In the gun issue, as in almost any sensitive one, there are two essentially radicalized positions with most people not having anything to do with either. On one side you've got the NRA, Wayne LaPierre, and assorted loons and then on the other you've got Michael Bloomberg, Jesse Jackson, and the Bradys and taken all together about as much stupidity and over-heated rhetoric as I've seen since... well the last time anything touchy came up.
Now look here, if you think that the idea of putting armed guards in every school, church, or other gathering area makes any sense - you've gotten yourself seriously derailed. If you think you're going to persuade anybody that isn't already all the way over in your corner of the loony bin you've missed your calling as a seller of bridges. If you think you're going to gain any ground with somebody that knows just even a little bit about firearms by telling them that AR15s are going to shoot down airplanes and stop trains or that Mayor of a place where you can own a firearm if you're rich and/or well-connected but otherwise suck it, well you can have the other corner from Wayne. That is straight up political calculus.
Most people in the US do not get their knickers in a twist about firearms, one way or the other. They may look at an incident and think, "wow, that just cannot keep happening," but they don't want Bloomberg's version of reality or LaPierre's. People who own guns don't want to be shouted at that they're evil any more than non-owners want to be shouted at and called weak-kneed pussies and the ones trying to make up their minds don't want to be called stupid. That is straight up political calculus.
Wayne LaPierre and his loons and Michael Bloomberg and his loons are not persuadable. I don't give a damn how many facts and statistics you provide to either group - they are not going to go along with anything other than their pet hobby horse. You can forget them and for the sake of your sanity you should turn the sound off when either bunch starts up. You are not going to get reality based anything from them and your thinking is not going to be improved and your decision making will only be impaired.
This is an actually serious issue. This is not a "you didn't build that" kind of dust-up. It isn't about semantics and it isn't about what something looks like - it is about fucking carnage and it is about something important enough to be enshrined in the Bill of Rights and stupidity is not a guarantee of anything other than just that - stupid results. The only reason to have this discussion at all is to do something constructive in regard to a problem and that involves addressing goddam realities. There are realities regarding who can get guns and how they can get them, there are realities involved in what a particular type of gun is and what it does and why it does that, and I could go on and on and on about just how many things bear on this issue and none of this stupidity has any bearing at all. I'm sick of it and I'm sick of feeling as though any time I spend on this would be as well spent sitting in the corner sucking on my thumb.
You have a legislative process that is currently being driven by people who are ignorant of the function of a particular firearm proposing to deal with that particular firearm and people whose view of the Second Amendment makes it a suicide pact. This has got to stop, it has got to be stopped in its tracks. I agree that this needs to be addressed expeditiously or the populous will move on the the next hare-brained thing our pols get up to and it'll just hang fire and that isn't good enough, but - and this counts - rushing to do any old thing won't do the job, anyhow.
Ammunition capacity is a real thing, access to firearms purchase is a real thing, our war-like culture is a real deal, our mental health disaster is a real thing, the complete unreality around firearms offered up by media is an issue, the ignorance we inculcate in our children is an issue. We have very real things to deal with and we can do some things short-term and mostly long-term to address these real things. We do not need to be wasting time playing at people's fantasies.
(Yeah, I know - I'll just go piss into the wind and accomplish just as much)
Showing posts with label Terminal Stupidity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Terminal Stupidity. Show all posts
Friday, January 11, 2013
Wednesday, January 09, 2013
Firearms Stupidity Continues... A Primer On Knowing What You're Talking About
The problem with this kind of discussion it its length. It won't fit a portion of a five minute TV presentation and it is, frankly, longer than most will tolerate in an internet posting. It isn't full of shocking rheroric and immediate points made. I don't give a damn about talking points and I don't give a damn about emotional appeals.
I'm getting increasingly aggravated by absolute stupidity put forward as a part of the discussion regarding gun regulation. When you get someone like Jesse Jackson getting on the TV and talking about being able to shoot down airplanes or stop trains with an "assault rifle" and not be questioned you've reached the stratosphere of ludicrous. Airplanes are in fact vulnerable to gun fire (and a well thrown rock) at take-off and landing and thereafter... forget about it and then... a train??? In regard to gunfire and trains, you could watch films of P51 Mustangs or P47 Thunderbolts shooting up trains and start to get an idea of what it takes. On the other hand you have complete idiots like Wayne LaPierre whose stupidity I can't begin to address.
Let me be about as clear as I know how, we do actually need to do something in regard to gun violence in this country. Needing to do something is not carte blanche for stupid behavior. If you recognize the insanity of things like our drug policies, our terrorism policies, our disregard of the 4th and 5th Amendments, and pretty much on and on in regard to law enforcement you need to stop and look at during just exactly what environment those abortions were enshrined.
If you take a look at post-Prohibition propaganda and our War on Drugs you can start to get an idea of what kinds of stupidity can drive legislation. The War on the Mafia morphed into things that bear almost no relationship to our Constitutional ideas of law enforcement which then morphed onto drugs, terror, general law enforcement.
Ugly guns have become the focus. There are two things that separate those guns from others - their appearance and their magazine capacity. Looks don't have a damn thing to do with anything - function is what is at issue. This is the part that somehow gets missed and it is the crux of any issue regarding any particular type of firearm, or damn near any object. If there is a problem surrounding these particular objects it is their ammunition capacity because their operational function is common with a huge number of other firearms that are not even mentioned.
The deadliness of a firearm has to do with three factors: its overall fire rate, bullet performance, and accuracy. These things don't have a simple one or two word description, they are in fact complicated issues which is why there are so many types and varieties within type of firearms. Whatever it is you've seen out of Hollywood regarding a gun it is almost surely stupidly wrong and done for no more than dramatic effect.
Starting at the back end of my list with accuracy you hit one of the most complicated of the bunch. Putting a bullet where it is supposed to be is a subject for an entire book. The factors are so broad and so variable that I'm not even going to bother with listing a couple and this is outside the interest of this article and an aspect to be covered under another of the factors.
Bullet performance is generally typed under ballistics and this matters in regard to what happens with a hit and in respect to accuracy that is narrowly relevant here. There is a very good reason people hand load, beyond getting cheaper bullets. What a bullet is made of and its shape matters, steel is a part of a bullet for armor piercing, copper jackets decrease deformation on hit and hold the bullet together a bit more, then things like hollow point to increase mushrooming of a bullet on impact bear on damage. Velocity and weight are large determinants of bullet behavior. Bullet energy matters and that is made up of velocity and weight but it is not the be-all-end-all. You can equal out energy by varying either weight or velocity because a high velocity light round can have the same energy as a slow heavy round but what happens on impact varies wildly within that equation. A slow heavy round will go through things that will shatter or stop a fast light round. A 30-06 hunting round at 150 grains and 2600 feet per second will do things an AR15 .223 at 55-80 grains and 2900 fps will not do. In Jesse Jackson's ridiculous scenario that hunting round have much more serious consequences than the assault rifle round. Recoil is also an issue that has to do with weight and velocity, covered later.
Fire rate is a huge factor in something like the mass killings we've seen. Semi-automatic firearms work by firing a round and loading the next into the camber with that firing without manually cocking the firearm. This is taken as the crux of "assault weapons" and yet that feature is accomplished in many ways by many other completely different firearms. A double action revolver mechanically advances the cylinder with each trigger pull, recoil is used to cock and chamber most pistols (semi-auto Glocks, Colts, on and on) and gas operation or recoil on rifles and shotguns. What that boils down to is the ability to fire as fast as the trigger can be operated and that stops when the capacity is exhausted and then the next set of rounds must be mechanically inserted and chambered. Being able to operate the trigger does not mean the ability to hit a target, the bullet will hit something and that can be bad. A couple factors matter and it isn't simple. The physical dimensions of the firearm affect how quickly it can be moved, weight and length matter in that respect. Recoil is the big one in rapid firing and this one is somewhat complex. Newton laid this one out a long time ago.
For each action there is an equal and opposite reaction. If you use contained gas expansion to send a weighty object in a direction at high velocity that container is going to try to go in the opposite direction. Thanks to the shape and rifling twist modern firearms tend to go back and up and to the right. This effect's dimensions are driven by the gas expansion, projectile weight, and firearm weight in resistance. Quite simply, when you fire the gun it is no longer pointed where it was and just how much it isn't pointed there is quite variable. (regarding Hollywood - if you could knock somebody flying with a gun it would knock you flying just as much minus the weight of the gun)
In the realm of a mass shooting the only thing that sets an "assault rifle" out is its ammunition capacity at one moment. It is the ability to fire consecutively a large number of rounds. If a person wants to do something useful in regard to an item it is important to address what there is about the item that sets it aside from others. It is important to note that addressing an item does not address any other factors that might bear on the problem.
There is a parade of stupidity on display from both sides and the issue deserves much better than that. It is not a simple thing to address and the consequences of stupidity made policy are horrifying. This is not going to have any sort of useful corrective actions taken if the persuasion is undertaken by assholes of whatever stripe. If you were to take the media representatives of either side and drop them off the edge of the world they inhabit the collective sense of the remaining populous would be measurably improved (on the spherical one). Lying to people who know better only makes them angry, which ever side you fall on.
I'm getting increasingly aggravated by absolute stupidity put forward as a part of the discussion regarding gun regulation. When you get someone like Jesse Jackson getting on the TV and talking about being able to shoot down airplanes or stop trains with an "assault rifle" and not be questioned you've reached the stratosphere of ludicrous. Airplanes are in fact vulnerable to gun fire (and a well thrown rock) at take-off and landing and thereafter... forget about it and then... a train??? In regard to gunfire and trains, you could watch films of P51 Mustangs or P47 Thunderbolts shooting up trains and start to get an idea of what it takes. On the other hand you have complete idiots like Wayne LaPierre whose stupidity I can't begin to address.
Let me be about as clear as I know how, we do actually need to do something in regard to gun violence in this country. Needing to do something is not carte blanche for stupid behavior. If you recognize the insanity of things like our drug policies, our terrorism policies, our disregard of the 4th and 5th Amendments, and pretty much on and on in regard to law enforcement you need to stop and look at during just exactly what environment those abortions were enshrined.
If you take a look at post-Prohibition propaganda and our War on Drugs you can start to get an idea of what kinds of stupidity can drive legislation. The War on the Mafia morphed into things that bear almost no relationship to our Constitutional ideas of law enforcement which then morphed onto drugs, terror, general law enforcement.
Ugly guns have become the focus. There are two things that separate those guns from others - their appearance and their magazine capacity. Looks don't have a damn thing to do with anything - function is what is at issue. This is the part that somehow gets missed and it is the crux of any issue regarding any particular type of firearm, or damn near any object. If there is a problem surrounding these particular objects it is their ammunition capacity because their operational function is common with a huge number of other firearms that are not even mentioned.
The deadliness of a firearm has to do with three factors: its overall fire rate, bullet performance, and accuracy. These things don't have a simple one or two word description, they are in fact complicated issues which is why there are so many types and varieties within type of firearms. Whatever it is you've seen out of Hollywood regarding a gun it is almost surely stupidly wrong and done for no more than dramatic effect.
Starting at the back end of my list with accuracy you hit one of the most complicated of the bunch. Putting a bullet where it is supposed to be is a subject for an entire book. The factors are so broad and so variable that I'm not even going to bother with listing a couple and this is outside the interest of this article and an aspect to be covered under another of the factors.
Bullet performance is generally typed under ballistics and this matters in regard to what happens with a hit and in respect to accuracy that is narrowly relevant here. There is a very good reason people hand load, beyond getting cheaper bullets. What a bullet is made of and its shape matters, steel is a part of a bullet for armor piercing, copper jackets decrease deformation on hit and hold the bullet together a bit more, then things like hollow point to increase mushrooming of a bullet on impact bear on damage. Velocity and weight are large determinants of bullet behavior. Bullet energy matters and that is made up of velocity and weight but it is not the be-all-end-all. You can equal out energy by varying either weight or velocity because a high velocity light round can have the same energy as a slow heavy round but what happens on impact varies wildly within that equation. A slow heavy round will go through things that will shatter or stop a fast light round. A 30-06 hunting round at 150 grains and 2600 feet per second will do things an AR15 .223 at 55-80 grains and 2900 fps will not do. In Jesse Jackson's ridiculous scenario that hunting round have much more serious consequences than the assault rifle round. Recoil is also an issue that has to do with weight and velocity, covered later.
Fire rate is a huge factor in something like the mass killings we've seen. Semi-automatic firearms work by firing a round and loading the next into the camber with that firing without manually cocking the firearm. This is taken as the crux of "assault weapons" and yet that feature is accomplished in many ways by many other completely different firearms. A double action revolver mechanically advances the cylinder with each trigger pull, recoil is used to cock and chamber most pistols (semi-auto Glocks, Colts, on and on) and gas operation or recoil on rifles and shotguns. What that boils down to is the ability to fire as fast as the trigger can be operated and that stops when the capacity is exhausted and then the next set of rounds must be mechanically inserted and chambered. Being able to operate the trigger does not mean the ability to hit a target, the bullet will hit something and that can be bad. A couple factors matter and it isn't simple. The physical dimensions of the firearm affect how quickly it can be moved, weight and length matter in that respect. Recoil is the big one in rapid firing and this one is somewhat complex. Newton laid this one out a long time ago.
For each action there is an equal and opposite reaction. If you use contained gas expansion to send a weighty object in a direction at high velocity that container is going to try to go in the opposite direction. Thanks to the shape and rifling twist modern firearms tend to go back and up and to the right. This effect's dimensions are driven by the gas expansion, projectile weight, and firearm weight in resistance. Quite simply, when you fire the gun it is no longer pointed where it was and just how much it isn't pointed there is quite variable. (regarding Hollywood - if you could knock somebody flying with a gun it would knock you flying just as much minus the weight of the gun)
In the realm of a mass shooting the only thing that sets an "assault rifle" out is its ammunition capacity at one moment. It is the ability to fire consecutively a large number of rounds. If a person wants to do something useful in regard to an item it is important to address what there is about the item that sets it aside from others. It is important to note that addressing an item does not address any other factors that might bear on the problem.
There is a parade of stupidity on display from both sides and the issue deserves much better than that. It is not a simple thing to address and the consequences of stupidity made policy are horrifying. This is not going to have any sort of useful corrective actions taken if the persuasion is undertaken by assholes of whatever stripe. If you were to take the media representatives of either side and drop them off the edge of the world they inhabit the collective sense of the remaining populous would be measurably improved (on the spherical one). Lying to people who know better only makes them angry, which ever side you fall on.
Thursday, January 03, 2013
The Oh So Very Cool Gov Christie
I don't suppose many people have missed Gov Christie's comments regarding the House non-vote regarding Sandy relief. Now maybe those folks who are finding him laudable have forgotten some of this dick's associates, people he enthusiastically helped. Maybe he can't remember or chooses to forget that the Mitt he so loved had some things to say about disaster aid that sounds like the House loons who crapped on his head. This would be the guy who gave a keynote speech at the GOP Convention where they drafted their Platform of excrescence. He is a GOPer and he'd like folks to forget that.
Short of developing Mittnesia like that other GOPer blue state governor, there is no way Christie will win GOP Primaries against anyone more formidable than Michele Bachmann (and that could be iffy). There are certain fundamentals in GOP Primaries that you don't violate and Christie has done that. (and I don't just mean hugging that black guy in the WHITE House)
The guy has been pretty competent at managing a disaster and made nice with somebody he needed badly to stay competent. He has pretty much followed the standard GOPer playbook as Gov right up to when his friends kicked him (and the people who vote for him) right smack in the teeth and he yelled at them. Since pneumonia is more popular than the House he was safe there.
Look here, being basically competent at disaster and not being completely batshit crazy might make him a GOP standout to most people but that is not much of bar to jump.
Short of developing Mittnesia like that other GOPer blue state governor, there is no way Christie will win GOP Primaries against anyone more formidable than Michele Bachmann (and that could be iffy). There are certain fundamentals in GOP Primaries that you don't violate and Christie has done that. (and I don't just mean hugging that black guy in the WHITE House)
The guy has been pretty competent at managing a disaster and made nice with somebody he needed badly to stay competent. He has pretty much followed the standard GOPer playbook as Gov right up to when his friends kicked him (and the people who vote for him) right smack in the teeth and he yelled at them. Since pneumonia is more popular than the House he was safe there.
Look here, being basically competent at disaster and not being completely batshit crazy might make him a GOP standout to most people but that is not much of bar to jump.
Entitlements and Entitlements and
Now that the dysfunctional 113th has been sworn in (no, that's not being at all previous) the talk has all turned to the upcoming CLIFFS, OMFG!!! Yep, the train is steaming down the tracks and the bridge is out (Casey Jones) [still out] giving folks something to talk about for the next couple months. And what is everybody talking about, what budget busting, economy shriveling thing is it? Entitlements.
There, I said the bad word. I'll say it again, just for emphasis - Entitlements. You know, the nastiness that the grubbing Fed hands out to those others. You know like that Medicare that hands out something to those 'olds' who'll be 'olds' enough in four years or whatever. The primary drivers of nonsense like that have never paid SS/FICA on their entire wage for their entire working life, you might bother to note that SS/FICA sunsets at $110,000 wages/salary and no other income. You might bother to note that the worst occupational health cost they face is a paper cut from the envelope with their dividend/capital gains check. You can probably do that until age 67... or older.
I got to listen to ex-Gov Rendell talk about the increase in life expectancy make a mockery of (D) concerns over the last decades. True, I (skilled labor) can expect, statistically, to make it to 72yrs up from 66 in the Sixties, but then the paper cut crowd can pretty much expect 84. So... those who put the least in take the most out. But - we have to give the GOP Vandals something if we expect them to give any ground, and what we'll give will affect Gov Rendell and his cohort essentially not spit. Getting to age 65 as a capable construction worker is damned tough to expect, but it isn't a hell of a lot more likely to be exactly easy for a waitress. Screw those folks if it keeps the GOPers from crashing the economic car.
The word you won't hear, you can't get to hear it, is Defense. The Sacred Cow can't be mentioned. If something happened to take some few percent out of that budget we'd all be dead or somehow unsafe. Now if you consider that we're number one in spending on this and of the top 15 spenders we spend more than the following 14 put together; we must no be getting much bang for our bucks if we're suddenly going to be unsafe if we spent more than only the following 13. Unsafe gets put a lot more into context if you consider who it is that gets most of that spending and just how goddam rich they are. Some very Important people would have a little less Monopoly money to play with versus screw you old and poor.
I suppose you could point some of this stuff out to your Representatives, you could but I'll repeat, the losers in Defense spending cuts are Very Important People and YOU are not. Messing about in the business of you betters is, well, unseemly.
There, I said the bad word. I'll say it again, just for emphasis - Entitlements. You know, the nastiness that the grubbing Fed hands out to those others. You know like that Medicare that hands out something to those 'olds' who'll be 'olds' enough in four years or whatever. The primary drivers of nonsense like that have never paid SS/FICA on their entire wage for their entire working life, you might bother to note that SS/FICA sunsets at $110,000 wages/salary and no other income. You might bother to note that the worst occupational health cost they face is a paper cut from the envelope with their dividend/capital gains check. You can probably do that until age 67... or older.
I got to listen to ex-Gov Rendell talk about the increase in life expectancy make a mockery of (D) concerns over the last decades. True, I (skilled labor) can expect, statistically, to make it to 72yrs up from 66 in the Sixties, but then the paper cut crowd can pretty much expect 84. So... those who put the least in take the most out. But - we have to give the GOP Vandals something if we expect them to give any ground, and what we'll give will affect Gov Rendell and his cohort essentially not spit. Getting to age 65 as a capable construction worker is damned tough to expect, but it isn't a hell of a lot more likely to be exactly easy for a waitress. Screw those folks if it keeps the GOPers from crashing the economic car.
The word you won't hear, you can't get to hear it, is Defense. The Sacred Cow can't be mentioned. If something happened to take some few percent out of that budget we'd all be dead or somehow unsafe. Now if you consider that we're number one in spending on this and of the top 15 spenders we spend more than the following 14 put together; we must no be getting much bang for our bucks if we're suddenly going to be unsafe if we spent more than only the following 13. Unsafe gets put a lot more into context if you consider who it is that gets most of that spending and just how goddam rich they are. Some very Important people would have a little less Monopoly money to play with versus screw you old and poor.
I suppose you could point some of this stuff out to your Representatives, you could but I'll repeat, the losers in Defense spending cuts are Very Important People and YOU are not. Messing about in the business of you betters is, well, unseemly.
Now We've Got A "New" Congress
So I just watched the House stand up and applaud the election of The Orange Man to be Speaker of the Ass-ylum. Well there you go, he got there by about 3 votes from a bunch who is so impressed with him that the non-Representative loon Allen West got a couple votes. So if you've been engaging in any welcome of a "new" Congress you should understand just what kind of gauntlet was thrown down today.
The Vandals just gave Speaker Boehner a shot across the bow. If he bothers to act as though the business of the people means getting some things done; his neck is already in the noose and the trap trigger is set. The tax bill was passed with twice as many of his Party voting against it, they've told him today that they're not kidding even if nobody else wants the job right now.
There are some big important votes coming up and their lack of action could be a sledgehammer to the economy's head. Sure, the Debt Limit vote ought to be nothing more than affirming a joke, but that joke has become a mean practical joke on the citizenry. I'm not sure how many people would think it reasonable to not pay the house mortgage because the carpet is dirty - but there is a sizable portion of GOPers (demonstrated today) that do think it is reasonable. Allen goddam West is about as up-front a "fuck you" as it gets.
I'm about real tired of hearing optimistic bullshit about what the '12 election means. What that election means is that Congress is still in the hands of the Vandals. In a Party with a modicum of sanity they'd just be the fringe that you have to put up with getting on the TV machine and saying stupid stuff. This GOP is not that Party. It does not mean squat to these people and, in the final run, their Party that the President and the Senate are Democratic and that most people think they're full of shit. If you think things are going to be better over the next two years...
The Vandals just gave Speaker Boehner a shot across the bow. If he bothers to act as though the business of the people means getting some things done; his neck is already in the noose and the trap trigger is set. The tax bill was passed with twice as many of his Party voting against it, they've told him today that they're not kidding even if nobody else wants the job right now.
There are some big important votes coming up and their lack of action could be a sledgehammer to the economy's head. Sure, the Debt Limit vote ought to be nothing more than affirming a joke, but that joke has become a mean practical joke on the citizenry. I'm not sure how many people would think it reasonable to not pay the house mortgage because the carpet is dirty - but there is a sizable portion of GOPers (demonstrated today) that do think it is reasonable. Allen goddam West is about as up-front a "fuck you" as it gets.
I'm about real tired of hearing optimistic bullshit about what the '12 election means. What that election means is that Congress is still in the hands of the Vandals. In a Party with a modicum of sanity they'd just be the fringe that you have to put up with getting on the TV machine and saying stupid stuff. This GOP is not that Party. It does not mean squat to these people and, in the final run, their Party that the President and the Senate are Democratic and that most people think they're full of shit. If you think things are going to be better over the next two years...
Wednesday, January 02, 2013
Fashionable New Year Predictions
Predictions... ahahaha ... that's a laugh. Really this is more like "I Ask Questions."
In a little while the President will be Inaugurated again thanks to minority and youth votes (and yes, women) right onto the 113th Congress (that looks enough like 112 to be a meaningless distinction) so the question is whether after this year those folks will turn out in the next mid-terms after that exposure. How do you think their enthusiasm will fare in the face of... I don't have a polite expression... that this Congress gets up to.
The economy is supposed to be poised to take off. In the first place poised seems to be able to last for quite awhile and secondly - take off for whom? If it takes off anymore for the very rich there won't be a damned thing left for anybody else and for people who actually work I'd bet what will take off is more work for less. But hold the phone, I've already said I'm asking not predicting. Well, talking about the rich screwing everybody else isn't predicting anything.
Speaking of the economy, can Congress 113 manage to tank it?
Maybe the most important and new theme of the last year was kicked off by OWS, want to bet it'll be business as usual? IOW OWS was almost a bump in the road... $400K is middle class now. BTW, $43K is median wage so $250K was middle? (media = half above/half below)
I'm real sure nobody is stupid enough to want Boehner's job other than Boehner. I suppose that says something.
Chuck will remain single and maybe somebody will want to pay him to do something, maybe. This blog may well stumble along which depends on whether I continue to care more than anybody else that it does.
I might update this if something else occurs to me or somebody brings it to my attention (which would mean commenting. Happy New Year anyhow...
In a little while the President will be Inaugurated again thanks to minority and youth votes (and yes, women) right onto the 113th Congress (that looks enough like 112 to be a meaningless distinction) so the question is whether after this year those folks will turn out in the next mid-terms after that exposure. How do you think their enthusiasm will fare in the face of... I don't have a polite expression... that this Congress gets up to.
The economy is supposed to be poised to take off. In the first place poised seems to be able to last for quite awhile and secondly - take off for whom? If it takes off anymore for the very rich there won't be a damned thing left for anybody else and for people who actually work I'd bet what will take off is more work for less. But hold the phone, I've already said I'm asking not predicting. Well, talking about the rich screwing everybody else isn't predicting anything.
Speaking of the economy, can Congress 113 manage to tank it?
Maybe the most important and new theme of the last year was kicked off by OWS, want to bet it'll be business as usual? IOW OWS was almost a bump in the road... $400K is middle class now. BTW, $43K is median wage so $250K was middle? (media = half above/half below)
I'm real sure nobody is stupid enough to want Boehner's job other than Boehner. I suppose that says something.
Chuck will remain single and maybe somebody will want to pay him to do something, maybe. This blog may well stumble along which depends on whether I continue to care more than anybody else that it does.
I might update this if something else occurs to me or somebody brings it to my attention (which would mean commenting. Happy New Year anyhow...
112th Congress Is Now History
So now the 112th Congress passes into history and memory. While that is a blessed event what now becomes a reality is the 113th which may very well remind us that 13 is supposed to be an unlucky number. The 112th is a real standout in a couple respects easily summarized in the term "stupidity." Americans had nearly two years to notice what happens when they vote like they did in 2010, their reaction is pretty interesting - 113 looks a lot like 112, enough to toss the same monkey wrenches into the works.
One could bring up things like gerrymandering... which in this case means distributing enough stupidity to keep the stupid coming. But that gerrymandering idea ignores the essential that enough stupidity exist in order for it to work and this wasn't a low turnout mid-term election.
If you're one of those who has celebrated the '12 election of Obama as the death knell of GOPerism loon-acy; maybe you should take another look. The 113th is the reality of the next two years, that is just how that is. I'm not seer enough to be comfortable making predictions of the specific sort, but I will tell you that plutocrat enabling at the cost to the rest will continue.
Let me give you something to regard 113 with - debt ceiling, sequestration, budget resolution. Do you suppose you can excuse my skepticism?
One could bring up things like gerrymandering... which in this case means distributing enough stupidity to keep the stupid coming. But that gerrymandering idea ignores the essential that enough stupidity exist in order for it to work and this wasn't a low turnout mid-term election.
If you're one of those who has celebrated the '12 election of Obama as the death knell of GOPerism loon-acy; maybe you should take another look. The 113th is the reality of the next two years, that is just how that is. I'm not seer enough to be comfortable making predictions of the specific sort, but I will tell you that plutocrat enabling at the cost to the rest will continue.
Let me give you something to regard 113 with - debt ceiling, sequestration, budget resolution. Do you suppose you can excuse my skepticism?
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Governor Chris Christie Fer Christ's Sake
Gov. Christie is running for re-election to be Governor of New Jersey - that would be Republican Governor of that Blue State of New Jersey. That would mean that he will have to run for that re-election as a Republican governor of a blue state with policies designed to win in a blue state, a northeastern blue state. There has been talk about Gov. Christie running in 2016 for the GOP Presidential election.
Uh...
The GOP Primary voters really didn't like Mitt Romney, you know - the Blue State Republican Governor - but he did manage to money bomb and campaign competence bomb his rivals into extinction after his 180 on being a Republican Blue State Governor - barely (see Santorum). Consider that damn near anybody breathing polled higher than Mittens for awhile. The GOP ran a fairly democratic Primary this last time and the results were... disappointing for the GOP.
I'm sure the GOP can manage to jury rig the Primary process to get something closer to their desires but I'm not sure they can tilt the field enough to get the Confederate Party of Republicanism to swallow Christie, even as abrasive as he can be. Tough talk isn't going to cover the realities of being a blue state governor - especially not in The Old Confederacy (and The New Confederacy). Well, the Media needs something to talk about...
there's always Jeb BUSH
ahahahahaha, please do that.
Uh...
The GOP Primary voters really didn't like Mitt Romney, you know - the Blue State Republican Governor - but he did manage to money bomb and campaign competence bomb his rivals into extinction after his 180 on being a Republican Blue State Governor - barely (see Santorum). Consider that damn near anybody breathing polled higher than Mittens for awhile. The GOP ran a fairly democratic Primary this last time and the results were... disappointing for the GOP.
I'm sure the GOP can manage to jury rig the Primary process to get something closer to their desires but I'm not sure they can tilt the field enough to get the Confederate Party of Republicanism to swallow Christie, even as abrasive as he can be. Tough talk isn't going to cover the realities of being a blue state governor - especially not in The Old Confederacy (and The New Confederacy). Well, the Media needs something to talk about...
there's always Jeb BUSH
ahahahahaha, please do that.
Thursday, November 08, 2012
Why The GOP Lost, So They Say
A couple things about GOP loss excusing were pretty obvious years ago and so were included today to nobody's surprise featuring the oldie goldie:
Conservatism cannot fail, only be failed...
ie: Mitt sucked at being conservative
But for real gold you had to mine fine minds like Hannity and O'Reilly, Bill O' started his evening off with a mantra I later learned is the new GOP talking point - the election was bought by O'Bama (heh, couldn't resist) from the over 50% that want their gubbmint free stuff. This was the center piece of his little peroration that went from the opening theme to the pre-commercial announcement of his guests which induced uncontrolled gagging on my part and a quick click to the XBox that was idling for just such an eventuality. There were some other bits surrounding the lazy no good takers part that I won't credit Bill with since what I remember may be confused with some other GOPer stuff. He sure didn't like the demographics, St Ronnie hadn't had that problem.
I returned from the fictional XBox endeavors to the alternate reality of Hannity who also opened with a title screen to first commercial sermon, and to my less than great surprise its center piece was the failing of the gubbmint teat sucking Americans to act in a moral way and elect the rMoney guy. This one also brought in an oblique "more later" reference to the Librul Media efforts on behalf of that not Irish Obama and some extensive going on about the dirty campaign run by "that guy." The words lying, sliming, and defaming in regard to Mittens' self were in emphatic usage as was the qualifier "the most... in memory" I'm happy to point out that Hannity has a very short memory and extremely selective attention span. In Hannity's case I was willing to stick around for the after commercial first guest Ann Coulter, despite what better sense told me.
The first order of business was to get Ann to agree that the moral failings of the teat suckers had to be corrected in order to... hmmm, it gets a bit sticky here... achieve happiness through self-reliance and return the Hannity version of Conservatism to power... or something like that. Ann's short, "I agree," sentiment seemed to contain a bit of annoyance at having Hannity put words in her mouth while using up her on air time. Ann managed to sort of apologize for drifting off reservation with her Christie/Romney/we loose jabber earlier on. She'd thought - well after some fourth grader political analysis - that (do you have any idea how difficult it is to sort of repeat Ann Coulter and be sure you're making any kind of sense in what you're relating?)... anyhow, that incumbents are hard to beat and O'Bama (ooops, wrong show) Obama is popular and so was Christie and, aw geeze, free stuff and lies and rMoney was really a good candidate and Sandy screwed the works and...crap, the hell with it.
Both BillO and Hannity were pretty much in agreement that there is no problem with GOP right wingery and both seemed to wax philosophical about how America would come running to them to right the insults to Americanism of the O'Bama crowd and seemed to think '14 should do pretty well as a time line and their crowd had best not despair... ayup, conservatism cannot fail, it can only be failed. Oddly enough a day later and they were still holding fire on rMoney although O'Reilly had some fairly harsh criticism of the staff for not making their point strongly enough and surging back after Sandy and he did want Axelrod.
So, what we've got here is that with the help of the compliant liberal media the sinning suckers were bought with cheap trinkets and lies about the fine fellow Mitt who was let down by his shitty staff while being ambushed by a hurricane named Sandy to the point where the non-traditional electorate of loser types would fail the conservatism that would come roaring back to save them when through the ministrations of some undetermined agency they would return to their senses after the Democrat Party failed them and we go bankrupt while being killed by the foreign boogeymen and what did O'Bama know and when did he know it...
Or - in short - most Americans are shitty people who failed a shitty campaign and both failed Conservatism but not to worry, it's coming back... soon.
Really, in a sad sick way they were damn near as funny as the Comedy News guy John Stewart. Well, there is the part where he is deliberately being funny... and he's waiting for the laughter when he says really stupid stuff.
Have I mentioned that watching people talk about the GOPers re-assessing and returning to reason leaves me ROTFLMAO?
Conservatism cannot fail, only be failed...
ie: Mitt sucked at being conservative
But for real gold you had to mine fine minds like Hannity and O'Reilly, Bill O' started his evening off with a mantra I later learned is the new GOP talking point - the election was bought by O'Bama (heh, couldn't resist) from the over 50% that want their gubbmint free stuff. This was the center piece of his little peroration that went from the opening theme to the pre-commercial announcement of his guests which induced uncontrolled gagging on my part and a quick click to the XBox that was idling for just such an eventuality. There were some other bits surrounding the lazy no good takers part that I won't credit Bill with since what I remember may be confused with some other GOPer stuff. He sure didn't like the demographics, St Ronnie hadn't had that problem.
I returned from the fictional XBox endeavors to the alternate reality of Hannity who also opened with a title screen to first commercial sermon, and to my less than great surprise its center piece was the failing of the gubbmint teat sucking Americans to act in a moral way and elect the rMoney guy. This one also brought in an oblique "more later" reference to the Librul Media efforts on behalf of that not Irish Obama and some extensive going on about the dirty campaign run by "that guy." The words lying, sliming, and defaming in regard to Mittens' self were in emphatic usage as was the qualifier "the most... in memory" I'm happy to point out that Hannity has a very short memory and extremely selective attention span. In Hannity's case I was willing to stick around for the after commercial first guest Ann Coulter, despite what better sense told me.
The first order of business was to get Ann to agree that the moral failings of the teat suckers had to be corrected in order to... hmmm, it gets a bit sticky here... achieve happiness through self-reliance and return the Hannity version of Conservatism to power... or something like that. Ann's short, "I agree," sentiment seemed to contain a bit of annoyance at having Hannity put words in her mouth while using up her on air time. Ann managed to sort of apologize for drifting off reservation with her Christie/Romney/we loose jabber earlier on. She'd thought - well after some fourth grader political analysis - that (do you have any idea how difficult it is to sort of repeat Ann Coulter and be sure you're making any kind of sense in what you're relating?)... anyhow, that incumbents are hard to beat and O'Bama (ooops, wrong show) Obama is popular and so was Christie and, aw geeze, free stuff and lies and rMoney was really a good candidate and Sandy screwed the works and...crap, the hell with it.
Both BillO and Hannity were pretty much in agreement that there is no problem with GOP right wingery and both seemed to wax philosophical about how America would come running to them to right the insults to Americanism of the O'Bama crowd and seemed to think '14 should do pretty well as a time line and their crowd had best not despair... ayup, conservatism cannot fail, it can only be failed. Oddly enough a day later and they were still holding fire on rMoney although O'Reilly had some fairly harsh criticism of the staff for not making their point strongly enough and surging back after Sandy and he did want Axelrod.
So, what we've got here is that with the help of the compliant liberal media the sinning suckers were bought with cheap trinkets and lies about the fine fellow Mitt who was let down by his shitty staff while being ambushed by a hurricane named Sandy to the point where the non-traditional electorate of loser types would fail the conservatism that would come roaring back to save them when through the ministrations of some undetermined agency they would return to their senses after the Democrat Party failed them and we go bankrupt while being killed by the foreign boogeymen and what did O'Bama know and when did he know it...
Or - in short - most Americans are shitty people who failed a shitty campaign and both failed Conservatism but not to worry, it's coming back... soon.
Really, in a sad sick way they were damn near as funny as the Comedy News guy John Stewart. Well, there is the part where he is deliberately being funny... and he's waiting for the laughter when he says really stupid stuff.
Have I mentioned that watching people talk about the GOPers re-assessing and returning to reason leaves me ROTFLMAO?
Sunday, September 30, 2012
Debate Game Change...
Gov. Christie predicted that the Wed debate would be... well, huge.
I don't know that a campaign that's said what this one has said about facts should wander out onto that limb.
It seems that the R/R campaign is hoping to gain a special moment.
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.
"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.
Thursday, September 27, 2012
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
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
Monday, September 24, 2012
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
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
Friday, September 21, 2012
Anne, STOP IT
CBS News reports on Anne Romney's Iowa radio comments:
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...
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...
Thursday, September 20, 2012
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.
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.
Friday, September 14, 2012
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.
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.
“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.
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
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...
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...
Thursday, August 30, 2012
Anything Happening Today? Nothing Important
I suppose I could be torturing myself by listening to the RNC speeches, but I'd like to save myself that self-induced pain. It isn't so much the stupid lies that hurt my brain, it is the process of them stupidly countering the stupid thing they made up for their stupid listeners. That's a hell of a lot of stupid to endure for the sake of pitter-patting my fingers on this keyboard for people who can't be bothered to laugh at me or say attaboy or acknowledge they were here at all. For cripes sake if it's that damn embarrassing to be caught out reading this drivel, why come in?
Ah, I don't really mean it - well, mostly not. I'm cranky. Look here, I'm not going to apologize for being well Left of the President (publicly...anyhow) and thinking that his inclinations and policies are way too rightish, corporatistic, and plutocratic enabling. What I am is real tired of the lunatics from the GOPerish side of Elsewhere insulting me by putting him rhetorically miles Left of me. You goddam idiots - I'm not even a Socialist and you don't even know what the term means in regard Shinola.
These idiots have no idea that the Health Care model preceding ACA (ObamaCare) was the most bastardized version of socialized medicine probably possible. Every uninsured hospital visit or other medical care was billed directly to either the taxpayers or their Health Insurance Billing. Yeah, I think the Bill that got through Congress stinks, but its smell is nothing compared to the blatant idiocy that preceded it. These people seem to think that the damned health care providers magically generated money to cover those expenses - they got one o' them money trees in the atrium...
If they want to get up in the air about socialism they need to go look at BushCo who provided the military industrial complex with unfunded wars to subsidize their products, or the crony unbidded contracts for services in those wars, or maybe most outrageously the Financial Crook Bailout - that crushed the hell out of most of the population. Now you could almost as accurately describe that as something like the Italian Fascisti program... but that would be rude considering who they Allied with (er... Axised with?).
Despite all their redistribution of wealth, job creator, individualism bullshit they run a program that is essentially the socialism of plutocracy. In the process of stripping wealth out of the country and sending it up to the top of the scale they use the labor and investment of ordinary people to support a system deliberately designed to enhance the earning power of an incredibly small percentage of the populace. They wish to accelerate the process and in the process defeat all those bullshit rhetorical devices they espouse. Jobs are created by demand and people without income do not create that state, wealth is redistributed - upwards and deliberately so, individualism is crushed by the access to power of the few through wealth and nobody takes responsibility other than those most crushed in the process.
I'm cranky. A decent percentage of the voters know what has to happen but it will not and those people will be called the cause of the problem. The vast, too disinterested to figure it out, majority will send us farther down the road we're on and the difference will be how fast we get to disaster. Some of us will vote for the least offensive and maybe along with some of the vast majority it will be enough to defeat the party of rush to wreckage and we can continue to stumble down that same path a bit more slowly.
We have good decent people with a clue like Jeff Merkley and Sherrod Brown and Bernie Sanders in the halls of power and that would be nice if they were more than window dressing. Because we load their ranks with people like Rand Paul or even Joe Lieberman those people become immaterial. Without a lot of similar company they amount to a "feel good" for some of us. Stupidity is going to be the end of us, we won't go out in a bang, we'll go quietly smothered in a blanket of idiocy and that is sad - makes me cranky.
Ah, I don't really mean it - well, mostly not. I'm cranky. Look here, I'm not going to apologize for being well Left of the President (publicly...anyhow) and thinking that his inclinations and policies are way too rightish, corporatistic, and plutocratic enabling. What I am is real tired of the lunatics from the GOPerish side of Elsewhere insulting me by putting him rhetorically miles Left of me. You goddam idiots - I'm not even a Socialist and you don't even know what the term means in regard Shinola.
These idiots have no idea that the Health Care model preceding ACA (ObamaCare) was the most bastardized version of socialized medicine probably possible. Every uninsured hospital visit or other medical care was billed directly to either the taxpayers or their Health Insurance Billing. Yeah, I think the Bill that got through Congress stinks, but its smell is nothing compared to the blatant idiocy that preceded it. These people seem to think that the damned health care providers magically generated money to cover those expenses - they got one o' them money trees in the atrium...
If they want to get up in the air about socialism they need to go look at BushCo who provided the military industrial complex with unfunded wars to subsidize their products, or the crony unbidded contracts for services in those wars, or maybe most outrageously the Financial Crook Bailout - that crushed the hell out of most of the population. Now you could almost as accurately describe that as something like the Italian Fascisti program... but that would be rude considering who they Allied with (er... Axised with?).
Despite all their redistribution of wealth, job creator, individualism bullshit they run a program that is essentially the socialism of plutocracy. In the process of stripping wealth out of the country and sending it up to the top of the scale they use the labor and investment of ordinary people to support a system deliberately designed to enhance the earning power of an incredibly small percentage of the populace. They wish to accelerate the process and in the process defeat all those bullshit rhetorical devices they espouse. Jobs are created by demand and people without income do not create that state, wealth is redistributed - upwards and deliberately so, individualism is crushed by the access to power of the few through wealth and nobody takes responsibility other than those most crushed in the process.
I'm cranky. A decent percentage of the voters know what has to happen but it will not and those people will be called the cause of the problem. The vast, too disinterested to figure it out, majority will send us farther down the road we're on and the difference will be how fast we get to disaster. Some of us will vote for the least offensive and maybe along with some of the vast majority it will be enough to defeat the party of rush to wreckage and we can continue to stumble down that same path a bit more slowly.
We have good decent people with a clue like Jeff Merkley and Sherrod Brown and Bernie Sanders in the halls of power and that would be nice if they were more than window dressing. Because we load their ranks with people like Rand Paul or even Joe Lieberman those people become immaterial. Without a lot of similar company they amount to a "feel good" for some of us. Stupidity is going to be the end of us, we won't go out in a bang, we'll go quietly smothered in a blanket of idiocy and that is sad - makes me cranky.
Wednesday, August 29, 2012
Boehner's Bar
"A guy walked into a bar..."
You'd have thought he'd have noticed...
Boehner may have over-visited a bar... you'd think somebody'd have noticed.
Should've been tears... that's always fun with Boehner.
There are few national pols I have less respect for... there are r-Money and his faithless side-kick Ayn Ryan.
You'd have thought he'd have noticed...
Boehner may have over-visited a bar... you'd think somebody'd have noticed.
Should've been tears... that's always fun with Boehner.
There are few national pols I have less respect for... there are r-Money and his faithless side-kick Ayn Ryan.
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Whither The Paulistas ?
You would think that the Ron Paul supporters would have known they would get mugged at the GOP Convention. I don't know what they thought the reaction would be to how well they worked the rules in the Caucuses and Delegate Selections but it certainly seems wishful thinking that the GOP would ignore it. Well, the GOP didn't ignore it and has gone to lengths to keep things on track (non-Paul track) and following the script of Romney. The Paul crowd doesn't seem to quite understand the authoritarianism inherent in both the GOP and particularly Romney.
They're going to have a few days to watch the GOP Convention follow its script and maybe actually think about it. I'll be damned if I'm going to spend a page debunking bullshit that they think Paul stands for, I'll just go ahead and pretty much accept that they believe the things they say. They are going to get absolutely not spit out of the GOP Platform, the speakers, or R-money. It gets worse than that, the R/R campaign's foreign policy outfit is stuffed full of neo-cons; remember Iraq? There is a stated desire to go to war with Iran... and others. Whatever version of Anti-abortion you pick from the mess that is the GOP/R-money it is in direct opposition to the Paulista's position. (I already said I'm not debunking...) As for the Drug War, any comparison between their positions is ludicrously divergent. You can go on and on, and find about the only thing close is the Platform in regard to the Fed - and you can bet your first born that R-money isn't on board with that. (maybe the 2nd Amendment, also; too)
The Paulistas get truly pissed-off if you bring up the racism of Paul - denying and stomping their feet, but since the R/R campaign is blatantly whistling up the race card there is that congruence; unless, of course, they actually mean their denials. This brings about the crux of "Whither The Paulistas ?" because almost everything they say they believe is in direct opposition to R/R beyond the amorphous assertions about smaller government and that fails their included phrase "less intrusive."
No, Obama is not directly in line with the Paulista's themes, in fact he is pretty awful in regard to a lot of their stuff. The question they have to ask themselves is which of the two actual candidates, c'mon nobody else is a factor, is less bad. Yep, I said it - less bad, you know the "lesser of two evils." What are they going to do with that? There are options:
Vote the least bad real candidate - Obama (he is black)
Vote the most offensive candidate - r-Money (he isn't black)
Vote the protest candidate - whatever...
Stay the hell home
Really, I'd bet on splintering badly, the "not black", the protest candidate, staying home. You may note that the lesser evil gets no consideration in my guess-work. I'll even tell you why two thing drive that consideration - I'm pretty sure the denials of racism are horseshit and less intrusive government counts for nothing against SMALL government - FYIGM ( F*** You I Got Mine). Like almost every small government bullshit booster; the second their break gets the axe they go ballistic.
I'm sorry Paulistas, you're as full of shit as your candidate is and as ignorant of history and consequences as most rocks. The second you come on this blog and swarm me with promises to vote Obama I'll take it back. Don't bother me with the protest candidate vote - it is outcome meaningless other than possibly tilting a very few places Obama. And before you get all over me about being an Obama-ite, I see him as a lesser evil and have stated that repeatedly and kicked the Democrats for their corporatist outcomes.
They're going to have a few days to watch the GOP Convention follow its script and maybe actually think about it. I'll be damned if I'm going to spend a page debunking bullshit that they think Paul stands for, I'll just go ahead and pretty much accept that they believe the things they say. They are going to get absolutely not spit out of the GOP Platform, the speakers, or R-money. It gets worse than that, the R/R campaign's foreign policy outfit is stuffed full of neo-cons; remember Iraq? There is a stated desire to go to war with Iran... and others. Whatever version of Anti-abortion you pick from the mess that is the GOP/R-money it is in direct opposition to the Paulista's position. (I already said I'm not debunking...) As for the Drug War, any comparison between their positions is ludicrously divergent. You can go on and on, and find about the only thing close is the Platform in regard to the Fed - and you can bet your first born that R-money isn't on board with that. (maybe the 2nd Amendment, also; too)
The Paulistas get truly pissed-off if you bring up the racism of Paul - denying and stomping their feet, but since the R/R campaign is blatantly whistling up the race card there is that congruence; unless, of course, they actually mean their denials. This brings about the crux of "Whither The Paulistas ?" because almost everything they say they believe is in direct opposition to R/R beyond the amorphous assertions about smaller government and that fails their included phrase "less intrusive."
No, Obama is not directly in line with the Paulista's themes, in fact he is pretty awful in regard to a lot of their stuff. The question they have to ask themselves is which of the two actual candidates, c'mon nobody else is a factor, is less bad. Yep, I said it - less bad, you know the "lesser of two evils." What are they going to do with that? There are options:
Vote the least bad real candidate - Obama (he is black)
Vote the most offensive candidate - r-Money (he isn't black)
Vote the protest candidate - whatever...
Stay the hell home
Really, I'd bet on splintering badly, the "not black", the protest candidate, staying home. You may note that the lesser evil gets no consideration in my guess-work. I'll even tell you why two thing drive that consideration - I'm pretty sure the denials of racism are horseshit and less intrusive government counts for nothing against SMALL government - FYIGM ( F*** You I Got Mine). Like almost every small government bullshit booster; the second their break gets the axe they go ballistic.
I'm sorry Paulistas, you're as full of shit as your candidate is and as ignorant of history and consequences as most rocks. The second you come on this blog and swarm me with promises to vote Obama I'll take it back. Don't bother me with the protest candidate vote - it is outcome meaningless other than possibly tilting a very few places Obama. And before you get all over me about being an Obama-ite, I see him as a lesser evil and have stated that repeatedly and kicked the Democrats for their corporatist outcomes.
Monday, August 27, 2012
Are We Deaf, Blind, and Stupid
Over the past months the Romney campaign and the GOP campaign and their "allies" in big money have run out the post '64 GOPer rhetoric. You might remember '64 or you might have read about it and the little matter of the Civil Rights Movement and the Dixiecrat exodus. The GOP, the "Party of Lincoln," took the South and they took it in the ugly way you'd have to - pounding race. After awhile they realized they'd have to pull a white sheet over their racism and use dog-whistles. "Don't say nigger, put that thin cloth over it and use welfare or..." It didn't quite play to use the "N" word with people who'd watched, live, fire hoses, German Shepards, and kids dug out of dike and couldn't quite get along with it.
Some of us were young and didn't know; our hearts were broken and a fierce rage was lit. No, the "N" word wasn't going to work and a hell of a lot of us got the tune played on the whistles. In our country the issue of where to eat and sleep, of going to school, and trying to vote ended in being buried in a goddam dike. That dike was the end point of the "discussion." That is what they mean, that is the level of resentment that got the GOP the goddam South.
A couple of pundits are starting to get actually angry, Chris Matthews is having trouble being polite and some are surprised - forgetting where, when, and how he was raised. Some people seem to forget or not know that a large chunk of the Civil Rights Movement was white and that those people were deeply hurt by what our nation was doing and tolerating. One of the results was that a lot of white people who are not (words fail) race conscious are not pleased when the whistles are exposed for what they are. Their racism is primarily ignorance and avoidance - different is unsettling, but buried in fucking dike - uh... no. They'd be really pleased if, "nobody asked for my birth certificate," could be passed off as a bit of awkward moment of humor. "It's just a joke, fer pete's sake." Yeah, and a burial in a dike is pretty goddam funny, also.
Those black people are soooo sensitive... Cripes on a crutch - I sit here white and far from my dotage and I can remember how and what got us here and feel that rage at what is done in my country being fanned into white hot flames. I have not had my daily existence shaped by what these cretins espouse so I'm less sensitive, but I'm not deaf, blind, and stupid; and neither are a lot of people if someone jumps up and down and yells. Hey, you - I'm yelling. I'm so goddam mad my eyes start leaking when I reflect on what got us here.
Nineteen Sixty goddam Four was 48 years ago, almost a half century, and here we are. A candidate for the Presidency and his allies are playing at race hate. That seems like piss poor improvement over that length of time from dead in a dike. Yes, you cretins, the end point of your shit is dead in a dike. That is what you goddam mean. Yeah, I do judge you on that basis. I'd throw away a pair of shoes I got you on.
If you're white working class you might want to ask yourself why this is what Mitt has got for you... if you don't wonder - you could point it out to your friends.
Some of us were young and didn't know; our hearts were broken and a fierce rage was lit. No, the "N" word wasn't going to work and a hell of a lot of us got the tune played on the whistles. In our country the issue of where to eat and sleep, of going to school, and trying to vote ended in being buried in a goddam dike. That dike was the end point of the "discussion." That is what they mean, that is the level of resentment that got the GOP the goddam South.
A couple of pundits are starting to get actually angry, Chris Matthews is having trouble being polite and some are surprised - forgetting where, when, and how he was raised. Some people seem to forget or not know that a large chunk of the Civil Rights Movement was white and that those people were deeply hurt by what our nation was doing and tolerating. One of the results was that a lot of white people who are not (words fail) race conscious are not pleased when the whistles are exposed for what they are. Their racism is primarily ignorance and avoidance - different is unsettling, but buried in fucking dike - uh... no. They'd be really pleased if, "nobody asked for my birth certificate," could be passed off as a bit of awkward moment of humor. "It's just a joke, fer pete's sake." Yeah, and a burial in a dike is pretty goddam funny, also.
Those black people are soooo sensitive... Cripes on a crutch - I sit here white and far from my dotage and I can remember how and what got us here and feel that rage at what is done in my country being fanned into white hot flames. I have not had my daily existence shaped by what these cretins espouse so I'm less sensitive, but I'm not deaf, blind, and stupid; and neither are a lot of people if someone jumps up and down and yells. Hey, you - I'm yelling. I'm so goddam mad my eyes start leaking when I reflect on what got us here.
Nineteen Sixty goddam Four was 48 years ago, almost a half century, and here we are. A candidate for the Presidency and his allies are playing at race hate. That seems like piss poor improvement over that length of time from dead in a dike. Yes, you cretins, the end point of your shit is dead in a dike. That is what you goddam mean. Yeah, I do judge you on that basis. I'd throw away a pair of shoes I got you on.
If you're white working class you might want to ask yourself why this is what Mitt has got for you... if you don't wonder - you could point it out to your friends.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)