the can of worms is opened then where we're at is self-imposed limits on the artistry involved and that starts to get to the issue of intelligence... or lack there of.

OK, I really don't care - but these people are so insistent on imposing their stupidity on the rest of us that even a goddam Presidential election starts to revolve around their complete and utter inability to understand their own damn Book and artistry.  Folks, we may be seriously screwed here...

Mitt Should Have Waited... Huh?

Lately I've been hearing or reading that Mitt's mistake was not waiting and getting accurate information.  I'm afraid such an idea assumes things not at all in evidence.  The idea seems to be that Mitt wouldn't have said things about apologies and weakness in the face of no apology and death.

The lack of information seems to be the crux of the argument and the whole thing falls apart in the face of previous Mitt behaviors.  Starting a ways back there is no tape, transcript, or verifiable instance of the President apologizing for the US.  The bust of Churchill is still in the White House - easily verified.  The "when" plants closed is a matter of public record.  The HHS guidelines for Welfare to Work waivers were available to anyone.  The details of the Medicare savings were right in front of any one's nose who cared to look.  The employment numbers and economic metrics for the last five years are quite handy.  The point is that in these and other instances all the information is readily available and has been for an extended period and yet Mitt hasn't managed to include the truth.

It should be pretty clear that he'll say whatever the hell he thinks will be to his advantage at any given moment, despite truth or costs to the nation.  Considering the low bar of my lack of respect for this guy that he'd have to try really hard to lower it - damned if he isn't managing it... 

Mitt Ain't Like Most Of Us - Fortunately

Mitt leaves the podium after speaking about the Consulate killings in Benghazi

I'd say there is something wrong with the expression on the face of a man who'd just finished lying about the deaths of Americans in the service of their country - whatever political advantage he figured he'd just gotten over... that black guy in his White House.  I've read all sorts of reactions that involve all kinds of pyscho-babble trying to establish just what kind of... asshole he is.

I've said it before and I'll repeat myself - The Deal is all that counts; truth, honor, and decency toward your fellows are immaterial in service to The Deal.  You little people don't get it - YOU DO NOT COUNT, you are simply the capital to be accrued and spent in service to the ends of The Deal.  There is no need for complicated analysis of the man's psyche - he figures he's a shark in a pool of minnows that don't even qualify as bait.  Anne supposedly asked him if he could save the nation - no such thing is going on; this is the BIG DEAL.  He's made more money than Daddy, he's made and broken more companies than Daddy, now he wants the big prize that Daddy couldn't get (and Daddy couldn't get it because he counted those things called truth, honor, and decency).  r-Money learned the lesson and the rest of us may just get to find out what that means if he can play enough marked cards.

Romney And God And Lies?

For someone who doesn't claim any religion and is pretty darn sure no religion would claim him; I know a bit about the various Gods.  One of the things that is pretty clear about all of them is that they don't like lies or the lying liars that tell them - there is some debate about whether non-adherents deserve equal treatment under their God.  Mr r-Money and his campaign and the GOPers make a really big deal about being all Godly.  I'm perfectly willing to let them claim their variants on Gods and leave it go... assuming they let me do so.

I'm pretty sure that all these claimants to Christianity are aware that their God doesn't make exceptions for exigencies like campaign polling deficits.  Now the fact that I don't like liars a bit has nothing to do with a God, it has a lot to do with their inclusion in a list of liars, cheats, and thieves and that liars are generally engaging in the rest of the lists actions.  I don't claim to know why Gods don't like lying but they don't.  r-Money doesn't seem to much care about those Gods opinions regarding lying and today is another example when the Egyptian Embassy did NOT apologize to its attackers.

Hey God, the President did not apologize to attackers, he did not loosen welfare work requirements, he did not raise your taxes, he does not want to take you off our coins, or several other things Your Candidate has said.  How about you do some of that smiting?  No shit, if you're all concerned about what's going on in this nation maybe you ought to get with the program like the GOPers insist you will.  I'm not suggesting lightning bolts are necessary, how about a bad rash or maybe an uncontrollable gag reflex upon lying?

OK, how about I just quit snarking and get to the point?  You r-Money supporting theocracy fluffers are total and complete hypocritical pieces of... stuff.   There's not much I can say to most of the rest of the r-Money bunch since they don't claim all that Godly stuff other than they're idiots or mean natured bigoted sons a bitches... oh hell, why am I being so nice?

Really Mr Rather? Paul Ryan Isn't Who You Thought He Was?

I watched with a certain amount of disbelief as Dan Rather blurted out something I considered rather unobservant on Rachel Maddow's 9/10 Show... words to the effect that he was astonished that Paul Ryan has done so poorly in television and other interviews.  Rachel in a rather nice way tuned Dan up.  She pointed out to him some of what I'm about to go off on.

Paul Ryan is exactly as much of an intellect as you could expect from someone who takes Ayn Rand seriously once out of puberty... or high school, anyhow.  This ought to be a starting point for anyone talking about Ryan's abilities.  Ayn Rand's writings are about stoking the testosterone fueled imaginings of superiority over 'the other' - the ones who don't run things and just do.  You are aware of 'just do' - they cook your food, they build your house, they clean your house or others houses, they don't get the big bucks and they don't get their pictures in the 'nice' magazines.  Worker bees.  Not one goddam cent the Ayn Rand Superiors have is generated by their own sweat and blood - some pissant worker bee makes the things and gets them their income and those folks are disposable, they are "the takers."  They're takers because they make the shit and buy the shit and want to get paid something for it and they're not grateful to the great men who'd as soon they starved while they work.  If they don't work thanks to the decisions of their betters then they can just starve, or if they can't work because they got dealt a real shitty hand - they should have found a better dealer - like running mate Mitt did.  It is a simplistic world where force and influence are all that matters and where the only consequences are when the truly great are inconvenienced - only a very limited intellect would be impressed.  That is for starters.

Paul Ryan has "shone" within the simplified world of the conservative media and amongst his similarly minded and within a pissant CD in the same state where Michelle Bachman has prospered in a similar venue.  Results are quite understandably different when the surroundings aren't composed of his friends and sycophants and include people who are willing to look at a record and analyze talking points policy.  Wanting something to be so does not make a four hour plus marathon into a sub-three hour one and it does not make the fevered imaginings of Ayn into workable policy and it doesn't make ideology into goddam mathematics.  The real rules of the world say that you can't make money in to match money out without actually doing it - ideology be damned.  The real world says that you can't make rape into several other things without really pissing off anyone who gives a damn about women and after you've tried to do it you don't get to claim it is all a misunderstanding.  Some people pay attention to these things and will question it outside Janesville WI and the GOP House Caucus. 

Why the hell Dan Rather is surprised that a pip-squeak ideologue doesn't do well when challenged on his bullshit is way beyond me.  Paul Ryan's ideas have been in full view for some time and they've not been misrepresented and they stink in practical terms.  To put it simply - they are in practice stupid, if ideologically sound.  Paul Ryan has to deny that a vote for Sequestration was a vote for Sequestration and do it in front of people who say, "What the hell?"  This is from the Party that accused John Kerry of flip-flopping for voting differently on two different variations of a Bill.  Paul says he did it to force a better deal... he voted for what he voted for outcomes be damned and wants to pass that off as principled action.  Yes, he thought he was playing hostage taker just as those GOPers thought the rest of their Debt Ceiling hostage taking was a good idea - real world outcomes be damned.

The unexplainable doesn't get explained by Paul Ryan and Dan Rather is surprised.  When you try to do things that make no damned sense at all it is real hard to make it sensible, or even make sensible responses to questions about them.  The measure of an intellect is not the ability to parrot stupidity and pass it off as policy, the measure of intellect is an ability to face reality and do a somewhat good job of matching your desires to it and working within its constraints.  Buying the idiotic punditry that making stupid policy involves nerve and out-of-the-box-thinking is asking to be disappointed or astonished that its object can't live up to its billing.  An actual intellect knows how to adapt and innovate and improvise in the face of conditions, not hew to wishful thinking that things will just work because it wants them to.

Paul Ryan is a chimera of the right and the teabaggers, not anything more and his resolute stupidity is going to cost the GOPers for uplifting it into something is doesn't in the least resemble.  And yes, they deserve anything they get for it... and if the electorate buys into it, well hell, then we'll get what we as a nation deserve and too bad for those who knew better...  

You Do Need To Vote, But...

Do not mistake me, there are two choices this election and they're between the Vandals and Status Quo and that vandalism could have consequences that are irreparable. The GOP stool stands on three legs: Plutocracy, Theocracy, and Bigotry. Be under no illusion that the Democratic Party does not have Plutocratic Enabling as one of its legs. The elected Democrats have a sufficient number/percentage of Plutocratic Enablers in their membership that no program concerning economics that depends on a solid Democratic vote is going anywhere without that percentage's vote and it will include for their vote the interests of the Plutocracy. It will be conveniently forgotten by that coterie that wealth doesn't need any damn help being wealthy or powerful.

The GOP depends on the Plutocrats for most of their money and those folks know perfectly good and well that their interests will be exclusively served, the rest of the economy be damned.  They will manage their political fortunes by serving up theocratic bullshit and whistling up the bigots, though that alone won't be enough.  In order to get somewhere beyond those narrow interests they will have to use a stenographic media to serve up scary lies (something well beyond exaggeration or framing) and dupe an ignorant and disinterested electorate.  The 2010 election serves as proof that given utter cowardice by quite a few Democrats and enabled lying, the GOP can win.

Here's the deal with the Democrats, they need to win in order to do anything and in order to win they have to serve an electorate that qualifies as stupid by outcome.  No, the actuality of the electorate's intellectual ability doesn't equal stupidity, it is their lack of access to good information, their disinterest in good information, and their distraction from political issues by the pressing details of living (OK, and Dancing With The Stars or whatever).  You cannot and will not get good results by putting junk information into a computer and you'll get just as bad results by putting it into the electorate - in fact worse because a computer will actually process the junk.

If you are expecting the Democratic Party to bring any kind of meaningful economic change then you need more and better Democrats.  You can, in a lot of places, manage that with a lot of work and money in Primary Elections - your problem then is the General Election and that means a hell of a lot more work and money and some losses.  When you lose, what you can hope for is that there is sufficient contrast to bring you forward next time in the face of the GOP's failures and mismanagement.  You can't get there by looking sort of like the other side.  If you want to lay a lot of blame on the President, you haven't bothered to look at Congress - at all.

If you think this election will change things for the better if Democrats are elected, you've got some real wishful thinking going on.  What you can hope for is that we won't get pushed over the cliff the other side is wistful for.  If that isn't enough, then maybe you need to take some time to find out the history of revolutions other than our original one.  It is not pretty.

Oh Fer God's Sake... or something

It seems that Rev Wright isn't around this time, so...

I'll be go to hell if anyone with any sense thinks this is going to make any sense. Now while I might take offense to the ideas that this is a "Nation Under God" when it clearly is under something entirely different and I'm real sure the my money doesn't "In God We Trust" but rather is subject to the whims of greed-headed sub-one-percenters; I know way better than to think that Pres Obama doesn't understand that there is a Religious Test for election and that he would do something to offend that Test.

Mormon Mittens is scared he'll have trouble with the Fundies and their view of his cult as a anti-Christian cult. Of course it is a cult, observe its behaviors regarding those who dissent and its actions to keep the observant in the fold. Now you could certainly argue that it isn't greatly different from Catholicism and I'd be pretty hard put to refute such a thing. But then you have to remember that I'm pretty much an equal offender in my dismissal of all those exclusive clubs called religions. I'm happy if they do something positive in your life, I just really hope you'll leave me out of your agenda and let me try to be good in my own way.

Now, if you'd like to make a case that the Religious Test doesn't exist, I'd like your estimation of exactly when an atheist, agnostic, Jew, or Muslim will get elected President (assuming you don't buy that Obama is actually an undercover... whatever). Is this a good way to chose an elected leader - I'd say no. I'd say a truthful candidate with a demonstrated interest in the general population's welfare and protection of the minority trumps whatever religion or lack there of.

A religion or lack of one is no guarantee of any course of behavior.  Despite the assertions of any one of the exclusive clubs, membership is not determinative of behavior.  Liars, cheats, and thieves have belonged to all facets of regard toward religion and, in fact, have often used their orientation as cover for their behaviors.  Well, hell - Mittens has been lying like a rug on certain matters for some time now and here he is covering himself with GOD.  The theocratic will assert that you cannot manage "goodness" without their version - what I've found it that the lack of their versions removes the cover of some Book for their hate and disdain for "the other."

I didn't think that after the first months of the Primary it would be possible for me to have less regard for Mitt - I was wrong. 

R.E.S...P.E.C.T. , All I Want Is A Little...

I don't know, maybe some of us like women... or even are women. The GOPers made a real big point of telling us they "love women" and about what a tough job they have. The biggie in delivering that "love" was Anne r-Money with her slew of affordable spawn. It may have escaped the notice of the GOPers that Ann and Mittens r-Money could have afforded another 25 or 30 rug rats and if any medical issues came up it would take pocket change for them access the best care in the world. Well, the Democrats invited somebody who thinks women have brains and ethics and that liking them or loving them includes letting them exercise those assets.



What the hell could I add to this? Maybe I could suggest to my mostly male* readership that you go hug your wife, girl friend, or lady pal and tell her that you trust the female gender because you actually respect them. Is that real hard - to respect women?

*if you're not male, tell him or her - well, you can figure it out for yourself...

Oh, and by the way... DAMN, how much better a place is this world for the fact that Aretha has been in it?